HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 4a. 600 Tank Farm Rd. (ARCH-0406-2021, SBDV-0407-2021, GENP-0814-2019, EID-0608-2020)
Memorandum
DATE: November 17, 2021
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Tyler Corey, Deputy Director Community Development
VIA: Kyle Bell, Associate Planner and John Rickenbach, Contract Project Planner
SUBJECT: Item #4a – GENP-0814-2019, SPEC-0407-2020, ARCH-0406-2021, SBDV-0407-
2021, & EID-0608-2020 (600 Tank Farm Road) – Agenda Correspondence Staff
Response Memo
DISCUSSION
The following memorandum provides City staff responses to comments received from members
of the Planning Commission that relate to the 600 Tank Farm Road project.
1. Site Plan: The legends of the site plans on agenda packet pages 193 and 194 are not
legible. Could revised site plans be sent to Commissioners?
Response: City staff agrees the legends of the site plans on those two pages are not legible.
High resolution plans have been provided to the Planning Commission separately through
the City Clerk’s Office. The attachments in escribe have also been amended for legibility.
2. Acacia Creek Restoration: Is the project at 650 Tank Farm responsible for restoring and
enhancing Acacia Creek adjacent to this site?
Response: 650 Tank Farm is completing some restoration in the creek in areas the project
disturbs, including along Tank Farm Road where the applicant is expanding the culvert to
the road to accommodate the Tank Farm improvements and at the bridge connecting 650
and 600 Tank Farm. 650 Tank Farm will be installing a pedestrian path along the creek as
well, which will enhance the creek setback space. Notably, Acacia Creek is almost entirely
within the boundaries of the 650 Tank Farm Road site, not the 600 Tank Farm Road site.
3. Mixed Use, Compatible Uses: Table 4-23 in the AASP lists many uses as “allowed” (without
an Administrative Use Permit) in the C-S Zone. Some of those allowed uses may not be compatible
with the planned residential uses in the mixed use building adjacent to Tank Farm and Santa Fe
Roads. Some examples are dry cleaning, wholesale and distribution, printing, and veterinary
clinics.
Page 15 of 401
Memo: 600 Tank Farm Road, PC Agenda Correspondence Memo
Page 2
a. Are dry cleaning, wholesale and distribution, and printing considered “manufacturing or
industrial activities” per Section 17.70.130D.4.c. and therefore not allowed in mixed use
developments? (those uses are listed under the heading, “Industry, Manufacturing & Processing
Wholesaling in Table 4-3 in the AASP).
Response: Uses within the project must be consistent with both the AASP and zoning
requirements that apply to the site. The uses described in the comment above, while
identified in the AASP as possible in the C-S portion of the specific plan, are incompatible
uses with nearby residential development per Section 17.70.130D.4.c. of the Zoning
Regulations, and therefore would not be allowed in this mixed-use project. Uses listed
under AASP Table 4-3 under the category “Industry, Manufacturing & Processing
Wholesaling” may be permissible so long as they do not conflict with the prohibited uses
and activities identified in 17.70.130.D.4, including any uses that are not determined to be
incompatible with residential activities and do not “have the possibility of affecting the
health or safety of mixed-us development residents.”
b. Even if a proposed use is listed as an “allowed” use in the AASP, is it still subject to the standard
in Section 17.70.130D.4.d. that enables the review authority (I presume the Director in that case)
to determine that a proposed use is incompatible with residential uses and therefore not allowed
in that case? If not, does the Planning Commission have the ability to limit allowable uses on this
site through an amendment to the AASP or a Condition of Approval?
Response: Yes, the Community Development Director can determine whether a use is
incompatible for this or any other project per Section 17.70.130D.4.d. Uses which require
discretionary action would be reviewed on a case by case basis. The proposed application
does not include any amendments to the AASP for uses allowed or conditionally allowed
within the AASP; and any such amendments to the AASP would require a separate Specific
Plan Amendment with review by the Airport Land Use Commission, including
environmental review. It should be noted that no additional restrictions on land uses were
placed on the adjacent development at 650 Tank Farm.
4. Noise: Mixed Use Building E adjacent to Tank Farm and Santa Fe Roads appears to have upper
story decks/balconies that face towards Tank Farm Rd. and towards the east and west (left and
right elevations) close to Tank Farm Road. The Acoustical Analysis does not address potential
noise conditions and mitigation for the outdoor areas of this mixed use building. The Acoustical
Analysis does show that noise levels at the decks/balconies in question are up to about 68
db(A). The decks appear to be recessed, but will their design adequately mitigate noise levels to
meet the standards for outdoor activity areas?
Response: Residential balconies in Building E that face Tank Farm Road could be subject
to street noise estimated to be 68 dB per the acoustical analysis. Section 9.12.060 (Table
1) of the noise ordinance allows for exterior noise levels of up to 70 dB within th e C-S
zone. Notably, there are only four balconies facing Tank Farm Road, and each is recessed
into the structure and provide a solid railing system to further mitigate noise consistent
with Municipal Code thresholds.
Page 16 of 401
Memo: 600 Tank Farm Road, PC Agenda Correspondence Memo
Page 3
5. Pedestrian Safety: Building Type B has garages that do not appear to provide direct access to
the building interior, requiring occupants of the flats to walk from the garage around the building
to the entrances to the flats on the other side of the building. This is of particular concern in the
case of Buildings 8, 9 and 11, which have garages located along primary driveways.
a. There appear to be separate walkways along the driveways serving the garages of Buildings 8,
9 and 11, as well as along the driveways of the garages of Buildings 12 and 13. Is that correct,
and if so, how wide are the walkways?
b. Are there continuous and well lighted walkways leading from all the garages of Type B buildings
around the buildings to the entrances to the flats?
Response: There is a pedestrian path that leads from the garages to the paths that connect
to the entrances of the structures, per Section 17.70.130.G.5.a all pedestrian paths are
required to be six feet wide. The applicant has not provided a site lighting plan, however,
Condition 9 requires that a photometric plan is provided to determine compliance with
lighting requirements.
Attachment: Project plan replacement pages (pages 193 and 194 of the agenda packet)
Page 17 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021ACACIACREEK26262613%L1DESIGN .E<CLU%HOUSE - SEE ENLARGEMENT SHEET 32PEDESTRIAN WAL.WA<, T<P.SHORT-TERM %I.E PAR.ING, T<P. (63 MIN.)SEE SHEET A35COMMUNIT< MAIL%OXES - SEE ARCH SHEETS111555555557777777777777777MULTI-USE PATH 22222FLEXI%LE USE DEC. AT %IORETENTION AREA333ENTR< NODE AT MULTI-USE PATH WITH SEATING4466NATURAL PLA< AREA - SEE ENLARGEMENTDECORATIVE PERMEA%LE PAVERS, T<P.PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGLOADING =ONETRASH ENCLOSURE, T<P. - SEE SHEET A37EXISTING ROC. OUTCROP9998888812121313%1313131414141414141414COMMUNIT< PICNIC AREAS10101010%IORETENTION AREA, T<P. - SEE CIVIL SHEETS111111111111RIGHT-OF-WA< IMPROVEMENTS - NOT A PART15161515LONG TERM %I.E PAR.ING %ARNS, T<P. (5)SEE SHEET A35 35· ACACIA CREE. SET%AC.16161616171717RETAINING WALL, T<P. - SEE CIVIL SHEETS A3618181818181818FUTURE %I.E/ PEDESTRIAN %RIDGE - NOT A PART1919ACACIA CREE. %UFFER202020%IC<CLE REPAIR STATION WITH SEATINGDROUGHT TOLERANT PLANTINGSEE SHEET A39 FOR LANDSCAPE PLANFENCING - 6·H POOL FENCING - 6·H PRIVAC< ENTR< MONUMENT LOCATION - SEE SHEET A35FENCING - 42µH ON WALL - SEE SHEET A36 EARTH MOUNDSPU%LIC ART LOCATION22222221212323232323F1F1F2F3F32425FFF226F32524EXISTING EUCAL<PTUS CANOP< T<P.SEE SHEET A40 FOR TREE INVENTORY & REMOVALSSANTA FE ROADTANK FARM ROAD0·80·40·20·75·0·160·80·40·320·SCALES: 1µ = 80·- 0µ (12”X18” SHEET) 1µ=40·-0µ (24”X36” SHEET)NORTH600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A33ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEPRELIMINARY SITE PLANPage 18 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021COVERED OUTDOOR PATIOPOOL / SPAOVERHEAD STUCTURE - SEE A34OUTDOOR SEATING, T<P. - SEE A33-34, 36S<NTHETIC TURF EXERCISE AREA - SEE A34FIRE TA%LES WITH SEATINGTIM%ERSTAC.S CLIM%ING LOGS - SEE A33FLEXI%LE USE DEC. OVER %IORETENTION AREAEXERCISE E4UIPMENTWATER TROUGH ENTR< FEATURECENTRAL %OARDWAL.6· H PERIMETER POOL FENCE - SEE A36CLIM%ER PLA< FEATURE - SEE A3330-42µH LANDSCAPE ACCENT WALLS, T<P. SEE SHEET A36CA%ANAS WITH RAISED PLANTERS112223334444445566778899101011111112121313141414151518-30µH SEATWALL, T<P. - SEE SHEET A361616161616ART / MURAL 171717%AR%ECUE AND COUNTER 1818DRAGONFL< PLA< ELEMENTOUTDOOR PING PONG TA%LEFIREPLACE 192021212019CLU%HOUSE DESIGN .E<600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A34ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGESITE PLAN ENLARGEMENTPage 19 of 401
Page 20 of 401
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT INCLUDING 280 RESIDENTIAL
UNITS & 12,500 SF OF COMMERCIAL/OFFICE WITH ASSOCIATED EXCEPTIONS,
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT, VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT & REZONE, & ASSOCIATED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
RE
PROJECT ADDRESS: 600 Tank Farm Road BY: John Rickenbach, Contract Planner
Phone Number: 805-610-1109
Email: JFRickenbach@aol.com
FILE NUMBERS: ARCH-0406-2021;
SBDV-0407-2021; GENP-0814-2019;
SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020 FROM: Tyler Corey, Deputy Director
RECOMMENDATION
1. Adopt the Draft Resolution (Attachment A) recommending the City Council:
a. Approve a General Plan Amendment from Business Park to Services and
Manufacturing;
b. Approve Vesting Common Interest Tentative Parcel Map No. 21-0015;
c. Approve a Major Development Review entitlement and associated
exceptions that would allow for a mixed-use development consisting of 280
residential units and 12,500 square feet of commercia l space; and
d. Certify the associated Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) pursuant
to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
2. Recommend the City Council adopt the Draft Ordinance (Attachment B), that
would include amending the Zoning Map by changing the zoning designation
of the properties associated with the 600 Tank Farm Project from Business
Park (BP-SP) to Commercial Services (C-S-SP) and making associated text
amendments to the Airport Area Specific Plan.
SITE DATA
Applicant
Representative
Existing General
Plan and Zoning
Proposed General
Plan and Zoning
Site Area
Environmental
Status
Covelop, Inc.
Stephen Peck; Damien Mavis
Business Park under the Airport
Area Specific Plan
Commercial Service (CS) under the
Airport Area Specific Plan
~11.7 acres
A Final EIR has been prepared. A
Draft EIR circulated from June 15 to
August 3, 2021.
State Clearing House #2020110426
Meeting Date: 11/17/2021
Item Number: 4a
Time Estimate: 90 Minutes
Page 21 of 401
Item 4a
ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Planning Commission Report – November 17, 2021
SUMMARY
The applicant, Covelop, Inc., proposes a new mixed-use development consisting of 280
residential units and up to 12,500 square feet of commercial-service/office uses within the
Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP) area. The project site is located at 600 Tank Farm
Road, 130 feet northeast of the intersection of Tank Farm Road and Santa Fe Road, in
the southern portion of the City of San Luis Obispo, and west of Acacia Creek. The project
site is comprised of two parcels (Assessor Parcel Numbers [APN] 053-421-002 and 053-
421-006) totaling approximately 11.7 acres. The project includes various off-site
transportation improvements located in areas south and west of the parcel boundary to
facilitate the project, totaling approximately 1.0 acre. The total project site area is 12.7
acres.
The project proposes 280 residential units, with shared public and private open spaces,
common yards, and a 2,250-square foot clubhouse building with a 2,800-square foot
private patio area. The project includes a mix of residential unit types including, one-
bedroom, two-bedroom, and three-bedroom units. Balconies and outdoor activity areas
would be located on the north and east faces of the buildings to minimize exposure to
vehicle noise from Tank Farm Road and aircraft flyovers from the San Luis Obispo County
Regional Airport located south of the project site.
The applicant has provided a project description (Attachment C) that includes several
requests for exceptions from development standards, as summarized below:
An exception is requested to allow a paved bike/pedestrian trail within the 35 -foot
creek setback, in accordance with § 17.70.030.G.2.c;
An exception is requested to allow portions of Buildings 14, 19, and 21, to encroach
within the creek setback to allow a 30-foot setback, where a 35-foot setback is
normally required, in accordance with § 17.70.030.G.4;
An exception is requested to allow portions of Buildings 4, 8, 14, 19, and 21, to
encroach within the upper-story creek setback1 to allow a 30-foot setback where a
45-foot setback is normally required, in accordance with § 17.70.030.G.4
An exception is requested to allow ground floor residential uses along Santa Fe
Road on the ground floor within the first 50 feet of Buildings 7 and 9, in accordance
with § 17.70.130.D.1.a;
A fence height exception is requested to allow a retaining wall with a maximum
height of 15 feet, where 8 feet is normally the standard, in accordance with §
17.70.070.H; and
A 6.8 percent parking reduction is requested to reduce the required parking from
467 vehicle spaces to 435 spaces, in accordance with AASP Standards 5.4.5,
5.4.6, and 5.4.7.
1 Zoning Regulations § 17.70.030.E.3 Additional Upper Story Setbacks. Where the zone allows more
than two stories, an additional 10-foot step back (upper story building setback) shall be provided
beginning at the third story level. The upper story step back shall be provided along all building
elevations with creek-facing frontage.
Page 22 of 401
Item 4a
ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Planning Commission Report – November 17, 2021
The project includes a total of 25 three-story buildings and one single-story clubhouse,
consisting of six building types. As shown in Figure 1, there are four residential building
types proposed (shown as “Type A,” “Type B,” “Type C“, and “Type D”), and one mixed
use building type (“Type E”) and the one clubhouse structure (“Type F”) (Attachment D,
Project Plans).
Table 1 below summarizes the various unit types by size and distribution within the project
site.
Table 1: Project Characteristics
In order to facilitate the project, the following entitlements have been incorporated into the
application submittal package: a General Plan Map Amendment, a Specific Plan
Amendment to the AASP, a rezone of the property, a Vesting Common Interest Tentative
Parcel Map (Attachment E), and Major Development Review. Approval of these
entitlements would allow a final development plan (consistent with the requirements of
the granted entitlements).
The proposed General Plan Map Amendment would change the land use designation of
the property from Business Park to Services and Manufacturing. This change is
necessary to accommodate the zone change from Business Park (BP-SP) to Commercial
Services (C-S-SP) within the AASP. In accordance with the AASP and Zoning
Unit Type Size (sf) Units
Residential
Area (sf)
Non-Residential
Area (sf)
Acres
(net) Units/Acre
Townhomes and
Cluster Units
750-1,450 140 154,000 n/a 6.5 21
Stacked Flats 600-925 100 85,700 n/a 2.9 34
Mixed Use
(studio and 1-bed)
450-625 40 21,500 12,500 1.5 26
Total 450-1,450 280 261,200 12,500 10.9 25.7
sf = square feet
Figure 1: Architectural Site Plan
Page 23 of 401
Item 4a
ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Planning Commission Report – November 17, 2021
Regulations, the BP zone does not allow for residential densities; the zone change
associated with the AASP text amendments would allow for a mixed-use development to
occur within the subject property.
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment to the AASP would include the following text
amendments to address the mixed-use development (See Attachment B, Draft Ordinance
Exhibit B), and associated site improvements specific to the project site:
1. Change the site’s land use designation from Business Park (BP-SP) to Service
Commercial (C-S-SP) with the Specific Plan Overlay, which is necessary to allow
the proposed mixed-use development;
2. Amendment to allow a mixed-use development specific to the property at 600 Tank
Farm within the C-S-SP zone;
3. Amend all AASP tables and text to reflect the addition of 2 80 residential units, and
12,500 square feet of commercial-service/office space for the project site;
4. Modify the road section figures to reflect modifications to Tank Farm Road and
Santa Fe Road consistent with traffic projections and full buildout of the circulation
system;
5. Describe necessary setback of improvements and buildings to delineated wetland
areas in conformance with project Biological Assessments;
6. Update applicable figures and graphics to reflect the changes in land use
designations and circulations systems.
A small portion on the east side of the property delineating a portion of A cacia Creek is
within the Conservation Open Space (C/OS) zone, and this designation will remain
unchanged.
The Vesting Common Interest Tentative Parcel Map (SLO 21-0015) proposes to divide
the two existing parcels into 11 common interest parcels (ranging in size from 0.44 to 1.90
acres) for the purposes of establishing 280 airspace condominiums.
The project is planned to be constructed in two phases. Phase 1 would include 124
multifamily residential units on the central portion of the project site, the c ompletion of
Santa Fe Road along the project frontage, completion of the shared -use
bicycle/pedestrian path along Acacia Creek connecting bicycles and pedestrians from
Tank Farm Road to Damon-Garcia Sports Complex, construction of the Tank Farm
Road/Santa Fe Road (west) roundabout (north, west and east legs with two westbound
lanes and one eastbound lane), and the completion of frontage improvements along Tank
Farm Road. Phase 2 would include 116 multifamily residential units, 40 mixed -use units,
12,500 square feet of commercial-service/office space, and remaining project
improvements. The conceptual phasing plan is shown in Figure 2.
Page 24 of 401
Item 4a
ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Planning Commission Report – November 17, 2021
On-Site Transportation Improvements. The project would be required to contribute its
fair share toward transportation improvements envisioned in the General Plan Circulation
Element and shown in the AASP, either through participation in the City’s Transportation
Impact Fee program, or as conditions of approval per the circulation recommen dations
identified in the focused transportation study prepared for the project (refer to Attachment
A, Draft Resolution for specific requirements). Transportation improvements funded or
constructed by this project include widening Tank Farm Road along the project frontage
(provides two westbound auto lanes, protected bike lanes, curb/gutter, sidewalk and
parkway on the north side of the street), construction of a roundabout at the intersection
of Tank Farm Road and Santa Fe Road (west), and construction of a portion of the Santa
Fe Road Extension north of Tank Farm Road (including two travel lanes, sidewalks and
protected bike lanes on the east side) (refer to Attachment A, Draft Resolution for specific
requirements). These improvements are included in the City’s list of Transportation
Capital Projects in the General Plan Circulation Element and Active Transportation Plan
and are shown in the AASP. Stormwater runoff from these improvements would be
directed to a planned retention basin located at the northwe st corner of the proposed
roundabout. The anticipated area within which these required improvements would be
constructed is identified in Final EIR Section 2, Project Description, Figure 2-2.
Off-Site Transportation Improvements. In addition to the transportation improvements
included in the project, the project applicant would be required to provide preliminary
planning and engineering support for a future shared -use pedestrian/bicycle path along
Tank Farm Road from Santa Fe Road west to Innovation Way (4,700 feet west of Santa
Fe Road), as identified in the City’s Active Transportation Plan and the CEQA
Transportation Impact Analysis Memorandum and Multimodal Transportation Impact
Study (included as Appendix B to the Final EIR). This requirement would be implemented
through Condition No. 118 (Tank Farm Road Shared-Use Path), which articulates the
Figure 2: Conceptual Phasing Plan
Page 25 of 401
Item 4a
ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Planning Commission Report – November 17, 2021
intent for the applicant to provide preliminary design and planning analysis for the shared -
use pedestrian/bicycle path, as well as a Reimbursement Agreement detailing the specific
requirements of the applicant to support the future improvement. The goal of Condition s
No. 113 (Transportation Impact Fees) and 114 (Reimbursement for Public Improvements)
require a Reimbursement Agreement to advance planning of the shared-use
pedestrian/bicycle path to a point where the City or others can take this on as a capital
improvement project in the future.
1.0 COMMISSION'S PURVIEW
The Planning Commission’s (PC’s) role is to 1) review the project for consistency with the
General Plan2, AASP3, Zoning Regulations4, Community Design Guidelines (CDG)5,
Active Transportation Plan6, Subdivision Regulations7 and applicable City development
standards, and 2), review the associated Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR),
making recommendations to the City Council.
2.0 PREVIOUS REVIEW
On April 21, 2020, the City Council approved the initiation of the project and authorized
the issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the preparation of an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) for the project. The Council, by a vote of 5:0, provided d irection to
the applicant and staff to work toward a Development Agreement to accomplish the
needed planning area infrastructure outlined in the AASP and to maximize housing
opportunities for those individuals in geographic areas included in the City’s annual jobs-
housing balance analysis (Council Initiation and Minutes of 4.21.20). City is not proposing
a development agreement because: 1) the developer currently intends to start
construction soon and does not need a vested right that would last longer than the life of
the tentative map (16.12.050.A); and 2) staff did not identify any specific needed
consideration that was non-nexus based and therefore could use a combination of project
design, conditions of approval, mitigation measures to secure the City’s desired public
benefits.
On July 16, 2020, the Active Transportation Committee (ATC) reviewed the conceptual
design of the project and by consensus provided 21 recommendations regarding the
proposed bicycle and pedestrian connectivity and safety, as well as consistency with the
latest updates to the City’s Active Transportation Plan for the applicant to incorporate into
2 General Plan: Land Use Element Chapter 2 (Conservation and Development of Residential
Neighborhoods), Housing Element Chapter 3 (Goals, Policies and Programs), Circulation Element
Chapter 6 (Multi-Modal Circulation) and Chapter 9 (Street Network Changes)
3 AASP: Chapter 4.0 (Land Use); Chapter 5.0 (Community Design)
4 Zoning Regulations Article 3 (Regulations and Standards Applicable to All Zones) and Article 8 (Housing-
Related Regulations)
5 CDG: Chapter 2 (General Design Principals) and Chapter 5 (Residential Project Design)
6 Active Transportation Plan Chapter 5 (Recommended Bicycle & Pedestrian Projects), Chapter 6 (Bicycle
& Pedestrian Programs), and Chapter 7 (Implementation)
7 Subdivision Regulations Chapter 16.10 (Tentative Maps), Chapter 16.12 (Vesting Tentative Maps), Chapter 16.17
(Common Interest Subdivisions, Airspace Subdivisions and Condominium Conversions).
Page 26 of 401
Item 4a
ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Planning Commission Report – November 17, 2021
the project design and associated materials (Conceptual ATC Report and Minutes
7.16.20).
On August 17, 2020, the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) reviewed the
conceptual design of the project and by consensus provided nine recommendations
regarding building orientation in relation to site access and private/common open space
areas, and provided comments on the architectural style of the project in terms of
compatibility between the different uses for the applicant to incorporate into the project
design and associated materials (Conceptual ARC Report and Minutes 8.17.20). As
noted below, the ARC reviewed the applicant’s resubmittal on October 4, 2021.
On September 23, 2020, the Planning Commission (PC) reviewed the conceptual design
of the project and by consensus provided seven directional items regarding build ing
orientation in relation to Tank Farm Road, mixed-use development compatibility, and on-
site and off-site pedestrian and bicycle circulation for the applicant to incorporate into the
project design and associated materials (Conceptual PC Report and Minutes 9.23.20).
A more detailed evaluation of the comments, and recommendations from the previous
City Council hearing, ARC, ATC and PC have been consolidated and provided as
Attachment F (Initiation and Advisory Body Comments Summary).
On December 9, 2020, PC reviewed the scope of the EIR for the purpose of receiving
public testimony, to provide input to City Staff and consultants on any additional scope
items or environmental issues. No action was taken at this meeting (PC Scoping and
Minutes 12.9.20).
On July 14, 2021, the PC received an overview of the Draft EIR and received public
testimony and provided input to City staff and EIR consultants regarding any additional
analysis to adequately evaluate environmental issue areas within the Draft EIR. No action
was taken at this meeting (PC DEIR Review and Minutes 7.14.21). FEIR Chapter 8
(Response to Comments) includes responses to public and Planning Commissioner
comments received during the July 2021 meeting.
On August 18, 2021, the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) reviewed the referral by
the City of San Luis Obispo and provided conditions and a determination of consistency
with the Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) for the proposed AASP amendments, General
Plan Map Amendment, Rezoning, and the mixed-use development plan (Attachment G,
ALUC Report and Recommendation 8.18.21). See further discussion in Section 4.5
Consistency with the Airport Land Use Plan.
On September 27, 2021, the Tree Committee (TC) reviewed the proposed 26 tree
removals and replanting plan for 236 trees for consistency with the City’s Tree Removal
Regulations. The TC recommended that the PC find the proposed tree removal plan and
replanting plan consistent with the City’s Tree Removal Regulations § 12.24 (TC Report
and Minutes 9.27.21). An arborist report prepared by Jake Minnick, PLA, was provided to
assist the TC review (Attachment H, Arborist Report).
Page 27 of 401
Item 4a
ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Planning Commission Report – November 17, 2021
On October 4, 2021, the ARC reviewed the proposed project design for consistency with
the CDG and AASP Design Standards. During their review the ARC provided six
recommendations to the applicant to address specific concerns related to building and
site design, and recommended that the PC find the project consistent with the CDG and
AASP (ARC Report and Minutes 10.4.21). The applicant provided a design consistency
assessment to assist the ARC’s review for consistency with the CDG and AASP Design
Standards (Attachment I, AASP Design Conformity Analysis). See Section 4.7
Architectural Review Commission Recommendations for further discussion regarding the
applicant’s response to ARC recommendations for PC consideration.
3.0 PROJECT STATISTICS
Table 1. Project Characteristics and Requirements
Site Details Proposed Allowed/Required*
Density (net area 10.84 acres) 256.88 density units 24 du/ac (260 density units)
Setbacks
Street Setback (Buildings)
Street Setback (Parking Lots)
Side Yard (Parking Lots)
16 feet
10 feet
5 feet
16 feet
10 feet
5 feet
Creek Setback
Pathways
Structures
Upper-Story Step Backs
2 feet
30 feet
30 feet
35 feet
35 feet
45 feet
Maximum Height of Structures
Occupied
Un-occupied
36 feet
46 feet
36 feet
46 feet
Fence Heights 15 feet (max) 8 feet
Floor Area Ratio 0.60 0.60
Max Lot Coverage 65.6% 90%
Affordable Housing 11 units (moderate income) 3 units or In-lieu fees
Public Art On-site (differed) On-site or In-lieu fee
Vehicle and Bicycle Parking
Total # Parking Spaces
EV Parking (Ready)
EV Parking (Capable)
Bicycle Parking
Short Term
Long Term
Motorcycle Parking
435 (6.8% reduction)
48
117
63
563
23
467
48
117
63
563
23
*2019 Zoning Regulations; Airport Area Specific Plan (updated May 2021)
Page 28 of 401
Item 4a
ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Planning Commission Report – November 17, 2021
4.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
The proposed project must conform to the standards and limitations of the General Plan,
AASP, and any applicable aspects of the Zoning Regulations, and Engineering Standards
that are not otherwise addressed in the AASP that apply to the overall development plan
approval including the subdivision component. Staff has evaluated the project and
identified discussion items for the Planning Commission to consider, including
recommendations provided by the ARC.
4.1 Consistency with the General Plan
The process for review of a General Plan Amendment is set forth in Chapter 17.130 of
the City’s Municipal Code. When a private applicant requests an amendment of the
General Plan, the application should include: 1) a statement explaining how the proposed
change will better reflect community desires as expressed in General Plan goals and
policies, 2) a discussion of why the change is warranted by new information or
reevaluation of community needs, and 3) an analysis of how the proposed change will
beneficially and detrimentally affect adjacent areas or shared resources. The discussion
below provides background information on the policy and regulatory environment that
shape the review of the proposed project.
The current Business Park designation provides for research and development and light
manufacturing in a campus setting. The proposed Services & Manufacturing designation
provides for a wide range of uses including business and professional services, medical
services, research and development, and retail sales. It also provides for residential uses
as part of a mixed-use project with a residential density of up to 24 du/acre (density units
per acre).
The Housing and Land Use Elements encourage mixed -use projects where they can be
found to be compatible with existing and potential future development. The Land Use
Element (LUE) encourages compatible mixed uses in commercial districts (LUE Policy
3.8.5) and specifically discusses residential and commercial mixed use (LUE Policy
Figure 3: Proposed Site Plan
Page 29 of 401
Item 4a
ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Planning Commission Report – November 17, 2021
2.3.6)8. Staff’s analysis of the request indicates that it is in line with the City’s General
Plan goals and policies and the Zoning Code. In this case, the project would provide
additional housing proximate to employment opportunities and help address housing
affordability through the project’s compliance with inclusionary housing requirements. City
policies further support in-fill projects and additional mixed-use developments, especially
those located close to major transit, bike, and pedestrian corridors.
The proposed project is consistent with multiple City Goals and General Plan policies for
Land Use, Housing, Conservation and Open Space, Multi-model Circulation, and Water
and Wastewater, as identified and discussed below.
Major City Goals, General Plan Goals and Policies
Major City Goal - Housing: Increasing the supply and diversity of housing was determined
to be one of the most important, highest-priority goals for the City as established by the
2021-23 Financial Plan. This major City goal states: 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.
Housing Element (HE): The HE includes several policies that encourage infill residential
development, housing for all financial strata, and the promotion of higher -residential
density where appropriate. The Housing Element further states that the City consider
General Plan Amendments to rezone commercial areas for higher-density or mixed-use
housing where compatible with surrounding development, and specifically lists the project
site at 600 Tank Farm as a potential site for rezoning (Program 6.13).
Land Use Element (LUE): LUE Policy 1.5 Jobs/Housing Relationship states that the gap
between housing demand (due to more jobs and college enrollment) and supply should
not increase.
LUE Policy 2.2.6. states that: The City shall promote livability, quiet enjoyment, and safety
for all residents. Characteristics of quality neighborhoods vary from neighborhood to
neighborhood, but often include one or more of the following characteristics:
A mix of housing type styles, density, and affordability.
Design and circulation features that create and maintain a pedestrian scale.
Nearby services and facilities including schools, parks, retail (e.g., grocery store,
drug store), restaurants and cafes, and community centers or other public facilities.
A tree canopy and well-maintained landscaping.
A sense of personal safety (e.g., low crime rate, short police and emergency
response times). Convenient access to public transportation.
Well- maintained housing and public facilities.
8 LUE Policy 2.3.6. The City shall encourage mixed use projects, where appropriate and compatible with
existing and planned development on the site and with adjacent and nearby properties. The City shall
support the location of mixed-use projects and community and neighborhood commercial centers near
major activity nodes and transportation corridors / transit opportunities where appropriate.
Page 30 of 401
Item 4a
ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Planning Commission Report – November 17, 2021
Additionally, the LUE states the City shall promote infill development, redevelopment,
rehabilitation, and adaptive reuse efforts that contribute positively to existing
neighborhoods and surrounding areas (LUE Policy 2.2.7).
Finally, the project has components that support circulation -oriented policies in the LUE.
LUE Policy 10.1 (Neighborhood Access) states that all residences should be within close
proximity to food outlets including grocery stores, farmers’ markets, and community
gardens. LUE Policy 10.4 (Encourage Walkability) states that the City shall encour age
projects that provide for and enhance active and environmentally sustainable modes of
transportation, such as pedestrian movement, bicycle access, and transit services.
Circulation Element (CE): The CE describes how transportation will be provided in the
community. The project includes features that support multi -modal transportation,
consistent with the following policies. CE Policy 3.1.7 (Transit Service Access) states that
new development should be designed to facilitate access to transit service. CE Policy
4.1.1 (Bicycle Use) states that the City shall expand the bicycle network and provide end
of trip facilities to encourage bicycle use and to make bicycling safe, convenient and
enjoyable. CE Policy 5.1.2 (Sidewalks and Paths) states that the City s hould complete a
continuous pedestrian network connecting residential areas with major activity centers as
well as trails leading into city and county open spaces.
Project Features that Support General Plan Policies and Programs
In accordance with the Major City Housing Goal cited above and General Plan policies
and programs, the project will provide a mix of housing units that include deed -restricted
affordable units, and market rate units that are affordable by design (studios and one -
bedrooms). The proposed project is consistent with LUE Policy 2.2.6, as the project is
located in walking distance to MindBody Headquarters, SESLOC Credit Union, and other
nearby employers, as well as to retail uses and other services of the Marigold Shopping
Center. The project’s redevelopment and in-fill development components support LUE
Policy 2.2.7 because the project provides for an adaptive reuse of the property that
contributes positively to the existing neighborhood by providing housing adjacent to a
significant employment area. In accordance with LUE Policy 1.5, this project helps reduce
the gap between housing demand and supply by adding residential units, some of which
are deed restricted affordable units.
The mixed-use development pattern with commercial uses along the street corridor and
residential uses on the interior of the site is consistent with other C-S zoned development
projects in the immediate vicinity. The housing uses on the site are appropriate for infill
development that is close to both jobs and services. The neighboring property to the east
has been historically used for residential development, and has been recently rezoned
and approved for a mixed-use development similar to the proposed project (650 Tank
Farm – ARCH-0755-2019). The expansion of the residential uses to the subject property
is appropriate given evolving development patterns in the area and the need to increase
the supply of housing.
Project components that support circulation-related policies include improvements to
Page 31 of 401
Item 4a
ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Planning Commission Report – November 17, 2021
transit, bicyclist facilities, and pedestrian facilities. The San Luis Obispo Regional Transit
Authority (RTA) and the City of San Luis Obispo Transit Division (SLO Transit) provide
transit service to the study area. SLO Transit Routes 1 and 3 provide fixed -route service
to the study area. RTA offers Dial-A-Ride curb to curb services within the City limits.
Bicycle facilities in the study area consist of Class II bike lanes, which provide a striped
lane for one-way bicycle travel on the side of street. Broad Street and Tank Farm Road
both have Class II bike lanes on both sides of the road throughout the study segments.
Future development of the project site includes a pedestrian/bicycle access path from the
northern site boundary to the existing pedestrian/bicycle paths at the Damon-Garcia
Sports Complex. This potential connection would be consistent with the intent of the
Active Transportation Plan and the AASP, which show a planned Class I bicycle path
from Tank Farm up to Damon-Garcia. Similarly, the project would provide improvements
to pedestrian circulation facilities along Tank Farm Road and Santa Fe Road. The
proposed project would provide for improved pedestrian facilities and connectivity by
connecting and improving existing sidewalks, crosswalks, and pedestrian signals at
signalized intersections, and a new round-a-bout at the intersection of Tank Farm Road
and Santa Fe Road.
4.2 Consistency with the Airport Area Specific Plan
A Specific Plan is a tool for the systematic implementation of a general plan. It effectively
establishes a link between implementing policies of the General Plan and the individual
development proposals in a defined area. In the case of the AASP, it addresses the broad
range of planning issues and policies typically covered in the City’s General Plan or
zoning ordinance, from land use, circulation, site planning standards, design guidelines,
landscape design requirements, and infrastructure requirements. For that reason, the
project will be evaluated against the requirements of the AASP to determine consistency
with City planning policies. In certain instances, the AASP defers to the City’s zoning
ordinance, and where this is the case, it is noted in the analysis that follows. The AASP
has been amended multiple times, with the last amendment adopted on May 18, 2021,
for changes to day care facilities.
Consistency with Service Commercial (C-S) Designation
The project entitlements would change the existing land use designation and zoning from
Business Park (BP-SP) to Service Commercial (C-S-SP) with the Specific Plan Overlay,
which would allow a mixed-use project.
Under the existing AASP, the C-S-SP designation allows residential mixed-use
development in similar specific locations, including at the neighboring 650 Tank Farm
Road property. The proposed development is adjacent to that property across Acacia
Creek, and is appropriate for similar mixed -use residential development because the
project site is within walking distance of significant employment centers and commercial
shopping areas. If approved, the Specific Plan Amendment would update the description
of the Service Commercial designation under Sec tion 4.2.2 of the AASP to include 600
Tank Farm Road as an appropriate location for a residential mixed -use development,
similar to the recent amendment adopted for the 650 Tank Farm Road property.
Page 32 of 401
Item 4a
ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Planning Commission Report – November 17, 2021
The AASP includes several design goals and policies applicable to the project, which
were reviewed and evaluated by the ARC. The AASP includes standards and
requirements, including zoning-related issues for the C-S-SP designation that in many
cases supersede those in the Zoning Regulations. These include standards such as
allowed land uses, setbacks, and building heights. Where it is silent on an issue, the
AASP defers to the Zoning Regulations (refer to Section 4.3, Consistency with Zoning
Regulations, below). Consistency with these requirements is previously discussed in
Section 3.0 (Project Statistics) of this report as well as described in the ARC Report and
Minutes 10.4.21 and the AASP Design Conformity Analysis (Attachment I). Notably, the
ARC recommended the PC find the project consistent with the CDG and AASP D esign
Standards.
4.3 Consistency with the Zoning Regulations
Mixed-Use Development: Zoning Regulations Section 17.70.130 Mixed Use Projects
provides standards for the design of mixed-use projects to consider potential impacts on
adjacent properties and to ensure design compatible with the adjacent and surrounding
residential neighborhoods. Mixed-use projects must be designed to achieve specific
objectives including design criteria, site layout, pedestrian access and performance
standards. The project has been designed to provide physical separation between the
residential and nonresidential uses and associated activity areas by incorporating outdoor
seating areas and a drive aisle through the site and to ensure that the residential units
are of a residential character and provide privacy between the uses, while maintaining
internal compatibility between the different uses by integrating pedestrian connectivity
with the commercial areas. The project minimizes potential impacts to and from adjacent
properties by locating commercial activities towards Tank Farm Road and Santa Fe Road
with the majority of the residential uses towards the rear of the property. The subject
property is conducive to a mixed-use project because it is consistent with approved
mixed-use and commercial developments to the east. The project’s proposed common
area is located internal to the project and along Acacia Creek, which is oriented toward
the neighboring residential properties, ensuring privacy from non-residential project
activities.
Creek Setback Exceptions: The Zoning Regulations require a 35-foot setback from the
top of bank for new structures in this location (§ 17.70.030). The proposed project is
requesting a setback exception to allow a paved bike/pedestrian trail within the creek
setback area9, an exception for a 30-foot setback for Buildings 14, 19, and 21, and an
exception to allow portions of Buildings 4, 8, 14, 19, and 21 to encroach within the upper-
9 Zoning Regulations § 17.70.030.G.2. Accessory Structures and Uses. The following items may be
located within the required creek setback without obtaining a discretionary exception unless otherwise
noted,…(c.) Patios and pervious walkways. However, impervious pedestrian walkways and bicycle
paths shall require a Director’s Hearing ...
Page 33 of 401
Item 4a
ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Planning Commission Report – November 17, 2021
story creek setback10 as measured from the average top of bank as identified by the City’s
Natural Resources Manager, where 35-feet is normally required (see Figure 4 Creek
Setback Excerpt and Attachment D, Sheet A6). Zoning Regulations § 17.70.030.G.4
stipulates that an exception to the creek setback requirements may be considered where
substantiated evidence demonstrates that there is no practical way to comply with the
provisions and that no other feasible alternatives will result in better implementation of
other Zoning Regulations or General Plan policies while allowing reasonable use of the
site, subject to required findings.
The City’s creek setback regulations provide provisions for setback exceptions that are
consistent with State and Federal Law, and the request does not result in any specific
adverse impact to the public health, safety, or the physical environment. No useful
purpose would be realized by requiring the full 35-foot creek setback because no
significant fire protection, emergency access, privacy, or biological resources impacts
would occur. A larger creek setback within the project design is not possible without a
substantial project redesign that could adversely affect site circulation, safety,
functionality, and the provision of housing consistent with City goals. Thus, the proposed
design exception is supportable in the larger context of achieving multiple City goals to
the extent possible.
Residential on the Ground Floor: The project meets site layout standards for mixed -use
projects by orienting the commercial building toward the public street consistent with the
neighborhood pattern; however, the applicant is requesting to locate residential units on
10 Zoning Regulations § 17.70.030.E.3 Additional Upper Story Setbacks. Where the zone allows more
than two stories, an additional 10-foot step back (upper story building setback) shall be provided
beginning at the third story level. The upper story step back shall be provided al ong all building
elevations with creek-facing frontage
Figure 4: Creek Setback excerpt from Project Plans Sheet A6: Top of bank
(blue line), 35-foot creek setback (orange line), and the additional 10-foot upper-
story setback (grey line).
Page 34 of 401
Item 4a
ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Planning Commission Report – November 17, 2021
the ground floor within 50 feet of Buildings 7 and 9 facing Santa Fe Road11. The residential
area on the ground floor includes eight residential units within Building 7 and two
residential units within Building 9. The proposed residential setback reduction on the
ground floor is appropriate for this site and location because primary commercial activities
in the immediate neighborhood are oriented toward the intersection of Tank Farm Road
and Santa Fe Road rather than this portion of Santa Fe. The residential uses on the
ground floor will not expose residents to any greater noise impacts than the upper stories
as the residential structure is set back 15 feet from the public right-of-way and located
outside of the 60 decibel noise contour boundary associated with the build-out of Tank
Farm Road (Noise Element, Figure 5), which is consistent with allowable noise thresholds
for residential uses. Furthermore, the noise evaluation conducted for the project
concluded that “…if residential units get put into the commercial buildings facing Tank
Farm Road, normal/typical construction practices and designs will be acoustically
sufficient there…to meet City noise standards for interior spaces” (Final EIR Appendix H,
Acoustical Analysis). In addition, the residential units within the project would enhance
the pedestrian environment, in that those residents would b e adjacent to commercial
development, which encourages walking to such services, rather than taking a vehicle to
a similar commercial establishment elsewhere in the City. Moreover, front doors that face
the street would encourage direct pedestrian access to Santa Fe Road, which is
consistent with the City‘s goal of providing multimodal transportation facilities.
Fence Height Exception: Zoning Regulations Section 17.70.070 (Fences, Walls, and
Hedges) states that fences and walls may be placed within required setbacks, provided
they do not exceed maximum height limitations, however, exceptions to the maximum
height limitations may be considered by the Community Development Director (in
accordance with Section 17.102.020.E multiple applications for the same project shall be
processed concurrently and shall be reviewed and acted upon by the highest review
authority, such as the City Council in this instance). The proposed fence height exception
is specific to a retaining wall along the west property line, leading along the private drive
from the end of the Santa Fe Road cul-de-sac towards Building 26, as identified on Sheet
C5 of the VTPM (Attachment E). The maximum height limitation within this portion of the
property is normally eight feet, however, the project includes grading the property to
accommodate the drive aisle and access to Buildings 26 and 24, with a drop in grade of
approximately 20 feet to the finished elevation of the drive aisle. The grade difference
results in a retaining wall that spans from 5 feet in height to a maximum height of 15 feet
(the retaining wall spans a length of approximately 220 feet). The height exception will
have negligible to no aesthetic impact as seen from the public right of way as the height
will only be perceived from internal locations within the project site. Condition No. 13
requires that the retaining walls are designed to remain as low as possible and include
adequate landscape screening to prevent visual monotony.
11 Zoning Regulations § 17.70.130.D Mixed-Use Development. Ground Floor Limitations: …In all other
zones, residential units shall not occupy ground floor space within the first 50 feet of floor area
measured from each building face adjacent to a street toward the rear of the building unless the review
authority finds that the project enhances the pedestrian environment in the surrounding area or will
perform a function or provide a service that is essent ial or beneficial to the community or City.
Page 35 of 401
Item 4a
ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Planning Commission Report – November 17, 2021
Parking Reduction: The project requires 467 vehicle parking spaces for all commercial
and residential uses (commercial parking based on a standard parking ratio for
commercial uses at 1 space per 300 square feet). The applicant is requesting a 6.8%
parking reduction, resulting in a total of 435 spaces to serve the project. The applicant
has requested this reduction to accommodate a variety of potential tenants for the
commercial space as well as shared parking usage between the commercial and
residential uses. The project qualifies for up to a 10% parking reduction because AASP
Section 5.4.6 stipulates that a 5% reduction may be granted for developments that
provide showers and changing rooms and secure sheltered bicycle parking facilities, and
AASP Section 5.4.7 states that an additional 5% reduction may be granted for parking
areas that increase storm water infiltration. The project provides shower facilities in both
the commercial areas and the clubhouse with secure bicycle parking provided throughout
the project site. The parking areas have also bee n designed with pervious pavers that
increase water filtration, and a series of bioswales for water quality management that will
facilitate drainage. Furthermore, in accordance with the Institute of Transportation
Engineers Parking Demand Generation 4th Editions, the peak parking demand of the
project would not exceed 391 parking spaces. The project provides 435 parking spaces.
Therefore, proposed parking is adequate to serve all uses on-site12. Condition No. 6
includes a requirement that the property owner submit a running total of the site’s parking
requirements with the submittal of any building permit for tenant improvements, and/or
each business license.
4.4 Consistency with the Subdivision Regulations
The applicant is requesting a common interest phased subdivision (Vesting Common
Interest Tentative Parcel Map – VTPM 21-0015) that includes easements for shared
driveways and parking spaces. Per Section 16.17.030 of the Municipal Code, common
interest subdivisions within the C-S zone do not have a specific minimum common open
space requirement; however, the project is providing 34.4% of the site (162,282 SF) in
landscaped area for common use, or 579 SF per unit (see Sheet A1 within the project
plan set). In addition, the project includes a 2,250 -square foot clubhouse building with a
2,800-square foot patio area, as well as pedestrian paseos throughout the site between
the various residential and mixed-use buildings. These features are shown in Figure 3
Proposed Site Plan (also see Attachment D, Sheet A1).
4.5 Consistency with the Airport Land Use Plan
The San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) oversees
development subject to the ALUP to ensure safety related to airport operations, while the
City has ultimate jurisdiction over potential land use decisions and future development.
The ALUC reviewed the project on August 18, 2021 and determined that development
12 Zoning Regulations § 17.16.060K.3. Where there has been a reduction in required parking, all resulting
spaces must be available for common use and not exclusively assigned to any individual use. In mixed
use projects, required residential parking may be reserved, but commercial parking must be made
available for guests or overflow from residences.
Page 36 of 401
Item 4a
ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Planning Commission Report – November 17, 2021
facilitated under the proposed AASP Amendment and rezone would be consistent with
the ALUP subject to nine conditions (Attachment G). Condition No. 18 has been
incorporated into the Draft Resolution to address the ALUC’s conditions, and to ensure
that plans submitted for a building permit are consistent with the ALUC’s determination of
consistency with the ALUP.
4.6 Consistency with Affordable Housing Requirements
The City has recognized housing as an important issue. The City’s 2021-23 Financial
Plan identifies affordable housing as a Major City Goal. The project is required to provide
affordable inclusionary housing based on the City’s Housing Element and municipal code.
In accordance with Section 17.138.040.A (Table 2 – Inclusionary Housing Requirements,
and Table 2A – Inclusionary Housing Element Factors), the project is required to provide
three affordable inclusionary units, based on the number and size of housing units
proposed, as well as the commercial component.
The applicant has worked with City staff to create an affordable housing program that
exceeds the City’s inclusionary housing requirement. The applicant will b uild and sell 11
deed restricted affordable units throughout the site, which would include the three units
to meet the City’s inclusionary requirement and an additional 8 above and beyond the
requirement. All the units would be sold at “Moderate” affordability level. The mix would
be three studios, six 1-bedrooms, two 2-bedrooms.
Figure 5 shows the proposed location of the affordable inclusionary units within the site.
4.7 Architectural Review Commission Recommendations
On October 4, 2021, the ARC reviewed the project design and found it consistent with the
CDG and applicable AASP Guidelines and provided six recommendations for
Figure 5: Proposed Inclusionary Housing Locations
Page 37 of 401
Item 4a
ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Planning Commission Report – November 17, 2021
amendments to the project design to be reviewed and evaluated prior to Planning
Commission review and the City Council taking final action on the project. The applicant
has provided an exhibit that outlines the changes to the project plans in response to t he
ARC recommendations (Attachment J, Revised Project Plan Exhibit):
ARC Directional Item #1: Provide one more color scheme for Building A types.
Response: The applicant has revised the design to include an additional color scheme
for Building types A and B, and an additional scheme for Building types C and D
(Attachment R, Sheet X1 and Sheet X2).
ARC Directional Item #2: Incorporate balcony railings that provide more privacy; 66%-
75% solid panels to screen views.
Response: The applicant has revised the design of the balconies to provide approximately
75% screening of balcony railing to screen storage and improve privacy between
structures (Attachment R, Sheet X2).
ARC Directional Item #3: On the Building B rear elevation provide white garage doors
rather than gray to blend in more.
Response: The applicant has modified the designs of Building B and the new color
scheme for Building types C and D, to include white garage doors to correspond with the
alternating colors on the rear elevations (Attachment R, Sheet X1).
ARC Directional Item #4: Provide more planting or other visual indicators for pedestrians
and traffic calming (referencing the red arrow shown on sheet A10 descending from Santa
Fe Road).
Response: The applicant has revised the design of the project to provide additional traffic
calming measures along the drive isle, by providing alternative pavement for pedestrian
crossings and additional parking planters (Attachment R, Sheet X3).
ARC Directional Item #5: Use landscaping to reduce massing of Building E.
Response: The applicant has revised the project plans to provide greater landscaping
along Tank Farm Road and Santa Fe Road to reduce the mass of Building E as seen
from the public right-of-way (Attachment R, Sheet X5).
ARC Directional Item #6: Provide well thought out pedestrian-scale elements.
Response: The applicant has provided enhanced exhibits of the pedestrian -scale
elements throughout the site, to provide greater context of amenities and pedestrian
linkages (Attachment R, Sheets X3-X6).
Page 38 of 401
Item 4a
ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Planning Commission Report – November 17, 2021
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
A Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and circulated for a 50 -day public review period that
began on June 15, 2021 and ended on August 3, 2021. In addition, a public meeting was
held on Wednesday July 14, 2021 at a Planning Commission meeting to receive public
comments on the Draft EIR.
The City of San Luis Obispo received nine comment letters on the Draft EIR and fi ve
public comments during the public meeting. A Final EIR was prepared that addressed
these comments, and responses to comments received are provided in Chapter 8 of the
Final EIR. While there were several relatively minor changes in the Final EIR, none
resulted in new impacts, or increased the severity of previously identified impacts. None
of the clarifying information in the Final EIR warranted recirculation of the Draft EIR
pursuant to CEQA.
One impact (Impact HAZ-3) was found to be significant and unavoidable. The project
would contribute to new pedestrian demand along Tank Farm Road west of the project
site, which does not have dedicated pedestrian facilities. The potential increase in
pedestrian demand would result in a potential hazard to pedestria ns. The applicant will
be required to reduce this impact by funding and installing interim signage along Tank
Farm Road west of Santa Fe Road to highlight potential safety hazards to pedestrians
along this connection. The signage shall remain in place unti l the future shared-use
pedestrian/bicycle path along the north side of Tank Farm Road between Santa Fe Road
and Innovation Way is constructed and open to the public , an improvement that is out of
the control of the project applicant because it requires the consent and cooperation of the
neighboring property owner.
The Final EIR, including responses to comments on the Draft EIR, maybe be found at
the following link: https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-
development/documents-online/environmental-review-documents/-folder-2187
6.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
The project has been reviewed by various City departments and divisions including
Planning, Engineering, Transportation, Building, Natural Resources, Utilities, and Fire.
Staff has identified several unique conditions given the specific circumstances of the
project that would require special conditions. Specific attention should be provided on the
following conditions: Engineering Division has identified Conditions No. 30, 31, 36, and
39-48, to address stormwater control, drainage, and floodproofing of the site in proximity
to the creek. The Transportation Division has identified Condition No. 120 to require a
new streetlight located near the eastern property line. Other comments have been
incorporated into the draft resolutions as conditions of approval.
Page 39 of 401
Item 4a
ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Planning Commission Report – November 17, 2021
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
1. Continue the item. An action to continue the hearing should include a detailed
list of additional information or analysis required.
2. Recommend denial of the project. An action recommending that the City
Council deny the project should include findings that cite the basis for denial
and should reference inconsistency with the General Plan, Community Design
Guidelines, AASP, Zoning Regulations or other policy documents. Should the
PC want to pursue this alternative, Staff recommends that the specific findings
under Subdivision Regulations Section 16.10.130 are adequately addressed.
8.0 ATTACHMENTS
A – Draft PC Resolution
B – Draft Ordinance
C – Project Description
D – Project Plans
E – Vesting Common Interest Tentative Parcel Map #21-0015
F – Initiation and Advisory Body Comments Summary
G – ALUC Report and Recommendation 8.18.21
H – Arborist Report
I – AASP Conformity Matrix
J – Revised Project Plan Exhibit
Page 40 of 401
RESOLUTION NO. PC-XXXX-21
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR AND APPROVAL OF THE 600 TANK FARM
MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF 280 RESIDENTIAL
UNITS AND 12,500 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERICAL/OFFICE SPACE,
INCLUDING A CREEK SETBACK EXCEPTION, SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENTS, GENERAL PLAN MAP AMENDMENT, REZONING,
AND VESTING COMMON INTEREST TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #21-
0015; AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND
ATTACHMENTS DATED NOVEMBER 17, 2021 (600 TANK FARM
ROAD, PR-0005-2021, ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021; GENP-
0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City San Luis Obispo conducted a web based
teleconference hearing on April 21, 2020, authorizing the initiation of the project and
issuance of a request for proposals for preparation of an Environmental Impact Report
for the project, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under GENP-0814-2019, Covelop Inc.,
applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Active Transportation Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a web based teleconference hearing on July 16, 2020, and provided
recommended direction on the conceptual designs of the proposed mixed-use
development, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-0216-2020, Covelop Inc.,
applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a web based teleconference hearing on August 17, 2020, and provided
recommended direction on the conceptual designs of the proposed mixed-use
development, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-0216-2020, Covelop Inc.,
applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
web based teleconference hearing on September 23, 2020, and provided direction on the
conceptual designs of the proposed mixed-use development, pursuant to a proceeding
instituted under ARCH-0216-2020, Covelop Inc., applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
web based teleconference hearing on December 9, 2020, for the purposes of reviewing
the scope of the Environmental Impact Report, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under
GENP-0814-2019, SPEC-0407-2020, and EID-0608-2020, Covelop Inc., applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
web based teleconference hearing on July 14, 2021, received public testimony and
Page 41 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 2
provided input on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, pursuant to a proceeding
instituted under ARCH-0406-2021, SBDV-0407-2021, GENP-0814-2019, SPEC-0407-
2020, and EID-0608-2020, Covelop Inc., applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Airport Land Use Commission of the County of San Luis Obispo,
upon receipt of a formal referral from the City of San Luis Obispo, conducted a web based
teleconference hearing on August 18, 2021, and determined consistency with the San
Luis Obispo County Regional Airport Land Use Plan subject to conditions, pursuant to a
proceeding instituted under PR-0005-2020, Covelop Inc., applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Tree Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a web
based teleconference hearing on September 27, 2021, and provided recommendations
for consideration by the Planning Commission including a recommendation of
consistency with the City’s Tree Regulations, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under
ARCH-0406-2021, Covelop Inc., applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a web based teleconference hearing on October 4, 2021, and recommended
approval of the project to the Planning Commission based on consistency with the
Community Design Guidelines and Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP) Design Standards
and Guidelines, including recommended directional items pursuant to a proceeding
instituted under ARCH-0406-2021, Covelop Inc., applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
web based teleconference hearing on November 17, 2021, pursuant to a proceeding
instituted under ARCH-0406-2021, SBDV-0407-2021, GENP-0814-2019, SPEC-0407-
2020, and EID-0608-2020, Covelop Inc., applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo has duly
considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and
evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the
manner required by law; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City
of San Luis Obispo to recommend to the City Council certification of the Final
Environmental Impact Report (EIR), and approval of the General Plan Map Amendment,
Rezone, Airport Area Specific Plan Amendment, Vesting Common Interest Tentative
Parcel Map, and Major Development Review. This resolution is based on the following
findings, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) findings and Statement of
Overriding Considerations, mitigation measures, and conditions:
Page 42 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 3
SECTION 1. Findings. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend
certification of the 600 Tank Farm Mixed-Use EIR and approval of the project to the City
Council, inclusive of applications ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021; GENP-0814-
2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020, a Specific Plan Amendment, General Plan
Amendment/Re-zoning, Vesting Common Interest Tentative Tract Map, and Final EIR,
based on the following findings:
General Plan Map Amendment and Airport Area Specific Plan Amendments Findings
1. The Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP) as amended is consistent with policy
direction for the area included in the General Plan, and in particular with the
following General Plan policies: Policy LUE Policy 1.5 Jobs/Housing Relationship,
because the project provides additional housing opportunities at a location close
to major employers and multimodal transportation facilities; LUE Policy 2.2.6 and
2.2.7, which promote quality neighborhoods and infill development, because the
project is located within walking distance to MindBody Headquarters, SESLOC
Credit Union, other nearby employers as well as retail uses and other services of
the Marigold Shopping Center; and Circulation Element policies 3.1.7 Transit
Service Access, 4.1.1 Bicycle Use, and 5.1.2 Sidewalks and Paths, because SLO
Transit Routes 1 and 3 provide service to the project site area and because the
project would provide improvements to bicyclist and pedestrian facilities in the
project area.
2. The AASP Amendment, General Plan Map Amendment, and Rezone allow the
implementation of the 600 Tank Farm Road Mixed-Use Project by:
a. Updating the City’ s General Plan and Specific Plan land use maps from
Business Park to Services Manufacturing to reflect the development pattern
included in the 600 Tank Farm Mixed-Use development plan;
b. Rezoning the site from Business Park (BP-SP) to Commercial Services (C-
S-SP) to be consistent with the General Plan, Specific Plan, and
development plan.
3. As conditioned, the County of San Luis Obispo Airport Land Use Commission, on
August 18, 2021, found the proposed project to be consistent with the Airport Land
Use Plan.
4. The proposed General Plan Map Amendment and AASP Amendments will not
conflict with easements for access through the property.
Development Review Findings
5. 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 will be compatible
with site constraints and the scale and character of the neighborhood.
Page 43 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 4
6. The proposed project is consistent with Land Use Element Policy 2.3.6 “Housing
and Businesses” and 3.8.5 “Mixed Uses” because future development facilitated
by the proposed project would provide residential dwellings within a commercial
district near neighborhood commercial centers, major activity nodes and transit
opportunities. Housing at this location is compatible with proposed and existing
commercial and residential uses on adjacent properties.
7. The project is consistent with Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 4.4.3
because the project promotes higher-density, compact housing to achieve more
efficient use of public facilities and services and to improve the jobs/housing
balance.
8. As conditioned, the project design maintains consistency with the City’s
Community Design Guidelines and Chapter 5 (Community Design) of the AASP
through articulation, massing, and a mix of color/finish materials that are
compatible with the neighborhood and complementary to other development within
the immediate vicinity. The project design is consistent with the Community Design
Guidelines by providing a variety of architectural treatments that add visual interest
and articulation to the building design that complements the design and scale of
the existing structures in the surrounding neighborhood (CDG, Chapter 5.4).
9. The proposed height, mass and scale of the project will not negatively alter the
overall character of the neighborhood or the street’s appearance because the
development is designed in a manner that does not deprive reasonable solar
access to adjacent properties. The project incorporates vertical and horizontal wall
plan offsets, which provide a high-quality and aesthetically pleasing architectural
design.
Mixed-use Project Findings
10. As conditioned, the project is consistent with the Zoning Regulations for Mixed-
Use Projects (Section 17.70.130), because the proposed building design complies
with objective design criteria and performance standards for mixed-use
development by providing internal compatibility between the different uses in terms
of noise, hours of operation, vehicle and pedestrian circulation, access, and use of
open space.
Creek Setback Exception Findings
11. The location and design of the Buildings 4, 8, 14, 19, and 21, and the proposed
bike/pedestrian path receiving the exception will minimize impacts to scenic
resources, water quality, and riparian habitat, including opportunities for wildlife
habitation, rest, and movement, because the project includes the implementation
of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) through BIO-2(e).
Page 44 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 5
12. As conditioned, the exceptions for portions of Buildings 14, 19, and 21 to reduce
the setback requirement to 30 feet, where 35 feet is normally required, and for
portions of the upper story setbacks for Buildings 4, 8, 14, 19, and 21 to reduce
the setback requirement to 30 feet, where 45 feet is normally required, as well as
the proposed bike path within the creek setback will not limit the City’s design
options for providing flood control measures that are needed to achieve adopted
City flood policies.
13. The exceptions will not prevent the implementation of City-adopted plans, nor
increase the adverse environmental effects of implementing such plans because
the proposed bike/pedestrian path is designed in accordance with the Active
Transportation Plan.
14. There are circumstances applying to the site, such as a greater creek setback
requirement than other properties in the vicinity, that would deprive the property of
privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity with the same zoning.
15. The exceptions will not constitute a grant of special privilege because the
bike/pedestrian path is envisioned with the Active Transportation Plan to provide
a connection to the Damien Garcia Sports Fields, and the exceptions for Buildings
4, 8, 14, 19, and 21 are considered minor.
16. The exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
property in the area of the project or downstream, because the project includes the
implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) through BIO-2(e).
17. A larger creek setback within the project design is not possible without a
substantial project redesign that could adversely affect site circulation, safety,
functionality, and the provision of housing consistent with City goals. with
applicable City goals..
Placement of Residential Units Along Street Frontage Findings
18. The allowance of ground-floor residential units within the first 50 feet of floor area
adjacent to the street for Buildings 3, 7, and 9, will not negatively alter the overall
character of the neighborhood or the streets appearance because primary
commercial activities in the neighborhood are oriented toward the intersection of
Tank Farm Road and Santa Fe Road.
19. The majority of residential uses within the project are outside the 60-decbel noise
contour from Tank Farm Road or are otherwise shielded by the commercial mixed
use structure adjacent to Tank Farm Road.
20. Those residences within the structures adjacent to Santa Fe Road can meet state
and local interior noise standard of 45 decibels through a project design that that
Page 45 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 6
includes building materials and windows that attenuate noise to achieve this
standard.
21. The residential units within the project would enhance the pedestrian environment,
in that those residents would be adjacent to commercial development, which
encourages walking to such services, rather than taking a vehicle to a similar
commercial establishment elsewhere in the City. Moreover, front doors that face
the street would encourage direct pedestrian access to Santa Fe Road, which is
consistent with the City‘s goal of providing multimodal transportation facilities.
Fence Height Exception Findings
22. As conditioned, the proposed height of 15 feet for the retaining wall along the west
property line between the Santa Fe Road cul-de-sac and Building 26 is acceptable
because the fence provides adequate security and safety for circulation of the site
due to the drop in grade.
23. As conditioned, the proposed fence’s design, placement, and materials are
consistent with the Community Design Guidelines because it is of the same quality
as adjacent structures and fences in the vicinity.
24. No public purpose is served by strict compliance with the City’s fence height
standards because the retaining walls will not create a visible or tangible
obstruction between properties or the public right-of-way because the retaining
walls are predominantly visible from within the project site that provides necessary
access and circulation for the project.
25. As conditioned, the fences will not have any sight distance impacts for vehicles
entering and exiting properties since there is adequate clearance between the
retaining walls and the entrances to the street.
Parking Reduction Findings
26. The proposed 6.8 percent vehicle parking reduction is appropriate for the site
because the project is located within a quarter mile of a regularly scheduled transit
stop, consistent with AASP Standard 5.4.5 which qualifies for a reduction up to 10
percent.
27. As conditioned, the project qualifies for a 6.8 percent parking reduction in
accordance with Zoning Regulations Section 17.72.050.C and the Institute of
Transportation Engineers Parking Demand, where the peak hours of use will not
overlap or coincide to the degree that peak demand for parking spaces from all
uses or projects will be greater than the total supply of spaces.
Vesting Common Interest Tentative Parcel Map Findings
Page 46 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 7
28. As conditioned, the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for design
and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan, including compatibility with
objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the General Plan
and the AASP because Housing Element Program 6.13 specifically identifies the
project site as appropriate for rezoning to provide for higher-density or mixed-use
housing as compatible with other projects in the vicinity.
29. The design of the project is consistent with the City’s Clean Energy Choice
Program that provides for future natural heating, or cooling opportunities.
30. As conditioned, the applicant has agreed to an indemnification clause to 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 site is physically suited for the type and density
allowed in the Service Commercial zone (C-S-SP) within the Specific Plan overlay,
because the adjacent property at 650 Tank Farm is also zoned C-S-SP and
provides for a similar mixed-use development project.
31. The design of the tentative map is not likely to cause serious health problems,
substantial environmental damage, or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat, since the subdivision will occur on a previously developed
site within an urbanized area and, approval of this subdivision does not include
variances or exceptions from applicable design standards set forth in the
Subdivision Regulations.
32. The project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of those living
or working on the site and vicinity since it has been found in conformance with
development standards and the Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP), and the project
will be compatible with site constraints and the scale and character of the site and
the surrounding neighborhood.
33. As conditioned, the design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements for
access through, or use of property within, the proposed subdivision since any
existing easements will remain in place following the subdivision and will be
applicable to the newly-created parcels; and code requirements require the
recordation of new easements and the relocation of utilities wherever necessary
to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and Public Works
Department Director.
34. As conditioned, the proposed subdivision will not be detrimental to the health,
safety, or welfare of those working or residing in the vicinity. The property is not
subject to fault rupture or landslide hazards. As a Common Interest Subdivision,
Page 47 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 8
the project is subject to architectural review and enforcement of relevant building
and safety codes.
35. The project is consistent with Housing Element Policies 6.1 and 7.4 because the
project supports the development of more housing in accordance with the assigned
Regional Housing Needs Allocation and establishes a new neighborhood, with
pedestrian and bicycle linkages that provide direct, convenient and safe access to
adjacent neighborhoods consistent with the AASP.
SECTION 2. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Findings, Mitigation
Measures, and Mitigation Monitoring Program. Based upon all the evidence, the Planning
Commission recommends the City Council certify the Final Environmental Impact Report
(FEIR) (State Clearing House #2020110426), subject to the following CEQA findings in
support of all entitlements related to the 600 Tank Farm Mixed-Use project:
1. The 600 Tank Farm Mixed Use Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) was
prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
the State CEQA Guidelines, adequately addressing impacts associated with the
project.
2. The proposed project is consistent with the requirements of the 600 Tank Farm
Mixed-Use FEIR as proposed based on the CEQA Findings and Statement of
Overriding Considerations, and prepared consistent with CEQA Guidelines
Sections 15091 and 15093, and this approval incorporates those FEIR mitigation
measures as applicable to Vesting Common Interest Tentative Parcel Map #21-
0015, as detailed below, and described more fully in the attached CEQA Findings
of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations (Exhibit A) and Mitigation,
Monitoring, and Reporting Program (Exhibit B).
3. All potentially significant effects were analyzed adequately in the referenced FEIR,
and reduced to the extent feasible, provided identified mitigation measures are
incorporated into the project and the mitigation monitoring program (refer to Exhibit
B, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program).
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 hereby recommends final approval of the project to the City Council with
incorporation of the following conditions:
Planning Division
1. Final project design and construction drawings submitted for a building permit shall
be in substantial compliance with the project plans approved by the Planning
Page 48 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 9
Commission (ARCH-0406-2021). A separate, full-size sheet shall be included in
working drawings submitted for a building permit that lists all conditions and code
requirements of project approval listed as sheet number 2. Reference shall be
made in the margin of listed items as to where in plans requirements are
addressed. Any change to approved design, colors, materials, landscaping, or
other conditions of approval must be approved by the Director or Architectural
Review Commission, as deemed appropriate.
2. Plans submitted for a building permit shall incorporate the design considerations
as described at the ARC hearing on October 4, 2021, the final designs of the
proposed project shall be modified to incorporate the following items, subject to
the satisfaction of the Community Development Director:
a. Provide one more color scheme for Building A types.
b. Incorporate balcony railings that provide more privacy; 66%-75% solid
panels to screen views.
c. On the Building B rear elevation provide white garage doors rather than gray
to blend in more.
d. Provide more planting or other visual indicators for pedestrians and traffic
calming (referencing the red arrow shown on sheet A10 descending from
Santa Fe Road)
e. Use landscaping to reduce massing of Building E.
f. Provide well thought out pedestrian-scale elements.
3. Plans submitted for a building permit shall call out the colors and materials of all
proposed building surfaces and other improvements. Colors and materials shall
be consistent with the color and material board submitted with Major Development
(Architectural) Review application. The project shall avoid repetition of design
color schemes, such that adjacent townhomes or buildings of a similar layout use
different color schemes. The applicant shall also note the use of smooth finish
stucco on the building plans to the satisfaction of the Community Development
Director.
4. Plans submitted for a building permit shall include recessed window details or
equivalent shadow variation, and all other details including but not limited to
awnings and railings. Plans shall indicate the type of materials for the window
frames and mullions, their dimensions, and colors. Plans shall include the
materials and dimensions of all lintels, sills, surrounds recesses and other related
window features. Plans shall demonstrate the use of high-quality materials for all
design features that reflect the architectural style of the project and are compatible
with the neighborhood character, to the approval of the Community Development
Director.
5. Plans submitted for a building permit shall include a revised railing system for the
balconies that provides a design that visually obscures views of storage on the
Page 49 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 10
balconies and provides additional privacy between existing and new residential
units, subject to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
6. The property owner shall be responsible for maintaining and updating the current
parking calculation for the commercial component of the project upon the submittal
of Planning and Building permits for tenant changes or improvements, and/or each
business license, to ensure the site does not become under-parked.
7. All surface parking spaces must be available for common use and not exclusively
assigned to any individual use, required residential parking may be reserved, but
commercial parking must be made available for guests or overflow from
residences.
8. Plans submitted for a building permit shall clearly depict the location of all required
short and long-term bicycle parking for all intended uses, plans submitted for
construction permits shall include bicycle lockers or interior space within each
residential unit or parking area for the storage of at least two bicycle per residential
unit. Short-term bicycle racks such as “Peak Racks” shall be installed in close
proximity to, and visible from, the main entry into the buildings (inverted “U” rack
designs shall not be permitted). Sufficient detail shall be provided about the
placement and design of bike racks and lockers to demonstrate compliance with
relevant Engineering Standards and Community Design Guidelines, to the
satisfaction of the Public Works and Community Development Directors.
9. Plans submitted for building permit shall include a photometric plan, demonstrating
compliance with maximum light intensity standards not to exceed a maintained
value of 10 foot-candles. The locations of all lighting, including bollard style
landscaping or path lighting, shall be included in plans submitted for a building
permit. All wall-mounted lighting fixtures shall be clearly called out on building
elevations included as part of working drawings. All wall-mounted lighting shall
complement building architecture. The lighting schedule for the building shall
include a graphic representation of the proposed lighting fixtures and cut-sheets
on the submitted building plans. The selected fixture(s) shall be shielded to ensure
that light is directed downward consistent with the requirements of the City’s Night
Sky Preservation standards contained in Chapter §17.70.100 of the Zoning
Regulations.
10. Mechanical and electrical equipment shall be located internally to the buildings.
With submittal of working drawings, the applicant shall include sectional views of
the buildings, which clearly show the sizes of any proposed condensers and other
mechanical equipment. If any condensers, transformers, or other mechanical
equipment are to be ground mounted or placed on the roof, plans submitted for a
building permit shall confirm that these features will be adequately screened. A
line-of-sight diagram may be required to confirm that proposed screening will be
adequate. This condition applies to initial construction and later improvements.
Page 50 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 11
11. The storage area for trash and recycling cans shall be screened from the public
right-of-way consistent with §17.70.200 of the Zoning Regulations. The subject
property shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner at all times; free of
excessive leaves, branches, and other landscape material. The applicant shall be
responsible for the clean-up of any landscape material in the public right-of-way.
12. A final landscaping plan, including irrigation details and plans, shall be submitted
to the Community Development Department along with working drawings. The
legend for the landscaping plan shall include the sizes and species of all
groundcovers, shrubs, and trees with corresponding symbols for each plant
material showing their specific locations on plans. Landscaping plans shall include
the following information, at a minimum:
a. The species, diameter at breast height, location, and condition of all existing
trees;
b. Identification of trees that will be retained, removed, or relocated;
c. Location and size of plant and tree species proposed to be planted;
d. The location of proposed utilities, driveways, street tree locations, and the
size and species of proposed street trees; and
e. A reclaimed water irrigation plan.
13. Plans submitted for construction permits shall include elevation and detail
drawings of all walls and fences. Fences, walls, and hedges will comply with the
development standards described in the Zoning Regulations (§17.70.070 –
Fences, Walls, and Hedges), except those identified in the Wall Height Exception
attached to the staff report dated November 17, 2021. Walls and fences should
remain as low as possible, long expanses of fence or wall surfaces shall be offset
and architecturally designed to prevent monotony. Evergreen ivy shall be planted
along the downslope side of all retaining walls that exceed 6-feet in height, planting
of ivy shall be spaced out at a minimum of every 15 feet along the retaining walls,
to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
14. The location of any required backflow preventer and double-check assembly shall
be shown on all site plans submitted for a building permit, including the
landscaping plan. Construction plans shall also include a scaled diagram of the
equipment proposed. Where possible, as determined by the Utilities Director,
equipment shall be located inside the building within 20 feet of the front property
line. Where this is not possible, as determined by the Utilities Director, the back-
flow preventer and double-check assembly shall be located in the street yard and
screened using a combination of paint color, landscaping and, if deemed
appropriate by the Community Development Director, a low wall. The size and
configuration of such equipment shall be subject to review and approval by the
Utilities and Community Development Directors.
15. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit an application and
Page 51 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 12
receive approval for the installation of public art as part of the project or pay the in-
lieu fee (Municipal Code §17.32.030.E.5.b.(ii).(g)). Public art shall be installed prior
to occupancy of the project, to the satisfaction of the Community Development
Director.
