Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
08-27-14
City of San Luis Obispo, Agenda, Planning Commission Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the Community Development, 919 Palm Street, during normal business hours. SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Council Chamber City Hall - 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 NOTE EARLIER START TIME: August 27, 2014 Wednesday 5:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL:Commissioners Hemalata Dandekar, Michael Draze, John Fowler, Ronald Malak, William Riggs, Vice-Chairperson Michael Multari, and Chairperson John Larson ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA: Commissioners or staff may modify the order of items. MINUTES: Minutes of August 13, 2014. Approve or amend. PUBLIC COMMENT: At this time, people may address the Commission about items not on the agenda. Persons wishing to speak should come forward and state their name and address. Comments are limited to five minutes per person. Items raised at this time are generally referred to staff and, if action by the Commission is necessary, may be scheduled for a future meeting. PUBLIC HEARINGS: NOTE: Any court challenge to the action taken on public hearing items on this agenda may be limited to considering only those issues raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City of San Luis Obispo at, or prior to, the public hearing. Any decision of the Planning Commission is final unless appealed to the City Council within 10 days of the action (Recommendations to the City Council cannot be appealed since they are not a final action.). Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Commission may file an appeal with the City Clerk. Appeal forms are available in the Community Development Department, City Clerk’s office, or on the City’s website (www.slocity.org). The fee for filing an appeal is $273 and must accompany the appeal documentation. If you wish to speak, please give your name and address for the record. Please limit your comments to three minutes; consultant and project presentations limited to six minutes. Planning Commission Agenda Page 2 The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs, and activities. Please contact the City Clerk or staff liaison prior to the meeting if you require assistance. 1.3080 Rockview Place.TR/A/ER 202-13: Review of a nine-lot common-interest subdivision, construction of nine residences on a site designated Special Considerations, and requested other yard, street yard, and creek setback exceptions with review of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact; R-2-S zone; Covelop, Inc., applicant. (Marcus Carloni) 2.City-Wide.GPI/ER 15-12: Review of Chapter 7 of the Draft Land Use Element, Chapter 11 of the Draft Circulation Element, and proposed implementation through creation of an Airport Overlay Zone, and associated consistency changes through Safety and Noise Elements; General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements Update and Environmental Impact Report (EIR); City of San Luis Obispo – Community Development Dept., applicant. (Gary Kaiser) COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 3.Staff a. Agenda Forecast 4.Commission ADJOURNMENT Presenting Planners: Marcus Carloni and Gary Kaiser PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: Review of revised plans for a Vesting Tentative Tract Map 3057 for a nine (9) lot common-interest subdivision with exceptions to yard standards and a Use Permit to allow development on a site zoned Medium-Density Residential with the Special Considerations overlay (R-2-S). The project includes the dedication of one affordable housing unit to families qualifying as “moderate income”. PROJECT ADDRESS: 3080 Rockview Place BY:Jaime Hill, PMC Contract Planner Marcus Carloni, Associate Planner Phone Number: 781-7176 E-mail: mcarloni@slocity.org DD FILE NUMBER: TR/A/ER 202-13 FROM: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director RECOMMENDATION: Recommend that the City Council approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 3057 and Use Permit A 202-13, and adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact (Attachment 8, Draft Resolution), based on findings, and subject to conditions. SITE DATA Applicant Covelop, Inc. Representative Damien Mavis Zoning R-2-S (Medium Density Residential, Special Considerations) General Plan Medium Density Residential Site Area 31,479 square feet (0.7227 ac) Application Complete Environmental Status February 7, 2014 A Mitigated Negative Declaration was recommended by the Community Development Department on May 7 2014 (ER 202- 14) SUMMARY On May 14, 2014, the Planning Commission reviewed an application for a vesting tentative tract map, use permit, and environmental review to create a nine-unit common interest subdivision, and continued the project to allow the applicant to address specific concerns. The applicant has Meeting Date: August 27, 2014 Item Number:1 r PC1 - 1 TR/A/ER 202-13 (3080 Rockview Place) Page 2 since revised the proposal and provided the additional requested information. Previously staff had recommended that the ARC take the final action on requested exceptions to development standards, including reductions in street yard, other yard, and creek setbacks, and a request to allow tandem parking in a street yard. Because of the interest shown by Planning Commission on the specific layout of property lines, and the effect their realignment has on building setbacks, staff is now recommending that all setback reductions and the request for tandem parking be reviewed as part of the subdivision map, and acted upon by the Planning Commission. This staff report focuses on evaluation of the revisions made subsequent to the Commissions’ earlier review. For the complete project analysis please see the May 14, 2014 staff report; Attachment 3. Following the review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council of the use permit to allow development of a site with Special Considerations, Vesting Tentative Map (VTM) 3057) with exceptions to property development standards, and Mitigated Negative Declaration, the project will be forwarded to the Architectural Review Commission (ARC). At that time the ARC will be asked to take the site plan into account, but focus on the home designs. 1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW The project is VTM 3057 to create a residential common interest subdivision, and Use Permit A 202-13 to allow development on a site with the Special Considerations overlay zoning (R-2-S). The Planning Commission’s role is to review the project in terms of its consistency with the General Plan, Zoning, and Subdivisions Regulations, and make a recommendation to the Council on approval of the subdivision, use permit, and environmental review. Relevant excerpts and standards are included in the analysis where pertinent. 2.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS The following discussion provides an evaluation of revisions to the project following earlier review and for consistency with previous Commission direction. For the complete project description and evaluation for consistency with the General Plan and property development standards, please see the May 2014, 2014 staff report (Attachment 3). The applicants’ resubmittal letter detailing the revisions proposed is included as Attachment 4. 2.1 Planning Commission Direction 1. Simplify the pattern of lot lines to reduce instances where fence lines and property lines differ, and reduce the need for excessive private use easements. Applicant Response and Staff Analysis: Lot shapes and sizes have been adjusted to simplify the internal property lines and reduce the number of private use easements, while maintaining compliance with the minimum allowable lot sizes 1. Where previously 1 Lot sizes range from 3,392 square feet (lot 4) to 9,958 square feet (lot 2); for the density proposed, the minimum area required per lot is 3,376 square feet. PC1 - 2 TR/A/ER 202-13 (3080 Rockview Place) Page 3 fences and property lines differed in many places, private yards and parking spaces are now wholly on the lots they serve. A single common driveway, open space, utility and maintenance easement incorporates all access ways, shared parking, and other site features, such as the creek corridor, trash enclosure and bike parking (see Attachment 2, project plans page C-1). Although the placement and separation between homes is largely unchanged in the revised submittal, restructuring the property lines has affected the internal setbacks. As shown on Table 2.1, internal setbacks to property lines are reduced in several locations. In two locations internal setbacks are less than the 5-foot minimum; in both these instances the reductions are adjacent to the private driveway, which guarantees that minimum separations required by building code will be maintained. In all cases the required minimum setback between buildings of 10feet is retained. The only change to an external setback is on the south side of Lot 1, discussed in item 4, below. The Zoning Regulations Section 17.16.020E2c allows the entity approving a subdivision map to approve exceptions to other yard standards, provided at least 10feet separation between buildings and an acceptable level of solar exposure is maintained. Staff supports approval of these exceptions, as it will facilitate the development of affordable housing on-site, fulfilling the applicants entitlement to one development incentive/concession 2. Table 2.1: Setback Table Lot Number (model) Direction Roof Height (in feet) Above Av. Natural Grade Required Setback for height (in feet) Proposed Setback2 (in feet) Exceptions to the setback requirements requested for multiple external and internal setbacks Lot 1 (model a ) North 27 11.5 5 Internal East 24-28 11.5 5 Internal Creek (Top of Bank) - 20 41 South 24 10 10 West (street yard) 24-28 20 20, with tandem parking Street Yard Parking Lot 2 (model c) North 28 12 28 East 23-28 12 15 South 23 10 5.5 Internal West (street yard) 23-28 20 14 Street Yard Lot 3 (model a) North 23-27 11.5 11.5 East 27 11.5 24 Creek (Top of Bank) - 20 10 Creek South 23-27 11.5 8 Internal West 23 10 5 Internal Lot 4 North 26 11 5 Internal 2 Zoning Regulations Section 17.90.040G and .060A: 1 affordable unit / 8 market rate units = 12.5% of the project restricted, yielding a 7.5% density bonus. With greater than 10% of the total units restricted for families of moderate income the developer is entitled to one incentive or concession. PC1 - 3 TR/A/ER 202-13 (3080 Rockview Place) Page 4 (model a) East 22-26 11 7 Internal South 22 9 9 West 22-26 11 26 Creek (Top of Bank) - 20 18 Creek Lot 5 (model d) North 21-25 10.5 7.5 Internal East 21 9 10 South 21-25 10.5 8 External property line West 25 10.5 24 Lot 6 (model c) North 26 11 5.5 Internal East 22-26 11 10 External property line South 22 9 5 Internal West 22-26 11 3 Internal Lot 7 (model c) North 20 8.5 10 East 20-25 10.5 10.5 South 25 10.5 24 West 20-25 10.5 12 Lot 8 (model a) North 22-25 10.5 10 External property line East 25 10.5 5 Internal South 22-25 10.5 10.5 West 22 9 24 Lot 9 (model b) North 26 11 6 Internal East 22-26 11 3 Internal South 22 9 9 West 22-26 11 41 Creek (Top of Bank) - 20 10 Creek 2. Explore providing public access at the eastern corner of the site to the Crossroads Center. Applicant Response and Staff Analysis: At the direction of the Planning Commission, the applicant evaluated the potential for pedestrian access to the neighboring Crossroads Commercial Center, which share about 10feet of property along their rear property lines (see Attachment 5, Pedestrian Access Exhibit and email correspondence). Four main issues led to the determination that such a connection was not practical: x Pedestrian access would cross an existing drainage swale and easement from the neighboring property which would require renegotiation and reengineering. x The existing drainage swale at the location of potential connection contributes to a 3-5-foot elevation change from the project site to the Crossroads parking lot. x If access easements were granted by Crossroads, the access to the front of the development would also need to meet ADA accessibility standards, which it does not currently. The only feasible location for ADA access improvements would necessitate additional engineering, demolition and construction, and would encroach on the parking space back up distances to the extent that required parking would be eliminated. PC1 - 4 TR/A/ER 202-13 (3080 Rockview Place) Page 5 x Both the developer and the owner of the Crossroads Commercial Center agree that encouraging pedestrian traffic through an unattended, rear parking lot has the potential to invite vagrancy. Staff agrees that connections between residential and commercial facilities should be forged where the topography and existing physical improvements are conducive. However, given the existing design of the Crossroads Development and the potential impacts associated with providing a public access path adjacent to a private yard (Lot 5, the moderate-income family unit), in this instance such a connection appears to be impracticable. 3. Submit a sample Joint Maintenance Agreement (JMA), including method for ongoing creek maintenance. Staff Analysis: The Planning Commission expressed concern as to how ongoing maintenance of common facilities, including the creek corridor, would be controlled in absence of a formal Home Owners Association (HOA). To address this concern the applicant has submitted an exhibit that identifies several Common Interest Subdivisions of similar scale within the City and copies of their City-approved JMAs (see Attachment 6). Although none of these other subdivisions include creek corridors, maintenance would occur here like in any other commonly held facility. Reading of these JMAs confirms that the CCR’s and home buyers responsibilities will be the same under a JMA as under an HOA, only without need for professional management and the higher costs this entails. Given the small number of homes, the ongoing monthly costs for an HOA can be a substantial burden and negatively impact the ongoing affordability of the units. 4. Modify the home on Lot 1 to provide required South side yard setback. Staff Analysis: The home has been mirrored to reverse the home on the site and reduce the height along the property line, which coincides with a reduced setback requirement, and shifted north so that it now conforms to setback standards for this exterior property line. Additional minor adjustments have been made throughout to simplify the property lines while meeting lot size minimums and building code requirements. As noted in discussion item 1, above, multiply setback reductions have been requested as part of the subdivision, but in all cases a minimum separation of 10-feet is maintained. 2.2 Additional Refinements and Information 1.10-Foot Creek Corridor Maintained. As discussed in the May 14th staff report, the restoration plan was designed in conjunction with the City’s Natural Resource Manager, who determined that the newly engineered 3:1 slope bank, together with a reduced creek setback for development, was environmentally preferable to the alternative, which includes a more space-economical 2:1 slope with a standard 20-foot development setback. To maintain the 10-foot creek setback recommended by the Natural Resources Manager the home on Lot 9 was shifted north and east. Previous plans identified a creek PC1 - 5 TR/A/ER 202-13 (3080 Rockview Place) Page 6 setback of down to 7-feet at this location. 2. Adjusted guest parking layout.To accommodate the changes made to the home on Lot 9, the guest parking space that was previously shown as parallel to the east side of this home has been rotated, to be a standard stall to the south of the home. 3. Green Building Checklist Update.The applicant revisited the Green Building Checklist and found additional features to include which would bring the Total Targeted Points to 104 from 87; an increase of nearly 20% and more than double the minimum. These include some additional landscape measures such as resource efficient landscapes, minimization of turf, and installation of high-efficiency irrigation systems (see Attachment 7, revised Green Building Checklist). 4. Finance discussion contrasting Common Interest Subdivisions with Condominiums. Incited by the complexity of property lines and number of setback variations necessary for this project, there was some discussion by the Planning Commission on whether an attached condominium product would yield a better housing product than would a Common Interest Subdivision. In their cover letter, the applicant provides an assessment of the total cost differences to homeowners that result from the different subdivision approaches in consideration of the financing opportunities and HOA fees that the buyers of the homes will face (Attachment 4). According to the information provided, ongoing expenses and the ability to obtain low-cost financing would both be negatively impacted by development as a condominium based on structural requirements outside the developer or City’s control. 