16. The design of proposed structures will incorporate noise attenuating construction
techniques that reduces noise exposure to acceptable levels. Exposure in outdoor
activity areas must not exceed 60 dB and indoor exposure must not exceed 45 dB
consistent with the City’s Noise Ordinance. Plans submitted for construction
permits must clearly indicate and describe noise attenuation measures,
techniques, and materials, and demonstrates their compliance with noise levels
limits.
17. Prior to building occupancy, the owner of the property shall provide a Residential
Noise Notice in writing for residential occupants stating that the property is located
within a commercial zone in an urban-type environment and that noise levels may
be higher than a strictly residential area.
18. Plans submitted for a building permit shall ensure consistency with the Airport Land
Use Commission’s (ALUC) conditions from the August 18, 2021 hearing. Any
increase in the number of dwelling units or commercial square footage shall be
referred to the ALUC for determination of consistency with the Airport Land Use
Plan (ALUP). The project is subject to the following ALUC conditions;
a. The average density/intensity for the site shall not exceed 75 persons per
acre.
b. The densest portion of the site (southwest 1 acre containing the two mixed-
use buildings) shall have an intensity not to exceed 150 persons per acre.
c. The maximum height limit of structures on the Project site shall not exceed
36 feet for any occupied structures, and 46 feet for any non-occupied
architectural features. The construction plans for the proposed dwelling
shall be submitted via FAA Form 7460-1 to the Air Traffic Division of the
FAA regional office having jurisdiction over San Luis Obispo County at least
45 days before proposed construction or application for a building permit,
to determine compliance with the provisions of FAR Part 77.
d. The Project shall comply with all noise policies as required by the ALUP.
e. No structure, landscaping, apparatus, or other feature, whether temporary
or permanent in nature shall constitute an obstruction to air navigation or a
hazard to air navigation, as defined by the ALUP.
f. Any use is prohibited that may entail characteristics which would potentially
interfere with the takeoff, landing, or maneuvering of aircraft at the Airport,
including:
• Creation of electrical interference with navigation signals or radio
communication between the aircraft and airport;
• Lighting which is difficult to distinguish from airport lighting;
Page 52 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 13
• Glare in the eyes of pilots using the airport;
• Uses which attract birds and create bird strike hazards;
• Uses which produce visually significant quantities of smoke; and
• Uses which entail a risk of physical injury to operators or passengers of
aircraft (e.g., exterior laser light demonstrations or shows).
g. Avigation easements shall be recorded for each property developed within
the Project site prior to the issuance of any building permit or land use
permit.
h. All owners, potential purchasers, occupants (whether as owners or renters),
and potential occupants (whether as owners or renters) shall receive full
and accurate disclosure concerning the noise, safety, or overflight impacts
associated with Airport operations prior to entering any contractual
obligation to purchase, lease, rent, or otherwise occupy any property or
properties within the Airport area.
19. Any new proposed signage in addition to the monument sign shall be reviewed by
the Planning Division to ensure appropriateness for the site and compliance with
the Sign Regulations. Signage shall coordinate with building architecture and the
type of land use. The Director may refer additional signage to the ARC if it seems
excessive or out of character with the project.
Housing Programs – Community Development Department
20. Prior to the issuance of construction permits, the city and the project owners shall
enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement, to be recorded in the office of the
county recorder. The agreement shall specify mechanisms or procedures to
assure the continued affordability and availability of 11 units (three studios, six 1-
bedrooms, and two 2-bedroom units) to moderate income households that is of the
same size, appearance and basic quality as the market-rate units, to the
satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
Engineering Division – Public Works/Community Development
21. The development project plans shall be in accordance with the approved tentative
map and any mitigation measures or conditions of approval related to Vesting
Common Interest Tentative Parcel Map SLO 21-0015 (SBDV-0407-2021) and the
certified Final EIR and approved Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
22. The public and subdivision improvements related to this development shall be
approved or substantially approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works and
Community Development Departments prior to building permit issuance for the
development project.
23. Construction and/or improvement phasing, if proposed, shall be approved to the
Page 53 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 14
satisfaction of the directors of Community Development, Public Works, and Utility
Departments.
24. Final roadway alignment shall be substantially in conformance with the AASP,
Active Transportation Plan, and City Engineering Standards except where the
applicant has requested and been granted a formal design exception by the Public
Works Director or designee.
25. A separate public improvement/subdivision improvement plan application, review
fee, and inspection fee will be required in accordance with the Engineering fee
schedule in effect at the time of plan submittal. The plans and supporting
documents shall be in accordance with the codes and standards in effect at the
time of application.
26. A separate demolition permit will be required for the removal of any existing non-
exempt structures, if applicable.
27. The improvement plans and building plan submittals shall include a complete
topographic survey and/or existing site development plans showing all existing
structures, site improvements, utilities, water wells, private waste disposal
systems, tanks, and trees, if applicable. The plan shall clarify the limits of the
demolitions and improvements to remain.
28. The plans shall include a complete tree summary show the diameter and species
of all trees. The plans 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.
29. Invasive plant species, if discovered along the Acacia Creek corridor or on site
shall be removed or eradicated to the satisfaction of the Planning Division and
Natural Resources Manager.
30. 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 and/or authorizations and/or
authorizations from the Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish
and Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 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 plans
and/or development submittal supporting documents.
31. 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 permit issuance.
Page 54 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 15
32. The site development plan and grading plan shall show and honor the entitled
design for the pedestrian and emergency vehicle access across Acacia Creek to
650 Tank Farm Road.
33. A reciprocal access agreement with 650 Tank Farm Road shall be recorded to
provide continuity for the pedestrian/bikeway accessways. The agreement shall
be recorded in junction with the parcel map recordation and/or prior to building
permit issuance for the development project.
34. Unless an alternate design is approved by the Planning Division and the Public
Works/Transportation Division, the proposed bike and pedestrian walks and
pathways shall be designed and constructed of Portland Cement Concrete per City
Engineering Standards.
35. The final site and stairway designs shall verify that required handrail extensions
will not project into walkways and the bikeway or required 2’ shoulder areas.
36. The limits of demolitions, culvert removal, rubble removal, and creek
cleaning/restoration in the area of the existing Acacia Creek crossing and access
easement shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City Biologist and Natural
Resources Manager.
37. Depending upon project timing through this corridor of Tank Farm Road, off-site
improvements currently proposed with the mixed-use development located at 650
Tank Farm Road may be required to accommodate motor vehicle, bike, and
pedestrian circulation improvements and their transitions to the existing
improvements.
38. The applicant/developer may request that the City support a private
reimbursement agreement for certain off-site improvements or infrastructure
oversizing that are considered to be in excess of those required to support the
proposed development.
39. If applicable for any off-site improvements, the limits of improvements within the
creek corridors required for the Tank Farm Road widening shall be approved by
the Public Works Director in collaboration with the City Biologist and Natural
Resources Manager. Additional silt and debris removal may be required within the
culverts and at their downstream outlets.
40. The development plans, building plans, grading/drainage plans, and public
improvement plans shall show and note compliance with the City’s Drainage
Design Manual, Floodplain Management Regulations, and Post Construction
Stormwater Regulations (PCRs).
41. The project plans and reports shall show that the new structures will be located
Page 55 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 16
outside of the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) and shall be constructed with
finish floors at least 1’ above any established Base Flood Elevation(s). A
Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) shall be processed and approved
prior to grading or placement of fill within the SFHA. The final Letter of Map
Revision (LOMR) shall be processed within 6 months after the completion of
grading and shall be finally approved prior to building permit issuance for any
structures located within the existing and unamended SFHA.
42. The grading and drainage plan and associate reports shall evaluate the run-on
from the adjoining “flower mound”. The plan and analysis shall evaluate how any
run-on will be collected and conveyed to a non-erosive outlet.
43. The grading and drainage plan shall evaluate the run-off from the development
improvements, including any run-off from the partial/interim development of Santa
Fe, Tank Farm Road, and the round-a-bout. The analysis shall include both water
quantity and water quality treatment.
44. This project site shall include the private and public improvements related to this
common plan for evaluation of the PCRs. All off-site altered or replaced impervious
surfaces related to the development of the Santa Fe extension, round-a-bout
improvements, and Tank Farm Road improvements shall be included as Drainage
Management Areas (DMAs) with appropriate water quality treatment and retention
strategies. Temporary basins or Storm Water Control Measures (SCMs) may be
proposed.
45. Any off-site easements or easement agreements required for the proposed
improvements and SCM’s shall be recorded prior to plan approvals. A separate
grading permit and encroachment permits may be required from the County of San
Luis Obispo for work or construction staging that occurs outside the city limits or
within the County public right-of-way.
46. An Operation and Maintenance Manual will be required with the improvement and
building permit application submittals. A separate Private Stormwater Conveyance
Agreement shall be recorded prior to approvals.
47. Unless specifically approved by the Public Works Department all stormwater
control measures (SCMs) shall be located on private property and shall be
maintained by the property owner, a Property Owner Association, or Homeowner
Association.
48. Any SCMs approved for location within an existing or future public right-of-way
may require an encroachment and maintenance agreement with the city and/or
County unless the City or County agree to any maintenance.
49. Walls, fences, and wall-fence combinations shall meet the wall height
Page 56 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 17
requirements in the zoning code and community design guidelines to the
satisfaction of the Planning Division, unless a Fence Height Exception is approved
pursuant to the City Zoning Regulations. Tiered walls and/or off-site grading may
be required to eliminate walls or reduce the wall height in the area of the “flower
mound” along the tract boundary at lots 5 and 7.
50. All site retaining walls shall be evaluated for areas needing fall protection
fencing/guardrails or privacy fencing that would increase the height of the wall-
fence combination.
51. Access controls for the proposed new bridge across Acacia Creek shall be
approved to the satisfaction of the Fire Department and shall be in accordance
with City Engineering Standards. An offsite easement or license agreement may
be required from the property owner at 650 Tank Farm to construct or improve any
required emergency access or proposed construction access across the adjoining
parcel.
52. Unless a phased construction plan is approved by the Community Development
Department, all access roads, required secondary access, fire department access,
and any required fire hydrant installations shall be completed prior to commencing
with combustible construction.
53. Any required or proposed secondary access road(s) shall comply with City
Standards and guidelines, ADA standards, and the California Fire and Building
codes.
54. The developer shall exhaust reasonable efforts to complete the final design and
construction of the off-site improvements to the ultimate plan to limit the amount of
throw away improvements. Phased, partial, or temporary improvements may be
considered and shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works and
Community Development Departments. Temporary improvements may include
water quality treatment BMPs.
55. An offsite easement or license agreement may be required from Chevron to
construct the proposed Tank Farm and Santa Fe improvements.
56. Offers of dedication will be required for any Tank Farm Road widening, round-a-
bout construction, Santa Fe Road construction, cul-de-sac improvements, grading,
drainage, and slope easements.
57. The Tank Farm Road improvements shall conform to any existing endorsed and
entitled designs and/or built-out improvements or shall provide for a reasonable
transition to the existing unimproved sections to the satisfaction of the Public
Works Department.
Page 57 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 18
58. Except as set forth herein, all public improvements, including any off-site
improvements, shall be designed, and completed to the satisfaction of the Public
Works Department, Utilities Department and Fire Department. Public
Improvements shall be in substantial conformance with the Airport Area Specific
Plan (AASP), Active Transportation Plan, and City Standard Specifications and
Engineering Standards, except where the project applicant and/or the City have
requested and been granted a formal design exception. Where conflicts occur
between the AASP and other adopted City Standards, plans or policies, final
determination shall be provided by the City Engineer.
59. Unless stated otherwise in these conditions of approval, the public improvements
related to this development shall be approved or substantially approved to the
satisfaction of the Public Works and Community Development Departments prior
to issuance of any building permits and improvements shall be completed prior to
issuance of first occupancy permits. Prior to approval of any deferrals, the project
applicant shall demonstrate that the construction of the required improvements is
impractical to the satisfaction of the Community Development and Public Works
Directors.
60. Plans submitted for a building permit should include a phased improvement plan
with alternate designs and transitions, subject to the satisfaction of the Public
Works and Community Development Directors..
61. The project applicant shall be responsible for acquiring any off-site
dedication/acquisition of property for public right-of-way purposes necessary to
facilitate orderly development of the public improvements required to be
constructed by the applicant as described herein. The project applicant shall work
with the City and the landowner(s) to acquire the necessary rights-of-way. In the
event the applicant is unable to acquire said rights-of-way, the City Council may
consider lending the applicant its powers of condemnation to acquire the off-site
right-of-way dedication, including any necessary slope and drainage easements.
If condemnation is required, the applicant shall agree to pay all costs associated
with the off-site right-of-way acquisition (including attorney fees and court costs).
It should be noted that some right-of-way acquisition may require coordination with
and approval by the County of San Luis Obispo.
62. With respect to any off-site improvements, prior to the approval of the development
improvement plans or the filing of the Parcel Map, the developer/subdivider shall
either:
a. Clearly demonstrate their right to construct the improvements by showing
access to, title or interest in the property in a form acceptable to the City
Engineer; or,
b. Demonstrate, in writing, that the subdivider has exhausted all reasonable
efforts to acquire interest to the subject property and request that the City
Page 58 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 19
assist in acquiring the property required for the construction of such
improvements and exercise its power of eminent domain in accordance with
Government Code Section 66462 .5 to do so, if necessary. Subdivider shall
also enter into an agreement with the City to pay all costs of such acquisition
including, but not limited to, all costs associated with condemnation. Said
agreement shall be in a form acceptable to the City Engineer and the City
Attorney. If condemnation proceedings are required, the subdivider shall
submit, in a form acceptable to the City Engineer, the following documents
regarding the property to be acquired:
i. Property legal description and sketch stamped and signed by a
Licensed Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer authorized to practice land
surveying in the State of California.
ii. Preliminary title report including chain of title and litigation guarantee;
iii. Appraisal of the property by a City approved appraiser. In the course
of obtaining such appraisal, the property owner(s) must be given an
opportunity to accompany the appraiser during any inspection of the
property or acknowledge in writing that they knowingly waived the
right to do so;
iv. Copies of all written correspondence with off-site property owners
including purchase summary of formal offers and counter offers to
purchase at the appraised price.
v. Prior to submittal of the aforementioned documents for City Engineer
approval, the Subdivider shall deposit with the City all or a portion of
the anticipated costs, as determined by the City Attorney, of the
condemnation proceedings. The City does not and cannot guarantee
that the necessary property rights can be acquired or will, in fact, be
acquired. All necessary procedures of law would apply and would
have to be followed.
63. All public utilities including water, recycled water, sewer, and public storm drain
systems shall comply with City Engineering Standards. The final line and grade
for all public utilities shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works and
Utilities departments.
64. The improvement plans shall show the water, fire, and recycled water service
connections, meters, and backflow prevention devices designed per City
Engineering Standards. The services shall remain perpendicular to the main/street
rights-of-way until they reach their respective meters or backflow prevention
device. Changes in direction to serve the private on-sight system shall occur on
private property and not within the respective public rights-of-way.
65. The improvement plan submittal shall include a sewer system analysis to establish
the sizing, line, and grade for the public sewer main extension in Santa Fe to the
satisfaction of the Public Works and Utilities departments. The analysis shall
Page 59 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 20
consider the proposed sewer depth needed to provide adequate gravity service to
adjoining parcels in accordance with any Specific Plan, Sewer Master Plan, and
previously submitted area tentative map designs as required for orderly
development. The depth design should also consider construction and future
maintenance costs by limiting the depth to what is needed to serve a defined sewer
basin.
66. Street naming of the private streets and site addressing shall be established
through the building permit and subdivision mapping and improvement plan review
processes in accordance with City guidelines.
67. The parking and site development shall show and note compliance with the City’s
Parking and Driveway Standards, Community Design Guidelines, and the AASP.
68. Unless otherwise waived by the City, the use of pervious paving materials should
be expanded to include some of the more extensive parking areas serving the
commercial lease spaces, common area/Club House, and the northerly shared
parking area on Lots 9 and 11.
69. The final property line locations, site development, and building plans shall show
and note compliance with the California Building Code for building setbacks,
exterior wall protection, eave projections, openings, and access/egress. The final
development for the club house building Type F/#10 on Lot 6 shall be evaluated
for the proposed 2’-8” property line setback to the satisfaction of the Fire
Marshal/Building Official.
70. The existing access easements shall be abandoned or quit-claimed, where
necessary, prior to parcel map recordation or approval of the site development
plans.
71. Mailbox unit (MBUs) shall be provided on-site to the satisfaction of the Postal
Service and the City Planning Division. The number and location shall consider
access, convenience, and circulation requirements.
72. Private site lighting shall be provided per City Engineering Standards.
73. The development/improvement plan submittal shall include a complete
construction phasing plan in accordance with the conditions of approval, City
codes, and standards. A truck circulation plan and construction management and
staging plan shall be included with the improvement plan submittal. General truck
routes shall be submitted for review and acceptance by the City. The engineer of
record shall provide a summary of the extent of cut and fill with estimates on the
yards of import and export material. The summary shall include rough grading,
utility trench construction, road construction, AC paving, concrete delivery, and
vertical construction loading estimates on the existing public roadways. The
Page 60 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 21
developer shall either; I ) complete roadway deflection testing before and after
construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and shall complete repairs to
the pre-construction condition, or 2) shall pay a roadway maintenance fee in
accordance with City Engineering Standards and guidelines, or 3) shall propose a
pavement repair/replacement program to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
74. Separate utilities, including water, sewer, gas, electricity, telephone, and cable TV
shall be served to each proposed lot to the satisfaction of the Public Works
Department and serving utility companies. All public and private sewer mains shall
be shown on the development/improvement plans and shall be constructed per the
City’s adopted codes and City Engineering Standards unless a waiver or alternate
standard is otherwise approved by the City. The plans shall clearly delineate and
distinguish the difference between public and private improvements.
75. All new wire utilities shall be placed underground. The underground placement
shall be completed without a net increase in utility poles located within the public
right-of-way unless specifically approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works
and Community Development Departments.
76. The existing overhead wire services and service poles that are located on this
parcel and along the Tank Farm Road frontage shall be removed or services
placed underground within the limits and standards of the supplying utility
companies.
77. City recycled water or another non-potable water source, shall be used for
construction water (dust control, soil compaction, etc.). An annual Construction
Water Permit is available from the City's Utilities Department for the use of recycled
water. Recycled water is readily available near the intersection of Tank Farm Road
and Orcutt Road.
78. The proposed tree removals are supported with the compensatory tree plantings
shown on the plans provided with the Planning Commission Agenda Report on
November 17, 2021, and as reviewed by the Tree Committee. The final tree
species, mix, and specimen size for all street trees and on-site trees shall be
approved by the Planning Division and City Arborist. All street trees shall be
planted per City Engineering Standards. Street trees, including parkway trees and
landscaping shall be irrigated and maintained by the developer, property owner(s),
or HOA.
Engineering Division – Vesting Common Interest Parcel Map Conditions
79. The subdivision, required improvements, conditions, and mitigation measures
shall be in general conformance with the approved development project per
ARCH-0406-2021.
Page 61 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 22
80. Unless otherwise approved for deferral or partial deferral by the City, park land and
park improvement fees shall be paid prior to map recordation or building permit
issuance, whichever occurs first.
81. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private
utilities, access, grading, drainage, open space, slope banks, construction, public
and private streets, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, common driveways, and
maintenance of the same shall be shown on the parcel map and/or shall be
recorded separately prior map recordation. Said easements may be provided for
in part or in total as blanket easements.
82. The parcel map and improvement plans shall show the extent of all existing and
proposed on-site and off-site offers of dedication. Subdivision improvement plans
and or preliminary designs may be required for any deferred improvements so that
dedication limits can be established. These improvements may include but are not
limited to road construction and widening, grading and drainage improvements,
utility easements, utility undergrounding, bridges/culverts, bike bridges, transit
stops, bikeways, pedestrian paths, and intersection improvements.
83. The parcel map and improvement plans shall show and label the separate access
easements to and through the property to the east known as 650 Tank Farm.
84. The subdivider shall dedicate a 10’ wide street tree easement and 15’ wide public
utility easement (P.U.E.) across the Tank Farm Road frontage of each parcel. Said
easements shall be adjacent to and contiguous with all public right-of-way lines
bordering each parcel. Additional site-specific utility easements may be required
by PG&E or other wire utilities related to the required undergrounding and service
requirements for the development.
85. The preliminary PG&E memo shall be reviewed and endorsed by the City and the
engineer of record prior to final designs. Unless otherwise approved for deferral,
the final PG&E handout package(s) for all undergrounding along the southerly and
northerly map boundaries along with the development specific service
requirements shall be reviewed and approved by both the engineer of record and
the City.
86. Access rights shall be dedicated to the City along the Tank Farm Road and Santa
Fe Road frontages except at approved driveway locations. Said dedications shall
be shown and labeled on the parcel map.
87. The developer shall include any other out-of-tract offers of dedication related to the
need for public utility extensions related to orderly development of the AASP that
are not otherwise located within a public street.
Page 62 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 23
88. All private improvements shall be owned and maintained by the individual property
owners, Homeowners Association, and/or a Property Owner’s Association as
applicable. A common area maintenance agreement or other guiding agreement
shall be provided in conjunction with the parcel map submittal. Private
improvements include but are not limited to streets, drive aisles, parking lot
improvements, sidewalks, private pedestrian/bike paths, private sewer
mains/laterals, water services, fire services, reclaimed water services, drainage
systems, detention basin(s), site lighting, landscape, landscape irrigation, and
common areas.
89. A separate easement-agreement shall be processed in a format approved by the
Utilities Department for any future access and maintenance of on-site public water
meters that are served off of a private mainline system
90. A notice of requirements or other agreement acceptable to the City may need to
be recorded in conjunction with the parcel map to clarify development restrictions,
fee payments, conditions of development, and references to any pertinent
conditions of approval related to this map and/or off-site requirements.
91. Off-site improvements, easements and/or dedications may be required to facilitate
through street construction and transitions to the existing roadway, access, cul-de-
sac, round-a-bout, and public water, recycled water and sewer main extensions
beyond the map boundary and in accordance with the AASP.
92. Unless specifically approved by the City, all public and private subdivision
improvements shall be approved prior to map recordation and/or building permit
issuance, whichever occurs first. Subdivision sureties and a subdivision
agreement shall be provided for all subdivision improvements if the map will record
prior to completion of the improvements.
93. Unless phased or interim improvements are approved by the City, all pertinent
public and private subdivision improvements shall be completed prior to building
permit and building permit final inspection approvals/occupancy, respectively.
94. With respect to any off-site improvements, prior to filing of the Parcel Map, the
subdivider shall either:
a. Clearly demonstrate their right to construct the improvements by showing
access to, title or interest in the property in a form acceptable to the City
Engineer; or,
b. Demonstrate, in writing, that the subdivider has exhausted all reasonable
efforts to acquire interest to the subject property and request that the City
assist in acquiring the property required for the construction of such
improvements and exercise its power of eminent domain in accordance with
Government Code Section 66462.5 to do so, if necessary. Subdivider shall
also enter into an agreement with the City to pay all costs of such acquisition
Page 63 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 24
including, but not limited to, all costs associated with condemnation. Said
agreement shall be in a form acceptable to the City Engineer and the City
Attorney. If condemnation proceedings are required, the subdivider shall
submit, in a form acceptable to the City Engineer, the following documents
regarding the property to be acquired:
i. Property legal description and sketch stamped and signed by a
Licensed Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer authorized to practice land
surveying in the State of California;
ii. Preliminary title report including chain of title and litigation guarantee;
iii. Appraisal of the property by a City approved appraiser. In the course
of obtaining such appraisal, the property owner(s) must be given an
opportunity to accompany the appraiser during any inspection of the
property or acknowledge in writing that they knowingly waived the
right to do so;
iv. Copies of all written correspondence with off-site property owners
including purchase summary of formal offers and counter offers to
purchase at the appraised price.
v. Prior to submittal of the aforementioned documents for City Engineer
approval, the Subdivider shall deposit with the City all or a portion of
the anticipated costs, as determined by the City Attorney, of the
condemnation proceedings. The City does not and cannot guarantee
that the necessary property rights can be acquired or will, in fact, be
acquired. All necessary procedures of law would apply and would have
to be followed.
95. All public streets shall conform to City Engineering Standards and AASP including
curb, gutter, and sidewalk, driveway approaches, and curb ramps as approved by
the City Engineer. Where conflicts occur between the City Engineering Standards
and concepts identified in the AASP and/or this project approval, a final
determination on design shall be provided by the City Engineer.
96. Final roadway alignment shall be consistent with the AASP, Bike Plan, and City
Engineering Standards except where the applicant has requested and been
granted a formal design exception.
97. The on-site drive aisles and parking areas shall comply with the Parking and
Driveway Standards and soils engineer recommendations.
98. The improvement plans shall include all final line-of-sight analysis at applicable
intersections to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. Fence heights
and plantings in the areas of control shall be reviewed in conjunction with the
analysis. A separate recorded declaration, covenant, agreement or Notice of
Requirements for private property owner maintenance of sight lines may be
required.
Page 64 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 25
99. Any jurisdictional permits and/or authorizations from the Army Corps of Engineers,
California Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 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.
100. The map submittal shall clarify the limits and extent of the private access rights
shown and referenced on the tentative map and preliminary report. The easements
shall be terminated, quit-claimed, or otherwise adjusted prior to map recordation.
101. The subdivider shall install public street lighting and all associated facilities
including but not limited to conduits, sidewalk vaults, fusing, wiring and luminaires
along all public streets and intersections per City Engineering Standards.
102. Private site lighting shall be provided per City Engineering Standards. Unless
otherwise waived by the City or an alternate method of pathway lighting is
approved, the creek walk/bikeway from the northerly tract boundary to/through the
campus to the adjoining public street(s) shall include pathway lighting per City
Engineering Standards and the City’s Bike Plan.
103. Improvement plans for the entire subdivision, including any off-site improvements
shall be approved or substantially approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works
Department, Utilities Department, and Fire Department prior to map recordation
and prior to building permit issuance.
104. The improvement plans shall clearly show all existing structures, site
improvements, utilities, water wells, septic tanks, leach fields, gas and wire
services, etc. The plan shall include the proposed disposition of the improvements
and any proposed phasing of the removal and demolition. Any above grade or
buried structures and utilities affected by the proposed lot lines shall be removed
and receive final inspection approvals prior to map recordation.
105. A separate demolition permit is required from the building division for building
demolitions, if applicable. A separate permit is required from SLO County
Environmental Health and a plumbing permit from the City of SLO for the
abandonment of any water wells, if applicable.
106. The improvement plan submittal shall include a complete construction phasing
plan in accordance with the conditions of approval, City codes, and standards. A
truck circulation plan and construction management and staging plan shall be
included with the improvement plan submittal. General truck routes shall be
submitted for review and acceptance by the City. The engineer of record shall
provide a summary of the extent of cut and fill with estimates on the yards of import
and export material. The summary shall include rough grading, utility trench
construction, road construction, AC paving, concrete delivery, and vertical
Page 65 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 26
construction loading estimates on the existing public roadways. The developer
shall either; 1) complete roadway deflection testing before and after construction
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and shall complete repairs to the pre-
construction condition, or 2) shall pay a roadway maintenance fee in accordance
with City Engineering Standards and guidelines, or 3) shall propose a pavement
repair/replacement program to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to
acceptance of the subdivision improvements.
107. Separate utilities, including water, sewer, gas, electricity, telephone, and cable TV
shall be served to each lot to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department and
serving utility companies. All public and private sewer mains shall be shown on
the public improvement plans and shall be constructed per City Engineering
Standards unless a waiver or alternate standard is otherwise approved by the City.
The plans shall clearly delineate and distinguish the difference between public and
private improvements. Gas service is not required as a condition of the subdivision
if the applicant has documented the limits or absence of buildings proposing
mixed-fuel options.
108. City recycled water or another non-potable water source, shall be used for
construction water (dust control, soil compaction, etc.). An annual Construction
Water Permit is available from the City’s Utilities Department. Recycled water is
readily available near the intersection of Tank Farm Road and Orcutt Road.
109. Final grades and alignments of all public and/or private water, sewer and storm
drains shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and
Utilities Department. The final location, configuration, and sizing of service laterals
and meters shall be approved in conjunction with the review of the building plans,
fire sprinkler plans, and/or public improvement plans.
110. The improvement plans shall show the location of all domestic and landscape
water meters. The plan shall include service lateral sizes and meter sizes. Sizing
calculations may be required to justify service and meter sizing. Water impact fees
related to the irrigation water meter(s) for any public or private irrigation meter shall
be paid prior to approval of the subdivision improvement plans and
commencement with construction for each construction phase.
111. The final pathway design, location, access controls, and construction shall be
approved by the Planning Division, Public Works Department, and Parks and
Recreation Department. A separate use or license agreement may be required if
not otherwise covered within the property maintenance documentation or CCRs.
112. The public and private improvements are all considered part of the project site and
are subject to the Post Construction Stormwater Regulations as a common plan.
Stormwater Control Measures (SCMs) shall be located on private property unless
specifically allowed within the public rights-of-way by the Public Works
Page 66 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 27
Department. If allowed, they shall be privately maintained under an encroachment
agreement unless certain and limited SCMs are approved for maintenance by the
City or County of San Luis Obispo.
Transportation Division – Public Works
113. Transportation Impact Fees. Prior to issuance of building permits, the project
applicant shall pay all required transportation impact fees, including participation
in the Citywide Transportation Impact Fee Program and the County’s Highway 227
Impact Fee Program. Payment of Citywide Transportation Impact Fees may be
deferred to issuance of first occupancy permits and total fees due may be reduced
to reflect approved fee credits pursuant to the terms of an approved Credit and
Reimbursement Agreement.
114. Reimbursement for Public Improvements. Project applicant may be eligible for
reimbursement for costs related to planning, design and construction of eligible
public improvements. A Public Credit/Reimbursement Agreement must be
obtained prior to building permit issuance to maintain eligibility for financial
reimbursement and shall be subject to approval by the City Council.
115. Tank Farm Road Frontage Improvements. Project applicant shall reconstruct the
Tank Farm Road project frontage to current City Engineering Standards. Unless
otherwise approved by the Public Works Director, plans submitted for Public
Improvement Plans shall include widening the northern side of Tank Farm to a
cross section that substantially conforms with the Airport Area Specific Plan and
Active Transportation Plan, which includes the following typical cross section
elements on the north half of the street: 7’ sidewalk / 9’ parkway / curb and gutter
/ two westbound 12’-13’ auto lanes / raised median / one existing eastbound auto
lane / existing eastbound bike lane. Designs shall be developed in coordination
with the frontage improvements currently in development for the adjacent 650 Tank
Farm Road development to ensure that appropriate geometric transitions.
Improvements shall be approved or substantially approved to the satisfaction of
the Public Works and Community Development Departments prior to issuance of
any building permits and improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of first
occupancy permits.
116. Tank Farm/Santa Fe Roundabout. Project applicant shall be responsible for
constructing a roundabout at the intersection of Tank Farm Road & Santa Fe Road
(west). Unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director, plans submitted
for Public Improvement Plans shall include both the near-term and ultimate layout
for the roundabout, with the near-term configuration reflecting improvements to be
constructed by the project applicant and the ultimate configuration to reflect
remaining improvements to be constructed at a future date by the City or others.
Near-term roundabout improvements shall include the following geometrics:
Page 67 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 28
a. Landscaped center island with mountable truck apron.
b. Two continuous auto lanes approaching and continuing through the
roundabout in the westbound direction, tapering back down to a single lane
on Tank Farm Road west of the intersection.
c. One continuous lane approaching and continuing through the roundabout
in the eastbound direction.
d. One approach lane and one departure lane at the north leg of the
roundabout.
e. No south leg of the roundabout.
f. Concrete curb/gutter and separated bicycle and pedestrian facilities to be
constructed as permanent improvements along the northwest and northeast
quadrants of the roundabout, including the north leg within the functional
area of the roundabout.
g. Temporary improvements along the southern extent of the roundabout,
which may include an asphalt berm and asphalt shoulder/bike lane. All ADA
curb ramps at the roundabout shall be constructed in concrete.
h. Consistent with design guidance per the City’s Active Transportation Plan,
installation of Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) shall be
considered at the crosswalks on the east and west legs of the intersection.
Ultimate improvements, which shall be included in roundabout design
drawings, but are not required to be constructed by the project applicant
include:
a. Widening to provide two continuous auto lanes approaching and continuing
through the roundabout in the eastbound direction.
b. Permanent construction of separated bicycle and pedestrian facilities on the
southwest and southeast quadrants of the roundabout.
c. Construction of the south leg of the roundabout.
Roundabout designs shall be developed in coordination with the frontage
improvements currently in development for the adjacent 650 Tank Farm Road
development to ensure that appropriate geometric transitions are provided
approaching/departing the roundabout. Improvements shall be approved or
substantially approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works and Community
Development Departments prior to issuance of any building permits and
improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of first occupancy permits.
Applicable costs incurred by the applicant in designing and constructing this
public improvement shall be eligible for reimbursement pursuant to the terms
of an approved Public Credit/Reimbursement Agreement.
117. Santa Fe Road Extension. Project applicant shall be responsible for constructing
a portion of the Santa Fe Road Extension north of Tank Farm Road, extending
approximately 570 feet north of Tank Farm Road. Unless otherwise approved by
Page 68 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 29
the Public Works Director, plans submitted for Public Improvement Plans shall
include the following typical cross section elements listed from east to west: 5’
sidewalk / 7’ protected bike lane / 9’ parkway / curb and gutter / two 12’ auto lanes
/ 6.5’ bike lane / 2’ shoulder.
The northern terminus of the proposed Santa Fe Road Extension may be
constructed as an interim cul-de-sac or in the ultimate configuration, a single-lane
roundabout. If constructed as an interim cul-de-sac, the project applicant shall
provide preliminary design concepts for a future single-lane roundabout. Cul-de-
sac plans should be designed to minimize potential throw-away work to a
reasonable extent, and final project property boundaries and right-of-way
dedications shall honor the anticipated footprint required to accommodate the
future roundabout to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. Improvements
shall be approved or substantially approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works
and Community Development Departments prior to issuance of any building
permits and improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of first occupancy
permits.
Applicable costs incurred by the applicant in designing and constructing this public
improvement shall be eligible for reimbursement pursuant to the terms of an
approved Public Credit/Reimbursement Agreement.
118. Tank Farm Road Shared-Use Path. The project applicant shall provide planning
and preliminary engineering support for a proposed shared-use bicycle/pedestrian
path along Tank Farm Road, as identified in the City’s Active Transportation Plan,
extending from the new Tank Farm/Santa Fe Road Roundabout west to either
Innovation Way or Old Windmill Lane, with detailed path alignment and extents to
be confirmed in coordination with the City Public Works Department. Planning and
design for the Tank Farm Shared-Use Path are to be developed at a sufficient level
of detail to provide for an accurate determination of construction quantities,
necessary rights-of-way acquisition, and grading to a level sufficient to conduct a
project-level environmental assessment. Such level of detail is described as a
“65% level of detail” and is equivalent to Caltrans specifications and requirements
for a Plans, Specifications and Estimates (“PS&E”) and as contained and
described in Chapter 2, Section 2-1 through Section 2-2, of Caltrans’ Plans
Preparation Manual, and in accordance with the City’s Improvement Standards
and Standard Specifications.
The project applicant shall provide environmental documentation that summarizes
relevant environmental analysis/concerns provided in previous environmental
reviews conducted to date (including the Project EIR and the Chevron EIR),
describe level of CEQA review anticipated to be required, and provide applicable
technical studies to support the City’s subsequent preparation of a formal CEQA
document.
Page 69 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 30
The engineering design shall provide horizontal and vertical alignments, identify
utility conflicts, drainage strategy, grading needs, storm drainage solutions,
demonstrate compliance with Regional Board and Drainage Design Manual Post
Construction Storm Water regulations, and the approach to creek/stream
crossings. There shall be a rights of way analysis which shall define the right-of-
way needed to construct the path, provide ROW exhibits and legal descriptions to
help guide future negotiations between the City and property owner(s). This level
of design requires a physical survey of the property, environmental studies such
as biology, soils, wetlands, cultural resources, and other, and a detailed set of
plans with accurate vertical and horizontal design elements, structural calcs, and
accurate survey data. Finally, the work shall include an engineer’s Opinion of
Probable Cost (OPIC).
Unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director, notable deliverables
include the following:
a. Three alternative alignments and approaches for consideration and review
by the City. The City shall participate in the selection of these three
alternatives. These alternatives will be at a “schematic” level of detail with
general horizontal and vertical locations. After City comments (which may
include City Advisory body involvement to be managed by the City), the
three alternatives shall be refined and resubmitted to the City for selection
of one alternative. The relevant technical studies shall be submitted to the
City at this stage to inform City review, and for their comment and approval
by the City.
b. A refined alignment shall be presented to the City which reflects the further
development of the selected alternative. The level of detail shall be sufficient
to estimate construction quantities, structural design elements, rights of way
for the improvement, construction elements, earthwork calculations and
balance, and utility locations. An OPIC shall be prepared. This plan set shall
be submitted for City review and comment. City shall provide plan check
comments in a consistent, non-contradictory format for all relevant
departments and reviewers (Planning, Utilities, Engineering, Natural
Resources, etc.).
c. An environmental assessment and initial study shall be prepared based on
the selected alignment. The assessment shall include relevant technical
studies, evaluation of each environmental subject area contained in the
most current version of Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, analysis of the
compliance with the City’s VMT regulations for transportation construction
projects, and compliance with city development policies and regulations that
have been adopted for the purpose of environmental impact regulation and
mitigation.
d. A final set of plans shall be prepared with the form and content in Section
1.1 of Division 1010 of the Engineering Standards. A final OPIC shall be
prepared. No plan check or final permit is anticipated.
Page 70 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 31
Unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director, all work required by the
project applicant under this condition shall be completed prior to issuance of 1st
occupancy permits. Applicable costs incurred by the applicant in preparing this
work shall be eligible for reimbursement pursuant to the terms of an approved
Public Credit/Reimbursement Agreement.
119. Acacia Creek Shared-Use Path. The project applicant shall construct the Acacia
Creek Shared-use Path, as identified in the City’s Active Transportation Plan, with
an alignment generally following the west bank of Acacia Creek connecting Santa
Fe Road northeast to the Damon-Garcia Sports Park internal path network,
approximately 200 feet north of the project’s northern property line. Unless
otherwise approved by the Public Works Director, improvement plans shall include
a 12-foot-wide concrete path section per City Engineering Standard 7040 (Option
2), 2-foot clear shoulders, applicable path signage, striping, high-visibility markings
at driveway crossings, path lighting, and installation of a security gate on City
property at the boundary between the project site and the Damon Garcia Sports
Fields. Details for the security gate shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City
Public Works and Parks and Recreation Departments.
The Acacia Creek shared-use path shall be privately maintained by the HOA,
private property owner(s), or property association. The pathway shall remain open
and usable as a site amenity and for potential circulation to the Damon Garcia
Sports Fields. The City shall reserve the right to control hours accessing the
Damon Garcia Sports Fields via this path. Temporary closures of the path by the
HOA or others shall be approved at the discretion of the City. The path shall be
included in the maintenance documents related to the proposed subdivision or in
conjunction with the approval of the development permits. A private
easement/agreement or blanket easement will be required to allow for the shared
use.
Path improvements shall be approved or substantially approved to the satisfaction
of the Public Works and Community Development Departments prior to issuance
of any building permits and improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of
first occupancy permits. Applicable costs incurred by the applicant in designing
and constructing this public improvement shall be eligible for reimbursement
pursuant to the terms of an approved Public Credit/Reimbursement Agreement.
120. Street Lighting. Unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director,
improvement plans shall include the installation of public street lighting and all
associated facilities including but not limited to conduits, sidewalk vaults, fusing,
wiring and luminaires along the north side of Tank Farm Road and east side of
Santa Fe Road (along the project frontages) and within the Tank Farm/Santa Fe
Roundabout consistent with City Engineering Standards and best practice design
guidance for roundabout lighting design. Existing street lighting shall be shown on
Page 71 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 32
the improvement plans for reference and will be considered in establishing the
required spacing, location, number, and type of fixtures.
121. Shared-Use Path Lighting. Unless otherwise approved by the Public Works
Director, improvement plans shall include the installation of shared-use path
lighting along the extent of the Acacia Creek path and at the interface between
project site and pedestrian/bicycle/emergency vehicle only connection to the
adjacent 650 Tank Farm site. Path lighting design shall utilize City Standard path
lighting per Standard Plan 7905 (or City-approved equivalent solar product) and
all associated facilities including but not limited to conduits, sidewalk vaults, fusing,
and wiring. Path lighting shall be oriented in a manner that minimizes potential
light spillover into the Acacia Creek riparian area and may require backlight
shields.
122. Access to 650 Tank Farm Property. Unless otherwise approved by the Public
Works Director, improvement plans shall include adequate access control
measures, such as removable bollards, signage, pavement markings and lighting
per City Engineering Standards at the interface between the project site and the
planned pedestrian/bicycle/emergency access only connection to the adjacent 650
Tank Farm site. Access control measures shall be approved to the satisfaction of
the City Public Works and Fire Departments.
123. On-Site Bicycle Parking. Short-term bicycle parking shall consist of Peak “high-low
staggered style” racks or City-approved equivalent. Short-term and long-term
bicycle parking shall comply with applicable design policies per the City’s Active
Transportation Plan. Short-term bike racks shall be located as close as practical
to the commercial business entry doors, club house entry, and the outdoor
recreation areas.
124. On-Site Auto Parking.
a. Plans submitted for building permit shall demonstrate that all on-site auto
parking stalls conform with City Engineering Standards 2210-2260,
including addition of wheel stops where parking stalls front pedestrian
walkways to avoid vehicle encroachment into sidewalk space.
b. On-site improvement plans shall demonstrate that all on-site auto parking
located along the site access driveways from Tank Farm Road and Santa
Fe Road are set back a minimum of 36 feet from the adjacent street,
measured from the face of curb, unless otherwise approved by the Public
Works Director.
125. Intersection/Driveway Sight Distance. Improvement plans shall demonstrate that
all landscaping, entry signage/monuments or other vertical features exceeding 36
inches in height are located clear of applicable sight distance triangles at site
access driveways/intersections per City Engineering Standards. A separate
recorded declaration, covenant, agreement, or Notice of Requirements for private
Page 72 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 33
property owner or HOA maintenance of sight lines may be required.
126. Pedestrian Connectivity. Unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director,
the project applicant shall be responsible for constructing the following pedestrian
access improvements prior to issuance of first occupancy permits, unless
completed sooner by others (i.e., 650 Tank Farm and/or Northwest Corner
developments):
a. Install pedestrian signal and crosswalk at the east leg of the Tank
Farm/Mindbody signalized intersection.
b. Provide a continuous pedestrian connection along Tank Farm Road
between the 600 Tank Farm site and the intersection of Tank Farm/Broad.
If frontage improvements required by the adjacent 650 Tank Farm Road
development and 660 Tank Farm Road Development (Northwest Corner)
have not yet been constructed, a temporary pedestrian path of travel using
asphalt concrete may be accepted to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
127. Transit Stop. Prior to issuance of first building permits, Project applicant shall
provide payment of $25,000 to the City for installation of a future transit stop by
other property owners within the vicinity of the 600 Tank Farm development. The
ultimate location of this transit stop shall be confirmed by SLO Transit and the City
Public Works Department and based on guidance in the City’s Active
Transportation Plan and Short-Range Transit Plan.
Fire Department
128. All access roads less than 26 feet in width, unobstructed, shall be posted as Fire
lane-No Parking”.
129. Buildings containing 2 or less dwelling units shall have NFPA 13D fire sprinkler
systems.
130. Buildings containing 3 or more dwelling units shall have NFPA 13 fire sprinkler
systems and standpipes in the stairwells. Floor control valves shall be collocated
in a fire sprinkler riser room with exterior door access.
Utilities Department – Vesting Common Interest Parcel Map Conditions
131. The proposed utility infrastructure shall comply with the latest engineering design
standards effective at the time the building permit is obtained and shall have
reasonable alignments needed for maintenance of public infrastructure along
public roads.
132. Due to shallow groundwater in this area heat fused HDPE sewer lateral(s) shall be
installed per the engineering design standards and connected into the existing
sewer main.
Page 73 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 34
133. If commercial uses in the project include food preparation, provisions for grease
interceptors and FOG (fats, oils, and grease) storage within solid waste
enclosure(s) shall be provided with the design. These types of facilities shall also
provide an area to wash floor mats, equipment, and trash cans. The wash area
shall be drained to the sanitary sewer, and an environmental compliance permit
shall be filed prior to issuance of occupancy permit.
134. The project’s commercial and residential uses shall be metered separately. All
residential units are to be individually metered with a private meter after the City’s
master public service meter per MC 16.20.020. Privately owned sub-meters may
be provided for residential apartments upon approval of the Utilities Director. The
CCR’s for the property/homeowner association shall require that the sub-meters
be read by the association (or P/HOA contracted service) and each billed
according to water use.
135. Building permit submittal shall clarify size of existing and proposed water services
and water meters for the project.
136. The project shall install an 8” HDPE sewer main and manholes within Santa Fe
Road approximately 760 feet near the western boundary of the project’s frontage
improvements.
137. Any Existing well(s) shall be destroyed per County Health Requirements and the
California Department of Water Resources Standard Bulletin 74-81 and 74-90.
138. Water service meter(s) shall be adequately sized to serve the project’s proposed
units. Residential units shall be separately metered from the non-
residential/commercial units, and service lines shall not cross parcel boundaries
per MC 13.04.120
139. The project shall extend the existing 12” public water main within Tank Farm Road
approximately 750 feet near the southern part of the project’s frontage
improvements.
140. The project shall install an 8” public water main within Santa Fe Road
approximately 760 feet near the western boundary of the project’s frontage
improvements.
141. The project shall install an 8” recycled water main within Tank Farm Road
approximately 750 feet near the southern part of the project’s frontage
improvements.
142. The project shall install an 8” recycled water main within Santa Fe Road
approximately 760 feet near the western boundary of the project’s frontage
improvements.
Page 74 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 35
143. The subdivision map must include a common interest parcel to include all the
landscape areas under one parcel if the private irrigation currently crosses parcel
boundaries. The blanket easement statement must comply with MC 16.01.010 and
16.10.020.
144. Recycled water shall be used for major construction activities, such as grading and
dust control as required under Prohibited Water Uses; Chapter 17.07.070.C of the
City’s Municipal Code. Recycled water is available through the City’s Construction
Water Permit program.
145. Projects having landscape areas greater than 500 square feet shall provide a
Maximum Applied Water Allowance calculation as required by the Water Efficient
Landscape Standards; Chapter 17.87 of the City’s Municipal Code.
146. Projects generating more than two cubic yards of total waste shall comply with AB
1826, and local waste management ordinance to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions.
147. Commercial and residential refuse services shall be separate unless a letter of
agreement between the tenants and a Conditional Exception Application from the
City’s Development Standards for Solid Waste Services are provided to the City
with the building permit submittal.
148. The project will be required to provide a plan for the disposal, storage, and
collection of solid waste material for both the residential and commercial
components of the project. The development of the plan shall be coordinated with
San Luis Garbage Company. The plan must be submitted for approval by the City's
Solid Waste Coordinator.
149. Trash enclosure(s) shall conform the requirements by the San Luis Garbage
Company and refuse bins shall be sized to provide a reasonable level of service.
Separate refuse bins shall be accommodated within the site for the three (3) waste
streams, trash, recycling, and organics.
150. Driveways and access routes to all refuse receptacles shall be designed to
accommodate the size and weight of the garbage trucks; a written confirmation
from the San Luis Garbage Company shall be included in the building permit plans
for the proposed project.
Indemnification
151. The applicant shall with counsel selected by the City, 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
Page 75 of 401
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21
600 Tank Farm Road, PR-0005-2021; ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020
Page 36
relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review (“Indemnified
Claims”). The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Indemnified Claim
upon being presented with the Indemnified Claim and the City shall fully cooperate
in the defense against an Indemnified Claim.
On motion by Commissioner ___________, seconded by Commissioner
_____________, and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
REFRAIN:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 17th day of November, 2021.
_____________________________
Tyler Corey, Secretary
Planning Commission
Page 76 of 401
City of San Luis Obispo
600 Tank Farm Road Mixed-Use Project Exhibit B
Response to Comments
1
Exhibit B
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
This document is the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the 600 Tank Farm
Residential Mixed-Use Project, proposed in the City of San Luis Obispo, California; State
Clearinghouse No. 2020110426. Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(1) requires that a Lead
Agency adopt an MMRP before approving a project in order to mitigate or avoid significant impacts
that have been identified in an EIR. The purpose of the MMRP is to ensure that the required
mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR are implemented as part of the overall project
development process. In addition to ensuring implementation of mitigation measures, the MMRP
provides guidance to agency staff and decision-makers during project implementation and identifies
the need for enforcement action before irreversible environmental damage occurs. Where an
impact was identified to be less than significant in the Final EIR, no mitigation measures were
required.
The proposed project involves zoning-level entitlements: a General Plan Map Amendment, a rezone
of the property, a Specific Plan Amendment to the AASP, Conceptual Site Plan, and Major
Development Review for a 11.1-acre property in the City of San Luis Obispo.
The following table summarizes the mitigation measures for each issue area identified in the Final
EIR for the project. Specifically, the table identifies each mitigation measure; the action required for
the measure to be implemented; the time at which the monitoring is to occur; the monitoring
conditions; and the agency or party responsible for ensuring that the monitoring is performed. In
addition, the table includes columns for compliance verification.
Page 77 of 401
City of San Luis Obispo 600 Tank Farm Road Mixed-Use Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Response to Comments 2 Mitigation Measure Plan Requirements and Timing Monitoring Responsible Agency or Party Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments Air Quality AQ-3(a) Valley Fever Suppression Measures The project developer and contractor(s) shall prepare a Construction Valley Fever Plan to ensure the implementation of the following measures during construction activities to reduce impacts related to Valley Fever. a. Project construction activities shall implement standard SLOAPCD dust control measures described in SLOAPCD’s 2012 CEQA Air Quality Handbook. SLOAPCD dust control measures for projects with a grading area greater than 4 acres or that are located within 1,000 feet of any sensitive receptor include watering of the grading site and dirt stockpiles, vegetation and chemical soil stabilizer use on disturbed soil areas, early roadway paving, construction vehicle speed control, minimum freeboard for hauling vehicles, and vehicle wheel washing. b. If peak daily wind speeds exceed 15 mph or peak daily temperatures exceed 95 degrees Fahrenheit for three consecutive days, additional dust suppression measures (such as additional water or the application of additional soil stabilizer) shall be implemented prior to and immediately following ground disturbing activities. The additional dust suppression shall continue until winds are 10 mph or lower and outdoor air temperatures are below a peak daily temperature of 90 degrees for at least two consecutive days. c. The project developer(s) shall notify the San Luis Obispo County Public Health Department and the City not more than 60 nor less than 30 days before construction activities commence to allow the San Luis Obispo County Public Health Department opportunity to provide educational outreach to community members and medical providers, as well as enhanced disease surveillance in the area both during and after construction activities involving grading. d. Prior to any project grading activity, the project construction contractor(s) shall prepare and implement a worker training program that describes potential health hazards associated with Valley Fever, common symptoms, proper safety procedures to minimize health hazards, and notification procedures if suspected work-related symptoms are identified during construction, including the fact that certain ethnic groups and immune-compromised persons are at greater risk of becoming ill with Valley Fever. The objective of the training shall be to ensure the workers are aware of the danger associated with Valley Fever. The worker training program shall be included in the standard in-person training for project workers and shall identify safety measures to be implemented by construction contractors during construction. Prior to initiating any grading, the project developer shall provide the City and the San Luis Obispo County Public Health Department with copies of all educational training material for review and approval. No later than 30 days after any new employee or employees begin work, the project developer shall submit evidence to the City that each employee has acknowledged receipt of the training (e.g., sign-in sheets with a statement verifying receipt and understanding of the training). e. The developer shall work with a medical professional, in consultation with the San Luis Obispo County Public Health Department, to develop an educational handout for on-site workers and surrounding residents within 1,000 feet of the project site that includes the following information on Valley Fever: The project developer shall submit the Construction Valley Fever Plan to the City and SLOAPCD for review prior to the issuance of grading permits for the first project phase. The developer shall submit proof that San Luis Obispo County Public Health Department has been notified prior to commencement of construction activities; a worker training program has been conducted; and the educational handout has been mailed to existing residences within three miles of the project site. The City shall verify compliance with the Construction Valley Fever Plan during the grading phases of project construction. The City shall also verify notification of the San Luis Obispo County Public Health Department, implementation of the worker training program, and mailing of the educational handout via developer-submitted materials. City of San Luis Obispo Page 78 of 401
City of San Luis Obispo 600 Tank Farm Road Mixed-Use Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Response to Comments 3 Mitigation Measure Plan Requirements and Timing Monitoring Responsible Agency or Party Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments Potential sources/causes Common symptoms Options or remedies available should someone be experiencing these symptoms The location of available testing for infection x Prior to construction permit issuance, this handout shall have been created by the developer and reviewed by the City. No less than 30 days prior to any surface disturbance (e.g., grading, filling, trenching) work commencing, this handout shall be mailed to all existing residences within three miles of the project site. AQ-3(b) Naturally Occurring Asbestos Air Toxics Control Measure Compliance Consistent with the requirements of the NOA ATCM, the project developer shall file an exemption request form with SLOAPCD including the geologic evaluation documenting the conclusion that no serpentine is present at depths where proposed grading/excavation would occur. The project developer shall comply with SLOAPCD requirements associated with the exception, if granted, or with subsequent SLOAPCD requirements resulting from the exemption request, which may include additional geologic evaluation, dust mitigation, or air monitoring. The project developer shall submit the exemption request form and geologic evaluation to SLOAPCD for review prior to the issuance of grading permits for the first project phase. The project developer shall submit to the City SLOAPCD’s concurrence with the exception and any subsequent SLOAPCD requirements resulting from the exception request prior to the issuance of grading permits for the first project phase. Any subsequent requirements identified by SLOAPCD that would be required to be implemented during project construction (e.g., dust mitigation or air monitoring) shall be printed on all grading plans. The City shall verify compliance with the requirements of the NOA ATCM by confirming SLOAPCD receipt of the exemption request and SLOAPCD’s concurrence with the exception or any subsequent SLOAPCD requirements resulting from the exception request. City of San Luis Obispo; SLOAPCD Biological Resources BIO-1(a) Construction Best Management Practices The applicant shall ensure the following general wildlife Best Management Practices (BMPs) are required for construction activities for the project: Ground disturbance shall be limited to the minimum necessary to complete construction activities. Construction limits of disturbance shall be flagged. All equipment and material storage, parking, staging and other support areas shall be identified prior to issuance of a grading permit. Areas of special biological concern within or adjacent to construction limits shall have highly visible orange construction fencing installed between said area and the limits of disturbance. All project construction activities shall occur during daylight hours (i.e., between sunrise and sunset) and during dry weather conditions. Night lighting shall be prohibited. Upon completion of construction all excess materials and debris shall be removed from the project construction area and disposed of appropriately. The work area shall remain clean. All food-related trash items shall be enclosed in sealed containers and removed from the site weekly. Pets and firearms shall be prohibited at the construction site. All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles shall occur at least 100 feet from Acacia Creek and in a location where a spill would not drain toward aquatic habitat. A plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills prior to the onset of work activities. All workers shall be informed of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur. These measures shall be implemented during grading and construction activities. The applicant shall provide monthly maintenance reports during construction to the City compliance monitoring staff to document compliance with the above measures. The applicant shall notify the City immediately if a chemical or hazardous material occurs. City staff will spot check for compliance during construction. City of San Luis Obispo Page 79 of 401
City of San Luis Obispo 600 Tank Farm Road Mixed-Use Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Response to Comments 4 Mitigation Measure Plan Requirements and Timing Monitoring Responsible Agency or Party Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, appropriate erosion control BMPs (e.g., use of coir rolls, jute netting, etc.) shall be implemented to minimize adverse effects to Acacia Creek. No plastic monofilament netting shall be utilized on site. All equipment operating within aquatic habitat shall be in good conditions and free of leaks. Spill containment shall be installed under all equipment staged within stream areas and extra spill containment and clean up materials shall be located in close proximity for easy access. At the end of each workday, excavations shall be secured with cover or a ramp provided to prevent wildlife entrapment. All trenches, pipes, culverts or similar structures shall be inspected for animals prior to burying, capping, moving, or filling. Stockpiles of chemicals, drums, bagged materials, and other hazardous materials such as propane, acetylene shall have pallets and/or secondary containment. Should a material spills occur, City compliance monitoring staff shall be informed of the spill and materials and/or contaminants shall be cleaned from the project construction area and recycled or disposed of to the satisfaction of the City and in accordance with all applicable local, State, and federal regulations. BIO-1(b) Worker Environmental Awareness Program Training Prior to the initiation of construction activities (including staging and mobilization), a qualified biologist shall provide all personnel associated with project construction with a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training. The training will aid workers in recognizing special status resources that may occur in the project area. The specifics of this program shall include identification of the sensitive species and habitats, a description of the regulatory status and general ecological characteristics of sensitive resources, and review of the limits of construction and avoidance measures required to reduce impacts to biological resources within the work area. A fact sheet conveying this information shall also be prepared for distribution to all contractors, their employers, and other personnel involved with construction of the project. All employees shall sign a form provided by the trainer documenting they have attended the WEAP and understand the information presented to them. Fact sheets shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to conducting the training. The required notification and an attendance log that includes the names and signatures of all personnel that have received the training shall be provided to the City upon completion of the training. The applicant shall notify City compliance monitoring staff of the date and time the training is scheduled so that City staff may attend. City compliance monitoring staff shall review fact sheets prior to conducting the training. The required notification and an attendance log that includes the names and signatures of all personnel that have received the training shall be provided to City compliance monitoring staff prior to the start of grading or construction activities. The City shall review training materials, notification, and attendance log and provide confirmation of compliance with the conditions outlined in the measure. City of San Luis Obispo BIO-1(c) Updated Surveys for Infrastructure Improvement Parcels Within the portions of the study area not currently owned by the applicant, but where improvements are required to facilitate the project, the applicant shall conduct updated surveys of sensitive species habitats (including special status plant species, CRLF, wetland habitat, and VPFS habitat) within the appropriate season immediately prior to the onset of any ground disturbances associated with project-related construction activities to evaluate the current occupancy of suitable habitat for sensitive species and to refine the final habitat mitigation replacement acreages. Updated surveys for federally listed species shall be completed per the timing and methodology specified by resource agency protocol. Results of the survey(s) shall be documented and results communicated to City compliance monitoring staff and applicable agencies prior to issuance of grading permits. The City shall review the survey results and provide confirmation of compliance with the conditions outlined in the measure. City of San Luis Obispo Page 80 of 401
City of San Luis Obispo 600 Tank Farm Road Mixed-Use Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Response to Comments 5 Mitigation Measure Plan Requirements and Timing Monitoring Responsible Agency or Party Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments If special status plant species are identified during the updated survey(s), the species shall be incorporated into Special Status Plant Species Mitigation Plan in accordance with BIO-1(e). The plan shall provide a minimum ratio of 2:1 (number of acres/individuals restored to number of acres/individuals impacted) for impacts to any special status plant species with California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) of 1 or 2 and a minimum ratio of 1:1 for special status plant species with CRPR 3 or 4. If a federally and/or state listed plant species is identified during the surveys, the applicant shall avoid all impacts to the species. If avoidance is infeasible, the applicant shall consult with the City and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and/or California Department of Fish and Wildlife, as applicable, for authorization of take. If CRLF is identified during the survey(s), BIO-1(f) shall be implemented during project construction of the study area not currently owned by the applicant to ensure no take of individual CRLF. If VPFS are identified during the survey(s), BIO-1(d) shall be implemented during project construction of the study area not currently owned by the applicant to ensure no take of individual VPFS. If vernal marsh or other season wetland habitat is identified during the survey(s) and impacts to season wetland habitat cannot be avoided, a formal jurisdictional delineation shall be completed for the feature(s). Impacts to the habitat shall be included in the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan as detailed in BIO-2(b). BIO-1(d) Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Mitigation Plan If VPFS are present within the study area and may be impacted by project-related construction, a Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Mitigation Plan shall be prepared which provides a minimum ratio of 1:1 (number of acres restored to number of acres impacted) for impacts to VPFS. The plan shall identify the specific mitigation sites and can be prepared in conjunction with the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (BIO-2[b]). The plan shall include, at a minimum, the following components: Description of the project/impact site (i.e., location, responsible parties, areas to be impacted); Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project [area(s) of vernal pool fairy shrimp habitat to be established and/or preserved; Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation receiver site(s) (location and size, ownership status, existing conditions of the compensatory mitigation site); the receiver site(s) shall be at least the size as the area currently occupied by the current population to ensure the replacement ratio is achieved; Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation site (rationale for expecting implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan); Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, as appropriate (activities, responsible parties, schedule); Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site, (performance standards, target acreages to be established, and/or preserved, annual monitoring reports); Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives; The Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Mitigation Plan shall be prepared by the applicant and shall be submitted to the City compliance monitoring staff for review and approval prior to approval of grading and construction permits. The applicant shall be responsible for documenting compliance with the Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Mitigation Plan as stipulated by the plan. All reporting will be submitted to the City for review and approval. The replacement populations shall be monitored by a qualified biologist for 5 years. City of San Luis Obispo Page 81 of 401
City of San Luis Obispo 600 Tank Farm Road Mixed-Use Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Response to Comments 6 Mitigation Measure Plan Requirements and Timing Monitoring Responsible Agency or Party Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments An adaptive management program and remedial measures to address negative impacts to restoration efforts; Notification of completion of compensatory mitigation and agency confirmation; and x Contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for contingency compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism). BIO-1(e) Special Status Plant Mitigation Plan A Special Status Plant Mitigation Plan shall be prepared by a qualified botanist approved by the City, which will provide a minimum ratio of 2:1 (number of acres/individuals restored to number of acres/individuals impacted) for impacts to Congdon’s tarplant and a minimum ratio of 1:1 for Cambria morning-glory. If project construction has not occurred by January 1, 2024, seasonally timed botanical surveys shall be conducted to determine the current extent of the special status plant species populations on site. The plan shall identify the specific mitigation sites and can be prepared in conjunction with the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (BIO-2[b]). The plan shall include, at a minimum, the following components: Description of the project/impact site (i.e., location, responsible parties, areas to be impacted by habitat type); Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project [area(s) of special status plant species to be established and/or preserved; Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation receiver site(s) (location and size, ownership status, existing conditions of the compensatory mitigation site); the receiver site(s) shall be at least twice the size as the area currently occupied by the rare plant occurrences to ensure the replacement ratio is achieved. Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation site (rationale for expecting implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan [container sizes, seeding rates, etc.]); Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including weed removal and irrigation as appropriate (activities, responsible parties, schedule); Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site, (performance standards, target acreages to be established, and/or preserved, annual monitoring reports); Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives; An adaptive management program and remedial measures to address negative impacts to restoration efforts; Notification of completion of compensatory mitigation and agency confirmation; and Contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for contingency compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism). The Special Status Plant Mitigation Plan shall be prepared by the applicant and shall be submitted to City compliance monitoring staff for review and approval by the City prior to approval of grading and construction permits. The applicant will be responsible for documenting compliance with the Special Status Plant Mitigation Plan as stipulated by the plan. All reporting will be submitted to the City for review and approval. The replacement populations shall be monitored by a qualified biologist for 5 years. City of San Luis Obispo BIO-1(f) California Red-Legged Frog Impact Avoidance and Minimization A qualified biologist(s) shall conduct a pre-construction survey for CRLF within 48 hours prior to the initial onset of initial ground or vegetation disturbing activities. All potentially suitable habitat for CRLF shall be surveyed during the daytime and again after dark. The surveys shall include all areas where project construction activities will occur, as well as a 300-foot buffer upstream and downstream of the Results of the survey(s) shall be communicated to the City compliance monitoring staff immediately upon completion. The applicant shall submit the results report for the pre-construction surveys within one week of completing the surveys. The applicant shall consult with a qualified biologist The City shall review the survey results and provide confirmation of compliance with the conditions outlined in the measure. City of San Luis Obispo Page 82 of 401
City of San Luis Obispo 600 Tank Farm Road Mixed-Use Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Response to Comments 7 Mitigation Measure Plan Requirements and Timing Monitoring Responsible Agency or Party Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments project boundary in Acacia Creek. If no individuals are found during the pre-construction survey, work may proceed with monitoring as described below. If CRLF is found and the individual is likely to be injured or killed by work activities, all work must stop and the individual will be allowed to move out of harm’s way of its own volition then the applicant/developer shall comply with all relevant requirements of the FESA prior to resuming project activities. A qualified biologist(s) shall monitor the removal of material and debris piles that may contain cover for CRLF. If CRLF is identified within the construction area during project construction, ground-disturbing activities shall immediately cease, and the individual will be allowed to move out of harm’s way of its own volition before work activities may begin. If the individual does not move out of harm’s way, the USFWS shall be notified and consulted. Ground-disturbing activities shall commence following guidance from the USFWS and the City. No CRLF shall be captured, handled, or relocated without approval by the USFWS. if relocations are employed, and the applicant must provide the City with documentation of the effort and summary of the results within one week. BIO-1(g) Southwestern Pond Turtle and Western Spadefoot Impact Avoidance and Minimization A qualified biologist(s) shall conduct a pre-construction survey for southwestern pond turtle and western spadefoot within 48 hours prior to the initial onset of initial ground or vegetation disturbing activities. All potentially suitable habitat for southwestern pond turtle, western spadefoot toad within the study area where project-related activities would occur shall be surveyed. If southwestern pond turtle or western spadefoot is found and the individual is likely to be injured or killed by work activities, all work must stop and the individual will be allowed to move out of harm’s way of its own volition before work activities may begin. Individuals may be relocated out of harm’s way by a qualified biologist, if present, before work activities begin. The biologist(s) must relocate the any pond turtle or western spadefoot the shortest distance possible to a location that contains suitable habitat that is not likely to be affected by activities associated with the project. A qualified biologist(s) shall monitor the removal of material and debris piles that may contain cover for southwestern pond turtle and western spadefoot. If southwestern pond turtle or western spadefoot is found and the individual is likely to be injured or killed by work activities, all work must stop and the individual will be allowed to move out of harm’s way of its own volition before work activities may begin. Individuals may be relocated out of harm’s way by a qualified biologist, if present, before work activities begin. The biologist(s) must relocate the any pond turtle or western spadefoot the shortest distance possible to a location that contains suitable habitat that is not likely to be affected by activities associated with the project. Results of pre-construction survey(s) shall be communicated to the City immediately upon completion. The applicant shall submit the results report for the pre-construction surveys within one week of completing the surveys. The applicant shall consult with a qualified biologist if relocations are employed. The relocations must be conducted by a qualified biologist, and the applicant must provide the City with documentation of the effort and summary of the results within one week. The City shall review the survey results and provide confirmation of compliance with the conditions outlined in the measure. City of San Luis Obispo BIO-1(h) American Badger Impact Avoidance and Minimization A qualified biologist(s) shall conduct a pre-construction survey for potential American badger dens within one week prior to the initial onset of initial ground or vegetation disturbing activities. The survey shall be conducted within all project work areas and a 50-foot buffer. Any potential dens/burrows found shall be identified with flagging or stakes, as feasible, and a 50-foot no-work buffer shall be flagged. If any potential American badger dens are found that cannot be avoided by the 50-foot buffer area, a Results of pre-construction survey(s) shall be communicated to the City immediately upon completion. The applicant shall submit the results report for the pre-construction surveys within one week of completing the surveys. The applicant shall consult with a qualified biologist if passive exclusion methods are employed, and the applicant must provide the City with documentation of the effort and summary of the results within one week. The City shall review the survey results and provide confirmation of compliance with the conditions outlined in the measure. The City shall review the applicant’s methodology and rationale for passive exclusions prior to implementation of the exclusion. The City shall ensure the avoidance buffers are established and maintained as needed. City of San Luis Obispo Page 83 of 401
City of San Luis Obispo 600 Tank Farm Road Mixed-Use Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Response to Comments 8 Mitigation Measure Plan Requirements and Timing Monitoring Responsible Agency or Party Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments qualified biologist will monitor the dens and employ wildlife trail cameras and/or a tracking medium around dens and monitored daily for at least three days to determine whether they are currently occupied by badgers. If the den is determined not to be occupied by a badger or other special status wildlife species, construction may commence. No dens with young shall be disturbed, and no work shall be conducted within 50 feet of maternal dens until they have left the den. Any occupied badger den that is being used by a single adult with no young that cannot be avoided shall be blocked incrementally by placing sticks or debris over the entrance for three to five days, to discourage the individual from using the den. Only after the badger has left the den, as determined by the qualified biologist implementing the wildlife camera and/or tracking medium methods, can the den be concluded as unoccupied and the work proceed within the no-work buffer. BIO-1(i) Pallid Bat and Townsend’s Big-Eared Bat Impact Avoidance and Minimization The applicant shall ensure the following actions are implemented to avoid and minimize potential impacts to special status bat species: Within one week prior to construction activities, including tree removal, a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey of the trees proposed to be removed within the construction area to determine if roosting bats are present during the non-breeding season (November through March). If a colony of bats is found roosting in any tree or structure, further surveys shall be conducted sufficient to determine the species present and the type of roost (day, night, maternity, etc.). If the bats are not part of an active maternity colony, passive exclusion measures may be implemented with approval from the City in consultation with CDFW. Exclusions shall occur outside the breeding season (typically May through August) and winter hibernation (typically December through February). If bats are roosting in tree cavities in the construction area during the daytime but are not part of an active maternity colony, then exclusion measures must include one-way valves that allow bats to get out but are designed so that the bats may not re-enter the roost cavity. Results of pre-construction survey(s) shall be communicated to the City immediately upon completion. The applicant shall submit the results report for the pre-construction surveys within one week of completing the surveys. The applicant shall consult with a qualified biologist if passive exclusion methods are employed, and the applicant must provide the City with documentation of the effort and summary of the results within one week. The City shall review the survey results and provide confirmation of compliance with the conditions outlined in the measure. The City shall review the applicant’s methodology and rationale for passive exclusions prior to implementation of the exclusion. City of San Luis Obispo BIO-1(j) Burrowing Owl Impact Avoidance and Minimization The following measures shall be implemented in order to avoid and minimize impacts to burrowing owl. a. Not more than 30 days prior to initiation of ground-disturbing activities, and again within 24 hours of the initiation of ground-disturbing activities associated with construction, a City-approved biologist shall conduct a take avoidance survey of the construction area and surrounding areas to a distance of 150 meters, in accordance with the methods outlined in the Mitigation Methods – Pre-construction and Appendix D Surveys for Take Avoidance of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG; now CDFW) Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFG 2012). The pre-construction survey will cover all areas within 150 meters of the portion of the site where construction is scheduled to start. Areas within 150 meters that are not accessible due to property access restrictions shall be surveyed using binoculars. Surveys will be phased, based on the grading and construction schedule, such that they are Results of pre-construction survey(s) shall be communicated to the City immediately upon completion. The applicant shall submit the results report for the pre-construction surveys within one week of completing the surveys. A report on the implementation of impact avoidance measures used shall be included on all grading and construction plans prior to grading. A report on the implementation of impact avoidance measures implemented shall be submitted to City and CDFW upon completion of the construction project. If passive relocation is required, the Burrowing Owl Exclusion Plan must be submitted and approved by Planning and Development prior to conducting exclusion activities. The applicant shall retain a qualified City- and CDFW-approved biologist to monitor all construction activities as warranted to ensure compliance. The approved biologist shall submit monitoring reports to the City and CDFW for review. City of San Luis Obispo; CDFW Page 84 of 401
City of San Luis Obispo 600 Tank Farm Road Mixed-Use Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Response to Comments 9 Mitigation Measure Plan Requirements and Timing Monitoring Responsible Agency or Party Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments conducted not more than 30 days before the start of ground disturbing activities in new areas. If grading and/or construction activities in portions of the site cease for a period of 14 days, those portions of the site will be resurveyed for burrowing owls prior to the resumption of grading and/or construction activities. If no occupied (breeding or wintering) burrowing owl burrows are identified, no further mitigation would be required. If occupied burrows are identified on the site or within 150 meters of the Project disturbance area, one of the following actions shall be taken: 1) permanent avoidance of the burrow or 2) establishment of a temporary avoidance buffer followed by passive relocation and compensatory mitigation for loss of habitat in conjunction with the measures below: Site-specific, no-disturbance buffer zones shall be established and maintained between Project activities and occupied burrows, using the distances recommended in the CDFW guidelines (CDFG 2012) or as otherwise determined appropriate by the City-approved biologist in consultation with CDFW. During the non-breeding season, if an occupied burrow cannot be avoided, and the burrow is not actively in use as a nest, the burrowing owls can be excluded from burrows in accordance with an approved Burrowing Owl Exclusion Plan, which shall be prepared and submitted for approval by CDFW prior to passive relocation of any burrowing owls. The Burrowing Owl Exclusion Plan shall be based on the recommendations made in the CDFG Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFG 2012) and shall include the following information for each proposed passive relocation: a. Confirmation by site surveillance that the burrow(s) is empty of burrowing owls and other species; b. Identification of type of scope to be used and appropriate timing of scoping; c. Occupancy factors to look for and what shall guide determination of vacancy and excavation timing; d. Methods for burrow excavation; e. Removal of other potential owl burrow surrogates or refugia on site; f. Methods for photographic documentation of the excavation and closure of the burrow; g. Monitoring of the site to evaluate success and, if needed, to implement remedial measures to prevent subsequent owl use to avoid take; h. Methods for assuring the impacted site shall continually be made inhospitable to burrowing owls and fossorial mammals; and i. Method(s) for compensatory mitigation for burrow loss. BIO-1(k) Nesting Birds and Loggerhead Shrike Impact Avoidance and Minimization Construction activities shall be initiated outside of the typical avian nesting period, between February 1 and August 31, if feasible. All initial site and vegetation disturbance shall be limited to the time period between September 1 and January 31, if feasible. If initial ground disturbing activities and vegetation removal occurs between February 1 and August 31, nesting bird surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist for the entire construction area plus a 250-foot buffer within one week Results of pre-construction survey(s) shall be communicated to the City immediately upon completion. The applicant shall submit the results report for the pre-construction surveys within one week of completing the surveys. Buffer reduction requests must be submitted to the City for approval prior to implementation of a reduced buffer. The City shall review the survey results and provide confirmation of compliance with the conditions outlined in the measure. The City shall ensure the avoidance buffers are established and maintained as needed. City of San Luis Obispo Page 85 of 401
City of San Luis Obispo 600 Tank Farm Road Mixed-Use Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Response to Comments 10 Mitigation Measure Plan Requirements and Timing Monitoring Responsible Agency or Party Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments prior to initial ground disturbance activities or removal of vegetation. Surveys shall continue to be conducted within the timeframes specified above until all vegetation removal activities are completed. If surveys do not locate nesting birds, construction activities may be conducted. If nesting birds are located, no construction activities shall occur within 50 feet of nests of passerine species, including loggerhead shrike, 250 feet of nests of raptor species until chicks are fledged. Any changes in buffer extent shall be made in consultation with the City. The buffer will be delineated with flagging, and no work shall take place within the buffer area until the young have left the nest, as determined by the qualified biologist. BIO-2(a) Jurisdictional Delineation If impacts to seasonal wetland habitat cannot be avoided, the applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to complete a jurisdictional delineation. The jurisdictional delineation shall determine the extent of the jurisdiction of the USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW. The jurisdictional delineation shall be conducted in accordance with the requirement set forth by each agency. The results shall be a preliminary jurisdictional delineation report that shall be submitted to the implementing agency/agencies, USACE, RWQCB, and/or CDFW, as appropriate, for review and approval as part of the permitting process. The applicant shall submit the jurisdictional delineation report to the City prior to approval of grading and construction permits. The City shall ensure that the jurisdictional delineation report has been completed. City of San Luis Obispo BIO-2(b) Prepare a Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan A Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) shall be prepared which will provide a minimum 2:1 ratio (number of acres/individuals restored to number of acres/individuals impacted) for temporary and permanent impacts to vernal marsh. The HMMP will identify the specific mitigation sites and can be prepared in conjunction with the Special Status Plant Mitigation Plan. The HMMP will be implemented immediately following project completion. The HMMP shall include, at a minimum, the following components: Description of the project/impact site (i.e., location, responsible parties, areas to be impacted by habitat type); Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project [type(s) and area(s) of habitat to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved; specific functions and values of habitat type(s) to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved]; Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation site (location and size, ownership status, existing functions and values of the compensatory mitigation site); Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation site (rationale for expecting implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan [including plant species to be used, container sizes, seeding rates, etc.]); Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including weed removal and irrigation as appropriate (activities, responsible parties, schedule); Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site, including no less than quarterly monitoring for the first year (performance standards, target functions and values, target acreages to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved, annual monitoring reports); The HMMP shall be prepared by the developer/applicant and shall be submitted for review and approval by the City prior to the approval of grading and construction permits. The applicant shall send annual documentation to the City demonstrating compliance with the HMMP requirements and status of mitigation area. The City shall review and approve the HMMP for compliance prior to issuance of the grading permits and onset of construction. The replacement habitat shall be monitored by a qualified biologist for 5 years. City of San Luis Obispo Page 86 of 401
City of San Luis Obispo 600 Tank Farm Road Mixed-Use Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Response to Comments 11 Mitigation Measure Plan Requirements and Timing Monitoring Responsible Agency or Party Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives; said criteria to be, at a minimum, at least 80 percent survival of container plants and 80 percent relative cover by vegetation type; An adaptive management program and remedial measures to address negative impacts to restoration efforts; Notification of completion of compensatory mitigation and agency confirmation; and Contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for contingency compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism). BIO-2(c) Agency Coordination Impacts to wetlands as a result of the project are anticipated to require permits from CDFW, USACE, and/or RWQCB. The applicant shall comply with all applicable state and federal permitting requirements. The applicant shall obtain and produce for the City correspondence from applicable state and federal agencies indicating compliance of the proposed development with state and federal laws. The applicant shall submit copies of correspondence and/or permits (as applicable) with applicable agencies to the City prior to approval of grading and construction permits. The City shall confirm that the applicant has obtained all necessary permits and approvals. City compliance staff shall monitor and inspect to ensure that required measures are implemented during grading and construction of the project. City of San Luis Obispo BIO-2(d). Wetland Mitigation Impacts to federal and state wetlands (as defined by the Clean Water Act Section 404 and the State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State) shall be mitigated at a minimum ratio of 2:1 (acres of wetlands created to acres of wetlands permanently impacted) to meet the performance standard of no net loss of wetland habitat. The mitigation program shall be developed by a qualified biologist and be incorporated into and conform with the requirements for the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. The mitigation shall be implemented for no less than five years after construction or until the local jurisdiction and/or the permitting authority (e.g., USACE) has determined that restoration has been successful. The applicant shall submit the HMMP to the City as well as the USACE, RWQCB, and/or CDFW (depending upon the agencies permitting authority over the project) for review and approval prior to issuance of grading permits. The applicant shall send annual documentation to the City demonstrating compliance with the HMMP requirements and status of mitigation area. The City shall review and approve the HMMP for compliance prior to issuance of the grading permits and onset of construction. The replacement habitat shall be monitored by a qualified biologist for 5 years. City of San Luis Obispo; and USACE, RWQCB, and/or CDFW BIO-2(e) Jurisdictional Areas Best Management Practices During Construction The following best management practices shall be required for grading and construction within jurisdictional areas or wetlands where impacts are authorized. In addition, the measures shall be required at locations where construction occurs within 100 feet from jurisdictional areas or wetlands. Access routes, staging, and construction areas shall be limited to the minimum area necessary to achieve the project goal and minimize impacts to other waters (federal and state) including locating access routes and ancillary construction areas outside of jurisdictional areas. To control erosion and sediment runoff during and after project implementation, appropriate erosion control materials shall be deployed and maintained to minimize adverse effects on jurisdictional areas in the vicinity of the project. Project activities within the jurisdictional areas should occur during the dry season (typically between May 1 and September 30) in any given year, or as otherwise directed by the regulatory agencies. Deviations from this work window can be made with permission from the relevant regulatory agencies. During construction, no litter or construction debris shall be placed within jurisdictional areas. All such debris and waste shall be picked up daily and properly disposed of at an appropriate site. These measures shall be implemented during grading and construction and shall be included on all land use, grading, and building plans. The applicant shall provide the City with documentation of compliance with the above measures in monthly reports. City compliance staff shall periodically inspect to ensure compliance. City of San Luis Obispo Page 87 of 401
City of San Luis Obispo 600 Tank Farm Road Mixed-Use Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Response to Comments 12 Mitigation Measure Plan Requirements and Timing Monitoring Responsible Agency or Party Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments All project-generated debris, building materials, and rubbish shall be removed from jurisdictional areas and from areas where such materials could be washed into them. Raw cement, concrete or washings thereof, asphalt, paint or other coating material, oil or other petroleum products, or any other substances which could be hazardous to aquatic species resulting from project-related activities, shall be prevented from contaminating the soil and/or entering jurisdictional areas. All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles shall occur at least 100 feet from bodies of water and in a location where a potential spill would not drain directly toward aquatic habitat (e.g., on a slope that drains away from the water source). Prior to the onset of work activities, a plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills. All workers shall be informed of the importance of preventing spills and of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur. Cultural Resources CUL-1(a) Construction Monitoring Treatment Plan A Construction Monitoring Treatment Plan shall be developed and implemented to ensure that any new discoveries are adequately recorded, evaluated, and if, significant, mitigated. The Construction Monitoring Treatment Plan shall provide the following: a. All ground disturbances within 200 feet of the top of bank of Acacia Creek shall be monitored by a qualified archaeologist and Native American observer and all ground disturbance within 50 feet of the mapped boundaries of Feature 26 and Feature 27 shall be monitored by a qualified archaeologist. b. Procedures for notifying the City and other involved or interested parties in case of a new discovery. The qualified archaeologist and/or Native American observer shall have the authority to temporarily halt or redirect construction in the vicinity of any potentially significant discovery to allow for adequate recordation and evaluation. c. Preparation and approval of a plan that identifies procedures that shall be used to record, evaluate, and mitigate unanticipated discoveries with a minimum of delay. d. Procedures that shall be followed in case of discovery of human remains. In the event that isolated human remains are encountered, consultation with the most likely Native American descendant, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 5097.97 and 5097.98, shall apply. e. Results of the monitoring program shall be documented in a technical report after completion of all ground disturbances. The conditions for monitoring and treatment of discoveries shall be printed on all building and grading plans. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall submit to the City Construction Monitoring Treatment Plan prepared by a qualified archaeologist. The City shall review and approve the City Construction Monitoring Treatment Plan. City permit compliance staff shall confirm monitoring by the qualified archaeologist and Native American representative and City grading inspectors shall spot check fieldwork. The qualified archaeologist and Native American representative shall ensure that actions consistent with this mitigation measure are implemented in the event of any inadvertent discovery. City of San Luis Obispo CUL-1(b) Archaeological Monitoring Within 200 Feet of Acacia Creek Top of Bank All construction-related ground disturbances, including clearing/grubbing, within 200 feet of the top of bank of Acacia Creek shall be monitored by a qualified archaeologist and a Native American representative. Depending on the type of work, multiple teams of monitors may be necessary to observe construction activities occurring in separate areas. In the event that archaeological remains are The conditions for monitoring and treatment of discoveries shall be printed on all building and grading plans. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall submit to the City a contract or Letter of Commitment with a qualified archaeologist and Native American representative. The City shall review and approve the selected archaeologist to ensure they meet The conditions for monitoring and treatment of discoveries shall be printed on all building and grading plans. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall submit to the City a contract or Letter of Commitment with a qualified archaeologist and Native American representative. The City shall review and approve the selected City of San Luis Obispo Page 88 of 401
City of San Luis Obispo 600 Tank Farm Road Mixed-Use Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Response to Comments 13 Mitigation Measure Plan Requirements and Timing Monitoring Responsible Agency or Party Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments encountered during construction, City of San Luis Obispo staff shall be notified and all work within 50 feet of the find shall be halted until the find is evaluated by a qualified archaeologist and appropriate mitigation, if necessary, is implemented. If archaeological remains are identified, the resource shall be evaluated for significance under City Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines (ARPPG) and CEQA and further treatment measures including but not limited to avoidance consistent with City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Policies, Phase 2 Subsurface Archaeological Resource Evaluation (SARE), or Phase 3 Archaeological Data Recovery Excavation (ADRE) may be required. Work within 50 feet of the find shall not resume until authorization is received from the City. appropriate professional qualification standards, consistent with the ARPP Guidelines. archaeologist to ensure they meet appropriate professional qualification standards, consistent with the ARPP Guidelines. CUL-1(c) Archaeological Monitoring Within 50 feet of Feature 26 and Feature 27 All construction-related ground disturbances, including clearing/grubbing, within 50 feet of the mapped boundaries of Feature 26 and Feature 27 shall be monitored by a qualified archaeologist. In the event that archaeological remains are encountered during construction, City of San Luis Obispo staff shall be notified and all work within 50 feet of the find shall be halted until the find is evaluated by a qualified archaeologist and appropriate mitigation, if necessary, is implemented. If archaeological remains are identified, the resource shall be evaluated for significance under City Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines (ARPPG) and CEQA and further treatment measures including but not limited to avoidance consistent with City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Policies, Phase 2 Subsurface Archaeological Resource Evaluation (SARE), or Phase 3 Archaeological Data Recovery Excavation (ADRE) may be required. Work within 50 feet of the find shall not resume until authorization is received from the City. The conditions for monitoring and treatment of discoveries shall be printed on all building and grading plans. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall submit to the City a contract or Letter of Commitment with a qualified archaeologist and Native American representative. The City shall review and approve the selected archaeologist to ensure they meet appropriate professional qualification standards, consistent with the ARPP Guidelines. City permit compliance staff shall confirm monitoring by the City-approved archaeologist and Native American representative and City grading inspectors shall spot check fieldwork. The City-approved archaeologist and Native American representative shall ensure that actions consistent with this mitigation measure are implemented in the event of any inadvertent discovery. City of San Luis Obispo CUL-1(d) Unanticipated Discovery of Historical or Archaeological Resources In the event prehistoric or historic-period materials not identified during the ARI prepared for the project are encountered during construction-related ground disturbances, ground-disturbing activities within 50 feet of the discovery shall be halted, and a qualified archaeologist shall be contacted to determine if materials are isolated finds or part of a larger archaeological deposit. If the discovery is prehistoric, a Native American representative shall be contacted to participate in the evaluation of the discovery. Appropriate City of San Luis Obispo staff shall also be notified. Prehistoric materials may include chert flaked stone tools (e.g., projectile points, knives, scrapers) or toolmaking debris; culturally darkened soil (midden) containing artifacts or shellfish remains; and stone milling equipment (e.g., mortars, pestles, handstones). Historic-period materials might include stone, concrete, wood or adobe building foundations, corrals, and walls; filled wells or privies; mining features; and deposits of metal, glass, and/or ceramic refuse. If an archaeological site is identified, the resource should be evaluated for significance under City Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines (ARPPG) and CEQA and further treatment measures including but not limited to avoidance consistent with City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Policies, Phase 2 Subsurface Archaeological Resource Evaluation (SARE), or Phase 3 Archaeological Data Recovery Excavation (ADRE) may be required. Work within 50 feet of the discovery shall not resume until authorization is received from the City. The conditions for monitoring and treatment of discoveries shall be printed on all building and grading plans. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall submit to the City a contract or Letter of Commitment with a qualified archaeologist and Native American representative. The City shall review and approve the selected archaeologist to ensure they meet appropriate professional qualification standards, consistent with the ARPP Guidelines. City permit compliance staff shall confirm monitoring by the City-approved archaeologist and Native American representative and City grading inspectors shall spot check fieldwork. The City-approved archaeologist and Native American representative shall ensure that actions consistent with this mitigation measure are implemented in the event of any inadvertent discovery. City of San Luis Obispo Page 89 of 401
City of San Luis Obispo 600 Tank Farm Road Mixed-Use Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Response to Comments 14 Mitigation Measure Plan Requirements and Timing Monitoring Responsible Agency or Party Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments CUL-2(a) Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resources In the event that a resource of Native American origin is identified during construction, the City of San Luis Obispo staff shall contact all California Native American tribe(s) that have expressed interest in the project and begin or continue consultation procedures with any tribe or tribes that request consultation. If an archaeological site is identified, the resource should be evaluated for significance under City Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines (ARPPG) and CEQA. If the City, in consultation with local Native Americans, determines that the resource is a tribal cultural resource and the proposed project would have a potentially significant impact to the resource, a tribal cultural resource mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with State guidelines (PRC Sections 21080.3.2, 21080.3.3, 21084.3) and in consultation with Native American groups. The mitigation plan may include but would not be limited to avoidance, capping in place, excavation and removal of the resource, interpretive displays, sensitive area signage, or other mutually agreed upon measures. This condition shall be printed on all building and grading plans. City permit compliance staff shall check plans prior to issuance of grading permits, and City compliance monitoring staff shall spot check in the field throughout grading and construction. City of San Luis Obispo Geology and Soils GEO-1(a) Paleontological Monitoring Prior to issuance of grading permits and the commencement of ground disturbing activities on the project site that are greater than six feet in depth, a qualified professional paleontologist shall be retained to conduct paleontological monitoring during such ground disturbing activities. The Qualified Paleontologist shall have knowledge of the local paleontology and shall be familiar with paleontological procedures and techniques. Prior to the commencement of construction activities, an orientation meeting shall be conducted by the Qualified Paleontologist, general contractor, subcontractor, and construction workers associated with earth disturbing activities. The orientation meeting shall describe the potential of exposing paleontological resources, the types of materials may be encountered, and directions on the steps that shall be taken if such a find is encountered. Ground disturbing construction activities (including grading, trenching, drilling with an auger greater than 3 feet in diameter, and other excavation) within previously undisturbed sediments at depths greater than six feet shall be monitored on a full-time basis. Monitoring shall be supervised by the Qualified Paleontologist and shall be conducted by a qualified paleontological monitor, who is defined as an individual who meets the minimum qualifications per standards set forth by the SVP (2010), which includes a B.S. or B.A. degree in geology or paleontology with one year of monitoring experience and knowledge of collection and salvage of paleontological resources. If the Qualified Paleontologist determines that full-time monitoring is no longer warranted, he or she may recommend reducing monitoring to periodic spot-checking or cease entirely. Full-time monitoring shall be reinstated if any new ground disturbances are required at a depth of six feet or greater, and reduction or suspension would need to be reconsidered by the Qualified Paleontologist. Ground-disturbing activity that does not exceed six feet in depth within Quaternary alluvium would not require paleontological monitoring. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall submit to the City a contract or Letter of Commitment with a Qualified Paleontologist. The City shall review and approve the Qualified Paleontologist to ensure they meet appropriate professional qualification standards, consistent with the SVP standards. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall submit to the City the required Paleontological Monitoring Plan prepared by a Qualified Paleontologist. The City shall review and approve the Paleontological Monitoring Plan. The conditions for monitoring and treatment of discoveries shall be printed on all building and grading plans. City permit compliance staff shall check plans prior to issuance of grading permits. City permit compliance staff shall confirm monitoring by the Qualified Paleontologist and City grading inspectors shall spot check in the field throughout grading and construction. The Qualified Paleontologist shall ensure that actions consistent with this mitigation measure are implemented in the event of any inadvertent discovery. City of San Luis Obispo Page 90 of 401
City of San Luis Obispo 600 Tank Farm Road Mixed-Use Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Response to Comments 15 Mitigation Measure Plan Requirements and Timing Monitoring Responsible Agency or Party Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments GEO-1(b) Fossil Discovery, Preparation, and Curation In the event that a paleontological resource is discovered, the monitor shall have the authority to temporarily divert construction equipment around the find until it is assessed for scientific significance and collected. Once salvaged, significant fossils shall be identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level, prepared to a curation-ready condition, and curated in a scientific institution with a permanent paleontological collection along with all pertinent field notes, photos, data, and maps. Curation fees are assessed by the repository and are the responsibility of the project owner. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall submit to the City the required Paleontological Monitoring Plan prepared by a Qualified Paleontologist. The City shall review and approve the Paleontological Monitoring Plan. The conditions for monitoring and treatment of discoveries shall be printed on all building and grading plans. City permit compliance staff shall check plans prior to issuance of grading permits. City permit compliance staff shall confirm monitoring by the Qualified Paleontologist and City grading inspectors shall spot check in the field throughout grading and construction. The Qualified Paleontologist shall ensure that actions consistent with this mitigation measure are implemented in the event of any inadvertent discovery. City of San Luis Obispo GEO-1(c) Paleontological Monitoring Plan Prior to the start of ground-disturbing activities, a Paleontological Monitoring Plan shall be prepared and submitted to the City for review and approval. The Plan shall be prepared by a Qualified Paleontologist and shall address the following: Procedures for Paleontological Monitoring; Procedures for the paleontologist to make and implement recommendations as to whether or not monitoring should be required on a full-time basis; Procedures for the paleontological monitor to temporarily redirect construction away from an area if paleontological resources are encountered during grading or excavation in order to assess the significance of the find; and Procedures for the handling of collected resources, including preparation to the point of identification. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall submit to the City the required Paleontological Monitoring Plan prepared by a Qualified Paleontologist. The City shall review and approve the Paleontological Monitoring Plan. The conditions for monitoring and treatment of discoveries shall be printed on all building and grading plans. City permit compliance staff shall check plans prior to issuance of grading permits. City permit compliance staff shall confirm monitoring by the Qualified Paleontologist and City grading inspectors shall spot check in the field throughout grading and construction. The Qualified Paleontologist shall ensure that actions consistent with this mitigation measure are implemented in the event of any inadvertent discovery. City of San Luis Obispo GEO-1(d) Final Paleontological Mitigation Report At the conclusion of laboratory work and museum curation, a final report shall be prepared describing the results of the paleontological mitigation monitoring efforts associated with the project. The report shall include a summary of the field and laboratory methods, an overview of the project geology and paleontology, a list of taxa recovered (if any), an analysis of fossils recovered (if any) and their scientific significance, and recommendations. The report shall be submitted to the City and the designated museum repository. Applicant shall submit to the City and the designated museum repository the required Paleontological Mitigation Report at the conclusion of laboratory work and museum curation. City permit compliance staff shall check plans prior to issuance of grading permits. The Qualified Paleontologist shall ensure that actions consistent with this mitigation measure are implemented in the event of any inadvertent discovery. City of San Luis Obispo Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Safety HAZ-1(a) Soil Management Plan Prior to issuance of any grading permits for the planned roundabout and frontage improvements along Tank Farm Road and the future alignment of Santa Fe Road, a contaminated soil assessment shall be completed in the portions of land to be graded for the identified improvements. Soil samples shall be collected under the supervision of a professional geologist or environmental professional to determine the presence or absence of contaminated soil in these areas. The sampling density shall be in accordance with guidance from San Luis Obispo County Environmental Health Services (EHS), so as to define the area of contaminated soil that may be disturbed by grading activities. Laboratory analysis of soil samples shall be analyzed for the presence of petroleum hydrocarbons, VOCs, and heavy metals in accordance with applicable US EPA Test Methods. If soil sampling indicates the presence of hydrocarbon contamination, metal concentrations, or other contaminants exceeding applicable environmental The contaminated soils assessment and SMP, if necessary, shall be submitted and approved by City compliance monitoring staff and County EHS prior to the issuance of project grading permits. As applicable, the City shall ensure implementation of the SMP according to the measures included therein and as approved by County EHS. City of San Luis Obispo Page 91 of 401
City of San Luis Obispo 600 Tank Farm Road Mixed-Use Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Response to Comments 16 Mitigation Measure Plan Requirements and Timing Monitoring Responsible Agency or Party Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments screening levels as provided by the EHS, the soil assessment shall identify the area of contaminated soil that may be disturbed by grading activities. An Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) shall be prepared detailing the soil sampling, analysis, and findings and submitted to the EHS for review. If concentrations of contaminants exceed the EHS-provided environmental screening levels, the applicant shall prepare and implement a Soil Management Plan (SMP). The SMP shall be reviewed and approved by EHS prior to issuance of grading permits. The plan shall communicate information to project construction workers about environmental conditions and will present measures to mitigate potential risks to the environment, construction workers, and other nearby receptors from potential exposure to hazardous substances that may be associated with unknown conditions or unexpected underground structures, and known contaminated soil or groundwater encountered during construction activities. The SMP shall be updated and the updated recommendations shall be followed if the following occurs: A change in project site uses; Receipt of additional information pertaining to project site environmental conditions; Updated chemical toxicity information for contaminants detected at the project site based on revised regulatory screening levels; or, New legal or regulatory soil management requirements applicable to the project site. HAZ-1(b) Discovery of Contaminated Soils Should petroleum hydrocarbon- and volatile organic compound (VOC)-contaminated soil, metal concentrations exceeding applicable screening criteria, or other hazardous materials be discovered during construction activities, SLOAPCD must be notified as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after affected material is discovered to determine if a SLOAPCD Permit will be required. In addition, the following measures shall be implemented immediately on discovery of contaminated soil: Covers on soil stockpiles shall be maintained in place at all times in areas not actively involved in soil addition or removal; Contaminated soil shall be covered with at least six inches of packed uncontaminated soil or a non-permeable hydrocarbon barrier. If a hydrocarbon barrier is used, no headspace shall be allowed where vapors could accumulate; Covered piles shall be designed and installed without openings to minimize erosion due to wind or water; Criteria pollutant emissions from excavation and haul trips associated with removing contaminated soil shall be quantified and mitigated if total emissions would exceed applicable SLOAPCD construction phase thresholds; During soil excavation, odors shall be minimized to avoid public nuisance; and, Clean soil shall be segregated from contaminated soil. The notification and permitting determination requirements shall be directed to the SLOAPCD Engineering & Compliance Division. The conditions for discovery of contaminated soils shall be printed on all building and grading plans. City grading inspectors shall spot check fieldwork. City of San Luis Obispo Page 92 of 401
City of San Luis Obispo 600 Tank Farm Road Mixed-Use Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Response to Comments 17 Mitigation Measure Plan Requirements and Timing Monitoring Responsible Agency or Party Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments HAZ-3(a) Tank Farm Road Interim Pedestrian Safety Signage The project applicant shall fund and install interim signage along Tank Farm Road west of Santa Fe Road to highlight potential safety hazards to pedestrians along this connection. The signage shall be designed and installed consistent with applicable City Engineering Standards to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. The signage shall remain in place until the future shared-use pedestrian/bicycle path along the north side of Tank Farm Road between Santa Fe Road and Innovation Way is constructed and open to the public. The applicant shall submit public improvement plans that detail the proposed sign installations for review and approval by the City prior to issuance of any building permits. The signs shall be installed prior to issuance of any occupancy permits. Construction of the required improvements may require coordination with and an encroachment permit from San Luis Obispo County. The City shall verify that the applicant installs the improvements in accordance with approved design plans. City of San Luis Obispo Noise N-1(a) Construction-Related Noise Reduction Measures The applicant shall apply the following measures during construction of the project site: Electrical Power. Electrical power, rather than diesel equipment, shall be used to run compressors and similar power tools and to power temporary structures, such as construction trailers or caretaker facilities. Equipment Staging. All stationary equipment (e.g., air compressors, portable generators) shall be staged as far away from sensitive receptors as feasible. Equipment Idling. Construction vehicles and equipment shall not be left idling for longer than five minutes when not in use. Workers’ Radios. All noise from workers’ radios shall be controlled to a point that they are not audible at sensitive receptors near construction activity. Smart Back-up Alarms. Mobile construction equipment shall have smart back-up alarms that automatically adjust the sound level of the alarm in response to ambient noise levels. Alternatively, back-up alarms shall be disabled and replaced with human spotters to ensure safety when mobile construction equipment is moving in the reverse direction. Temporary Sound Barriers. During the site preparation, grading, building, and paving phases of construction, temporary sound barriers shall be installed and maintained facing noise-sensitive receptors within 300 feet of the project site (e.g., residences at the neighboring mobile home park). Temporary sound barriers typically consist of construction fence batted with light sound blankets. Temporary sound barriers shall, at a minimum, block the line of sight between the engines of diesel-powered construction equipment (typically 3 feet above grade) and adjacent windows at sensitive receptors and shall be placed as close to the source equipment as feasible. Such barriers shall be field tested to reduce noise by at least 10 dBA at sensitive receptors. (A sound barrier can achieve a 5 dBA noise level reduction when it is tall enough to break the line-of-sight from the source equipment to the sensitive receptor, and it can achieve an approximate 1 dBA additional noise level reduction for each 2 feet of height after it breaks the line of sight ([FHWA] 2011). Mobile sound barriers may be used as appropriate to attenuate construction noise near the source equipment. Disturbance Coordinator. The applicant shall designate a disturbance coordinator who shall be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The noise disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler) and Construction plans shall note construction hours, truck routes, and required noise reduction measures, and shall be submitted to the City for approval prior to grading and building permit issuance for each project phase. Noise reduction measures shall be identified and described for submittal to the City for review and approval prior to building or grading permit issuance. They shall be adhered to for the duration of the project. The applicant shall provide and post signs stating these restrictions at construction site entries. Signs shall be posted prior to commencement of construction and maintained throughout construction. The Community Development Department shall confirm that construction noise reduction measures are incorporated in plans prior to approval of grading/building permit issuance. All construction workers shall be briefed at a pre-construction meeting on construction hour limitations and how, why, and where measures are to be implemented. A workday schedule will be adhered to for the duration of construction for all phases. City staff shall ensure compliance throughout all construction phases. Building inspectors and permit compliance staff shall periodically inspect the site for compliance with activity schedules and respond to complaints. City of San Luis Obispo Page 93 of 401
City of San Luis Obispo 600 Tank Farm Road Mixed-Use Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Response to Comments 18 Mitigation Measure Plan Requirements and Timing Monitoring Responsible Agency or Party Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments shall require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented. A telephone number for the disturbance coordinator shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site. N-1(b) Neighboring Property Owner Notification and Construction Noise Complaints The contractor shall inform residents and business operators at properties within 300 feet of the project site of proposed construction timelines and noise complaint procedures to minimize potential annoyance related to construction noise. Proof of mailing the notices shall be provided to the Community Development Department before the City issues a zoning clearance. Signs shall be in place before beginning of and throughout grading and construction activities. Noise-related complaints shall be directed to the City’s Community Development Department. Schedule and neighboring property owner notification mailing list shall be submitted 10 days prior to initiation of any earth movement. A workday schedule will be adhered to for the duration of construction for all phases. City staff shall ensure compliance throughout all construction phases. Building inspectors and permit compliance staff shall periodically inspect the site for compliance with activity schedules and respond to complaints. City of San Luis Obispo Page 94 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
1
EXHIBIT A
SECTION 1. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo (City) considers and relies on the Final Environmental
Impact Report (EIR; State Clearinghouse Number 2020110426) for the proposed 600 Tank Farm
Residential Mixed-Use Project (Project) in determining to approve the Project, amend the General Plan
Map, rezone the property, and amend the Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP). The Project includes a
General Plan Amendment, Zoning Amendment, AASP Amendment, Conceptual Site Plan, and Major
Development Review to allow for development of the 11.1-acre site.
The Final EIR consists of the Draft EIR with changes in response to public comments, written responses
to comments received on the Draft EIR, identification of persons and agencies that commented on the
Draft EIR, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), and technical appendices. The City
Council has received, reviewed, considered, and relied on the information contained in the Final EIR, as
well as information provided at hearings and submissions of testimony from official participating
agencies, the public, and other agencies and organizations.
Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR]) and Section
21081 of the Public Resources Code require a Lead Agency to adopt findings for each significant
environmental impact disclosed in an EIR. Specifically, for each significant impact, the Lead Agency
must find that:
• Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR;
• Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other
agency or can and should be adopted by that agency; or
• Specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations, including provision of
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make the mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible.
The California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15091(b) requires that the City’s findings be
supported by substantial evidence in the record. Accordingly, the Lead Agency’s record consists of the
following:
• Documentary and oral evidence, testimony and staff comments and responses received and
reviewed by the Lead Agency during public review and the public hearings on the 600 Tank Farm
Residential Mixed-Use Project.
• The City of San Luis Obispo 600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project Final Environmental
Impact Report (September 2021).
The Final EIR, AASP, and other portions of the administrative record are available for review at:
City of San Luis Obispo
Community Development Department
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Contact: Shawna Scott
(805) 781-7176
Page 95 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
2
In addition to making a finding for each significant impact, if the Lead Agency approves a project without
mitigating all the significant impacts, it must prepare a statement of overriding considerations, in which it
balances the benefits of the project against the unavoidable environmental risks. The statement of
overriding considerations must explain the social, economic, or other reasons for approving the project
despite its environmental impacts (14 CCR 15093, Pub. Res. Code 21081).
This document contains the findings and statement of overriding considerations for the approval of the
Project and reflects the City’s independent judgment. This document incorporates by reference the Final
EIR.
Having received, reviewed and considered the foregoing information, as well as all information in the
record, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo hereby makes these Findi ngs pursuant to, and in
accordance with, Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code.
Page 96 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
3
SECTION 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The Final EIR objectives for the Project include:
Develop an economically feasible plan that is consistent with, and implements, policies within the
City’s General Plan and AASP.
Establish a complete internally and externally “linked” mixed use community with amenities such
as neighborhood parks and commercial goods and services that can serve the neighborhood.
Provide a variety of housing opportunities for a wide range of socioeconomic groups and
affordability levels, and at average unit sizes that are below current City averages.
Develop a Project with the maximum number of units permitted by the underlying zoning,
approximately 280 residential units, with approximately 261,200 square feet of total residential
floor space and 12,500 square feet of commercial floor space.
Develop the Acacia Creek frontage in a manner that provides that area as a Project amenity
without jeopardizing the creek’s biological resources or riparian qualities.
Implement the City-planned Tank Farm Road/Santa Fe Road (west) roundabout and
infrastructure improvements to improve traffic flow and safety for all road users in a manner that
does not exceed the level of impact fees generated on-site over the buildout of the project.
Provide a well-connected internal network of bicycle paths, pedestrian sidewalks, open space
buffers, private parks, and spaces for recreational activities, including development of a shared-
use bicycle/pedestrian path between Tank Farm Road and Damon-Garcia Sports Fields within
the 35’ creek setback, and protected bike lanes consistent with the Active Transportation Plan.
Provide City-identified roadway network improvements that meet current and long-term traffic
projections with preference for non-vehicular traffic modes.
Market and orient the project to the surrounding employers to reduce vehicle miles travelled and
to maximize the use of non-vehicular traffic modes.
Develop a project that complies with the safety, noise and overflight policies of the City’s Airport
Overlay Zone and the San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan.
B. PROPOSED PROJECT
The project entitlements would change the land use designation from Business Park to Service
Commercial with the Specific Plan overlay (C-S-SP), which would allow a mixed-use project providing
up to 280 residential units and commercial-service/office uses defined in AASP Table 4.3. The project
site would be developed at a density of 25.7 units per acre, with shared public and private open spaces,
common yards, and a recreation center with a community building. The proposed residential development
would include a mix of one-bedroom, two-bedroom, and three-bedroom units as detailed in Table 1.
Balconies and outdoor activity areas would be located on the north and east faces of the buildings to
minimize exposure to vehicle noise from Tank Farm Road and aircraft flyovers from the San Luis Obispo
County Regional Airport. The proposed zoning would allow for up to 12,500 square feet of commercial-
service/office space, which would be located in Buildings 1 and 2 shown in Figure 1.
Page 97 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
4
Table 1. Project Characteristics
Unit Type1 Size (sf) Units
Residential
Area (sf)
Non-Residential
Area (sf)
Acres
(net) Units/Acre2
Townhomes and
Cluster Units
750-1,450 140 154,000 n/a 6.5 21.5
Stacked Flats 600-925 100 85,700 n/a 2.9 34.5
Mixed Use
(studio and 1-bed)
450-625 40 21,500 12,500 1.5 26.7
Total 450-1,450 280 261,200 12,500 10.9 25.7
sf = square feet
The project also includes a 2,250-square foot clubhouse building with a 2,800-square foot patio area. The
clubhouse building would provide meeting areas, an indoor game area, a common lounge, administrative
office area, and a community kitchen. The building would also serve as a temporary sales office and an
administrative building during project sales and construction.
The project’s required creek setbacks, common areas and open space in the northwest corner of the
project site would result in 20 percent of the site being landscaped common open space, including play
areas, tot lots, and landscape parkways. Bike and pedestrian trips would be facilitated by a proposed
connection to the 650 Tank Farm Road property and extension of the onsite shared-use path to the shared-
use path at the Damon-Garcia Sports Fields to the north. The proposed project is requesting a minimum
setback of approximately 10 feet from the average top of bank for a bicycle/pedestrian path to connect to
Damon-Garcia Sports Fields (and an average shared-use path of 20 feet) and a minor exception for a
maximum 10-foot encroachment into the setback for portions of Buildings 14 and 21 from the average top
of bank.
The project would be required to contribute its fair share toward transportation improvements envisioned
in the General Plan Circulation Element and shown in the AASP. Transportation improvements funded or
constructed by this project include widening Tank Farm Road along the project frontage (provides two
westbound auto lanes, protected bike lanes, curb/gutter, sidewalk and parkway on the north side of the
street), construction of a roundabout at the intersection of Tank Farm Road and Santa Fe Road (west), and
construction of a portion of the Santa Fe Road Extension north of Tank Farm Road (including two travel
lanes, sidewalks and protected bike lanes on the east side). Stormwater runoff from these improvements
would be directed to a planned retention basin located at the northwest corner of the proposed
roundabout.
In addition to the transportation improvements included in the project, the project applicant would be
required to provide preliminary planning and engineering support for a future shared-use
pedestrian/bicycle path along Tank Farm Road from Santa Fe Road west to Innovation Way (4,700 feet
west of Santa Fe Road), as identified in the City’s Active Transportation Plan.
These elements of the Project are further described in the Final EIR, which is available at the following
link: https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-development/documents-
online/environmental-review-documents/-folder-2187
Page 98 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
5
Figure 1. Project Site Plan
TANK FARM ROAD Page 99 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
6
SECTION 3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
A. BACKGROUND
The Final EIR was prepared in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. In accordance
with Section 15121 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the purpose of the Final EIR is to serve as an
informational document for the public and City decision makers.
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15182, “where a public agency has prepared an EIR on a specific
plan after January 1, 1980, a residential project undertaken pursuant to and in conformity to that specific
plan is exempt from CEQA,” as long as the residential project is within the scope of the EIR, no new or
more severe environmental effects would occur, and no new mitigation measures are required for the
residential project.
In accordance with Section 15105 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Draft EIR was circulated for a 50-
day public review period that began June 5, 2021 and concluded on August 3, 2021. The City held a
Planning Commission Hearing public workshop on July 14, 2021 to receive public testimony in the form
of verbal comments on the Draft EIR.
Responses to each written and verbal comment that the City received are included in Section 8.0,
Response to Comments of the Final EIR. The Draft EIR and Response to Comments collectively comprise
the Final EIR for the Project.
B. IMPACT ANALYSIS
Four categories of impacts are identified in the Final EIR:
• No impact would result when no change in the environment would occur; no mitigation would be
required.
• A less than significant impact is an adverse impact that does not meet or exceed the applicable
significance criteria thresholds for a particular resource. Generally, no mitigation measures are
required for less than significant impacts; only compliance with standard regulatory conditions
would be required. However, mitigation may still be recommended should the lead or responsible
agency deem it appropriate to reduce the impact to the maximum extent feasible, as long as there
is rough proportionality between the environmental impacts caused by the project and the
mitigation measures imposed on the project.
• A less than significant impact with mitigation is an adverse impact that would cause a substantial
adverse effect that meets or exceeds the applicable significance criteria thresholds for a particular
resource, but which can be reduced to a less than significant level through successful
implementation of identified mitigation measures.
• A significant and unavoidable impact would cause a substantial adverse effect on the environment
that meets or exceeds the applicable significance criteria thresholds for a particular resource, and
no feasible mitigation measures would be available to reduce the impact to a less than significant
level.
Determinations of significance levels in the Final EIR are made based on impact significance criteria and
State CEQA Guidelines for each environmental resource.
Page 100 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
7
SECTION 4. FINDINGS FOR LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT
The findings below are for impacts that are adverse, but would not result in significant effects on the
natural or human environment.
The City Council concludes that the following impacts would result in adverse but less than significant
effects on the natural or human environment. The impacts identified in this section are considered in the
same sequence in which they appear in the Final EIR.
A. AIR QUALITY
1. Impact AQ-1: The Project would be consistent with the SLOAPCD Clean Air Plan growth
assumptions because it would be consistent with the population projections, it would result in a net
reduction in regional vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and regional residential VMT and not exceed the
Clean Air Plan VMT projections for the project site, and the project is consistent with the Land Use
Strategies and Transportation Control Measures in the Clean Air Plan. Therefore, impacts would be
less than significant (Refer to page 4.1-13 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
2. Impact AQ-2: Emissions associated with Project construction and operation would not exceed
applicable SLOAPCD thresholds for local or regional emissions. Therefore, impacts would be less
than significant (Refer to page 4.1-15 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
3. Cumulative Air Quality Impacts: The Project would be within the population projections of the
SLOAPCD Clean Air Plan and because the Project would be substantially consistent with
transportation control measures and land use strategies provided in the Clean Air Plan, the Project
would not contribute considerably to a potential Clean Air Plan consistency impact. Impacts
associated with CO hotspots or TACs tend to be localized to individual project sites and the
immediate vicinity. As a result, the project-level evaluations of these pollutants consider the
cumulative nature of these pollutants. Because the Project would not result in or be exposed to
concentrations of localized pollutants that would exceed applicable SLOAPCD thresholds, the Project
would not expose sensitive receptors to a cumulatively considerable impact associated with CO
hotspots, TACs, or valley fever (Refer to page 4.1-21 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
Page 101 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
8
B. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
1. Impact BIO-3: The Project site has low suitability for wildlife movement due to the existing level of
disturbance and human activity. Also, the Project would not affect the movement of native fish
because no project elements would directly affect the Acacia Creek channel. Due to the existing low-
quality and limited wildlife movement habitat and the existing baseline of human presence within the
vicinity of the Project site, wildlife movement would not be significantly diminished. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant (Refer to page 4.2-35 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
2. Impact BIO-4: The Project would be required to comply with the City’s Tree Ordinance and the
Tree Regulations in Chapter 12.24 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, which require
compensatory tree planting for any existing trees removed. Zoning Regulations section 17.70.030
stipulates that an exception to the creek setback requirements may be considered where substantiated
evidence is available that a project will result in better implementation of other Zoning Regulations or
General Plan policies while allowing reasonable use of the site. The encroachment area would not
significantly degrade the riparian corridor. The Project proposes an increase in the riparian setback
elsewhere along the corridor, with a riparian setback that averages approximately 40 feet. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant. (Refer to page 4.2-35 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
C. ENERGY
1. Impact E-1: Temporary Project construction would comply with state measures to reduce the
inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of energy. The use of energy to construct the
Project would not be unnecessary because the intention of the project is to provide additional housing.
Project operation would include energy efficiency measures including the installation of solar panels
and an all-electric design in compliance with the City’s Clean Energy Choice Program. As a result,
energy consumption resulting from the proposed built environment would not be wasteful, inefficient,
or unnecessary. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant (Refer to page 4.4-10 of the Final
EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
2. Impact E-2: The Project includes energy efficiency measures to achieve net-zero energy
requirements in the City’s Clean Energy Choice Program for New Buildings and the applicant has
committed to providing electricity through Central Coast Community Energy’s community choice
energy program. The proposed bicycle and pedestrian facilities and access would encourage the use
of alternative transportation modes, which would reduce VMT and associated fuel consumption.
Therefore, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the City’s 2020 Climate
Page 102 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
9
Action Plan or Clean Energy Choice Program for New Buildings, or any other applicable plans for
renewable energy and impacts would be less than significant. (Refer to page 4.4-13 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
3. Cumulative Energy Impacts: The City’s Clean Energy Choice Program for New Buildings, which
includes incentives and local amendments to the 2019 California Energy Code, and new iterations of
the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen would require increasingly more
efficient appliances and building materials that reduce energy consumption in cumulative
development in the City of San Luis Obispo in addition to the Project. In addition, county-wide
vehicle fuel efficiency is anticipated to continue improving through implementation of the existing
Pavley regulations under AB 1493, and implementation of the San Luis Obispo Council of
Governments 2019 Regional Transportation Plan would reduce per capita VMT. As a result, the
Project would not have a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact
related to the wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy resources (Refer to page
4.4-13 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than cumulatively
significant effect.
D. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
1. Impact GHG-1: The Project would generate temporary GHG emissions primarily as a result of
operation of construction equipment on-site as well as from vehicles transporting construction
workers to and from the project site. Operation of the project would generate GHG emissions
associated with area sources (e.g., landscape maintenance), energy and water usage, vehicle trips, and
wastewater and solid waste generation. However, the Project would be consistent with the City of San
Luis Obispo’s 2020 CAP because project GHG emissions would be less GHG intensive than
development anticipated for the existing General Plan land use designation for the site and would be
consistent with the City’s CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist. Therefore, the
Project’s potential impact associated with GHG emissions and greenhouse has reduction plan
consistency would be less than significant. (Refer to page 4.5-15 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required. The Draft EIR included Mitigation Measure GHG-1(a) which would
have required the project applicant to prepare and implement a Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Program. This mitigation was found to reduce the project’s GHG emissions. However, the Draft
EIR determined that, due to limited GHG emissions reductions that would be achievable through
on-site GHG reduction measures and limits on the use of off-site reduction credits and/or carbon
offsets, it would be speculative to determine that Mitigation Measure GHG-1(a) would reduce the
Project’s GHG emissions below the applicable threshold of significance and concluded that the
GHG impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
During preparation of the Final EIR, City staff reviewed the methodology used to determine the
project’s consistency with the Climate Action Plan and the basis for determining the potential
buildout of the existing General Plan land use designation. As a result, Impact GHG-1 was
revised to include a comparison of the proposed project’s GHG emissions to the potential GHG
Page 103 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
10
emissions estimated from development anticipated for the existing General Plan land use
designation, and in compliance with the Climate Action Plan methodology for projects which
would result in new development with lower GHG intensity than development anticipated for the
existing land use designation, the project was evaluated using the CEQA GHG Emissions
Analysis Compliance Checklist. With these revisions, Draft EIR Mitigation Measure GHG-1(a)
was rejected because it was found to no longer be required to ensure the Project would be
consistent with the City’s Climate Action Plan. Therefore, no mitigation is required to reduce the
Project’s impacts associated with GHG emissions.
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
2. Cumulative Greenhouse Gas Emission Impacts: The geographic scope for related projects
considered in the cumulative impact analysis for GHG emissions is global because the impacts of
climate change are experienced on a global scale regardless of the location of GHG emission sources.
Therefore, GHG emissions and climate change are, by definition, cumulative impacts. The Project is
consistent with the City’s 2020 CAP. Impacts from the proposed project would therefore not be
cumulatively considerable. (Refer to page 4.5-21 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
E. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
1. Impact HAZ-2: In conjunction with the City’s LUCE update process completed in 2014, the LUE
and associated Airport Safety Zones were developed with the updated safety and hazards
considerations identified in the 2014 Airport Land Use Compatibility Report. With the Airpo rt Land
Use Commission’s adoption of the updated Airport Land Use Plan in 2021, the project site is not
located within identified Aviation Safety Areas/Airport Safety Zones. Because the project site is not
located within an identified Aviation Safety Area in the City’s adopted LUE or an Airport Safety
Zone that limits residential development in the ALUC’s adopted ALUP, and because the Project does
not include any components that would pose risks to air navigation, or otherwise expose people or
workers to airport related risks, no substantial aviation-related safety hazard to residents or
commercial employees or patrons within the project site are expected to occur as result of the Project
and impacts would be less than significant. (Refer to page 4.6-17 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
3. Cumulative Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impacts: Overall, hazards and hazardous materials
impacts associated with individual developments are site specific in nature and must be addressed on
a case-by-case basis. Since hazards and hazardous materials are required to be examined as part of the
permit application and environmental review process, potential impacts associated with individual
projects will be adequately addressed prior to permit approval. Therefore, cumulative hazardous
material impacts would be less than significant. Cumulative projects area also within the ALUP
Safety Areas, thereby potentially exposing persons to risk of airport safety hazards. These primarily
include residential units and commercial development projects near the airport as well as Specific
Plans and Specific Plan amendments, including the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan and Airport Area
Specific Plan projects. However, these projects are subject to review of airport-related hazards during
Page 104 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
11
the environmental review process and by the ALUC, which would ensure that development does not
impose an aviation-related hazard on structures or people. Potential impacts associated with
transportation hazards would be site-specific and would not have corresponding cumulative effects.
Therefore, cumulative impacts would be less than significant. (Refer to page 4.6-22 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than cumulatively
significant impact.
F. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
1. Impact HWQ-1: Project construction activities would not directly affect Acacia Creek because the
Project does not include physical improvements to the creek. Both phases of Project construction
would be required to comply with the requirements of the Construction General Permit, which
requires preparation and implementation of a SWPPP. The SWPPP would detail Erosion Control,
Sediment Control, and Good Housekeeping BMPs to be implemented during project construction to
minimize erosion, retain sediment on site, control flooding, and reduce pollutant discharge to
stormwater to a less than significant level. Implementation of BMPs in compliance with City and
Phase II MS4 Permit drainage and water quality requirement would ensure that operational impacts
related to on- or off-site erosion or siltation, flooding, and additional sources of polluted runoff would
support stormwater runoff for the Project. Therefore, potential erosion, flooding, and associated water
quality impacts would be less than significant. (Refer to page 4.7-13 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
2. Impact HWQ-2: The Project does not involve grading or placement of structures within Acacia
Creek channel that could impede or redirect flood flows. The eastern portion of the Project site is
within an existing 100-year flood zone. However, creek setbacks and compliance with FEMA and
City regulations would ensure that the Project would not place structures within a 100-year flood
hazard area which could impede or redirect flood flows. In addition, with retention BMPs in
compliance with City and Phase II MS4 Permit requirements, the Project would not increase
discharge to Acacia Creek beyond the allowable 5 percent increase for the 2-year through 100-year
storm event. Therefore, the Project would not substantially alter or increase flood flows or change the
morphology of Acacia Creek downstream of the project site and impacts would be less than
significant. (Refer to page 4.7-17 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
3. Cumulative Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts: Compliance with NPDES and local water
quality requirements and City drainage design guidelines would minimize potentially significant
cumulative impacts. All projects that disturb one acre or more of soil must comply with the
requirements of the Construction General Permit. Additionally, all projects that would create and/or
replace 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface would be required to comply with the Phase
II MS4 Permit. The Project, as well as other cumulative development in City, would be required to
prepare a hydrology report and implement drainage facilities to minimize hydrologic impacts
Page 105 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
12
consistent with applicable City design guidelines. Compliance with the Construction General Permit,
the City drainage design guidelines, and the Phase II MS4 requirements would ensure that each
individual project would incorporate BMPs and other drainage facilities designed to address drainage
and surface water quality protection. As a result, cumulative impacts to water quality, drainage,
flooding, and sedimentation would be adverse, but less than significant (Refer to page 4.7-18 of the
Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than cumulatively
significant impact.
G. LAND USE AND PLANNING
1. Impact LU-1: The Project would be potentially consistent with all applicable General Plan and
AASP policies that minimize environmental effects such as water quality, scenic quality,
archaeological resource protection, and wildlife habitat protection. The required off-site
transportation improvements, including the roundabout and frontage improvements along Tank Farm
Road as well as the future alignment of Santa Fe Road are anticipated in the General Plan Circulation
Element. Therefore, the proposed transportation improvements are consistent with the City’s General
Plan and AASP. With City approval of the proposed rezone, the proposed mixed-use development
would be consistent with allowed uses in the C-S-SP zone. The ALUC reviewed the Project in
August 2021 and determined that development facilitated under the proposed AASP Amendment and
rezone would be consistent with the ALUP. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with applicable
policies or regulations relating to environmental effects in the General Plan, AASP, Municipal Code,
or ALUP and impacts would be less than significant. (Refer to page 4.8-5 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
2. Cumulative Land Use and Planning Impacts: Potential environmental impacts from land use
conflicts are addressed on a case-by-case basis as individual projects are reviewed by city decision-
makers for consistency with adopted policies. Much of the anticipated cumulative development is the
City is planned within adopted specific plan areas and would be required to comply with buildout
densities and policies within the respective specific plans. Projects within the ALUP would be subject
to review and oversight by the ALUC, which would ensure compliance with the safety measures and
standards in the ALUP. In addition, residential projects would be subject to the growth management
policy established in Land Use Element Policy 1.11.2. Implementation of the City’s General Plan
policies and development standards and those in other adopted plans that relate to land use would
minimize cumulative land use impacts. Therefore, cumulative land use impacts would be less than
significant. (Refer to page 4.8-7 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than cumulatively
significant impact.
Page 106 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
13
H. NOISE
1. Impact N-2: Rooftop-mounted HVAC equipment on new buildings on the Project site would not
exceed standards in Section 17.76.100.B of the City’s Municipal Code or the City’s maximum
allowable noise exposure level. In addition, new vehicle trips would not increase ambient
transportation-related noise by 1 dBA or more. Therefore, the Project would not result in an
exceedance of the FTA’s criteria for significant increases in traffic noise. Impacts would be less than
significant. (Refer to page 4.9-19 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
2. Impact N-3: The greatest anticipated source of vibration during general Project construction
activities would be from vibratory rollers, which may be used within approximately 200 feet of the
nearest off-site structures. However, vibration levels at nearby structures would be lower than the
strictest FTA construction vibration damage criterion and would not exceed Caltrans’ recommended
criterion for distinctly perceptible vibration from transient sources. Therefore, temporary impacts
associated with rollers (and other potential vibration-generating construction equipment) would be
less than significant. (Refer to page 4.9-21 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
3. Cumulative Noise Impacts:
On-site Operational Noise. Most cumulative projects are not located close enough to the project site
that operational noise would impact the same sensitive receivers. 650 and 660 Tank Farm Road are
located in proximity to the project site and their noise sources would be typical of multi-family
residential and commercial developments, and they would not generate noise levels at sensitive
receptors that exceed ambient noise levels from transportation sources. It is anticipated that nearby
cumulative projects would produce similar noise levels from HVAC equipment at adjacent property
lines. In this case, cumulative noise levels from on-site operational equipment would not approach
existing ambient noise levels from transportation sources. Therefore, cumulative projects, even those
near the project site, would not cause cumulative on-site operational noise impacts.
Vehicle Trip Noise. Cumulative projects, including the proposed project, would generate new vehicle
trips that result in a permanent increase in traffic noise. However, the project by itself would not
cause a detectable change in existing traffic noise levels on road segments with nearby sensitive
receptors. Similarly, the cumulative project at 650 Tank Farm Road would not increase traffic
volumes on nearby roadway segments by more than 4.6 percent, which would have a negli gible effect
on traffic noise. Based on the scale of trip generation by nearby cumulative projects, it is not
anticipated that these projects would combine to increase traffic noise to a perceptible extent.
Furthermore, the project would not considerably contribute to a cumulative increase in traffic noise.
(Refer to page 4.9-21 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the Project would have an adverse, but less than cumulatively
significant impact.
Page 107 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
14
I. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
1. Impact U-1: Existing water conveyance and wastewater treatment infrastructure would have
adequate capacity to serve the Project. The project would not require new or expanded off-site water
and wastewater treatment, stormwater drainage facilities, electrical power, natural gas, or
telecommunication facilities. In addition, the construction of required utility connections would occur
on the project site and adjacent Tank Farm Road right-of-way and are accounted for in the discussion
of temporary construction impacts. Therefore, the project would not result in a significant impact
associated with the need for new or expanded utility facilities. (Refer to page 4.10-10 of the Final
EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
2. Impact U-2: The Project would be required to obtain a Construction Water Permit which would
utilize recycled water for construction activities. The Project’s water demand would represent an
increase of approximately 1 percent in the City’s projected water demand and would consume
approximately 3.5 percent of the City’s available water supply. The City currently has sufficient
existing municipal water supply to provide water to the Project. In addition, WWME Policy A 5.2.5
requires new development to pay its proportionate share of water supplies, expanded treatment, and
distribution system capacity. Therefore, the potential impact to water supply would be less than
significant. (Refer to page 4.10-11 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
3. Impact U-3: The proposed roundabout and frontage improvements along Tank Farm Road and the
future alignment of Santa Fe Road would not result in a long-term increase in wastewater demand.
The City has sufficient existing wastewater treatment capacity to serve the Project’s estimated
wastewater generation. The WRRF is currently undergoing construction to increase available
capacity, which is estimated to be completed in 2024. WWME Policy B 2.2.3 requires new
development to pay its proportionate share of expanded treatment and collection system capacity and
upgrades. Therefore, the potential impact to wastewater capacity would be less than significant.
(Refer to page 4.10-12 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect
4. Cumulative Utility and Service System Impacts: The City has available water supplies that exceed
estimated buildout demand, and the project would not contribute substantially to an increase in water
demand that would exceed the City’s overall potable water supply. Therefore, the Project would not
contribute considerably to a cumulative water supply impact. The City has adequate wastewater
treatment capacity to serve the anticipated the estimated buildout demand, and the Project would be
required to comply with WWME Policy B 2.2.3, which requires new development to pay its
proportionate or “fair share” of expanded treatment and collection system capacity and upgrades.
Therefore, the Project would not contribute considerably to a cumulative wastewater capacity impact.
Individual projects would be subject to the stormwater capture and treatment requirements of the
Page 108 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
15
applicable MS4 Permit and the City’s Drainage Master Plan and stormwater regulations, which would
reduce potential impacts to stormwater drainage facilities. Therefore, the potential cumulative impacts
to stormwater/drainage facilities would be less than significant. Future development, including the
proposed project, would be subject to applicable local, regional, State, and federal policies regarding
energy efficiency, and, the Project would not require additional electricity substations. Therefore, the
Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts on energy facilities would not be cumulatively
considerable. The Project would include telecommunications connections to existing lines and
systems, as service providers exist for the project site and vicinity. Therefore, the Project’s
contribution to cumulative impacts on energy facilities would not be cumulatively considerable.
(Refer to page 4.10-13 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: None Required
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than cumulatively
significant impact.
Page 109 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
16
SECTION 5. FINDINGS FOR SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL
EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT THAT HAVE BEEN MITIGATED TO A
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL
The findings below are for impacts that would result in potentially significant effects on the natural
and/or human environment, but could be reduced to a less than significant level through feasible changes
or alterations to the Project or implementation of mitigation measures. When approving a project with
impacts that are less than significant with mitigation, the decision-makers must make findings that
changes or alterations to the project have been incorporated that reduce the impacts to a less than
significant level.
This section presents the Project’s significant environmental impacts and feasible mitigation measures.
Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR]) and Section
21081 of the Public Resources Code require a Lead Agency to make findings for each significant
environmental impact disclosed in an EIR. Specifically, for each significant impact, the Lead Agency
must find that:
• Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR;
• Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other
agency or can and should be adopted by that agency; or
• Specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations, including provision of
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make the mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible.
Each of these findings must be supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record. This
section identifies impacts that can be fully avoided or reduced to a less than significant level through the
incorporation of feasible mitigation measures into the Project. The impacts identified in this section are
considered in the same sequence in which they appear in the Final EIR.
A. AIR QUALITY
1. Impact AQ-3: The Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial CO concentrations,
and localized air quality impacts related to CO hot spots would be less than significant. Project
construction activities, including grading and construction vehicle traffic, could generate substantial
localized quantities of dust and expose sensitive receptors to potential health hazards associated with
the Coccidioides fungus, and this impact would be potentially significant. In addition, the proposed
grading and excavation has the potential to encounter serpentine rock that may contain Naturally
Occurring Asbestos at locations on the property other than those tested, this impact would be
potentially significant. (Refer to page 4.1-17 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts to sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations as a result of development of the Project.
- Mitigation Measure AQ-3(a) Valley Fever Suppression Measures. The project developer
and contractor(s) shall prepare a Construction Valley Fever Plan to ensure the
implementation of the following measures during construction activities to reduce impacts
related to Valley Fever.
Page 110 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
17
a. Project construction activities shall implement standard SLOAPCD dust control
measures described in SLOAPCD’s 2012 CEQA Air Quality Handbook. SLOAPCD
dust control measures for projects with a grading area greater than 4 acres or that are
located within 1,000 feet of any sensitive receptor include watering of the grading site
and dirt stockpiles, vegetation and chemical soil stabilizer use on disturbed soil areas,
early roadway paving, construction vehicle speed control, minimum freeboard for
hauling vehicles, and vehicle wheel washing.
b. If peak daily wind speeds exceed 15 mph or peak daily temperatures exceed 95 degrees
Fahrenheit for three consecutive days, additional dust suppression measures (such as
additional water or the application of additional soil stabilizer) shall be implemented
prior to and immediately following ground disturbing activities. The additional dust
suppression shall continue until winds are 10 mph or lower and outdoor air
temperatures are below a peak daily temperature of 90 degrees for at least two
consecutive days.
c. The project developer(s) shall notify the San Luis Obispo County Public Health
Department and the City not more than 60 nor less than 30 days before construction
activities commence to allow the San Luis Obispo County Public Health Department
opportunity to provide educational outreach to community members and medical
providers, as well as enhanced disease surveillance in the area both during and after
construction activities involving grading.
d. Prior to any project grading activity, the project construction contractor(s) shall prepare
and implement a worker training program that describes potential health hazards
associated with Valley Fever, common symptoms, proper safety procedures to
minimize health hazards, and notification procedures if suspected work-related
symptoms are identified during construction, including the fact that certain ethnic
groups and immune-compromised persons are at greater risk of becoming ill with
Valley Fever. The objective of the training shall be to ensure the workers are aware of
the danger associated with Valley Fever. The worker training program shall be
included in the standard in-person training for project workers and shall identify safety
measures to be implemented by construction contractors during construction. Prior to
initiating any grading, the project developer shall provide the City and the San Luis
Obispo County Public Health Department with copies of all educational training
material for review and approval. No later than 30 days after any new employee or
employees begin work, the project developer shall submit evidence to the City that
each employee has acknowledged receipt of the training (e.g., sign-in sheets with a
statement verifying receipt and understanding of the training).
e. The developer shall work with a medical professional, in consultation with the San Luis
Obispo County Public Health Department, to develop an educational handout for on-
site workers and surrounding residents within 1,000 feet of the project site that includes
the following information on Valley Fever:
▪ Potential sources/causes
▪ Common symptoms
▪ Options or remedies available should someone be experiencing these symptoms
▪ The location of available testing for infection
Prior to construction permit issuance, this handout shall have been created by the
developer and reviewed by the City. No less than 30 days prior to any surface disturbance
(e.g., grading, filling, trenching) work commencing, this handout shall be mailed to all
existing residences within three miles of the project site
Page 111 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
18
— Mitigation Measure AQ-3(b) Naturally Occurring Asbestos Air Toxics Control Measure
Compliance. Consistent with the requirements of the NOA ATCM, the project developer
shall file an exemption request form with SLOAPCD including the geologic evaluation
documenting the conclusion that no serpentine is present at depths where proposed
grading/excavation would occur. The project developer shall comply with SLOAPCD
requirements associated with the exception, if granted, or with subsequent SLOAPCD
requirements resulting from the exemption request, which may include additional geologic
evaluation, dust mitigation, or air monitoring.
b. Finding: The City finds that the Mitigation Measure AQ-3(a) and AQ-3(b) would reduce impacts
to sensitive receptors to a less than significant level by requiring implementation of protective
measures to reduce health hazards associated with the Coccidioides fungus and complying with
SLOAPCD requirements for Naturally Occurring Asbestos.
B. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
1. Impact BIO-1: The proposed disturbance footprint on the Project site would impact the entirety of
the occurrences of Cambria morning-glory and Congdon’s tarplant. The proposed road and
infrastructure improvements to Tank Farm Road would likely impact the historic population of
Congdon’s tarplant within the project area south of Tank Farm Road. Project impacts to the on-site
occurrences of these special status plant species would be potentially significant. The Project also has
the potential to impact special-status animal species that have the potential to occur within the project
site based on the presence of suitable habitat. These species include Vernal pool fair shrimp,
California red-legged frog, western spadefoot, southwestern pond turtle, American badger, pallid bat,
Townsend’s big-eared bat, burrowing owl, and loggerhead shrike. Suitable nesting habitat is also
present for special status nesting bird species. Impacts to special status plant and animal species are
potentially significant. (Refer to page 4.2-19 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required to reduce Project construction and
operational impacts to sensitive plant and animal species.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1(a) Construction Best Management Practices. The applicant
shall ensure the following general wildlife Best Management Practices (BMPs) are required
for construction activities for the project:
• Ground disturbance shall be limited to the minimum necessary to complete construction
activities. Construction limits of disturbance shall be flagged. All equipment and material
storage, parking, staging and other support areas shall be identified prior to issuance of a
grading permit. Areas of special biological concern within or adjacent to construction
limits shall have highly visible orange construction fencing installed between said area
and the limits of disturbance.
• All project construction activities shall occur during daylight hours (i.e., between sunrise
and sunset) and during dry weather conditions. Night lighting shall be prohibited.
• Upon completion of construction all excess materials and debris shall be removed from
the project construction area and disposed of appropriately.
• The work area shall remain clean. All food-related trash items shall be enclosed in sealed
containers and removed from the site weekly.
• Pets and firearms shall be prohibited at the construction site.
• All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles shall occur at least 100
feet from Acacia Creek and in a location where a spill would not drain toward aquatic
Page 112 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
19
habitat. A plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills
prior to the onset of work activities. All workers shall be informed of the appropriate
measures to take should an accidental spill occur.
• To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, appropriate erosion
control BMPs (e.g., use of coir rolls, jute netting, etc.) shall be implemented to minimize
adverse effects to Acacia Creek. No plastic monofilament netting shall be utilized on site.
• All equipment operating within aquatic habitat shall be in good conditions and free of
leaks. Spill containment shall be installed under all equipment staged within stream areas
and extra spill containment and clean up materials shall be located in close proximity for
easy access.
• At the end of each workday, excavations shall be secured with cover or a ramp provided
to prevent wildlife entrapment.
• All trenches, pipes, culverts or similar structures shall be inspected for animals prior to
burying, capping, moving, or filling.
Stockpiles of chemicals, drums, bagged materials, and other hazardous materials such as
propane, acetylene shall have pallets and/or secondary containment. Should a material spills
occur, City compliance monitoring staff shall be informed of the spill and materials and/or
contaminants shall be cleaned from the project construction area and recycled or disposed of
to the satisfaction of the City and in accordance with all applicable local, State, and federal
regulations
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1(b) Worker Environmental Awareness Program Training. Prior
to the initiation of construction activities (including staging and mobilization), a qualified
biologist shall provide all personnel associated with project construction with a Worker
Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training. The training will aid workers in
recognizing special status resources that may occur in the project area. The specifics of this
program shall include identification of the sensitive species and habitats, a description of the
regulatory status and general ecological characteristics of sensitive resources, and review of
the limits of construction and avoidance measures required to reduce impacts to biological
resources within the work area. A fact sheet conveying this information shall also be prepared
for distribution to all contractors, their employers, and other personnel involved with
construction of the project. All employees shall sign a form provided by the trainer
documenting they have attended the WEAP and understand the information presented to
them. Fact sheets shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to conducting the training.
The required notification and an attendance log that includes the names and signatures of all
personnel that have received the training shall be provided to the City upon completion of the
training. The applicant shall notify City compliance monitoring staff of the date and time the
training is scheduled so that City staff may attend.
— Mitigation Measures BIO-1(c) Updated Surveys for Infrastructure Improvement Parcels.
Within the portions of the study area not currently owned by the applicant, but where
improvements are required to facilitate the project, the applicant shall conduct updated
surveys of sensitive species habitats (including special status plant species, CRLF, wetland
habitat, and VPFS habitat) within the appropriate season immediately prior to the onset of
any ground disturbances associated with project-related construction activities to evaluate the
current occupancy of suitable habitat for sensitive species and to refine the final habitat
mitigation replacement acreages. Updated surveys for federally listed species shall be
completed per the timing and methodology specified by resource agency protocol.
Page 113 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
20
If special status plant species are identified during the updated survey(s), the species shall be
incorporated into Special Status Plant Species Mitigation Plan in accordance with BIO-1(e).
The plan shall provide a minimum ratio of 2:1 (number of acres/individuals restored to
number of acres/individuals impacted) for impacts to any special status plant species with
California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) of 1 or 2 and a minimum ratio of 1:1 for special status
plant species with CRPR 3 or 4. If a federally and/or state listed plant species is identified
during the surveys, the applicant shall avoid all impacts to the species. If avoidance is
infeasible, the applicant shall consult with the City and the United States Fish and Wildlife
Service and/or California Department of Fish and Wildlife, as applicable, for authorization of
take.
If CRLF is identified during the survey(s), BIO-1(f) shall be implemented during project
construction of the study area not currently owned by the applicant to ensure no take of
individual CRLF.
If VPFS are identified during the survey(s), BIO-1(d) shall be implemented during project
construction of the study area not currently owned by the applicant to ensure no take of
individual VPFS.
If vernal marsh or other season wetland habitat is identified during the survey(s) and impacts
to season wetland habitat cannot be avoided, a formal jurisdictional delineation shall be
completed for the feature(s). Impacts to the habitat shall be included in the Habitat Mitigation
and Monitoring Plan as detailed in BIO-2(b).
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1(d) Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Mitigation Plan. If VPFS are
present within the study area and may be impacted by project-related construction, a Vernal
Pool Fairy Shrimp Mitigation Plan shall be prepared which provides a minimum ratio of 1:1
(number of acres restored to number of acres impacted) for impacts to VPFS. The plan shall
identify the specific mitigation sites and can be prepared in conjunction with the Habitat
Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (BIO-2[b]). The plan shall include, at a minimum, the
following components:
• Description of the project/impact site (i.e., location, responsible parties, areas to be
impacted);
• Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project [area(s) of vernal pool fairy shrimp
habitat to be established and/or preserved;
• Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation receiver site(s) (location and size,
ownership status, existing conditions of the compensatory mitigation site); the receiver
site(s) shall be at least the size as the area currently occupied by the current population to
ensure the replacement ratio is achieved;
• Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation site (rationale for expecting
implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan);
• Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, as appropriate (activities,
responsible parties, schedule);
• Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site, (performance standards, target
acreages to be established, and/or preserved, annual monitoring reports);
• Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives;
• An adaptive management program and remedial measures to address negative impacts to
restoration efforts;
Page 114 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
21
• Notification of completion of compensatory mitigation and agency confirmation; and
• Contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for contingency
compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism).
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1(e) Special Status Plant Mitigation Plan. A Special Status Plant
Mitigation Plan shall be prepared by a qualified botanist approved by the City, which will
provide a minimum ratio of 2:1 (number of acres/individuals restored to number of
acres/individuals impacted) for impacts to Congdon’s tarplant and a minimum ratio of 1:1 for
Cambria morning-glory. If project construction has not occurred by January 1, 2024,
seasonally timed botanical surveys shall be conducted to determine the current extent of the
special status plant species populations on site. The plan shall identify the specific mitigation
sites and can be prepared in conjunction with the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan
(BIO-2[b]). The plan shall include, at a minimum, the following components:
• Description of the project/impact site (i.e., location, responsible parties, areas to be
impacted by habitat type);
• Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project [area(s) of special status plant species to
be established and/or preserved;
• Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation receiver site(s) (location and size,
ownership status, existing conditions of the compensatory mitigation site); the receiver
site(s) shall be at least twice the size as the area currently occupied by the rare plant
occurrences to ensure the replacement ratio is achieved.
• Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation site (rationale for expecting
implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan
[container sizes, seeding rates, etc.]);
• Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including weed removal and
irrigation as appropriate (activities, responsible parties, schedule);
• Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site, (performance standards, target
acreages to be established, and/or preserved, annual monitoring reports);
• Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives;
• An adaptive management program and remedial measures to address negative impacts to
restoration efforts;
• Notification of completion of compensatory mitigation and agency confirmation; and
• Contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for contingency
compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism).
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1(f) California Red-Legged Frog Impact Avoidance and
Minimization. A qualified biologist(s) shall conduct a pre-construction survey for CRLF
within 48 hours prior to the initial onset of initial ground or vegetation disturbing activities.
All potentially suitable habitat for CRLF shall be surveyed during the daytime and again after
dark. The surveys shall include all areas where project construction activities will occur, as
well as a 300-foot buffer upstream and downstream of the project boundary in Acacia Creek.
If no individuals are found during the pre-construction survey, work may proceed with
monitoring as described below. If CRLF is found and the individual is likely to be injured or
killed by work activities, all work must stop and the individual will be allowed to move out of
harm’s way of its own volition then the applicant/developer shall comply with all relevant
requirements of the FESA prior to resuming project activities.
Page 115 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
22
A qualified biologist(s) shall monitor the removal of material and debris piles that may
contain cover for CRLF. If CRLF is identified within the construction area during project
construction, ground-disturbing activities shall immediately cease, and the individual will be
allowed to move out of harm’s way of its own volition before work activities may begin. If
the individual does not move out of harm’s way, the USFWS shall be notified and consulted.
Ground-disturbing activities shall commence following guidance from the USFWS and the
City. No CRLF shall be captured, handled, or relocated without approval by the USFWS.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1(g) Southwestern Point Turtle and Western Spadefoot Impact
Avoidance and Minimization. A qualified biologist(s) shall conduct a pre-construction
survey for southwestern pond turtle and western spadefoot within 48 hours prior to the initial
onset of initial ground or vegetation disturbing activities. All potentially suitable habitat for
southwestern pond turtle, western spadefoot toad within the study area where project-related
activities would occur shall be surveyed. If southwestern pond turtle or western spadefoot is
found and the individual is likely to be injured or killed by work activities, all work must stop
and the individual will be allowed to move out of harm’s way of its own volition before work
activities may begin. Individuals may be relocated out of harm’s way by a qualified biologist,
if present, before work activities begin. The biologist(s) must relocate the any pond turtle or
western spadefoot the shortest distance possible to a location that contains suitable habitat
that is not likely to be affected by activities associated with the project.
A qualified biologist(s) shall monitor the removal of material and debris piles that may
contain cover for southwestern pond turtle and western spadefoot. If southwestern pond turtle
or western spadefoot is found and the individual is likely to be injured or killed by work
activities, all work must stop and the individual will be allowed to move out of harm’s way of
its own volition before work activities may begin. Individuals may be relocated out of harm’s
way by a qualified biologist, if present, before work activities begin. The biologist(s) must
relocate the any pond turtle or western spadefoot the shortest distance possible to a location
that contains suitable habitat that is not likely to be affected by activities associated with the
project.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1(h) American Badger Impact Avoidance and Minimization. A
qualified biologist(s) shall conduct a pre-construction survey for potential American badger
dens within one week prior to the initial onset of initial ground or vegetation disturbing
activities. The survey shall be conducted within all project work areas and a 50-foot buffer.
Any potential dens/burrows found shall be identified with flagging or stakes, as feasible, and
a 50-foot no-work buffer shall be flagged. If any potential American badger dens are found
that cannot be avoided by the 50-foot buffer area, a qualified biologist will monitor the dens
and employ wildlife trail cameras and/or a tracking medium around dens and monitored daily
for at least three days to determine whether they are currently occupied by badgers. If the den
is determined not to be occupied by a badger or other special status wildlife species,
construction may commence.
No dens with young shall be disturbed, and no work shall be conducted within 50 feet of
maternal dens until they have left the den. Any occupied badger den that is being used by a
single adult with no young that cannot be avoided shall be blocked incrementally by placing
sticks or debris over the entrance for three to five days, to discourage the individual from
using the den. Only after the badger has left the den, as determined by the qualified biologist
implementing the wildlife camera and/or tracking medium methods, can the den be concluded
as unoccupied and the work proceed within the no-work buffer.