3.0 Environmental Review On May 7, 2014, the Community Development Director recommended a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact (Attachment 8). The Initial Study identifies potentially significant impacts associated with air quality, and biological and cultural resources, and provides recommendations for mitigation measures that if incorporated into the project would reduce the potential impacts to below the threshold of significance. These mitigation measures will affect the development phase of the project, including provisions for ensuring that natural and cultural resources (should they be discovered) are adequately protected. Revisions to the project since the publication of the document have been evaluated and determined not to have created any new impacts not previously discussed. With the incorporation of the recommended mitigation measures the potential impacts to the environment will be reduced below a level of significance. 4.0 Conclusion Considerable effort has been made by the applicant to comply with the direction provided by the Planning Commission, and design a project that will provide affordable detached homes in the City of San Luis Obispo. The type and density of development has been planned to suit the physical character of the neighborhood and site, and improve the condition of the creek corridor. With the incorporation of conditions of approval and mitigation measures included in the PC1 - 6 TR/A/ER 202-13 (3080 Rockview Place) Page 7 Mitigated Negative Declaration, the design of the subdivision and proposed improvements would enhance creek resources and provide quality housing in an area anticipated by the General Plan for development. For these reasons, staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Use Permit A 202-13, and VTM 3057. Final design of the homes will be reviewed by the ARC following Council approval. Development-specific conditions of approval will be imposed at that time, as the project could be constructed as rental units without recordation of a final map. ALTERNATIVES 1. The Commission may provide direction to the applicant, staff or Architectural Review Commission on modifications that should be made to the project design for better consistency with General Plan policies, Design Guidelines, and property development standards. 2. The Commission may recommend that the City Council deny the use permit and vesting tentative tract map, based on findings of inconsistency with the General Plan. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity map 2. Reduced copy of project plans 3. May 14, 2014 Planning Commission Staff Report 4. CoVelop response to Planning Commission Comments, June 24, 2014 5. Pedestrian Access Exhibit and email correspondence between CoVelop and Cross Roads Center, June 25, 2014 6. Common Interest Subdivision Exhibits and Joint Maintenance Agreements 7. Revised Green Building Checklist 8. Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, recommended on May 7, 2014 9. Draft Resolution PC1 - 7 R-2-S R-2-S C/OS-40 R-2-S C-S-PD R-2-S C-S-S C-S-S C-S-PD R-3-PD R-2-PD C-S-S C-S C-S R-2-S C-C-S R-2-PD R-1-PD R-1-PD R-1-PD BROADROCKVIEW PERKI N S SWE E N E Y ORCUTT VICINITY MAP File No. 202-13 3080 Rockview ¯ ATTACHMENT 1 PC1 - 8 ATTACHMENT 2PC1 - 9 ATTACHMENT 2PC1 - 10 ATTACHMENT 2PC1 - 11 ATTACHMENT 2PC1 - 12 ATTACHMENT 2PC1 - 13 ATTACHMENT 2PC1 - 14 ATTACHMENT 2PC1 - 15 ATTACHMENT 2PC1 - 16 ATTACHMENT 2PC1 - 17 ATTACHMENT 2PC1 - 18 2312 3 22 3 1 233xxxxxxxxxxx30.0'226'227'228'229'229'229'231'231'231'231'232'232'232'232'233'233'233'233'234'234'236'236'237'237'237'238'238'239'239'239'225'230'230'230'235'235'234 234 233 232 231 230 upu p u p u p upupu p upup231232 231 233226'227'228'229'229'231'231'232'233'225'230'230'230'upup upup228'282223232222322223222322223223232223323223323232223323223333323 000'0'00'00''00'23223223233 23030330330000000000230303030303030030303000300230303000000033303030303000303000003112231312311223123131 222 1 222222222222222222222222222'2'2'2222222222222222 11111312331131313111311'11111''111121(E) 24" CALIFORNIA WALNUT TREETO BE REMOVED(E) BLACKBERRY. TRIM AS NEEDED TO COMPLETE IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN AND PRESERVE BALANCE IN PLACE.upupLAWNLAWNL-1Conceptual Landscape Plan Nine on Rockview Tract 3057, San Luis Obispo, CA November 26, 2013File Name: Firma_Rockview_Subdivision_21358 Last Date Modified: 11/26/13firmal a n d s c a p e a r c h i t e c t sp l a n n i n g • e n v i r o n m e n t a l s t u d i e s187 Tank Farm Road, Suite 230, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401phone: 805.781.9800 fax: 805.781.9803LegendRiparian Vegetation Enhancement Area (See enlargement at right) 3,600 s.f. Front Yard Landscape Area (See enlargement at right) 3,785 s.f. Rear Yard Landscape Area (See enlargement at right) 6,234 s.f. Front and Rear Yard Landscape (1 gallon min.) Mulch all ground cover and planter areas with 2” minimum layer 'walk-on' bark. Arbutus 'Marina' / Strawberry TreeCassia leptophylla / Golden Medallion Tree Pistacia chinensis / Chinese Pistache Agave americana 'Medio-Picta' / Century Plant Agave 'Blue Glow' / Blue Glow Agave Anigozanthos (Hybrids) / Kangaroo Paw Trees (5 Gallon min.) Alnus rhombifolia / White Alder Platanus racemosa / California Sycamore Populus trichocarpa / Black Cottonwood Quercus agrifolia / Coast Live Oak Riparian Vegetation Enhancement Area (1 gallon min.) Baccharis pilularis 'Pigeon Point' / Prostrate Coyote Brush Heteromeles arbutifolia / Toyon Myrica californica / Pacific Wax Myrtle Rhamnus californica 'Eve Case' / Coffeeberry Rosa californica / California Wild Rose 4" mulch layer under riparian trees on bank Retain existing vegetation in channel bottom. Plant the following plant materials at 1 per 25sf in the drainage channel (approx. 33 plants). Plant in groups of 3-5 at 3’ on center among existing vegetation. 10 Juncus patens (1 gallon) 13 Carex praegracilis (1 gallon) 10 Leymus triticoides (1 gallon) 21Proposed Plant Materials Proposed plant materials were reviewed and approved in July, 2008 by Molly Brown, Fire Inspector II, City of San Luis Obispo Fire Department and Dr. Neil Havlik, Natural Resources Manager, City of San Luis Obispo. Carex tumulicola / Berkeley Sedge Festuca 'Elijah Blue' / Elijah Blue Fescue Leymus condensatus 'Canyon Prince' / Canyon Prince Wild Rye Pennisetum 'Orientale' / Oriental Fountain Grass Aptenia cordifolia / Red Apple Arctostaphylos edmundsii 'Carmel Sur'/Carmel Sur Manzanita Senecio mandraliscae / Blue Chalk Sticks Rockview PlaceWater Conservation Concept Statement Planting & irrigation plans have been designed to conserve water. The following design techniques have been incorporated to achieve this goal. Irrigation System Design (Front & Rear Yards): Irrigation system to be a fully automatic underground system utilizing either low-precipitation spray heads, bubblers, or drip emitters, or a combination thereof. Irrigation hydrozones shall be separated with control valves and controller stations into appropriate and compatible zones. Matched precipitation spray heads have been utilized for efficient water application. Rain sensor override switches have been specified to limit irrigation during rainy season. Irrigation System Design (Riparian Vegetation Enhancement Area): Riparian Vegetation Enhancement Area to receive temporary drip irrigation to establish plant materials. Planting Design: Plant materials proposed are selected for their compatibility to climatic and site conditions, resistance to wind, and drought tolerance. All planters shall be mulched with a 2” minimum layer of organic mulch throughout, to retain soil moisture and reduce wind erosion. A variety of drought-tolerant ornamental plants have been selected for flower color, foliage texture and mature size to provide an attractive visual appearance. Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance Standards (WELO): Creek easement landscape area is 3,600 square feet total. Developer- installed landscape area is 10,018 square feet total. The requirements of the City of San Luis Obispo Water Efficient Landscape Standards (January 2010) are applicable and will be observed as the total landscape area exceeds 2,500 square feet. (Refer to Section 17.87.020 A 1.) Site lighting Concept Statement Low height (bollard) light fixtures will be installed along pedestrian and parking areas (low voltage with LED lamps) and shielded to direct light downward.Scale: 1" = 10'-0"05'10'10'NorthSite Landscape Area Plan Riparian Vegetation Enhancement Area Landscape PlanScale: 1" = 10'-0"05'10'10'NorthTypical Front & Rear Yard Landscape PlanScale: 1" = 20'-0"010'20'20'North Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3 Lot 4 Lot 5 Lot 6 Lot 7 Lot 8 Lot 9 ATTACHMENT 2PC1 - 19 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: Review of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 3057 for a nine (9) lot common-interest subdivision and a Use Permit to allow development on a site zoned Medium-Density Residential with the Special Considerations overlay (R-2-S). PROJECT ADDRESS: 3080 Rockview Place BY:Jaime Hill, PMC Contract Planner Marcus Carloni, Associate Planner Phone Number: 781-7176 E-mail: mcarloni@slocity.org FILE NUMBER: TR/A/ER 202-13 FROM: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director RECOMMENDATION: Recommend that the City Council approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 3057 and Use Permit A 202-13, and adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact (Attachment 5, Draft Resolution), based on findings, and subject to conditions. SITE DATA Applicant Covelop, Inc. Representative Damien Mavis Zoning R-2-S (Medium Density Residential, Special Considerations) General Plan Medium Density Residential Site Area 31,479 square feet (0.7227 ac) Application Complete Environmental Status February 7, 2014 Mitigated Negative Declaration was recommended by the Community Development Department on May 7 2014 (ER 202-14) SUMMARY On February 10, 2014, the City received applications for a vesting tentative tract map, use permit, architectural review, and environmental review to create a nine-unit common interest subdivision. The project includes construction of nine single-family homes on individual lots (including dedication of one unit as affordable to moderate-income households), a common driveway and landscaping, and a small bridge designed to provide access to six lots (Lots 4-9), which are across a drainage channel. Meeting Date: May 14, 2014 Item Number:3 r for D.D. uty DiDDDDDDDD ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 20 Following the review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council of the use permit to allow development of a site with Special Considerations, Vesting Tentative Map (VTM) 3057, and Mitigated Negative Declaration, the project will be forwarded to the Architectural Review Commission (ARC). At that time the ARC will be asked to grant approval of the site plan and home designs and exceptions to development standards, including reductions in street yard, other yard, and creek setbacks, and a request to allow tandem parking in a street yard. The staff report discusses in some detail the range of development exceptions requested, but staff is recommending that the ARC take the final action on these exceptions since refinements to the design continue to be discussed with the applicant that might lessen or eliminate certain exceptions. 1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW The project is VTM 3057 to create a residential common interest subdivision, and Use Permit A 202-13 to allow development on a site with the Special Considerations overlay zoning (R-2-S). The Planning Commission’s role is to review the project in terms of its consistency with the General Plan, Zoning, and Subdivisions Regulations, and make a recommendation to the Council on approval of the subdivision, use permit, and environmental review. Relevant excerpts and standards are included in the analysis where pertinent. 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 2.1 Site Information/Setting The overall project site consists of ruderal vacant land (primarily non-native annual grassland). At the center of the site is an unvegetated drainage channel, which is classified in the General Plan as “Perennial creek with degraded corridor, high encroachment, and difficulty in restoring”. The project site is located in an urbanized area of the City and is surrounded with multi-family zoned residential buildings and commercial uses to the southeast. The project is approximately 1.5 miles from the end of San Luis Obispo Airport Runway 29, which is within the boundary of Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP)1 Zone 6, but beyond Airport Noise Contours. 1 The ALUP allows for 12 front doors per acre. As measured to the center of the street right-of-way the site is 0.769ac / 12 unit/ac = 9.22 units, rounded down to 9 units. Site Size 31,479.29 sf (0.7227 ac) Present Use & Development Vacant ruderal land Topography Less than 15% slope Access Rockview Place Surrounding Use/Zoning North: Developed multi-family properties zoned R-2. South/Southeast: Multi-family development zoned R-2 and Crossroads commercial center zoned Service Commercial with Planned Development Overlay (C-S-PD). East: Residential development zoned Service-Commercial with Special Considerations Overlay. West: Developed multi-family properties zoned R-2. ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 21 2.2 Project Description The proposed project includes the following significant features: 1. Vesting Tentative Tract Map 3057 for a nine-lot common interest subdivision; 2. Eight detached two-bedroom single-family homes; 3. One designated moderate-income affordable unit – a three-bedroom single-family home on Lot 5 entitling the project to a density bonus and one concession/incentive;2 4. A small bridge designed to provide access to six lots (Parcels 4-9) which are across a drainage channel; 5. A common driveway and guest parking, decorative landscaping, and restorative plantings in the constructed creek bank areas along the drainage channel; 6. Requests to allow reduced creek, street yard, and other yard setbacks, and tandem parking in the street yard. The nine detached, single-family homes are all two-story with attached single-car garages. There are three different exterior building designs (A-D, with models B and D differing only internally), which provides for an aesthetically cohesive development without falling into monotony. Changes in massing, materials and accent colors, together with the use of quality natural materials, provide for distinctive compact home designs. Each home provides both ground level private yards and upper level balconies, private storage within the garage, and laundry facilities on the upper sleeping level. Dedication of one unit as affordable entitles the project to a 7.5% density bonus and one incentive/concession. The applicant has proposed to utilize these entitlements by adding an additional bedroom to the dedicated affordable unit, and requesting flexibility with regards to setbacks. As required of a new subdivision, the Planning Commission and City Council must approve allowance of setback reductions, details of which will be reviewed by the ARC. The proposed access bridge is approximately 18–feet in span and located at the western extent of Lot 6. The proposed grading and creek crossing remain similar to those approved with the previous version of the project. 3.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS The following discussion provides an evaluation of the project for consistency with applicable General Plan Policies and development standards. An earlier project at this site was approved in 2011, including a tentative parcel map creating four lots and a creek setback exception (A/MS/ER 34-11). However a final map was not recorded and the applicants have since revised the project. 2 Zoning Regulations Section 17.90.040G and .060A: 1 affordable unit / 8 market rate units = 12.5% of the project restricted, yielding a 7.5% density bonus. With greater than 10% of the total units restricted for families of moderate income the developer is entitled to one incentive or concession. ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 22 3.1 General Plan Consistency The site is designated as “Medium Density Residential” on the General Plan Land Use Element (LUE) map and the site is currently undeveloped. The General Plan anticipates compact residential development on small lots, with some private outdoor space for each dwelling. General Plan conformity is essential in reviewing all development applications. The City must make a finding that a tentative map is or is not consistent with the General Plan. Based on staff’s detailed review, the development proposal can be found consistent with numerous General Plan policies. Those policies are listed below in order of importance to the project in bold print and staff’s analysis follows in italics. 1. General Plan Land Use Element (LUE) Policy 2.2.11 (Site Constraints) states: “Residential development shall respect site constraints such as property size and shape, ground slope, access, creeks and wetlands, wildlife habitats, native vegetation, and significant trees”. 2. General Plan LUE Policy 2.2.8 (Natural Features) states: “Residential developments should preserve and incorporate as amenities natural site features, such as land forms, views, creeks, wetlands, wildlife habitats, and plants”. Staff Analysis: The project is consistent with these policies, and is considered to be an “acceptable” design according to Figure 8 of the COSE because the project, as proposed, adequately respects existing constraints, preserves, and incorporates natural site features as amenities, and enhances the degraded creek corridor. The project includes restoring the existing drainage swale into a creek corridor, with a re-contoured slope bank and native plant palette. The restoration plan was designed in conjunction with the City’s Natural Resource Manager, who determined that the newly- engineered 3:1 slope bank, together with a reduced creek setback for development, was environmentally preferable to the alternative, which includes a more space-economical 2:1 slope with a standard 20-foot development setback. The more moderate 3:1 slope grade is less susceptible to erosion and provides for greater site access for future maintenance. Additionally, because of the current degraded state of the channel, there is no native vegetation that would be affected with some creek setback encroachment. The City’s Natural Resource Manager has recommended that at least a 10-foot setback from the new top of bank should be maintained. The final site development plan, including building footprints and creek setbacks, will be reviewed by the ARC. 3. General Plan LUE Policy 2.2.6 (Neighborhood Pattern) states: “All residential development should be integrated with existing neighborhoods. Where physical features make this impossible, the new development should create new neighborhoods.” ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 23 Staff Analysis: This section of Rockview Place has been developed with a mixture of single family homes and small condominium and common-interest subdivisions, including either small-lot detached or attached units. Consistent with other similar developments, units fronting Rockview Place would address the street, while units at the interior of the site would address one another. Their consistent architectural style, color palate and landscape provides for a cohesive visual setting while adding to the neighborhood’s visual setting. 4. General Plan HE Policy 4.2 (Mixed-Income Housing) states: “Include both market-rate and affordable units in apartment and residential condominium projects and intermix types of units. Affordable units should be comparable in appearance and basic quality to market-rate units.” 5. General Plan HE Program (6.14 (Housing Production) states: “Encourage residential development through infill development and densification within City Limits and in designated expansion areas over new annexation of land.” Staff Analysis: The project is consistent with these policies, restricting one of the nine units as affordable to moderate-income households. The restricted unit, Lot 5/model d, is comparable in appearance and basic quality to other units, and also includes a third bedroom. Consistent with State Law and City policy, the applicant has utilized the allowable density bonus to increase the bedroom count of the affordable unit (as described in section 2.2 above). Given the unusual site configuration and significant portion of the site dedicated to the restored creek channel, the project relies on reduced setbacks to utilize all of the available density, and to provide for an affordable on-site unit. The requested setback flexibility is appropriate as the one concession/incentive that the project is entitled to under City Affordable Housing provisions (Zoning Regulations Section 17.90.040G and .060A). 3.2 Consistency with Property Development Standards 3.2.1 Development Standards. Common interest subdivisions provide for ownership of separate units as well as interest in commonly owned areas that are managed and maintained via a joint maintenance agreement. Within common interest subdivisions property development standards 3 including, but not limited to, density, yards, and coverage, apply with respect to both exterior property limits and within each new lot. In addition to property development standards, each unit must also comply with development standards specific to common interest subdivisions 4. Each of the proposed lots is approximately 3,500 square feet in area, with an average cross slope of less than 15%. The shapes of lots vary, as the property line layout was designed to accommodate the allowable residential density and affordable housing, as well as restoration of the degraded seasonal creek channel. To achieve the allowable density on this site the project requires the Council make findings in support of approval of setback reductions to 3 Zoning Regulations Chapter 17.16 (Property Development Standards) 4 Subdivision Regulations 16.17.030B-H: Property Improvement Standards for Common Interest Subdivisions ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 24 both internal and external property lines and the restored creek corridor. While the majority of these reductions are for internal setbacks, several could potentially impact adjacent neighbors. Staff is continuing to work with the applicant on refinements which would reduce these impacts, such as reversing the unit footprint on Lot 1 to reduce the height along the side yard, and utilizing model a in lieu of model b on Lot 9 to eliminate the need for a creek setback reduction at this location. Subdivision Regulation Chapter 16.17.110 B requires that the Council make certain findings to allow exceptions to property improvement standards for new common interest subdivisions. A table comparing setback standards and those proposed is provided as Attachment 3. Ordinance standards and project statistics are provided in Table 3.2, below. Staff has recommended findings supporting flexibility in these standards, and allowing the ARC to evaluate these property development exceptions with other aspects of the development plan (e.g. street yard, side yard and creek setbacks, and tandem parking). Table 3.2 Project Statistics Statistics Item Ordinance Standard A Proposed B Street Yards 20 feet 14 or 20 feet Other Yards 5 – 13 feet Varies Max. Height of Structure(s) 35 feet 26-30 feet Density 10 density units 5 10 density units6 Building Coverage (footprint) 50% ~ 25% Private Open Space 250 sf per unit Varies > 250 sf Common Open Space 150 sf per unit (1,350 sf) 4,618 sf within creek corridor Total Open Space 400 sf per unit (3,600 sf) ~ 7,000 sf Parking Spaces (for residents) 2 per home 2 per home Parking Spaces (for guests) Cars Motorcycle Bicycle 2 car 1 motorcycle 1 short-term rack 2 car 1 motorcycle 1 bicycle rack Landscaping n/a Private, Common & Riparian Grading n/a 1,500 CY Fill Notes: A. City Zoning and Subdivision Regulations B. Applicant’s project plans submitted [February 2014] 5 Total Site Area = 0.7227 ac Creek Area = 0.0239 ac Net Site Area = 0.6988 ac Allowed Density = 0.6988 ac * 12 units/ac = 8.39 units Density bonus with 1/8 (12.5%) of units restricted = 7.5% density bonus (plus one incentive/concession) = 9.02, (allowed to round up to next whole number per Section 17.90.040B) to 10.0 density units. Minimum parcel size = [43,560 sf/ac ]/ [12 units/ac (1.075) ] = 3,376.7 sf 6 Proposed 8 market rate units and 1 designated moderate unit: 8.39 units x 1.075 = 9.02 du = 10 Density Units Proposed 9.5 Density Units (eight 2-bedroom homes and one 3-bedroom home) ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 25 3.2.2 Density.Nine on Rockview is located on a narrow, L-shaped lot that is split perpendicularly by a degraded creek corridor. The nine detached, single-family homes would be on individual parcels created as part of a common interest subdivision. Lots range in size from 3,430 sf to 3,582 sf, in excess of the 3,376.7 sf minimum required for a two-bedroom home. As mentioned in the Project Description (Section 2.2), the home on Lot 5 would be restricted for moderate income families, entitling the project to a density bonus and one concession/incentive. The applicant has requested to apply the density bonus to the affordable unit, increasing it to three bedrooms. The requested concession takes the form of flexibility in setback standards, which will be reviewed by the ARC following Council approval of other entitlements. The shapes of lots vary, as the property line layout was designed to accommodate the allowable residential density and affordable housing, as well as restoration of the degraded seasonal creek channel. 3.2.3 Open Space. Internal property lines and the fences that delineate individual private yard spaces do not necessarily correspond, as fences are located to maximize the useable portion of each lots yard area, while minimizing view conflicts and privacy issues. Property and fence lines are shown on page A-1 of Attachment 2 (Project Plans). Each unit exceeds the Subdivision Regulations minimum 250-square feet of qualifying private open space by providing ground level yard space for each unit. Passive common open space is provided within the restored creek corridor far in excess of the 1,350 sf required. Similarly, total open space exceeds the 3,600 sf required (see table 3.2 below). 3.2.4 Access and Parking.Eight of the homes will take access via a common driveway at the north extent of the site, while the home at the south-west corner of the property will front Rockview Place directly. A small bridge across the creek channel would provide access to Lots 4-9. The bridge is approximately 18–feet in span and located at the western extent of Lot 6. The crossing is proposed to be bridged with either a wood structure or a con-span open bottom arch. Both potential options require a concrete foundation wall at each end of the span to transfer loads from the structure to the ground. Vehicle parking for each unit includes both one space within an attached garage and one uncovered space immediately adjacent to the home. The uncovered parking space for Lot 1 has been proposed to be in tandem within the required street yard. Garages are sized such that they can also provide enclosed, secure bicycle storage. Guest Parking for two vehicles, one motorcycle, and bicycles is provided on lot 3, adjacent to the creek, and parallel to the home on lot 9. 3.3 Environmental Review On May 7, 2014, the Community Development Director recommended a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact (Attachment 4). The Initial Study identifies potentially significant impacts associated with air quality, and biological and cultural resources, and provides recommendations for mitigation measures that if incorporated into the project would reduce the potential impacts to below the threshold of significance. These mitigation measures ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 26 will affect the development phase of the project, including provisions for ensuring that natural and cultural resources (should they be discovered) are adequately protected. With the incorporation of the recommended mitigation measures the potential impacts to the environment will be reduced below a level of significance. 4.0 Conclusion Considerable effort has been made by the applicant to design a project that is consistent with the General Plan and applicable property development standards. The type and density of development has been planned to suit the physical character of the neighborhood and site, and improve the condition of the creek corridor. With the incorporation of conditions of approval and mitigation measures included in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the design of the subdivision and proposed improvements would enhance creek resources and provide quality housing in an area anticipated by the General Plan for development. For these reasons, staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Use Permit A 202-13, and VTM 3057. Final design of the homes, including requested setbacks and tandem parking, will be reviewed by the ARC following Council approval. Development-specific conditions of approval will be imposed at that time, as the project could occur without recordation of a final map as rental units. ALTERNATIVES 1. The Commission may provide direction to the applicant, staff or Architectural Review Commission on modifications that should be made to the project design for better consistency with General Plan policies, Design Guidelines, and property development standards. 2. The Commission may recommend that the City Council deny the use permit and vesting tentative tract map, based on findings of inconsistency with the General Plan. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity map 2. Reduced copy of project plans 3. Table identifying building setbacks 4. Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, recommended on May 7, 2014 5. Draft Resolution Enclosed: Full-size project plans ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 27 R-2-S R-2-S C/OS-40 R-2-S C-S-PD R-2-S C-S-S C-S-S C-S-PD R-3-PD R-2-PD C-S-S C-S C-S R-2-S C-C-S R-2-PD R-1-PD R-1-PD R-1-PD BROADROCKVIEW PERKI N S SWE E N E Y ORCUTT VICINITY MAP File No. 202-13 3080 Rockview ¯ ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 28 ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 29 ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 30 ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 31 ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 32 ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 33 ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 34 ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 35 ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 36 The following table identifies yard requirements, proposed setbacks, and functional setback Lot Number (model) Direction Roof Height (in feet) Required Setback (in feet) Proposed Setback (in feet) Functional Setback (in feet) Lot 1 (model a) North 23.5 10 5 4 East 23.5-28.5 12.5 38 13-35 South* 28.5 12.5 6 6 West (street yard)* 23.5-28.5 20 20, tandem parking 20, tandem parking Lot 2 (model c) North* 28.5 12.5 32 5-12 East 23.5-28.5 12.5 12 13 South 23.5 10 5 6 West(street yard)* 23.5-28.5 20 14 14 Lot 3 (model a) North* 22.5-27.5 12 27 4 East 27.5 12 13 2-12 South 22.5-27.5 12 6 3-8 West 22.5 10 16 1-10 Creek (east) 27.5 20 11 n/a Lot 4 (model a) North 22 9 5 3 East 22-27 11.5 5 9 South* 27 11.5 10 10 West 22-27 11.5 60 10 Creek (west) 22-27 20 14 n/a Lot 5 (model d) North 21.5-26.5 11.5 9 5 East* 26.5 11.5 10 10 South* 21.5-26.5 11.5 9 9 West 21.5 9 30 8 Lot 6 (model c) North 27.5 12 4 8 East* 22.5-27.5 12 10 10 South 22.5 10 4 8 West 22.5-27.5 12 21 8 Lot 7 (model c) North* 21 9 10 10 East* 21-26 11 10 10 South 26 11 25 5 West 21-26 11 12 12 Lot 8 (model a) North* 20-25 10.5 10 5 East 25 10.5 5 5 South 20-25 10.5 16 8 West* 20 8.5 24 4 Creek (west) 20 20 14 n/a Lot 9 (model a) North 27 11.5 4 5-11 East 22-27 11.5 5 6 South 22 9 8 10 West 22-27 11.5 50 9 Creek (west) 22-27 20 7 n/a Notes: *External Setback Bold Text Indicated Reduced Yard Setback ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 37 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM For ER # 202-13 1. Project Title: Nine on Rockview 9 Lot Common Interest Subdivision, Vesting Tentative Tract Map, with creek and yard setback exception requests, on a site with Special Considerations; City File A/ARC/TR/ER 202-13. 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Marcus Carloni, Associate Planner 805-781-7176 4. Project Location: 3080 Rockview Place (APN 004-583-048/049) 5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Covelop, Inc. c/o Damien Mavis (Project Representative) P.O. Box 12910 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 6. General Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential 7. Zoning: Medium-Density Residential with Special Considerations Overlay (R-2-S) ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 38 8. Description of the Project: The project proposes the following: 1. Nine lot Common Interest Subdivision 2. Construction of nine detached single-family homes (approximately 1,700 square feet each), including one unit affordable to moderate-income households, and relying on a 7.5% density bonus and exception to allow reduced setbacks. a. One 3-bedroom residence (the designated affordable unit) b. Eight 2-bedroom residences 3. Creek setback reductions to allow a small bridge providing access to Lots 4-9 and both structures and uncovered parking on lots 3, 4, 8 and 9. 