Page 116 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
23
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1(i) Pallid Bat and Townsend’s Big-Eared Bat Impact Avoidance
and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are implemented to avoid
and minimize potential impacts to special status bat species:
Within one week prior to construction activities, including tree removal, a qualified biologist
shall conduct a survey of the trees proposed to be removed within the construction area to
determine if roosting bats are present during the non-breeding season (November through
March). If a colony of bats is found roosting in any tree or structure, further surveys shall be
conducted sufficient to determine the species present and the type of roost (day, night,
maternity, etc.). If the bats are not part of an active maternity colony, passive exclusion
measures may be implemented with approval from the City in consultation with CDFW.
Exclusions shall occur outside the breeding season (typically May through August) and
winter hibernation (typically December through February).
If bats are roosting in tree cavities in the construction area during the daytime but are not part
of an active maternity colony, then exclusion measures must include one-way valves that
allow bats to get out but are designed so that the bats may not re-enter the roost cavity.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1(j) Burrowing Owl Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The
following measures shall be implemented in order to avoid and minimize impacts to
burrowing owl:
a. Not more than 30 days prior to initiation of ground-disturbing activities, and again within
24 hours of the initiation of ground-disturbing activities associated with construction, a
City-approved biologist shall conduct a take avoidance survey of the construction area and
surrounding areas to a distance of 150 meters, in accordance with the methods outlined in
the Mitigation Methods – Pre-construction and Appendix D Surveys for Take Avoidance of
the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG; now CDFW) Staff Report on
Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFG 2012). The pre-construction survey will cover all areas
within 150 meters of the portion of the site where construction is scheduled to start. Areas
within 150 meters that are not accessible due to property access restrictions shall be
surveyed using binoculars. Surveys will be phased, based on the grading and construction
schedule, such that they are conducted not more than 30 days before the start of ground
disturbing activities in new areas. If grading and/or construction activities in portions of
the site cease for a period of 14 days, those portions of the site will be resurveyed for
burrowing owls prior to the resumption of grading and/or construction activities. If no
occupied (breeding or wintering) burrowing owl burrows are identified, no further
mitigation would be required. If occupied burrows are identified on the site or within 150
meters of the Project disturbance area, one of the following actions shall be taken: 1)
permanent avoidance of the burrow or 2) establishment of a temporary avoidance buffer
followed by passive relocation and compensatory mitigation for loss of habitat in
conjunction with the measures below:
Site-specific, no-disturbance buffer zones shall be established and maintained between
Project activities and occupied burrows, using the distances recommended in the
CDFW guidelines (CDFG 2012) or as otherwise determined appropriate by the City-
approved biologist in consultation with CDFW.
During the non-breeding season, if an occupied burrow cannot be avoided, and the
burrow is not actively in use as a nest, the burrowing owls can be excluded from
burrows in accordance with an approved Burrowing Owl Exclusion Plan, which shall
Page 117 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
24
be prepared and submitted for approval by CDFW prior to passive relocation of any
burrowing owls. The Burrowing Owl Exclusion Plan shall be based on the
recommendations made in the CDFG Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation
(CDFG 2012) and shall include the following information for each proposed passive
relocation:
a. Confirmation by site surveillance that the burrow(s) is empty of burrowing owls and
other species;
b. Identification of type of scope to be used and appropriate timing of scoping;
c. Occupancy factors to look for and what shall guide determination of vacancy and
excavation timing;
d. Methods for burrow excavation;
e. Removal of other potential owl burrow surrogates or refugia on site;
f. Methods for photographic documentation of the excavation and closure of the
burrow;
g. Monitoring of the site to evaluate success and, if needed, to implement remedial
measures to prevent subsequent owl use to avoid take;
h. Methods for assuring the impacted site shall continually be made inhospitable to
burrowing owls and fossorial mammals; and
i. Method(s) for compensatory mitigation for burrow loss.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1(k) Nesting Birds and Loggerhead Shrive Impact Avoidance and
Minimization. Construction activities shall be initiated outside of the typical avian nesting
period, between February 1 and August 31, if feasible. All initial site and vegetation
disturbance shall be limited to the time period between September 1 and January 31, if
feasible.
If initial ground disturbing activities and vegetation removal occurs between February 1 and
August 31, nesting bird surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist for the entire
construction area plus a 250-foot buffer within one week prior to initial ground disturbance
activities or removal of vegetation. Surveys shall continue to be conducted within the
timeframes specified above until all vegetation removal activities are completed. If surveys
do not locate nesting birds, construction activities may be conducted. If nesting birds are
located, no construction activities shall occur within 50 feet of nests of passerine species,
including loggerhead shrike, 250 feet of nests of raptor species until chicks are fledged. Any
changes in buffer extent shall be made in consultation with the City. The buffer will be
delineated with flagging, and no work shall take place within the buffer area until the young
have left the nest, as determined by the qualified biologist.
b. Finding: The City finds that implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(k)
would minimize potential impacts to special status species and ensure that the project would
comply with COSE Policies 7.3.1, Protected Species, and 7.3.2 Species of Local Concern. With
implementation of mitigation, Project impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.
2. Impact BIO-2: Development of the Project site and study area where project-related activities would
occur would result in direct impacts to 0.12 acre of vernal marsh, a sensitive natural community
associated with the potentially jurisdictional wetlands identified on the applicant-owned parcel, as
well as the portion of the project site south of Tank Farm Road. Therefore, the Project could result in
direct impacts to approximately 0.12 acre of wetland where the basin containing the wetland is
Page 118 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
25
proposed to be reconfigured and impacts are potentially significant. (Refer to page 4.2-31 of the Final
EIR).
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation would be required to reduce impacts to sensitive natural
communities and State or federally protected wetlands to a less than significant level.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2(a) Jurisdictional Delineation. If impacts to seasonal wetland
habitat cannot be avoided, the applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to complete a
jurisdictional delineation. The jurisdictional delineation shall determine the extent of the
jurisdiction of the USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW. The jurisdictional delineation shall be
conducted in accordance with the requirement set forth by each agency. The results shall be a
preliminary jurisdictional delineation report that shall be submitted to the implementing
agency/agencies, USACE, RWQCB, and/or CDFW, as appropriate, for review and approval
as part of the permitting process:
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2(b) Prepare a Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. A
Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) shall be prepared which will provide a
minimum 2:1 ratio (number of acres/individuals restored to number of acres/individuals
impacted) for temporary and permanent impacts to vernal marsh. The HMMP will identify
the specific mitigation sites and can be prepared in conjunction with the Special Status Plant
Mitigation Plan. The HMMP will be implemented immediately following project completion.
The HMMP shall include, at a minimum, the following components:
• Description of the project/impact site (i.e., location, responsible parties, areas to be
impacted by habitat type);
• Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project [type(s) and area(s) of habitat to be
established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved; specific functions and values of habitat
type(s) to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved];
• Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation site (location and size, ownership
status, existing functions and values of the compensatory mitigation site);
• Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation site (rationale for expecting
implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan
[including plant species to be used, container sizes, seeding rates, etc.]);
• Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including weed removal and
irrigation as appropriate (activities, responsible parties, schedule);
• Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site, including no less than quarterly
monitoring for the first year (performance standards, target functions and values, target
acreages to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved, annual monitoring
reports);
• Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives; said criteria to be, at a
minimum, at least 80 percent survival of container plants and 80 percent relative cover by
vegetation type;
• An adaptive management program and remedial measures to address negative impacts to
restoration efforts;
• Notification of completion of compensatory mitigation and agency confirmation; and
• Contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for contingency
compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism)
Page 119 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
26
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1(c) Agency Coordination. Impacts to wetlands as a result of the
project are anticipated to require permits from CDFW, USACE, and/or RWQCB. The
applicant shall comply with all applicable state and federal permitting requirements. The
applicant shall obtain and produce for the City correspondence from applicable state and
federal agencies indicating compliance of the proposed development with state and federal
laws.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2(d) Wetland Mitigation. Impacts to federal and state wetlands (as
defined by the Clean Water Act Section 404 and the State Wetland Definition and Procedures
for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State) shall be mitigated at a
minimum ratio of 2:1 (acres of wetlands created to acres of wetlands permanently impacted)
to meet the performance standard of no net loss of wetland habitat. The mitigation program
shall be developed by a qualified biologist and be incorporated into and conform with the
requirements for the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. The mitigation shall be
implemented for no less than five years after construction or until the local jurisdiction and/or
the permitting authority (e.g., USACE) has determined that restoration has been successful.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2(e) Jurisdictional Areas Best Management Practices During
Construction. The following best management practices shall be required for grading and
construction within jurisdictional areas or wetlands where impacts are authorized. In addition,
the measures shall be required at locations where construction occurs within 100 feet from
jurisdictional areas or wetlands:
• Access routes, staging, and construction areas shall be limited to the minimum area
necessary to achieve the project goal and minimize impacts to other waters (federal and
state) including locating access routes and ancillary construction areas outside of
jurisdictional areas.
• To control erosion and sediment runoff during and after project implementation,
appropriate erosion control materials shall be deployed and maintained to minimize
adverse effects on jurisdictional areas in the vicinity of the project.
• Project activities within the jurisdictional areas should occur during the dry season
(typically between May 1 and September 30) in any given year, or as otherwise directed
by the regulatory agencies. Deviations from this work window can be made with
permission from the relevant regulatory agencies.
• During construction, no litter or construction debris shall be placed within jurisdictional
areas. All such debris and waste shall be picked up daily and properly disposed of at an
appropriate site.
• All project-generated debris, building materials, and rubbish shall be removed from
jurisdictional areas and from areas where such materials could be washed into them.
• Raw cement, concrete or washings thereof, asphalt, paint or other coating material, oil or
other petroleum products, or any other substances which could be hazardous to aquatic
species resulting from project-related activities, shall be prevented from contaminating
the soil and/or entering jurisdictional areas.
All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles shall occur at least 100
feet from bodies of water and in a location where a potential spill would not drain directly
toward aquatic habitat (e.g., on a slope that drains away from the water source). Prior to the
onset of work activities, a plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any
accidental spills. All workers shall be informed of the importance of preventing spills and of
the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur.
Page 120 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
27
b. Finding: The City finds that implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2(a) through BIO-2(c)
would reduce project impacts on sensitive natural communities to a less than significant level by
requiring a qualified biologist to delineate the extent of features, require regulatory agency
permitting to ensure compliance with regulations and the preparation of a HMMP would provide
compensatory mitigation to offset impacts to vernal marsh habitat. Mitigation Measure BIO-2(d)
would require State or federal wetlands to be mitigated at a minimum ratio of 2:1 to ensure no net
loss of wetland habitat and Mitigation Measure BIO-2(e) would ensure best management
practices are followed during construction within the wetland features. The City finds that this
impact would be reduced to a less than significant level.
3. Cumulative Biological Resource Impacts: Cumulative biological resource impacts in the City and
surrounding areas include conversion of portions of City properties from undeveloped to developed
uses, with resultant loss of open space and habitat, and regional increases in impervious surfaces and
pollutant loading in the San Luis Obispo Creek watershed, night light, noise, and traffic associated
with the increase in regional development. The Project, in conjunction with other nearby planned,
pending, and potential future projects would have the potential to adversely impact biological
resources (Refer to page 4.2-36 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: Cumulative impacts are addressed on a project-by-project basis through site-specific
investigations and surveys as well as appropriate mitigation. Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a)
through BIO-1(k) described under Item B.1.a above and Mitigation Measures BIO-2(a) through
BIO-2(e) described under Item B.2.a above are required to reduce cumulative impacts to
biological resources:
b. Finding: The City finds that implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(k)
include sufficient measures to reduce impacts to sensitive species, and implementation of
Mitigation Measures BIO-2(a) through BIO-2(e) require a habitat mitigation and monitoring
project and wetland mitigation which would reduce impacts to sensitive plant communities and
protected wetlands. The City finds that implementation of these mitigation measures would
reduce the project’s contribution to cumulative biological resources impacts to a less than
significant level.
C. CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
1. Impact CUL-1. One archaeological site, the Unocal (Union Oil Company) Tank Farm (CA-SLO-
2617H) was found eligible for listing and has two contributing features (Feature 26 and Feature 27)
that appear to be within the project site and could be impacted by project construction activities. Acacia
Creek is adjacent to the Project site on the east, and the City ARPPG identifies areas within 200 feet of
the top of bank of Acacia Creek as sensitive areas and Native American tribal contacts requested
cultural examinations of the area. Therefore, Project construction impacts near Acacia Creek are
potentially significant. The Project also has the potential for unanticipated discoveries of cultural
resources during ground disturbance. Therefore, impacts to historical and archaeological resources are
potentially significant. (Refer to page 4.3-19 of the Final EIR).
a. Project Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required to reduce potential construction
related impacts to historical and archaeological resources.
— Mitigation Measure CUL-1(a) Construction Monitoring Treatment Plan. A Construction
Monitoring Treatment Plan shall be developed and implemented to ensure that any new
Page 121 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
28
discoveries are adequately recorded, evaluated, and if, significant, mitigated. The
Construction Monitoring Treatment Plan shall provide the following:
a. All ground disturbances within 200 feet of the top of bank of Acacia Creek shall be
monitored by a qualified archaeologist and Native American observer and all ground
disturbance within 50 feet of the mapped boundaries of Feature 26 and Feature 27 shall
be monitored by a qualified archaeologist.
b. Procedures for notifying the City and other involved or interested parties in case of a new
discovery. The qualified archaeologist and/or Native American observer shall have the
authority to temporarily halt or redirect construction in the vicinity of any potentially
significant discovery to allow for adequate recordation and evaluation.
c. Preparation and approval of a plan that identifies procedures that shall be used to record,
evaluate, and mitigate unanticipated discoveries with a minimum of delay.
d. Procedures that shall be followed in case of discovery of human remains. In the event that
isolated human remains are encountered, consultation with the most likely Native
American descendant, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 5097.97 and 5097.98,
shall apply.
e. Results of the monitoring program shall be documented in a technical report after
completion of all ground disturbances.
— Mitigation Measure CUL-1(b) Archaeological Monitoring Within 200 feet of Acacia Creek
Top of Bank. All construction-related ground disturbances, including clearing/grubbing,
within 200 feet of the top of bank of Acacia Creek shall be monitored by a qualified
archaeologist and a Native American representative. Depending on the type of work, multiple
teams of monitors may be necessary to observe construction activities occurring in separate
areas. In the event that archaeological remains are encountered during construction, City of
San Luis Obispo staff shall be notified and all work within 50 feet of the find shall be halted
until the find is evaluated by a qualified archaeologist and appropriate mitigation, if
necessary, is implemented.
If archaeological remains are identified, the resource shall be evaluated for significance under
City Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines (ARPPG) and CEQA and
further treatment measures including but not limited to avoidance consistent with City of San
Luis Obispo General Plan Policies, Phase 2 Subsurface Archaeological Resource Evaluation
(SARE), or Phase 3 Archaeological Data Recovery Excavation (ADRE) may be required.
Work within 50 feet of the find shall not resume until authorization is received from the City.
— Mitigation Measure CUL-1(c) Archaeological Monitoring Within 50 feet of Feature 26
and Feature 27. All construction-related ground disturbances, including clearing/grubbing,
within 50 feet of the mapped boundaries of Feature 26 and Feature 27 shall be monitored by a
qualified archaeologist. In the event that archaeological remains are encountered during
construction, City of San Luis Obispo staff shall be notified and all work within 50 feet of the
find shall be halted until the find is evaluated by a qualified archaeologist and appropriate
mitigation, if necessary, is implemented.
If archaeological remains are identified, the resource shall be evaluated for significance under
City Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines (ARPPG) and CEQA and
further treatment measures including but not limited to avoidance consistent with City of San
Luis Obispo General Plan Policies, Phase 2 Subsurface Archaeological Resource Evaluation
Page 122 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
29
(SARE), or Phase 3 Archaeological Data Recovery Excavation (ADRE) may be required.
Work within 50 feet of the find shall not resume until authorization is received from the City.
— Mitigation Measure CUL-1(d) Unanticipated Discovery of Historical or Archaeological
Resources. In the event prehistoric or historic-period materials not identified during the ARI
prepared for the project are encountered during construction-related ground disturbances,
ground-disturbing activities within 50 feet of the discovery shall be halted, and a qualified
archaeologist shall be contacted to determine if materials are isolated finds or part of a larger
archaeological deposit. If the discovery is prehistoric, a Native American representative shall
be contacted to participate in the evaluation of the discovery. Appropriate City of San Luis
Obispo staff shall also be notified. Prehistoric materials may include chert flaked stone tools
(e.g., projectile points, knives, scrapers) or toolmaking debris; culturally darkened soil
(midden) containing artifacts or shellfish remains; and stone milling equipment (e.g., mortars,
pestles, handstones). Historic-period materials might include stone, concrete, wood or adobe
building foundations, corrals, and walls; filled wells or privies; mining features; and deposits
of metal, glass, and/or ceramic refuse. If an archaeological site is identified, the resource
should be evaluated for significance under City Archaeological Resource Preservation
Program Guidelines (ARPPG) and CEQA and further treatment measures including but not
limited to avoidance consistent with City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Policies, Phase 2
Subsurface Archaeological Resource Evaluation (SARE), or Phase 3 Archaeological Data
Recovery Excavation (ADRE) may be required. Work within 50 feet of the discovery shall
not resume until authorization is received from the City.
b. Finding: The City finds that Mitigation Measures CUL-1(a) and CUL-1(c) would reduce impacts
to Features 26 and 27 by requiring a treatment plan for construction activities and archaeological
monitoring within 50 feet of the resources. The City finds that Mitigation Measures CUL -1(b)
would reduce impacts to potential resources near Acacia Creek to a less than significant level by
requiring archaeological monitoring within 200 feet of the Top of Bank. In addition, the City finds
that Mitigation Measure CUL-1(d) would reduce impacts to unanticipated cultural resources by
requiring construction activities halt in the event of an unanticipated discovery until the find can be
assessed by a qualified archaeologist, consistent with City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Policy
COS 3.5.6.
2. Impact CUL-2. San Luis Obispo County has a long history of Native American occupation and,
therefore, ground-disturbing activities have the potential to uncover previously unknown tribal
cultural resources. During project ground disturbing activities such as grading and surface excavation,
there is potential for encountering previously undiscovered cultural resources of Native American
origin that could be considered tribal cultural resources. Therefore, impacts to tribal cultural resources
would be potentially significant. (Refer to page 4.3-23 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measures CUL-1(b) and CUL-1(d) described under Item C.1.a above as
well as following mitigation measure are required to reduce potential impacts to tribal cultural
resources.
— Mitigation Measure CUL-2(a) Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resources. In
the event that a resource of Native American origin is identified during construction, the City
of San Luis Obispo staff shall contact all California Native American tribe(s) that have
expressed interest in the project and begin or continue consultation procedures with any tribe
or tribes that request consultation. If an archaeological site is identified, the resource should
be evaluated for significance under City Archaeological Resource Preservation Program
Guidelines (ARPPG) and CEQA. If the City, in consultation with local Native Americans,
Page 123 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
30
determines that the resource is a tribal cultural resource and the proposed project would have
a potentially significant impact to the resource, a tribal cultural resource mitigation plan shall
be prepared and implemented in accordance with State guidelines (PRC Sections 21080.3.2,
21080.3.3, 21084.3) and in consultation with Native American groups. The mitigation plan
may include but would not be limited to avoidance, capping in place, excavation and removal
of the resource, interpretive displays, sensitive area signage, or other mutually agreed upon
measures.
b. Finding: The City finds that Mitigation Measure CUL-1(b) addresses archaeological monitoring
within 200 feet of the top of bank of Acacia Creek, and Mitigation Measure CUL-1(d) addresses
the potential for unanticipated discovery of historical or archaeological resources during project
construction activities. In addition, the City finds that Mitigation Measure CUL-2(a) would reduce
impacts to unidentified tribal resources by requiring native American consultation and an
evaluation of the resource. The City finds that Mitigation Measures CUL-1(b), CUL-1(d), and
CUL-2(a) would reduce impacts to tribal resources to a less than significant level.
3. Cumulative Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resource Impacts. The California State Archaeological
Task Force has estimated that a large percentage of archaeological sites in the state have been
destroyed. The project, in conjunction with other nearby planned, pending, and potential future
projects would have the potential to adversely impact cultural resources. (Refer to page 4.3-25 of the
Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measures CUL-1(a) through CUL-1(d) described under Item C.1.a above
and Mitigation Measure CUL-2(a) described under Item C.2.a above would be required to reduce
potential cumulative impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources.
b. Finding: The City finds that implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1(a) through CUL-1(d)
and CUL-2(a) include sufficient measures to reduce the project’s impacts to identified cultural
resources as well as unanticipated historical, archaeological, or tribal cultural resources to a less
than significant level. Because cumulative projects would be reviewed separately and undergo
environmental review on a case-by-case basis, the City finds that implementation of these
mitigation measures would reduce the project’s contribution to cumulative cultural and tribal
cultural resources impacts to a less than significant level.
D. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
1. Impact GEO-4.11.6: The Project site contains Quaternary (Holocene) alluvial deposits mapped at
the surface, which are generally too young to contain fossilized material, and are assigned a low
paleontological sensitivity. However, based on regional geologic mapping these Holocene sediments
may grade into older buried Pleistocene alluvium in which scientifically significant fossils have a
higher potential to occur. Therefore, there is the potential for Project construction and implementation
to impact paleontological resources. (Refer to page 4.11-6 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts to paleontological
resources to a less than significant level.
— Mitigation Measure GEO-1(a) Paleontological Monitoring. Prior to issuance of grading
permits and the commencement of ground disturbing activities on the project site that are
greater than six feet in depth, a qualified professional paleontologist shall be retained to
conduct paleontological monitoring during such ground disturbing activities. The Qualified
Page 124 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
31
Paleontologist shall have knowledge of the local paleontology and shall be familiar with
paleontological procedures and techniques.
Prior to the commencement of construction activities, an orientation meeting shall be
conducted by the Qualified Paleontologist, general contractor, subcontractor, and
construction workers associated with earth disturbing activities. The orientation meeting shall
describe the potential of exposing paleontological resources, the types of materials may be
encountered, and directions on the steps that shall be taken if such a find is encountered.
Ground disturbing construction activities (including grading, trenching, drilling with an auger
greater than 3 feet in diameter, and other excavation) within previously undisturbed
sediments at depths greater than six feet shall be monitored on a full-time basis. Monitoring
shall be supervised by the Qualified Paleontologist and shall be conducted by a qualified
paleontological monitor, who is defined as an individual who meets the minimum
qualifications per standards set forth by the SVP (2010), which includes a B.S. or B.A. degree
in geology or paleontology with one year of monitoring experience and knowledge of
collection and salvage of paleontological resources.
If the Qualified Paleontologist determines that full-time monitoring is no longer warranted, he
or she may recommend reducing monitoring to periodic spot-checking or cease entirely. Full-
time monitoring shall be reinstated if any new ground disturbances are required at a depth of
six feet or greater, and reduction or suspension would need to be reconsidered by the
Qualified Paleontologist. Ground-disturbing activity that does not exceed six feet in depth
within Quaternary alluvium would not require paleontological monitoring.
— Mitigation Measure GEO-1(b) Fossil Discovery, Preparation, and Curation. In the event
that a paleontological resource is discovered, the monitor shall have the authority to
temporarily divert construction equipment around the find until it is assessed for scientific
significance and collected. Once salvaged, significant fossils shall be identified to the lowest
possible taxonomic level, prepared to a curation-ready condition, and curated in a scientific
institution with a permanent paleontological collection along with all pertinent field notes,
photos, data, and maps. Curation fees are assessed by the repository and are the responsibility
of the project owner.
— Mitigation Measure GEO-1(c) Paleontological Monitoring Plan. Prior to the start of
ground-disturbing activities, a Paleontological Monitoring Plan shall be prepared and
submitted to the City for review and approval. The Plan shall be prepared by a Qualified
Paleontologist and shall address the following:
• Procedures for Paleontological Monitoring;
• Procedures for the paleontologist to make and implement recommendations as to whether
or not monitoring should be required on a full-time basis;
• Procedures for the paleontological monitor to temporarily redirect construction away
from an area if paleontological resources are encountered during grading or excavation in
order to assess the significance of the find; and
• Procedures for the handling of collected resources, including preparation to the point of
identification.
— Mitigation Measure GEO-1(d) Final Paleontological Mitigation Report. At the conclusion
of laboratory work and museum curation, a final report shall be prepared describing the
Page 125 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
32
results of the paleontological mitigation monitoring efforts associated with the project. The
report shall include a summary of the field and laboratory methods, an overview of the
project geology and paleontology, a list of taxa recovered (if any), an analysis of fossils
recovered (if any) and their scientific significance, and recommendations. The report shall be
submitted to the City and the designated museum repository.
b. Finding: The City finds that the implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1(a) through GEO-
1(d) would reduce impacts related to paleontological resources during construction by requiring
paleontological monitoring an approved monitoring plan, provisions to follow if resources are
discovered, and a final report that would document the results of the paleontological mitigation
monitoring efforts associated with the Project. The City finds that this impact would be reduced to
a less than significant level.
E. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
2. Impact HAZ-1: There are no listed hazardous material sites/facilities or active clean ups were
identified on the site. The Preliminary Soil Sampling Assessment did not identify exceedances of
SWRCB, U.S. EPA, or DTSC action levels for total petroleum hydrocarbons for both diesel and
motor oil. However, the soil testing results detected metals above screening levels, including arsenic,
cobalt, nickel, vanadium, and zinc. None of the detected metal concentrations exceed risk-based
action levels that would require remediation. Therefore, potential impacts associated with hazardous
materials that may be encountered during construction of the proposed residential development on the
600 Tank Farm Road property would be less than significant. However, ground disturbing activities
during construction of the planned transportation infrastructure improvements could expose
construction workers and/or the public to hazardous materials in on-site soil via direct contact or
inhalation of dust particles and could result in a health risk to people which would be potentially
significant. (Refer to page 4.6-14 of the Final EIR).
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required to reduce risk of hazardous material
exposure during construction to a less than significant level.
— Mitigation Measure HAZ-1(a) Soil Management Plan. Prior to issuance of any grading
permits for the planned roundabout and frontage improvements along Tank Farm Road and
the future alignment of Santa Fe Road, a contaminated soil assessment shall be completed in
the portions of land to be graded for the identified improvements. Soil samples shall be
collected under the supervision of a professional geologist or environmental professional to
determine the presence or absence of contaminated soil in these areas. The sampling density
shall be in accordance with guidance from San Luis Obispo County Environmental Health
Services (EHS), so as to define the area of contaminated soil that may be disturbed by
grading activities. Laboratory analysis of soil samples shall be analyzed for the presence of
petroleum hydrocarbons, VOCs, and heavy metals in accordance with applicable US EPA
Test Methods. If soil sampling indicates the presence of hydrocarbon contamination, metal
concentrations, or other contaminants exceeding applicable environmental screening levels as
provided by the EHS, the soil assessment shall identify the area of contaminated soil that may
be disturbed by grading activities. An Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) shall be
prepared detailing the soil sampling, analysis, and findings and submitted to the EHS for
review.
If concentrations of contaminants exceed the EHS-provided environmental screening levels,
the applicant shall prepare and implement a Soil Management Plan (SMP). The SMP shall be
Page 126 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
33
reviewed and approved by EHS prior to issuance of grading permits. The plan shall
communicate information to project construction workers about environmental conditions
and will present measures to mitigate potential risks to the environment, construction
workers, and other nearby receptors from potential exposure to hazardous substances that
may be associated with unknown conditions or unexpected underground structures, and
known contaminated soil or groundwater encountered during construction activities.
The SMP shall be updated and the updated recommendations shall be followed if the
following occurs:
• A change in project site uses;
• Receipt of additional information pertaining to project site environmental conditions;
• Updated chemical toxicity information for contaminants detected at the project site based
on revised regulatory screening levels; or,
• New legal or regulatory soil management requirements applicable to the project site.
— Mitigation Measure HAZ-1(b) Discovery of Contaminated Soils. Should petroleum
hydrocarbon- and volatile organic compound (VOC)-contaminated soil, metal concentrations
exceeding applicable screening criteria, or other hazardous materials be discovered during
construction activities, SLOAPCD must be notified as soon as possible and no later than 48
hours after affected material is discovered to determine if a SLOAPCD Permit will be
required. In addition, the following measures shall be implemented immediately on discovery
of contaminated soil:
• Covers on soil stockpiles shall be maintained in place at all times in areas not actively
involved in soil addition or removal;
• Contaminated soil shall be covered with at least six inches of packed uncontaminated soil
or a non-permeable hydrocarbon barrier. If a hydrocarbon barrier is used, no headspace
shall be allowed where vapors could accumulate;
• Covered piles shall be designed and installed without openings to minimize erosion due
to wind or water;
• Criteria pollutant emissions from excavation and haul trips associated with removing
contaminated soil shall be quantified and mitigated if total emissions would exceed
applicable SLOAPCD construction phase thresholds;
• During soil excavation, odors shall be minimized to avoid public nuisance; and,
• Clean soil shall be segregated from contaminated soil.
b. Finding: The City finds that the implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1(a) and Mitigation
Measure HAZ-1(b) would reduce impacts related to hazardous material exposure during
transportation infrastructure construction by requiring a contaminated soil assessment and soil
management plan, along with provisions to follow consistent with SLOAPCD requirements if
concentration of hazardous materials are discovered. The City finds that this impact would be
reduced to a less than significant level.
F. NOISE
1. Impact N-1: Construction activity on the Project site and off-site roadway modifications would
temporarily increase ambient noise levels at noise-sensitive receptors in the vicinity. The exposure of
Phase 1 residences to estimated noise levels of up to 79 dBA Leq from construction near the eastern
boundary of the project site would result in a 9-dBA exceedance of the long-term standard of 70 dBA.
Page 127 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
34
In addition, noise levels reaching 75 dBA Leq at future multi-family residences at 650 Tank Farm
Road would exceed the long-term standard of 70 dBA by 5 dBA. Project construction activities
would be required to adhere to the City’s allowed hours of construction, which would protect
residents from nighttime noise that could disturb people during normal sleeping hours. However,
construction activity during daytime hours would still result in a potentially significant impact from
temporary increases in ambient noise.
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required to reduce construction-generated noise
levels to a less than significant level.
— Mitigation Measure N-1(a) Construction-Related Noise Reduction Measures. The applicant
shall apply the following measures during construction of the project site:
• Electrical Power. Electrical power, rather than diesel equipment, shall be used to run
compressors and similar power tools and to power temporary structures, such as
construction trailers or caretaker facilities.
• Equipment Staging. All stationary equipment (e.g., air compressors, portable generators)
shall be staged as far away from sensitive receptors as feasible.
• Equipment Idling. Construction vehicles and equipment shall not be left idling for longer
than five minutes when not in use.
• Workers’ Radios. All noise from workers’ radios shall be controlled to a point that they
are not audible at sensitive receptors near construction activity.
• Smart Back-up Alarms. Mobile construction equipment shall have smart back-up alarms
that automatically adjust the sound level of the alarm in response to ambient noise levels.
Alternatively, back-up alarms shall be disabled and replaced with human spotters to
ensure safety when mobile construction equipment is moving in the reverse direction.
• Temporary Sound Barriers. During the site preparation, grading, building, and paving
phases of construction, temporary sound barriers shall be installed and maintained facing
noise-sensitive receptors within 300 feet of the project site (e.g., residences at the
neighboring mobile home park). Temporary sound barriers typically consist of
construction fence batted with light sound blankets. Temporary sound barriers shall, at a
minimum, block the line of sight between the engines of diesel-powered construction
equipment (typically 3 feet above grade) and adjacent windows at sensitive receptors and
shall be placed as close to the source equipment as feasible. Such barriers shall be field
tested to reduce noise by at least 10 dBA at sensitive receptors. (A sound barrier can
achieve a 5 dBA noise level reduction when it is tall enough to break the line-of-sight
from the source equipment to the sensitive receptor, and it can achieve an approximate 1
dBA additional noise level reduction for each 2 feet of height after it breaks the line of
sight ([FHWA] 2011). Mobile sound barriers may be used as appropriate to attenuate
construction noise near the source equipment.
• Disturbance Coordinator. The applicant shall designate a disturbance coordinator who
shall be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The
noise disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g.,
starting too early, bad muffler) and shall require that reasonable measures warranted to
correct the problem be implemented. A telephone number for the disturbance coordinator
shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site.
— Mitigation Measure N-1(b) Neighboring Property Owner Notification and Construction
Noise Complaints. The contractor shall inform residents and business operators at properties
Page 128 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
35
within 300 feet of the project site of proposed construction timelines and noise complaint
procedures to minimize potential annoyance related to construction noise. Proof of mailing
the notices shall be provided to the Community Development Department before the City
issues a zoning clearance. Signs shall be in place before beginning of and throughout grading
and construction activities. Noise-related complaints shall be directed to the City’s
Community Development Department.
b. Finding: The City finds that with implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1(a), construction noise
levels would be reduced by approximately 10 dBA Leq. and construction noise at the nearest
sensitive receptors would not exceed 70 dBA Leq, consistent with City standards for construction
noise. The City finds that Mitigation Measure N-1(b) would allow affected receptors to report
potential exceedances, providing contractors with the opportunity to implement additional specific
noise reduction measures on an as-needed basis during construction. The City finds that
construction noise impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.
Page 129 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
36
SECTION 6. SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL
EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT FOR WHICH SUFFICIENT
MITIGATION IS NOT AVAILABLE
The findings below are for impacts that would result in potentially significant effects on the natural or
human environment that could not be lessened to a less than significant level through changes or
alternations in the project or implementation of mitigation measures. To approve a project resulting in
significant and unavoidable impacts, the CEQA Guidelines require decision makers to make findings of
overriding consideration that "... specific legal, technological, economic, social, or other considerations
make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR...".
This section presents the Project’s significant and unavoidable environmental impacts after feasible
mitigation measures have been considered. Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California
Code of Regulations [CCR]) and Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code require a Lead Agency to
make findings for each significant environmental impact disclosed in an EIR. Specifically, for each
significant impact, the Lead Agency must find that:
• Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR;
• Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other
agency or can and should be adopted by that agency; or
• Specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations, including provision of
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make the mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible.
Each of these findings must be supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record. This
section identifies significant impacts that can be reduced, but not to a less than significant level, through
the incorporation of feasible mitigation measures into the Project, and which, therefore, remain significant
and unavoidable, as identified in the Final EIR. The impacts identified in this section are considered in the
same sequence in which they appear in the Final EIR. Where adoption of feasible mitigation measures is
not effective in avoiding an impact or reducing it to a less-than-significant level, the feasibility of
adopting alternatives to the proposed Project is considered in Section 7 of this document.
A. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
1. Impact HAZ-3: The proposed entitlements and planned roundabout and frontage improvements
along Tank Farm Road and the future alignment of Santa Fe Road also would be designed consistent
with applicable City guidelines and standards in the City’s Engineering Standards and Access
Management Policies and ALUP safety requirements. The traffic added by the Project to the Broad
Street/Industrial Way intersection represents a marginal increase in the total traffic volume entering
this intersection and would not substantially increase hazards at this location. There are currently no
dedicated pedestrian facilities or controlled crossings along either side of Tank Farm Road between
the Project site and the recently constructed collector Street (Innovation Way). By generating
additional pedestrian demand, the Project would increase the propensity for pedestrians to walk along
the roadway shoulder or cross at inappropriate locations along Tank Farm Road—a high traffic
speed/volume arterial roadway—which may result in hazards to pedestrian safety along this roadway
segment. The addition of Project-generated pedestrian trips would exacerbate the potential safety
hazard, which would be a potentially significant impact.
Page 130 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
37
a. Mitigation: The Draft EIR included Mitigation Measure HAZ-3(a) which would have required the
project applicant to take specific actions to facilitate the future construction of a shared-use
pedestrian/bicycle pathway along the north side of Tank Farm Road from Santa Fe Road west to
Innovation Way (4,700 feet west of Santa Fe Road), as identified in the City’s Active
Transportation Plan. This mitigation was found to partially offset the project’s contribution
towards pedestrian operations and safety impacts along this segment of Tank Farm Road.
However, the Draft EIR determined that, due to the potential right-of-way/jurisdiction authority
constraints, construction of the planned shared-use pedestrian/bicycle path along Tank Farm Road
west of Santa Fe Road would not be a viable mitigation strategy in conjunction with the proposed
project and concluded that the pedestrian safety impact would remain significant and
unavoidable.
During preparation of the Final EIR, City staff reviewed the potential right-of-way/jurisdiction
authority constraints associated with Draft EIR Mitigation Measure HAZ-3(a), as well as
comments related to the proportionality and feasibility associated with this mitigation measure,
and determined that the Conditions of Approval and Reimbursement Agreement for the project
are the appropriate vehicle for implementing requirements of the project related to a future
shared-use pedestrian/bicycle pathway along the north side of Tank Farm Road. As a result, Final
EIR Section 2, Project Description, Subsection 2.5.2, Transportation Improvements, was
modified to describe the applicant’s obligation to provide preliminary planning and engineering
support for a future shared-use pedestrian/bicycle path along Tank Farm Road through Conditions
of Approval and a Reimbursement Agreement, and Draft EIR Mitigation Measure HAZ-3(a) was
rejected. Therefore, the incorporation of the following mitigation measure is required to reduce
the Project’s impacts associated with pedestrian safety hazards.
— Mitigation Measure HAZ-3(a) Tank Farm Interim Pedestrian Safety Signage. The project
applicant shall fund and install interim signage along Tank Farm Road west of Santa Fe Road
to highlight potential safety hazards to pedestrians along this connection. The signage shall be
designed and installed consistent with applicable City Engineering Standards to the
satisfaction of the Public Works Director. The signage shall remain in place until the future
shared-use pedestrian/bicycle path along the north side of Tank Farm Road between Santa Fe
Road and Innovation Way is constructed and open to the public.
b. Finding: The City finds that the installation of interim signage along Tank Farm Road west of
Santa Fe Road would highlight potential safety hazards to pedestrians along this connection but
would not eliminate the project’s contribution toward pedestrian operations and safety impacts
along this segment of Tank Farm Road. Implementation of the planned, shared-use
pedestrian/bicycle path along the north side of Tank Farm Road west of Santa Fe Road, as
identified in the City’s Active Transportation Plan and AASP, would address the pedestrian
operations and safety deficiency west of the project site. However, the City finds there are no
feasible mitigation measures to implement the planned path due to potential right-of-
way/jurisdiction authority constraint because most of the shared-use path is located outside of the
San Luis Obispo City limit and would require right-of-way acquisition from private property
owner(s), as well as approval by the County of San Luis Obispo. Furthermore, there are no other
feasible mitigation measures available that would mitigate this impact. The City finds that this
impact would be significant and unavoidable.
Page 131 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
38
SECTION 7. FINDINGS FOR ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED
PROJECT
A. INTRODUCTION
As identified in Section 6 of this document, the proposed Project will cause the following significant and
unavoidable environmental impacts to occur:
• Impact HAZ-3: Contribution to new pedestrian demand which would increase the existing
identified pedestrian safety hazard along Tank Farm Road west of the project site.
Because the proposed Project will cause significant and unavoidable environmental impacts to occur as
identified above, the City must consider the feasibility of any environmentally superior alternatives to the
Project, as proposed. The City must evaluate whether one or more of these alternatives could substantially
lessen or avoid the unavoidable significant environmental effects.
As such, the environmental superiority and feasibility of each alternative to the Project is considered in
this section. Specifically, this section evaluates the effectiveness of these alternatives in reducing the
significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed Project.
B. DESCRIPTION OF THE ALTERNATIVES
The Final EIR evaluates the following three alternatives to the Project: a No Project (No Build)
Alternative; a No Project (Existing Land Use Designation- Business Park) Alternative; and a 25%
Reduced Project Alternative.
1. Alternative 1: No Project (No Build) Alternative. As required by CEQA, the EIR evaluates the
environmental consequences of not proceeding with the Project, including the General Plan Map
Amendment, rezone, Specific Plan Amendment to the AASP, Conceptual Site Plan, and Major
Development Review. This alternative assumes the Project site is not developed with the proposed
residential mixed-use project. Under this alternative, the Project site would continue to be used for
vehicle parking and construction material storage.
2. Alternative 2: No Project (Existing Land Use Designation- Business Park) Alternative.
Alternative 2 assumes the Project is not approved and envisions the potential buildout of the Project
site based on the property’s existing land use designation. The Project site is located within the AASP
and is currently designated Business Park (BP) with a small portion of the property within the
Conservation Open Space (C/OS) zone delineating a portion of Acacia Creek which is primarily
located on the adjacent property to the east. The BP land use designation provides for research and
development and light manufacturing in a campus setting. As identified in the AASP Land Use
Program and Development Capacities Table 4-1, the Specific Plan assumes that estimated buildout in
the BP designation would be based on a 0.21 floor area ratio (FAR). The maximum FAR allowable
for the BP designation under the General Plan Land Use Element is 1.0. City staff conducted an
independent analysis of project located in the BP land use designation that were constructed and
entitled within the last 20 years1 and concluded that the average FAR for the BP designation is 0.51.
1 Evaluated BP project include 301 Prado Road, 6541 Tank Farm Road, 4051 Broad Street, 689 Tank Farm Road,
892 Aerovista Place, 862 Aerovista Place, and 950 Aero Drive. Note that of these projects 301 Prado Road is the
only one not located in the AASP.
Page 132 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
39
Therefore, a more accurate estimate of the existing development potential of the property is
approximately 246,600 square feet of business park development
3. Alternative 3: 25% Reduced Project Alternative. Alternative 3 envisions development of similar
land uses to the proposed Project, but reduced in size and scale by 25%. Alternative 3 would include
similar entitlements to the proposed Project, but the conceptual site plan would instead allow
development of up to 180 high density residential units, 30 mixed-use units, 9,375 square feet of
commercial-service/office space, and a 1,700-square foot clubhouse building on the 11.1-acre project
site.
C. EFFECTIVENESS OF ALTERNATIVES IN AVOIDING SIGNIFICANT PROJECT
IMPACTS
This section evaluates the effectiveness of the alternatives in reducing the significant and unavoidable
impacts.
1. Significant and Unavoidable Pedestrian Hazard Impacts. The Project would result in significant
and unavoidable project impacts related to pedestrian operations and safety impacts. Under the No
Project (No Build) Alternative, no development would occur, and no additional pedestrian trips along
a facility where no pedestrian facilities exist would be generated; therefore, pedestrian operations and
safety impacts would be reduced. Under the No Build (Existing Land Use Designation – Business
Park) Alternative, there would still be an increase in pedestrian demand in a location without
dedicated pedestrian facilities or controlled intersection crossings, which would be a potentially
significant pedestrian safety impact. Similar to the proposed Project, potential right-of-way
constraints along Tank Farm Road would make the feasibility of mitigation at this location uncertain,
resulting in a significant and unavoidable pedestrian safety impact under Alternative 2. Under the
25% Reduced Project Alternative, there would still be an increase in pedestrian demand in a location
without dedicated pedestrian facilities or controlled intersection crossings, which would be a
potentially significant pedestrian safety impact. Similar to the proposed Project, potential right-of-
way constraints along Tank Farm Road would make the feasibility of mitigation at this location
uncertain, resulting in a significant and unavoidable pedestrian safety impact under Alternative 3.
D. ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE AND FEASIBILITY OF
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
1. Finding: The No Project (No Build) Alternative, would result in the fewest adverse environmental
effects. However, the No Project (No Build) Alternative fails to meet the Project objectives. As a
result, the City finds that the No Project Alternative would be infeasible to implement.
2. Finding: The No Project (Existing Land Use Designation – Business Park) Alternative would result
in increased environmental impacts in comparison to the proposed Project for several topics,
including impacts to sensitive receptors from criteria pollutants, wildlife corridors, energy, and
greenhouse gas emissions. Impacts to pedestrian hazards, traffic noise, vibration, and water and
wastewater utilities would be similar but would be less compared to the proposed Project. The
significant pedestrian safety impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. As a result, the City
finds that Alternative 2 is feasible, but is not environmentally superior to the proposed project.
Alternative 2 would not meet the Project objectives related to developing housing and would not help
meet General Plan Land Use Policy 2.3.6, which requires the City to encourage mixed-use projects,
Land Use Policy 3.8.5 and Housing Policy 5.1, which require the City to encourage mixed residential
Page 133 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
40
and commercial uses in commercial districts and zones, or Conservation and Open Space Policy
4.4.3, which requires the City to promote higher-density, compact housing to achieve more efficient
use of public facilities and services, land resources, and to improve the jobs/housing balance. As a
result, the City finds that Alternative 2 would not satisfy all of the Project objectives or reduce
significant environmental impacts compared to the Project, and would conflict with General Plan
Goals and Policies related to mixed-uses and high-density housing.
3. Finding: Among the development scenarios, Alternative 3, the 25% Reduced Project Alternative,
would be the environmentally superior alternative. Alternative 3 would result in a reduced magnitude
of impacts related to air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, hazards,
noise, and utilities. However, Alternative 3 would result in potentially significant impacts to sensitive
species and jurisdictional features, undiscovered cultural/tribal cultural resources, contaminated soils,
and construction noise, similar to the proposed Project and would require similar mitigation measures
as the proposed Project to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. In addition, the Project’s
significant and unavoidable pedestrian safety impact would remain significant and unavoidable under
Alternative 3. Alternative 3 would partially meet Project objectives, but to a lesser extent than the
proposed Project because of the reduced scale of planned residential development in comparison to
the proposed Project. Alternative 3 would not help meet Land Use Policy 3.8.5 and Housing Policy
5.1, which require the City to encourage mixed residential and commercial uses in commercial
districts and zones, or Conservation and Open Space Policy 4.4.3, which requires the City to promote
higher-density, compact housing to achieve more efficient use of public facilities and services, land
resources, and to improve the jobs/housing balance. As a result, the City finds that Alternative 3
would partially satisfy the Project objectives, but while both the Project and Alternative 3 would
require a General Plan Amendment, Alternative 3 would conflict with General Plan Goals and
Policies related to mixed-uses and high-density housing and would not reduce the potentially
significant impacts or the significant and unavoidable environmental impacts compared to the Project.
Thus, the City finds Alternative 3 to be infeasible.
Page 134 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
41
SECTION 8. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
A. INTRODUCTION
The Final EIR for the Project identifies the following significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project:
1. The Project would result in addition of project-generated pedestrian trips would exacerbate
existing safety hazards along either side of Tank Farm Road between the project site and the
recently constructed collector Street (Innovation Way).
For a project that would result in significant and unavoidable environmental impacts after consideration
of feasible mitigation measures, CEQA requires that the lead agency balance the benefits of the project
against the unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits
of the project outweigh the unavoidable impacts, those impacts may be considered acceptable (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15093[a]). CEQA requires that, before adopting such a project, the lead agency adopt
a Statement of Overriding Considerations setting forth the reasons why the agency finds that the benefits
of the project outweigh the significant environmental effects caused by the project. This statement is
provided below for the Project.
B. REQUIRED FINDINGS
The City has incorporated all feasible mitigation measures into the Project. Although these measures will
lessen the unavoidable impacts listed above, the measures will not fully avoid these impacts.
The City has examined a reasonable range of alternatives to the Project and has determined that none of
these alternatives are feasible, environmentally superior, or would satisfy all of the Project objectives to
the same or greater extent as the Project.
Alternative 1 would avoid all of the significant impacts of the project but would not achieve the Project
objectives and is not considered feasible. Alternative 2 would result in increased environmental impacts
to sensitive receptors from criteria pollutants, wildlife corridors, energy, and greenhouse gas emissions. In
addition, Alternative 2 would fail to achieve the Project objectives, would conflict with General Plan
Goals and Policies related to mixed-uses and high-density housing, and would still result in significant
and unavoidable pedestrian safety impacts. Alternative 3 would be environmentally superior to the project
for some environmental issue areas but would not reduce the significant and unavoidable impacts to
pedestrian safety and would still require mitigation for significant environmental impacts. Alternative 3
would result in reduced mixed-use development and physical environmental effects, resulting in
correspondingly reduced impacts. However, Alternative 3 would only partially satisfy the Project
objectives, would conflict with General Plan Goals and Policies related to mixed-uses and high-density
housing, and would not reduce the potentially significant impacts or the significant and unavoidable
environmental impacts compared to the Project.
In preparing this Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has balanced the benefits of the
proposed Project against its unavoidable environmental risks. For the reasons specified below, the City
finds that the considerations below outweigh the Project’s unavoidable environmental risks. The City
further finds that each of these findings is individually sufficient to support the approval of the Project. A
determination that one of more of these findings is not supported by substantial evidence shall not affect
the validity of the remaining findings.
Page 135 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
42
1. Provision of Variety of Housing Types. The Project will develop new multi-family residences for a
range of socioeconomic groups and affordability levels, providing average unit sizes that are below
current City averages. The Project fulfills a portion of the City’s housing needs identified in the
Housing Element and is consistent with Housing Element and Land Use Element goals that
encourage more housing to achieve the City’s housing affordability goals.
2. Establish a Connected Mixed-Use Community. Bike and pedestrian trips would be connected to
adjacent developments and uses by a proposed connection to the 650 Tank Farm Road property and
extension of the onsite shared-use path to the shared-use path at the Damon-Garcia Sports Fields to
the north.
3. Implementation of Transportation Improvements. The Project would implement planned
transportation improvements in the City’s Circulation Element, which include sidewalks and bike
lanes along Tank Farm Road, an on-site Class I bike path from the Santa Fe Road extension to the
Damon-Garcia Sports Fields, and off-site transportation improvements, including the roundabout and
frontage improvements along Tank Farm Road as well as the future alignment of Santa Fe Road.
4. Encourage Walkability. Land Use Element Policy 1.5, 10.1, and 10.4, Circulation Element Policy
5.5.1, and Conservation and Open Space Policy 2.2.4 and 4.4.1 all encourage the development of
more housing in close proximity to services to promote walkability. The project would add high-
density residential use in close proximity to commercial centers, employment centers, and parks,
consistent with these policies.
5. Reduce Per-Capita Vehicle Trips: The Project would develop a new mixed-use residential
neighborhood to meet the City’s housing needs near a major employment and commercial center
which would encourage the use of bicycles and walking, reducing regional VMT. The addition of the
project is projected to result in an overall decrease in overall regional VMT (all trip types) and
regional residential VMT.
6. Provision of New Jobs: The Project would create new construction-related and permanent jobs in the
Project area. In addition, 12,500 square feet of commercial-service/office space would provide jobs in
close proximity to housing.
7. Sales Tax: Development of neighborhood commercial uses would contribute sales tax revenues that
help fund needed City services (City of San Luis Obispo website, Local Revenue Measure G-20).
8. Sustainability: The Project includes energy efficiency measures including an all-electric design and
the installation of solar panels. In addition, shared cars would be provided at a minimum rate of one
car per 50 units to reduce the need for additional vehicles in each housing unit. The project includes a
preference program for housing units for workers within a 1.5-mile radius of the project site to
encourage commuting without the use of vehicles.
9. Economic Public Benefits: The project will provide significant economic benefits to the public from
a variety of one time and continuing revenue sources. One-time revenue sources include activities
such as construction jobs and purchase of construction materials and supplies. Continuing revenue
sources include property taxes, sales taxes on locally procured materials and supplies and other
revenues.
Page 136 of 401
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
600 Tank Farm Residential Mixed-Use Project
City of San Luis Obispo October 2021
43
Accordingly, the City finds that the Project’s adverse, unavoidable environmental impacts are outweighed
by these considerable benefits.
Dated: ______________________, 2021
_____________________________________
Erica A. Stewart
Mayor, City of San Luis Obispo
3887627.1
Page 137 of 401
T A N K F A R M
SANTA FEEXHIBIT - C GENP-0814-2019
Existing Land Use - Business Park (Left)Proposed Land Use - Services & Manufacturing (Right)¯
T A N K F A R M
SANTA FELegend
Open Space
Community Commercial
Recreation
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Medium-high Density Residential
Public
Neighborhood Commercial
Business Park
Sevrices & Manufacturing
Page 138 of 401
ORDINANCE NO. _____ (2022 SERIES)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A REZONE FOR PROPERTY AT
600 TANK FARM ROAD. THE PROJECT INCLUDES AMENDING THE
ZONING MAP TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF THE
ASSOCIATED PROPERTIES FROM BUSINESS PARK (BP-SP) TO
COMMERCIAL SERVICES (C-S-SP), RESPECTIVELY, AND MAKING
ASSOCIATED TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE AIRPORT AREA
SPECIFIC PLAN TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE 600 TANK FARM
MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT PLAN INCLUDING ADOPTION OF A
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. AS REPRESENTED IN
THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED _________, 2022
(600 TANK FARM: PR-0005-2021, GENP-0814-2019, SPEC-0407-2020,
& EID-0608-2020)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City San Luis Obispo conducted a web based
teleconference hearing on April 21, 2020, authorizing the initiation of the project and
issuance of a request for proposals for preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for
the project, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under GENP-0814-2019, Covelop Inc.,
applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
web based teleconference hearing on July 14, 2021, received public testimony and provided
input on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under
ARCH-0406-2021, SBDV-0407-2021, GENP-0814-2019, SPEC-0407-2020, and EID-
0608-2020, Covelop Inc., applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Airport Land Use Commission of the County of San Luis Obispo,
upon receipt of a formal referral from the City of San Luis Obispo, conducted a web based
teleconference hearing on August 18, 2021, and determined consistency with the San Luis
Obispo County Regional Airport Land Use Plan subject to conditions, pursuant to a
proceeding instituted under PR-0005-2020, Covelop Inc., applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
web based teleconference hearing on November 17, 2021, and recommended findings of
consistency to the City Council regarding the proposed rezoning application; pursuant to a
proceeding instituted under GENP-0814-2019, SPEC-0407-2020, and EID-0608-2020,
Covelop Inc., applicant; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted web based
teleconference hearing, on ________, 2022, for the purposes of approving the rezoning
application, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under GENP-0814-2019, SPEC-0407-2020,
and EID-0608-2020, Covelop Inc., applicant; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo has duly considered all
evidence, including the written and oral testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and
evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing.
Page 139 of 401
Ordinance No. _____ (2022 Series) Page 2
O ______
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo does hereby
ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence in the record, the Council makes
the following findings:
1. The rezone and associated text amendments to the AASP allow the implementation
of the 600 Tank Farm Mixed-Use Project by rezoning the site to be consistent with
the General Plan as amended.
2. The rezone and associated text amendments are consistent with General Plan Land
Use Element policies and map as amended related to 600 Tank Farm Road Project,
including the land uses and development envisioned for the area for following
reasons: 1) The rezone and text amendments would facilitate the General Plan Land
Use map as amended and reflect General Plan development parameters for the
area; and 2) the rezone and text amendments would facilitate appropriate infill
development and construction of additional housing including affordable housing to
meet City housing goals and better balance jobs and housing opportunities, because
the project provides additional housing opportunities at a location close to major
employers, commercial services and multimodal transportation facilities.
3. A Final Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for the project consistent
with the rezone and AASP text amendments.
4. The rezone and text amendments will not create non-conforming uses at the site
because any existing uses that remain on site would be allowed under the new
zoning.
SECTION 2. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Findings, Mitigation
Measures, and Mitigation Monitoring Program. Based upon all the evidence, the Planning
Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the Final Environmental Impact
Report (FEIR) (State Clearing House #2020110426), subject to the following CEQA findings
in support of all entitlements related to the 600 Tank Farm Mixed-Use project:
1. The 600 Tank Farm Mixed Use Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) was
prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
the State CEQA Guidelines, adequately addressing impacts associated with the
project.
Page 140 of 401
Ordinance No. _____ (2022 Series) Page 3
O ______
2. The proposed rezone is consistent with the requirements of the 600 Tank Farm
Mixed-Use FEIR as proposed based on the adopted CEQA Findings and Statement
of Overriding Considerations, and prepared consistent with CEQA Guidelines
Sections 15091 and 15093, and this approval incorporates those FEIR mitigation
measures as described fully in the adopted CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement
of Overriding Considerations (Resolution __________, Exhibit A) and Mitigation,
Monitoring, and Reporting Program (Resolution ___________Exhibit B).
3. All potentially significant effects were analyzed adequately in the referenced FEIR,
and reduced to the extent feasible, provided identified mitigation measures are
incorporated into the project and the mitigation monitoring program (Resolution
_________, Exhibit B, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program).
SECTION 3. Action. The City Council of San Luis Obispo hereby approves the
rezone as shown in attached “Exhibit A”, which is consistent with the land use designations
included in the General Plan as amended, and 2) approves amendments of the text of the
Airport Area Specific plan attached hereto marked “Exhibit B” and included herein by
reference to be modified as follows:
a) Change the site’s land use designation from Business Park (BP-SP) to Service
Commercial (C-S-SP) within the Specific Plan Overlay, which is necessary to
allow the proposed mixed-use development;
b) Amendments to allow a mixed-use development specific to the property at 600
Tank Farm within the C-S-SP zone;
c) Amend all AASP tables and text to reflect the zone change and addition of 280
residential units, and 12,500 square feet of commercial-service/office space for
the project site;
d) Modify the road section figures to reflect modifications to Tank Farm Road and
Santa Fe Road consistent with traffic projections and full buildout of the
circulation system;
e) Describe necessary setback of improvements and buildings to delineated
wetland areas in conformance with project Biological Assessments; and
f) Updated applicable figures and graphics to reflect the changes in land use
designations, and circulations systems.
SECTION 4. Severability. If any subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or
phrase of this Ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unenforceable by a
court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the
validity or enforcement of the remaining portions of this Ordinance, or any other
provisions of the city' s rules and regulations. It is the city' s express intent that each
remaining portion would have been adopted irrespective of the fact that any one or more
subdivisions , paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid or
unenforceable.
Page 141 of 401
Ordinance No. _____ (2022 Series) Page 4
O ______
SECTION 5. Publication. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of
Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its
final passage, in The Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This
ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage.
INTRODUCED on the ___ day of ___, 2022, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the
Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the ___ day of ___, 2022, on the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
____________________________
Mayor Erica A. Stewart
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 142 of 401
BROADSANTA FETA N K F A R M
HOOVERIN D U S TR IA LCLARION
EXHIBIT - A GENP-0814-2019
Existing Zone - BP-SP (Left)Proposed Zone - C-S-SP (Right)¯BROADSANTA FETA N K F A R M
HOOVERIN D U S TR IA LCLARION
Legend
Project Site
Zoning
General Zoning
BP
C-C
C-R
C-S
C/OS
M
PF
R-1
R-2
R-3
Page 143 of 401
600 Tank Farm Road
AASP Policy, Text and Graphic
Amendments
Chapter 1—Introduction
I. None.
Chapter 2—Planning Area Description
II. None.
Chapter 3—Conservation and Resource Management
III. Add the following to the description of aircraft operations on Page 3‐12 under Aircraft Operations:
“The Airport Land Use Commission has completed a major amendment of the Airport Land Use
Plan which was adopted on May 26, 2021. The amended ALUP provides for noise contours that
are tied to aircraft and airport activity that is based on adopted federal Terminal Area Forecasts,
and on safety zones that are based on and consistent with those described in the Caltrans Airport
Land Use Planning Handbook.“
Chapter 4—Land Use
IV. Modify the paragraph on Page 4‐2 to read as follows:
“The land use plan was developed to ensure compatibility with airport operations. Uses that have
high concentrations of people or are sensitive to airport noise (e.g., low density residential,
schools, hospitals, etc.) are not included in the planning area. The designated AASP land uses
(Figure 4‐1) are consistent with the permitted and conditionally permitted land uses respond to
the in the flight patterns and land use criteria associated with the airport safety areas in the San
Luis Obispo County Regional Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP), as amended. Generally, the critical
areas in line with the runways will be maintained as open space. Lower intensity warehousing,
manufacturing, service, business park and residential uses are designated for the less sensitive
zones to the sides of the runways, and further out from the ends of the runways.”
Modify the last sentence on paragraph 7 on page 4‐2 to read as follows:
“In addition, by designating lands along the Broad Street and Tank Farm Road corridor as
Business Park, Services and Manufacturing, and Community Commercial, the plan is encouraging
higher quality development that is in keeping with this important entry to the City from the Edna
Valley.”
V. Amend the first sentence of the Land Use Program description on page v to read as follows:
“The land use program for the Airport Area plans for the development of up to 1,255.1617.6 acres
with a mixture of Services and Manufacturing, Business Park, Government Facilities, and public
facilities that may be developed with recreation or public services. Residential development of a
total of up to 62 91 acres is planned, consisting of 48.568.2 acres within the Avila Ranch area,
and 22.8 acres along Tank Farm Road as identified in AASP Section 4.2.2 providing for mixed‐use
Page 144 of 401
developmentan existing mobile home park (6.7 acres) that will be retained. The balance of the
area is to be preserved as Open Space and Agriculture (371 acres). Table 4‐1 shows the amount
of land within each land‐use designation, as well as the estimated development potential at full
development of the AASP area.”
VI. Amend Table 4‐1 as follows:
Table 4-1
San Luis Obispo Airport Area Specific Plan
Land Use Program and Development Capacities
Residential Land Use Acres Units Per
Acre
Estimated Dwelling Units
Undeveloped Land1
Low Density 17.512.8 7.9 1051
Medium Density 3520.5 10.9 306223
Medium-High Density 11.0415.2 21.2 184322
High Density 4.7 24 125
Mixed-Use (AASP 4.2.2) 22.8 24 547
Subtotal 48.59171.3 1,267720
Developed Land (Existing Mobile
Homes
6.7 4.8 32
Total Residential Property 55.29171.3 6781,267
Non-Residential Land Use
Designations
Acres Floor Area
Ratio
Estimated Building
Undeveloped Land
Neighborhood Commercial 8.4 0.31 115,000
Community Commercial 9.66 0.44 185,147
Business Park 116.94107 0.21 1978,800
Service Commercial 155.0 0.24 1,620,432
Manufacturing 101.3 0.17 747,642
Subtotal 384.4381.4 3,647,021
Developed Land 145.2 0.28 1,786,745
Total Non-Residential Property 5269.6 5,433,7667,474
Other Land Use Designations Acres
Agriculture 76.1
Conservation / Open Space/Parks 294.9
Government 292.5
Total Other Property 663.5
Total AASP Acreage2 1,281.155.1
1 The total potential square footage (and associated acreage) includes future development on properties
currently under pre‐annexation agreements and properties outside of the City’s jurisdiction with alternative fee
programs. Since these properties may not be required to pay their fair share of infrastructure costs, the
difference will need to be funded by other funding sources (e.g., grants, additional City contributions, etc.).
2 Excludes acreage associated with roads, setbacks, creeks, and other features.
VII. Amend Figure 4‐1 to show the project site as C‐S.
VIII. Amend Figure 4‐4 to show the project site as C‐S.
IX. Amend the description of Service Commercial land use Page 4‐15 as follows:
“The redevelopment of the site of 650 Tank Farm Road (the Hidden Hills Mobilodge Mobile
Home Park and recreational vehicle storage) at 650 Tank Farm Road and the development of
600 Tank Farm (APNs 053‐421‐002 and 053‐421‐006) under the Service Commercial (C‐S) zoning
designation shall be limited to a commercial and residential mixed‐use development with a
predominantly residential component.”
Page 145 of 401
X. Amend Policy 4.3.7 as follows:
“According to updated traffic projections, traffic on Tank Farm Road can be adequately and
safely accommodated with a two‐lane, limited access configuration. Prior to development of
the Chevron Tank Farm site, Chevron, or its successor in interest, must provide a tentative map
with preliminary design plans for improvements to Tank Farm Road adjacent to its property that
are consistent with traffic projections and full buildout of the circulation system. The design plans
will address roadway design standards provided in Chapter 6, including the roadway design,
median and parkway landscaping, re‐grading of the berms, re‐location and replacement of chain
link fencing with a more visually compatible solution, and alignment and design of on‐street and
off‐street pedestrian and bicycle connections as shown in the circulation section, chapter 6.”
XI. Modify the Parking Requirements text as follows:
4.4.5 Parking Requirements
“The parking requirements for development in the Specific Plan area are shown in Table 4‐8. The
table includes minimum and maximum parking rates. The design of parking areas is discussed in
detail in Chapter 5. The Avila Ranch Development Plan prescribes parking standards that shall
apply in the Avila Ranch Subarea. If the parking standards are not otherwise stated herein, the
zoning ordinance parking standards shall apply.”
XII. Delete the reference to and text associated with Medium Density Residential in Table 4‐4, as
follows:
Table 4-4
San Luis Obispo Airport Area Specific Plan
PARCEL DIMENSIONS
Land Use
Designation
Minimum
Area
Minimum
Width
Minimum
Depth
Maximum
Depth:
Width Ratio
Minimum
Frontage
Open Space 40 ac 660 ft 660 ft None None
(b)
Business Park 0.5 ac (a) 100 ft 100 ft 3:1 50 ft
Service
Commercial 9,000 sf 60 ft 100 ft 3:1 40 ft
Manufacturing 9,000 sf 60 ft 100 ft 3:1 40 ft
Airport Facility Subdivision and lease parcels are subject to approval by the County.
Medium density
Residential
Minimum dimensions are as provided in the Subdivision Regulations.
The mobile-home park has been recognized as a long-established use.
It may be converted to resident-ownership, but redevelopment of the
site at an increased density is not permitted by the Airport Land Use
Plan.
Notes: (a) Guideline: The Business Park zone should include a range
of parcel sizes above the minimum.
(b) Each parcel must have access from a public road, or an access
easement from a public road acceptable to the City.
(c) Common Interest Subdivisions are permitted, subject to the
requirements of the Subdivision Regulations.
Chapter 5—Community Design
XIII. None.
Chapter 6—Circulation
XIV. Modify the introductory paragraph for Circulation and Transportation on Page 6‐2 as follows:
“The transportation and circulation system for the Airport Area should provide safe and
convenient mobility and access to all modes of transportation. The transportation system should
Page 146 of 401
be balanced with interconnected streets, transit routes, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and
open space recreational areas with limited gaps or barriers. The transportation system should
encourage the use of, and provide facilities for, alternatives to the single‐occupant vehicle. The
2014 Circulation Element Update has established significant new modal split objectives for
buildout of the City and the AASP is consistent with those goals. The City has also re‐calibrated
its traffic model to reflect the scope and quantity of major community development projects
(e.g., Avila Ranch, San Luis Ranch, Froom Ranch, Orcutt Area Specific Plan), and trip generation
factors. These items, combined, have resulted in reconsideration of the extent of facilities to
accommodate vehicle traffic. At the same time, the Specific Plan must recognize the need to
serve regional and citywide traffic and freight on its street system.”
XV. Modify all reference to bike facilities and bike planning to be consistent with the Active
Transportation Plan.
“The Bicycle Transportation Plan, illustrated in Figure 6‐2, is comprised of the following three
types of bicycle facilities:
A. “Off‐street Class I multi‐use paths that parallel creeks and riparian corridors as well as major
streets consistent with the Active Transportation Plan;
B. On‐street Class II bicycle lanes on arterial (separated where feasible), and collector streets
consistent with the Active Transportation Plan;
C. Off‐street Class IV bicycle lanes on arterial and collector streets consistent with the Active
Transportation Plan; and
C.D. A combination of off‐street paths adjacent to streets and on‐street bicycle lanes.”
XVI. Modify Figure 6‐1 to show two different segments and design standards for Tank Farm Road. The
portion between Windmill/Chevron Collector and Santa Fe should be shown as a 2‐lane limited
access arterial. East of Santa Fe is 4 lanes and west of Windmill/Chevron Collector is 4 lanes.
XVII. Modify Program 6.3.7 on Creek Setbacks on page 6‐17 to read as follows:
“Where possible, Class I bicycle paths adjacent to riparian corridors should be located outside of
setbacks required by the City’s Creek Setback Ordinance (SLO Municipal Code 17.16.025) to
protect creekbanks and riparian vegetation. A vegetative buffer shall be provided on the creek
side of paths and berms to ensure visual access to riparian corridors while controlling pedestrian
and bicycle access. Lesser setbacks may be provided if a finding is made that there will not be a
significant impact on riparian vegetation, wildlife migration or other biological resources.”
XVIII. Modify Figure 6‐4 to show Tank Farm with two separate road types‐‐a 4‐lane east of Santa Fe and
west of the “Chevron Collector”—and a 2‐lane limited access section between Santa Fe and the
Chevron Collector.
XIX. Modify Standard 6.4.2.2 to read as follows:
6.4.1.2 Tank Farm Road is designated a parkway arterial and will have a continuous, four‐lane,
urban cross‐section easterly of Santa Fe and westerly of Windmill/Chevron Collector. Between
Santa Fe and Windmill/Chevron Collector, it shall be a two‐lane, limited access arterial.
XX. Add Figure 6.4.3 to show the two‐lane configuration for Tank Farm.
Page 147 of 401
XXI. Add Standard 6.4.4.4 on Page 6‐24 as follows:
6.4.4.4 Santa Fe Road between Prado & Tank Farm shall be consistent with Figure 6‐4.5.
XXII. Modify referenced 6‐4.5 to be consistent with Figure 3 of the initiation package for 600 Tank Farm.
Total future cross section as follows:
Figure Interim cross section as follows:
Chapter 7—Utilities and Services
XXIII. None.
Chapter 8‐‐Finance
XXIV. None.
Chapter 9—Implementation
XXV. None.
Page 148 of 401
1
Project Location
Theprojectsiteislocatedat600TankFarmRoad,130feetnortheastoftheintersectionofTank
FarmRoadandSantaFeRoad,inthesouthernportionoftheCityofSanLuisObispo.Theproject
siteiscomprisedoftwoparcels(AssessorParcelNumbers[APN]053Ͳ421Ͳ002and053Ͳ421Ͳ006)
totalingapproximately11.7acres,aswellasproposedoffͲsitetransportationimprovementareas
southandwestoftheparcelboundarytotalingapproximately1.0acre.Thetotalprojectsiteareais
12.7acres.Figure1showstheregionallocationoftheprojectsite,whileFigure2showstheproject
sitewithinthelocalcontext.Theprojectsiteslopesfromthenorthwesttosoutheast,withsite
elevationsat210feetmeansealevel(msl)inthenorthwestcornerofthepropertyand150feet
mslatthesoutheastcorneroftheproperty.DamonGarciaͲSportsFieldstothenorth,undeveloped
ChevronpropertyistothewestandsouthandAcaciaCreekistotheeast.TheSanLuisObispoCity
Limitlinefollowsthesouthernandwesternboundaryofthesubjectparcelsandparallelsthe
southernsideofTankFarmRoadsouthoftheprojectsite.TheSanLuisObispoCountyRegional
Airportislocatedapproximately1,400feetsouthoftheprojectsite.
ExistingSiteCharacteristics
GeneralPlanDesignationandZoning
TheprojectsiteislocatedwithintheAirportAreaSpecificPlan(AASP)andiscurrentlydesignated
BusinessPark(BP)withasmallportionofthepropertywithintheConservationOpenSpace(C/OS)
zone.Theexistingdevelopmentpotentialofthe11.7Ͳacresiteisapproximately250,000squarefeetof
businessparkdevelopment.
SurroundingLandUses
TheprojectsiteisborderedbyTankFarmRoadtothesouth,AcaciaCreektotheeast,DamonGarciaͲ
SportsFieldstothenorth,andundevelopedChevronpropertytothewest.TheSanLuisObispoCity
Limitlinefollowsthesouthernandwesternboundaryoftheprojectsiteandparallelsthesouthern
sideofTankFarmRoadsouthoftheprojectsite(refertoFigure3).TheDamonGarciaͲSportsFields
propertynorthoftheprojectsiteisdesignatedPublicFacilities(PF).AcaciaCreekeastoftheproject
siteisdesignatedConservationOpenSpace(C/OS)andthemobilehomeparkeastofthecreekis
designatedServiceCommercialwiththeSpecificPlanoverlay(CͲSͲSP).TheundevelopedChevron
propertywestoftheprojectsiteboundaryisdesignatedCommercialServiceandIndustrialbySanLuis
ObispoCounty.TheundevelopedpropertysouthofTankFarmRoadisdesignatedRecreationbySan
LuisObispoCounty.Propertieswestoftheprojectsitelocatedat650TankFarmRoadand660Tank
FarmRoadincludeapprovedentitlementsfordevelopmentofresidentialmixedͲuseandassistedliving
facilities,depictedonFigure3.
ProjectCharacteristics
Otherentitlementsareunderway,includingaGeneralPlanMapAmendment,arezoneofthe
property,aSpecificPlanAmendmenttotheAASP,aMinorUsePermitforamixedͲuseproject,
ConceptualSitePlan,MajorDevelopmentReview,areimbursementagreement,andenvironmental
clearanceandpermittingfornecessaryoffͲsiteimprovements.Approvaloftheseentitlementswould
allowafinalDevelopmentPlan(consistentwiththerequirementsofthegrantedentitlements),
includinggradingpermits,improvementplansandbuildingpermitstobehandledbytheCityas
ministerialapprovals.
Page 149 of 401
2
Figure 1 Regional Project Location
Page 150 of 401
3
Figure 2 Project Site Boundary
Page 151 of 401
5
Figure 3 Surrounding Land Uses
Page 152 of 401
6
TheGeneralPlanMapAmendmentisnecessarytochangetheprojectsite’slandusedesignationin
theCity’sLandUseElementinordertoreflectproposeddevelopment.TheSpecificPlan
Amendmentwouldchangethesite’slandusedesignationaccordinglyandwouldalsomake
associatedtextamendmentstotheAASP,asfollows:
1. AmendallAASPtablesandtexttoreflecttheadditionof240highdensityunits,40mixedͲ
useunits,and12,500squarefeetofcommercialͲservice/officespacefortheprojectsite;
2. AmendvarioustextsectionsoftheAASPtoconformtotheproject;
3. ModifytheroadsectionfigurestoreflectmodificationstoTankFarmRoadandSantaFe
Roadconsistentwithtrafficprojectionsandfullbuildoutofthecirculationsystem;
4. Describenecessarysetbackofimprovementsandbuildingstodelineatedwetlandareasin
conformancewithprojectBiologicalAssessments;and,
5. UpdatereferencestotheSLOCountyRegionalAirportLandUsePlananddescribethe
updatedAirportLandUsePlan.