4. Street and Other yard setback reductions to allow reduced setbacks at both internal and external property lines on lots. 5. Tandem parking within the street yard on Lot 2 6. Complete road improvements along Rockview Place. The proposed project includes a nine-lot Common Interest Subdivision, construction of a single- family home on each new lot, and a small bridge designed to provide access to six lots (Parcels 4-9) which are across a drainage channel. The project also includes restorative plantings along constructed creek bank areas along the drainage channel, which is classified in the General Plan as “Perennial creek with degraded corridor, high encroachment, and difficulty in restoring”. Access to eight of the nine parcels is proposed via a common driveway from Rockview Place (Lot 1 would take access directly from Rockview Place). The bridge is approximately 18–feet in span and located at the western extent of Lot 6. The crossing is proposed to be bridged with either a wood structure or a con-span open bottom arch. Both potential options require a concrete foundation wall at each end of the span to transfer loads from the structure to the ground. Numerous yard setback reductions have been requested, for internal and external property lines given the height of the structures, and along the restored creek. The applicant has provided a winter solstice shading plan (Attachment 2: project plans, page A7), demonstrating the additional shading that would affect properties to the north and east. A 20-foot Creek setback is required unless some lesser setback is approved through the Use Permit process. Together with the uncovered parking and trash enclosures, which are allowable accessory features per Section 17.16.25G2 and 3 of the Zoning Code, the requested encroachment for the homes account for less than 21% of the creek setback area, below the 50% maximum allowed by Zoning Regulations Section 17.16.025G2. These setback reductions will be subject to the review and approval of the Architectural Review Commission. Internal property lines were established to comply with City density standards. But in order to provide more functional outdoor spaces the project relies on an alternative fencing plan and easements, which allow each residence to have more useable spaces. All buildings would maintain a minimum separation of 9-feet. ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 39 The following table identifies yard requirements, proposed setbacks, and functional setback where easements/fencing plan differ from property lines. Lot Number (model) Direction Roof Height (in feet) Required Setback (in feet) Proposed Setback (in feet) Functional Setback (in feet) Lot 1 (model a) North 23.5 10 5 4 East 23.5-28.5 12.5 38 13-35 South* 28.5 12.5 6 6 West (street yard)* 23.5-28.5 20 20, tandem parking 20, tandem parking Lot 2 (model c) North* 28.5 12.5 32 5-12 East 23.5-28.5 12.5 12 13 South 23.5 10 5 6 West(street yard)* 23.5-28.5 20 14 14 Lot 3 (model a) North* 22.5-27.5 12 27 4 East 27.5 12 13 2-12 South 22.5-27.5 12 6 3-8 West 22.5 10 16 1-10 Creek (east) 27.5 20 11 n/a Lot 4 (model a) North 22 9 5 3 East 22-27 11.5 5 9 South* 27 11.5 10 10 West 22-27 11.5 60 10 Creek (west) 22-27 20 14 n/a Lot 5 (model d) North 21.5-26.5 11.5 9 5 East* 26.5 11.5 10 10 South* 21.5-26.5 11.5 9 9 West 21.5 9 30 8 Lot 6 (model c) North 27.5 12 4 8 East* 22.5-27.5 12 10 10 South 22.5 10 4 8 West 22.5-27.5 12 21 8 Lot 7 (model c) North* 21 9 10 10 East* 21-26 11 10 10 South 26 11 25 5 West 21-26 11 12 12 Lot 8 (model a) North* 20-25 10.5 10 5 East 25 10.5 5 5 South 20-25 10.5 16 8 West* 20 8.5 24 4 Creek (west) 20 20 14 n/a Lot 9 (model a) North 27 11.5 4 5-11 East 22-27 11.5 5 6 South 22 9 8 10 West 22-27 11.5 50 9 Creek (west) 22-27 20 7 n/a Notes: * External Setback Bold Text Indicates Reduced Yard Setback ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 40 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings: The overall project site consists of 31,479 square feet (0.7227 acres) of ruderal vacant land (primarily non-native annual grassland) zoned R-2-S (Medium-Density Residential Special Considerations Overlay). The project site is located in an urbanized area of the City and is surrounded with multi-family zoned residential buildings and commercial uses to the southeast. Existing uses surrounding the site area are as follows: West: Developed multi-family properties zoned R-2. North: Developed multi-family properties zoned R-2. East: Residential development zoned Service-Commercial with Special Considerations Overlay. South/Southeast:Multi-family development zoned R-2 and Crossroads commercial center zoned Service Commercial with Planned Development Overlay (C-S-PD). See Attachment 1, Vicinity Map. In 2011 a tentative parcel map creating four lots and a creek setback exception were approved (A/MS/ER 34-11). A final map was not recorded and those approvals have since expired. 10.Project Entitlements Requested: Use Permit: Use Permit approval is required to allow development of a site with Special Considerations, reduced side and street yard setbacks, reduced creek setbacks for the bridge structure, residences and unenclosed parking, and tandem parking within a street yard. Architectural Review: Architectural Review Commission (ARC) approval is required for the site layout and home designs. The ARC will also take action on the requested setback reductions and tandem parking. Tentative Tract Map: Tentative Tract Map approval will be required for the proposed nine lot common interest subdivision. The vesting tentative tract map will require a Planning Commission review and City Council approval. The Council will also take action on allowing development of a site with Special Considerations at this time. 11.Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.): Air Pollution Control District – grading permits ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 41 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Greenhouse Gas Emissions Population / Housing Agriculture Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Public Services X Air Quality Hydrology / Water Quality Recreation X Biological Resources Land Use / Planning Transportation / Traffic X Cultural Resources Mineral Resources Utilities / Service Systems Geology / Soils Noise Mandatory Findings of Significance FISH AND GAME FEES The Department of Fish and Wildlife has reviewed the CEQA document and written no effect determination request and has determined that the project will not have a potential effect on fish, wildlife, or habitat (see attached determination). X The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish and Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code. This initial study has been circulated to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for review and comment. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE X This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more State agencies (e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Department of Housing and Community Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines 15073(a)). ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 42 DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency): On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made, by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant” impact(s) or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR of NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature Date For: Derek Johnson Pam Ricci, AICP, Senior Planner Community Development Director ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 43 May 7, 2014 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 19, "Earlier Analysis," as described in (5) below, may be cross- referenced). 5. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration (Section 15063 (c) (3) (D)). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they addressed site-specific conditions for the project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. The explanation of each issue should identify: a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 44 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?1, 5 --X-- b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, open space, and historic buildings within a local or state scenic highway? 5, 11 --X-- c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? 1,11 --X-- d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 29 --X-- Evaluation a) The proposed project is in an urbanized section of the City and will not have adverse effects on a scenic vista. b, c) The proposed project will not damage or alter any scenic resources that are visible from a local or state scenic highway. Visual resources in the vicinity of the site include views of the South Hills (open space). The applicant proposes development of single-family residences with maximum peak heights that are well below the maximum allowed (35-feet). The proposed project is consistent with the scale of neighboring development and will not obstruct views of the South Hills. Additionally, the project will be reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission for consistency with the Community Design Guidelines. d) The project is located in an already urbanized area with light sources from neighboring residential uses, and light from vehicular circulation along neighboring streets. The proposed project will not create a new source of substantial light or glare or affect nighttime views in the area. The project will be required to conform to the Night Sky Preservation Ordinance (Zoning Regulations Chapter 17.23) which sets operational standards and requirements for lighting installations. Conclusion:Less than significant impact 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? 14 --X-- b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? 10 --X-- c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? 12 --X-- Evaluation a) b) c) The project site is not located on farmland nor is it designated for agricultural uses in the General Plan. The project site is surrounded by developed properties and public streets. The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency designate this property as Urban and Built-Up Land. There is no Williamson Act contract in effect on the project site. Redevelopment of the site will not contribute to conversion of farmland. No impacts to existing on site or off site agricultural resources are anticipated with development of the project site. Conclusion:No Impact 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? 9, 16 --X-- b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation?--X-- c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an --X-- ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 45 applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?--X-- e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?--X-- Evaluation a), b), c), d) The Clean Air Plan (CAP) for San Luis Obispo County was developed and adopted by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) and is a comprehensive planning document designed to reduce emissions from traditional industrial and commercial sources, as well as from motor vehicle use. Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 2.3.2 states that the City will help the APCD implement the CAP. Assessment of potential air quality impacts that may result from the proposed project was conducted using the April 2012, CEQA Air Quality Handbook. The CEQA Air Quality Handbook is provided by the County of San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District for the purpose of assisting lead agencies in assessing the potential air quality impacts from residential, commercial and industrial development. Under CEQA, the SLO County APCD is a responsible agency for reviewing and commenting on projects that have the potential to cause adverse impacts to air quality. Operational Screening Criteria for Project Impacts: Based on reference of Table 1-1 of the CEQA Air Quality Handbook, both thresholds of significance for the APCD Annual Bright Line threshold (MT CO2e) and reactive organic gases (ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx ) would not be exceeded by the proposed project. The project is well below operational thresholds of significance. Construction Significance Criteria: Temporary impacts from the project, including but not limited to excavation and construction activities, vehicle emissions from heavy duty equipment and naturally occurring asbestos, has the potential to create dust and emissions that exceed air quality standards for temporary and intermediate periods. However, the following dust control measures are recommended to augment existing City regulations and reduce any potential impacts. Mitigation Measure 1: 1. During construction/ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall implement the following particulate (dust) control measures. These measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. a. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible. b. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency will be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 m.p.h. and cessation of grading activities during periods of winds over 25 m.p.h. Reclaimed (non-potable) water is to be used in all construction and dust-control work. c. Dirt stock pile areas (if any) should be sprayed daily as needed. d. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 m.p.h. on any unpaved surface at the construction site. e. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with California Vehicle Code Section 23114. f. Scheduling of construction truck trips during non-peak hours to reduce peak hour emissions. g. If determined to be needed, periodic washdowns or mechanical streetsweeping of streets in the vicinity of the construction site shall be done. ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 46 e) The project includes the development of nine single-family residences, as anticipated in the Medium-Density Residential zone, and therefore would not include any potential land uses which would have the potential to produce objectionable odors in the area. Conclusion:With recommended construction mitigation measures, the project will have a less than significant impact on air quality. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? 5,10, 11 --X-- b) Have a substantial adverse effect, on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? --X-- c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? --X-- d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? --X-- e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? --X-- f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? --X-- Evaluation (a-f) There is no known candidate, sensitive or special status species in the immediate vicinity of the project. The City’s Natural Resource Manager has visited the site and identified no biological issues associated with the project. No heritage trees or significant native vegetation exist on the site. A tributary of Acacia Creek runs through the site. The drainage way that runs through the property has been highly disturbed and is in a degraded condition. While the creek’s value as a significant biological corridor is diminished by its physical separation from other segments of the riparian corridor, its condition could be improved with the proposed project development. The City’s Natural Resources Manager has reviewed the project plans and has recommended a grading and planting plan which would retain existing vegetation in the channel bottom and establish native plantings along the banks of the drainage way to establish a riparian corridor and promote restoration of the creek habitat. It is not anticipated that any areas meeting the criteria for jurisdictional wetlands will be disturbed by the project and the project site is not part of a local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. The large, multi-trunked Walnut tree in the northeast portion of the site would be removed with the proposed development. Both the City Arborist and Natural Resources Manager have reviewed the removal and concurred that the proposed landscape plan, including both street trees and trees within the riparian corridor, provide adequate mitigation. This tree was previously approved for removal with an earlier development application and planting plan (A/MS/ER 34-11). Conclusion: Potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated Community Development Department, Planning Division staff recommends a number of mitigation measures to reduce ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 47 potential direct impacts to species downstream of the project including erosion control measures and measures to eliminate sedimentation downstream of the project site; all of which are incorporated into this Initial Study as follows: Mitigation Measure 2: The project shall incorporate the following erosion control measures for work in and around the riparian corridor: a. No heavy equipment should enter flowing water. b. Equipment will be fuelled and maintained in an appropriate staging area removed from the riparian corridor. c. Restrict all heavy construction equipment to the project area or established staging areas. d. All project related spills of hazardous materials within or adjacent to the project area shall be cleaned up immediately. Spill prevention and clean up materials should be onsite at all times during construction. e. All spoils should be relocated to an upland location outside the creek channel area to prevent seepage of sediment in to the drainage/creek system. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource as defined in §15064.5. 10,21, 22, 23 --X-- b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5)--X-- c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?--X-- d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?--X-- Evaluation a-d) The existing property does not contain any historic or prehistoric archaeological resources identified on city maintained resource maps and no known archaeological resources exist within the project site. Though the site is not within an archaeologically sensitive area and additional study to determine the presence of archaeological historical resources is not required, there is the limited potential that materials (including but not limited to bedrock mortars, historical trash deposits, and human burials) could be encountered given the proximity to the creek. Conclusion: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated In the event archaeological resources are found, the following mitigation measure will be in effect: Mitigation Measure 3 If materials (including but not limited to bedrock mortars, historical trash deposits, and human burials) are encountered during excavation, work shall cease until a qualified archaeologist makes determinations on possible significance, recommends appropriate measures to minimize impacts, and provides information on how to proceed in light of the discoveries. All specialist recommendations shall be communicated to the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department prior to resuming work to ensure the project continues within procedural parameters accepted by the City of San Luis Obispo and the State of California. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: 4,10, 28, 30 I. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. --X-- II. Strong seismic ground shaking?--X-- III. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?--X-- IV. Landslides?--X-- ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 48 b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?--X-- c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on or off site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? --X-- d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1802.3.2 [Table 1806.2) of the California Building Code (2007) [2010], creating substantial risks to life or property? --X-- e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? --X-- Evaluation a) San Luis Obispo County, including the City of San Luis Obispo is located within the Coast Range Geomorphic Province, which extends along the coastline from central California to Oregon. This region is characterized by extensive folding, faulting, and fracturing of variable intensity. In general, the folds and faults of this province comprise the pronounced northwest trending ridge-valley system of the central and northern coast of California. Under the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act, the State Geologist is required to delineate appropriately wide special studies zones to encompass all potentially and recently-active fault traces deemed sufficiently active and well-defined as to constitute a potential hazard to structures from surface faulting or fault creep. In San Luis Obispo County, the special Studies Zone includes the San Andreas and Los Osos faults. The edge of this study area extends to the westerly city limit line, near Los Osos Valley Road. According to a recently conducted geology study, the closest mapped active fault is the Los Osos Fault, which runs in a northwest direction and is about one mile from the City’s westerly boundary. Because portions of this fault have displaced sediments within a geologically recent time (the last 10,000 years), portions of the Los Osos fault are considered “active”. Other active faults in the region include: the San Andreas, located about 30 miles to the northeast, the Nacimiento, located approximately 12 miles to the northeast, and the San Simeon-Hosgri fault zone, located approximately 12 miles to the west. Although there are no fault lines on the project site or within close proximity, the site is located in an area of “High Seismic Hazards,” specifically Seismic Zone D, which means that future buildings constructed on the site will most likely be subjected to excessive ground shaking in the event of an earthquake. Structures must be designed in compliance with seismic design criteria established in the California Building Code for Seismic Zone D. To minimize this potential impact, the California Building Code and City Codes require new structures be built to resist such shaking or to remain standing in an earthquake. No mitigation measures are necessary. b) This is an infill site located in an urbanized area and the planting plan for the drainage channel that runs through the property is specifically designed to enhance the riparian channel to prevent further erosion. The project will not result in loss of topsoil. c), d) The Safety Element of the General Plan indicates that the project site has a high potential for liquefaction, which is true for most of the City. Development will be required to comply with all City Codes, including Building Codes, which require proper documentation of soil characteristics for designing structurally sound buildings to ensure new structures are built to resist such shaking or to remain standing in an earthquake. The Building Division of the Community Development Department routinely reviews project plans for compliance with recommendations of the soils engineering reports. e) The proposed project will be required to connect to the City’s sewer system. Septic tanks or alternative wastewater systems are not proposed and will not be used on the site. Conclusion:Less than significant impact. ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 49 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? 1, 2, 13 X b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. X Evaluation a) b) In addition to the criteria pollutants discussed in the above air quality analysis, the state of California recently passed Assembly Bill 32, the California Global Warming Solution Act of 2006 and California Governor Schwarzenegger Executive Order S-3-05 (June 1, 2005), both require reductions of greenhouse gases in the State of California. The proposed project will result in infill development, located in close proximity to transit, services and employment centers. City policies recognize that compact, infill development allow for more efficient use of existing infrastructure and Citywide efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) also recognizes that energy efficient design will result in significant energy savings, which result in emissions reductions. The proposed development includes several features recognized on the GreenPoint Rated Checklist, scoring 87 total points, which far exceeds the minimum requirements of the program (minimum qualification = 50 points). Conclusion:Less than significant impact. 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? 28, 30 --X-- b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? 30 --X-- c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? 10, 30 --X-- d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? 10 --X-- e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 27, 30 --X-- f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 10, 12 --X-- g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 4, 30 --X-- h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 4, 11 --X-- Evaluation a), b), c), d) The proposed project involves a land division to allow development of nine small single-family residential lots, ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 50 and associated site improvements, and would not involve the use, transportation, disposal, or emission of hazardous materials. The site is not listed as having known hazardous materials or contamination, and there are no existing or proposed schools within one-quarter mile of the site. e), f), The project site is located within Safety area S-2 of the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport. Table 10 of the Airport Land Use plan allows up to a maximum of 12 density units per acre with an approved ACOS (Airport Compatible Open Space Area). The proposed project’s density is less than 12 density units per acre. The project site is not in the vicinity of a private airstrip. g), h) The project site is an infill site and plans have been reviewed by the Fire Marshal who determined that as designed the project will not conflict with any emergency response plan or evacuation plan. The site is not directly adjacent to any wildlands. Conclusion:Less than significant impact. 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? 10,19, 25, 30, 31 --X-- b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g. the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? --X-- c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site? --X-- d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off site? --X-- e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? --X-- f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?--X-- g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? --X-- h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows?--X-- i) Expose people or structures to significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? --X-- j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?11, 12 --X-- Evaluation a), f) This project received the first discretionary development approvals prior to March 6, 2014 so is not subject to the current stormwater regulations as promulgated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The proposed plan is subject to the requirements for Interim Low Impact Development as a Tier 3 Project, as it is a residential subdivision map of 5 or more units. The applicant proposes to store and release the sites’ increased storm water runoff in a subsurface detention/retention system. The re-vegetated creek corridor will also act as a vegetated bioswale, which will further decrease runoff and siltation compared to the current degraded configuration. Bio-swales will be used where possible to direct runoff into the sites subsurface system, which complies with the City’s Low Impact Development (LID) Tier 3 standards for stormwater runoff. ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 51 The project will comply with City Engineering Standard 1010.B for water quality treatment of stormwater runoff from expanded street paving; requiring the treatment for storm events. b) The project will be served by the City’s sewer and water systems and will not deplete groundwater resources. c), d), e), i) Physical improvement of the project site will be required to comply with the drainage requirements of the City’s Waterways Management Plan. This plan was adopted for the purpose of insuring water quality and proper drainage within the City’s watershed. The Waterways Management Plan requires that site development be designed so that post-development site drainage does not significantly exceed pre-development run-off. The applicant proposes to store and release the sites increased storm water runoff in a subsurface detention/retention system. The re-vegetated creek corridor will also act as a vegetated bioswale, which will further decrease runoff and siltation compared to the current degraded configuration. The Drainage Analysis prepared by Keith V. Crowe concludes the project’s water flows increase minimally from preconstruction to post-construction, which complies with the City’s Waterways Management Plan. Compliance with the Waterways Management Plan is sufficient to mitigate any potentially significant impacts of the project in the areas of water quality and hydrology. The Public Works Department has determined that the proposed improvements, including frontage improvements to redirect flows, bioswales in the reengineered creek corridor, and sizes of the detention/retention system are sufficient to avoid drainage impacts, such as flooding, on-site or downstream. g), h) The project site is located at the base of the South Hills and is not within the boundaries of an area subject to inundation from flood waters in a 100-year storm per the Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map. The project will not impede or re-direct the flow of any waters. j) The proposed development is outside the zone of impacts from seiche or tsunami, and the existing upslope projects do not generate significant storm water runoff such to create a potential for inundation by mudflow. The Soils Engineering Report prepared by GeoSolutions, Inc has not identified upslope or on-site slope instability. Conclusion: Less than significant impact 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community?1, 10 --X-- b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? 1, 9, 31 --X-- c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? 5, 12 --X-- Evaluation a), c) The proposed infill development project is designed to fit among existing residential development and will not physically divide an established community or conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plans. b) The proposed project will not conflict with applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The project is proposed to be consistent with City regulations and development standards, with the exception of a request for reduced setbacks which would allow development of structures and unenclosed parking within the minimum creek and yard setbacks, as depicted within the Project Description, on page 3 of this document. The City’s Natural Resource Manager has reviewed the proposed creek setback reductions and concluded that with the implementation of the creek corridor restoration plan, including re-engineered 3:1 slope-banks and riparian vegetation plan, the setback reductions are less than significant and the project will result in improved conditions. Home designs rely on exceptions to both internal and external property setback standards. Within the development, internal lot lines were derived to meet required minimum lot sizes, but do not always correlate with fence lines and the separation of spaces. Easements would be utilized to maximize functional yard areas while also minimizing view or privacy issues. In no case would building separation be less than the minimum requirements. The Architectural Review Commission will review ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 52 the proposed setback exceptions and determine if they are appropriate and if the diminished solar exposure is acceptable. Conclusion: Less than significant impact. 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? 5 --X-- b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? --X-- Evaluation a), b) There are no known mineral resources on the project site. Conclusion:No impact 12. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? 3, 9, 10 --X-- b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? --X-- c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?