Therequestedentitlementswouldallowfor280totalresidentialunits,whichistheequivalentof
256“DensityUnits”asdefinedbytheCityofSanLuisZoningOrdinance(DensityUnitsarethe
numberofdwellingspernetacre,basedondwellingsizeandnumberofbedrooms,i.e.,studiounit
under600squarefeetequals0.5DensityUnits,whileatwobedroomunitequals1.0DensityUnits).
Inaddition,theprojectwouldprovidearoundaboutattheintersectionofTankFarmRoadand
SantaFeRoadandinterimimprovementsforSantaFeRoadincludingtwotravellanesandClassIV
bikepaths.
Conceptual Site Plan
Residential and Mixed-Use Rezone
TheprojectentitlementschangethelandusedesignationfromBusinessParktoService
Commercial,whichwouldallowamixedͲuseprojectprovidingupto280residentialunitsand
commercialͲservice/officeusesdefinedinAASPTable4.3.Figure4showstheproposedconceptual
siteplanfortheproject.
Theprojectsitewouldbedevelopedatadensityof23.7DensityUnitsperacre,withsharedpublic
andprivateopenspaces,commonyards,andarecreationcenterwithacommunitybuilding.The
proposedresidentialdevelopmentwouldincludeamixofstudios,oneͲbedroom,twoͲbedroom,
andthreeͲbedroomunits.Theproposedzoningwouldallowforupto12,500squarefeetof
commercialͲservice/officespace.Table1providestheproposedprojectcharacteristics,including
themixofresidentialunittypesandbuildingareafortheprimarycomponentsoftheproject.
Page 153 of 401
7 Figure 4 Conceptual Site Plan Page 154 of 401
9
Table 1 Project Characteristics
ResidentialNonͲResidentialAcres
UnitOccupancyTypeSize(sf)UnitsArea(sf)Area(sf)(net)Units/Acre
R3Occupancy
(1Ͳ,2Ͳand3Ͳbeds)
750Ͳ1,450140154,000n/a6.521.7
R4Occupancy
(studio,1Ͳ,and2Ͳbed)
600Ͳ92510085,700n/a2.934.7
MixedUse
(studioand1Ͳbed)
450Ͳ6254021,50012,5001.526.3
Total450Ͳ1,450280261,20012,50010.925.8
sf=squarefeet
Other Project Components
Theprojectincludesa2,250Ͳsquarefootclubhousebuildingwitha2,800Ͳsquarefootpatioarea.
Theclubhousebuildingwouldprovidemeetingareas,anindoorgamearea,acommonlounge,
administrativeofficearea,andacommunitykitchen.Thebuildingwouldalsoserveasatemporary
salesofficeandanadministrativebuildingduringprojectsalesandconstruction.
CitydevelopmentregulationsspecifyasetbackforAcaciaCreekof35feet,Figure6showsthe
locationofthetopofbankforAcaciaCreekneartheprojectsite.TheZoningRegulationssection
17.70.030requirea35Ͳfootsetbackfromthetopofbankfornewstructures.Theproposedproject
isrequestingaminimumsetbackofapproximately10feetfromtheaveragetopofbankfora
bicycle/pedestrianpathtoconnecttoDamonGarciaSportsFields(andanaveragebikepathof20
feet)andaminorexceptionforamaximum15Ͳfootencroachmentintothesetbackforportionsof
Buildings14and21fromtheaveragetopofbank.ZoningRegulationssection17.70.030stipulate
thatanexceptiontothecreeksetbackrequirementsmaybeconsideredwheresubstantiated
evidenceisavailablethatwillresultinbetterimplementationofotherZoningRegulationsor
GeneralPlanpolicieswhileallowingreasonableuseofthesite.TheBiologicalResourcesAssessment
(BRA)preparedfortheprojectbyKevinMerkAssociates,LLC(AppendixA)concludesthe
encroachmentareawillnotthreatensensitivespeciesortheripariancorridor.Inordertofurther
thepurposesofZoningRegulationssection17.70.030,theprojectproposesanincreaseinthe
ripariansetbackelsewherealongthecorridor,witharipariansetbackthataveragesapproximately
40feet.ProposedbuildingsetbacksalongTankFarmRoadandSantaFeRoadis16feet
Theproject’srequiredcreeksetbacks,commonareasandopenspaceinthenorthwestcornerofthe
projectsitewouldresultin18percentofthesitebeingonsite“green”commonopenspace,
includingplayareas,totlots,andlandscapeparkways.Theprojectwouldrequireremovalofsixteen
(16)nonͲnativeornamental/invasivetreesontheprojectsite.Nonativetreesareproposedtobe
removed.
Bikeandpedestriantripswouldbesupportedbyaconnectiontothe650TankFarmRoadproperty
andextensionoftheonsitebikepathtothebikepathattheDamonGarciaͲSportsFieldstothe
north.Anewbridgeconnectingtheprojectsitetothe650TankFarmRoadpropertyisplannedto
beinstalledbythedeveloperofthatproperty(refertoFigure4).Theplannedbridgeconnectingthe
projectsitetothe650TankFarmRoadpropertywouldprovideasecondaryemergencyaccess
route,pedestrianaccessandbicycleaccess.Theplannedbridgeconnecting600TankFarmand650
TankFarmwillnotbeforgeneralvehicletraffic.
Page 155 of 401
10
Regional Transportation Improvements
Theprojectwouldimplementseveraltransportationfeaturesunderareimbursementagreement
withtheCity,includingprovidingaroundaboutattheintersectionofTankFarmRoadandSantaFe
RoadandinterimimprovementsforSantaFeRoadincludingtwotravellanesandClassIVbike
paths.TheseimprovementsareincludedintheCity’slistofTransportationCapitalProjectsinthe
GeneralPlanCirculationElement(SantaFeRoadExtension)andareshownintheAASP.Final
improvementsforbikepaths,curbing,sidewalk,andparkwaystripwouldbeinstalledonthe
project’sfrontages.PlannedregionaltransportationimprovementsareshowninFigure5,which
providesaconceptualillustrationoftheSantaFeRoad/TankFarmRoadRoundabout.Theprojectis
alsoproposingtodopreliminaryplanningandengineeringfortheTankFarmCreekClassIbike
path.
ATransportationImpactStudy(TIS)wascompletedbyCentralCoastTransportationConsultingin
supportoftheCity’sGeneralPlanCirculationElementconsistencyevaluation.TheTISconcluded
thattheprojectcomplieswiththeCity’sVMTguidelines,withoutmitigation,andalsocomplies
withtheLevelofServicestandards.
Grading/Drainage
Thesitewouldbesteppedinfour5Ͳfootsections/benches,withanupperbenchofapproximately
174Ͳ180feetmslinthenorthernportionoftheproperty,amiddlebenchofapproximately160Ͳ166
feetmslaroundthecentralportionoftheproperty,andtwolowerbenchesofapproximately152Ͳ
156feetmslinthesouthernportionoftheproperty.Figure6showstheconceptualsitesections.
Theproposedgrading,totaling35,000Ͳ40,000cubicfeet,wouldbebalancedontheprojectsite(no
soilimporttothesiteorexportfromthesiteisproposed).Thegradingwouldcontourtheproject
sitetodrainfromwesttoeasttowardlocalizedsurfacebioswalesadjacenttoAcaciaCreek,which
woulddraintowardanexistingretentionbasininthesoutheastcornerofthesite.Thisbasinwould
dischargeintoAcaciaCreekatthepreͲdevelopmentrateasrequiredbytheCity’sDrainageMaster
Plan,asrequiredbytheCity’sstormwaterregulations.Thereisalsoanexistingdrainagepipeunder
TankFarmRoadthatpermitssitedrainagetothesouth.
Phasing
Theprojectisplannedtobeconstructedintwophases.Phase1wouldinclude80townhomeand60
stackedflat(singleͲfamilycondominium)dwellingsunitsonthecentralportionoftheprojectsite,
thecompletionofSantaFealongtheprojectfrontage,completionoftheClassIbikepathfromTank
FarmtoDamonGarciaSportsPark,andthecompletionofthefrontageimprovementsalongTank
FarmRoad.Phase2wouldinclude60townhomeunits,40stackedflatunits,the40mixedͲuseunits
and12,500squarefeetofcommercialͲservice/officespace,andremainingprojectimprovements.
Theintersectioncontrolimprovementswillbephasedasnecessaryaccordingtothetrafficanalysis
fortheproject.TheconceptualphasingplanisshowninFigure7.
Page 156 of 401
11 Figure 5 Conceptual Illustration of the Santa Fe Road/Tank Farm Road Roundabout Page 157 of 401
12 Figure 6a Conceptual Site Grading – Sections/Benches Page 158 of 401
13 Figure 6b Conceptual Site Grading – Sections/Benches Page 159 of 401
15 Figure 7 Conceptual Phasing Plan Page 160 of 401
17
Project Objectives
Theprimaryobjectivesfortheprojectareasfollows:
1. Developmentofaneconomicallyfeasiblespecificplanthatisconsistentwith,and
implements,policieswithintheCity’sLUCEandAASP.
2. Establishmentofacompleteinternallyandexternally“linked”mixedusecommunitywith
amenitiessuchasneighborhoodparksandcommercialgoodsandservicesthatcanserve
theneighborhood.
3. Provisionofavarietyofhousingopportunitiesforawiderangeofsocioeconomicgroups
andaffordabilitylevels,andataverageunitsizesthatarebelowcurrentCityaverages.
4. DevelopmentofaProjectwiththemaximumnumberofunitspermittedbytheunderlying
zoning,approximately280residentialunits,withapproximately340,000squarefeetoftotal
residentialfloorspaceand12,500squarefeetofcommercialfloorspace.
5. DevelopmentoftheAcaciaCreekfrontagethatprovidesthatareaasaProjectamenity
withoutjeopardizingthecreeksbiologicalresourcesorriparianqualities.
6. InfrastructureobligationsthatdonotexceedthelevelofimpactfeesgeneratedonͲsiteover
thebuildoutoftheproject;thatis,infrastructureobligationsshouldbesizedsuchthatoffͲ
siteimpactfeesarenotnecessarytoreimbursethedeveloperinaccordancewitha
ReimbursementAgreement.
7. ProvisionofawellͲconnectedinternalnetworkprivateparks,bicyclepaths,pedestrian
sidewalks,openspacebuffers,andspacesforrecreationalactivities,includingdevelopment
ofaClass1bikepathbetweenTankFarmRoadandDamonGarciaSportsParkwithinthe
35’creeksetback,andClassIVbikelanesconsistentwiththedraftActiveTransportation
Plan.
8. Developmentoftheadjacentroadwaynetworkthatdoesnotoverbuildtheroadsabovethe
longͲtermtrafficprojections,andwithpreferencefornonͲvehiculartrafficmodes.
9. Marketingandorientationoftheprojecttothesurroundingemployerstoreducevehicle
milestravelledandtomaximizetheuseofnonͲvehiculartrafficmodes.
10. Developmentofaprojectthatcomplieswiththesafety,noiseandoverflightpoliciesofthe
City’sAirportOverlayZoneandtheSanLuisObispoCountyAirportLandUsePlan.
Required Approvals
TheCityofSanLuisObispoistheleadagencyfortheproject.Asdescribedabove,theproposed
projectrequeststhefollowingCityentitlements:aGeneralPlanMapAmendment,arezoneofthe
property,aSpecificPlanAmendmenttotheAASP,ConceptualSitePlan,MinorUsePermit,Major
DevelopmentReview,aDevelopmentAgreementandenvironmentalclearancefornecessaryoffͲ
siteimprovements.Approvaloftheseentitlementswouldallowafinaldevelopmentplan
(consistentwiththerequirementsofthegrantedentitlements),includinggradingpermits,
improvementplans,andbuildingpermitstobehandledbytheCityasministerialapprovals.
TheprojectwillbereviewedbytheAirportLandUseCommission(ALUC)todetermineifitis
consistentwiththeadoptedSanLuisObispoCountyAirportLandUsePlan(ALUP).Developmentof
theprojectsiteundertheproposedprojectwouldberequiredtocomplywiththeRegionalWater
Page 161 of 401
18
QualityControlBoard(RWQCB)PostConstructionStormWaterRequirementsforredevelopedsites.
Futuredevelopmentoftheprojectsite,includingwideningofTankFarmRoadalongtheproject’s
frontageeastoftheprojectsitemayrequireworkwithinAcaciaCreek.Assuch,futuredevelopment
undertheproposedprojectmayrequirepermittingperSection401/404oftheCleanWaterAct
fromtheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineersandtheRWQCB,andunderSection1600etseq.ofthe
CaliforniaFishandGameCodefromtheCaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife.Aportionofthe
offͲsiteimprovementsarelocatedonadjacentpropertythathasacertifiedEIR.TheFinalEIR
preparedfortheChevronTankFarmRemediationandDevelopmentProject(StateClearinghouse
No.2009031001)wouldbeusedtoidentifytheimpactsandrequiredmitigationmeasuresatthese
offͲsiteimprovementlocations.Theresponsibilityfortheimplementationofthesemitigation
measuresfromtheChevronTankFarmRemediationandDevelopmentProjectwillbedeterminedas
partoftheEIR.
Page 162 of 401
Comment19:
Pleaseupdatetheprojectdescriptiontoclearlyidentifyanyandallexceptionsorconcessionsthatarerequested
fromtheZoningRegulationsPropertyDevelopmentStandards(Chapter17.70),pleaseincludeallstandardincentive
requestsforaffordablehousingprojects.Exceptionsandconcessionsorincentivesshouldbeclearlydescribed(i.e.,
upperstorycreekstepbacksandtheparkingreductionrequest,andgroundfloorresidentialusesalongSantaFe
Road).Pleaseprovideadescriptionwhichincludesasummaryjustifyingeachexceptionorconcessionasitrelatesto
relevantpolicyobjectives.SeeAASPSection4.4.7,5.4.5,or5.4.6toverifywhetheranyrequestedexceptionscanbe
satisfiedthroughtheAmenityIncentivesopportunityorsatisfiesspecificdesignstandards.
Response
CreekSetbacks/UpperStoryCreekSetbacks
TheprojectincludesvariationinthesetbacksforAcaciaCreek.Thebuildingsetbacksrangefrom29feetto50feet
alongtheeasternportionofthepropertyandaverageapproximately43feetovertheentiresite.TheClassIbike
pathfromTankFarmRoadtoDamonGarciaSportsParkislocatedwithinthesetback,withanaveragesetbackof
approximately20feet.Theprojectalsodoesnotincludetheadditionalsetbackforthethirdstorythatiscalledfor
inZoningCode17.070.030E3.
ABiologicalAssessmentwaspreparedtodeterminewhetherornotthecreeksetbacksproposedbytheproject
wouldprovideimpactstothewildlifecorridororbiologicalresources.TheBiologicalAssessmentconcludedthatthe
bikepathandtheproposedbuildingsetbackswouldnot.Theprojectalsoincludescompensatorysetbackssothat
theaveragegroundfloorsetbackalongtheeasternboundaryoftheprojectis43feetasapposedto35feet.With
theseproposedsetbacksalongthethreeͲstoryfrontage,theprojectisproviding12%Ͳ15%greateraveragesetbacks
thatcalledforbytheAASPandZoningOrdinance.Theproposedsetbacksarenecessarytoprovidereasonable
developmentoftheparcel,asprovidedinPolicy7.7.9oftheOpenSpaceandConservationElement,anddonot
adverselyimpacttheripariancorridor.
ParkingReductionRequest
Theprojectincludesprojectdesignfeaturesthatwillreduceparkingdemandandjustifyaparkingreduction
exception.Theprojectincludesthefollowingfeatures:
1) Enhancedpedestrianandbicycleconnectivitythatisintegratedwiththeareawidesystem,includingped
andbikeconnectivityto650TankFarmRoad,690TankFarmRoad,andDamonGarciaSportsPark.The
projectwillimplementtheCity’snewraised“ClassIV”bikelanes.
2) Affordablehousingwillbeprovidedatadensityof23DensityUnitsperacre,andanaverageunitsizebelow
1,100squarefeetperdwellingunit(lessthan1,000squarefeetperunitacrosstheentireproject),the
projectisaffordablebydesignandisrequiredtoprovidethree(3)deedrestrictedunits.
3) TheprojectislocatedonequarterofamilefromanexistingtransitstoponBroadStreetnearTankFarm
Road.
4) Theprojectislocatedina“lowVMT”areaaccordingtotheCityandSLOCOGbecauseofthedensityof
shoppingandjobsintheimmediatevicinity.Thereislessrelianceonvehicleformsoftransportation.
Page 163 of 401
5) TheprojectwillhaveanonͲvehicular(bike,ped,transit)modesplitof17.3percentandhighervehicle
occupancythanistypicaloftheremainderofthecommunity.
6) Privateonsiterecreationalamenitiesthatwillreducethenecessitytotraveltooffsiterecreation
destinations.
GroundFloorResidentialonSantaFe
Section17.70.130oftheZoningOrdinancerequiresthatthedwellingunitsnotoccupythefirst50feetofground
floorareawhichfacesapublicstreet,unlesstheCityfindsthattheprojectenhancesthepedestrianenvironmentin
thesurroundingareaorwillperformafunctionorprovideaservicethatisessentialorbeneficialtothecommunity
City.Theprojectincludesamixedusebuilding(Building21)onthecornerofTankFarmRoadandSantaFethat
meetsthiscriterion,andaresidentialbuildingonthenorthernendofSantaFe(Building4)thatdoesnot.The
reasonsfornotincludinggroundfloorcommercialspaceinBuilding4areasfollows:
1) SantaFeisnotanticipatedtobeconnectedtoPradoRoadfor10Ͳ15years,andSantaFewillfunctioninthe
neartermasaresidentialculdesac.Groundfloorcommercialspaceinsuchalocationisnotdesirableto
tenantsexceptindense,highlydevelopedareassuchasadowntown.
2) Theprojectisproviding12,500SFofcommercialgroundfloorspace.Thisamountofcommercialspaceis
consideredthemaximumfeasiblefortheprojectsite,consideringotherproposalsinthearea,andthe
goodsandservicesalreadyofferedinthearea(i.e..,MarigoldShoppingCenter).
3) Theprojectprovidesanessentialfunctionandservicethatisbeneficialtothecommunitybyproviding
dwellingunitsthataresmallerinsizeandmoreaffordabletoworkersintheimmediatevicinity.Theproject
maximizestheavailabilityoftheseunitsbydevelopingthegroundfloorofBuilding4asresidentialrather
thancommercial.
AASPPolicy4.4.7AmenityIncentivesProvided
B. Bicycleorpublictransportationfacilities,integratedwithareawidesystems,suchasimprovedtransit
stopsorbikepaths.(TheprojectincludesClassIandClassIVbikepathsthatareintegratedtothe
areawidesystem.)
F. Privaterecreationalfacilities(sportsandvolleyballcourts).(Aclubhousesandrecreationalfacilities
areprovided.)
AASPPolicy5.4.5
5.4.5 A10percentreductionintherequirednumberofparkingspacesmaybegrantedbytheDirectorfor
developmentwithinoneͲquartermileofaregularlyscheduledtransitstop.(Atransitstopisprovidedon
BroadStreetatTankFarm.)
5.4.6 A5percentreductionintherequirednumberofparkingspacesmaybegrantedbytheDirectorfor
developmentthatprovidesshowersandchangingrooms,inadditiontothesecure,shelteredbicycle
parkingfacilitiesalreadyrequiredbyCitycode.(Theclubhouseprovidesadditionalshowersandchanging
areas.)
Page 164 of 401
5.4.7 A5percentreductionintherequirednumberofparkingspacesmaybegrantedbytheDirectorfor
developmentofparkingareasthatincreasestormwaterinfiltration(seeDrainageguidelinesinsection
5.2.4).(Theparkinglotsincludeperviouspaversandconcretethatincreasefiltration.Theprojectalso
includesaseriesofconnectedbioswalesandwaterqualitymanagementareasthatwillfacilitate
drainage.)
Page 165 of 401
Page 166 of 401
566HSWHPEHU600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A1ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEVICINITY MAPTITLE SHEETPROJECT DESCRIPTION7+(352-(&7(17,7/(0(176352326($&+$1*(,1/$1'86('(6,*1$7,21)520%86,1(663$5.726(59,&(&200(5&,$/:+,&+:28/'$//2:$0,;('86(352-(&73529,',1*83725(6,'(17,$/81,76$1'83726)2)&200(5&,$/6(59,&(2)),&(86(67+(352-(&76,7(+$6$'(16,7<2)'8$&5(:,7+6+$5('38%/,&$1'35,9$7(23(163$&(6&20021<$5'6$1'$5(&5($7,21&(17(5:,7+$&20081,7<%8,/',1*7+(352326('5(6,'(17,$/'(9(/230(17:28/',1&/8'($0,;2)678',2621(%('52207:2%('5220$1'7+5((%('522081,76:,7+35,9$7(%$/&21,(67+(352-(&7$/62,1&/8'(6$648$5()227&/8%+286(%8,/',1*:,7+$648$5()2273$7,2$5($7+(&/8%+286(%8,/',1*:28/'3529,'(0((7,1*$5($6$1,1'225*$0($5($$&20021/281*($'0,1,675$7,9(2)),&($5($$1'$&20081,7<.,7&+(17+(352326('352-(&7,65(48(67,1*$0,1,0806(7%$&.2)$3352;,0$7(/<)((7)520$&$&,$&5((.)25$%,&<&/(3('(675,$13$7+72&211(&772'$021*$5&,$632576),(/'6 $1'$1$9(5$*(%,.(3$7+2))((7 $1'$0,125(;&(37,21)25$0$;,080)227(1&52$&+0(17,1727+(6(7%$&.)253257,2162)%8,/',1*6$1')5207+($9(5$*(7232)%$1.7+(352-(&7·65(48,5('&5((.6(7%$&.6&20021$5($6$1'23(163$&(,17+(1257+:(67&251(52)7+(352-(&76,7(:28/'5(68/7,1$3352;,0$7(/<3(5&(172)7+(6,7(%(,1*216,7(´*5((1µ&2002123(163$&(,1&/8',1*3/$<$5($6727/276$1'/$1'6&$3(3$5.:$<6%,.($1'3('(675,$175,36:28/'%(6833257('%<$&211(&7,21727+(7$1.)$5052$'3523(57<$1'(;7(16,212)7+(216,7(%,.(3$7+727+(%,.(3$7+$77+('$021*$5&,$632576),(/'6727+(1257+$1(:%5,'*(&211(&7,1*7+(352-(&76,7(727+(7$1.)$5052$'3523(57<,63/$11('72%(,167$//('%<7+('(9(/23(52)7+$73523(57<7+(352-(&7,65(48(67,1*7+()2/2:,1*(;&(37,216 3$5.,1*5('8&7,21 *5281')/2255(6,'(17,$/$/21*6$17$)(52$' (1&52$&+0(172)%8,/',1* ,1727+(&5((.5,3$5,$16(7%$&. 12$'',7,21$/7+,5')/225&5((.6(7%$&.PROJECT TEAMCLIENT:&29(/23&2//$%25$7,9('(9(/230(17$''5(66 6$17$526$6768,7(6$1/8,62%,632&$ &217$&7 '$0,(10$9,6(0$,/ '0$9,6#&29(/231(73+21( ARCHITECT:550'(6,*1*5283$''5(66 6+,*8(5$68,7(6$1/8,62%,632&$ &217$&7 '$5,1&$%5$/(0$,/ '-&$%5$/#550'(6,*1&203+21( CIVIL ENGINEER:550'(6,*1*5283$''5(66 6+,*8(5$68,7(6$1/8,62%,632&$ &217$&7 12$+:$/7(56(0$,/ 1*:$/7(56#550'(6,*1&203+21( LANDSCAPE ARCH:550'(6,*1*5283$''5(66 6+,*8(5$68,7(6$1/8,62%,632&$ &217$&7 -$.(0,11,&.(0$,/ -50,11,&.#550'(6,*1&203+21( PROJECT STATISTICSPROJECT ADDRESS:7$1.)$5052$'6$1/8,62%,632&$ APN: CURRENT ZONING:%363PROPOSED REZONING:&6OVERALL SITE AREA:$&5(6 6) NET SITE AREA:$&5(6 6) BUILDING AREASBUILDING TYPE BUILDING COUNT AREARESIDENTIAL:%8,/',1*$ 6)%8,/',1*% 6)%8,/',1*& 6)%8,/',1*' 6)727$/5(6,'(17,$/ 6)MIXED USE:%8,/',1*( 6)%8,/',1*) 6)727$/0,;('86( 6)TOTAL BUILDINGS= 26 282,594 SFPROPOSED FAR 59.85%UNIT AREAS:UNIT TYPE UNIT COUNT AREA81,7$ %57+ 60 6)81,7$ %57+ /* 6)81,7$ %57+ 6)81,7% %5 :,'( 6)81,7% %5 /21* 6)81,7% %5 :,'( 6)81,7% %5 /21* 6)81,7&' 678',2 6)81,7&' %5 6)81,7&' %5 6)81,7( 678',2 6)81,7( %5 6)&200(5&,$/1$ 6)DENSITY & UNIT MIXALLOWED DENSITY:24 DU/ACREALLOWED DU’S260.16 DU’SPROPOSED:DU/UNIT UNIT COUNTTOTAL DU(DU/UNIT X UNIT COUNT)678',2'881,7 %(''881,7 %(''881,7 %(''881,7 TOTALS = 280 UNITS 256.88 DU’SPARKING CALCSVEHICLE PARKINGREQUIRED PARKING:RESIDENTIAL:678',2 63$&(681,7
81,76 63$&(6%(' 63$&(681,7
81,76 63$&(6%(' 63$&(681,7
81,76 63$&(6%(' 63$&(681,7
81,76 63$&(6*8(67 63$&(81,76
81,76 63$&(6727$/5(6,'(17,$/ 63$&(6COMMERCIAL:63$&(6)
6) 63$&(6TOTAL REQUIRED PARKING: 467 SPACESPROPOSED PARKING: (OVERALL 6.8% REDUCTION)435 SPACESEV PARKINGREQUIRED EV SPACES:RESIDENTIAL:5($'< 2)5(48,5('!
63$&(6&$3$%/( 2)5(48,5('!
63$&(COMMERCIAL:5($'< 2)5(48,5('!
63$&(6&$3$%/( 2)5(48,5('!
63$&(6TOTAL EV READY REQUIRED= 48 SPACESTOTAL EV CAPABLE REQUIRED= 117 SPACESPROPOSED EV SPACES:EV READY 48 SPACESEV CAPABLE 117 SPACESBICYCLE PARKINGREQUIRED:RESIDENTIAL:/21*7(50 63$&(681,7
81,76 63$&(66+2577(50 *8(6763$&(6 63$&(81,76
81,76 63$&(6727$/5(6,'(17,$/%,.(3$5.,1* 63$&(6COMMERCIAL:/21*7(50 2)5(48,5('!
!63$&(66+2577(50 2)5(48,5('!
!63$&(6727$/&200(5&,$/%,.(3$5.,1* 63$&(6TOTAL LONG TERM BIKE PARKING= 563 SPACESTOTAL SHORT TERM BIKE PARKING= 63 SPACESPROPOSED BICYLE SPACES:LONG TERM 563 SPACESSHORT TERM 63 SPACESMOTORCYCLE PARKINGREQUIRED:02725&<&/(3$5.,1*63$&(6 63$&(6PROPOSED:23 SPACES%52$'
67
7$1.)$505',1'8675,$/:$<PROJECT SITE6$17$)(5'$&$&,$&5((.NET AREA EXHIBIT%%4
;
;
;
;
;
PROPERTY LINEPROPERTYLINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEROW BOUNDARYROW BOUNDARYTOP OF BANKTOP OF BANKOVERALL SITE AREA=11.7 ACRESNET AREA=10.8 ACRES(EXCLUDES STREET RIGHTS-OF-WAYANDAREA BETWEEN THE TOPS OF BANK OF ACACIA CREEK PER 6/20&)SETBACKS:PER SAN LUIS OBISPO AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, TABLE 4-7 REQUIRED(C-S)PROPOSED',67$1&()5203/·6$/21*675((76)7 %8,/',1*6 )7 3$5.,1* )7 %8,/',1*6 )7 3$5.,1* ',67$1&()5203/·6$/21*$'-$&(173$5&(/6)7 %8,/',1*6 )7 3$5.,1* )7 %8,/',1*6 )7 3$5.,1*BUILDING HEIGHT: PER SAN LUIS OBISPO AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, TABLE 4-9$//2:(' 2&&83,(' ·µ1212&&83,(')($785(6 ·µ6725,(60$;352326(' 9$5,(65()(572%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216MAX. FAR:60% = ; 6) 6)MAX. BLDG & HARDSCAPE COVERAGE90% = ; 6) 6)MIN. LANDSCAPE COVERAGE10%= ; 6) 6)PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE:%8,/',1*+$5'6&$3( 6) 6) 6) /$1'6&$3,1* 6) 6) 6) CLEAN ENERGY STATEMENTSHEET INDEX7,7/(6+((7$(;,67,1*6,7(6859(<$6,7(3/$1$*5$',1*3/$1$67250:$7(5$1''5$,1$*(3/$1 $$5&+,7(&785$/6,7(3/$1 $6,7(6(&7,216$%8,/',1*6(&7,216$%8,/',1*6(&7,216$ 6,7(&,5&8/$7,21(;+,%,7 $9,(:678',(63(5$$63 $9,(:678',(63(5$$63 $9,(:678',(63(5$$63 $9,(:678',(63(5$$63 $%8,/',1*$)/2253/$16 $%8,/',1*$(/(9$7,216 $%8,/',1*%)/2253/$16 $%8,/',1*%(/(9$7,216 $%8,/',1*&)/2253/$16 $ %8,/',1*&(/(9$7,216 $%8,/',1*')/2253/$16 $%8,/',1*'(/(9$7,216 $%8,/',1*()/2253/$16 $%8,/',1*()/2253/$16 $%8,/',1*((/(9$7,216 $%8,/',1*((/(9$7,216 $%8,/',1*))/2253/$16 $%8,/',1*)(/(9$7,216 $&2/256$1'0$7(5,$/66&+(0( $ &2/256$1'0$7(5,$/66&+(0( $&2/256$1'0$7(5,$/66&+(0( $&2/256$1'0$7(5,$/66&+(0( $35(/,0,1$5<6,7(3/$1 $6,7(3/$1(1/$5*(0(17 $/$1'6&$3(&+$5$&7(5 $0(1,7,(6 $6,7()851,6+,1*6$1'0$7(5,$/6 $%,&<&/(3$5.,1*$1'02180(176,*1$*( $6,7(:$//6$1')(1&,1* $75$6+(1&/2685(6$ /$1'6&$3(3/$170$7(5,$/6 $35(/,0,1$5</$1'6&$3(3/$1 $(;,67,1*75((,19(1725< 5(029$/6 $/2:32,172)6,7(
+,*+32,172)6,7(
$9*1$785$/*5$'(
0$;+(,*+7$//2:('(OCCUPIED)
ń
0$;+(,*+7$//2:('(UNOCCUPIED) ·µń· · ·AVG. NATURAL GRADE CALCULATIONPage 167 of 401
566HSWHPEHUAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA2+2+2+
2+2+2+2+371/276/268%85%$175$&756 25$31(;,67,1*)(0$)/22'=21($3(5),503$1(/ &*(;,67,1*7232)%$1.$1'25('*(2)5,3$5,$1(;,67,1*
$&$&,$&5((.6(7%$&.(;,67,1*
$&&(66($6(0(1772%($%$1'21('(;,67,1*
35,9$7(87,/,7<($6(0(1772%($%$1'21('5(029((;,67,1*0$7(5,$/6725$*($1'$662&,$7(',03529(0(1765(029((;,67,1*%$6($&&(6652$'5(029((;,67,1*$&$1'&21&5(7('5,9(:$<,03529(0(1765(029((;,67,1*81'(5'5$,1$1'67250'5$,13527(&7(;,67,1*&&)5306(:(5 6 1
(
1
:
1
(
1
:
1
:
1
(
1
:
1
:
5(029((;,67,1*%$6($&&(6652$'81'(5*5281'(;,67,1*29(5+($'87,/,7</,1(6(;660+5,0,195(029((;,67,1**5$9(/3$5.,1*/27,03529(0(1765(029((;,67,1*)(1&,1*$1'0,6&6725$*(,03529(0(176 7<3 5(029((;,67,1*)(1&,1*$1'0,6&6725$*(,03529(0(1767$1.)$5052$'3527(&7(;,67,1*)(1&($&$&,$&5((. 6(&21'$5<:$7(5:$< 6((& )2575((,19(1725<$1'',6326,7,21 7<3 6((& )2575((,19(1725<$1'',6326,7,21 7<3 6((& )2575((,19(1725<$1'',6326,7,21 7<3 371/276/268%85%$175$&756$311
:
1
:
1
:
6
:
81'(5*5281'(;,67,1*29(5+($'87,/,7</,1(6$/21*3523(57<)5217$*(/(*(1'66(;,67,1*38%/,&6(:(50$,1:(;,67,1*38%/,&:$7(50$,1(;,67,1*($6(0(17(;,67,1*0$-25&217285(;,67,1*0,125&217285600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A2ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEEXISTING SITE SURVEY· ··· ····· ·SCALES:µ ·µ(12”X18” SHEET)µ ·µ(24”X36” SHEET)1257+Page 168 of 401
566HSWHPEHUAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
A::::::6'6'):):):):):):):6'6'6'6666666666666'6':::::::::::):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):66 66666666666666666666
::::::5:5:5:5:5:5:66666666:::::
5:5:5:5:5:
:):):::66
66AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA2+2+2+
2+2+2+2+666'66%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1* %8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1* %8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*7$1.)$5052$'6$17$)(52$'(;,67,1*)(0$)/22'=21($3(5),503$1(/ &*352326('%,25(7(17,21$5($ 6((6+((7&)2567250:$7(5'(7$,/6 7<3 $&$&,$&5((.
$&$&,$&5((.6(7%$&.352326('75$6+(1&/2685( 7<3 660+ 5,0,19660+5,0,19660+ 5,0,19660+ 5,0 ,19660+5,0,19660+5,0,19660+ 5,0,19660+5,0,19660+5,0,19&211(&772(;,67,1*&&)5306(:(50$,1 ,19 352326('6(:(5/$7(5$/ 7<3 352326(':$7(56(59,&($1'0(7(5 7<3 352326('3(50($%/(3$9(56352326('3(50($%/(3$9(56 7<3
7<3
7<3
7<3
352326('5:,55,*$7,2132&6(59,&( 0(7(5
%8,/',1*6(7%$&.352326('%$&.2)6,'(:$/.$1'5,*+72):$<352326('),5($1''20(67,&:$7(5'28%/(&+(&.$66(0%/<352326('38%/,&:$7(50$,1352326('38%/,&5(&<&/(':$7(50$,15
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
7<3 5
7<3 5
5
5
352326('75$6+(1&/2685( 7<3
7<3
7<35
5
352326('(0(5*(1&<9(+,&/($&&(6621/<$1'5(029$%/(%2//$5'6352326('(0(5*(1&<9(+,&/($&&(6621/<$1'5(029$%/(%2//$5'629(5/$1'5,9(552&.6:$/(72%$6,1 6((&)25*5$',1*29(5/$1'5,9(552&.6:$/(72%$6,1 6((&)25*5$',1*352326('75$6+(1&/2685( 7<3 352326('),5($1''20(67,&:$7(5'28%/(&+(&.$66(0%/<0$7&+(;,67,1*38%/,&,03529(0(176352326('38%/,&5(&<&/(':$7(50$,1352326('38%/,&:$7(50$,1352326('322/$1')/$7:25.352326('5(7$,1,1*:$// 6((6+((7&)25*5$',1*352326('5(7$,1,1*:$// 6((6+((7&)25*5$',1*352326('5(7$,1,1*:$// 6((6+((7&)25*5$',1*352326('
08/7,86(3$7+,17(5,07851$5281' )8785(,17(56(&7,21,03529(0(176%<27+(56(;,67,1*$&$&,$&5((.)/2:/,1(660+5,0,19660+ 5,0 ,19352326('<5)/22'/,0,76%$
[
&200(5&,$//2$',1*=21(352326('%8,/',1*6(&7,21%1766$17$)(52$' ,17(5,0 3/352326('52:
/$1(
%,.(
/$1(
3$5.:$<
&/,9%,.(
6:
6(7%$&.
(;,67,1**5$'(&/352326('%8,/',1*(;,67,1*52:(;,67,1*52:
/$1(9$5,(60(',$1
(;,67,1*
/$1(
/$1(
%,.(/$1(6(&7,21$1767$1.)$5052$'
3$5.:$<
6:
6(&7,21&1767<3,&$/%,.(3$7+6(&7,213/352326('%8,/',1*9$5,(6
%,.(/$1(9$5,(6
352326('5(7$,1,1*:$//$&$&,$)/2:/,1($&$&,$7232)%$1.(;,67,1**5$'(
$&%,.(/$1(:,7+
0,1&/$66,,%$6(6+28/'(56325&+(63(53/$1
/$1(
/$1(:(67(5/<3523(57</,1(
/$1(
%,.(
3$5.:$<
:$/.6(&7,21%1766$17$)(52$' 8/7,0$7( )8785(,03529(0(176%<27+(56
&/,9%,.(
6:
3$5.:$<3/&/6:66352326('35,9$7(39&:$7(5/(*(1'352326('35,9$7(39&6(:(5352326('35,9$7(+'3(67250'5$,166(;,67,1*38%/,&6(:(50$,1:(;,67,1*38%/,&:$7(50$,1352326('),5(+<'5$176'5:352326('5(&<&/(':$7(50$,1IHHW
35(/,0,1$5< 6,7( 3/$1 6((6+((7&)2567250'5$,1,03529(0(176 ,17(5,06$17$)(,03529(0(1766+2:1 )8785(,03529(0(176:,'(1,1*%<27+(56 216,7(,03529(0(17635,9$7(81/(66127('27+(5:,6(127( '20(67,&:$7(56(59,&( 0(7(5),5(635,1./(56(59,&():&600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A3ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGESITE PLANPage 169 of 401
566HSWHPEHUAA
A AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA2+2+2+
2+2+2+2+
5:
:::::::6'6'):):):):):):):6'6'6'6666666666666'6':::::::::::):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):66 66666666666666666666
::::::5:5:5:5:5:5:66666666:::::
5:5:5:5:5:
:):)::66A
A A A A A A A A A%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1* %8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1* %8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*%8,/',1*7<37<37<37<37<37<37<37<37<37<37<37<37<37<37<37<37<37<37<37<3
7<37<3
7<3
7<37<37<37<37<37<37<37<3)) )) )) )) )) )) )) )) )) )) )) )) )) )) )) )) )) )) )) )) )) )) )) )) )) )) 5,0,195,0 ,19%$6,1%27)* %$6,1%27)* %$6,1%27)* %$6,1%27)* %$6,1%27)* 5,0 ,19 5,0,19 5,0,195,0,195,0,19)6 )6)6)6)6 )6)6)) )6 &216758&7(;326('52&.&873(5*(2/2*<5(32575(&200(1'$7,216352326('5(7$,1,1*:$//+(,*+79$5,(6352326('5(7$,1,1*:$//+(,*+79$5,(66((6,7(3/$1)25%,.(3$7+7<3,&$/6(&7,2112352326('*5$',1*:,7+,1(;,67,1*$&$&,$&5((.7232)%$1.&211(&772(;,67,1*7$1.)$50,03529(0(176352326('%,25(7(17,21%$6,1 6((67250:$7(5&21752/3/$1)25'(7$,/6 7<3 (;,67,1*)(0$)/22'=21($3(5),503$1(/ &*352326('5(7$,1,1*:$//+(,*+79$5,(6
0$; )6 )6)6 )6)6)6+3352326('%$6,16/23( 0$; 7<3 352-(&7287/(77+58(;,67,1*287/(7$7$&$&,$+($':$//)6 )6 )6)6)6 )6 )6&216758&729(5/$1'6:$/(72%,25(7(17,21%$6,1 6 )7)70,1
&5((.6(7%$&.)612352326('*5$',1*:,7+,1(;,67,1*$&$&,$&5((.7232)%$1.7237237237237&)6 7& )67&)6 7&)67&)67&)6 7&)6 7& )6 7& )67&)67& )67&)6 7& )67& )67&)6 )6 7& )67&)67& )67&)6 7&)6 7& )67& )67&)6)66((6+((7&)25:$7(548$/,7<%$6,17& )6 7& )67&)6352326('\U)/22'/,0,76&216758&72))6,7($&3$7+72'$021*$5&,$&21&5(7(3$7+&216758&75(7$,1,1*:$// +
0$; (;,67,1*0(7$92/&$1,&52&.52&.&873(562,/65(3257&21&5(7(3('(675,$16,'(:$/.325&+3(5$5&+3/$16352326('*$5$*()/225 ))3(53/$1 ),567),1,6+(')/225352326('67(0:$//&21&5(7('5,9(:$<$3521
7<3 02817$%/(&85%$&'5,9($,6/(3(53/$175$&7%281'$5<352326('*$5$*()/225 ))3(53/$1 325&+3(5$5&+3/$16&21&5(7(3('(675,$16,'(:$/.352326('5(7$,1,1*:$//
0$; )(1&,1*3(5/$1'6&$3(3/$16352326('/$1'6&$3(%8))(5$&%,.(3$7+3(53/$1(;,67,1*7232)%$1.('*(2)5,3$5,$1+$%,7$73(5352-(&7%,2/2*,679$5,(6/,0,762)352326('*5$',1*/(*(1'352326('35,9$7(+'3(67250'5$,1666(:(50$,1 6((6,7(3/$1& ::$7(50$,1 6((6,7(3/$1& 5:5(&<&/(' 6((6,7(3/$1& 6'5$:&87 FX\G5$:),// FX\G5$:1(7 FX\G ,03257!$5($2)',6785%$1&( DF48$17,7<(67,0$7(6217+(6(3/$16$5(72%(86(')25%21',1*$1'3(50,7385326(621/<,7,67+(5(63216,%,/,7<2)7+(&2175$&725729(5,)<$&78$/48$17,7,(6)257+(385326(2)&216758&7,21$3352;,0$7(($57+:25.48$17,7,(6600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A4ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEGRADING PLANPage 170 of 401
566HSWHPEHUAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA2+2+
2+2+6'6'6'6'AAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAA$'$$'$(;,67,1*3523(57</,1(35(/,0,1$5<352326('5,*+72):$<'(',&$7,21(;,67,1*7232)%$1.
7232)%$1.$1'('*(2)5,3$5,$16(7%$&.6&0 35,9$7(75,%$5($ VI&L 9 FI9IURP6&0 FI6&0$5($ VI6&0 35,9$7(75,%$5($ VI&L 9 FI6&0$5($ VI6&0 3,3V75,%$5($ VI&L 9 FI6&0$5($ VI6&0 35,9$7(75,%$5($ VI&L 9 FI6&0$5($ VI9WR6&0 FI7$1.)$50,03529(0(176%<27+(56$&$&,$&5((.$&$&,$&5((.6$17$)(52$'7$1.)$5052$''0$'0$'0$5(/2&$7( (;,67,1*352326('35,9$7(67250'5$,16&0 3,3V75,%$5($ VI&L 9 FI6&0$5($ VI'0$6&0 :$7(548$/,7<75($70(1721/< 6,=('2)'0$3(53&55(&200(1'$7,216 VI '0$(;,67,1*3523(57</,1(6'6'6'6''0$'0$'0$ '0$'0$6&0 35,9$7(75,%$5($ VI&L 9 FI6&0$5($ VI6&0 35,9$7(75,%$5($ VI&L 9 FI6&0$5($ VI6&0 35,9$7(75,%$5($ VI&L 9 FI6&0$5($ VI6&0 35,9$7(75,%$5($ VI&L 9 FI6&0$5($ VI(;,67,1*3523(57</,1((;,67,1*
7232)%$1.6(7%$&.A
A 66:):
352326(''5$,1$*($1'0$,17(1$1&(($6(0(17IHHW
'5$,1$*(0$1$*(0(17$5($%281'$5<PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS3$9,1*$5($6,'(:$/. VI%8,/',1*6 VI+$5'6&$3( VITOTAL IMPERVIOUS = 384,460727$/$5($ $&5(6PROPOSED TREATMENT%,25(7(17,21$5($3(59,2863$9(56TIER 1- RUNOFF REDUCTIONx522)'5$,1',6&211(&7x0,1,0,=(,03(59,286$5($6TIER 2 - WATER QUALITY (85th PERCENTILE = 1.15")x216,7(5(7(17,21%$6('75($70(17$1',1),/75$7,21TIER 3 - RETAIN 95TH PERCENTILE STORM EVENT (1.95")x%$6,16:,//5(7$,1$1',1),/75$7(7+(5(48,5(' 7+3(5&(17,/(5(7(17,2192/80(:+(5( 92/80( FI
&L
$&L LLL$ 75,%87$5<$5($ VI TIER 4 - PEAK MANAGEMENTx3($.0$1$*(0(17)257+(216,7('(9(/230(17,63529,'(',17+(5(7(17,21%$6,16$66+2:1x2))6,7(5(7(17,21,63529,'('35(9,286/<%<7+($92&(7$1'3$'5(*5$',1*$&7,9,7,(6&203/(7(',1 ,15(6(592,5$1'7+(1257+0$56+5(7(17,21%$6,19$5,(6&2%%/(2563/$6+%/2&.:+(5(67250:$7(5(17(56)/$7%27720126/23(6 0$;*5$9(/6725$*(%,25(7(17,2162,/0,;'(37+9$5,(629(5)/2:287/(76758&785(7232,172)',6&+$5*(25$'-$&(1767250'5$,1/(*(1'7<3,&$/%,25(7(17,21$5($176+2$0$,17$,1(':$7(548$/,7<75($70(17$5($5(48,5('67250:$7(5&21752/0($685(6&21&5(7(3$9(567<3$**5(*$7(,123(1,1*67<3*5$9(/&21&5(7(('*(62,/68%*5$'(&21&5(7(3$9(0(179$5,(67<3,&$/3(50($%/(3$9(56$5($176600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A5ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGESTORMWATER AND DRAINAGE PLANPage 171 of 401
566HSWHPEHU %%4
;
;
;
;
;
$'$$'$<,(/'<,(/'<,(/'BLDG. 5BUILING TYPEDBLDG. 6BUILING TYPEDBLDG. 7BUILING TYPECBLDG. 4BUILING TYPECBLDG. 3BUILING TYPECBLDG. 9BUILING TYPEBBLDG. 1-2BUILING TYPEEBLDG. 11BUILING TYPEBBLDG. 12BUILING TYPEBBLDG. 13BUILING TYPEBBLDG. 8BUILING TYPEBBLDG. 10BUILING TYPEFBLDG. 14BUILING TYPEABLDG. 16BUILING TYPEABLDG. 19BUILING TYPEABLDG. 21BUILING TYPEABLDG. 26BUILING TYPEABLDG. 24BUILING TYPEABLDG. 27BUILING TYPEABLDG. 25BUILING TYPEABLDG. 15BUILING TYPEABLDG. 17BUILING TYPEABLDG. 18BUILING TYPEABLDG. 20BUILING TYPEABLDG. 22BUILING TYPEABLDG. 23BUILING TYPEAPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEROW BOUNDARYROW BOUNDARYROW BOUNDARYTOP OF BANKTOP OF BANKBLDG. SETBACK16' - 0"BLDG. SETBACK16' - 0"2' - 6"15' - 6"24' - 0"15' - 6"5' - 0"15' - 6"24' - 0"15' - 6"2' - 6"8' - 7 1/4"EVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEV EV EV EV EVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEV EV EVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVEVMOTORCYCLE PARKING, TYPMOTORCYCLE PARKING, TYPMOTORCYCLE PARKING, TYPSHORT TERM BIKE RACK, TYPSHORT TERM BIKE RACK, TYPSHORT TERM BIKE RACK, TYPSHORT TERM BIKE RACK, TYPSHORT TERM BIKE RACK, TYPSHORT TERM BIKE RACK, TYPSHORT TERM BIKE RACK, TYPSHORT TERM BIKE RACK, TYPSHORT TERM BIKE RACK, TYPSHORT TERM BIKE RACK, TYPSHORT TERM BIKE RACK, TYPSHORT TERM BIKE RACK, TYPSHORT TERM BIKE RACK, TYP10' THIRD FLOOR CREEK SETBACK, TYP10' THIRD FLOOR CREEK SETBACK, TYPON-SITE LOADING AREA1 0 ' - 0"
1 0 ' - 0 "%,.(%$517<3600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A6ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEARCHITECTURAL SITE PLANB-BB-BA-AA-AC-CC-C1257+· ··· ····· ·SCALES:µ ·µ(12”X18” SHEET)µ ·µ(24”X36” SHEET)Page 172 of 401
566HSWHPEHU600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A7ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGESITE SECTIONSSITE SECTION A-ASITE SECTION B-B+(,*+7 ·+(,*+7 ·+(,*+7 ·+(,*+7 ·*5281')/225+(,*+7 ·BLDG 7BLDG 41 & 2BLDG 5BLDG 6BLDG 10BLDG 131718202223SITE SECTION C-C+(,*+7 ·+(,*+7 ·BLDG 18192627Page 173 of 401
566HSWHPEHU !""# !"#" !$# !"#" !$# !"#RFFXSLHGVSDFHRFFXSLHGVSDFHRFFXSLHGVSDFHXQRFFXSLHGVSDFH !"#RFFXSLHGVSDFHRFFXSLHGVSDFHRFFXSLHGVSDFHXQRFFXSLHGVSDFH" !$# !"#" !$# !"#RFFXSLHGVSDFHRFFXSLHGVSDFHRFFXSLHGVSDFHXQRFFXSLHGVSDFH !""# !"#" !$# !"#" !$# !"#RFFXSLHGVSDFHRFFXSLHGVSDFHRFFXSLHGVSDFHXQRFFXSLHGVSDFH !""# !"#" !$# !"#" !$# !"#"" !%"&#$" !'%"&#' !'#(' !)#"( !*%"&#$( !$%"&# !""# !"#" !$# !"#" !$# !"#"" !%"&#$" !'%"&#RFFXSLHGVSDFHRFFXSLHGVSDFHRFFXSLHGVSDFHXQRFFXSLHGVSDFHRFFXSLHGVSDFHRFFXSLHGVSDFHRFFXSLHGVSDFHXQRFFXSLHGVSDFH600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A8ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEBUILDING SECTIONSBUILDING A SECTION6&$/(
BUILDING B SECTION6&$/(
BUILDING C SECTION6&$/(
BUILDING D SECTION6&$/(
Page 174 of 401
566HSWHPEHU(+ !,# !"#" !$# !"#" !$#"* !#", !,#$+ !,#RFFXSLHGVSDFHRFFXSLHGVSDFHRFFXSLHGVSDFHXQRFFXSLHGVSDFH XQRFFXSLHGVSDFH600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A9ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEBUILDING SECTIONSBUILDING E SECTION6&$/(
Page 175 of 401
566HSWHPEHU600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A10ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGESITE CIRCULATION EXHIBITLEGEND6$17$)(5'7$1.)$505'$&$&,$&5((.$&$&,$&5((.CONNECTION TO 650 TANK FARM PROJECTCONNECTION TO DAMON GARCIA SPORTS FIELD1257+Page 176 of 401
566HSWHPEHU600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A11ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEVIEW STUDIES PER AASPKEY MAPVIEW OF PROJECT FROM TANK FARM ROAD7$1.)$505'$&$&,$&5((.6$17$)(5'Page 177 of 401
566HSWHPEHU600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A12ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEVIEW STUDIES PER AASPVIEW OF PROJECT FROM INTERIOR PARKING LOTKEY MAP7$1.)$505'$&$&,$&5((.6$17$)(5'Page 178 of 401
566HSWHPEHU600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A13ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEVIEW STUDIES PER AASPVIEW FROM BUILDING ‘F’ PARKING ON SITEKEY MAP7$1.)$505'$&$&,$&5((.6$17$)(5'Page 179 of 401
566HSWHPEHU600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A14ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEVIEW STUDIES PER AASPVIEW OF PROJECT FROM SANTA FE ROADKEY MAP7$1.)$505'$&$&,$&5((.6$17$)(5'Page 180 of 401
566HSWHPEHU3/$17<3($ %('72:1+20( 3/$17<3($ %('72:1+20( 3/$17<3($ %('72:1+20( 3/$17<3($ %('72:1+20( 3/$17<3($ %('72:1+20( 31' - 6"112' - 1"31' - 11 1/8"3/$17<3($ %('72:1+20( 3/$17<3($ %('72:1+20( 3/$17<3($ %('72:1+20( 3/$17<3($ %('72:1+20( 3/$17<3($ %('72:1+20( 111' - 11 1/4"'(&.'(&.'(&.'(&.'(&.31' - 6"2' - 0"3/$17<3($ %('72:1+20( 3/$17<3($ %('72:1+20( 3/$17<3($ %('72:1+20( 3/$17<3($ %('72:1+20( 3/$17<3($ %('72:1+20( 112' - 1"6&$/(
%8,/',1*$ *5281')/2256&$/(
%8,/',1*$ 6(&21')/2256&$/(
%8,/',1*$ 7+,5')/225600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A15ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEBUILDING A FLOOR PLANSPLAN TYPE - A1
PLAN TYPE - A2
PLAN TYPE - A3
2BED 2.5 BATH TOWNHOME$3352;6)2BED 2.5 BATH TOWNHOME$3352;6)3BED 2.5 BATH TOWNHOME$3352;6)LAUNDRYLAUNDRYLAUNDRYENTRYENTRYENTRYSTORAGE & BIKE PARKINGSTORAGE & BIKE PARKINGSTORAGE & BIKE PARKINGBALCONYBALCONYBALCONYBED 1BED 2BED 2BED 2BED 1BED 1BATH 1BATH 1BATH 2BATH 2BED 2BATH 2BATH 1POWDERPOWDERPOWDERGREATROOMGREATROOMGREATROOMKITCHENKITCHENKITCHENDININGDININGGARAGEGARAGEGARAGE· ··· ·· ··· ·SCALES:µ ·µ(12”X18” SHEET)µ ·µ(24”X36” SHEET)Page 181 of 401
566HSWHPEHU600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A16ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEBUILDING A ELEVATIONSLEFT ELEVATION6&$/(
FRONT ELEVATION6&$/(
RIGHT ELEVATION6&$/(
REAR ELEVATION6&$/(
0$;+7 812&&83,('63$&(6 ·0$;+7 2&&83,('63$&(6 ·HEIGHT CALC:/2:32,172)6,7(
+,*+32,172)6,7(
$9*1$785$/*5$'(
0$;+(,*+7$//2:('(OCCUPIED)
ń
0$;+(,*+7$//2:('(UNOCCUPIED) ·µń· · ·
)) · %8,/',1*
)) · %8,/',1* %/'*0$;3/$7(+(,*+7
*NOTE:3529,',1*+(,*+7,1)250$7,21)25,167$1&(2)%8,/',1*7<3($7+,*+(67$1'/2:(67/2&$7,216216,7($9*1$785$/*5$'(·· %8,/',1* · %8,/',1* %/'*0$;+(,*+7
· %8,/',1* · %8,/',1* Page 182 of 401
566HSWHPEHU3/$17<3(% %(')/$7 3/$17<3(% %(')/$7 3/$17<3(% %(')/$7 *$5$*( *$5$*( *$5$*( *$5$*( *$5$*( *$5$*( *$5$*( *$5$*( *$5$*('(&. '(&. '(&.3/$17<3(% %(')/$7 3/$17<3(% %(')/$7 3/$17<3(% %(')/$7 3/$17<3(% %(')/$7 3/$17<3(% %(')/$7 '(&. '(&. '(&.'(&. '(&.106' - 0 1/2"116' - 0 1/2"55' - 5 1/2"21' - 9 1/2"30' - 0"3/$17<3(% %(')/$7 3/$17<3(% %(')/$7 3/$17<3(% %(')/$7 3/$17<3(% %(')/$7 3/$17<3(% %(')/$7 3/$17<3(% %(')/$7 '(&. '(&. '(&.'(&.'(&. '(&.6&$/(
%8,/',1*% *5281')/2256&$/(
%8,/',1*% 6(&21')/2256&$/(
%8,/',1*% 7+,5')/225600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A17ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEBUILDING B FLOOR PLANSPLAN TYPE - B1
PLAN TYPE - B3
PLAN TYPE - B2
PLAN TYPE - B4
1 BEDROOM 1 BATH FLAT$3352;6)2 BEDROOM 2.5 BATH FLAT$3352;6)1 BEDROOM 1 BATH FLAT$3352;6)2 BEDROOM 2 BATH FLAT$3352;6)BED 1BED 1BED 1BED 1BED 2BED 2BALCONYBALCONYBALCONYBALCONYLAUNDRYLAUNDRYGREATROOMGREATROOMGREATROOMGREATROOMKITCHENKITCHENKITCHENKITCHENDININGSTORAGELAUNDRYLAUNDRYDININGSTORAGEBATH 1BATH 1BATH 2BATH 2BATH 1BATH 16(&21'%,.(3$5.,1*#*5281'81,7621/<6(&21'%,.(3$5.,1*#*5281'81,7621/<6(&21'%,.(3$5.,1*#*5281'81,7621/<%,.(3$5.,1*6(&21'%,.(3$5.,1*#*5281'81,7621/<%,.(3$5.,1*%,.(3$5.,1*%,.(3$5.,1*· ··· ·· ··· ·SCALES:µ ·µ(12”X18” SHEET)µ ·µ(24”X36” SHEET)Page 183 of 401
566HSWHPEHU600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A18ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEBUILDING B ELEVATIONSLEFT ELEVATION6&$/(
FRONT ELEVATION6&$/(
RIGHT ELEVATION6&$/(
REAR ELEVATION6&$/(
HEIGHT CALC:/2:32,172)6,7(
+,*+32,172)6,7(
$9*1$785$/*5$'(
0$;+(,*+7$//2:('(OCCUPIED)
ń
0$;+(,*+7$//2:('(UNOCCUPIED) ·µń· · ·0$;+7 812&&83,('63$&(6 ·0$;+7 2&&83,('63$&(6 ·
)) · %8,/',1*
)) · %8,/',1* %/'*0$;3/$7(+(,*+7
*NOTE:3529,',1*+(,*+7,1)250$7,21)25,167$1&(2)%8,/',1*7<3($7+,*+(67$1'/2:(67/2&$7,216216,7($9*1$785$/*5$'(·· %8,/',1* · %8,/',1* %/'*0$;+(,*+7
· %8,/',1* · %8,/',1* Page 184 of 401
566HSWHPEHU3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 '(&. '(&.'(&. '(&.'(&. '(&.'(&.'(&.3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 '(&. '(&.'(&.'(&.'(&.'(&.'(&.'(&.151' - 4"161' - 4"51' - 9 1/2"26' - 0"25' - 9 1/2"3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 3/$17<3(" " 3/$17<3(&' %(')/$7 '(&. '(&. '(&. '(&.'(&.'(&.'(&.'(&.6&$/(
%8,/',1*& *5281')/2256&$/(
%8,/',1*& 6(&21')/2256&$/(
%8,/',1*& 7+,5')/225600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A19ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEBUILDING C FLOOR PLANSPLAN TYPE - CD2
PLAN TYPE - CD3
1 BEDROOM 1 BATH FLAT$3352;6)2 BEDROOM 2 BATH FLAT$3352; 6)6(&21'%,.(3$5.,1*#*5281'81,7621/<6(&21'%,.(3$5.,1*#*5281'81,7621/<%,.(3$5.,1*%,.(3$5.,1*· ··· ·· ··· ·SCALES:µ ·µ(12”X18” SHEET)µ ·µ(24”X36” SHEET)Page 185 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A20ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEBUILDING C ELEVATIONSLEFT ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" FRONT ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0" RIGHT ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" REAR ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" HEIGHT CALC:LOW POINT OF SITE: 148.5'HIGH POINT OF SITE: 199.5' AVG. NATURAL GRADE: (148.5' + 199.5') / 2 = 174'MAX HEIGHT ALLOWED (OCCUPIED)= 36'-0" ń174' + (36)' = 210'MAX HEIGHT ALLOWED (UNOCCUPIED)= 46·-0µ ń174· + (46)· = 220·MAX. HT (UNOCCUPIED SPACES)220.0·MAX. HT (OCCUPIED SPACES)210.0·
FF = 158.0· (%UILDING 7)
FF = 154.0· (%UILDING 3)%LDG MAX. PLATE HEIGHT
*NOTE:PROVIDING HEIGHT INFORMATION FOR INSTANCE OF %UILDING T<PE AT HIGHEST AND LOWEST LOCATIONS ON SITE.AVG. NATURAL GRADE174.0· 188.0· (%UILDING 24 25)184.0· (%UILDING 14)%LDG MAX. HT
199.71· (%UILDING 24 25)195.71· (%UILDING 14)Page 186 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 20215' - 11"52' - 10"63' - 1"PLAN T<PE&' %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE&' %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE&' 678',2 PLAN T<PE&' 678',2 PLAN T<PE&' 678',2 PLAN T<PE&' 678',2 85' - 4"DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.PLAN T<PE&' %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE&' %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE&' %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE&' %(')/$7 DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.75' - 9 1/2"PLAN T<PE&' %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE&' %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE&' %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE&' %(')/$7 51' - 10"60' - 6"85' - 4"DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"1%8,/',1*' *5281')/225SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"2%8,/',1*' 6(&21')/225SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"3%8,/',1*' 7+,5')/225600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A21ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEBUILDING D FLOOR PLANSPLAN TYPE - CD31/8" = 1'-0" PLAN TYPE - CD11/8" = 1'-0" 2 BEDROOM 2 BATH FLATAPPROX. 950 SFSTUDIOAPPROX. 565 SFSECOND %I.E PAR.ING # GROUND UNITS ONL<SECOND %I.E PAR.ING # GROUND UNITS ONL<%I.E PAR.ING%I.E PAR.ING0·16·8·4·24·0·32·16·8·48·SCALES: 1/16µ = 1·- 0µ (12”X18” SHEET) 1/8µ=1·-0µ (24”X36” SHEET)Page 187 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A22ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEBUILDING D ELEVATIONSLEFT ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" FRONT ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0" RIGHT ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" REAR ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" HEIGHT CALC:LOW POINT OF SITE: 148.5'HIGH POINT OF SITE: 199.5' AVG. NATURAL GRADE: (148.5' + 199.5') / 2 = 174'MAX HEIGHT ALLOWED (OCCUPIED)= 36'-0" ń174' + (36)' = 210'MAX HEIGHT ALLOWED (UNOCCUPIED)= 46·-0µ ń174· + (46)· = 220·MAX. HT (UNOCCUPIED SPACES)220.0·MAX. HT (OCCUPIED SPACES)210.0·
FF = 157.0· (%UILDING 6)
FF = 155.0· (%UILDING 5)%LDG MAX. PLATE HEIGHT
*NOTE:PROVIDING HEIGHT INFORMATION FOR INSTANCE OF %UILDING T<PE AT HIGHEST AND LOWEST LOCATIONS ON SITE.AVG. NATURAL GRADE174.0· 187.0· (%UILDING 6)185.0· (%UILDING 5)%LDG MAX. PLATE HEIGHT198.71· (%UILDING 6)196.71· (%UILDING 5)Page 188 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021COMMERCIAL SPACECOMMERCIAL SPACEUNIT STORAGEELECTRICALRESIDENT'S ENTR<LO%%<7494 SF572 SF459 SF641 SF5295 SFELEV ROOM200' - 4"212' - 3"51' - 4"57' - 0"155' - 3"149' - 1"SHOWERS LOC.ERSPLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( 678',2 PLAN T<PE( 678',2 PLAN T<PE( 678',2 PLAN T<PE( 678',2 PLAN T<PE( 678',2 PLAN T<PE( 678',2 PLAN T<PE( 678',2 PLAN T<PE( 678',2 452 SF453 SF613 SF612 SFDEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.PLAN T<PE( 678',2 DEC.DEC.PLAN T<PE( 678',2 528 SFDEC.452 SFDEC.DEC.DEC.456 SF456 SFDEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"1%8,/',1*( *5281')/225SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"2%8,/',1*( 6(&21')/225600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A23ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEBUILDING E FLOOR PLANS0·16·8·4·24·0·32·16·8·48·SCALES: 1/16µ = 1·- 0µ (12”X18” SHEET) 1/8µ=1·-0µ (24”X36” SHEET)Page 189 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021PLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( %(')/$7 PLAN T<PE( 678',2 PLAN T<PE( 678',2 PLAN T<PE( 678',2 PLAN T<PE( 678',2 PLAN T<PE( 678',2 612 SFPLAN T<PE( 678',2 PLAN T<PE( 678',2 PLAN T<PE( 678',2 DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.PLAN T<PE( 678',2 DEC.DEC.DEC.DEC.PLAN T<PE( 678',2 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"1%8,/',1*( 7+,5')/225600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A24ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEBUILDING E FLOOR PLANSPLAN TYPE - E21/8" = 1'-0" PLAN TYPE - E11/8" = 1'-0" 1 BEDROOM 1 BATH FLATAPPROX. 615 SFSTUDIOAPPROX. 450 SF%I.E PAR.ING. (2) VERTICAL%I.E PAR.ING. (2) VERTICAL0·16·8·4·24·0·32·16·8·48·SCALES: 1/16µ = 1·- 0µ (12”X18” SHEET) 1/8µ=1·-0µ (24”X36” SHEET)Page 190 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A25ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEBUILDING E ELEVATIONSFRONT ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0" LEFT ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" HEIGHT CALC:LOW POINT OF SITE: 148.5'HIGH POINT OF SITE: 199.5' AVG. NATURAL GRADE: (148.5' + 199.5') / 2 = 174'MAX HEIGHT ALLOWED (OCCUPIED)= 36'-0" ń174' + (36)' = 210'MAX HEIGHT ALLOWED (UNOCCUPIED)= 46·-0µ ń174· + (46)· = 220·MAX. HT (UNOCCUPIED SPACES)220.0·MAX. HT (OCCUPIED SPACES)210.0·FF = 154.0· (%UILDING 1-2)%LDG MAX. PLATE HEIGHT
AVG. NATURAL GRADE174.0· 190.0· (%UILDING 1-2)%LDG MAX. HEIGHT200.0· (%UILDING 1-2)0·16·8·4·24·0·32·16·8·48·SCALES: 1/16µ = 1·- 0µ (12”X18” SHEET) 1/8µ=1·-0µ (24”X36” SHEET)Page 191 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A26ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEBUILDING E ELEVATIONSREAR ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0" RIGHT ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" Page 192 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021LOUNGE SPACEOUTDOOR %%4 AREA.ITCHENENTR<%USINESS AREARRRRRRPOOL E4UIPMENTELECT.EXERCISE ROOMSHOWER SHOWERSCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1*5281')/2253/$1600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A27ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEBUILDING F FLOOR PLANS0·16·8·4·24·0·32·16·8·48·SCALES: 1/16µ = 1·- 0µ (12”X18” SHEET) 1/8µ=1·-0µ (24”X36” SHEET)Page 193 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A28ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEBUILDING F ELEVATIONSLEFT ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" FRONT ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0" RIGHT ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" REAR ELEVATIONSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" HEIGHT CALC:LOW POINT OF SITE: 148.5'HIGH POINT OF SITE: 199.5' AVG. NATURAL GRADE: (148.5' + 199.5') / 2 = 174'MAX HEIGHT ALLOWED (OCCUPIED)= 36'-0" ń174' + (36)' = 210'MAX HEIGHT ALLOWED (UNOCCUPIED)= 46·-0µ ń174· + (46)· = 220·MAX. HT (UNOCCUPIED SPACES)220.0·MAX. HT (OCCUPIED SPACES)210.0·FF = 163.0· (%UILDING 10)%LDG MAX. PLATE HEIGHTAVG. NATURAL GRADE174.0· 173.0· (%UILDING 10)%LDG MAX. HT183.25· (%UILDING 10)MAIL%OX LOCATIONPage 194 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021COLOR AND MATERIALS PALETTE FOR BUILDING TYPES A & B2. BOARD & BATTEN FI%ER CEMENT %OARD %ATT SIDING3. HORIZ. SIDING FI%ER CEMENT 8µ LAP SIDING4. PAINT COLOR SHERWIN WILLIAMS WHITE SNOW SW 9541 5. PAINT COLOR SHERWIN WILLIAMS GRA< SHINGLE SW 76705600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A29ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGECOLORS AND MATERIALS SCHEME 1CHARACTER SKETCH15555552134761. ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOFING: OWENS CORNING OA.RIDGE TWILIGHT %LAC.6. METAL ROOFING STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFING, - DAR. GRA<88. LIGHT FIXTURE STYLE: MAXIM MODEL 86393%= (NIGHT S.< COMPLIANT)33333667. STOREFRONT: MILGARD WINDOWS %LAC. FRAME2223333322222666622333444442222224444445555555222222224444Page 195 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021COLOR AND MATERIALS PALETTE FOR BUILDING TYPES C & D3. BOARD & BATTEN FI%ER CEMENT %OARD %ATT SIDING COLOR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS WHITE SNOW SW 95414. HORIZ. SIDING FI%ER CEMENT 8µ LAP SIDING COLOR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS WHITE SNOW SW 95415. BOARD & BATTEN FI%ER CEMENT %OARD %ATT SIDING COLOR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS LIVEA%LE GREEN SW6176 6. CEMENT PLASTER: SHERWIN WILLIAMS GREEN EARTH SW 7748 4444600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A30ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGECOLORS AND MATERIALS SCHEME 2CHARACTER SKETCH1666666666666666666666666621347652. METAL ROOFING: MCARTH< WHOLSALE STANDING SEAM METAL SHA.E GRA<55555555533335555555589. LIGHT FIXTURE STYLE: MAXIM MODEL 86393%= (NIGHT S.< COMPLIANT)1. ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOFING: OWENS CORNING OA.RIDGETWILIGHT %LAC.92222226666668. RAILING: POSTS AND RAILING STAINED WOOD %ALISTRADE: %LAC. HOG WIRE5555555544444333333344444444427. STOREFRONT: MILGARD WINDOWS %LAC. FRAME8888888888888888888888888Page 196 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021zzCOLOR AND MATERIALS PALETTE FOR BUILDING E (MIXED USE)5. BRICK VENEER TRAIN STATION THIN %RIC. %RIC. VENEER3. PAINT COLOR SHERWIN WILLIAMS WHITE SNOW SW 9541 3600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A31ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGECOLORS AND MATERIALS SCHEME 3CHARACTER SKETCH33214561. METAL ROOFING: MCARTH< WHOLSALE STANDING SEAM METAL SHA.E GRA<4. PAINT COLOR: SEVEL 4 SMOOTH TROWEL FINISH COLOR: SHERWIN WILLIAMS SAGE GREEN LIGHT11111111662. HORIZ. SIDING FI%ER CEMENT 8µ LAP SIDING7777. STOREFRONT: STOREFRONT WINDOW S<STEM - %LAC.6. WAINSCOT: PRECAST CONCRETE 355555533333333311111155555555222222222222227788. LIGHT FIXTURE STYLE: MAXIM MODEL 86393%= (NIGHT S.< COMPLIANT)4444444444444466Page 197 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021COLOR AND MATERIALS PALETTE FOR BUILDING F (CLUBHOUSE)4. PAINT COLOR SHERWIN WILLIAMS WHITE SNOW 9541 4600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A32ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGECOLORS AND MATERIALS SCHEME 4CHARACTER SKETCH1111122222135761. METAL ROOFING: MCARTH< WHOLSALE STANDING SEAM METAL SHA.E GRA<2. BOARD & BATTEN FI%ER CEMENT %OARD %ATT SIDING3. HORIZ. SIDING FI%ER CEMENT 8µ LAP SIDING 5555555. WOOD PLANK SIDING: HORI=. CEDER PLAN. 6. BRICK VENEER TRAIN STATION THIN %RIC. %RIC. VENEER8. LIGHT FIXTURE STYLE: MAXIM MODEL 86393%= (NIGHT S.< COMPLIANT)C3333366666666666666666687. STOREFRONT: STOREFRONT WINDOW S<STEM - %LAC.44444444411Page 198 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021ACACIACREEK26262613%L1DESIGN .E<CLU%HOUSE - SEE ENLARGEMENT SHEET 32PEDESTRIAN WAL.WA<, T<P.SHORT-TERM %I.E PAR.ING, T<P. (63 MIN.)SEE SHEET A35COMMUNIT< MAIL%OXES - SEE ARCH SHEETS111555555557777777777777777MULTI-USE PATH 22222FLEXI%LE USE DEC. AT %IORETENTION AREA333ENTR< NODE AT MULTI-USE PATH WITH SEATING4466NATURAL PLA< AREA - SEE ENLARGEMENTDECORATIVE PERMEA%LE PAVERS, T<P.PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGLOADING =ONETRASH ENCLOSURE, T<P. - SEE SHEET A37EXISTING ROC. OUTCROP9998888812121313%1313131414141414141414COMMUNIT< PICNIC AREAS10101010%IORETENTION AREA, T<P. - SEE CIVIL SHEETS111111111111RIGHT-OF-WA< IMPROVEMENTS - NOT A PART15161515LONG TERM %I.E PAR.ING %ARNS, T<P. (5)SEE SHEET A35 35· ACACIA CREE. SET%AC.16161616171717RETAINING WALL, T<P. - SEE CIVIL SHEETS A3618181818181818FUTURE %I.E/ PEDESTRIAN %RIDGE - NOT A PART1919ACACIA CREE. %UFFER202020%IC<CLE REPAIR STATION WITH SEATINGDROUGHT TOLERANT PLANTINGSEE SHEET A39 FOR LANDSCAPE PLANFENCING - 6·H POOL FENCING - 6·H PRIVAC< ENTR< MONUMENT LOCATION - SEE SHEET A35FENCING - 42µH ON WALL - SEE SHEET A36 EARTH MOUNDSPU%LIC ART LOCATION22222221212323232323F1F1F2F3F32425FFF226F32524EXISTING EUCAL<PTUS CANOP< T<P.SEE SHEET A40 FOR TREE INVENTORY & REMOVALSSANTA FE ROADTANK FARM ROAD0·80·40·20·75·0·160·80·40·320·SCALES: 1µ = 80·- 0µ (12”X18” SHEET) 1µ=40·-0µ (24”X36” SHEET)NORTH600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A33ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEPRELIMINARY SITE PLANPage 199 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021COVERED OUTDOOR PATIOPOOL / SPAOVERHEAD STUCTURE - SEE A34OUTDOOR SEATING, T<P. - SEE A33-34, 36S<NTHETIC TURF EXERCISE AREA - SEE A34FIRE TA%LES WITH SEATINGTIM%ERSTAC.S CLIM%ING LOGS - SEE A33FLEXI%LE USE DEC. OVER %IORETENTION AREAEXERCISE E4UIPMENTWATER TROUGH ENTR< FEATURECENTRAL %OARDWAL.6· H PERIMETER POOL FENCE - SEE A36CLIM%ER PLA< FEATURE - SEE A3330-42µH LANDSCAPE ACCENT WALLS, T<P. SEE SHEET A36CA%ANAS WITH RAISED PLANTERS112223334444445566778899101011111112121313141414151518-30µH SEATWALL, T<P. - SEE SHEET A361616161616ART / MURAL 171717%AR%ECUE AND COUNTER 1818DRAGONFL< PLA< ELEMENTOUTDOOR PING PONG TA%LEFIREPLACE 192021212019CLU%HOUSE DESIGN .E<600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A34ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGESITE PLAN ENLARGEMENTPage 200 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021OUTDOOR AMENITIES &NATURAL PLAY SEE SHEETS A31 & A32FOR LOCATIONS OF ELEMENTS SHOWN ON THIS SHEET600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A35ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGELANDSCAPE CHARACTER & AMENITIES Page 201 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021600 TANK FARM ROADL3SITE FURNISHINGS AND MATERIALSWALL LIGHTSLITHONIA WM1925850 LUMEN LED850 LUMEN LEDWASTE RECEPTACLESVICTOR STANLE<R%36 AND SD 242R%-36 AND SD 242PEDESTRIAN LIGHTSLITHONIA W527 WITH PM30POST MOUNT 12 HIGH, LEDPOST MOUNT - 12· HIGH, LEDBOLLARDLITHONIA RADEAN LEDSEE ARCH AND VSEEARCHANDVSIGN LIGHTSLITHONIA M707 E12 ARM850 U850 LUMEN LEDALL LIGHTS AND %OLLARDS IN COLOR %LAC. OR %RON=ESITEFURNISHINGS AND MATERIALSSEE SHEETS A31 & A32FOR LOCATIONS OF ELEMENTS SHOWN ON THIS SHEET, EXCLUDING LIGHT FIXTURES600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A36ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGESITE FURNISHINGS AND MATERIALSPage 202 of 401
1622-02-RS20-XO\ 30, 20216$1/8,62%,632&$6&$/( ,1&+(6'$7( '5$:1%< &0+(0$,/ LQIR#3HDN5DFNVFRP3+21( 0$7(5,$/6 ),1,6+ 0$7(5,$/6 +2752//('5281'%$5+2752//('5281'%$5[[$1*/(),1,6+ 67$1'$5'+27',33('*$/9$1,=('237,21$/32:'(5&2$7 %$6,&&2/256 %,.(6,1*/(6,'(':+((/63$&,1*
127('5$:,1*1266&56$1/8,62%,632&$0$,/ IR#3HDN5DFNVFRP3+21( 42-60 H ENTRY MONUMENT SIGNAGE - WOOD OPTIONSCEDAR WOOD SLAT MATERIAL WITH CONCRETE ACCENTSALUMINUM LETTERING, 24 S4 FT LETTERING MAX.DIMENSIONS SHALL %E CONSISTENT WITH CIT< OF SLO STD.SEE SITE PLAN FOR LOCATIONS, SHEET A31 42-60 H ENTRY MONUMENT SIGNAGE - GABION OPTIONSSTONE GA%ION WITH STEEL ACCENTS ALUMINUM LETTERING, , 24 S4 FT LETTERING MAX.DIMENSIONS SHALL %E CONSISTENT WITH CIT< OF SLO STD.SEE SITE PLAN FOR LOCATIONS, SHEET A31 SHORT TERM BIKE PARKING PEA. ¶CAMPUS· RAC.S, GALVANI=ED POWDER COATED STEEL IN COLOR %RON=ESURFACE MOUNT PER MANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONSSEE SITE PLAN FOR LOCATIONS AND 4UANITITIES, SHEET A31LONG-TERM BIKE PARKING SEE SITE PLAN FOR LOCATIONS AND 4UANITITIES, SHEET A31SEE TITLE SHEET FOR %I.E PAR.ING STATISTICS, SHEET A1MATERIAL AND FINISH TO MATCH ARCHITECTURE 600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A35ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEBICYCLE PARKING AND MONUMENT SIGNAGEPage 203 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 202118"1P.I.P. CONCRETE WALL2AD-ACENT PAVING, SEE PLAN3COMPACTED AGGREGATE %ASEPER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT4CONCRETE FOOTING5EXPANSION -OINT64 RE%AR HORI=ONTAL AS SHOWN74 RE%AR #16" O.C. VERT9HOO. TAILS INTO FOOTING, T<P.67213595881/2" CHAMFER ALL EDGES, T<P.3'-6"1" MIN.6’ WOOD SLAT PRIVACY FENCE AND GATE42 METAL FENCE ON WALL4-6’ METAL PICKET GATE30-42 LANDSCAPE ACCENT WALLCONCRETE %OARDFORM FINISH, IN COLOR GRE<SEE EXAMPLE IMAGER< AT RIGHT, THIS SHEET6’ METAL PICKET FENCESEE CIVIL SHEETS FOR RETAINING WALL HEIGHTS AND LOCATIONSSEE SITE PLAN SHEET A31FOR FENCING LOCATIONSSEE SHEET A31 & ENLARGEMENT SHEET A32 FOR LANDSCAPE WALL LOCATIONS CMU RETAINING WALLSHEIGHT VARIES, SEE CIVIL PLANSCOLOR, T<PE AND FINISH TO MATCH TRASH ENCLOSURES, SHEET A3730-42 LANDSCAPE ACCENT WALLSCONCRETE %OARDFORM FINISH, IN COLOR GRE<18-30 SEATWALLSFINISH TO MATCH LANDSCAPE ACCENT WALLS WITHWOOD SLAT INSETS* FENCE HEIGHT EXCEPTION REQUEST SHALL BE INCLUDED IN FUTURE SUBMITTAL 600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A38ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGESITE WALLS AND FENCINGPage 204 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021SIDE ELEVATION - TRASH ENCLOSURENOTES:1. FINISHES OF CMU WALL, WOOD, ROOF, AND HARDWARE TOMATCH CORRESPONDING ARCHITECTURAL FINISHES.2. ENTRANCE TO SIDE ACCESS ENCLOSURE WILL OCCUR ONEITHER SIDE DEPENDING ON SITE LOCATION.FRONT ELEVATION - TRASH ENCLOSURESLIDE BOLT AND SLEEVEDROP BOLT AND SLEEVE6'-0"8'-0"10'-0"PRECAST CONCRETE CAPWOOD POSTCORRUGATEDMETAL ROOFCMU BLOCK WALL4 CU YD BINWOOD POSTCORRUGATEDMETAL ROOFPRECAST CONCRETE CAPCMU BLOCK BSPLIT-FACE BLOCK8x8x16 HALF-SCORE9'-1"6" ALL SIDESSTEEL GATE FRAMEBARREL HINGEWOOD PANELSCMU BLOCK APRECISION BLOCK8x8x16 STANDARD4 CU YD BINORGANICSORGANICS18'-5"10'-7"(2) DOUBLE SWING GATESROOF POST3'-5"PLAN VIEW - TRASH ENCLOSURE (SIDE ACCESS OPTION)CMU WALLROOF OUTLINEGATE POST6'-7"10'-7"(2) DOUBLE SWING GATESROOF POSTCMU WALLROOF OUTLINEGATE POST5'-4"6'-7"4 CU YD BIN4 CU YD BINPLAN VIEW - TRASH ENCLOSURE (REAR ACCESS OPTION)8'-0"3.REFER TO CIVIL SITE PLAN, SHEET A3 FOR LOCATIONS OF TRASH ENCLOSURES. 4.TRASH ENCLOSURES SHALL BE SCREENED WITH VEGETATION PER CITY OF SLO STD.600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A39ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGETRASH ENCLOSURESPage 205 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021SENECIOSERPENS.NIPHOFIA UVARIALOMANDRA LONGIFOLIAARCTOSTAPH<LOS SPP.LEUCADENDRON ¶SAFARI GOLD STRI.E·DECOMPOSED GRANITE ALOE POL<PH<LLAAGAVE ¶%LUE GLOW· AGAVE ATTENUATAFURCREA FOETIDA ¶MEDIOPICTA·OLEA EUROPEA ¶FRUTILESS·ECHEVERIA SPP.DWARF CITRUSCOTINUS COGGR<IAASST. CITRUSPLANT PALETTEASSTSUCCULENTSDROUGHT TOLERANT MASSINGLID MEADOW MIX600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A40ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGELANDSCAPE PLANT MATERIALSPage 206 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 2021ACACIACREEKSANTA FE ROADTANK FARM ROAD600 TANK FARM ROADLPRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANPLANTING LEGENDT E ES TED SOIL THE PLANT PALETTE IS COMPRISED OF SPECIES .NOWN TO THRIVE IN THE LOCAL MEDITTERAENEAN CLIMATE ANE4UIREE4UIRECONDITIONS. THE PROPOSED PLANT MATERIAL OUTSIDE OF AREAS ALLOCATED FOR RECREATIONAL USE WILL RCONDITIONS THE PROPOSED PLANT MATERIAL OUTSIDE OF AREAS ALLOCATED FOR RECREATIONAL USE WILL RSCRI%EDLOW TO VER< LOW WATER ONCE ESTA%LISHED. THIS PLANT PALETTE COUPLED WITH THE IRRIGATION S<STEM DESION%ELOW HAS %EEN DESIGNED TO MEET OR EXCEED THE STATE AND LOCAL STANDARDS FOR WATER CONSERVAT%ASED ON THE MODEL WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE PER SLOMC 17.70.220 AND A WEATHER SENSING, ¶SMART CONTROLLER· WILL %E USED TO MONITOR THE PROVISION OF IRRIGATION WATERHRU%S,MANAGE DAIL< WATER CONSUMPTION TO THE MINIMUM RE4UIREMENTS FOR EACH H<DRO=ONE. ALL TREES, SHATER CANAND GROUNDCOVER AREAS WILL %E IRRIGATED ON SEPARATE H<DRO=ONES SO THAT ONCE ESTA%LISHED, WATING%E REGULATED IN A MORE EFFICIENT MANNER. TREES WILL %E IRRIGATED %< %U%%LERS. ALL ORNAMENTAL PLANT%EWILL RECEIVE DRIP IRRIGATION OR OTHER HIGHL< EFFICIENT IRRIGATION. ALL A%OVE GROUND UTILITIES SHALL %SCREENED WITH VEGETATION.SUCH AS:ACER MACROPH<LLUM %IGLEAF MAPLEALNUS RHOM%IFOLIA WHITE ALDERGLEDITSIA TIACANTHOS INERMIS ¶SHADE MASTER· THORNLESS LOCUSTGING.O %ILO%A ¶AUTUMN GOLD· GING.O .OELREUTERIA %IPINNATA CHINESE FLAME TREELOPHOSTEMON CONFERTUS %RIS%ANE %OXLIRIODENRON TULIPIFERA TULIP TREECERCIDIUM PAR.INSONIA ¶DESERT MUSEUM· PALO VERDE TREEPISTACHIA CHINENSIS CHINESE PISTACHEPLATANUS X ACERIFLOIA (HISPANICA) LONDON PLANE TREE4UERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST LIVE OA. 4UERCUS TOMENTELLA ISLAND OA.SH E ST EET T EES (1 24” X) T 161SH S SSES E S (1 1 ) T 683 SSUCH AS:AR%UTUS X ¶MARINA· MARINA AR%UTUSARCHONTOPHOENIX CUNNINGHAMIANA .ING PALM%AUHINIA %LA.EANA HONG .ONG ORCHID TREE%RACH<CHITON SPP. PIN. %OTTLE TREE%RAHEA EDULIS GUADALUPE PALMCASSIA LEPTOPH<LLA GOLDEN MEDALLION TREECERCIS X ¶HEARTS OF GOLD· GOLDEN RED%UDH<MENOSPORUM FLAVUM SWEETSHADELAGERSTROEMIA SPP. CRAPE M<RTLEM<RICA CALIFORNICA PACIFIC WAX M<RTLEOLEA EUROPEA ¶SWAN HILL· - STERILE FRUITLESS OLIVEP<RUS CALLER<ANA FLOWERING PEARE T T EES (1 ) T 6 SUCH AS:CHORISIA SPECIOSA (CIE%A) FLOSS SIL. TREE-ACARANDA MIMOSIFOLIA -ACARANDA MULTI-TRUN.PLATANUS RACEMOSA MULTI-TRUN. CALIFRONIA S<CAMORE4UERCUS AGRIFOLIA MULTI-TRUN. COAST LIVE OA.S E E T EES (24 36” X) T 1TOTAL ON-SITE LANDSCAPE AREA: 56, 835 SFESTIMATED TOTAL WATER USE: 1,543,411.3 GAL / YR.ESTIMATED TOTAL WATER USE: 1,543,411.3 GAL / YR.MAXIMUM APPLIED WATER ALLOWANCE: 1,543,411.3 GAL / 0 YR.MAXIMUM APPLIED WATER ALLOWANCE: 1,543,411.3 GAL / 0 YR.MAXIMUM APPLIED WATER ALLOWANCE: 1,543,411.3 GAL / 0 YR.AREAS WITHIN THE PRO-ECT SITE THAT ARE TO %E USED FOR RECREATIONAL PURPOSES AND ALL AREAS THAT WILL %E IRRIGATED WITH RECLAIMED WATER ARE CLASSIFIED AS SPECIAL LANDSCAPE AREAS. SPECIAL LANDSCAPE AREAS HAVE %EEN INCORPORATED INTO THE FOLLOWING CALCULATIONS AND ARE REFLECTED IN THE MAXIMUMAPPLIED WATER ALLOWANCE PER CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS AND THE MODEL WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE. TOTAL TREES TO BE PLANTED ON THE PROJECT SITE = 236TOTAL TREES TO BE PLANTED ON THE PROJECT SITE = 236SEE EXISTING TREE DISPOSITION TABLE SHEET A40 FOR SPECIES, SIZE, QUANTITY AND LOCATION OF (E) TREES TO REMAIN, PROTECT, AND TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL.ACACIA COGNATA CCOUSIN ITTCRIVER WATTLEADENANTHOS SERICEUS COASTAL WOOLL<%USHAEONIUM CANARIENSE AEONIUMAGAVE ATTENUATA CNOVAC%LUE CLONEAGAVE DESMETTIANA CVARIEGATACVARIEGATED AGAVEAGAVE VILMORINIANA OCTOPUS AGAVEAGAVE X C%LUE GLOWC%LUE GLOW AGAVEALOE POL<PH<LLA SPIRAL ALOEALOE STRIATA CORAL ALOEAL<OG<NE HUEGELII CSANTA CRU=C %LUE HI%ISCUSARCTOSTAPH<LOS SPP. MAN=ANITA%ACCHARIS PILULARIS CPIGEON POINTCCO<OTE %RUSH%UL%INE FRUTESCENS STAL.ED %UL%INECAESALPINIA SPP.<ELLOW/RED %IRD OF PARADISECAREX PRAEGRACILIS CALIFORNIA FIELD SEDGECAREX TUMULICOLA%ER.ELE< SEDGECEANOTHUS GRISEUS HORI=ONTALIS C<AN.EE POINTCCALIFORNIA LILACCERCIS CANADENSIS CRISING SUNCRISING SUN RED%UDCHONDROPETALUM TECTORUM CAPE RUSHCISTUS PULVERULENTUS CSUNSETCROC.ROSECL<TOSTOMA CALLISTEGIOIDES VIOLET TRUMPET VINECOTINUS COGG<GRIA CRO<AL PURPLECRO<AL PURPLE SMO.E TREEDIANELLA CAERULEA CCASSA %LUECCASSA %LUE FLAX LIL<DIETES %ICOLOR FORTNIGHT LIL<ECHEVERIA X CAFTERGLOWCAFTERGLOW ECHEVERIAFURCRAEA FOETIDA CMEDIOPICTACMAURITIUS HEMPHARDEN%ERGIA VIOLACEA CHAPP< WANDERERCLILAC VINEHESPERALOE PARVIFLORA RED <UCCAHETEROMELES AR%UTIFOLIA TO<ONHEUCHERA SANGUINEA CORAL %ELLS-UNCUS EFFUSUS COCCIDENTAL %LUECOCCIDENTAL %LUE RUSH.NIPHOFIA UVARIA CECHO MANGOCRE%LOOMING TORCHLIL<LAVANDULA X INTERMEDIA CPROVENCECPROVENCE LAVENDRTLEUCADENDRON SPP. CONE%USHLEUCOSPERMUM CORDIFOLIUM NODDING PINCUSHIONLE<MUS CONDENSATUS CCAN<ON PRINCECNATIVE %LUE R<ELOMANDRA SPP. MAT RUSHMIMULUS AURANTIACUS STIC.< MON.E< FLOWERMUHLEN%ERGIA DU%IA PINE MUHL<MUHLEN%ERGIA RIGENS DEER GRASSNEPETA X FAASSENII CWAL.ERS LOWCWAL.ERS LOW CATMINTOLEA EUROPAEA CLITTLE OLLIEC TM LITTLE OLLIE OLIVEPENNISETUM SPATHIOLATUM R<E PUFFSPENSTEMON X CFIRE%IRDCFIRE%IRD %EARD TONGUEPHLOMIS FRUTICOSA-ERUSALEM SAGEPHORMIUM X CSEA -ADECNEW =EALAND FLAXPITTOSPORUM TENUIFOLIUM CSILVER SHEENCSILVER SHEEN TAWHIWHIPODOCARPUS X CICEE %LUECICEE %LUE PODOCARPUSRHUS INTEGRIFOLIA LEMONADE %ERR<RI%ES SANGUINEUM RED FLOWERING CURRANTRI%ES SPECIOSUM FUCHSIA FLOWERING GOOSE%ERR<SALVIA GREGGII CRAS%ERR< DELIGHTCAUTUMN SAGESALVIA SPATHACEA HUMMING%IRD SAGESALVIA X CPO=O %LUECPO=O %LUE SAGESENECIO MANDRALISCAE%LUE FINGERSESLERIA AUTUMNALIS AUTUMN MOOR GRASSSTRELIT=IA NICOLAI GIANT %IRD OF PARADISEVER%ENA %ONARIENSIS PURPLETOP VERVAINVER%ENA LILACINA CDE LA MINACLILAC VER%ENAVER%ENA X C%ALENDA.LEC TM ENDURASCAPE PURPLE VER%ENAVITIS CALIFORNICA CALIFORNIA WILD GRAPEINDICATES SPECIES IS ALSO SUITABLE USE IN BIORETENTION AREASINDICATES SPECIES IS ALSO SUITABLE FOR USE IN ACACIA CREEK BUFFERPROPOSED STREET TREES PER CITY OF SLO STREET TREE MASTER PLAN
PLNORTH0·80·40·20·75·0·160·80·40·320·SCALES: 1µ = 80·- 0µ (12”X18” SHEET) 1µ=40·-0µ (24”X36” SHEET)
600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A41ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEPRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN Page 207 of 401
1622-02-RS20September 3, 20217677717470696872737567434241403938373635343332313029282725242322212019188517161514131211109875432184818283798078TANK FARM RDEXISTING TREEDRIPLINE, TYPICAL.TOP OF BANK PERBIOLOGICAL RESOURCESASSESSMENT BY KEVINMERK ASSOCIATES, LLC,DATED 8-14-20, TYPICAL600 TANK FARM ROADAPN: 053-421-001,053-421-006PROPERTYLINE, TYPICAL650 TANK FARM ROADAPN: 053-421-005ACACIA CR
E
E
K
ACACIA CREEK
ACACI
A
C
R
E
E
KSCALE: 1" = 80'1.TREE INVENTOR<, LOCATIONS, AND TAG NUM%ERS PER AR%ORIST REPORTPREPARED %< RRM DESIGN GROUP, DATED 08/06/2021.2. ALL TREES LOCATED WITHIN THE PRO-ECT %IOLOGIST DESIGNATEDRIPARIAN AREAS DEFINED IN THE %IOLOGICAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT %<.EVIN MER. ASSOCIATES, DATED NOVEM%ER 4, 2020, ARE TO REMAIN.3. NESTING RAPTORS ARE .NOWN TO INHA%IT THE STAND OF %LUE GUMEUCAL<PTUS LOCATED ALONG ACACIA CREE.. PLEASE CONSULT WITHTHE PRO-ECT %IOLOGIST PRIOR TO AN< TREE MAINTENANCE ORREMOVAL OPERATIONS.4. SEE SHEET A39 IN THE ENTITLEMENT DRAWING PAC.AGE AND/OR C7 OFTHE VESTING TENTATIVE MAP DRAWING PAC.AGE FOR SPECIES,LOCATION, AND SI=E OF PROPOSED TREE PLANTINGS.NOTESEXISTING SITE PLANTree TagBotanical Name Common NameDiameter at BreastHeight (in.)Approx. Dripline ØDisposition1(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'blue gum98.5 45'2blue gum72.5 50'3blue gum33.5 20' Remove4blue gum53.5 35'5(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum115.5 50'TREE TAG 6 NOT USED7(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum71.0 60' Protect8blue gum112.5 55' Protect9(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum65.5 40' Protect10(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum60.5 60'11(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum39.5 50' Protect12blue gum54.0 20' Protect13blue gum60.055' Protect14(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum33.0 40' Protect15(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum58.0 60' Protect16(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum55.0 60' Protect17blue gum64.0 50'18blue gum49.5 30' Protect19blue gum52.0 30'20blue gum52.0 30'21blue gum71.5 30'22blue gum38.5 20' Remove23blue gum38.5 20'24blue gum50.0 20' Remove25blue gum62.0 20'TREE TAG 26 NOT USED27blue gum50.0 20'28blue gum49.5 20' Remove29blue gum30.5 40'30blue gum48.5 20' Remove31blue gum53.0 20'32blue gum26.0 20' Remove33blue gum32.0 20'34blue gum22.5 20'Remove35blue gum16.0 20' Remove36blue gum17.5 20' Remove37(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum80.5 60'38(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum70.0 60'39(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum53.0 60'40(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum44.0 60'41(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum61.0 60'42(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum82.0 60'43(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum42.0 25'TREE TAGS 44-66 NOT USEDExisting Tree InventoryPrepared By: Jake Minnick, PLA, ISA Certified Arborist #WE-11830ADBH Measurement Height: 54"Date of Evaluation: 06/01/2021686FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper49.5 30' Remove696FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper27.0 20' Remove706FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper21.5 30' Remove716FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper54.0 20' Remove726FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper69.0 30' Remove736FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper67.035' Remove746FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper48.5 25' Remove756FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper3.0 3' Remove766FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper48.5 25' Remove776FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper53.5 25' Remove78(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum35.5 30'79(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum20.0 20' Remove80(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum7.5 10' Remove81(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum8.5 6' Remove82(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum5.0 5' Remove83(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum11.0 15' Remove84(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum54.0 25' Protect85blue gum47.5 30' ProtectExisting Tree Inventory ContinuedINDICATES AN EXISTING TREE TO REMAININDICATES AN EXISTING TREE TO %E REMOVEDTREE TAG NUM%ERLEGENDQUANTITY60342691 MIN.3.5:1 MIN.TREE DISPOSITION TABLEEXISTINGPROTECTTOTAL REMOVALSPROPOSEDPROPOSED MITIGATION RATIO74TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL ARE IN POOR HEALTH, ARE OVERCROWDED, EXHI%IT STRUCTURAL DEFECTS, ORCONFLICT WITH PROPOSED ONSITE IMPROVEMENTS, SUCH AS %UILDING LOCATIONS, A STORMWATER %ASIN, A MULTI-USEPATH, AND ASSOCIATED GRADING. THESE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ENCROACH INTO THE CRITICAL ROOT =ONE (CR=)OF TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL. ALL TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL ARE RECOGNI=ED AS INVASIVE SPECIES %<THE CALIFORNIA INVASIVE PLANTS COUNCIL (CAL-IPC), AND EACH SPECIES HAS NATURALI=ED ONSITE AND SPREAD TOOFFSITE LOCATIONS NEAR%<.TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL ONSITE SHOULD %E REMOVED, AND THEIR STUMPS GROUND DOWN TO A DEPTH OF 24".SEVERAL TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL ARE LOCATED OFFSITE, AD-ACENT TO THE WESTERN ACACIA CREE. TOP OF%AN. %OUNDAR<. THESE TREES SHOULD %E CUT FLUSH NEAR THE TOP OF THE ROOT COLLAR AND THE STUMPS AND ROOTSLEFT IN PLACE TO PROVIDE INTERIM STA%ILI=ATION OF THE CREE. %AN.S WHILE SUITA%LE REPLACEMENT RIPARIAN SPECIESESTA%LISH. THE PRO-ECT AR%ORIST WILL FLAG TREES WITH STUMPS AND ROOTS THAT ARE TO REMAIN PRIOR TO THEINITIATION AN< TREE WOR..OFFSITE TREES PROPOSED TO REMAIN ALONG ACACIA CREE. SHOULD %E PRUNED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THEPRO-ECT AR%ORIST. IT HAS %EEN DETERMINED THAT ALL TREES TO REMAIN CAN %E PRUNED TO ACCOMMODATE THEPROPOSED PRO-ECT. IN GENERAL, TREES TO REMAIN HAVE NOT %EEN MAINTAINED IN MAN< <EARS. MAN< HAVE LARGEAMOUNTS OF DEAD WOOD THROUGHOUT THE CROWN, AND SEVERAL HAVE UN%ALANCED CROWNS. MOST WILLRE4UIRE A CROWN CLEANING TO REDUCE RIS. ASSOCIATED WITH DEAD LIM% DROP AND SEVERAL WILL RE4UIRE ACROWN REDUCTION TO ENSURE A %ALANCED CROWN.A TREE REPLACEMENT PLAN IS PROPOSED FOR %OTH ONSITE AND OFFSITE TREE REMOVALS AT A MINIMUM 3.5:1REPLACEMENT RATIO. THIS EXCEEDS THE RE4UIRED 1:1 REPLACEMENT RATIO SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 12.24 TREEREGULATIONS OF THE SAN LUIS O%ISPO MUNICIPAL CODE %< 3.5X. ONSITE REPLACEMENT TREE SPECIES ARE PROPOSEDAS A MIXTURE OF NATIVE AND NON-NATIVE SELECTIONS %ASED ON THEIR PROVEN SUCCESS UNDER LOCAL CLIMATICAND SOIL CONDITIONS.PRUNING, REMOVAL, AND REPLACEMENT PLANProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectRemoveProtectProtectProtectRemoveProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectTree TagBotanical Name Common NameDiameter at BreastHeight (in.)Approx. Dripline ØDisposition67(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum55.5 45' ProtectONSITE REMOVALSOFFSITE REMOVALS1610(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401A42ENTITLEMENTSPACKAGEEXISTING TREE INVENTORY & REMOVALSPage 208 of 401
W
WWWWWWSDSDSDSDSDSSS
S
SSSSAA%UILDING 1%UILDING 2%UILDING 3%UILDING 4%UILDING 5%UILDING 6%UILDING 7%UILDING 8%UILDING 9%UILDING 11%UILDING 12%UILDING 13%UILDING 14%UILDING 15%UILDING 16%UILDING 17%UILDING 18%UILDING 19%UILDING 20%UILDING 21%UILDING 22%UILDING 23%UILDING 24%UILDING 25%UILDING 26%UILDING 27%UILDING 10SWSSPROPOSED PRIVATE 8" PVC WATERLEGENDPROPOSED PRIVATE 8" PVC SEWERPROPOSED PRIVATE 12" HDPE STORM DRAINSSEXISTING 18" PU%LIC SEWER MAINWEXISTING 12" PU%LIC WATER MAINPROPOSED FIRE H<DRANTSDRWPROPOSED REC<CLED WATER MAINN:?1600?1622-02-RS20-600-TDQN-FDrm-EQtLtOemeQtV?EQJLQeerLQJ?TTM?SKeet-FLOeV?C4BSLte PODQ.GZJ, C4, -XQ 01, 2021 8:36Dm, QJZDOterV-XQe 1, 2021600 TAN. FARM0feet801"=40'40120PRELIMINAR< SITE PLANC41. SEE SHEET C5 FOR STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTSNOTE:DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE METERFIRE SPRIN.LER SERVICEFW(1) 2-bed unit, 2nd Floor(1) 1-bed unit, 3rd Floor(1) 2-bedunit(1) 1-bed unit, 3rd Floor(1) Studio unit, Ground Floor(1) Studio unit, 2nd Floor(1) Studio unit, Ground Floor(1) 1-bed unit, 2nd Floor(1) 1-bed unit, 3rd Floor(1) 1-bed unit, 2nd Floor(1) 1-bed unit, 2nd FloorPage 209 of 401
Page 210 of 401
S P R R
SOUTH STREETHIGHW
A
Y BROAD ST
REET TANK FARM ROADHIGUERA STREETHIGHWAY PROJECTVesting Common Interest Tentative Parcel Map No. SLO 21-0015IN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIAUTILITIESBEING A PORTION OF LOT 57 OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPOSUBURBAN TRACT AS SHOWN IN BOOK 1, PAGE 92 OFRECORDS OF SURVEYELECTRIC.............. PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRICTELEPHONE.......... AT&TCABLE.................. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONSGAS...................... SOCAL GAS COMPANYSEWER.................. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPOWATER.................. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPORECYCLED............ CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPOHORIZONTAL & VERTICAL CONTROLTOPOGRAPHYTOPOGRAPHY AND MAPPING PROVIDED BY RRM DESIGNGROUP, MAY 2016VICINITY MAPSHEET INDEXNOT TO SCALEC1..............TITLE SHEETC2..............EXISTING CONDITIONS MAPC3..............VESTING PARCEL MAPC4..............SITE PLANC5..............GRADING PLANC6..............STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLANC7..............PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANC8..............TREE INVENTORYA1..............BUILDING SECTIONSA2-A8........FLOOR PLANSTHE BASIS OF BEARING FOR THIS MAP THE BASIS OFBEARINGS IS THE NORTHERLY LINE OF TANK FARM, ROAD,BEARING BEING SOUTH 65°07'52" WEST PER 67/RS/93.THE BENCHMARK FOR THIS SURVEY IS BASED ON CITY OFSAN LUIS OBISPO BENCHMARK NO. 47, BEING USG&GSE-910 AT THE EASTERLY END OF THE NORTH SIDE OF THEBRIDGE ABUTMENT OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CREEK ON PRADOROAD WEST OF S. HIGUERA STREET, ELEVATION OF 138.88'.OWNERCOVELOP HOLDINGS, LLCP.O. BOX 12910SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401REPRESENTATIVERRM DESIGN GROUP3765 S. HIGUERA STREETSAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401(805) 543-1794LAND USETHE PROPOSED LAND USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THEEXISTING C-S-SP ZONING AND APPLICABLE SPECIFICPLAN AND CIRCULATION ELEMENTS FOR (11)COMMERCIAL MIXED USE PARCELS AS A SUBDIVISIONOF (2) BP-SP PARCELS (UNDER REVIEW FOR ZONECHANGE TO C-S-SP).TITLE SHEETC1N:\1600\1622-02-RS20-600-Tank-Farm-Entitlements\Engineering\TTM\Sheet-Files\C1_Title.dwg, C1, Sep 02, 2021 3:56pm, ngwaltersSeptember 2, 2021600 TANK FARMPage 211 of 401
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^OH OH OH
OH OH OH OHPTN LOT 57 SLO SUBURBAN TRACT2/RS/551009/OR/474APN 053-421-002EXISTING FEMA FLOODZONE A, PER FIRMPANEL 06079C1332GEXISTING TOP OF BANKAND/OR EDGE OFRIPARIANEXISTING 35' ACACIACREEK SETBACKEXISTING 50' ACCESSEASEMENT TO BEABANDONEDEXISTING 20' PRIVATEUTILITY EASEMENT TO BEABANDONEDREMOVE EXISTING MATERIALSTORAGE AND ASSOCIATEDIMPROVEMENTSREMOVE EXISTINGBASE ACCESS ROADREMOVE EXISTING AC ANDCONCRETE DRIVEWAYIMPROVEMENTSREMOVE EXISTINGUNDERDRAIN AND STORMDRAINPROTECT EXISTING 18"CCFRPM SEWER(S = 0.0040)N1°20'06"E 1260.68'N87°55'14"W 449.10'N1°23'43"E 189.14'N14°00'29"W 200.10'N19°40'58"W 125.76'N8°53'28"E 445.94'N4°13'36"W 358.80'N88°36'26"W 375.24'REMOVE EXISTINGBASE ACCESS ROADUNDERGROUND EXISTINGOVERHEAD UTILITY LINESEX SSMH150.8± RIM131.3± INVREMOVE EXISTING GRAVELPARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTSREMOVE EXISTING FENCINGAND MISC STORAGEIMPROVEMENTS(TYP)REMOVE EXISTING FENCINGAND MISC STORAGEIMPROVEMENTSTANK FARM ROADPROTECT EXISTING FENCEACACIA CREEK(SECONDARY WATERWAY)SEE C9 FOR TREEINVENTORY ANDDISPOSITION(TYP)SEE C9 FOR TREEINVENTORY ANDDISPOSITION(TYP)SEE C9 FOR TREEINVENTORY ANDDISPOSITION(TYP)PTN LOT 57 SLO SUBURBAN TRACT2/RS/55APN 053-421-006N19°33'43"W 124.20'N36°15'34"W 150.03'N53°14'05"W 110.02'S79°41'29"W 12
8
.
8
2
'UNDERGROUND EXISTINGOVERHEAD UTILITY LINES ALONGPROPERTY FRONTAGELEGENDSSEXISTING 18" PUBLIC SEWER MAINWEXISTING 12" PUBLIC WATER MAINEXISTING EASEMENTN:\1600\1622-02-RS20-600-Tank-Farm-Entitlements\Engineering\TTM\Sheet-Files\C2_Existing.dwg, C2, Sep 02, 2021 3:56pm, ngwaltersSeptember 2, 20210feet801"=40'40120600 TANK FARMEXISTING MAJOR CONTOUREXISTING MINOR CONTOUREXISTING CONDITIONSC2Page 212 of 401
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^0.92 ACRESLOT 100.79 ACRESLOT 80.82 ACRESLOT 110.45 ACRESLOT 61.41 ACRESLOT 70.93 ACRESLOT 11.56 ACRESLOT 21.83 ACRESLOT 3N1°20'06"E 99.61'N88°39'54"W 156.42'N1°20'06"E 147.27'N88°39'54"W 82.44'N1°20'06"E 153.56'N55°19'18"E 88.80'N88°39'54"W 188.67'N88°39'54"W 45.37'N88°39'54"W 130.61'N1°26'06"E 149.61'N1°20'06"E 149.61'N88°39'54"W 130.35'N88°39'54"W 102.00'N88°39'54"W 181.82'N1°26'06"E 29.17'N1°23'34"E 178.34'N88°39'54"W 153.36'N1°20'06"E 28.36'N88°39'54"W 93.26'N88°39'54"W 231.83'N1°23'34"E 159.61'N73°16'16"E 13.24'N88°39'54"W 45.25'0.50 ACRESLOT 4EXISTING ACCESS EASEMENT TO BE ABANDONEDPROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION(WIDTH VARIES)PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAYDEDICATIONN1°23'43"E 189.14'N14°00'29"W 200.10'N19°40'58"W 125.76'N8°53'28"E 445.94'N4°13'36"W 358.80'N88°36'26"W 375.24'N1°20'06"E 1260.68'Δ=6°56'58"R=767.00'L=93.03'Δ=1°28'20"R=433.00'L=11.13'Δ=15°30'41"R=433.00'L=117.22'Δ=9°42'42"R=50.00'L=8.47'N87°55'14"W 449.10'Δ=20°55'56"R=169.00'L=61.74'Δ=46°15'20"R=56.00'L=45.21'Δ=4°45'22" R=101.50' L=8.43'Δ=37°43'04"R=101.00'L=66.49'N5°21'40"W 18.32'Δ=11°43'40"R=469.00'L=96.00'Δ=5°01'54"R=50.00'L=4.39'N1°20'06"E 50.51'N1°20'06"E 174.33'Δ=13°05'14"R=50.00'L=11.42'Δ=59°39'17"R=27.00'L=28.11'Δ=64°37'52"R=69.00'L=77.83'Δ=82°22'25"R=69.00'L=99.20'EXISTING ACCESS EASEMENT TO REMAINEXISTING 12' PGE EASEMENT TO REMAINTANK FARM ROADSANTA FE ROADEXISTING 35' TOP OF BANK AND/OREDGE OF RIPARIAN SETBACK1.16 ACRESLOT 50.44 ACRESLOT 9N1°20'06"E 338.00'N88°39'54"W 56.75'PROPOSED PUBLIC ACCESSEASEMENT (WIDTH VARIES)PROPOSED PUBLIC ACCESSEASEMENT (WIDTH VARIES)PROPOSED 24' EMERGENCYACCESS EASEMENTABANDON EXISTING 20' UTILITY EASEMENT10'10'48.9'36'34.2'34'33'46'27'17.5'7.5'2.8'16'16'16'16'16'16'61'49.9'5.9'23.5'16'16'18.4'32'6.8'15.8'22.9'27.2'19.4'18'18'17.5'5.8'29.9'16'42.9'28.8'46'16'16.7'16.7'PROPOSED 100-YR FLOOD LIMITS;SEE SHEET C5 FOR PROPOSEDGRADINGEXISTING 100-YR FLOOD LIMITSN88°39'54"W 13.61'N88°39'54"W 9.95'S88°39'54"E 5.00'5.9'50.9'50.9'
7.78'10'6.8'28.8'28.7'16'24.1'16'20.1'20.1'
20.2'S1°20'06"W 34.02'S1°20'06"W 99.40'S88°39'54"E 5.00'17'23.1'8.9'10'10'10'N1°26'06"E 111.00'N88°39'54"W 63.00'N:\1600\1622-02-RS20-600-Tank-Farm-Entitlements\Engineering\TTM\Sheet-Files\C3_VPM.dwg, C3, Sep 02, 2021 3:56pm, ngwaltersSeptember 2, 20210feet801"=40'40120600 TANK FARMTRACT BOUNDARYLEGENDPROPOSED PROPERTY LINEPROPOSED EASEMENT/SETBACKPROPOSED RWPRIVATE VEHICULAR ACCESS, PEDESTRIAN ACCESS,PARKING, DRAINAGE, STORM DRAIN, SEWER,RECYCLED WATER, AND WATER EASEMENTS OVERLOTS 1 THROUGH 11 EXCLUDING BUILDINGLOCATIONS.PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT (PUE) OVER LOTS 1THROUGH 11 EXCLUDING BUILDING LOCATIONS.EASEMENTS NOTEVESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAPC3Page 213 of 401
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^WWWWWWSDSDFWFWFWFWFWFWFWSDSDSDSSSSSSSSSSSSSD SDWWWWWWWWWWWFW FWFWFWFWFWFWFWFWFWFWFWFWFWFWSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
WWWWWWRWRWRWRWRWRWSSSSSSSSW W W W W
RW RW RW RW RW
W
FWFWWWSS
SS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^OH OH OH
OH OH OH OH 7+00SSSDSSBUILDING #1BUILDING #2BUILDING #3BUILDING #4BUILDING #5BUILDING #6BUILDING #7BUILDING #8BUILDING #9BUILDING #11BUILDING #12BUILDING #13BUILDING #14BUILDING #15BUILDING #16BUILDING #17BUILDING #18BUILDING #19BUILDING #20BUILDING #21BUILDING #22BUILDING #23BUILDING #24BUILDING #25BUILDING #26BUILDING #27BUILDING #10TANK FARM ROADSANTA FE ROADEXISTING FEMA FLOOD ZONE APER FIRM PANEL 06079C1332GPROPOSED BIORETENTION AREA; SEESHEET C6 FOR STORMWATER DETAILS(TYP)ACACIA CREEK35' ACACIA CREEK SETBACKPROPOSED TRASH ENCLOSURE(TYP)SSMH169.42 RIM163.42 INVSSMH174.25 RIM168.25 INVSSMH179.08 RIM173.08 INVSSMH174.69 RIM168.69 INVSSMH170.08 RIM164.08 INVSSMH164.37 RIM158.37 INVSSMH159.18 RIM153.18 INVSSMH157.41 RIM151.41 INVSSMH153.51 RIM147.51 INVCONNECT TO EXISTING18" CCFRPM SEWER MAIN(INV = 132.4±)PROPOSED SEWER LATERAL(TYP)PROPOSED WATERSERVICE AND METER(TYP)PROPOSEDPERMEABLE PAVERSPROPOSEDPERMEABLE PAVERS(TYP)8.6' (TYP)61'TYP24'TYP61'9'8'PROPOSED RW IRRIGATIONPOC, SERVICE, & METER.16' BUILDING SETBACKPROPOSED BACK OFSIDEWALK AND RIGHT OF WAYPROPOSED FIRE AND DOMESTICWATER DOUBLE CHECK ASSEMBLYPROPOSED 8"PUBLIC WATER MAINPROPOSED PUBLICRECYCLED WATER MAINR50'R50'R83'R63'R120'R75'R35'R15' (TYP)R15' (TYP)R412'R35'R47'PROPOSED TRASH ENCLOSURE(TYP)24'TYP24'TYPR46'R50'PROPOSED EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESSONLY AND REMOVABLE BOLLARDSPROPOSED EMERGENCYVEHICLE ACCESS ONLY ANDREMOVABLE BOLLARDSOVERLAND RIVER ROCKSWALE TO BASIN; SEE C4FOR GRADINGOVERLAND RIVER ROCKSWALE TO BASIN; SEE C4FOR GRADINGPROPOSED TRASH ENCLOSURE(TYP)PROPOSED FIRE AND DOMESTICWATER DOUBLE CHECK ASSEMBLYMATCH EXISTINGPUBLIC IMPROVEMENTSPROPOSED PUBLICRECYCLED WATER MAINPROPOSED 8"PUBLIC WATER MAINPROPOSED POOL AND FLATWORKPROPOSED RETAINING WALL;SEE SHEET C4 FOR GRADINGPROPOSED RETAINING WALL;SEE SHEET C4 FOR GRADINGPROPOSED RETAINING WALL;SEE SHEET C4 FOR GRADINGPROPOSED 12'MULTI-USE PATHINTERIM TURNAROUND;FUTURE INTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS BY OTHERSEXISTING ACACIA CREEK FLOWLINESSMH158.2± RIM150.20 INVSSMH149.9± RIM131.9± INVPROPOSED 100-YR FLOODLIMITSB
A4'8.6'10' x 36' COMMERCIALLOADING ZONEPROPOSEDBUILDINGSECTION BNTSSANTA FE ROAD (INTERIM)PLPROPOSED ROW12'LANE6.5'BIKE12'LANE9'PARKWAY7'CL IV BIKE5'SW15'SETBACK2'EXISTINGGRADECLPROPOSEDBUILDINGEXISTING ROWEXISTING ROW12'LANEVARIESMEDIAN12.62'EXISTING13'LANE13'LANE8'BIKE LANESECTION ANTSTANK FARM ROAD9'PARKWAY7'SW5'15'SECTION CNTSTYPICAL BIKE PATH SECTIONPLPROPOSEDBUILDINGVARIES14'BIKE LANEVARIES4'PROPOSEDRETAININGWALLACACIAFLOW LINEACACIA TOPOF BANKEXISTINGGRADE10' AC BIKE LANE WITH2' MIN CLASS II BASESHOULDERSPORCHESPER PLAN14'LANE13'LANEWESTERLYPROPERTY LINE13'LANE2'7'BIKE7'PARKWAY5'WALKSECTION BNTSSANTA FE ROAD (ULTIMATE)FUTURE IMPROVEMENTSBY OTHERS7'CL IV BIKE5'SW9'PARKWAYPLCLSWSSPROPOSED PRIVATE 8" PVC WATERLEGENDPROPOSED PRIVATE 8" PVC SEWERPROPOSED PRIVATE 12" HDPE STORM DRAINSSEXISTING 18" PUBLIC SEWER MAINWEXISTING 12" PUBLIC WATER MAINPROPOSED FIRE HYDRANTSDRWPROPOSED RECYCLED WATER MAINN:\1600\1622-02-RS20-600-Tank-Farm-Entitlements\Engineering\TTM\Sheet-Files\C4_Site Plan.dwg, C4, Sep 02, 2021 3:56pm, ngwaltersSeptember 2, 2021600 TANK FARM0feet801"=40'40120PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN1. SEE SHEET C5 FOR STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS2. INTERIM SANTA FE IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN; FUTUREIMPROVEMENTS/WIDENING BY OTHERS3. ON-SITE IMPROVEMENTS PRIVATE UNLESS NOTEDOTHERWISENOTE:DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE & METERFIRE SPRINKLER SERVICEFWC4Page 214 of 401
^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^OH OH OH
OH OH OH OH
RW
WWWWWWWSDSDFWFWFWFWFWFWFWSDSDSDSSSSSSSSSSSSSDSDWWWWWWWWWWWFWFWFWFWFWFWFWFWFWFWFWFWFWFWFWSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSWWWWWWRWRWRWRWRWRWSSSSSSSSWWWWW
RW RW RW RW RW
W
FWFWWSS^
^^^^^^^^^BUILDING #1BUILDING #2BUILDING #3BUILDING #4BUILDING #5BUILDING #6BUILDING #7BUILDING #8BUILDING #9BUILDING #11BUILDING #12BUILDING #13BUILDING #14BUILDING #15BUILDING #16BUILDING #17BUILDING #18BUILDING #19BUILDING #20BUILDING #21BUILDING #22BUILDING #23BUILDING #24BUILDING #25BUILDING #26BUILDING #27BUILDING #102%3%TYP3%TYP3%TYP3%TYP3%TYP3%TYP1%TYP1%TYP0.5%TYP0.5%TYP0.5%TYP0.5%TYP0.5%TYP0.5%TYP3.5%2%TYP2%TYP2%TYP2%TYP2%TYP2%TYP2%TYP2%TYP2%
TYP
2%
TYP2%TYP2%TYP2%TYP2%TYP2%TYP2%TYP2%3%TYPFF=177.00FF=180.00FF=174.50FF=173.00FF=171.00FF=170.00FF=165.50FF=166.00FF=170.00FF=174.00FF=163.00FF=172.50FF=172.50FF=163.00FF=163.00FF=177.50FF=180.00FF=163.00FF=160.00FF=157.00FF=157.00FF=158.00FF=155.00FF=154.00FF=154.00FF=154.00165170175160160165170175155154.36 RIM151.37 INV151.82 RIM149.20 INVBASIN BOTFG=151.0BASIN BOTFG=149.0BASIN BOTFG=156.0BASIN BOTFG=158.0BASIN BOTFG=163.0159.19 RIM153.93 INV156.99 RIM153.03 INV154.89 RIM152.20 INV160.66 RIM154.33 INV163.80 RIM156.80 INV167.45FS170.98FS175.10FS171.68FS174.58FS179.78FS177.42FSFF=179.00169.65FS150150 155160165170175180185190195200205 210215150150155160 165170175175 155155160160165170155155160155155150150155155150150155155CONSTRUCT EXPOSED ROCKCUT PER GEOLOGY REPORTRECOMMENDATIONSPROPOSED RETAINING WALLHEIGHT VARIESPROPOSED RETAINING WALLHEIGHT VARIESSEE SITE PLAN FOR BIKE PATHTYPICAL SECTIONNO PROPOSED GRADINGWITHIN EXISTING ACACIA CREEKTOP OF BANKCONNECT TO EXISTING 650TANK FARM IMPROVEMENTSPROPOSED BIORETENTIONBASIN; SEE STORMWATERCONTROL PLAN FOR DETAILS(TYP)EXISTING FEMA FLOOD ZONE APER FIRM PANEL 06079C1332GPROPOSED RETAINING WALLHEIGHT VARIES(4' MAX)164.05FS159.34FS158.06FS155.95FS153.48FS153.56FS/HPPROPOSED BASINSLOPE 3:1 MAX(TYP)PROJECT OUTLETTHRU EXISTINGOUTLET AT ACACIAHEADWALL153.18FS159.01FS159.87FS158.31FS153.42FS149.96FS151.98FSCONSTRUCTOVERLAND SWALE TOBIORETENTION BASIN(S = 0.01 FT/FT MIN)35' CREEK SETBACK154.36FSNO PROPOSED GRADINGWITHIN EXISTING ACACIA CREEKTOP OF BANK152.0TOP155.0TOP160.0TOP165.8TOP154.81 TC154.31 FS155.39 TC154.89 FS154.12 TC153.62 FS154.90 TC154.40 FS156.12 TC155.62 FS157.52 TC157.02 FS158.97 TC158.47 FS159.93 TC159.43 FS159.45 TC158.95 FS161.16 TC160.66 FS163.47 TC162.97 FS164.56 TC164.06 FS165.49 TC164.99 FS170.31 TC169.81 FS174.10 TC173.60 FS173.59FS179.61 TC179.11 FS174.57 TC174.07 FS153.46 TC152.96 FS154.50 TC154.00 FS152.97 TC152.47 FS154.39 TC153.89 FS163.40 TC162.90 FS164.81 TC164.31 FS156.02FSSEE SHEET C6 FOR WATERQUALITY BASIN161.43 TC160.93 FS160.99 TC160.49 FS161.72 TC161.22 FSPROPOSED 100-yr FLOOD LIMITSCONSTRUCT OFF-SITE AC PATHTO DAMON-GARCIACONCRETE PATHCONSTRUCT RETAININGWALL (H = 6' MAX)SECTION A-ANTSEXISTING METAVOLCANICROCKROCK CUT PER SOILSREPORTCONCRETE PEDESTRIANSIDEWALKPORCH PER ARCH PLANSPROPOSEDGARAGE FLOOR(FF PER PLAN)FIRST FINISHEDFLOORPROPOSED STEM WALLCONCRETE DRIVEWAYAPRON (3.5' TYP)6" MOUNTABLE CURBAC DRIVE AISLE PER PLANTRACT BOUNDARYPROPOSEDGARAGE FLOOR(FF PER PLAN)PORCH PER ARCH PLANSCONCRETE PEDESTRIANSIDEWALKPROPOSED RETAININGWALL (4' MAX)FENCING PER LANDSCAPEPLANSPROPOSED LANDSCAPEBUFFERAC BIKE PATH PER PLANEXISTING TOP OF BANK/EDGEOF RIPARIAN HABITAT PERPROJECT BIOLOGISTVARIESLIMITS OF PROPOSEDGRADINGSECTION B-BNTSLEGENDPROPOSED PRIVATE 12" HDPE STORM DRAINSSSEWER MAIN (SEE SITE PLAN - C4)WWATER MAIN (SEE SITE PLAN - C4)RWRECYCLED (SEE SITE PLAN - C4)SDN:\1600\1622-02-RS20-600-Tank-Farm-Entitlements\Engineering\TTM\Sheet-Files\C5_Grading.dwg, C5, Sep 02, 2021 3:57pm, ngwaltersSeptember 2, 2021600 TANK FARMPRELIMINARY GRADING PLANRAW CUT: 16,700 cu ydRAW FILL: 28,700 cu ydRAW NET: 12,000 cu yd <IMPORT>AREA OF DISTURBANCE: 14.3 acQUANTITY ESTIMATES ON THESE PLANS ARE TO BE USED FORBONDING AND PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY. IT IS THERESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ACTUALQUANTITIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTIONAPPROXIMATE EARTHWORK QUANTITIES0feet801"=40'40120C5Page 215 of 401
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^OH OH
OH OH SDSDSDSD^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ADAADAEXISTING PROPERTY LINEPRELIMINARY PROPOSEDRIGHT OF WAY DEDICATIONEXISTING TOPOF BANK35' TOP OF BANK AND EDGE OFRIPARIAN SETBACKSCM 2: PRIVATETRIB AREA: 121,100 sfC i: 0.54 (75%)V: 11,415 cfV from SCM 5: 3,279 cf SCM AREA: 2,800 sfSCM 6: PRIVATETRIB AREA: 25082 sfC i: 0.54 (75%)V: 3,015 cfSCM AREA: 1,005 sfSCM 4: PIPsTRIB AREA: 23,062 sfC i: 0.54 (75%)V: 3,171 cfSCM AREA: 1,057 sfSCM 5: PRIVATETRIB AREA: 110,268 sfC i: 0.54 (75%)V: 6647 cfSCM AREA:1,187 sfV to SCM 2: 3279 cf650 TANK FARM IMPROVEMENTS BYOTHERSACACIA CREEKACACIA CREEKSANTA FE ROADTANK FARM ROADDMA 2DMA 1DMA 5RELOCATE EXISTINGOUTLET FOR PROJECTDISCHARGE TO ACACIAPROPOSED PRIVATESTORM DRAINSCM 1: PIPsTRIB AREA: 50,500 sfC i: 0.81 (95%)V: 6,625 cfSCM AREA: 5,300 sfDMA 7SCM 7: WATER QUALITY TREATMENT ONLY; SIZED4% OF DMA 7 PER PCR RECOMMENDATIONS(4,800 sf)DMA 4EXISTINGPROPERTY LINESDSDSDSDDMA 6DMA 8DMA 9DMA 3DMA 10SCM 3: PRIVATETRIB AREA: 111,640 sfC i: 0.54 (75%)V: 12,780 cf SCM AREA: 12,780 sfSCM 8: PRIVATETRIB AREA: 11,396 sfC i: 0.54 (75%)V: 2,600 cf SCM AREA: 2,600 sfSCM 3: PRIVATETRIB AREA: 11,250 sfC i: 0.54 (75%)V: 2,600 cf SCM AREA: 2,600 sfSCM 8: PRIVATETRIB AREA: 20000 sfC i: 0.54 (75%)V: 3,305 cf SCM AREA: 3,305 sfEXISTINGPROPERTY LINEEXISTING 35' TOPOF BANK SETBACKEXISTING CREEKFLOWLINE^
^^^^4+005+006+007+008+009+00SSSDWWWRWRWRWRWRWRWRW
FWFWFWSSJT10' PROPOSED DRAINAGE AND MAINTENANCEEASEMENTN:\1600\1622-02-RS20-600-Tank-Farm-Entitlements\Engineering\TTM\Sheet-Files\C6_Stormwater.dwg, SW1, Sep 03, 2021 10:45am, ngwaltersSeptember 3, 2021600 TANK FARM0feet1201"=60' 60180DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT AREA BOUNDARYPROPOSED IMPROVEMENTSPAVING AREA/SIDEWALK: 50640 sfBUILDINGS: 133,320 sfHARDSCAPE: 38,970 sfTOTAL IMPERVIOUS = 384,460TOTAL AREA: 10.5 ACRESPROPOSED TREATMENTBIORETENTION AREAPERVIOUS PAVERSTIER 1- RUNOFF REDUCTIONxROOF DRAIN DISCONNECTxMINIMIZE IMPERVIOUS AREASTIER 2 - WATER QUALITY (85th PERCENTILE = 1.15")xON-SITE RETENTION-BASED TREATMENT AND INFILTRATIONTIER 3 - RETAIN 95TH PERCENTILE STORM EVENT (1.95")xBASINS WILL RETAIN AND INFILTRATE THE REQUIRED95TH PERCENTILE RETENTION VOLUME WHERE:VOLUME (cf) = (1.95" / 12")* C i * AC i= 0.858i 3 - 0.78i 2 + 0.774i + 0.04A = TRIBUTARY AREA (sf)TIER 4 - PEAK MANAGEMENTxPEAK MANAGEMENT FOR THE ON-SITE DEVELOPMENT ISPROVIDED IN THE RETENTION BASINS AS SHOWN.xOFF-SITE RETENTION IS PROVIDED PREVIOUSLY BY THE AVOCETAND PADRE GRADING ACTIVITIES COMPLETED IN 2019 INRESERVOIR 4 AND THE NORTH MARSH RETENTION BASIN.24"VARIESCOBBLE OR SPLASHBLOCK WHERE STORMWATER ENTERSFLATBOTTOMNO SLOPES3:1MAX GRAVEL STORAGEBIORETENTION SOIL MIXDEPTH VARIESOVERFLOW /OUTLET STRUCTURETO POINT OF DISCHARGEOR ADJACENT STORMDRAINLEGENDTYPICAL BIORETENTION AREANTSHOA MAINTAINEDWATER QUALITYTREATMENT AREAREQUIRED STORMWATER CONTROL MEASURESCONCRETE PAVERS TYP.AGGREGATE INOPENINGS, TYP.GRAVELCONCRETE EDGESOIL SUBGRADECONCRETE PAVEMENTVARIESTYPICAL PERMEABLE PAVERS AREANTSSTORMWATER CONTROL PLANC6Page 216 of 401
YIELDYIEL
D BUILDING #6BUILDING #7BUILDING #9BPROPOSED ROUNDABOUTBACK OF SIDEWALKCOLINEAR WITH PROPOSEDVPM IMPROVEMENTSR69'PROPOSED PROJECT RIGHTOF WAY DEDICATION PERVPMR50'R30'R47'PROPOSED VPM INTERIMIMPROVEMENTS; DRIVEWAYACCESS TO REMAIN AS PARTOF FUTURE ROUNDABOUT'(TYP)18'PROPOSED VPM INTERIM EDGEOF PAVEMENT7' PARKWAY18'R18.25'R28.25'14'TRANSITION TO SANTA FETYPICAL SECTION NOTSHOWNEXISTING TRACT BOUNDARYLANDSCAPEDMEDIANFUTURE SANTA FECONTINUATION ANDALIGNMENT BY OTHERSR56'
R61'WB-50 DESIGN VEHICLE(NB-LEFT TURN)WB-50 DESIGN VEHICLE(EB-RIGHT TURN)MOUNTABLE CURB ORSTRIPING MODIFICATIONSN:\1600\1622-02-RS20-600-Tank-Farm-Entitlements\Engineering\TTM\Exhibits\RB1_Santa Fe Roundabout Exhibit_072421.dwg, SHEET TITLE, Sep 02, 2021 3:28pm, ngwaltersSeptember 2, 2021600 TANK FARM0feet401"=20'2060SANTA FE ROUNDABOUT EXHIBITRB2Page 217 of 401
BUILDING #1BUILDING #2BUILDING #3BUILDING #4BUILDING #5BUILDING #6BUILDING #7BUILDING #8BUILDING #9BUILDING #11BUILDING #12BUILDING #13BUILDING #14BUILDING #15BUILDING #16BUILDING #17BUILDING #18BUILDING #19BUILDING #20BUILDING #21BUILDING #22BUILDING #23BUILDING #24BUILDING #25BUILDING #26BUILDING #27BUILDING #10^^^40822Pumper Fire TruckOverall Length 40.000ftOverall Width 8.167ftOverall Body Height 7.745ftMin Body Ground Clearance 0.656ftTrack Width 8.167ftLock-to-lock time 5.00sMax Wheel Angle 45.00°N:\1600\1622-02-RS20-600-Tank-Farm-Entitlements\Engineering\TTM\Exhibits\TR-1_Truck Turning_072721.dwg, ngw, Jul 28, 2021 9:23am, ngwaltersJuly 28, 20210feet801"=40'40120600 TANK FARM0feet401"=20'2060FIRE TRUCK TURNING EXHIBITTR1Page 218 of 401
1622-01-LP19MAY 2021600 TANK FARM ROAD600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401LENTITLEMENT PACKAGEPRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANPLANTING LEGENDIRRIGATION COMPLIANCE & DESIGN CRITERIATHE PLANT PALETTE IS COMPRISED OF SPECIES KNOWN TO THRIVE IN THE LOCAL MEDITTERAENEAN CLIMATE AND SOIL CONDITIONS. THE PROPOSED PLANT MATERIAL OUTSIDE OF AREAS ALLOCATED FOR RECREATIONAL USE WILL REQUIRE LOW TO VERY LOW WATER ONCE ESTABLISHED. THIS PLANT PALETTE COUPLED WITH THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESCRIBED BELOW HAS BEEN DESIGNED TO MEET OR EXCEED THE STATE AND LOCAL STANDARDS FOR WATER CONSERVATION BASED ON THE MODEL WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE PER SLOMC 17.70.220A WEATHER SENSING, ‘SMART CONTROLLER’ WILL BE USED TO MONITOR THE PROVISION OF IRRIGATION WATER AND MANAGE DAILY WATER CONSUMPTION TO THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH HYDROZONE. ALL TREES, SHRUBS, AND GROUNDCOVER AREAS WILL BE IRRIGATED ON SEPARATE HYDROZONES SO THAT ONCE ESTABLISHED, WATER CAN BE REGULATED IN A MORE EFFICIENT MANNER. TREES WILL BE IRRIGATED BY BUBBLERS. ALL ORNAMENTAL PLANTING WILL RECEIVE DRIP IRRIGATION OR OTHER HIGHLY EFFICIENT IRRIGATION. ALL ABOVE GROUND UTILITIES SHALL BE SCREENED WITH VEGETATION.SUCH AS:ACER MACROPHYLLUM BIGLEAF MAPLEGLEDITSIA TIACANTHOS INERMIS ‘SHADE MASTER’ THORNLESS LOCUSTGINGKO BILOBA ‘AUTUMN GOLD’ GINGKO KOELREUTERIA BIPINNATA CHINESE FLAME TREELOPHOSTEMON CONFERTUS BRISBANE BOXLIRIODENRON TULIPIFERA TULIP TREECERCIDIUM PARKINSONIA ‘DESERT MUSEUM’ PALO VERDE TREEPISTACHIA CHINENSIS CHINESE PISTACHEPLATANUS X ACERIFLOIA (HISPANICA) LONDON PLANE TREEQUERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST LIVE OAKSHADE & STREET TREES (15 GAL - 24” BOX) QTY 132SHRUBS, GRASSES, AND GROUNDCOVERS (1, 5, 15 GAL) QTY 56,835 SFSUCH AS:ARBUTUS X ‘MARINA’ MARINA ARBUTUSARCHONTOPHOENIX CUNNINGHAMIANA KING PALMBAUHINIA BLAKEANA HONG KONG ORCHID TREEBRACHYCHITON SPP. PINK BOTTLE TREEBRAHEA EDULIS GUADALUPE PALMCASSIA LEPTOPHYLLA GOLDEN MEDALLION TREECERCIS X ‘HEARTS OF GOLD’ GOLDEN REDBUDCITRUS SPP. CITRUSHYMENOSPORUM FLAVUM SWEETSHADELAGERSTROEMIA SPP. CRAPE MYRTLEOLEA EUROPEA ‘SWAN HILL’ - STERILE FRUITLESS OLIVEPYRUS CALLERYANA FLOWERING PEARACCENT TREES (15 GAL) QTY 45 SUCH AS:CHORISIA SPECIOSA (IEBA) FLOSS SILK TREEJACARANDA MIMOSIFOLIA JACARANDA MULTI-TRUNKPLATANUS RACEMOSA MULTI-TRUNK CALIFRONIA SYCAMOREQUERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST LIVE OAKSPECIMEN TREES (24-36” BOX) QTY 10TOTAL ON-SITE LANDSCAPE AREA: 56, 835 SFESTIMATED TOTAL WATER USE: 1,543,411.3 GAL / YR.MAXIMUM APPLIED WATER ALLOWANCE: 1,543,411.3 GAL / 0 YR.AREAS WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE THAT ARE TO BE USED FOR RECREATIONAL PURPOSES AND ALL AREAS THAT WILL BE IRRIGATED WITH RECLAIMED WATER ARE CLASSIFIED AS SPECIAL LANDSCAPE AREAS. SPECIAL LANDSCAPE AREAS HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED INTO THE FOLLOWING CALCULATIONS AND ARE REFLECTED IN THE MAXIMUM APPLIED WATER ALLOWANCE PER CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS AND THE MODEL WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE. SEE EXISTING TREE DISPOSITION TABLE SHEET A32 FOR SPECIES, SIZE, QUANTITY AND LOCATION OF (E) TREES TO REMAIN, PROTECT, AND TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL.ACACIA COGNATA `COUSIN ITT` RIVER WATTLEADENANTHOS SERICEUS COASTAL WOOLLYBUSHAEONIUM CANARIENSE AEONIUMAGAVE ATTENUATA `NOVA` BLUE CLONEAGAVE DESMETTIANA `VARIEGATA` VARIEGATED AGAVEAGAVE VILMORINIANA OCTOPUS AGAVEAGAVE X `BLUE GLOW` BLUE GLOW AGAVEALOE POLYPHYLLA SPIRAL ALOEALOE STRIATA CORAL ALOEALYOGYNE HUEGELII `SANTA CRUZ` BLUE HIBISCUSARCTOSTAPHYLOS SPP. MANZANITABACCHARIS PILULARIS `PIGEON POINT` COYOTE BRUSHBULBINE FRUTESCENS STALKED BULBINECAESALPINIA SPP. YELLOW/RED BIRD OF PARADISECAREX PRAEGRACILIS CALIFORNIA FIELD SEDGECAREX TUMULICOLA BERKELEY SEDGECEANOTHUS GRISEUS HORIZONTALIS `YANKEE POINT` CALIFORNIA LILACCERCIS CANADENSIS `RISING SUN` RISING SUN REDBUDCHONDROPETALUM TECTORUM CAPE RUSHCISTUS PULVERULENTUS `SUNSET` ROCKROSECLYTOSTOMA CALLISTEGIOIDES VIOLET TRUMPET VINECOTINUS COGGYGRIA `ROYAL PURPLE` ROYAL PURPLE SMOKE TREEDIANELLA CAERULEA `CASSA BLUE` CASSA BLUE FLAX LILYDIETES BICOLOR FORTNIGHT LILYECHEVERIA X `AFTERGLOW` AFTERGLOW ECHEVERIAFURCRAEA FOETIDA `MEDIOPICTA` MAURITIUS HEMPHARDENBERGIA VIOLACEA `HAPPY WANDERER` LILAC VINEHESPERALOE PARVIFLORA RED YUCCAHETEROMELES ARBUTIFOLIA TOYONHEUCHERA SANGUINEA CORAL BELLSJUNCUS EFFUSUS `OCCIDENTAL BLUE` OCCIDENTAL BLUE RUSHKNIPHOFIA UVARIA `ECHO MANGO`REBLOOMING TORCHLILYLAVANDULA X INTERMEDIA `PROVENCE` PROVENCE LAVENDRTLEUCADENDRON SPP. CONEBUSHLEUCOSPERMUM CORDIFOLIUM NODDING PINCUSHIONLEYMUS CONDENSATUS `CANYON PRINCE` NATIVE BLUE RYELOMANDRA SPP. MAT RUSHMIMULUS AURANTIACUS STICKY MONKEY FLOWERMUHLENBERGIA DUBIA PINE MUHLYMUHLENBERGIA RIGENS DEER GRASSNEPETA X FAASSENII `WALKERS LOW` WALKERS LOW CATMINTOLEA EUROPAEA `LITTLE OLLIE` TM LITTLE OLLIE OLIVEPENNISETUM SPATHIOLATUM RYE PUFFSPENSTEMON X `FIREBIRD` FIREBIRD BEARD TONGUEPHLOMIS FRUTICOSA JERUSALEM SAGEPHORMIUM X `SEA JADE` NEW ZEALAND FLAXPITTOSPORUM TENUIFOLIUM `SILVER SHEEN` SILVER SHEEN TAWHIWHIPODOCARPUS X `ICEE BLUE` ICEE BLUE PODOCARPUSRHUS INTEGRIFOLIA LEMONADE BERRYRIBES SANGUINEUM RED FLOWERING CURRANTRIBES SPECIOSUM FUCHSIA FLOWERING GOOSEBERRYSALVIA GREGGII `RASBERRY DELIGHT` AUTUMN SAGESALVIA SPATHACEA HUMMINGBIRD SAGESALVIA X `POZO BLUE` POZO BLUE SAGESENECIO MANDRALISCAE BLUE FINGERSESLERIA AUTUMNALIS AUTUMN MOOR GRASSSTRELITZIA NICOLAI GIANT BIRD OF PARADISEVERBENA BONARIENSIS PURPLETOP VERVAINVERBENA LILACINA `DE LA MINA` LILAC VERBENAVERBENA X `BALENDAKLE` TM ENDURASCAPE PURPLE VERBENAVITIS CALIFORNICA CALIFORNIA WILD GRAPEINDICATES SPECIES IS SUITABLE USE IN BIORETENTION AREASPROPOSED STREET TREES PER CITY OF SLO STREET TREE MASTER PLAN(PLATANUS X ACERIFOLIA/HISPANICA) ************June 7, 2021600 TANK FARMSTORMWATER CONTROL PLANC6June 7, 2021600 TANK FARMSTORMWATER CONTROL PLANC6PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN0’ 80’40’20’ 75’0’160’80’40’ 320’SCALES: 1” = 80’- 0” (12”X18” SHEET) 1”=40’-0” (24”X36” SHEET)NORTHC7SEPTEMBER 2021ACACIA CREEKSANTA FE ROADTANK FARM ROADPLANTING LEGENDIRRIGATION COMPLIANCE & DESIGN CRITERIATHE PLANT PALETTE IS COMPRISED OF SPECIES KNOWN TO THRIVE IN THE LOCAL MEDITTERAENEAN CLIMATE AND SOIL CONDITIONS. THE PROPOSED PLANT MATERIAL OUTSIDE OF AREAS ALLOCATED FOR RECREATIONAL USE WILL REQUIRE LOW TO VERY LOW WATER ONCE ESTABLISHED. THIS PLANT PALETTE COUPLED WITH THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESCRIBED BELOW HAS BEEN DESIGNED TO MEET OR EXCEED THE STATE AND LOCAL STANDARDS FOR WATER CONSERVATION BASED ON THE MODEL WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE PER SLOMC 17.70.220A WEATHER SENSING, ‘SMART CONTROLLER’ WILL BE USED TO MONITOR THE PROVISION OF IRRIGATION WATER AND MANAGE DAILY WATER CONSUMPTION TO THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH HYDROZONE. ALL TREES, SHRUBS, AND GROUNDCOVER AREAS WILL BE IRRIGATED ON SEPARATE HYDROZONES SO THAT ONCE ESTABLISHED, WATER CAN BE REGULATED IN A MORE EFFICIENT MANNER. TREES WILL BE IRRIGATED BY BUBBLERS. ALL ORNAMENTAL PLANTING WILL RECEIVE DRIP IRRIGATION OR OTHER HIGHLY EFFICIENT IRRIGATION. ALL ABOVE GROUND UTILITIES SHALL BE SCREENED WITH VEGETATION.SUCH AS:ACER MACROPHYLLUM BIGLEAF MAPLEALNUS RHOMBIFOLIA WHITE ALDERGLEDITSIA TIACANTHOS INERMIS ‘SHADE MASTER’ THORNLESS LOCUSTGINGKO BILOBA ‘AUTUMN GOLD’ GINGKO KOELREUTERIA BIPINNATA CHINESE FLAME TREELOPHOSTEMON CONFERTUS BRISBANE BOXLIRIODENRON TULIPIFERA TULIP TREECERCIDIUM PARKINSONIA ‘DESERT MUSEUM’ PALO VERDE TREEPISTACHIA CHINENSIS CHINESE PISTACHEPLATANUS X ACERIFLOIA (HISPANICA) LONDON PLANE TREEQUERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST LIVE OAK QUERCUS TOMENTELLA ISLAND OAKSHADE & STREET TREES (15 GAL - 24” BOX) QTY 161SHRUBS, GRASSES, AND GROUNDCOVERS (1, 5, 15 GAL) QTY 56,835 SFSUCH AS:ARBUTUS X ‘MARINA’ MARINA ARBUTUSARCHONTOPHOENIX CUNNINGHAMIANA KING PALMBAUHINIA BLAKEANA HONG KONG ORCHID TREEBRACHYCHITON SPP. PINK BOTTLE TREEBRAHEA EDULIS GUADALUPE PALMCASSIA LEPTOPHYLLA GOLDEN MEDALLION TREECERCIS X ‘HEARTS OF GOLD’ GOLDEN REDBUDHYMENOSPORUM FLAVUM SWEETSHADELAGERSTROEMIA SPP. CRAPE MYRTLEMYRICA CALIFORNICA PACIFIC WAX MYRTLEOLEA EUROPEA ‘SWAN HILL’ - STERILE FRUITLESS OLIVEPYRUS CALLERYANA FLOWERING PEARACCENT TREES (15 GAL) QTY 65 SUCH AS:CHORISIA SPECIOSA (CIEBA) FLOSS SILK TREEJACARANDA MIMOSIFOLIA JACARANDA MULTI-TRUNKPLATANUS RACEMOSA MULTI-TRUNK CALIFRONIA SYCAMOREQUERCUS AGRIFOLIA MULTI-TRUNK COAST LIVE OAKSPECIMEN TREES (24-36” BOX) QTY 10TOTAL ON-SITE LANDSCAPE AREA: 56, 835 SFESTIMATED TOTAL WATER USE: 1,543,411.3 GAL / YR.MAXIMUM APPLIED WATER ALLOWANCE: 1,543,411.3 GAL / 0 YR.AREAS WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE THAT ARE TO BE USED FOR RECREATIONAL PURPOSES AND ALL AREAS THAT WILL BE IRRIGATED WITH RECLAIMED WATER ARE CLASSIFIED AS SPECIAL LANDSCAPE AREAS. SPECIAL LANDSCAPE AREAS HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED INTO THE FOLLOWING CALCULATIONS AND ARE REFLECTED IN THE MAXIMUM APPLIED WATER ALLOWANCE PER CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS AND THE MODEL WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE. TOTAL TREES TO BE PLANTED ON THE PROJECT SITE = 236SEE EXISTING TREE DISPOSITION TABLE SHEET A40 FOR SPECIES, SIZE, QUANTITY AND LOCATION OF (E) TREES TO REMAIN, PROTECT, AND TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL.ACACIA COGNATA `COUSIN ITT` RIVER WATTLEADENANTHOS SERICEUS COASTAL WOOLLYBUSHAEONIUM CANARIENSE AEONIUMAGAVE ATTENUATA `NOVA` BLUE CLONEAGAVE DESMETTIANA `VARIEGATA` VARIEGATED AGAVEAGAVE VILMORINIANA OCTOPUS AGAVEAGAVE X `BLUE GLOW` BLUE GLOW AGAVEALOE POLYPHYLLA SPIRAL ALOEALOE STRIATA CORAL ALOEALYOGYNE HUEGELII `SANTA CRUZ` BLUE HIBISCUSARCTOSTAPHYLOS SPP. MANZANITABACCHARIS PILULARIS `PIGEON POINT` COYOTE BRUSHBULBINE FRUTESCENS STALKED BULBINECAESALPINIA SPP. YELLOW/RED BIRD OF PARADISECAREX PRAEGRACILIS CALIFORNIA FIELD SEDGECAREX TUMULICOLA BERKELEY SEDGECEANOTHUS GRISEUS HORIZONTALIS `YANKEE POINT` CALIFORNIA LILACCERCIS CANADENSIS `RISING SUN` RISING SUN REDBUDCHONDROPETALUM TECTORUM CAPE RUSHCISTUS PULVERULENTUS `SUNSET` ROCKROSECLYTOSTOMA CALLISTEGIOIDES VIOLET TRUMPET VINECOTINUS COGGYGRIA `ROYAL PURPLE` ROYAL PURPLE SMOKE TREEDIANELLA CAERULEA `CASSA BLUE` CASSA BLUE FLAX LILYDIETES BICOLOR FORTNIGHT LILYECHEVERIA X `AFTERGLOW` AFTERGLOW ECHEVERIAFURCRAEA FOETIDA `MEDIOPICTA` MAURITIUS HEMPHARDENBERGIA VIOLACEA `HAPPY WANDERER` LILAC VINEHESPERALOE PARVIFLORA RED YUCCAHETEROMELES ARBUTIFOLIA TOYONHEUCHERA SANGUINEA CORAL BELLSJUNCUS EFFUSUS `OCCIDENTAL BLUE` OCCIDENTAL BLUE RUSHKNIPHOFIA UVARIA `ECHO MANGO`REBLOOMING TORCHLILYLAVANDULA X INTERMEDIA `PROVENCE` PROVENCE LAVENDRTLEUCADENDRON SPP. CONEBUSHLEUCOSPERMUM CORDIFOLIUM NODDING PINCUSHIONLEYMUS CONDENSATUS `CANYON PRINCE` NATIVE BLUE RYELOMANDRA SPP. MAT RUSHMIMULUS AURANTIACUS STICKY MONKEY FLOWERMUHLENBERGIA DUBIA PINE MUHLYMUHLENBERGIA RIGENS DEER GRASSNEPETA X FAASSENII `WALKERS LOW` WALKERS LOW CATMINTOLEA EUROPAEA `LITTLE OLLIE` TM LITTLE OLLIE OLIVEPENNISETUM SPATHIOLATUM RYE PUFFSPENSTEMON X `FIREBIRD` FIREBIRD BEARD TONGUEPHLOMIS FRUTICOSA JERUSALEM SAGEPHORMIUM X `SEA JADE` NEW ZEALAND FLAXPITTOSPORUM TENUIFOLIUM `SILVER SHEEN` SILVER SHEEN TAWHIWHIPODOCARPUS X `ICEE BLUE` ICEE BLUE PODOCARPUSRHUS INTEGRIFOLIA LEMONADE BERRYRIBES SANGUINEUM RED FLOWERING CURRANTRIBES SPECIOSUMFUCHSIA FLOWERING GOOSEBERRYSALVIA GREGGII `RASBERRY DELIGHT` AUTUMN SAGESALVIA SPATHACEA HUMMINGBIRD SAGESALVIA X `POZO BLUE` POZO BLUE SAGESENECIO MANDRALISCAE BLUE FINGERSESLERIA AUTUMNALIS AUTUMN MOOR GRASSSTRELITZIA NICOLAI GIANT BIRD OF PARADISEVERBENA BONARIENSIS PURPLETOP VERVAINVERBENA LILACINA `DE LA MINA` LILAC VERBENAVERBENA X `BALENDAKLE` TM ENDURASCAPE PURPLE VERBENAVITIS CALIFORNICA CALIFORNIA WILD GRAPEINDICATES SPECIES IS ALSO SUITABLE USE IN BIORETENTION AREASINDICATES SPECIES IS ALSO SUITABLE FOR USE IN ACACIA CREEK BUFFERPROPOSED STREET TREES PER CITY OF SLO STREET TREE MASTER PLAN*************PLNORTH0’ 80’40’20’ 75’0’160’80’40’ 320’SCALES: 1” = 80’- 0” (12”X18” SHEET) 1”=40’-0” (24”X36” SHEET)********************Page 219 of 401
7677717470696872737567434241403938373635343332313029282726 (DEAD)25242322212019188517161514131211109876 (DEAD)5432184818283798078TANK FARM RDEXISTING TREEDRIPLINE, TYPICAL.EXISTING TREE,TYPICALTOP OF BANK PERBIOLOGICAL RESOURCESASSESSMENT BY KEVINMERK ASSOCIATES, LLC,DATED 8-14-20, TYPICAL600 TANK FARM ROADAPN: 053-421-001,053-421-006PROPERTYLINE, TYPICAL650 TANK FARM ROADAPN: 053-421-005ACACIA CR
E
E
K
ACACIA CREEK
ACACI
A
C
R
E
E
K
TREE TAGNUMBER, TYPICALEXISTING TREEAPPROXIMATETRUNK LOCATION,TYPICAL OF 10SCALE: 1" = 80'1.ALL EXISTING TREE RELATED INFORMATION PER ARBORIST REPORT BY RRM DESIGNGROUP, DATED 06/09/2021.2. PROPOSED SITE PLAN INCLUDES REPLACEMENT TREE QUANTITIES EXCEEDING A 1:1MITIGATION RATIO TO THE TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL.3. ALL TREES LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT BIOLOGIST DESIGNATED RIPARIANAREAS DEFINED IN THE BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT BY KEVIN MERKASSOCIATES, DATED NOVEMBER 4, 2020, ARE TO REMAIN.NOTESEXISTING SITE PLANTree TagBotanical Name Common NameDiameter at BreastHeight (in.)Approx. Dripline ØDisposition1Eucalyptus globulusblue gum98.5 45' Remove2Eucalyptus globulusblue gum72.5 50' Remove3Eucalyptus globulusblue gum33.5 20' Remove4Eucalyptus globulusblue gum53.5 35' Remove5Eucalyptus globulusblue gum115.5 50' RemoveTREE TAG 6 NOT USED7Eucalyptus globulusblue gum71.0 60' Protect8Eucalyptus globulusblue gum112.5 55' Protect9Eucalyptus globulusblue gum65.5 40' Protect10Eucalyptus globulusblue gum60.5 60' Remove11Eucalyptus globulusblue gum39.5 50' Protect12Eucalyptus globulusblue gum54.0 20' Protect13Eucalyptus globulusblue gum60.055' Protect14Eucalyptus globulusblue gum33.0 40' Protect15Eucalyptus globulusblue gum58.0 60' Protect16Eucalyptus globulusblue gum55.0 60' Protect17Eucalyptus globulusblue gum64.0 50' Remove18Eucalyptus globulusblue gum49.5 30' Protect19Eucalyptus globulusblue gum52.0 30' Remove20Eucalyptus globulusblue gum52.0 30' Remove21Eucalyptus globulusblue gum71.5 30' Remove22Eucalyptus globulusblue gum38.5 20' Remove23Eucalyptus globulusblue gum38.5 20' Remove24Eucalyptus globulusblue gum50.0 20' Remove25Eucalyptus globulusblue gum62.0 20' RemoveTREE TAG 26 NOT USED27Eucalyptus globulusblue gum50.0 20' Remove28Eucalyptus globulusblue gum49.5 20' Remove29Eucalyptus globulusblue gum30.5 40' Remove30Eucalyptus globulusblue gum48.5 20' Remove31Eucalyptus globulusblue gum53.0 20' Remove32Eucalyptus globulusblue gum26.0 20' Remove33Eucalyptus globulusblue gum32.0 20' Remove34Eucalyptus globulusblue gum22.5 20'Remove35Eucalyptus globulusblue gum16.0 20' Remove36Eucalyptus globulusblue gum17.5 20' Remove37Eucalyptus globulusblue gum80.5 60' Remove38Eucalyptus globulusblue gum70.0 60' Remove39Eucalyptus globulusblue gum53.0 60' Remove40Eucalyptus globulusblue gum44.0 60' Remove41Eucalyptus globulusblue gum61.0 60' Remove42Eucalyptus globulusblue gum82.0 60' Remove43Eucalyptus globulusblue gum42.0 25' RemoveTREE TAGS 44-66 NOT USEDExisting Tree InventoryPrepared By: Jake Minnick, ISA Certified Arborist #WE-11830ADBH Measurement Height: 54"Date of Evaluation: 06/01/202167Eucalyptus globulusblue gum55.5 45' Protect68Schinus molleCalifornia pepper49.5 30' Remove69Schinus molleCalifornia pepper27.0 20' Remove70Schinus molleCalifornia pepper21.5 30' Remove71Schinus molleCalifornia pepper54.0 20'Remove72Schinus molleCalifornia pepper69.0 30' Remove73Schinus molleCalifornia pepper67.0 35' Remove74Schinus molleCalifornia pepper48.5 25' Remove75Schinus molleCalifornia pepper3.0 3' Remove76Schinus molleCalifornia pepper48.5 25' Remove77Schinus molleCalifornia pepper53.5 25' Remove78Eucalyptus globulusblue gum35.5 30' Remove79Eucalyptus globulusblue gum20.0 20' Remove80Eucalyptus globulusblue gum7.5 10' Remove81Eucalyptus globulusblue gum0.0 6' Remove82Eucalyptus globulusblue gum5.0 5' Remove83Eucalyptus globulusblue gum11.0 15' Remove84Eucalyptus globulusblue gum54.0 25' Protect85Eucalyptus globulusblue gum47.530'ProtectExisting Tree Inventory ContinuedN:\1600\1622-02-RS20-600-Tank-Farm-Entitlements\Xrefs\XLT-1622-02-RS20.dwg, TREE MAP 24x36, Jun 09, 2021 3:32pm, jrminnickJune 9, 2021600 TANK FARMTREE PLANC87677717470696872737567434241403938373635343332313029282725242322212019188517161514131211109875432184818283798078TANK FARM RDEXISTING TREEDRIPLINE, TYPICAL.TOP OF BANK PERBIOLOGICAL RESOURCESASSESSMENT BY KEVINMERK ASSOCIATES, LLC,DATED 8-14-20, TYPICAL600 TANK FARM ROADAPN: 053-421-001,053-421-006PROPERTYLINE, TYPICAL650 TANK FARM ROADAPN: 053-421-005ACACIA CR
E
E
K
ACACIA CREEK
ACACI
A
C
R
E
E
KSCALE: 1" = 80'1.TREE INVENTORY, LOCATIONS, AND TAG NUMBERS PER ARBORIST REPORTPREPARED BY RRM DESIGN GROUP, DATED 08/06/2021.2. ALL TREES LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT BIOLOGIST DESIGNATEDRIPARIAN AREAS DEFINED IN THE BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT BYKEVIN MERK ASSOCIATES, DATED NOVEMBER 4, 2020, ARE TO REMAIN.3. NESTING RAPTORS ARE KNOWN TO INHABIT THE STAND OF BLUE GUMEUCALYPTUS LOCATED ALONG ACACIA CREEK. PLEASE CONSULT WITHTHE PROJECT BIOLOGIST PRIOR TO ANY TREE MAINTENANCE ORREMOVAL OPERATIONS.4. SEE SHEET A39 IN THE ENTITLEMENT DRAWING PACKAGE AND/OR C7 OFTHE VESTING TENTATIVE MAP DRAWING PACKAGE FOR SPECIES,LOCATION, AND SIZE OF PROPOSED TREE PLANTINGS.NOTESEXISTING SITE PLANTree TagBotanical Name Common NameDiameter at BreastHeight (in.)Approx. Dripline ØDisposition1(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'blue gum98.5 45'2blue gum72.5 50'3blue gum33.5 20' Remove4blue gum53.5 35'5(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum115.5 50'TREE TAG 6 NOT USED7(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum71.0 60' Protect8blue gum112.5 55' Protect9(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum65.5 40' Protect10(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum60.5 60'11(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum39.5 50' Protect12blue gum54.0 20' Protect13blue gum60.055' Protect14(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum33.0 40' Protect15(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum58.0 60' Protect16(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum55.0 60' Protect17blue gum64.0 50'18blue gum49.5 30' Protect19blue gum52.0 30'20blue gum52.0 30'21blue gum71.5 30'22blue gum38.5 20' Remove23blue gum38.5 20'24blue gum50.0 20' Remove25blue gum62.0 20'TREE TAG 26 NOT USED27blue gum50.0 20'28blue gum49.5 20' Remove29blue gum30.5 40'30blue gum48.5 20' Remove31blue gum53.0 20'32blue gum26.0 20' Remove33blue gum32.0 20'34blue gum22.5 20'Remove35blue gum16.0 20' Remove36blue gum17.5 20' Remove37(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum80.5 60'38(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum70.0 60'39(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum53.0 60'40(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum44.0 60'41(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum61.0 60'42(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum82.0 60'43(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum42.0 25'TREE TAGS 44-66 NOT USEDExisting Tree InventoryPrepared By: Jake Minnick, PLA, ISA Certified Arborist #WE-11830ADBH Measurement Height: 54"Date of Evaluation: 06/01/2021686FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper49.5 30' Remove696FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper27.0 20' Remove706FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper21.5 30' Remove716FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper54.0 20' Remove726FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper69.0 30' Remove736FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper67.035' Remove746FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper48.5 25' Remove756FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper3.0 3' Remove766FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper48.5 25' Remove776FKLQXVPROOHCalifornia pepper53.5 25' Remove78(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum35.5 30'79(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum20.0 20' Remove80(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum7.5 10' Remove81(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum8.5 6' Remove82(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum5.0 5' Remove83(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum11.0 15' Remove84(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum54.0 25' Protect85blue gum47.5 30' ProtectExisting Tree Inventory ContinuedINDICATES AN EXISTING TREE TO REMAININDICATES AN EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVEDTREE TAG NUMBERLEGENDQUANTITY60342691 MIN.3.5:1 MIN.TREE DISPOSITION TABLEEXISTINGPROTECTTOTAL REMOVALSPROPOSEDPROPOSED MITIGATION RATIO74TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL ARE IN POOR HEALTH, ARE OVERCROWDED, EXHIBIT STRUCTURAL DEFECTS, ORCONFLICT WITH PROPOSED ONSITE IMPROVEMENTS, SUCH AS BUILDING LOCATIONS, A STORMWATER BASIN, A MULTI-USEPATH, AND ASSOCIATED GRADING. THESE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ENCROACH INTO THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE (CRZ)OF TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL. ALL TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL ARE RECOGNIZED AS INVASIVE SPECIES BYTHE CALIFORNIA INVASIVE PLANTS COUNCIL (CAL-IPC), AND EACH SPECIES HAS NATURALIZED ONSITE AND SPREAD TOOFFSITE LOCATIONS NEARBY.TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL ONSITE SHOULD BE REMOVED, AND THEIR STUMPS GROUND DOWN TO A DEPTH OF 24".SEVERAL TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL ARE LOCATED OFFSITE, ADJACENT TO THE WESTERN ACACIA CREEK TOP OFBANK BOUNDARY. THESE TREES SHOULD BE CUT FLUSH NEAR THE TOP OF THE ROOT COLLAR AND THE STUMPS AND ROOTSLEFT IN PLACE TO PROVIDE INTERIM STABILIZATION OF THE CREEK BANKS WHILE SUITABLE REPLACEMENT RIPARIAN SPECIESESTABLISH. THE PROJECT ARBORIST WILL FLAG TREES WITH STUMPS AND ROOTS THAT ARE TO REMAIN PRIOR TO THEINITIATION ANY TREE WORK.OFFSITE TREES PROPOSED TO REMAIN ALONG ACACIA CREEK SHOULD BE PRUNED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THEPROJECT ARBORIST. IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT ALL TREES TO REMAIN CAN BE PRUNED TO ACCOMMODATE THEPROPOSED PROJECT. IN GENERAL, TREES TO REMAIN HAVE NOT BEEN MAINTAINED IN MANY YEARS. MANY HAVE LARGEAMOUNTS OF DEAD WOOD THROUGHOUT THE CROWN, AND SEVERAL HAVE UNBALANCED CROWNS. MOST WILLREQUIRE A CROWN CLEANING TO REDUCE RISK ASSOCIATED WITH DEAD LIMB DROP AND SEVERAL WILL REQUIRE ACROWN REDUCTION TO ENSURE A BALANCED CROWN.A TREE REPLACEMENT PLAN IS PROPOSED FOR BOTH ONSITE AND OFFSITE TREE REMOVALS AT A MINIMUM 3.5:1REPLACEMENT RATIO. THIS EXCEEDS THE REQUIRED 1:1 REPLACEMENT RATIO SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 12.24 TREEREGULATIONS OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE BY 3.5X. ONSITE REPLACEMENT TREE SPECIES ARE PROPOSEDAS A MIXTURE OF NATIVE AND NON-NATIVE SELECTIONS BASED ON THEIR PROVEN SUCCESS UNDER LOCAL CLIMATICAND SOIL CONDITIONS.PRUNING, REMOVAL, AND REPLACEMENT PLANProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectRemoveProtectProtectProtectRemoveProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectProtectTree TagBotanical Name Common NameDiameter at BreastHeight (in.)Approx. Dripline ØDisposition67(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXVblue gum55.5 45' ProtectONSITE REMOVALSOFFSITE REMOVALS1610(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'(XFDO\SWXVJOREXOXV'Compacta'SEPTEMBER 2021Page 220 of 401
N:\1600\1622-02-RS20-600-Tank-Farm-Entitlements\Engineering\TTM\Sheet-Files\CA_Floor Plans.dwg, A1, Sep 02, 2021 3:57pm, ngwaltersSeptember 2, 2021600 TANK FARMA1BUILDING SECTIONSPage 221 of 401
N:\1600\1622-02-RS20-600-Tank-Farm-Entitlements\Engineering\TTM\Sheet-Files\CA_Floor Plans.dwg, A2, Sep 02, 2021 3:57pm, ngwaltersSeptember 2, 2021600 TANK FARMA2FLOOR PLANSPage 222 of 401
N:\1600\1622-02-RS20-600-Tank-Farm-Entitlements\Engineering\TTM\Sheet-Files\CA_Floor Plans.dwg, A3, Sep 02, 2021 3:57pm, ngwaltersSeptember 2, 2021600 TANK FARMA3FLOOR PLANSPage 223 of 401
N:\1600\1622-02-RS20-600-Tank-Farm-Entitlements\Engineering\TTM\Sheet-Files\CA_Floor Plans.dwg, A4, Sep 02, 2021 3:57pm, ngwaltersSeptember 2, 2021600 TANK FARMA4FLOOR PLANSPage 224 of 401
N:\1600\1622-02-RS20-600-Tank-Farm-Entitlements\Engineering\TTM\Sheet-Files\CA_Floor Plans.dwg, A5, Sep 02, 2021 3:57pm, ngwaltersSeptember 2, 2021600 TANK FARMA5FLOOR PLANSPage 225 of 401
N:\1600\1622-02-RS20-600-Tank-Farm-Entitlements\Engineering\TTM\Sheet-Files\CA_Floor Plans.dwg, A6, Sep 02, 2021 3:57pm, ngwaltersSeptember 2, 2021600 TANK FARMA6FLOOR PLANSPage 226 of 401
N:\1600\1622-02-RS20-600-Tank-Farm-Entitlements\Engineering\TTM\Sheet-Files\CA_Floor Plans.dwg, A7, Sep 02, 2021 3:57pm, ngwaltersSeptember 2, 2021600 TANK FARMA7FLOOR PLANSPage 227 of 401
FLOOR PLANSA8N:\1600\1622-02-RS20-600-Tank-Farm-Entitlements\Engineering\TTM\Sheet-Files\CA_Floor Plans.dwg, A8, Sep 02, 2021 3:57pm, ngwaltersSeptember 2, 2021600 TANK FARMPage 228 of 401
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 10, 2021
TO: Planning Commission
BY: John Rickenbach, Contract Planner
FROM: Tyler Corey, Deputy Director
SUBJECT: Item #1 ARCH-0406-2021; SBDV-0407-2021; GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-
0407-2020; EID-0608-2020 (600 Tank Farm Road) – A summary and
evaluation of the comments from the Council Initiation and Conceptual
Review.