--X-- d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? --X-- e) For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 27 --X-- 10,12 --X-- Evaluation a), c) The Noise Guidebook includes distances from the center line of roads to noise contours on sites along roadways with heavier traffic volumes. The table indicates that existing noise levels at the site are below 60 decibels (dB) Ldn. With build- out of the City noise levels will increase to about 60 at the most easterly portion of the project site. The Guidebook indicates that these estimates should be taken as worst case estimates and do not take into account shielding by buildings or landforms which can reduce noise exposure up to 14 dB. Residences are designated as noise sensitive by the Noise Element. The Noise Element indicates that noise levels of 60 dB are acceptable for outdoor activity areas and 45 dB for indoor areas. Exterior noise levels will be less than 60 dB when attenuation afforded by intervening buildings or property fencing is taken into account. Interior noise levels of less than 45dB will be achievable with standard building materials and construction techniques. Noise and ground borne vibrations may occur during construction. However, the temporary noise and vibration will have less than significant impacts since construction will be during daytime hours and temporary in nature. b), d) Site development will result in increases in ambient noise levels but not to significant levels because policies in the City’s Noise Element regulate potential noise impacts. Noise increases that would affect ambient levels are to be reduced to thresholds determined to be acceptable in residential areas. Construction activities also generate noise, and may temporarily raise the ambient noise levels above acceptable levels for the duration of construction, including ground borne vibration and noise. Construction noise is regulated by the City’s Noise Ordinance, which regulates time of construction and maximum noise levels that may be generated. The project would be required to meet the noise standards contained in the Ordinance, which includes limitations on the days and hours of construction. ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 53 e), f) The project is approximately 1.5 miles from the end of San Luis Obispo Airport Runway 29 and is just within the boundary of ALUP Zone 6 and is beyond Airport Noise Contours projecting a 50 dB airport noise. Table 1 of the General Plan Noise Element states that the maximum noise exposure for outside residential activities is 60dB. The project will not experience noise sources which exceed significance thresholds. The project is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Conclusion: Less than significant impact 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? 1, 11 --X-- b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? --X-- --X-- Evaluation: a), b), c) The project proposes the construction of nine single-family residences on a vacant infill site. The General Plan encourages this type of development because efficiently utilizes existing facilities for water, sewer, storm drainage, transportation and parks. The added population growth caused by this project is within the General Plan’s projection and will not result in population exceeding local and regional growth projections. Conclusion:No impact 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection?12, 30 --X-- b) Police protection?--X-- c) Schools?--X-- d) Parks?--X-- e) Roads and other transportation infrastructure?--X-- f) Other public facilities?--X-- Evaluation a), b), d), e), f) No potential impacts have been identified to any public services because of the scale of the project and its location within a developed portion of the City. c) The school districts in the state have the authority to collect fees at the time of issuance of building permits to offset the costs to finance school site acquisition and school construction, and are deemed by State law to be adequate mitigation for all school facility requirements.Any increases in demand on school facilities caused by the project are considered to be mitigated by the district’s collection of adopted fees at the time of building permit issuance. Conclusion: No impact. 15. RECREATION. a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? 1, 30 --X-- b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? --X-- ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 54 Evaluation: a) The project will add incrementally to the demand for parks and other recreational facilities. However, given the size of the project (nine new residences) and expected number of residents, no significant recreational impacts are expected to occur with development of the site. Park Land In-Lieu fees will be required to be paid to the City to help finance additional park space, maintenance or equipment in the vicinity, per existing City policy. Should the map not be recorded and the project developed as for-rent units on one parcel, the City also collects a Dwelling Unit Construction tax that goes to a Park Improvement Fund with building permits for multi-family projects. Collection of these fees helps offset the impacts of new projects on the City’s recreational facilities. b) Each of the nine proposed homes will include a small private outdoor area. No additional recreational facilities are proposed. Conclusion: Less than significant impact 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? 9,12, 17 --X-- b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? --X-- c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? 27 --X-- d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? 30 --X-- e) Result in inadequate emergency access?12 --X-- g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? 2, 9, 30 --X-- Evaluation a), b)The project does not conflict with any applicable circulation system plans and does not add to demand on the circulation system or conflict with any congestion management programs or any other agency’s plans for congestion management. The project will add vehicular trips to local and area streets which lead out of the neighborhood to uncontrolled intersections. The existing streets have sufficient unused capacity to accommodate the added vehicular traffic without reducing existing levels of service. The proposed project would not result in a significant impact with regard to increased vehicular trips and does not conflict with performance standards provided in City adopted plans or policies. The project will also contribute to overall impact mitigation for transportation infrastructure by participating in the Citywide Transportation Impact Fee program. c) The project will not result in any changes to air traffic patterns and does not conflict with any safety plans of the Airport Land Use Plan. d) The project has been designed to meet City Engineering Standards and will not result in safety risks. The project will include curb, gutter, and sidewalk per City Engineering Standards, which will improve pedestrian and vehicle safety along Rockview Drive. ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 55 e) The project has been reviewed by the City Fire Marshal to ensure adequate emergency access has been provided. f) The project is consistent with policies supporting alternative transportation due to the site’s location within the City’s urban center, and its proximity to shopping, parks and services. Conclusion: Less than significant impact 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? 9,12, 20,24, 28 --X-- b) Require or result in the construction or expansion of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? --X-- c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? --X-- d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new and expanded entitlements needed? --X-- e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? --X-- f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? --X-- g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? --X-- Evaluation a), b), c), e) The proposed project would result in an incremental increase in demand on City infrastructure, including water, wastewater and storm water facilities. Development of the site is required to be served by City sewer and water service, which both have adequate capacity to serve the use. Existing storm water facilities exist in the vicinity of the project site, and it is not anticipated the proposed project will result in the need for new facilities or expansion of existing facilities which could have significant environmental effects. This project has been reviewed by the City’s Utilities Department and no resource/infrastructure deficiencies have been identified. The developer will be required to construct private sewer facilities to convey wastewater to the nearest public sewer. The on- site sewer facilities will be required to be constructed according to the standards in the Uniform Plumbing Code and City standards. Impact fees are collected at the time building permits are issued to pay for capacity at the City’s Water Reclamation Facility (WRF). The fees are set at a level intended to offset the potential impacts of each new residential unit in the project. d) The proposed project would result in an incremental increase in demand on water supplies, as anticipated by the General Plan. Per the 2012 Water Resource Status Report, the City has sufficient water supplies for build-out of the City’s General Plan. The incremental change is not considered to be significant. This project has been reviewed by the City’s Utilities Engineer and no resource/infrastructure deficiencies have been identified. f), g) The proposed project will be served by San Luis Garbage Company, which maintains standards for access and access to ensure that collection is feasible, both of which will be reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission. ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 56 Background research for the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) shows that Californians dispose of roughly 2,500 pounds of waste per month. Over 90% of this waste goes to landfills, posing a threat to groundwater, air quality, and public health. Cold Canyon landfill is projected to reach its capacity by 2018. The Act requires each city and county in California to reduce the flow of materials to landfills by 50%` (from 1989 levels) by 2000. To help reduce the waste stream generated by this project, consistent with the City’s Source Reduction and Recycling Element, recycling facilities must be accommodated on the project site and a solid waste reduction plan for recycling discarded construction materials must be submitted with the building permit application. The project is required by ordinance to include facilities for recycling to reduce the waste stream generated by the project, consistent with the Source Reduction and Recycling Element. The incremental additional waste stream generated by this project is not anticipated to create significant impacts to solid waste disposal. Conclusion:Less than significant impact 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? --X-- The project is an infill residential development in an urbanized area of the city. Without mitigation, the project could have the potential to have adverse impacts on all of the issue areas checked in the Table on Page 3. As discussed above, potential impacts to biological and cultural resources will be less than significant with incorporation of recommended mitigation measures. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? --X-- The project is consistent with the General Plan, which identifies this site as appropriate for medium-density residential uses, and which supports infill development utilizing existing infrastructure. The proposed project will not result in cumulatively considerable impacts. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? --X-- With the incorporation of a mitigation measures, the project will not result in substantial adverse impacts on humans. 19. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case a discussion should identify the following items: a) Earlier analysis used.Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. In 2011 The City of San Luis Obispo certified a Mitigated Negative Declaration (ER 34-11) for a tentative parcel map and setback exception request for the project site. The map and setback exception were subsequently approved (MS/A 34-11); however these projects were never completed. Project files, including all findings and conditions are available for review at the City of San Luis Obispo’s Community Development Department. b) Impacts adequately addressed.Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The earlier Environmental Review for this site (ER 34-11) also recognized and addressed potential significant impacts in the areas of Biological and Cultural Resources. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 57 measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions of the project. Because the potentially significant impacts identified in ER 34-11 were related to the features of the site (as opposed to the proposed development project), they have been reintroduced in this document. Please see Required Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Program, below. 20. SOURCE REFERENCES. 1. City of SLO General Plan Land Use Element, June 2010 2. City of SLO General Plan Circulation Element, April 2006 3. City of SLO General Plan Noise Element, May 1996 4. City of SLO General Plan Safety Element, March 2012 5. City of SLO General Plan Conservation & Open Space Element, April 2006 6. City of SLO General Plan Housing Element, April 2010 7. City of SLO Water and Wastewater Element, July 2010 8. City of SLO General Plan EIR 1994 for Update to the Land Use and Circulation Elements 9. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code 10. City of San Luis Obispo, Land Use Inventory Database 11. Site Visit 12. City of San Luis Obispo Staff Knowledge 13. City of SLO Climate Action Plan, August 2012 14. Website of the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency: http://www.consrv.ca.gov/dlrp/FMMP/ 15. Unused 16. CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Air Pollution Control District, April 2012 17. Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 9 th Edition, on file in the Community Development Department 18.Soils Engineering Report, GeoSolutions, Inc. May 14, 2013 19. City of SLO Waterways Management Plan 20. Water Resources Status Report, July 2012, on file with in the Utilities Department 21. City of San Luis Obispo, Archaeological Resource Preservation Guidelines, on file in the Community Development Department 22. City of San Luis Obispo, Historic Site Map 23. City of San Luis Obispo Burial Sensitivity Map 24. City of SLO Source Reduction and Recycling Element, on file in the Utilities Department 25.Drainage Analysis, Keith V. Crowe, Consulting Engineer, January 20, 2014 26.Engineering Geology Investigation Report, GeoSolutions, Inc., November 8, 2013 27. San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan 28. 2010 California Building Code 29. City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations August 2012 30. Project Plans 31. Applicant project statement/description Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Project Plans ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 58 REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS Mitigation Measure 1: Air Quality During construction/ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall implement the following particulate (dust) control measures. a. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible. b. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency will be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 m.p.h. and cessation of grading activities during periods of winds over 25 m.p.h. Reclaimed (non-potable) water is to be used in all construction and dust-control work. c. Dirt stock pile areas (if any) should be sprayed daily as needed. d. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 m.p.h. on any unpaved surface at the construction site. e. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with California Vehicle Code Section 23114. f. Scheduling of construction truck trips during non-peak hours to reduce peak hour emissions. g. If determined to be needed, periodic washdowns or mechanical streetsweeping of streets in the vicinity of the construction site shall be done. ¾Monitoring Plan, MM #1: These measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. Mitigation Measure 2:Biological Resources The project shall incorporate the following erosion control measures for work in and around the riparian corridor: a. No heavy equipment should enter flowing water. b. Equipment will be fuelled and maintained in an appropriate staging area removed from the riparian corridor. c. Restrict all heavy construction equipment to the project area or established staging areas. d. All project related spills of hazardous materials within or adjacent to the project area shall be cleaned up immediately. Spill prevention and clean up materials should be onsite at all times during construction. e. All spoils should be relocated to an upland location outside the creek channel area to prevent seepage of sediment in to the drainage/creek system. ¾Monitoring Plan, MM #2:All construction and grading plan sets shall clearly note the above mitigation measures on applicable sheets and be clearly visible to contractors and City ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 59 inspectors. Prior to issuance of building permits, a pre-construction meeting is required between Associate Planner, Marcus Carloni (or assigned planner) and the project contractor supervisor to ensure the above requirements are understood and complied with at all times. Community Development Department staff and Public Works staff will periodically inspect the site for continued compliance with the above mitigation measures. Mitigation Measure 3:Cultural Resources If materials (including but not limited to bedrock mortars, historical trash deposits, and human burials) are encountered during excavation, work shall cease until a qualified archaeologist makes determinations on possible significance, recommends appropriate measures to minimize impacts, and provides information on how to proceed in light of the discoveries. All specialist recommendations shall be communicated to the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department prior to resuming work to ensure the project continues within procedural parameters accepted by the City of San Luis Obispo and the State of California. ¾Monitoring Plan, MM #3:All construction and grading plan sets shall clearly note the above mitigation measures on applicable sheets and be clearly visible to contractors and City inspectors. Prior to issuance of building permits, a pre-construction meeting is required between Associate Planner, Marcus Carloni (or assigned planner) and the project contractor supervisor to ensure the above requirements are understood and complied with at all times. Community Development Department staff and Public Works staff will periodically inspect the site for continued compliance with the above mitigation measures. ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 60 RESOLUTION NO. XXXX-14 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF A VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND A USE PERMIT ALLOWING DEVELOPMENT OF A NINE-UNIT COMMON INTEREST SUBDIVISION ON A SITE WITH SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS (R-2-S ZONING) AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AS REPRESENTED IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED MAY 15, 2014 3080 ROCKVIEW PLACE; TR/A/ER 202-13 (TRACT 3057) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on May 15, 2014, for the purpose of considering application TR/A/ ER 202-13, a request for a use permit to allow development of a site zoned Medium-Density Residential with a Special Considerations overlay with a nine-unit Common Interest Subdivision and Vesting Tentative Tract Map for a residential subdivision; and WHEREAS, said public hearing was for the purpose of formulating and forwarding recommendations to the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo regarding the project; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for the project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Planning Commission makes the following findings in support of approval of the request for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 3057, including support for exceptions to the property improvement standards for new common interest subdivisions, and Use Permit A 202-13 to allow development of a site with the Special Consideration overlay zoning: Subdivision Findings 1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan and Airport Land Use Plan, including compatibility with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan for Medium Density Residential land uses. ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 61 2. As demonstrated by the Winter Solstice Shading Plan and Conceptual Landscape Plan, the design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision. 3. As conditioned, the subdivider will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers or employees to attach set aside, void or annul an approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff concerning a subdivision. 4. The proposed tentative tract map is consistent with the General Plan, including LUE Policies 2.2.11, 2.2.8 and 2.2.6, and HE Policies 4.2 and 6.14, because the subdivision will provide residential development anticipated by the General Plan and preserve and incorporate as amenities, natural site features, and sensitive natural resources. 5. The site is physically suited for the proposed type of development because the project has been designed to utilize available residential density while enhancing creek resources. 6. The project is consistent with the intent of the City’s Common Interest Subdivision standards, in that it provides for small ownership units with private and common amenities in a compact, cohesive manner. 7. With the incorporation of the recommended conditions and mitigation measures, the design of the subdivision and improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat because the project will create beneficial enhancement of degraded natural resources. 8. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, is not likely to cause serious public health or safety problems because the type of improvements are appropriate for the location and will be designed to meet existing building and safety codes. 9. The design of the subdivision, or the type of improvements, will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision because such easements will be maintained. Affordable Housing 10. The development of one home restricted for a moderate-income family on-site is consistent with the City’s inclusionary housing requirements which require that projects of this size provide one affordable unit on-site or pay the in-lieu housing fee. Property Improvement Standards Exceptions 11. There are circumstances of the site, such as the unusual configuration and bifurcation by an open drainage channel, distinct from land in the same zoning, which would make compliance with all setbacks infeasible. ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 62 12. Strict adherence to the required property improvement standards would decrease the size or number of units within the project resulting in a significant loss of entitlement, and inability to provide for restricted affordable housing on-site. 13. The reduced setbacks will not constitute a grant of special privilege; an entitlement inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning, as dedication of one on-site affordable unit, or 12.5% of the project, entitles the project to at 7.5% density bonus and one incentive or concession. 14. No feasible alternative to authorizing the exception would satisfy the intent of the city policies and regulations. Final configuration of the homes, including setbacks, will be reviewed and approved by the Architectural Review Commission. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared by the Community Development Department on May 7, 2014. The Planning Commission finds and determines that the project’s Mitigated Negative Declaration adequately identifies that there is no foreseeable potential for significant environmental impacts by the proposed project. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend adoption of the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (ER 202-13) with incorporation of the following mitigation measures: Mitigation Measure 1: Air Quality 1. During construction/ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall implement the following particulate (dust) control measures. a. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible. b. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency will be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 m.p.h. and cessation of grading activities during periods of winds over 25 m.p.h. Reclaimed (non-potable) water is to be used in all construction and dust-control work. c. Dirt stock pile areas (if any) should be sprayed daily as needed. d. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 m.p.h. on any unpaved surface at the construction site. e. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with California Vehicle Code Section 23114. f. Scheduling of construction truck trips during non-peak hours to reduce peak hour emissions. g. If determined to be needed, periodic washdowns or mechanical streetsweeping of streets in the vicinity of the construction site shall be done. ¾ Monitoring Plan, MM #1: These measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 63 shall be provided to the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. Mitigation Measure 2: Biological Resources 2. The project shall incorporate the following erosion control measures for work in and around the riparian corridor: a. No heavy equipment should enter flowing water. b. Equipment will be fuelled and maintained in an appropriate staging area removed from the riparian corridor. c. Restrict all heavy construction equipment to the project area or established staging areas. d. All project related spills of hazardous materials within or adjacent to the project area shall be cleaned up immediately. Spill prevention and clean up materials should be onsite at all times during construction. e. All spoils should be relocated to an upland location outside the creek channel area to prevent seepage of sediment in to the drainage/creek system. ¾Monitoring Plan, MM #2: All construction and grading plan sets shall clearly note the above mitigation measures on applicable sheets and be clearly visible to contractors and City inspectors. Prior to issuance of building permits, a pre-construction meeting is required between Associate Planner, Marcus Carloni (or assigned planner) and the project contractor supervisor to ensure the above requirements are understood and complied with at all times. Community Development Department staff and Public Works staff will periodically inspect the site for continued compliance with the above mitigation measures. Mitigation Measure 3: Cultural Resources 3. If materials (including but not limited to bedrock mortars, historical trash deposits, and human burials) are encountered during excavation, work shall cease until a qualified archaeologist makes determinations on possible significance, recommends appropriate measures to minimize impacts, and provides information on how to proceed in light of the discoveries. All specialist recommendations shall be communicated to the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department prior to resuming work to ensure the project continues within procedural parameters accepted by the City of San Luis Obispo and the State of California. ¾Monitoring Plan, MM #3: All construction and grading plan sets shall clearly note the above mitigation measures on applicable sheets and be clearly visible to contractors and City inspectors. Prior to issuance of building permits, a pre-construction meeting is required between Associate Planner, Marcus Carloni (or assigned planner) and the project contractor supervisor to ensure the above requirements are understood and complied with at all times. Community Development Department staff and Public Works staff will periodically inspect the site for continued compliance with the above mitigation measures. ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 64 SECTION 3. Action. The Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Use Permit to allow development of a site with Special Considerations, and adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (TR/A/ER 202-13), with incorporation of the following project conditions: Community Development Department - Planning 1. The project, including requested property development exceptions, shall be reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission (ARC). 2. All conditions of approval, including those required by the Architectural Review Commission, mitigation measures and easements shall be shown on the final map and/or subdivision improvement/building plans. 3. Lot 5 shall provide an affordable housing unit in compliance with Section 17.91 of the Municipal Code. An affordable housing agreement shall be recorded in compliance with the City’s Affordable Housing Standards. Community Development Department - Engineering 4. All easements shall be recorded on-title with the individual lots. 5. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this subdivision, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review (“Indemnified Claims”). The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any Indemnified Claim upon being presented with the Indemnified Claim and City shall fully cooperate in the defense against an Indemnified Claim." 6. Some of the proposed lot lines are shown relatively close to the proposed building. Wall rating requirements and opening protective will apply per Table R302.1(2). Proposed setback dimensions shall be clearly shown on plans to assess the requirements based on Table as referenced. 7. Park in-lieu fees shall be paid for each lot prior to map recordation in accordance with the fee resolution in effect at the time of final map submittal/recordation. 8. Complete frontage improvements are required as a condition of the subdivision and development. All improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance the City Engineering Standards and Standard Specifications in effect at the time of submittal of said improvements. The required subdivision improvements shall be completed or covered by an appropriate surety prior to map recordation. 9. Grade and line shall be established by the developer for the new curb and gutter to the ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 65 satisfaction of the Public Works Director. A separate public improvement plan may be required where grades and alignment have not been established or where significant discrepancies are discovered. The developer is responsible for any required engineering and/or surveying. Record drawings shall be provided at the completion of construction. 10. The required public and private subdivision improvements may be completed with a separate subdivision improvement plan submittal processed through the Public Works Department. As an alternate, the building plan submittal may be used to show all required improvements. Improvements located within the public right-of-way will require a separate encroachment permit and associated inspection fees. A separate plan review fee based on the fee resolution in effect at the time of plan submittal will be required for the Public Works Department review of the subdivision improvements associated with the building plan submittal. 11. The final map shall show and note the offer of dedication for the sidewalk, public pedestrian easement for any ADA sidewalk extensions, a 10’ PUE, and a 10’ street tree easement. 12. Any required or proposed off-site easements or license agreements shall be secured or recorded prior to or concurrent with recordation of the map or prior to construction. 13. Private easements for access, parking, maneuverability, drainage, utilities, and open space shall be shown and noted on the final map. Some or all of the private easements may be in the form of a blanket easement. The common driveway and any maintenance agreements shall be recorded in conjunction with the map. 14. The open space easement, drainage easement, and any easement agreements shall be reviewed and approved to the satisfaction of city’s Natural Resource Manager and Public Works Department in conjunction with recordation of the map. Restoration planting within the open space and creek corridor shall be approved by the Natural Resource Manager. 15. The final map or additional map sheet shall show the limits of 100-year flood inundation in accordance with the drainage analysis and as generally shown on the tentative map. 16. The updated project soils report shall be referenced on the map or on an additional sheet. 