DISCUSSION
On April 21, 2020 the City Council provided the following direction to assist staff with the
processing of the application for the project:
• Proceed the processing of the Project through the entitlement process;
• Authorize the issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the preparation of an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the project and related entitlements;
• Authorize the City Manager to enter into a consultant services agreement with the
consultant that best responds to the RFP in terms of qualifications, cost, and
approach, that is funded (consultant and staff costs) solely by the Applicant;
• Include requested changes by the Applicant;
• Staff to work toward a Development Agreement or other enforceable mechanism,
with the applicant to accomplish the infrastructure scope, the local’s preference
and other areas as determined by staff; and
• Include early feedback from the Active Transportation Committee (ATC) and
Planning Commission (PC) for the conceptual review and scoping.
Based on that direction, City staff began processing the application, and initiated an RFP
process to prepare an EIR for the project, ultimately selecting Rincon Consultants in a
competitive bid process. Staff also began discussions with the applicant toward a
possible Development Agreement, later determining a more effective mechanism to
achieve City goals would be through project conditions that included various public
Page 229 of 401
600 Tank Farm - ARCH-0406-2021, SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019, SPEC-0407-2020 & EID-0608-2020
Memorandum: Council Initiation and Conceptual Review Comments Summary
Page 2
infrastructure to be built by the applicant where possible. The City is not proposing a
development agreement because: 1) the developer currently intends to start construction
soon and does not need a vested right that would last longer than the life of the tentative
map (16.12.050.A); and 2) staff did not identify any specific needed consideration that
was non-nexus based and therefore could use a combination o f project design, conditions
of approval, and mitigation measures to secure the City’s desired public benefits. As
appropriate, the City would enter into a reimbursement agreement with the applicant for
improvements that go beyond the applicant’s fair share in the context of possible project
impacts.
The applicant’s plan was presented to the ATC, Architectural Review Commission (ARC)
and PC for additional input, with the intent of incorporating their comments into the project
for further processing as appropriate. The following discusses that input and how the
application responded to each directional item. The applicant also provided responses to
each of the recommendations, (see Attachment 1 of this memo).
ATC Directional Items
On July 16, 2020, the ATC provided 21 comments related to the project, which are
summarized into the following directional items.
ATC Directional Item #1: The project should consider bicycle and pedestrian
connections along Tank Farm Road to improve east ‐west connections between
Higuera and Broad Streets.
Response: This issue was considered and addressed in the EIR, with mitigation
provided to address possible impacts. Other project conditions require planning and
design to facilitate offsite connections along Tank Farm Road as appropriate , and in
coordination with the Public Works Department.
ATC Directional Item #2: The project should study bicycle and pedestrian impacts
to the Broad/Tank Farm Road intersection.
Response: This issue was addressed in the traffic study for the project, an d the
project incorporates the study’s recommendations.
ATC Directional Item #3: Concerned about connecting the Acacia Creek Path to a
wrong way Class IV bikeway.
Response: This issue is no longer applicable to the project. The connection was
revised to provide direct bicycle access to Santa Fe Road.
ATC Directional Item #4: Consider the potential of connecting Clarion Court to Fiero
Lane as an alternative to Tank Farm Road for bikes and pedestrians.
Page 230 of 401
600 Tank Farm - ARCH-0406-2021, SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019, SPEC-0407-2020 & EID-0608-2020
Memorandum: Council Initiation and Conceptual Review Comments Summary
Page 3
Response: This is outside the project area and therefore not part of the project . In
addition, this improvement was not included as a mitigation measure to address
potential impacts identified in the EIR, or from any multi-modal impacts identified in
the traffic impact study.
ATC Directional Item #5: If Hawthorne Elementary is the designated school for this
site, consider how children will walk and bike there.
Response: This is outside the project area and therefore not part of the project . In
addition, this improvement was not included as a mitigation measure to address
potential impacts identified in the EIR, or from any multi-modal impacts identified in
the traffic impact study.
ATC Directional Item #6: Consider what possible role a bridge across the Railroad
Safety Trail at Industrial Way could do to provide access to the east side of the
railroad tracks.
Response: This is outside the project area and therefore not part of the project . In
addition, this improvement was not included as a mitigation measure to address
potential impacts identified in the EIR, or from any multi-modal impacts identified in
the traffic impact study.
ATC Directional Item #7: Consider the role that bike lanes on Industrial Road could
play to improve access to the site and avoid busy arterial streets like Tank Farm.
Response: This is outside the project area and therefore not part of the project . In
addition, this improvement was not included as a mitigation measure to address
potential impacts identified in the EIR, or from any multi-modal impacts identified in
the traffic impact study.
ATC Directional Item #8: Concerned about the impact widening Tank Farm Road to
5 lanes would have on bicycle and pedestrian comfort levels.
Response: Potential improvements to Tank Farm Road have been directed by City
staff, and the project is designed to address potential safety impacts through the EIR
mitigation and conditions of approval.
ATC Directional Item #9: Suggests the design of roundabout at Tank Farm / Santa
Fe should separate bike and ped modes.
Response: This can be considered by City staff through the design process for that
facility.
ATC Directional Item #10: Requests that the Acacia Creek Path have adequate
connections to other bikeway and pedestrian facilities.
Page 231 of 401
600 Tank Farm - ARCH-0406-2021, SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019, SPEC-0407-2020 & EID-0608-2020
Memorandum: Council Initiation and Conceptual Review Comments Summary
Page 4
Response: The Acacia Creek crossing has been coordinated with the adjacent
project at 650 Tank Farm Road, Santa Fe Road, and Damon-Garcia Sports Fields.
ATC Directional Item #11: Suggests considering other options before using bollards
on the bike/ped bridge across creek to 650 Tank Farm. If bollards are the only option,
make safe as possible.
Response: The proposed bollards have been set back from the Class I path to limit
vehicle access only and not impede pedestrian bicycle circulation.
ATC Directional Item #12: Avoid bike facility designs that encourage wrong way
riding.
Response: The circulation design, which was developed in coordination with City
staff, discourages wrong way riding.
ATC Directional Item #13: Recommends avoiding multilane road on Tank Farm to
minimize bike/ped impacts. Consider not widening Tank Farm Road for multilanes.
Response: The circulation design was developed in coordination with City staff to
minimize safety impacts and maximize functionality. The traffic impact study for the
project did not recommend multilane improvements for Tank Farm Road.
ATC Directional Item #14: Ensure adequate sidewalk connections throughout
internal development.
Response: Appropriate pedestrian connectivity was incorporated in the project, as
coordinated with City staff. The project accommodates possible pedestrian links to
offsite locations, including to Tank Farm Road, the bridge to neighboring development
at 650 Tank Farm Road, and along Acacia Creek.
ATC Directional Item #15: Suggests more separation than 2 feet between Class IV
bikeway and motor traffic. Suggests adding a parkway between the bike and motor
vehicle modes.
Response: Circulation design was coordinated with City staff. A conceptual design
for project circulation is included in Figure 2-6 of the Final EIR, but a final design has
not yet been determined. As proposed, there is no parkway between the bike lane
and motor vehicles just east of the roundabout on Tank Farm Road. The comment
may be considered by the PC and City Council in their review of the project.
ATC Directional Item #16: Recommends that pathways for pedestrians throughout
the development are direct.
Page 232 of 401
600 Tank Farm - ARCH-0406-2021, SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019, SPEC-0407-2020 & EID-0608-2020
Memorandum: Council Initiation and Conceptual Review Comments Summary
Page 5
Response: Appropriate pedestrian connectivity was incorporated in the project, as
coordinated with City staff. The project accommodates possible pedestrian links to
offsite locations, including to Tank Farm Road, the bridge to neighboring development
at 650 Tank Farm Road, and along Acacia Creek.
ATC Directional Item #17: Please look for ways to incorporate design elements of
the forthcoming Active Transportation Plan as much as possible into the project
Response: Circulation design was coordinated with City staff, with an eye toward
incorporating the elements of the Active Transportation Plan (ATP). Based on
coordinated review with City Transportation staff, the project is consistent with the
ATP.
ATC Directional Item #18: Recommends to incorporate slower roadway speeds
where possible.
Response: The circulation design was developed in coordination with City staff to
minimize safety impacts and maximize functionality. Internal privately maintained
roadways will be limited to low speeds based on recommendations from City
transportation staff to maintain safe pedestrian circulation and because of parking
movements within the project.
ATC Directional Item #19: Consider locating the bridge to 650 Tank Farm farther
north.
Response: The Acacia Creek crossing has been coordinated with the adjacent
project at 650 Tank Farm Road, and is outside of the scope of this project; however,
the bridge has been designed to minimize safety impacts and maximize functionality
in accordance with the mitigation measures per the 650 Tank Farm Mixed-use
Mitigated Negative Declaration.
ATC Directional Item #20: Please provide more separation between ped/bike/motor
vehicle modes on Tank Farm Road cross section
Response: The circulation design, which was developed in coordination with City staff
to minimize safety impacts and maximize functionality. A conceptual design for
project circulation is included in Figure 2-6 of the Final EIR, but a final design has not
yet been determined. As proposed, there is no parkway between the bike lane and
motor vehicles just east of the roundabout on Tank Farm Road.
ATC Directional Item #21: Suggests that a lot of thought be put into how the project
will provide good bike/ped connectivity to destinations outside of the project.
Response: The circulation design, which was developed in coordination with City staff
to minimize safety impacts and maximize functionality. The project accommodates
Page 233 of 401
600 Tank Farm - ARCH-0406-2021, SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019, SPEC-0407-2020 & EID-0608-2020
Memorandum: Council Initiation and Conceptual Review Comments Summary
Page 6
possible pedestrian links to offsite locations, including to Tank Farm Road, the bridge
to neighboring development at 650 Tank Farm Road, and along Acacia Creek. Refer
to the Site Circulation exhibit included in the ARC application package.
ARC Directional Items
On August 17, 2020, the ARC provided nine comments related to the project, which are
summarized into the following directional items.
ARC Directional Item #1: Incorporate more open space between the parking area
and the commercial building creating a plaza for patrons of the commercial
businesses.
Response: The project design does not include additional open space because of
tradeoffs in project design, balancing housing, parking, circulation, and infrastructure
requirements.
ARC Directional Item #2: Incorporate more recessed windows to add articulation.
Response: The applicant did not include more recessed windows after considering
the need for additional waterproofing and fiber cement siding; however, window trims
have been incorporated into the design to provide greater shadow variation on the
building facades in order to provide additional articulation.
ARC Directional Item #3: Identify fencing along Acacia Creek, promote Acacia
Creek to be accessible to residents as open space.
Response: The project is not proposing fencing along Acacia Creek in order to
provide residences better access to the open space associated with the creek.
ARC Directional Item #4: Consider ways to engage the street along the commercial
building to encourage exterior space along Tank Farm.
Response: No additional exterior public space was provided along Tank Farm Road,
in large part because of concerns about noise. At this time, the tenants of the
commercial shell building are unknown, and future tenants may apply for
improvements to provide amenities along Tank Farm Road on an individual case by
case basis.
ARC Directional Item #5: Consider adding small patios that relate to the retail use.
Response: This idea was considered by the applicant, but ultimately not included
because of other design considerations due to noise exposure along Tank Farm
Road, and other viable locations would further reduce the amount of required parking.
Page 234 of 401
600 Tank Farm - ARCH-0406-2021, SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019, SPEC-0407-2020 & EID-0608-2020
Memorandum: Council Initiation and Conceptual Review Comments Summary
Page 7
ARC Directional Item #6: The residential and retail buildings would benefit from a
common color palette or more compatible architectural styles.
Response: Proposed color schemes 2 and 3 have been updated to respond to this
concern by providing more compatible and complementary color palettes.
ARC Directional Item #7: Incorporate a serpentine pattern to the drive aisles on the
site plan.
Response: The applicant has incorporated a serpentine design between Tank Farm
Road and the woonerf street from Santa Fe Road, how ever, other drive aisles were
unable to support a more serpentine design without reducing the number of
residential units and required parking.
ARC Directional Item #8: Create an interfacing element between the wood siding
and the shed roof on the residential units.
Response: The elevation design has been updated to reflect a more consistent
relationship between the various building types.
ARC Directional Item #9: Incorporate a pronounced rafter tail (similar to the
SESLOC building) on the edges of the buildings to tie the commercial space with the
residential.
Response: The project has incorporated some shed roof and wood corbels into the
Mixed Use building as well as the two building types (C & D) to better reflect the
architecture of the SESLOC building and provide more visual cohesiveness.
PC Directional Items
On September 23, 2020, the PC provided seven comments related to the project, which
are summarized into the following directional items.
PC Directional Item #1: Consider the circulation interrelationship of this and other
nearby developments as a whole and their impact on bicycling and pedestrian
connectivity in the immediate area as well as to further destinations in the City.
Response: This concept was considered in the project design. The applicant worked
closely with City staff on a variety of circulation and land use issues, the impacts of
which were examined in the EIR for the project. The project accommodates possible
pedestrian links to offsite locations, including to Tank Farm Road, the bridge to
neighboring development at 650 Tank Farm Road, and along Acacia Creek. Please
also refer to the responses to issues raised by the ATC, previously discussed in this
memorandum.
Page 235 of 401
600 Tank Farm - ARCH-0406-2021, SBDV-0407-2021;
GENP-0814-2019, SPEC-0407-2020 & EID-0608-2020
Memorandum: Council Initiation and Conceptual Review Comments Summary
Page 8
PC Directional Item #2: Consider increasing the number of units.
Response: This concept was considered by the applicant who determined that
various site constraints precluded additional housing units from being proposed.
PC Directional Item #3: Ensure compatibility of the commercial services for this
project and adjacent sites.
Response: The mixed use development will likely attract businesses that are
compatible with neighboring residential uses within the framework of the proposed
square footage and other site constraints, such as parking.
PC Directional Item #4: Design of building adjacent to Tank Farm should be oriented
to Tank Farm if they serve the general public rather than just the development.
Response: The applicant worked closely with staff to implement this direction. The
commercial aspect of this project is conceived being oriented to the public rather than
inward to serve only the residents of the site.
PC Directional Item #5: Provide a more prominent direct pedestrian connection
between the residential and commercial areas – minimize crossing of parking areas.
Response: Various site constraints make achieving this goal somewhat difficult.
However, various landscaping cues and paseos provide for some degree of physical
and visual connectivity between residents on one side of the project and commercial
uses on the other.
PC Directional Item #6: Consider broadening the proposed 1.5‐mile local preference
zone.
Response: The applicant considered this concept, but is currently not proposing to
expand the 1.5-mile local preference zone.
PC Directional Item #7: Consider opportunities to enhance connectivity across the
emergency bridge.
Response: As proposed, the bridge would be for pedestrian or bike access, as well
as emergency vehicles.
Page 236 of 401
# Directional Item Response
1
include requested changes by the Applicant, staff to work
toward a Development Agreement or other enforceable
mechanism, with the applicant to accomplish the infrastructure
scope, the locals preference and other areas as determined by
staff and to include early feedback from the Active
Transportation Committee and Planning Commission for the
conceptual review and scoping.
No longer applicable
2
The project should consider bicycle and pedestrian connections
along Tank Farm Rd to improve east‐west connections between
Higuera and Broad Streets
Considered. Refer to the mitigation in the DEIR
3 The project should study bicycle and pedestrian impacts to the
Broad/Tank Farm Rd intersection Refer to Traffic Study
4 Concerned about connecting the Acacia Creek Path to a wrong
way Class IV bikeway
No longer applicable. The connection has been
revised to direct bicycle circulation to Santa Fe
Road
5 Consider the potential of connecting Clarion Court to Fiero Lane
as an alternative to Tank Farm Road for bikes and peds This request is outside the scope of this project
6 If Hawthorne Elementary is the designated school for this site,
consider how children will walk and bike there This request is outside the scope of this project
7
Consider what possible role a bridge across the Railroad Safety
Trail at Industrial Way could do to provide access to the east
side of the railroad tracks
This request is outside the scope of this project
8
Consider the role that bike lanes on Industrial Road could play
to improve access to the site and avoid busy arterial streets like
Tank Farm
This request is outside the scope of this project
9 Concerned about the impact widening Tank Farm Road to 5
lanes would have on bicycle and pedestrian comfort levels.
Noted. The design of the Tank Farm Road
improvements have been directed by City
staff.
10 Suggests the design of roundabout at Tank Farm / Santa Fe
should separate bike and ped modes Noted
City Council ‐ Rezone Initiation (April 21, 2020)
ATC ‐ Conceptual Review (July 17, 2020)
600 Tank Farm - Conceptual City Comments
Page 237 of 401
11 Requests that the Acacia Creek Path have adequate connections
to other bikeway and pedestrian facilities
The Acacia Creek crossing has been
coordinated with thew adjacent project for
pedestrian and bicycle use.
12
Suggests considering other options before using bollards on the
bike/ped bridge across creek to 650 Tank Farm. If bollards are
the only option, make safe as possible.
The proposed bollards have been set back
from the Class I path to limit vehicle access
only and not impede pedestrian bicycle
circuilation
13 Avoid bike facility designs that encourage wrong way riding. Agreed
14
Recommends avoiding multilane road on Tank Farm to minimize
bike/ped impacts. Consider not widening Tank Farm Road for
multilanes
Noted. The design of the Tank Farm Road
improvements have been directed by City
staff.
15 Ensure adequate sidewalk connections throughout internal
development Provided in project design
16
Suggests more separation than 2 feet between Class IV bikeway
and motor traffic. Suggests adding a parkway between the bike
and motor vehicle modes.
Understood. The design of the road
improvements have been directed by City
staff.
17 Recommends that pathways for pedestrians throughout the
development are direct Provided in project design
18
Please look for ways to incorporate design elements of the
forthcoming Active Transportation Plan as much as possible into
the project
Provided in project design
19 Recommends to incorporate slower roadway speeds where
possible
The road speed is dictated by the width of the
roadway improvements and City staff.
20 Consider locating the bridge to 650 Tank Farm farther north
The proposed bridge crossing at Acaia Creek is
located per the previous crossing location and
the Environmental Analysis that was certified
for the adjacent project (650 Tank Farm)
21 Please provide more separation between ped/bike/motor
vehicle modes on Tank Farm Road cross section
Understood. The design of the road
improvements have been directed by City
staff.
22
Suggests that a lot of thought be put into how the project will
provide good bike/ped connectivity to destinations outside of
the project
Agreed. Please refer to the Site Circulation
exhibit included in the ARC package
Page 238 of 401
23
Incorporate more open space between the parking area and the
commercial building creating a plaza for patrons of the
commercial businesses.
The design of the project was not able to
accommodate this request.
24 Incorporate more recessed windows to add articulation.
Concidered, but given the extensive amount of
fiber cement siding, recessed windows are not
recommended based on waterproofing
concerns.
25 Identify fencing along Acacia Creek, promote Acacia Creek to be
accessible to residents as open space.
This project is not proposing fencing along
Acacia Creek, thus residences would have
access to the open space.
26 Consider ways to engage the street along the commercial
building to encourage exterior space along Tank Farm.
Providing exterior use spaces along Tank Farm
Road is not desirable given the concerns
regarding noise.
27 Consider adding small patios that relate to the retail use.Considered but felt they would not be
approporiate
28 The residential and retail buildings would benefit from a
common color pallet or more compatible architectural styles.Agreed. Refer to scheme 2 & 3
29 Incorporate a serpentine pattern to the drive aisles on the site
plan.
Refer to pavers in the main intersection off
Santa Fe Road
30 Create an interfacing element between the wood siding and the
shed roof on the residential units.
The elevation design has been updated to
reflect a more consistant relationship between
the various building types.
31
Incorporate a pronounced rafter tail (similar to the SESLOC
building) on the edges of the buildings to tie the commercial
space with the residential.
We have incorporated some shed roof and
wood corbels into the Mixed‐Use building as
well as the two buldings types (C & D) as a
knod to SESLOC without matches their design
ARC ‐ Conceptual Review (August 17, 2020)
Page 239 of 401
32
Consider the circulation interrelationship of this and other
nearby developments as a whole and their impact on bicycling
and pedestrian connectivity in the immediate area as well as to
further destinations in the City.
Considered.
33 Consider increasing the number of units. Unable to acheieve this due to site constraints.
34 Ensure compatibility of the commercial services for this project
and adjacent sites.Understood.
35
Design of building adjacent to Tank Farm should be orientated
to Tank Farm if they serve the general public rather than just
the development.
Agreed. The Mixed‐Use building addresses
Tank Farm and Santa Fe.
36
Provide a more prominent direct pedestrian connection
between the residential and commercial areas – minimize
crossing of parking areas.
37 Consider broadening the proposed 1.5‐mile local preference
zone.
Considered and not currently planning on
broadening.
38 Consider opportunities to enhance connectivity across the
emergency bridge.
Bridge to be used for ped and bike access, or
emergency vehicles only.
PC ‐ Conceptual Review (September 23, 2020)
Page 240 of 401
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY
AIRPORT LAND USE
COMMISSION
William (Bill) Borgsmiller
Adam Verdin
Craig Piper
Jeremy Klyde
Roger Oxborrow
Allen Settle
Erich Schaefer
County of San Luis Obispo ▪ 976 Osos St., Rm 300 ▪ San Luis Obispo California 93408 ▪ (805) 781-5600 Email:
planning@co.slo.ca.us ▪ Fax (805) 781-1242 ▪ Website: http://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Planning
NOTICE OF AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION ACTION
ALUC 2021-0004
HEARING DATE: August 18,2021
RECOMMENDATION TO: City of San Luis Obispo
SUBJECT: Hearing to consider a mandatory referral by the City of San Luis Obispo for a determination
of consistency or inconsistency with the Airport Land Use Plan for the San Luis Obispo County Regional
Airport for proposed amendments to the City’s General Plan and Rezoning to Service-commercial (C-S) and
to the City’s Airport Area Specific Plan (collectively, amendments) to facilitate the future development of a
mixed use residential and commercial project.
Agency: City of San Luis Obispo County File Number: PR-0005-2020
Project Manager: Kyle Bell Applicant: Covelop, Inc.
Recommendation: Consistent with the ALUP
On August 18, 2021, the Airport Land Use Commission determined the above referenced project consistent
with the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport Land Use Plan and referred it back to the City of San Luis
Obispo, Kyle Bell, Project Manager, based on the Findings and Revised Conditions in the Staff Report.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (805) 781-4848 or dchavez@co.slo.ca.us
Sincerely,
Daniela Chavez
Daniela Chavez, Secretary
Airport Land Use Commission
Page 241 of 401
COVELOP, INC (600 Tank Farm Road- Mixed Use Development)
ALUC August 18, 2021
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
DATE: August 18, 2021
TO: AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION (ALUC)
FROM: NICOLE ELLIS, COUNTY PLANNING AND BUILDING
REFERRING AGENCY: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPLICANT: COVELOP, INC.
CITY FILE NUMBER: PR-0005-2020
PROJECT MANAGER: KYLE BELL, ASSOCIATE PLANNER
SUBJECT: HEARING TO CONSIDER A REFERRAL BY THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO (CITY)
FOR A DETERMINATION OF CONSISTENCY OR INCONSISTENCY WITH THE
AIRPORT LAND USE PLAN (ALUP) FOR THE SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY
REGIONAL AIRPORT (AIRPORT) FOR PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY’S
GENERAL PLAN AND REZONING TO SERVICE-COMMERCIAL (C-S) AND TO THE
CITY’S AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN (AASP) (COLLECTIVELY,
AMENDMENTS) TO FACILITATE THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF A MIXED USE
RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROJECT (PROJECT).
LOCATION: THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, AT THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF TANK FARM ROAD AND SANTA FE ROAD, AT 600
TANK FARM ROAD. THE PROJECT SITE IS COMPRISED OF TWO PARCELS
(APNS: 053-421-002 AND -006) TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 11.7 GROSS ACRES,
AND IS LOCATED WITHIN ALUP SAFETY ZONE 6 AND OUTSIDE OF ALUP NOISE
CONTOUR CNEL 60 dB.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the ALUC determine that Project-specific Amendments for 600 Tank Farm Road
are consistent with the ALUP based on the findings outlined below and subject to the conditions of
consistency set forth in Attachment 1.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Proposal: Amendments to the City’s General Plan and Rezoning to Service-Commercial (C-S),
and amendments to the City’s Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP). The Amendments
are proposed to facilitate the future development of a mixed use residential and
commercial project.
Setting: Broad Street and Tank Farm Road corridor containing a mixture of Business Park,
Services and Manufacturing, and Community Commercial uses.
Existing Use: Material and vehicle storage
Site Area: Approximately 11.7 gross acres
BACKGROUND
San Luis Obispo City Council Initiation of the Project
During the April 21, 2020, San Luis Obispo City Council hearing, city staff provided a summary
presentation of the Project whereby the City Council initiated the Project to rezone the property from
BP -SP to C-S-SP to allow for a mixed use development project consisting of 280 residential units and
15,000 square feet of commercial space. Initiation of the Project was made based on City policies
Page 242 of 401
COVELOP, INC (600 Tank Farm Road- Mixed Use Development)
ALUC August 18, 2021
prioritizing housing and mixed-use development with a variety of housing types, where found to be
compatible with existing and future development.
San Luis Obispo Airport ALUP
The ALUP for the Airport was initially adopted by the ALUC in December 1973. The plan was
subsequently amended and restated in June 2002, July 2004, and May 2005. The current ALUP,
amended and reinstated May 26, 2021, was recently updated by the ALUC to reflect current state law
and the guidance of the 2011 California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook revisions, and to reflect
updates since 2004 to the airport layout plan, aviation activity forecasts, and noise contour maps.
This Project is the first to be reviewed for consistency under the newly amended ALUP. The developer,
Covelop, Inc., (Developer) has participated in the recent update to the ALUP, including submittal of
comment letters. The Developer also consulted with the ALUC on April 21, 2021, for a pre-application
review of the Project.
DISCUSSION
County staff received the referral from the City on July 12, 2021. Staff determined that all required
information was included with the August 5, 2021, application materials and the request was deemed
complete and accepted for processing on August 9, 2021. Thus, pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 21676(d), the ALUC must determine whether the Amendments are consistent with the ALUP
on or before October 8, 2021, (the regularly scheduled September ALUC meeting date is September
15, 2021) in order to avoid a default consistency determination (absent an extension or waiver of the
statutory deadline by the referring agency).
The project site, comprised of two parcels (APNS: 053-421-002 & -006) totaling approximately 11.7 gross
acres, is currently zoned Business Park (BP-SP) within the AASP. The BP-SP zone as well as the AASP
do not currently allow residential uses at this location. The project application proposes to amend the
AASP and rezone the property to Commercial Services (C-S-SP) zone to allow for a mixed use residential
and commercial project, similar to what has been approved on the adjacent property at 650 Tank Farm
Road. The proposed Project consists of 280 residential units and approximately 15,000 square feet of
commercial space. The Project does not propose any changes in the City’s adopted Zoning Regulations or
the AASP, in terms of permitted and conditional uses, development standards and regulations.
ALUP POLICIES AND FINDINGS
The Project-specific Amendments for 600 Tank Farm Road are consistent with the Specific ALUP
Policies.
Finding – General: The Amendments are consistent with applicable General Land Use Policies, G-1
through G-4 because: all information required for review of the Amendments was provided by the City,
the Amendments (as conditioned) would not present specific incompatibilities to the continued
economic vitality and efficient operation of the Airport with specific r espect to safety, noise, overflight
or obstacle clearance and are in conformance with all applicable Specific Land Use Policies.
ALUP 4.4 Specific Land Use Policies: Safety Policies
The objective of the ALUP safety policies is to minimize the risk to the safety and property of persons
on the ground associated with potential aircraft accidents and to enhance the chances for survival of
the occupants involved in an accident which takes place beyond the immediate runway environment.
These policies include a prohibition of structures within the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ), and ensure
a project meets the density, building coverage, and special land use function requirements. The
Project site is located within Safety Zone 6- Traffic Pattern Zone (Figure 2-2 ALUP) and the Project site
is located entirely outside of Safety Zones 1 through 5 (Zone 1: Runway Protection Zone, Zone 2: Inner
Approach/Departure Zone, Zone 3: Inner Turning Zone, Zone 4: Outer Approach/Departure Zone,
Zone 5: Sideline Zone). Page 243 of 401
COVELOP, INC (600 Tank Farm Road- Mixed Use Development)
ALUC August 18, 2021
Mixed Use Density/Intensity1 Calculations
ALUP Section 4.4.3 establishes allowable methods to calculate mixed use density/intensity. One
criterion used is the maximum number of people per acre that can be present in a given area at any
one time. ALUP Section 4.4.3.1 establishes the allowable methods for determining concentrations of
people. The Project utilizes the allowable California Building Code (CBC) standard for determining the
maximum occupancy of certain uses to determine the number of people-per-acre (ALUP Figure 4-3).
Table 4-2 of the ALUP establishes the maximum allowable densities/intensities for residential, non-
residential, and mixed-use land use within each Aviation Safety Zone. The maximum allowable mixed
use intensity within Safety Zone 6 is 300 persons per gross acre area (across the entire site, both
parcels) and 1,200 persons per single gross acre (maximum on any single acre), with or without an
approved Airport Compatible Open Space Place (ACOS).
Using the ALUP’s California Building Code (CBC) calculation method, the average density/intensity
for the site is 63.9 persons per acre which is less than the maximum allowable 300 persons per gross
acre area.
The densest portion of the site is the southwest 1 acre that contains the two mixed use buildings that
have an intensity of 132.5 persons per acre. This represents 11 percent of the maximum allowable
density/intensity of 1,200 persons per acre. The Project’s building lot coverage (17.7%) also complies
with the maximum lot coverage (100% in Safety Zone 6) allowed under Table 4-5.2
Land Use Compatibility Table
Based on review of the ALUP Land Use Compatibility Table 4-5:
• Residential Land Uses such as Multi-family dwellings, within Safety Zone 6, are listed as a
compatible/acceptable (C) use;
• Retail Land Uses such as retail sales, within Safety Zone 6, are also listed as a
compatible/acceptable (C) use; and
• Service Land Uses such as offices, within Safety Zone 6, are also listed as a
compatible/acceptable (C) use.
Finding – Safety: The Amendments are consistent with the Specific Land Use Policies for Safety, S-1
through S-3, because the Project is located within Safety Zone 6 and Amendments would not result in a
density/intensity greater than specified in Table 4-2. The Amendments would also not result in high
intensity land uses or special land use functions, as conditioned, other than those specified in Table 4-5
and the Project does not propose any changes in the City’s adopted Zoning Regulations or the AASP in
terms of permitted and conditional uses, development standards and regulations.
ALUP 4.3 Specific Land Use Policies: Noise
The Specific Land Use Policies for Noise in the ALUP identify whether a project would permit or fail to
sufficiently prohibit establishment of extremely noise-sensitive land uses within the 60 dB contour
except for infill, any moderate noise-sensitive land use within the 60 dB contour without mitigation, or
1
4.4.1 Definitions:
• Mixed-use development/ mixed-use land use – projects which consist of and will result in establishment of structures intended
and used both for commercial purposes, and for human habitation. A project which includes both commercial and residential
components will be considered as a mixed-use development or land use regardless of whether the commercial and residential
components are contained within single structures or are separated into individual structures.
• Mixed-use intensity – the maximum number of persons per acre that a mixed-use development is expected to attract during
periods of use at any given time.
2
Improved and unimproved open space requirements under Table 4-3 of ALUP (3% improved open space and 7% unimproved open space
in Safety Zone 6) would not apply so long as the Project is not proposing an ACOS on the site and the site is not designated as an ACOS
site under an ACOS plan. Page 244 of 401
COVELOP, INC (600 Tank Farm Road- Mixed Use Development)
ALUC August 18, 2021
any extreme or moderate noise-sensitive use adjacent to an area of demonstrated noise
incompatibility.
Finding – Noise: The Amendments are consistent with the Specific Land Use Policies for Noise, N-1
through N-4, because the Project site is located entirely outside of the ALUP 60 dB community noise
equivalent level (CNEL) noise contour and is, therefore, consistent with the Specific Land Use Policies
for noise. Both extreme and moderate noise sensitive land uses are allowable for development located
outside of the 60 dB CNEL noise contour. The Project is obligated under City Zoning and AASP
regulations to ensure that interior noise levels do not exceed 45 dB from all transportation noise
sources. The Project shall comply with all noise policies as required by the ALUP.
ALUP 4.5 Specific Land Use Policies: Airspace Protection
The construction of tall structures, including buildings and construction cranes – in the vicinity of an
airport can be hazardous to the navigation of airplanes. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA),
through Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77, established a method of identifying surfaces that
should be free from penetration by obstructions in order to maintain sufficient airspace around airports.
FAR Part 77, in effect, identifies the maximum height at which a structure would be considered an
obstacle at any given point around an airport. The extent of the off-airport coverage needing to be
evaluated for tall structure impacts can extend miles from an airport facility. Any tall structure(s)
proposed as future development within a project area shall be reviewed by the Air Traffic Division of
the FAA to determine compliance with the provisions of FAR Part 77.
Finding – Airspace Protection: The Amendments are consistent with the Specific Land Use Policies for
Airspace Protection, A-1 through A-4, because the AASP Table 4-9 regulations limit the maximum
permissible building height as 36 feet for any occupied structures, and 46 feet for any non-occupied
architectural features. The maximum height of occupied structures in the project is 36 feet, and the
maximum height of the entire structure (including roofs and architectural features) is 41 feet. The projected
maximum elevations of any structure on the Project site range from 195 feet mean sea level (MSL) for
buildings along the Tank Farm Road frontage to 221 feet MSL for buildings at the rear one-fourth of the
site. The Project is located within the Horizontal Airport Imaginary Surface. The applicant has submitted
a Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation from the FAA for the proposed buildings. The Form 7460
FAA consultation determined that the proposed building heights did not pose a hazard to air navigation
or navigation aids. The Amendments will not permit any structure, landscaping, glare, apparatus, or other
feature, whether temporary or permanent in nature to constitute an obstruction to air navigation or a
hazard to air navigation. The Project is conditioned to comply with these policies and therefore is
consistent with the Specific Land Use Policies for airspace protection.
ALUP 4.6 Specific Land Use Policies: Overflight
The Amendments are consistent with the overflight policies of the ALUP, O-1 through O-2, to ensure
that potential and prospective Airport area land users are provided with sufficient information on the
presence and activity of the Airport and associated noise and safety impacts in order for them to make
an informed decision as to whether or not they wish to live and/or work in the Airport area. Avigation
Easements and Natural Hazard Disclosure Reports are required for real estate transactions in the
Airport Area. Individual projects will be required to provide avigation easements and full and accurate
disclosure of airport operations.
Finding - Overflight: The Amendments are consistent with the Specific Land Use Policies for
Overflight because the Project has been conditioned to record avigation easements for each property
developed within the Project site prior to the issuance of any building permit or land use permit; and all
owners, potential purchasers, occupants (whether as owners or renters), and potential occupants
(whether as owners or renters) will receive full and accurate disclosure concerning the noise, safety,
or overflight impacts associated with Airport operations prior to entering any contractual obligation to
purchase, lease, rent, or otherwise occupy any property or properties within the Airport Area. The
Project is conditioned to comply with these policies and therefore is consistent with the Specific Land
Use Policies for overflight. Page 245 of 401
ALUC REVISED CONDITIONS OF CONSISTENCY
600 Tank Farm Road- Covelop, Inc.
1. The City shall prepare conditions of consistency to ensure that all applicable ALUP policies
and aviation related development restrictions are enforced (Conditions of Approval), and
that no development other than the Project as specifically described to the ALUC in the
Project Description of the August 11, 2021, (not to exceed 280 residential units and
approximately 12,500 square feet of mixed use office and retail commercial area),
application materials and testimony by the Applicant during the ALUC hearing may be
established without subsequent prior referral to the ALUC.
2. This consistency determination shall apply only to the property currently proposed to be
occupied by the Project, i.e. the Project site.
3. Utilizing the ALUP’s California Building Code (CBC) calculation method (Figure 4-3), the
Amendments and Conditions of Consistency shall limit mixed use density/ intensity for the
Project site as follows:
a. The average density/intensity for the site shall not exceed 75 persons per acre.
b. The densest portion of the site (southwest 1 acre containing the two mixed use
buildings) shall have an intensity not to exceed 150 persons per acre.
4. The maximum height limit of structures on the Project site shall not exceed 36 feet for any
occupied structures, and 46 feet for any non-occupied architectural features. The
construction plans for the proposed dwelling shall be submitted via FAA Form 7460-1 to
the Air Traffic Division of the FAA regional office having jurisdiction over San Luis Obispo
County at least 45 days before proposed construction or application for a building permit,
to determine compliance with the provisions of FAR Part 77.
5. The Project shall comply with all noise policies as required by the ALUP.
6. No structure, landscaping, apparatus, or other feature, whether temporary or permanent
in nature shall constitute an obstruction to air navigation or a hazard to air navigation, as
defined by the ALUP.
7. Any use is prohibited that may entail characteristics which would potentially interfere with
the takeoff, landing, or maneuvering of aircraft at the Airport, including:
• creation of electrical interference with navigation signals or radio communication
between the aircraft and airport;
• lighting which is difficult to distinguish from airport lighting;
• glare in the eyes of pilots using the airport;
• uses which attract birds and create bird strike hazards;
• uses which produce visually significant quantities of smoke; and
• uses which entail a risk of physical injury to operators or passengers of aircraft (e.g.,
exterior laser light demonstrations or shows).
8. Avigation easements shall be recorded for each property developed within the Project site
prior to the issuance of any building permit or land use permit.
Page 246 of 401
9. All owners, potential purchasers, occupants (whether as owners or renters), and potential
occupants (whether as owners or renters) shall receive full and accurate disclosure
concerning the noise, safety, or overflight impacts associated with Airport operations prior
to entering any contractual obligation to purchase, lease, rent, or otherwise occupy any
property or properties within the Airport area.
Page 247 of 401
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
San Luis Obispo County
Minutes of Wednesday, August 18, 2021
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Airport Land Use Commission held in the (new) County Board of
Supervisors Chambers, County Government Center 1055 Monterey Street, Room D170, San Luis Obispo, CA, at
1:30 P.M.
HEARINGS ARE ADVERTISED FOR 1:30 P.M. HOWEVER, HEARINGS GENERALLY PROCEED IN THE ORDER
LISTED. THIS TIME IS ONLY AN ESTIMATE AND IS NOT TO BE CONSIDERED AS TIME GUARANTEED. THE
PUBLIC AND APPLICANTS ARE ADVISED TO ARRIVE EARLY.
Chairperson Oxborrow: opens meeting and provides meeting procedures.
ROLL CALL:
Present: William Borgsmiller, Adam Verdin, Craig Piper, Jeremy Klyde, Allen Settle, Eric Schaefer, Roger
Oxborrow
Absent: None.
STAFF UPDATES:
Lacey Minnick, Airports Liaison and Brian Stack, County Counsel: provide an update to the commission related
to county support staffing, Commissioner Adam Verdin appointment, future term expirations and vacancy
procedures.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD:
1) Members of the public wishing to address the Commission on matters other than scheduled items may
do so at this time, when recognized by the Chair. Presentations are limited to three minutes per
individual.
Chairperson Oxborrow: opens and closes Public Comment with no one coming forward.
HEARINGS:
2) Hearing to consider a mandatory referral by the City of San Luis Obispo for a determination of
consistency or inconsistency with the Airport Land Use Plan for the San Luis Obispo County Regional
Airport for proposed amendments to the City’s General Plan and Rezoning to Service-commercial (C-S)
and to the City’s Airport Area Specific Plan (collectively, amendments) to facilitate the future
development of a mixed use residential and commercial project.
Agency: City of San Luis Obispo: County File Number: PR-0005-2020
Project Manager: Kyle Bell Applicant: Covelop, Inc.
Recommendation: Consistent with the ALUP
Page 248 of 401
Commissioner Adam Verdin recuses himself from item.
Nicole Ellis, Airports Planner: presents Staff Report via PowerPoint.
John Rickenbach, Contract Planner and Kyle Bell, City of SLO: speak.
Chairperson Oxborrow: opens Public Comment.
Stephen Peck, Agent: speaks to the project and states he is available for questions.
Chairperson Oxborrow: closes Public Comment.
Discussion and commission deliberation.
Thereafter, on motion of Commissioner Eric Schaefer, seconded by Commissioner Allen Settle
and on the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Erich Schafer, Allen Settle, William Borgsmiller, Craig Piper, Jeremy
Klyde, Erich Schafer, Roger Oxborrow.
RECUSED: Commissioner Adam Verdin.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
The motion carries on all yes roll call vote to find the referral by the City of San Luis consistent
with the Airport Land Use Plan for the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport for proposed
amendments to the City’s General Plan and Rezoning to Service-commercial (C-S) and to the
City’s Airport Area Specific Plan based on the findings and revised conditions in the staff report
and is referred back to the City of San Luis Obispo.
Commissioner Adam Verdin rejoins the meeting.
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION (ALUC) BUSINESS:
3) Receive and File: All Correspondence and Exhibits if received at this meeting.
Thereafter, on motion of Commissioner Erich Schaefer, seconded by Commissioner Allen Settle and on
the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Erich Schaefer, Allen Settle, William Borgsmiller, Adam Verdin, Craig Piper,
Jeremy Klyde, Roger Oxborrow.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
Page 249 of 401
The motion carries on all yes voice vote to accept all correspondence received into the Airport
Land Use Commission record.
ADJOURNMENT: 2:21 P.M.
Thereafter, on motion of Commissioner Erich Schaefer, seconded by Commissioner Allen Settle and on
the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Erich Schaefer, Allen Settle, Craig Piper, William Borgsmiller, Adam Verdin,
Jeremy Klyde, Roger Oxborrow.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
The motion carries on an all yes voice vote to adjourn to the next regularly scheduled Airport
Land Use Commission on Wednesday, September 15, 2021.
Next Scheduled Meeting: Wednesday, September 15, 2021, at 1:30 p.m. For additional information,
please contact Daniela Chavez, Airport Land Use Commission Secretary, at (805) 781-5600 or by e-mail
address: dchavez@co.slo.ca.us
Daniela Chavez, Secretary
Airport Land Use Commission
Page 250 of 401
Page 251 of 401
Page 252 of 401
Page 253 of 401
Page 254 of 401
Page 255 of 401
Page 256 of 401
Page 257 of 401
Page 258 of 401
Page 259 of 401
Page 260 of 401
Page 261 of 401
Page 262 of 401
Page 263 of 401
Page 264 of 401
Page 265 of 401
Page 266 of 401
Page 267 of 401
Page 268 of 401
Page 269 of 401
Page 270 of 401
Page 271 of 401
Page 272 of 401
Page 273 of 401
Page 274 of 401
General Plan Land Use Element
2.3.1. Mixed Uses and Convenience
The City shall promote a mix of compatible uses in neighborhoods to serve the daily needs of
nearby residents, including schools, parks, churches, and convenience retail stores. Neighbor‐
hood shopping and services should be available within about one mile of all dwellings. When
nonresidential, neighborhood serving uses are developed, existing housing shall be preserved
and new housing added where possible. If existing dwellings are removed for such uses, the de‐
velopment shall include replacement dwellings (no net loss of residential units).
Response: The project provides residential uses in an area with significant jobs and shop‐
ping. The project contributes to the improvement of the jobs‐housing balance in the commu‐
nity.
2.3.6. Housing and Businesses
The City shall encourage mixed use projects, where appropriate and compatible with existing
and planned development on the site and with adjacent and nearby properties. The City shall
support the location of mixed use projects and community and neighborhood commercial cen‐
ters near major activity nodes and transportation corridors / transit opportunities where appro‐
priate.
Response: The project adds housing to an area with significant jobs, shopping and services.
7.3. Airport Land Use Plan
Land use density and intensity shall carefully balance noise impacts and the progression in the
degree of reduced safety risk further away from the runways, using guidance from the San Luis
Obispo County Regional Airport Land Use Plan, State Aeronautics Act, and California Airport
Land Use Planning Handbook guidelines. The City shall use the Airport Master Plan forecasts of
aviation activity as a reasonably foreseeable projection of ultimate aviation activity sufficient
for long‐term land use planning purposes. Prospective buyers of property subject to airport in‐
fluence should be so informed.
Response: The project was found to be compatible with the County ALUP.
7.9. Internal Open Space
The City shall ensure areas designated for urban uses in the Airport Area Specific Plan, but not
necessarily each parcel, include open areas as site amenities and to protect resources, con‐
sistent with the Conservation and Open Space Element. In addition, the City shall ensure wild‐
life corridors across the Airport Area shall be identified and preserved.
Page 275 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 2 of 33
Response: The project include internal open space, adjacent open space with Acacia Creek
and the Flower Mound, and complies with the open space requirements of the ALUP.
Airport Area Specific Plan
Community Design Guidelines
Goal 5.1 A continuous, well‐defined streetscape edge that unifies and enhances the
character of the development areas and that supports pedestrian activity
through its site planning and design.
Guidelines
A. Buildings are encouraged to front directly on the landscaped setback adjacent to the
street right‐of‐way, rather than locating parking between the street and building.
B. Parking should be located behind or along the sides of buildings.
C. The main entrance to any building with frontage on the primary street serving the pro‐
ject should be oriented toward the primary street.
D. Building setbacks on adjacent parcels should be varied to provide visual interest, but not
so much that the variation destroys the continuity of the streetscape frontage. The varia‐
tion between setbacks along a streetscape frontage should not be more than 5 meters
(16 feet).
Response: Buildings front on to Acacia Creek, Tank Farm and Santa Fe. All parking is located
behind the commercial buildings fronting on Tank Farm Road and Santa Fe. Articulation is
provided along both public street frontages.
Standards
5.1.1 Principal buildings shall be oriented parallel to the street.
5.1.2 No more than one double‐loaded parking bay will be allowed between the street and
the front of the building.
5.1.3 Direct pedestrian access shall be provided from the street serving the project to the
main entrance.
5.1.4 Buildings shall have architecturally articulated entry features facing the street.
Response: All buildings along the public street frontages are parallel to the street centerlines.
Goal 5.2: New development fully integrated with a comprehensive open space frame‐
work. Pedestrian (bike and peds) access is provided by way of sidewalks and intersecting
project sidewalks. Entry features are clearly marked and articulated.
Page 276 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 3 of 33
Guidelines
A. On sites with multiple buildings, building heights and separation between structures
should be coordinated to allow views to surrounding open space and landforms.
B. Development adjacent to public open space and trails should allow for public access to
the open space from developments that do not share adjacency or direct access to the
open space system.
C. The siting of buildings, service facilities, circulation, parking, and other elements of new
development should take into consideration established development patterns adjacent
to the site. Potentially incompatible uses or design elements (e.g., loading areas, refuse
collection areas, and high traffic access drives) shall be sited away from sensitive existing
use areas on adjacent sites, such as entrances, plazas, lunch areas and other gathering
places.
Standards
A.1.1 On properties adjacent to public open space and trails, convenient pedestrian and bicycle
connections shall be provided for employees between the buildings and the open space system
and to connect residential, commercial and recreational areas.
Response: Finished floor elevations range from 154 MSL to 179 MSL. Building height finished
elevations provide a range that allows views of open space, as illustrated in Sheet A7 of the
entitlement submittal. Access is provided to open space areas by onsite sidewalks at least
every other building.
Goal 5.4: Safe and efficient vehicular parking areas that are designed to be in scale with
and visually subordinate to the development and landscape setting. In addi‐
tion, parking is to be provided as a buffer element between residential uses
and non‐residential uses, and between residential uses and areas of greater
noise exposure.
Guidelines
A. On‐street parking is encouraged along all streets providing direct access to a develop‐
ment site.
Response: Onstreet parking is not permitted.
Page 277 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 4 of 33
B. The number of parking area entrances and exits should be minimized to reduce vehicular
conflicts at intersections. Parking lots with more than 100 spaces should have more than
one street access.
Response: There are two access points to the main commercial parking lot. An additional ac‐
cess point is provided for the residential portions. These access points are interconnected and
there three drives that provide direct or indirect access to the residential and commercial por‐
tions of the site.
C. Where possible, parking lots on adjacent parcels should have vehicular and pedestrian
connections between lots of adjacent developments in order to facilitate circulation.
D. Parking areas should be divided into multiple small lots, rather than one large lot,
through the siting of internal circulation corridors, landscaped medians, and buildings.
E. The use of porous surfaces that reduce heat buildup and stormwater runoff are encour‐
aged for parking areas, particularly in overflow parking areas and those adjacent to
open space (see drainage guidelines at the end of this chapter).
F. Use low (approximately one meter in height) hedges, shrub masses or walls between
parking areas and street.
G. For each parking lot, a single tree species should be used for all end‐of‐aisle planting is‐
lands, and that species, or one additional species, should be used for planter areas be‐
tween stalls.
H. The use of native plant materials that reference the natural landscape or ornamental
versions of orchard‐type tree species that reference the area’s agricultural heritage are
encouraged. Orchard‐style planting of parking areas can be achieved with an equally‐
spaced planting of trees at a ratio of one tree for every four parking spaces for Business
Park development, and one tree for every six parking spaces for Services and Manufac‐
turing development.
I. In R‐3 and R‐4 zones, parking bays and garages shall be placed adjacent to non‐residen‐
tial uses or adjacent to noise exposure areas to buffer sound impacts.
Response: There are two access points to the main commercial parking lot. An additional ac‐
cess point is provided for the residential portions. These access points are interconnected and
there three drives that provide direct or indirect access to the residential and commercial por‐
tions of the site. The project complies with Guidelines G, H and I regarding landscaping.
Standards
5.4.1. Parking lots shall be located at the rear or side of buildings, rather than between the
front facade of the building and the street. Side parking shall not exceed 40 percent of
the frontage of the lot on the primary street.
Page 278 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 5 of 33
Response: All parking is located behind street‐side buildings. Parking provided on the build‐
ing sides is less than 40 percent of the total frontage.
5.4.2 Where parking layout exceeds two rows in depth (i.e., one double‐loaded parking bay),
parking lot aisles shall be oriented perpendicular to the building(s) (i.e., aligned in direc‐
tion of pedestrian movement) to increase pedestrian safety.
5.4.3 A pedestrian path or sidewalk located within the landscape median between parking
bays is required in cases where there are more than three bays of parking or the config‐
uration of the bays makes it difficult for pedestrians to access the buildings, to the dis‐
cretion of the Community Development Director.
Response: The commercial parking lot is perpendicular to the longest leg of the L‐shaped
commercial building. A pedestrian path is provided through the parking lot. See Sheet A3.
5.4.4 Parking lots shall be planted with shade trees in a pattern and number that can be rea‐
sonably expected to shade at least 50 percent of the lot surface within ten (10) years of
planting, and provide a nearly continuous canopy at maturity.
Response: See Sheets A40 and A41.
5.4.5 A 10 percent reduction in the required number of parking spaces may be granted by the
Director for development within one‐quarter mile of a regularly scheduled transit stop.
5.4.6 A 5 percent reduction in the required number of parking spaces may be granted by the
Director for development that provides showers and changing rooms, in addition to the
secure, sheltered bicycle parking facilities already required by City code.
5.4.7 A 5 percent reduction in the required number of parking spaces may be granted by the
Director for development of parking areas that increase storm water infiltration (see
Drainage guidelines in section 5.2.4).
Response: The project is within one‐fourth mile of the transit stop on Broad/Tank Farm Road.
A five percent parking reduction is requested.
Goal 5.8 Roadway View Protection
Tank Farm Road
Davenport Hills to
south; South Street
Hills to north
Building volume and mature street trees allow view
of at least 60% of the scenic resources visible be‐
fore development, as seen from 1.5 meters (5 feet)
above opposite side of roadway, looking perpendic‐
ular to road. (see following illustration.)
Page 279 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 6 of 33
Santa Fe Road
(Buckley Road to
Prado Road)
South Street Hills to
north; Davenport
Hills to south
View of these features will be preserved mainly
looking in the direction of the road rather than
perpendicular to it.
Response: Project drives and building articulations provides views to South Hills, Acacia Creek
and other open space resources to the extent practicable.
Goal 5.10: Building massing that adds visual interest, maintains human scale, and ex‐
presses building function.
Guidelines
A. Bold offsets and articulations of the wall plane should be used to reduce the apparent
overall building mass; create a play of shadow; provide visual interest; and maintain a
sense of scale.
B. Facades that face public streets shall be articulated to give human scale, reduce the ap‐
parent mass of large buildings, to add visual interest and avoid the uniform, impersonal
appearance typical of many large industrial and office type buildings.
C. Massing may vary from building to building but must reinforce the concept of a harmo‐
nious and unified cluster of buildings.
D. Building forms and placement should be used to create pedestrian areas that are pro‐
tected from the wind, but have appropriate sun exposure.
Response: Building massing and articulation provides for variation. See Sheets A13, A14. The
project also provides variations in building styles, colors schemes, wall planes, and building ori‐
entation.
Standards
5.10.1 Building facades visible from streets shall vary in modules of 20 meters (66 feet) or less.
On any building facade, continuous wall planes longer than 30 meters (100 feet) should
be avoided. Where interior functions require longer continuous spaces, exterior walls
should have architectural features such as columns or pilasters at least every 20 meters.
Such architectural features shall have a depth of at least 3 percent of the length of the
facade, and shall extend at least 20 percent of the length of the facade.
Page 280 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 7 of 33
Response: The project complies with the requirements.
5.10.2 Facades that face public streets shall use elements such as arcades, awnings, entry fea‐
tures, windows, or other such animating features along at least 60 percent of their hori‐
zontal length.
Response: Awnings, arcades, windows, entry features and other details are present in 90 per‐
cent of building street frontages.
Goal 5.11: An overall development profile that contributes to the unity and harmony of the
planning area when viewed as a whole, but also has enough variety to contrib‐
ute visual interest and avoid monotony.
Guidelines
A. Building height profile should be designed to create a harmonious relationship with adja‐
cent buildings both within the site and on adjacent sites.
B. Building heights should be varied both within and between sites to provide visual interest
and to mitigate the scale of the buildings. Lower building heights should be used near
entrances, plazas and other gathering places to maintain human scale.
C. Rooflines should be varied to add character and interest to buildings. Roof forms that
reference rural, agricultural building prototypes are preferred over flat roofs.
D. Rooftop equipment shall be consolidated as much as possible and screened from public
views, including open space areas open to the public. Enclosures for rooftop equipment
shall be integrated into the overall design of the structure.
Response: The building masses are consistent with those of the adjoining property (650 Tank
Farm Road. Finished building elevations are varied because of the sloping nature of the site,
and the variation is roof styles and slopes.
Standard
A.11.1 Table 4‐9 shows building height standards for the planning area. See the Zoning Regula‐
tions for allowed height in the R‐2 zone.
Response: Sheet 1 summarizes the building heigh requirements per Table 4‐9 of the AASP. Oc‐
cupied portions of structures are permitted to be 36’‐0” above average existing grade
(210’msl), and non‐occupied portions of structures are permitted to be 46’‐0” above average
existing grade (220’ msl). Sheets A16, A18, A20, A25 and A28 show how the building comply
with this standard.
Page 281 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 8 of 33
Goal 5.12: Architectural detailing that gives buildings human scale, visual interest and dis‐
tinctiveness through the use of high‐quality finishes and materials that are har‐
moniously combined to unify individual buildings and to ensure a consistent
level of design quality.
Guidelines
A. Arcades and/or recessed exterior balconies should be used to articulate building form,
provide a sense of scale, and create a play of light and shadow.
B. Wall and window surface planes should be articulated with reveals, trim, recesses, pro‐
jections, or other details to provide visual interest and a sense of scale.
C. Rooftop equipment should be shielded to provide pleasant roof views from taller adja‐
cent buildings or other elevated viewpoints such as open space areas and trails.
D. Building entries should be clearly defined and highly visible. This can be accomplished
through architectural feature such as a portico, overhang, decorative cornice, canopy or
arcade, and accentuated with a change in materials and color, and accent plantings.
E. Emphasize main building entries with entry courtyards or other features so they are eas‐
ily recognizable from approaching automobiles and to provide “ceremonial” entry for pe‐
destrians.
F. Exterior gutters, scuppers, leaders, leader heads and other exterior rainwater drainage
devices are allowed only if they are visually integrated into the building design as a deco‐
rative enhancement.
Response: Sheets A16, A18, A20, A25 and A28 show how the buildings comply with these
guidelines.
Goal 5.13: A unified identity through use of a harmonious, but varied, palette of materials
and colors that is coordinated with landscape elements and signage.
Guidelines
Exterior Materials
A. Within a given architectural design, the exterior appearance of a building should receive
a consistent treatment of material and colors on all sides, although the proportion of
materials may vary.
Page 282 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 9 of 33
B. In general, materials should be used honestly, reflecting their natural character, and arti‐
ficial versions of natural materials such as wood, rock, and masonry should be avoided.
C. Reflective or shiny exterior finishes such as glazed roofing tiles, enameled metals, reflec‐
tive glass, and glossy vinyl coatings are discouraged. When used, glass panels or win‐
dows that cover a large portion of the building facade should be clear or moderately re‐
flective. Highly reflective mirror glass is discouraged.
Color
D. In general, colors should be restrained. Colors that are compatible and complementary
with the range of natural tones found in the surrounding landscape are preferable for
exterior walls. Trim and accent colors may be brighter, but should still be somewhat
muted.
Response: Sheets A16, A18, A20, A25 and A28 show how the buildings comply with these
guidelines.
Goal 5.14: An attractive and sustainable landscape pattern that unifies and enhances the
quality of the proposed development, while being compatible with the rural ag‐
ricultural landscape that bounds the area to the south and east.
Guidelines
A. Street trees in the Airport Area should be planted to enhance the area’s image, and create
a strong sense of identity and unity regardless of the variety in land uses and architectural
styles.
B. Landscaping along streets and trails should employ a relatively simple palette of plants
and other materials that is repeated throughout the area to create a sense of continuity
and visual coherence.
C. Focal areas, such as the Airport Area gateways, key intersections and project entries
should be highlighted through the introduction of specimen trees, intensified planting
schemes, special paving and other landscape enhancements.
D. Native and naturalized plant species (plants that can easily survive local climatic and soil
conditions) are favored over exotic species that require more water, higher maintenance,
and are less compatible with the natural landscape.
Page 283 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 10 of 33
E. The use of native trees and those associated with the agricultural landscape are encour‐
aged throughout the area. For example, Oak trees are a recognized resource in the area.
The use of oak species, including Quercus agrifolia (coast live oak) and Quercus lobata
(valley oak), in focal areas and landmark locations is encouraged. California sycamore is
another appropriate species, particularly in areas adjacent to riparian corridors and wet‐
land areas.
F. The character of planted areas near riparian corridors should respect and respond to the
natural landscape character of these areas. A gradual transition should be created be‐
tween zones of purely native vegetation and predominantly ornamental planting areas.
G. The use of specimen trees and ornamental species is appropriate to highlight the im‐
portance of building entries and distinguish them from the rest of the site landscape.
H. Development in the Avila Ranch area shall be designed so the projected annual water
consumption is 35 percent less than the average annual community water consumption.
To meet this goal, the following performance standards shall be used:
1. Turf shall not be permitted for individual yard landscaping. Landscape plans shall
be developed which require lower water usage and lower maintenance. Landscape
plans shall reflect the local climate zones and local plant material.
2. Turf may be used where it is associated with a common open space, parkways,
sports field or other common area. Where feasible, these areas will be irrigated
with recycled water.
3. Landscape and irrigation plans should use drip irrigation systems to the extent fea‐
sible. General broadcast irrigation is discouraged.
4. EPA Watersense fixtures shall be used.
Goal 5.17: A consistent, high quality system of signs that allows for creativity in design and
commercial identification, while avoiding extremes of size, number, color,
height, and shape.
Guidelines
A. Signs should be visually integrated with the contours, forms, colors and detailing of the land‐
scape design. Low‐profile monument signs are generally preferred.
Page 284 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 11 of 33
B. The colors and materials of signs should reflect the visual attributes of the buildings to which
they refer. Harsh or garish colors for background or lettering are discouraged.
C. The total square‐footage of on‐site signage is governed by the City’s Sign Regulations.
Response: See sheets A35, A36, A40 and A41 for the overall landscape plan, plant materials,
and site details that show compliance with these guidelines.
Standards
Goal 5.17.1: Building identity signs shall be limited to major site entries from public roadways.
Corporate and business identity signs can be placed on the buildings themselves, if they are lo‐
cated near the building entrance and are for identification within the site (i.e., not from public
roadways).
Goal 5.17.2: Signs on poles or other raised structures are not allowed in the planning area.
Goal 5.17.3: All signs shall be located on private property.
Goal 5.17.4: Entry signs shall be externally illuminated. The light source shall be fully shielded
from view from roadways and pedestrian walkways. Lighting levels shall be as low as possible
while providing adequate illumination for signs to be seen by motorists.
Response: Commercial building signage and entry signs will be covered under a separate per‐
mit. Sheet A37 shows the proposed signage concepts.
Goal 5.18: A low level of ambient lighting that protects the rural ambience, while being
consistent with public safety needs.
Guidelines
A. When illuminated, pedestrian pathways and plazas within development parcels should use
light standards that limit the splay of light. Fixtures mounted no higher than 42 inches above
the ground are preferred, but light standards up to 12 feet tall are acceptable.
B. On‐site lighting to complement and enhance architecture, building identity and site design
should be restrained in its application. Fixtures should be concealed to avoid glare and light
intrusion into adjacent properties and streets.
C. Service area lighting should be contained within the service area boundaries and enclosure
walls. Light “spill over” outside service areas should be minimized.
Standards
Page 285 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 12 of 33
5.18.1 Provide minimum levels of lighting consistent with public safety standards along public
roadways.
5.18.2 At a minimum, streetlights shall be required at intersections, marked pedestrian cross‐
ings, and directional/warning signs. Where used, street lighting shall emphasize the creation of
“pools” of light around areas of concern, rather than providing a constant, even lighting across
the entire area.
5.18.3 Luminaire height shall not exceed 30 feet on arterials and major collectors such as Broad
Street, Prado Road, and Tank Farm Road.
5.18.4 To maintain a pedestrian scale and reduce ambient light levels, streetlights shall not ex‐
ceed 20 feet on all other streets.
5.18.5 Provide adequate illumination for safe use of parking lots after dark.
5.18.6 Color‐balanced lights that do not cast a tinted light are preferred.
5.18.7 Light fixtures shall be cut‐off type fixtures that focus light downward and shield the light
source from surrounding areas not intended to be illuminated.
5.18.8 Luminaire height should be uniform over the parking lot and not exceed 20 feet.
5.18.9 Parking area lighting should be designed to minimize shadow/light interference by siting
light standards between trees and below mature canopy tree height.
Response: Lighting will be permitted under a separate permit. The project will demonstrate
compliance under that permit.
Goal 5.20: Drainage systems that employ Best Management Practices, consistent with
City‐wide drainage standards, and are designed to be an integral part of the
natural landscape.
Guidelines
A. Use of surface stormwater collection systems, including swales, detention ponds, and energy
dissipaters, is encouraged to slow stormwater runoff and improve stormwater quality. Fea‐
tures such as sediment basins, filter strips, and infiltration beds can be included to further
enhance the removal of pollutants from runoff.
B. Where soils and water tables permit, developers are encouraged to use techniques for in‐
creasing stormwater infiltration. Such techniques could include infiltration basins, infiltration
trenches, swales with check dams, and/or permeable pavements.
Page 286 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 13 of 33
C. Use of permeable pavements, such as porous asphalt, porous concrete, and open‐celled pav‐
ers, is encouraged for pedestrian walkways, courtyards, parking areas and low‐volume
roads.
D. Use of parking lot planter strips as “bioswales” or infiltration beds that capture runoff from
the parking area in the planter areas is preferable to raised planter areas that drain off onto
the paved areas. The City can give up to a five percent reduction in required parking in ex‐
change for effective use of surface stormwater collection techniques that increase infiltra‐
tion.
E. Catchment and diversion of stormwater runoff from rooftops into surface collection/deten‐
tion/infiltration facilities is encouraged.
Response: The project will use an interconnected system of bioswales to manage stormwater
consistent with Regional Board and Drainage Management Plan guidelines. See sheet A5.
Community Design Guidelines
Residential Project Design
A. Develop neighborhoods. Each new residential project should be designed to inte‐
grate with the surrounding neighborhood to ensure that it maintains the established
character. Subdivisions in City expansion areas should be designed so that individual,
separately developed projects work together to create distinct neighborhoods, in‐
stead of disjointed or isolated enclaves.
Response: The project integrates to the employment areas, shopping, service areas, and
nearby recreation areas. It is integrated with the adjacent residential project with ped and
bike accessways.
B. Integrate open space. New subdivisions adjacent to planned or existing parks or
other public open spaces (e.g., creeks, riparian areas), or the landscaped grounds of
schools or other public facilities should maximize visibility and pedestrian access to
these areas. Where these facilities are not already planned, the subdivision should
be designed to provide usable public open spaces in the form of parks, linear bicycle
and pedestrian trails, squares, and greens, as appropriate.
Response: Acacia Creek and the Flow Mound are used as site amenities. Buildings and view
areas are oriented to these areas. Buildings are used to define local open spaces and yards.
C. Edges. "Gated communities," and other residential developments designed to ap‐
pear as continuous walled‐off areas, disconnected and isolated from the rest of the
community, are strongly discouraged. While walls and fences may be useful for se‐
curity, sound attenuation and privacy, these objectives can often be met by creative
Page 287 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 14 of 33
design that controls the height and length of walls, develops breaks and variations in
relief, and uses landscaping, along with natural topographical changes, for screening.
Response: There are no exterior walls. Buildings are used to line the public streets, per AASP
requirements.
D. Scale. New residential subdivisions, and groups of subdivisions that, in effect, collec‐
tively create a new neighborhood, should be designed to provide a "walkable" scale,
that places all homes within 1/4 mile of neighborhood shopping opportunities, a
neighborhood park, or a public facility that can serve as a "center" for the neighbor‐
hood. Ideally, each neighborhood should have a center that includes all three facili‐
ties.
Response: The project is within walking distance of the shopping, services and jobs. The club‐
house and recreation center (see Sheets A13, A28 and A32) services as the meeting area and
focal point for the project.
E. Site planning. Residential subdivision and multi‐family project site planning should em‐
phasize the needs of pedestrians and cyclists rather than cars
1. Street layout. New public streets and sidewalks should be aligned with, and be
connected to those of adjacent developments to interconnect the community.
a. Pedestrian orientation. Subdivision design should emphasize pedestrian
connectivity within each project, to adjacent neighborhoods, nearby
schools and parks, and to transit stops within 1/4‐mile of planned resi‐
dential areas. All streets and walkways should be designed to provide
safe and pleasant conditions for pedestrians, including the disabled, and
cyclists.
Response: The project is connected to services and jobs with on‐site and offsite
bike paths and sidewalks. The Tank Farm/Broad transit stop is located within
one‐quarter mile.
b. Block length. The length of block faces between intersecting streets
should be as short as possible, ideally no more than 400 feet, to provide
pedestrian connectivity.
Response: N/A. There are no internal public streets.
c. Street width and design speed. Streets within neighborhoods should be
no wider than needed to accommodate parking and two low‐speed travel
lanes. Streets in new subdivisions should be designed to accommodate
Page 288 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 15 of 33
traffic speeds of 25 miles per hour or less, with most streets in a subdivi‐
sion designed for lower speeds.
Response: Street widths and design speeds are defined by the City’s improve‐
ments standards, and the AASP.
d. Parkway/planting strips. Sidewalks should be separated from curbs by
parkway strips of at least five feet in width. The parkways should be
planted with canopy trees at an interval appropriate to the species of the
selected street tree that will produce a continuously shaded sidewalk.
The parkways should also be planted with ground covers and other plant
materials that will withstand pedestrian traffic.
Response: Parkway strips on Santa Fe and Tank Farm Road comply with City
standards in the Circulation Element and the AASP.
e. Access to open areas. Single‐loaded streets (those with residential devel‐
opment on one side and open space on the other) should be used to pro‐
vide public access to, and visibility of natural open spaces, public parks,
and neighborhood schools, as well as a means for buffering homes from
parks and schools. Where single‐loaded streets are not feasible or desira‐
ble, other methods that provide similar access and visibility may be used,
including private streets, bike and pedestrian paths, or the placement of
private common open space or recreation facilities adjacent to the public
open space.
Response: There are no public street defined adjacent to Acacia Creek. Drain‐
age basins and bioswales adjacent provide open vistas to the Acacia Creek cor‐
ridor.
f. Cul‐de‐sac streets. The use of cul‐de‐sac streets should be avoided wher‐
ever possible. If cul‐de‐sacs are necessary, the end of each cul‐de‐sac
should provide a pedestrian walkway and bikeway between private par‐
cels to link with an adjacent cul‐de‐sac, street, and/or park, school, or
open space area.
Response: Santa Fe is an interim cul‐de‐sac/turnaround. Ped and bike access
are provided to and through the cul‐de‐sac.
g. Alleys. Alleys may be provided for garage access, otherwise individual
lots should be wide enough to accommodate a side yard driveway to a
detached garage at the rear of the lot, so that appearance of the street
frontage is not dominated by garages and pavement.
Response: There are no alleys.
Page 289 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 16 of 33
2. Open space and natural features. Providing open space and integrating natural
features into a residential project can significantly increase the appreciation of
residents in their neighborhoods, provide safe places for children and families to
play, and maintain a strong sense of connection with the surrounding natural en‐
vironment in the city as a whole.
a. Natural amenities (such as views, mature trees, creeks, riparian corridors,
rock outcrops, and similar features) should be preserved and incorpo‐
rated into proposed development to the greatest extent feasible. Re‐
duced density and the clustering of units in hillside areas is encouraged as
a means of achieving this goal.
b. Development adjacent to parks or other public open spaces should be de‐
signed to provide maximum visibility of these areas.
c. Development on hillsides should generally follow the natural terrain con‐
tour. Stepped building pads, larger lot sizes, and setbacks should be used
to preserve the general shape of natural land forms and to minimize
grade differentials with adjacent streets and with adjoining properties.
d. Public access and visibility to creeks, and the separation of residences
and other uses from creeks should be provided through the use of single‐
loaded frontage roads in combination with multi‐use trails. Pedestrian
access to and along creeks and riparian corridors may need to be re‐
stricted to flatter areas (e.g. beyond top of bank, natural benches) where
grading needs and erosion potential are minimal, and where sensitive en‐
vironmental resources require protection.
Response: Acacia Creek, the Flower Mound, and Damon‐Garcia Sports Park are integrated to
the project through orientation of buildings, sidewalks, a Class I bike path along Acacia Creek.
The Class I bike path along Acacia Creek is according to the Circulation Element and the Active
Transportation Plan.
E. Exterior finish materials. Exterior finish materials should be durable and require low
maintenance. The use of combined materials (such as stucco and wood siding) can
provide visual interest and texture; however, all sides of each single‐family dwelling
or multi‐family structure should employ the same materials, design details, and win‐
dow treatment. No residential structure should have a carefully designed and de‐
tailed facade facing the street, and use bland, featureless stucco or other simple ma‐
terials on the other exterior building walls. Each residential structure should look
like the same building from all sides.
Response: Response: Sheets A16, A18, A20, A25 and A28 show how the buildings comply
with this guideline.
Page 290 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 17 of 33
F. Windows. Where one or more windows are proposed 10 feet or less from a side lot
line, or within 10 feet of another dwelling, the windows should be located and/or
screened to provide privacy for the residents of both structures. In some cases,
glass block or translucent glass may be appropriate to provide light, but also provide
privacy between buildings.
Response: All residential building are typically separated from others by at least 15 feet.
H. Garages and carports. Accommodating vehicle storage in both single‐family dwellings
and multi‐family projects should avoid the common problem of creating streets that ap‐
pear garage‐ and driveway‐dominated.
1. In the limited instances where an exception is granted for a setback to a garage
of less than 20 feet from a property line or internal driveway, the garage shall be
equipped with a roll‐up door. This requirement is intended to discourage vehi‐
cles from parking in front of garages and blocking the adjacent driveway or side‐
walk.
2. Where carports are provided, they may be bordered by patio walls, or used to
define public and private open space, but should not be located adjacent to pe‐
rimeter streets. Each carport end should be screened by a low wall, berm,
and/or landscaping.
3. Where multiple garages are located together, landscaped tree wells should be
placed between every two garage doors. Each tree well should be a minimum of
10 square feet.
4. Carports and detached garages should be designed as an integral part of a pro‐
ject. Their materials, color, and details should be the same as the principal struc‐
tures. Carports may have flat roofs but should not project above the exterior
walls of any buildings adjacent to streets. Prefabricated metal or canvas tent‐like
carports should not be used. Where garages are utilized, doors should appear set
into walls rather than flush with the exterior wall.
5. The use of quality materials, windows, and features with horizontal and vertical
relief are encouraged to add interest and character to the design of garage doors
and to coordinate their design with the architecture of the primary residence.
Response: There are no residential garages or carports that front onto, or have direct access
from public streets. Parking spaces are located at driveway entrances, but these areas com‐
prise less than 15 percent of any public street frontage. See Sheets A3, A11 and A14.
5.4 ‐ Multi‐Family and Clustered Housing Design
Page 291 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 18 of 33
A. Site planning. Site planning for a multi‐family or clustered housing project should create
a pleasant, comfortable, safe, and distinct place for residents, without the project "turn‐
ing its back" on the surrounding neighborhood
1. The placement of new units should consider the existing character of the sur‐
rounding residential area. New development should respect the privacy of adja‐
cent residential uses through appropriate building orientation and structure
height, so that windows do not overlook and impair the privacy of the indoor or
outdoor living space of adjacent units.
Response: The project is screened and buffered to the project to the east (650 Tank
Farm Creek) by Acacia Creek.
2. Multi‐family units should be clustered. A project of more than 10 units outside
the Downtown should separate the units into structures of six or fewer units.
See Figure 5‐1.
Response: The guideline is feasible for projects at densities of 15 units per the acre or
less. It is not feasible for projects of greater density, or for smaller unit sizes as pro‐
posed for this project. In order to comply with this requirement, the units would have
to be 75% larger which conflicts with the City and project objectives for the develop‐
ment of the site.
3. Multi‐family structures should be set back from adjacent public streets con‐
sistent with the prevailing setback pattern of the immediate neighborhood.
Response: There is no prevailing setback pattern. The project setbacks are consistent
with those established in the AASP.
4. Lower density multi‐family projects should be comprised of "walk‐up" rather
than "stacked" units, with each unit adjacent to a street having its primary pe‐
destrian entrance from the street sidewalk. Higher density projects should be
designed either with ground floor units having individual sidewalk entrances, or
as courtyard projects with at least one significant pedestrian entrance from the
street sidewalk. Where individual units have access to the street sidewalk, pri‐
vate "front yard" outdoor space may be differentiated from the public right‐of‐
way by a porch, or small yard enclosed by a low fence. See Figures 5‐1 and 5‐2.
Response: The project is a higher‐density multi‐family project. N/A.
5. Residential units and activity areas not adjacent to a street should be accessible
via pedestrian walkway and driveways.
Response: See Sheet A10 for site circulation.
Page 292 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 19 of 33
B. Parking and driveways. Individual closeable garages are the preferred method for
providing parking for residents in multi‐family projects. If garages within the residential
structures are not provided, dispersed parking courts are acceptable.
1. Long, monotonous parking drives and large, undivided parking lots are discour‐
aged.
2. The main vehicle access into a multi‐family site should be through an attractive
entry drive. Colored and textured paving treatment is encouraged outside of the
public street right‐of‐way, and within the project.
3. Parking areas should be visible from the residential units to the extent possible.
4. Safe and protected bicycle parking should be located convenient to each dwell‐
ing unit.
5. Parking courts, with or without carports, should not consist of more than two
double‐loaded parking aisles (bays) adjacent to each other. The length of a park‐
ing court should not exceed the width of eight adjoining stalls.
6. Parking courts should be separated from each other by buildings within the pro‐
ject or by landscape or natural open space areas at least 30 feet wide.
7. Large scale multi‐family projects (i.e., more than 20 units) with internal streets
should have the streets designed as if they were pleasant public streets, with
comprehensive streetscapes including sidewalks, and planting strips between
curb and sidewalk with canopy trees.
Response: A quarter of the residential parking is provided in garages that are tucked under
residential structures. There are approximately 200 residential parking spaces that are pro‐
vided in 10 separate parking lots. Bike parking is provided per City building codes and Active
Transportation Plan regulations.
C. Multi‐family project architecture. The exterior design of multi‐family projects should be
derived from architectural styles in the surrounding neighborhood. Often, these types
of projects are adjacent to single family neighborhoods, and care in design should en‐
sure that the height and bulk of the higher density projects do not impact adjacent
lower density residential areas.
1. Facade and roof articulation. A structure with three or more attached units
should incorporate significant wall and roof articulation to reduce apparent
scale. Changes in wall planes and roof heights, and the inclusion of elements
such as balconies, porches, arcades, dormers, and cross gables can avoid the bar‐
racks‐like quality of long flat walls and roofs. Secondary hipped or gabled roofs
Page 293 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 20 of 33
covering the entire mass of a building are preferable to mansard roofs or seg‐
ments of pitched roof applied at the structure's edge. Structures (including gar‐
ages and carports) exceeding 150 feet in length are discouraged. See Figures 5‐2
and 5‐4.
2. Scale. Because multi‐family projects are usually taller than one story, their bulk
can impose on surrounding uses. The larger scale of these projects should be
considered within the context of their surroundings. Structures with greater
height may require additional setbacks at the ground floor level and/or upper
levels (stepped‐down) along the street frontage so they do not shade adjacent
properties or visually dominate the neighborhood. Large projects should be bro‐
ken up into groups of structures, and large single structures should be avoided.
See Figure 5‐4.
3. Balconies, porches, and patios. The use of balconies, porches, and patios as part
of multi‐family structures is encouraged for both practical and aesthetic value.
These elements should be used to break up large wall masses, offset floor set‐
backs, and add human scale to structures. Multi‐family units with individual ac‐
cess to the street sidewalk should have individual covered porches. See Figure 5‐
4.
4. Dwelling unit access. The use of balconies and corridors to provide access to five
or more units should be avoided. Access points to units should instead be clus‐
tered in groups of four or less. To the extent possible, main entrances to individ‐
ual units should be from adjoining streets. Distinctive architectural elements and
materials should be used to highlight primary entrances.
5. Exterior stairways. Stairways providing access to the upper levels of multi‐family
structures should be located mostly within the buildings themselves. Where ex‐
terior stairways are necessary, they should provide residents and visitors protec‐
tion from weather, and should be of stucco, plaster or wood, with accent trim to
match the main structure. Thin‐looking, open metal, prefabricated stairs that
are not integrated with the design of the structure are discouraged.
6. Accessory structures. Accessory structures should be designed as an integral
part of a project. Their materials, color, and details should be the same as the
principal structures on the site.
Response: See Sheets A12, A14, A16, A18, A20, A22, A25 and A26 for building elevations and
details which comply with these guidelines. The longest residential structure is less than 165
feet long.
Page 294 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 21 of 33
Miscellaneous Design Details
A. Energy and resource conservation. Site planning and building design should take ad‐
vantage of all reasonable opportunities to reduce energy and other resource con‐
sumption, in compliance with the Energy Conservation Element of the General Plan.
The City also encourages all proposed development to comply with the standards for
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) developed by the Green
Building Council (www.usgbc.org).
1. The placement of a building on a site and the building itself should be designed
to maximize opportunities for the optimal operation of passive systems for heat‐
ing, cooling and lighting. Sunlight should be used for direct heating and illumina‐
tion whenever possible. Natural ventilation and shading should be used to cool
a building.
2. The use of exterior shading devices, skylights, daylighting controls, high perfor‐
mance glazing that allows the transmission of light with minimal heat gain, and
high thermal mass building components is encouraged.
3. An application for proposed building construction shall include a solid waste re‐
cycling plan for recycling discarded building materials, such as concrete, sheet‐
rock, wood, and metals from the construction site. The plan must be submitted
for approval by the Community Development Director, prior to building permit
issuance.
Response: The project complies with the most recent version of the CalGreen Code, city
building codes, Climate Action Plan, and the City’s Clean Energy Choice Program.
B. Fences and walls. Fences and walls can effectively provide safety, security, screening,
and privacy, but can also be unsightly site elements because of their length and visibil‐
ity, unless thoughtfully designed.
1. The design and placement of fences, retaining walls, gates, arbors, footbridges
and other site features should relate well to building architecture and site topog‐
raphy. These elements should be of the same quality in design and materials as
the buildings.
2. The color of fence and wall materials should complement the other structures on
the site. The use of chain‐link fencing and “crib” retaining wall designs are dis‐
couraged. Tall retaining walls (five feet and higher) should be divided up into
two or more shorter walls (depending on height), with the upper portion of the
wall set back from the lower wall at least two feet, with the slope between the
Page 295 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 22 of 33
walls not exceeding 4:1. Landscaping (with an irrigation system) should be in‐
stalled in the space between walls.
3. Long, monotonous fences or walls should be avoided. Fences and walls should
be offset at least every 10 feet. Landscaping should be installed in offset areas
where appropriate. Landscaping along fences and walls should be coordinated
with the street tree planting scheme.
Response: The project uses stained‐wood with contrasting black hog wire patio and balcony
fences for private patio areas (see Sheet A30). See Sheet A38 for site walls and fencing. Oth‐
erwise, buildings are used to define and contain interior spaces.
C. Lighting. Exterior lighting should be designed to be compatible with the architectural
and landscape design of the project while preserving the night sky, and not create a nui‐
sance for adjacent and nearby properties. See also the Night Sky Preservation standards
in Chapter 17.23 of the Zoning Regulations.
1. Outdoor lighting fixtures, including lighting for outdoor recreational facilities,
shall be cutoff fixtures designed and installed so that no emitted light will break
a horizontal plane passing through the lowest point of the fixture (See Figure 6‐
1).
2. Outdoor lighting shall be fully shielded, recessed, directed downward and not
spill onto adjacent properties and public rights‐of‐way (See Figure 6‐1).
3. An appropriate hierarchy of lighting fixtures/structures and intensity should be
considered when designing the lighting for the various elements of a project (i.e.,
building and site entrances, walkways, parking areas, or other areas of the site).
4. To achieve the desired lighting level for parking and pedestrian areas, it is pre‐
ferred to have more, smaller scale lights instead of fewer, overly tall and large
lights. Parking lot lights shall be as low in height as possible, and shall not exceed
a height of 21 feet from the approved finished grade to the bottom of the fix‐
ture.
5. The design of outdoor light fixtures should be in keeping with the architectural
style of adjacent structures. Outdoor wall‐mounted fixtures should not exceed a
height of 15 feet from grade or the height of the building, whichever is less.
6. The maximum light intensity on residential and nonresidential sites shall not ex‐
ceed a maintained value of 10 footcandles at grade. Exceptions are allowed for
sports lighting.
Page 296 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 23 of 33
7. No lighting on private property shall produce an illumination level greater than
two maintained horizontal footcandles at grade on any property within a resi‐
dential zoning district except on the site of the light source.
8. The use of exterior lighting to accent building architecture is encouraged. When
neon tubing is used to illuminate portions of a building it should be concealed
from view by parapets, cornices or ledges. Small portions of exposed neon tub‐
ing may be used to add special emphasis to an architectural feature, but this
must be well thought out and integrated into the overall design.
9. No permanently installed lighting shall blink, flash, rotate or be of unusually high
intensity or brightness.
10. Exterior lighting should enhance building design and landscaping, as well as pro‐
vide for safety and security, but should not create glare for residents or neigh‐
bors. Cut sheets or details of lighting fixtures shall be submitted with plans to
confirm that lighting will be cast downward, rather than spreading glare onto ad‐
jacent properties.
11. Lighting fixtures should be durable, and of a design that complements building
design and landscaping.
12. The Architectural Review Commission can approve an exception to these stand‐
ards based on specific extenuating circumstances.
Response: Lighting will be permitted under a separate permit. The project will demonstrate
compliance with these guidelines and the City’s Dark Sky regulations under that permit.
D. Mechanical equipment. The attractive appearance of an otherwise appropriate building
design can be ruined by the placement of mechanical equipment (for example, heating,
ventilation, and air conditioning) in visible locations on the roof, or on the ground adja‐
cent to the structure. Equipment that is not effectively integrated into the building de‐
sign should be screened as follows.
1. All mechanical equipment (e.g., compressors, air conditioners, pumps, heating
and ventilating equipment, generators, solar collectors, satellite dishes, commu‐
nications equipment, etc.) and any other type of mechanical equipment should
be concealed from view of public streets, and neighboring properties, and should
be insulated as necessary to prevent noise generated by the equipment from be‐
ing audible off the property.
2. Roof‐mounted mechanical equipment should be screened by a building parapet
or other effective roof design. If equipment will be visible above the parapet,
Page 297 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 24 of 33
some other type of screen shall be proposed. Plans must clearly call out the
height of equipment and demonstrate how equipment will be adequately
screened. A line of site diagram may be needed to confirm that proposed
screening will be adequate. Ground or interior‐mounted mechanical equipment
(with appropriate screening) is encouraged as an alternative to roof‐mounting.
3. Roof penetrations (such as plumbing and exhaust vents, air conditioner units,
and transformer boxes) should be grouped together where feasible to minimize
their visual impact. The roof design should help to screen or camouflage rooftop
protrusions.
4. Solar heating equipment should be as unobtrusive as possible and complement
the building design.
5. Standpipes for fire sprinkler systems should be shown on plans early in the re‐
view process so that their visual impact will be understood. They should prefera‐
bly be placed within the building.
Response: See Sheets A12, A14, A16, A18, A20, A22, A25 and A26 for building elevations, de‐
tails and mechanical equipment screening which comply with these guidelines.
F. Outdoor storage. Outdoor storage areas shall be screened with a solid fence, wall or
mature hedge or other screen planting at least six feet high (per Zoning Regulations Sec‐
tion 17.6.090).
Response: There are no outdoor storage areas.
F. Trash/recycling enclosures & service areas. Refuse containers, service areas, loading
docks, and similar facilities should be located out of view from the general public, and so
that their use does not interfere with on‐site parking or circulation areas, and adjacent
uses, especially residential uses.
1. Trash/recycling enclosures and service and loading docks should be conveniently
located and large enough to accommodate the uses on the site, but must not in‐
terfere with other circulation or parking on the site.
2. Trash containers should be located away from public streets and primary build‐
ing entrances, and should be completely screened with materials that are con‐
sistent with those on adjacent building exteriors.
3. If space constraints or excessive site slope mandate that a trash/recycling enclo‐
sure be installed in a street yard, then it should be located so it gates do not
face the street; finished with high quality materials to match the architecture of
the project buildings; and utilize surrounding landscaping to further screen and
Page 298 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 25 of 33
enhance its appearance. Screening techniques such as trailing vines on walls,
berming alongside and rear walls, and overhead trellises are all encouraged.
4. Trash storage areas that are visible from the upper stories of adjacent structures
should be screened with a trellis or other horizontal cover to mitigate unsightly
views. The covering structure should be consistent with the architectural style of
adjacent buildings.
5. Enclosures should be designed for long‐term use and made of durable materials
built on a concrete pad, in compliance with the standards for trash enclosure de‐
sign in Appendix B, “City of San Luis Obispo Development Standards for Solid
Waste Services.”
6. Pedestrian access through a separate gate to trash/recycling enclosures is re‐
quired for developments with multiple businesses, and multi‐family residential
projects, such as condominiums and planned developments, consistent with Sec‐
tion D of Exhibit 4. of the Bin Enclosure Standards available at www.sloc‐
ity.org/utilities/recycling.asp.
Response: See Sheet A6 for the location of trash enclosures. See Sheet A36 for waste recepta‐
cles to be used on the site, and Sheet A39 for trash enclosure details that meet these guide‐
lines.
G. Utilities. The location of meters and electrical transformers, control boxes, utility poles
and lines, fire safety apparatus and any other utility equipment needs to be conceptu‐
ally shown on plans submitted for architectural review pending final utility company ap‐
proval. Equipment and fixtures must be accessible for their intended purposes, but also
located and otherwise designed to be as unobtrusive as possible.
1. Utility service equipment (for example, electric and gas meters, electrical panels,
and junction boxes) should be located in a utility room within the structure, or
enclosed utility cabinets at the rear of the structure that are consistent with
building architecture and, where feasible, integral to the building. Locations of
meter boxes and other similar equipment should be clearly shown on elevations.
Response: See Sheets A12, A14, A16, A18, A20, A22, A25 and A26 for building eleva‐
tions, details and utility location and screening which comply with these guidelines.
2. Transformers must be placed so that they are not visible from streets adjacent to
the site. When transformers are unavoidable in a front setback, they should be
placed below grade. If below grade placement is not possible, they should be
completely screened by walls and/or thick landscaping, and should be located to
not obstruct views of tenant spaces, monument signs, windows, and/or
Page 299 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 26 of 33
driveways. Underground placement and screening is also necessary when trans‐
formers must be located in side setbacks that are visible from the street.
Response: Transformers, switchgear and other utility structures will be located in ac‐
cordance with the design requirements of the relevant utility. Where feasible and per‐
missible, they are located underground. However, transformers and switchgear must
be accessible from a public road or utility easement without obstruction.
3. The location of any required backflow prevention devices shall be shown on all
site plans, including the landscaping plan, as part of an application for architec‐
tural review. When buildings are located within 20 feet of the front right‐of‐way
line, the backflow preventer may be installed just inside this front part of the
building in direct alignment with the fire service lateral from the water main in
the street. Exterior backflow prevention devices shall be painted to blend in
with the landscaping or other background material. In addition, the backflow
prevention device shall be screened using a combination of slopes, landscaping,
or other site improvements such as garden walls. Specific screening proposals
shall allow access to the device for required annual testing, and shall be subject
to review and approval by the Community Development Director, or for projects
requiring their approval, the Architectural Review Commission.
Response: These details will be included in the Construction Plans.
6.2 – Landscaping
A. Goals for landscaping. The landscape design goals for the City include landscape that:
1. Enhances building architecture.
2. Reflects local climate and is water conserving
3. Emphasizes native species while providing botanical and visual diversity
4. Helps to preserve and create views
5. Is low maintenance, while in keeping with the City’s high standards for the best
of design
6. Provides aesthetic links and transitions between centers of activity
7. Uses plantings as examples of design, creative combinations of shapes, textures,
and colors
8. Provides shade, either seasonal or year round
9. Provides seasonal variety
Page 300 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 27 of 33
10. Preserves and utilizes historic plantings
11. Preserves and establishes landmark trees
12. Provides imaginative combinations of plantings and hardscape
B. Landscape design guidelines. The following guidelines are intended to assist in achiev‐
ing the above goals.
1. Overall landscaping guidelines. Planting areas should be integrated with the
building design, enhance the appearance and enjoyment of the project and sof‐
ten the visual impact of buildings and paving. Landscaping should use a combi‐
nation of trees, shrubs, and ground cover. Project plantings should blend with
vegetation on nearby property if the neighboring greenery is healthy and appro‐
priate. The City encourages innovation in planting design and choice of land‐
scape materials.
2. Vegetation and natural features. Healthy existing vegetation and natural rock
formations should be kept and incorporated into site and planting plans if they
improve site appearance or enhance its proposed use.
3. Extent of landscaping. A site should be adequately planted on all sides, and
within its interior. Trees must be planted along streets in compliance with the
City’s Tree Regulations, and should be selected from the City’s “street tree” list.
Trees not on the list may be used if approved by the City’s Arborist. Trees may
also be required at other locations on a site for screening.
4. Plant selection. The purpose of planting for shade, screening, erosion control or
appearance should inform the selection of plant types. Thickness, height, color,
seasonal characteristics and ultimate growth should be considered. Where
planting is intended to perform a function such as screening or shading, its initial
size and spacing should be selected to achieve its purpose within two years, or it
should be supplemented by temporary architectural features such as screen
fencing or an arbor.
5. Water conservation. The conservation and efficient use of water are important
City goals. To that end, the City Council adopted Ordinance 1547 (2010 series)
that promotes the use of native and drought tolerant materials and sets water
efficient landscape standards consistent with State law. The purpose of the
standards are to provide landscape designers and project applicants with the
tools they will need to design a landscape that is consistent with the Community
Design Guidelines goals and meet the more stringent requirements for water
conservation. The landscape standards apply to the following types of develop‐
ment:
Page 301 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 28 of 33
New construction and rehabilitated landscapes for institutional, commer‐
cial and multi‐family development projects with a landscape area equal
to or greater than 2,500 square feet which are otherwise subject to a
building permit or development review.
Developer‐installed single‐family residential landscapes and common ar‐
eas of a project with a landscape area equal to or greater than 2,500
square feet which are otherwise subject to a building permit or develop‐
ment review. Where model homes are included, the developer shall in‐
stall at least two model homes with landscapes that comply with the City
Engineering Standards requirements and include signs and printed mate‐
rials explaining design strategies and plant materials for water conserva‐
tion.
New construction landscapes which are homeowner‐provided and/or
homeowner‐hired in single‐family projects with a total project landscape
area equal to or greater than 5,000 square feet requiring a building per‐
mit or development review.
Response: See sheets A35, A36, A40 and A41 for the overall landscape plan, plant materials,
and site details that show compliance with these guidelines.
6.3 ‐ Parking Facilities
A. General design principles. Parking areas should be designed to serve pedestrian needs
as effectively as vehicle parking needs.
1. The City strongly encourages shared parking arrangements. Parking areas on ad‐
joining parcels should be connected to allow continuous vehicle, bicycle, and pe‐
destrian access. Pedestrian linkages between parcels should be located sepa‐
rately from vehicle connections where possible and, in all cases, clearly differen‐
tiated from vehicle ways.
2. Pedestrian ways should connect parking areas to streets.
3. Pedestrian ways should be incorporated in parking lots, where practical, using
such elements as accented paving, trellises, and lighting.
Response: Parking is provided adjacent to the mixed use building, in dedicated residential
garages, and in distributed parking lots. A quarter of the residential parking is provided in
garages that are tucked under residential structures. There are approximately 200 residential
parking spaces that are provided in 10 separate parking lots. Bike parking is provided per City
building codes and Active Transportation Plan regulations. See Sheet A10 for site circulation
Page 302 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 29 of 33
and pedestrian connections to parking, and special pedestrian connections through parking
lots.
B. Siting and screening. Parking lots should not dominate street views of projects. Wher‐
ever possible, parking lots should be placed behind buildings.
1. Motorcycle and bicycle parking spaces and accessible parking spaces should be
located for convenience and safety.
2. When parking lots are proposed along street frontages, they shall be screened by
a three‐foot (minimum) high wall, fence, hedge consisting of five gallon or larger
plants, or landscaped berm. The area between such screen and the street shall
be landscaped. (per Parking and Driveway Standards).
3. A parking lot on a non‐residential site adjacent to a residential use shall be
screened by a solid six‐foot high wall, fence or an existing mature hedge.
4. Structured parking is encouraged to minimize “vast seas of parking” in large
commercial projects.
5. The number of driveway entries to a site should be minimized, and located as far
away as feasible from adjacent street intersections. Opportunities for common
driveways and shared parking areas through reciprocal easements should be
pursued.
6. Where there is adequate space to do so, planters should be created along the
edge of driveways leading to parking lots, rather than up to the property line.
Response: There are no residential garages or carports that front onto, or have direct access
from public streets. Parking spaces are located at driveway entrances, but these areas com‐
prise less than 15 percent of any public street frontage. See Sheets A3, A11 and A14. Access
points on Santa Fe and Tank Farm Road are separated from the intersection by at least 250
lineal feet, and the number of entries is limited to that required for adequate fire access and
per the AASP.
C. Landscaping in parking areas. The City encourages landscaping in parking lots to provide
visual interest, buffers between land uses and shading for cars and people.
1. A minimum of five percent of the total area of a parking lot shall be devoted to
landscaping, in compliance with the City's Parking and Driveway Standards.
2. To provide for trees in parking lots, planters shall be placed after each six parking
spaces in any row, and at the ends of each row of parking spaces, in compliance
with Parking and Driveway Standards Section I.1.
Page 303 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 30 of 33
3. Trees in parking lots should be selected to provide adequate visual interest and
shading when they mature. Trees with messy fruit and excessive litter should be
avoided.
4. Landscape areas shall have a minimum dimension of four feet exclusive of any
car overhang area, and eight feet where intended to accommodate trees. Land‐
scape areas shall be defined by concrete curbing at least six inches wide, de‐
signed to minimize damage to pavement caused by irrigation of landscaping.
5. Landscaping in parking lots should be located and maintained so as to not block
a driver’s view.
6. Planter areas should be provided between buildings and adjacent parking lots to
visually break up the hard surfaces.
Response: See sheets A35, A36, A40 and A41 for the overall landscape plan, plant materials,
and site details that show compliance with these guidelines. Parking is provided in conform‐
ance with the Improvement Plans and Standards. Statistically, the commercial parking lot
contains 6.5% of total area as landscape. The project complies with dimension minimums
specified above.
D. Pedestrian access. Parking lots should be designed to help direct pedestrians comforta‐
bly and safely to building entrances.
1. Walkways should be clearly delineated by changes in the color or texture of pav‐
ing materials.
2. Parking lot aisles should generally be oriented to run perpendicular to the build‐
ing’s entry to allow pedestrians to walk parallel to moving cars. This strategy
also minimizes the need for the pedestrian to cross parking aisles and land‐
scaped areas.
3. The design of pedestrian access within a site should also consider pedestrian ac‐
cess to adjacent sites and uses.
Response: See Sheet A10 for overall pedestrian and bicycle access to and through the site.
See Sheet A33 for usage of materials and identifying pedestrian facilities
D. Alternative paving materials. The City supports the use of innovative paving materials
such as colored and/or stamped concrete, brick or grasscrete to help define an entry or
walkway, to minimize the visual expansiveness of large paved areas, or to help save a
specimen tree. However, care should be taken that walkways connecting disabled‐ac‐
cessible parking stalls or public sidewalks and transit stops to proposed uses are con‐
structed with smooth surface materials that can be comfortably.
Page 304 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 31 of 33
Response: See Sheets A5 and A33 for the areas where pervious paving materials are pro‐
posed.
F. Bicycle parking. Adequate on‐site facilities for bicycle parking throughout the City will
encourage more widespread bicycle use.
1. Each new multi‐family, office, commercial, or industrial project that requires 10
or more automobile parking spaces must provide both short‐term (racks) and
long‐term (lockers or interior space) bicycle parking. The number of spaces re‐
quired is based on the percentages included in Section 17.16.060, Table 6.5 of
the Zoning Regulations. Section 17.16.060 E. of the City’s Zoning Regulations al‐
lows a project that provides more bicycle and/or motorcycle spaces than re‐
quired, to reduce its vehicle parking requirement at the rate of one vehicle space
for each additional five motorcycle or bicycle spaces, up to a 10 percent reduc‐
tion.
2. Each bicycle rack should:
a. Stand a minimum of 30 inches from ground level and support each bike in
a stable position by providing at least two vertical contact points for a bi‐
cycle frame. The rack should be coated with, or constructed of a durable
material that prevents rust and corrosion. Inverted “U” racks or “Peak
Racks” bike racks have been identified as complying with the City’s stand‐
ards, illustrated in Figure 6‐4. Other similar designs may be allowed upon
approval by the Public Works Director.
b. Allow the frame and both wheels (one wheel removed from the frame) to
be locked to the rack using a common locking device such as a standard‐
sized "U"‐lock.
c. Be installed with mounting brackets on a concrete surface with access
provided in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications for place‐
ment and clearance from obstructions as shown in Figure 6‐5.
d. Be installed at highly visible locations that are as close to the main en‐
trance of the destination as possible and be located at least as conven‐
iently as the most convenient automobile parking space available to the
general public.
e. Be distributed to serve all tenants/visitors on sites that contain more
than one structure or building entry.
f. Be visible from the interior of the destination.
g. Be placed where they will not be damaged by vehicles or vandals.
Page 305 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 32 of 33
h. Be located where clear and safe pedestrian circulation is ensured.
i. Be illuminated at night to the extent that the destination supports
nighttime activity.
j. Be sheltered, when shelter can be attractively integrated with project ar‐
chitecture.
Response: See Sheet A1 for bicycle parking calculations. See Sheet A6 for location of bicycle
parking.
7.1 ‐ Creekside Development
A. Streambed analysis. The project permit application shall include a site‐specific
streambed analysis prepared by a hydrologist, civil engineer, or other qualified profes‐
sional to determine the precise boundary/top of bank of the waterway. The Director
may waive this requirement if it is determined that the project, because of its size, loca‐
tion, or design will not have an impact on the waterway, or that sufficient information
already exists, and further analysis is not necessary. A required streambed analysis shall
include all information and materials required by the Department.
B. Creek setback development guidelines. Each proposed structure shall comply with the
following guidelines.
1. A building setback line along the waterway shall be measured from the existing
top of bank or from the edge of the predominant pattern of riparian vegetation,
whichever is farther from the creek flow line. Applicants should review the City
Creek Setback Standards (Municipal Code Section 17.16.025), for additional in‐
formation and exceptions for creek setback measurements and requirements.
2. A path or trail may be located within a creekside setback where biological and
habitat value will not be compromised; however, no other structure, road, park‐
ing access, parking space, paved area, or swimming pool should be constructed
within a creek or creekside setback area. The surfacing of a path or trail may
most appropriately be permeable; the type of surface will be based on the need
to protect riparian resources and minimize runoff to the creek channel.
3. No grading or filling, planting of exotic/non‐native or non‐riparian plant species,
or removal of native vegetation shall occur within a creek or creekside setback
area.
4. Where drainage improvements are required within a creek or creek setback
area, they shall be placed in the least visible locations and naturalized through
Page 306 of 401
____________________________________
600 Tank Farm Road
Policy and Standard Conformity Checklist Page 33 of 33
the use of river rock, earthtone concrete, and landscaping with native plant ma‐
terials.
5. Proposed development should incorporate permeable surfaces in hardscape ar‐
eas (for example, wood decks, sand‐joined bricks, and stone walkways) where
feasible, to minimize off‐site flows and facilitate the absorption of water into the
ground.
6. Development or land use changes that increase impervious surfaces or sedimen‐
tation may result in channel erosion. This may require measures to stabilize
creek banks.
a. Creek rehabilitation is the preferred method of stabilization, with the objective
of maintaining the natural character and quality of the creek and riparian area.
Rehabilitation may include enlarging the channel at points of obstruction, clear‐
ing obstructions at points of constriction, limiting uses in areas of excessive ero‐
sion, and restoring riparian vegetation.
b. Concrete channels and other mechanical stabilization measures are not appro‐
priate, and should be considered for use on a case‐by‐case basis and only unless
no other alternative exists.
c. If bank stabilization requires other rehabilitation or vegetative methods, hand‐
placed stone or rock rip‐rap are the preferred methods.
7. Public access and visibility to creeks should be provided through the use of sin‐
gle‐loaded frontage roads adjacent to creeks, but outside of the creek setback.
Structures, or lots that back‐on to creeks are discouraged. However, certain ar‐
eas along the creek may not be appropriate for public access due to on‐going
conservation plans and programs. These areas are determined by the City’s Nat‐
ural Resource Manager.
Response: Building setbacks have been provided in conformance with Zoning Regulation re‐
quirements based on the average setback across the eastern property boundary. The set‐
backs vary, and areas within the statutory setbacks were determined to not have a significant
affect on wildlife or plant life. The modified setbacks have been reviewed by the Natural Re‐
sources Manager.
Page 307 of 401
Page 308 of 401
1622-02-RS20November 5, 2021COLOR AND MATERIALS PALETTE FOR BUILDING TYPES A & B2. BOARD & BATTEN FIBER CEMENT BOARD & BATT SIDING3. HORIZ. SIDING FIBER CEMENT 8” LAP SIDING4. PAINT COLOR SHERWIN WILLIAMS WHITE SNOW 9541 5. PAINT COLOR SHERWIN WILLIAMS LINK GRAY SW62005600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401X1SUPPLEMENTAL EXHIBITSADDITIONAL COLOR SCHEME & GARAGE DOOR COLOR UPDATECHARACTER SKETCH (FRONT)1555552134761. ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOFING: OWENS CORNING OAKRIDGE TWILIGHT BLACK6. METAL ROOFING STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFING, - DARK GRAY88. LIGHT FIXTURE STYLE: MAXIM MODEL 86393BZ (NIGHT SKY COMPLIANT)33336667. STOREFRONT: MILGARD WINDOWS BLACK FRAME2223333332226666622333344222244444555555222222444455555555554444444555555555444444444444444444444444444444CHARACTER SKETCH (REAR)NOTE:GARAGE DOORS TO MATCH SURROUNDIING WALL COLORPage 309 of 401
1622-02-RS20November 5, 2021COLOR AND MATERIALS PALETTE FOR BUILDING TYPES C & D3. BOARD & BATTEN FIBER CEMENT BOARD & BATT SIDING COLOR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS WHITE SNOW 95414. HORIZ. SIDING FIBER CEMENT 8” LAP SIDING COLOR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS WHITE SNOW 95415. BOARD & BATTEN FIBER CEMENT BOARD & BATT SIDING COLOR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS CONTENTED SW 61916. CEMENT PLASTER: SHERWIN WILLIAMS GREEN EARTH SW 7748 444444444600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401X2SUPPLEMENTAL EXHIBITSADDITIONAL COLOR SCHEME & RAILING UPDATECHARACTER SKETCH1166666666666666621347652. METAL ROOFING: MCARTHY WHOLSALE STANDING SEAM METAL SHAKE GRAY55555333333555555589. LIGHT FIXTURE STYLE: MAXIM MODEL 86393BZ (NIGHT SKY COMPLIANT)1. ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOFING: OWENS CORNING OAKRIDGETWILIGHT BLACK9222222222222222222222222226666666666668. RAILING: POSTS AND RAILING STAINED WOOD BALISTRADE: BLACK PERFORATED METAL PANEL555555544433333333334444444444222227. STOREFRONT: MILGARD WINDOWS BLACK FRAME888888888888NOTE:RAILING TYPE UPDATED TO PROVIDE MORE PRIVACY, TYP.Page 310 of 401
1622-02-RS20November 5, 2021BLDG #7BLDG #2BLDG #1BLDG #3BLDG #4BLDG #6BLDG #5SANTA FE ROADTANK FARM ROADPLANTER ISLANDS & BULB-OUTSDECORATIVE PAVING AT CROSSINGS, TYP.CURVED ENTRY DRIVE SLOWS TRAFFIC PLANTER ISLAND, TYP.ACCENT AND CANOPY TREES LINE ENTRY DRIVE RAISED 4-WAY SPEED TABLENORTHNTS600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401X3SUPPLEMENTAL EXHIBITSPEDESTRIAN LINKAGES & TRAFFIC CALMING EXHIBITPage 311 of 401
1622-02-RS20November 5, 2021BLDG #8BLDG #7BLDG #4BLDG #6BLDG #8BLDG #9BLDG #11ENLARGEMENT AREA - ENTRY AT MULTI-USE PATH SANTA FE DRIVE - PROJECT ENTRY NORTHSHORT-TERM BIKE PARKING, TYP. 333MULTI-USE PATH 111BICYCLE REPAIR STATION & WATER BOTTLE RE-FILL 1FUTURE BIKE/ PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE - NOT A PARTSEAT WALL WITH WOOD INSET PLANTER AREA WITH ACCENT WALL455664WASTE RECEPTACLESBENCH SEATINGBOLLARD, TYP.DECORATIVE ENTRY PAVING (PERMEABLE)DROUGHT TOLERANT LANDSCAPE AREA, TYP.77891011111111109822DESIGN KEYNTSNORTHNTS600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401X4SUPPLEMENTAL EXHIBITSMULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION EXHIBIT - BIKE NODEPage 312 of 401
1622-02-RS20November 5, 2021BLDG #2BLDG #1ENLARGEMENT AREA - LANDSCAPE AREAS AT MIXED USE BUILDINGSREFER TO SHEET A3 IN ARC PACKAGE FOR TYPICAL PRELIMINARY SECTIONSREFER TO SHEET A40 AND A41 IN ARC PACKAGE FOR PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN AND SPECIES PLATANUS HISPANICA - DESIGNATED STREET TREE PER CITY OF SLO STREET TREE MASTER PLAN BLDG #2BLDG #1ANORTHNTS600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401X5SUPPLEMENTAL EXHIBITSLANDSCAPE AREAS AT MIXED USE BUILDING EXHIBITPage 313 of 401
1622-02-RS20November 5, 2021600 TANK FARM600 TANK FARM ROAD, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401X6SUPPLEMENTAL EXHIBITSOUTDOOR SPACES - ENLARMENTS EXHIBITNORTHNTSREFER TO SHEETS A33 - A41 IN ARC PACKAGE FOR FULL SITE PLAN AND IMAGES AND DESCRIPTIONS OF OUTDOOR AMENITIES, LANDSCAPE FEATURES, GATHERING AREAS, SITE FURNISHINGS, WALLS, AND BICYCLE PARKING.1225544331Page 314 of 401
11/17/2021 Planning Commission Item 4a,
Staff Presentation
1
600 Tank Farm Road
Residential Mixed-Use Project
GENP-0814-2019; SPEC-0407-2020; EID-0608-2020; ARCH-0406-
2021; and SBDV-0407-2021
Planning Commission Presentation for the
600 Tank Farm Road Project
November 17, 2021
Applicant: Covelop, Inc.
Representative: Stephen Peck
Recommendation – Part 1
2
Adopt the Draft Resolution (Attachment A) recommending the City
Council:
Approve a General Plan Amendment from Business Park to
Services and Manufacturing;
Approve Vesting Common Interest Tentative Parcel Map No.
21-0015;
Approve a Major Development Review entitlement and
associated exceptions that would allow for a mixed-use
development consisting of 280 residential units and 12,500
square feet of commercial space; and
Certify the associated Final Environmental Impact Report
(FEIR) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).
1
2
11/17/2021 Planning Commission Item 4a,
Staff Presentation
2
Recommendation – Part 2
3
Recommend the City Council adopt the Draft Ordinance
(Attachment B), that would include amending the Zoning Map by
changing the zoning designation of the properties associated with
the 600 Tank Farm Project from Business Park (BP-SP) to
Commercial Services (C-S-SP) and making associated text
amendments to the Airport Area Specific Plan.
Project Site and Location
4
3
4
11/17/2021 Planning Commission Item 4a,
Staff Presentation
3
Surrounding Land Uses
5
North: Damon Garcia Sports
Fields
East: Acacia Creek and mixed
use residential development
South: Tank Farm Road and
undeveloped land
West: undeveloped Chevron
property
Previous Review to Inform the Project
City Council – April 2020
Authorized staff to initiate and process the project
Active Transportation Committee – July 2020
Provided comment on conceptual design related to
bicycle and pedestrian safety
consistency with latest Active Transportation Plan
ARC – August 2020
Provided comment on conceptual design related to
building orientation
site access
common open space areas
architectural style compatibility
6
Planning Commission – September
2020
Provided comment on
conceptual design related to
building orientation
mixed use compatibility
bicycle and pedestrian
circulation
Proposed project reflects this input
(see Attachment G)
5
6
11/17/2021 Planning Commission Item 4a,
Staff Presentation
4
Project Overview
7
Development Characteristics
280 Residential Units
240 high density units
40 mixed use units
12,500 SF of commercial office space
11.7-acre site adjacent to Acacia Creek
1.0 acres of offsite transportation improvements
Within the Airport Area Specific Plan
Requested Entitlements
General Plan Map Amendment (BP to MS)
Rezone (BP-SP to C-S-SP)
Specific Plan Amendment (AASP text amendments)
Major Development Review (26 new structures)
Tentative Parcel Map (11 lots and 280 condominiums)
Proposed Site Plan
8
7
8
11/17/2021 Planning Commission Item 4a,
Staff Presentation
5
Building Types
Residential Buildings
24 buildings
Four building types (“A” through “D”)
565-1,550 SF units (studios to 3-bed units)
Three story buildings
Building heights up to 36 feet (46 feet for unoccupied area)
Other Buildings
1 Mixed-Use structure (3-story - building Type E)
450 and 625 SF units in Building E (studios and 1-bed units)
12,500 SF ground floor commercial in Building E
2,574 SF Clubhouse in Building F
9
Proposed Development
10
9
10
11/17/2021 Planning Commission Item 4a,
Staff Presentation
6
Requested Design Exceptions
11
Allow a paved bike/pedestrian trail within the 35-foot
creek setback, in accordance with § 17.70.030.G.2.c;
Allow portions of Buildings 14, 19, and 21, to encroach
within the creek setback to allow a 30-foot setback,
where a 35-foot setback is normally required, in
accordance with § 17.70.030.G.4;
Allow portions of Buildings 4, 8, 14, 19, and 21, to
encroach within the upper-story creek setback to allow
a 30-foot setback where a 45-foot setback is normally
required, in accordance with § 17.70.030.G.4
Requested Design Exceptions
12
Allow ground floor residential uses along Santa Fe
Road on the ground floor within the first 50 feet of
Buildings 7 and 9, in accordance with §
17.70.130.D.1.a;
Allow a retaining wall with a maximum height of 15 feet,
where 8 feet is normally the standard, in accordance
with § 17.70.070.H; and
A 6.8 percent parking reduction is requested to reduce
the required parking from 467 vehicle spaces to 435
spaces, in accordance with AASP Standards 5.4.5,
5.4.6, and 5.4.7.
11
12
11/17/2021 Planning Commission Item 4a,
Staff Presentation
7
Project Phasing
13
Transportation Improvements
Onsite. Contribute fair share to improvements programmed
in the GP or AASP either though TIF or Conditions of
Approval, including
Tank Farm Road widening along project frontage
Roundabout at Tank Farm Road/Santa Fe Road
Extension of Santa Fe Road north of Tank Farm Road
Offsite. Preliminary planning and engineering support for
future shared use ped/bike path on Tank Farm Road west to
Innovation Way.
Applicant’s planning and construction beyond fair share is
subject to a Reimbursement Agreement
14
13
14
11/17/2021 Planning Commission Item 4a,
Staff Presentation
8
Advisory Body Review and Direction
15
Tree Committee – August 18, 2021
Found the tree removal and replanting plan
consistent with City regulations
ARC – October 4, 2021
Found project consistent with CDG and
AASP design standards with six
recommendations
ARC Recommendations
16
Provide one more color scheme for Building A types
Incorporate balcony railings that provide more privacy; 66%- 75%
solid panels to screen views
On the Building B rear elevation provide white garage doors rather
than gray to blend in more
Provide more planting or other visual indicators for pedestrians and
traffic calming (referencing the red arrow shown on Sheet A10
descending from Santa Fe Road)
Use landscaping to reduce massing of Building E
Provide well thought out pedestrian-scale elements
15
16
11/17/2021 Planning Commission Item 4a,
Staff Presentation
9
Revisions based on ARC Recommendations
17
Applicant revised project to address the six
recommendations
Refer to Attachment R, Sheets X1 through X6
for details
Staff supports these changes, which
substantially address ARC recommendations
Policy Consistency
General Plan
Major City Goal – Housing
Housing Element
More diversity in product; affordability by design
600 Tank Farm is identified as a place appropriate for rezone to higher density or mixed use housing
Land Use Element
Promotes housing to balance job and housing opportunities
Promotes a mix of high quality pedestrian-oriented housing types
Promotes pedestrian circulation in design
Circulation Element
Multi-modal transportation design
Project is consistent with General Plan direction
Project includes multi-family housing with internal/external pedestrian and
bicycle transportation connections
18
17
18
11/17/2021 Planning Commission Item 4a,
Staff Presentation
10
Policy Consistency
Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP)
Consistent with proposed C-S-SP designation
allowing mixed use; compatible with neighboring
650 Tank Farm Road project
Consistent with key AASP policies regarding
allowed uses, setbacks, and building heights
AASP to be amended to ensure further
consistency
19
Policy Consistency
Zoning Regulations
Consistent with policies related to mixed use
Creek setbacks – requested exception is supportable per Zoning
Regulations § 17.70.030.G.4
Ground floor residential setback from Santa Fe Road is
supportable per Zoning Regulations § 17.70.130.D.
Parking reduction is supportable per Zoning Regulations §
17.16.060.K.
Subdivision Regulations
Consistent with common interest subdivision requirements
Affordable Housing Requirements
Consistent with affordability requirements
11 deed restricted moderate income units proposed; only 3 are
required
20
19
20
11/17/2021 Planning Commission Item 4a,
Staff Presentation
11
Inclusionary Housing
21
Proposed Inclusionary Housing Locations
Airport Land Use Plan Consistency
Airport Land Use Commission review
Project was referred to ALUC for consistency
review on August 18, 2021
ALUC determined the project was consistent with
Airport Land Use Plan
ALUC conditions are included in Attachment G
Condition 18 has been incorporated into the Draft
Resolution to ensure adherence to ALUC
conditions
22
21
22
11/17/2021 Planning Commission Item 4a,
Staff Presentation
12
CEQA Documentation
Draft EIR Circulated for 50 days (June 15 to Aug 3, 2021)
Public Workshop held on July 14, 2021
Final EIR prepared that responded to public comments
No new impacts or substantial changes to mitigation identified
Final EIR – key conclusions
Examined 11 environmental issues in detail; most were less
than significant, or significant but mitigable
One impact was determined to be significant and
unavoidable (HAZ-3), which addressed pedestrian safety
along Tank Farm Road
Applicant to provide signage until ped/bike connection
is completed along Tank Farm Road, which is outside
the control of the project
23
Corrections from the Agenda Report
Attachment F
ATC Directional Item #15 suggested a
landscaped parkway between Tank Farm Road
and the ped/bike path.
The staff response incorrectly indicated there is
no such parkway proposed.
However, Attachment J (Exhibit X3) shows the
applicant responded to this issue and provided
this feature.
24
23
24
11/17/2021 Planning Commission Item 4a,
Staff Presentation
13
Attachment J, Exhibit X3
25
Modified Conditions
26
Condition 115: Tank Farm Road Frontage Improvements. Project applicant
shall reconstruct the Tank Farm Road project frontage to current City
Engineering Standards. Unless otherwise approved by the Public Works
Director, plans submitted for Public Improvement Plans shall include
widening the northern side of Tank Farm to a cross section that substantially
conforms with the Airport Area Specific Plan and Active Transportation Plan,
which includes the following typical cross section elements on the north half
of the street: 5’ sidewalk / 7’ protected bike lane / 9’ parkway / curb and
gutter / two westbound 12’-13’ auto lanes / raised median / one existing
eastbound auto lane / existing eastbound bike lane. Designs shall be
developed in coordination with the frontage improvements currently in
development for the adjacent 650 Tank Farm Road development to ensure
that appropriate geometric transitions. Improvements shall be approved or
substantially approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works and
Community Development Departments prior to issuance of any building
permits and improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of first
occupancy permits.
25
26
11/17/2021 Planning Commission Item 4a,
Staff Presentation
14
Next Steps
Planning Commission to consider project based on
consistency with City policies and programs, and
ARC and Tree Committee recommendations.
If Planning Commission recommends approval, City
Council will consider project approval based on all
advisory body recommendations.
27
Recommendation – Part 1
28
Adopt the Draft Resolution (Attachment A) recommending the City
Council:
Approve a General Plan Amendment from Business Park to
Services and Manufacturing;
Approve Vesting Common Interest Tentative Parcel Map No.
21-0015;
Approve a Major Development Review entitlement and
associated exceptions that would allow for a mixed-use
development consisting of 280 residential units and 12,500
square feet of commercial space; and
Certify the associated Final Environmental Impact Report
(FEIR) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).
27
28
11/17/2021 Planning Commission Item 4a,
Staff Presentation
15
Recommendation – Part 2
29
Recommend the City Council adopt the Draft Ordinance
(Attachment B), that would include amending the Zoning Map by
changing the zoning designation of the properties associated with
the 600 Tank Farm Project from Business Park (BP-SP) to
Commercial Services (C-S-SP) and making associated text
amendments to the Airport Area Specific Plan.
Questions and Comments
30
29
30
11/17/2021 Planning Commission Item 4a,
Staff Presentation
16
Suggestions
31
Creek Setback Exceptions
32
31
32
11/17/2021 Planning Commission Item 4a,
Staff Presentation
17
Upper Story Setback Exceptions
33
Retaining Wall Exception
34
33
34
11/17/2021 Planning Commission Item 4a,
Staff Presentation
18
Ground Floor Residential Exception
35
35
11/17/2021 Planing Commission Item 4a,
Applicant Presentation
1
600 TANK FARM
PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING
General Plan/AASP Amendment
Rezoning
600 Tank Farm Road
NOVEMBER 17, 2021
Where?
…Close to shopping and jobs.
Near enough to Mindbody,
South Broad/Morabito
Business Park, Sacramento
Drive Business Park, and SLO
County airport to walk or
bike. Marigold Shopping
Center is within walking
distance. An “infill” location.
1
2
11/17/2021 Planing Commission Item 4a,
Applicant Presentation
2
Requested
GP/SP
Changes;
Entitlements
1. Re‐classification of Tank Farm Road, Santa Fe Road and
bike lanes to match traffic projections, and Draft Active
Transportation Plan.
a. 4‐Lane Santa Fe is overdesigned and does not match
classification and speed design. Convert to 2
through lanes.
b. Tank Farm Road—two through lanes and bikeway
connection.
c. Class IV vertically separated bike lanes per ATP.
2. Land Use/Zoning/AASP changes to mixed use CS and
residential.
Why Make A
Change In Land
Use
Designation?
1. There is still a need for projects that are smaller, more
compact, close to existing services and affordable by design.
2. This project has a lower overall average unit size, in both the
for‐sale and for‐rent categories. Average unit size for the for‐
sale townhomes 1,100 SF with sizes ranging from 450 SF to
1,450 SF. More about that later in the presentation.
3. Average unit size across the entire project is 933 SF,
substantially lower than other recent projects.
4. Project makes the Santa Fe/Tank Farm roundabout and
connector feasible to install by private developer (with fee
credits and reimbursements). Current BP zoning does not
without the City taking the financial lead.
5. Provides needed planning and design for the Tank Farm
Road Class I Bike Path.
6. Project was found consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan.
7. Project provides a preference for workers in the immediate
vicinity.
…city needs 250 acres of
vacant BP, M and CS land
to meet future employment
needs. Developing this site
as mixed use residential will
leave 320 acres, an 80-acre
surplus. This site is close to
employment, shopping and
services and is better used to
balance jobs and housing in
South SLO.
3
4
11/17/2021 Planing Commission Item 4a,
Applicant Presentation
3
Why?
Delivering
Critical
Infrastructure
…Project delivers the Santa Fe &
Tank Farm roundabout, with ped
and bike connections to Chevron
and Damon Garcia properties.
New “Class IV bike lanes surround
the site, and the project connects
Tank Farm bike paths to Damon
Garcia Sports Park.
Without the project, these
improvements would have to be
Installed by the City, or
substantially later by a large
project.
Why?
Special Community Benefits And Features
…Making a good project
better, the Project integrates
some of the most progressive
features to address
community needs,
affordability, and active
transportation.
1. New “Class IV” bike lanes for safety; connectivity to
Tank Farm, 650 Tank Farm, and Damon Garcia
Sports Park bike path.
2. Enhanced noise mitigation.
3. Buyer’s preference program for workers in the
immediate vicinity to reduce VMT and encourage
active transportation modes.
4. All‐electric; Central Coast Community Energy.
5
6
11/17/2021 Planing Commission Item 4a,
Applicant Presentation
4
Why?
Environmentally Superior To Current Land Use Designation
…Making a good project
better, the Project integrates
some of the most progressive
features to address
community needs,
affordability, and active
transportation.
Alternative 2—”Build” Alternative Under Existing Zoning
1. 280 Smaller Homes vs. 246,000 SF of Office/Business Park.
2. 800 new jobs and associated vehicle trips vs 280 new houses
targeted to existing local workers.
1. Relative Impacts
•“…approximately 60% higher project‐generated traffic on area roadways.”
•“…exceed the 25 pounds per day threshold for ROG and NOX, which would result in a
potentially significant impact.”
•“…biological resource impacts under Alternative 2 would be greater than the proposed
project.”
•“…operational energy usage would be lower higher under Alternative 2.”
•“…this alternative would not implement project components consistent with the City’s CEQA
GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist.”
1. Alternative 2 would meet objectives 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, and would
fail to meet objectives 2, 3, 4, and 9, which relate specifically to
providing housing and/or mixed‐use residential opportunities
on the site.
MAJOR CITY GOALS
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
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.
7
8
11/17/2021 Planing Commission Item 4a,
Applicant Presentation
5
WHY
FILLING A NEED FOR OBTAINABLE HOUSING
MULTI-MODAL CIRCULATION
•Class I Bike Path On-site
•Bike Lanes along TFR
•Bike Lanes on Santa Fe
•Preliminary Design for
Bike Path along TFR
9
10
11/17/2021 Planing Commission Item 4a,
Applicant Presentation
6
SITE PLAN
MIXED USE BUILDING:
More cohesive to over all architectural theme
•Tank farm frontage
•More cohesive architecture
•Private out door space
•Materials and details
11
12
11/17/2021 Planing Commission Item 4a,
Applicant Presentation
7
RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS
STACKED FLATS
•Roofline
•Siding
•Porch
•Windows
REAR OF SITE
STACKED FLATS /
TOWNHOMES
•Roofline
•Siding
•Porch/Decks
•Windows
13
14
11/17/2021 Planing Commission Item 4a,
Applicant Presentation
8
THE CLUBHOUSE
MATERIALS AND DETAILS
15
16
11/17/2021 Planing Commission Item 4a,
Applicant Presentation
9
OPEN SPACE
COLOR SCHEMES
ADDITIONAL COLOR SCHEME & GARAGE DOOR COLOR UPDATE
17
18
11/17/2021 Planing Commission Item 4a,
Applicant Presentation
10
COLOR SCHEME & RAILING DESIGN
ADDITIONAL COLOR SCHEME & UPDATED RAILING DESIGN
PED LINKAGE & TRAFFIC CALMING
ADDITIONAL PEDESTRIAN LINKAGES & TRAFFIC CALMING
19
20
11/17/2021 Planing Commission Item 4a,
Applicant Presentation
11
MULTI-MODAL
ENLARGEMENT OF THE MULTI-MODAL/BIKE NODE
MIXED-USE LANDSCAPE
ENLARGEMENT OF THE MIXED-USE LANDSCAPE
21
22
11/17/2021 Planing Commission Item 4a,
Applicant Presentation
12
OUTDOOR SPACES
ENLARGEMENT OF OUTDOOR AMENTIES
THANK YOU
QUESTIONS?
23
24