17. The parcel map/final map preparation and monumentation shall be in accordance with the city’s Subdivision Regulations, Engineering Standards, and the Subdivision Map Act. 18. All boundary monuments, lot corners and centerline intersections, BC's, EC's, etc., shall be tied to the City's Horizontal Control Network. At least two control points shall be used and a tabulation of the coordinates shall be submitted with the final map or parcel map. All coordinates submitted shall be based on the City coordinate system. A 3.5" diameter computer floppy disk, containing the appropriate data compatible with Autocad (Digital Interchange Format, DXF) for Geographic Information System (GIS) purposes, shall be ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 66 submitted to the City Engineer. On motion by _______________, seconded by __________, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: REFRAIN: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 15th day of May, 2014. ___________________________ Doug Davidson, Secretary Planning Commission ATTACHMENT 3 PC1 - 67 P.O. Box 12910, San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 P: 805.781.3133 | Fax: 805.781.3233 | covelop.net Damien Mavis and Patrick Arnold P.O. Box 12910 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 June 24, 2014 City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 RE: Planning Commission Comments, TTM 3057, 9 on Rockview Upon recommendation by the Planning Commission, we have revisited the design of our common interest subdivision project at 3080 Rockview Place, San Luis Obispo, CA and in many cases, made revisions to the plans. We have also revisited the Green Building Checklist; investigated financing and cost implications for homeowners of Common Interest Subdivision homes versus condominium homes; identified existing projects in the community as examples of the type of project we’re proposing; and, investigated the potential for a pedestrian connection to the Crossroads Commercial Center adjacent to our property. Plan Revisions 1. Revised C1.0 Common Interest Subdivision Vesting Tentative Tract Map to two separate pages for clarity, C-1 Vesting Tentative Tract Map and C-2 Preliminary Grading and Drainage; 2. Lot shapes and sizes have been adjusted to allow for items 3 and 4 and maintain the minimum allowable size; 3. Common Private Driveway, Open Space, Utility and Maintenance Easement shown in grey on C-1 and A-1 has been adjusted to reflect the new property lines; 4. Fences have been aligned with property lines to eliminate Exclusive Use Easements; 5. Reduced Lot 1’s balcony to front elevation only, pulling it out of the set-back; 6. Shifted home on Lot 9 out of the creek corridor; 7. Adjusted layout of Guest Parking Spaces to be more logical for the homes while maintaining the total number of spaces. Green Building Checklist Update We have revisited the Green Building Checklist and found additional features to include and measures to take which bring our Total Targeted Points to 104 from 87, an increase of nearly 20% and more than double the minimum. Some additional landscape measures include resource efficient landscapes, minimization of turf in the landscaped areas and installation of high-efficiency irrigation systems. Common Interest Subdivisions contrasted with Condominium Projects Our goal is to provide affordable detached homes in San Luis Obispo, and our hope is to make these the most affordable new homes in the city. Ongoing expenses and the ability to obtain low-cost financing for our buyers is a large part of this affordability equation. ATTACHMENT 4 PC1 - 68 P.O. Box 12910, San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 P: 805.781.3133 | Fax: 805.781.3233 | covelop.net There are vast differences in financing opportunities and HOA fees that the buyers of the homes in our subdivision will face if we entitle it as a Common Interest Subdivision versus a Condominium Complex. The CCR’s and Maintenance Agreements will be identical in either case so that the home buyers’ responsibilities will be the same and there will be no differences in how the development will look or feel; the only difference exists in the lines and easements on a map. The following outlines major differences between the two. Common Interest Subdivision – Pros: - No formal HOA needed; all common interests can be addressed through a Joint Maintenance Agreement which establishes an informal homeowner’s association. The fees for all common driveway and landscape are estimated at $32 per month per home. - The homes would qualify for FHA, VA, and Fannie Mae financing with no ongoing processing requirements and expenses. This allows for the best rates and down payments as low as 3.5% or $16,000. - All lot lines follow fence lines in the front and back yards. Cons: - Individual lot lines under the areas covered by the Common Easement may look “odd” so that each lot exceeds minimum lot size. Condominium Complex – Pros - There is no minimum lot size so the lot lines can be drawn right around the home footprints. Cons - A formal HOA will have to be established with professional management and minimum fees. Minimum HOA fee estimates per home are approximately $100 per month. - The project would have to be pre-approved by FHA and Fannie Mae to allow their financing. The HOA would have to maintain this approval in perpetuity to allow subsequent buyers to use this type of financing. Should their approval lapse, other buyer financing would have to be obtained. These other sources currently require a minimum of 10% down payment (or approximately $45,000), and charge an increased rate approximately 0.375% higher. We have been told that currently there is only one condominium project in SLO that has kept up on it FHA and Fannie Mae approvals, the others have let them lapse. For these reasons we have chosen to develop this project as a Common Interest Subdivision. Other successful Common Interest Subdivisions include Nipomo St. Commons, 1374-1386 Pismo St., and Stafford Court. These are all governed by similar documents and easements and have “odd” lot lines which cut through parking spaces, meander to reach minimum lot sizes, etc... They have all been approved in the recent past and have been built and sold successfully. Please see the attached Joint Maintenance Agreement Exhibits 1, 2 and 3. Lastly, we were asked to review the possibility of connection our project to the Crossroads Center with a pedestrian access. After investigation and discussion with the property’s owner, we determined that connection is not an option. Please see the Pedestrian Access Exhibit included here for more information. ATTACHMENT 4 PC1 - 69 P.O. Box 12910, San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 P: 805.781.3133 | Fax: 805.781.3233 | covelop.net Pedestrian Access Exhibit Upon request by the Planning Commission, we have evaluated the potential for pedestrian access to the neighboring Crossroads Commercial Center. After much consideration we determined that access is not financially feasible, not practical and not in the best interest of our homeowners. Pedestrian access would cross an existing drainage swale and easement from the neighboring property which would require renegotiation. Additionally, a new reciprocal access easement would need to be coordinated with the owner of the Crossroads Center who has expressed to us that he does not support a connection. If the easements were granted after further negotiation, the access would assumedly also need to meet ADA accessibility standards. Unfortunately, once connected to the Crossroads’ rear parking lot, no ADA access path exists to the front of the development therefor true ADA access is not feasible. Stairway access, if space can be made within the city setback and the resulting narrow connection, would require additional engineering, demolition and construction. Any access structure would also encroach on the parking lot’s back-up distances which could potentially eliminate spaces. ATTACHMENT 5A PC1 - 70 P.O. Box 12910, San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 P: 805.781.3133 | Fax: 805.781.3233 | covelop.net All of these costs, in addition to the legal costs for the easement negotiations listed above, would add significantly to the overall project budget and have to be passed on to our homeowners. A connection encouraging pedestrian traffic between a small residential neighborhood and an unattended, rear parking lot has the potential to invite vagrancy. Most concerning is that the access path would travel through the private side- yard on Lot 5, passing the back door of our moderate-income family unit. This type of residential to commercial connection is also not common within the city and recent neighboring developments have not been required to connect. A recent project nearby even appears to have taken additional steps to discourage through traffic. &ƌŽŵƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚ͕ƐŚŽǁŝŶŐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJůŝŶĞƐ&ƌŽŵ>Žƚϱ͕ƐŚŽǁŝŶŐϯ͛Ͳϱ͛ĞůĞǀĂƚŝŽŶĐŚĂŶŐĞ ATTACHMENT 5A PC1 - 71 ATTACHMENT 5B PC1 - 72 P.O. Box 12910, San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 P: 805.781.3133 | Fax: 805.781.3233 | covelop.net E/WKDK^dZ dKDDKE^ŽŵŵŽŶ/ŶƚĞƌĞƐƚ^ƵďĚŝǀŝƐŝŽŶ džŚŝďŝƚϭ ϴͲƵŶŝƚŽŵŵŽŶ/ŶƚĞƌĞƐƚ^ƵďĚŝǀŝƐŝŽŶǁŝƚŚŽƵƚĂĨŽƌŵĂů,K͖ŽŵŵŽŶƌŝǀĞǁĂLJĂŶĚDĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞĂŶĚWƌŝǀĂƚĞ^ĞǁĞƌ ĂƐĞŵĞŶƚĨŽƌŝŶŐƌĞƐƐ͕ĞŐƌĞƐƐ͕ƵƚŝůŝƚŝĞƐĂŶĚĚƌĂŝŶĂŐĞĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĚŝŶƌƚŝĐůĞ//WƌŽƉĞƌƚLJhƐĞZĞƐƚƌŝĐƚŝŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞΘZƐĂŶĚ ƌƚŝĐůĞ/sEŽŶͲĞdžĐůƵƐŝǀĞ ĂƐĞŵĞŶƚƐĨŽƌŽŵŵŽŶƌŝǀĞǁĂLJ͕WƌŝǀĂƚĞhƚŝůŝƚŝĞƐĂŶĚƌĂŝŶĂŐĞ͘dŚĞDĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞ KďůŝŐĂƚŝŽŶƐĂŶĚDĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞ&ƵŶĚĂƌĞĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĚŝŶƌƚŝĐůĞ/sĂƐǁĞůů͘ ATTACHMENT 6A PC1 - 73 P.O. Box 12910, San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 P: 805.781.3133 | Fax: 805.781.3233 | covelop.net ϭϯϳϰͲϭϯϴϲW/^DK^dZ dŽŵŵŽŶ/ŶƚĞƌĞƐƚ^ƵďĚŝǀŝƐŝŽŶ džŚŝďŝƚϮ ϰͲƵŶŝƚŽŵŵŽŶ/ŶƚĞƌĞƐƚ^ƵďĚŝǀŝƐŝŽŶǁŝƚŚŽƵƚĂĨŽƌŵĂů,K͖ĂƌĞĐŝƉƌŽĐĂůWƌŝǀĂƚĞ ĂƐĞŵĞŶƚĨŽƌŽŵŵŽŶƌŝǀĞǁĂLJ͕ ĐĐĞƐƐ͕ ĂƐĞŵĞŶƚĨŽƌĂĐĐĞƐƐ͕ƵƚŝůŝƚŝĞƐ͕ĚƌĂŝŶĂŐĞ͕ĂŶĚƐƚŽƌŵǁĂƚĞƌĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐƚŽďĞũŽŝŶƚůLJŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶĞĚŝƐĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĚŝŶ ƌƚŝĐůĞs ĂƐĞŵĞŶƚĂŶĚDĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞŽĨƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͛ƐΘZƐ͘ ATTACHMENT 6A PC1 - 74 P.O. Box 12910, San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 P: 805.781.3133 | Fax: 805.781.3233 | covelop.net ^d&&KZKhZdŽŵŵŽŶ/ŶƚĞƌĞƐƚ^ƵďĚŝǀŝƐŝŽŶ džŚŝďŝƚϯ ϰͲƵŶŝƚŽŵŵŽŶ/ŶƚĞƌĞƐƚ^ƵďĚŝǀŝƐŝŽŶǁŝƚŚĂĨŽƌŵĂů,K͖ƚŚĞŽŵŵŽŶhƐĞƌĞĂĂŶĚĞĂƐĞŵĞŶƚĨŽƌƉƵďůŝĐĂŶĚ ƉƌŝǀĂƚĞƵƚŝůŝƚŝĞƐ͕ĚƌĂŝŶĂŐĞ͕ŵĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞĂŶĚƉƌŝǀĂƚĞĂĐĐĞƐƐĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĚŝŶƌƚŝĐůĞ//WƌŽƉĞƌƚLJhƐĞZĞƐƚƌŝĐƚŝŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞ ΘZƐ͘DĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĚŝŶƌƚŝĐůĞ/ĞĨŝŶŝƚŝŽŶƐĂŶĚ/ŶƚĞƌƉƌĞƚĂƚŝŽŶ͘ZĞƉĂŝƌĂŶĚDĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞ KďůŝŐĂƚŝŽŶƐĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĚŝŶƐĞĐƚŝŽŶϰ͘ϱZĞƉĂŝƌĂŶĚDĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞ͘ ATTACHMENT 6A PC1 - 75 ATTACHMENT 6B PC1 - 76 ATTACHMENT 6B PC1 - 77 ATTACHMENT 6B PC1 - 78 ATTACHMENT 6B PC1 - 79 ATTACHMENT 6B PC1 - 80 ATTACHMENT 6B PC1 - 81 ATTACHMENT 6B PC1 - 82 ATTACHMENT 6B PC1 - 83 ATTACHMENT 6B PC1 - 84 ATTACHMENT 6B PC1 - 85 ATTACHMENT 6B PC1 - 86 ATTACHMENT 6B PC1 - 87 ATTACHMENT 6B PC1 - 88 ATTACHMENT 6B PC1 - 89 ATTACHMENT 6B PC1 - 90 ATTACHMENT 6C PC1 - 91 ATTACHMENT 6C PC1 - 92 ATTACHMENT 6C PC1 - 93 ATTACHMENT 6C PC1 - 94 ATTACHMENT 6C PC1 - 95 ATTACHMENT 6C PC1 - 96 ATTACHMENT 6C PC1 - 97 ATTACHMENT 6C PC1 - 98 ATTACHMENT 6C PC1 - 99 ATTACHMENT 6C PC1 - 100 ATTACHMENT 6C PC1 - 101 ATTACHMENT 6C PC1 - 102 ATTACHMENT 6C PC1 - 103 ATTACHMENT 6C PC1 - 104 ATTACHMENT 6C PC1 - 105 ATTACHMENT 6C PC1 - 106 ATTACHMENT 6C PC1 - 107 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 108 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 109 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 110 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 111 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 112 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 113 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 114 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 115 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 116 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 117 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 118 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 119 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 120 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 121 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 122 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 123 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 124 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 125 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 126 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 127 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 128 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 129 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 130 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 131 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 132 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 133 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 134 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 135 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 136 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 137 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 138 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 139 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 140 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 141 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 142 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 143 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 144 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 145 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 146 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 147 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 148 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 149 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 150 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 151 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 152 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 153 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 154 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 155 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 156 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 157 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 158 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 159 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 160 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 161 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 162 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 163 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 164 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 165 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 166 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 167 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 168 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 169 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 170 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 171 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 172 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 173 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 174 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 175 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 176 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 177 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 178 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 179 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 180 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 181 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 182 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 183 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 184 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 185 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 186 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 187 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 188 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 189 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 190 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 191 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 192 ATTACHMENT 6D PC1 - 193 eenPoint ate C ec list: ulti a il Co unit ne ealt A esou ces ate104 14 41 9 12 28 : FLOO A AS A LA SCAP A A B FO B C C L S nte otal Con itione Floo A ea o t e P o ect:13234 630563 nte otal on esi ential Floo A ea o P o ect:0 Pe cent o P o ect e icate to esi ential se 100 Pe centa e o Site e icate to Lan scapin 30 Points Ac ieve Co unit ne A ealt esou ces ateotes AA. CO S A PLA Yes 1 1 0 10 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 Yes 1 1 Located in garages No 0 1 8 TIER 1: Enter number of services within ½ Mile: 1) Day Care 2) Community Center 4) Drug Store 5) Restaurant 7) Library 8) Farmer's Market 3 TIER 2: Enter number of services within ½ Mile: 1) Bank 2) Place of Worship 4) Hardware 5) Theater/Entertainment 7) Post Office 8) Senior Care Facility 10) Hair Care 11) Commercial Office or Major Employer 1 1 0 1 Yes 1 1 Yes 1 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 Yes 1 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 Yes 1 1 Yes 1 1 Possible Points Possible Points Total Targeted Points: i. 1/4 Mile of One Planned or Current Bus Line Stop c. Reduced Parking Capacity i. Less than 1.5 Parking Spaces Per Unit ii. 1/2 Mile of a Major Transit Stop (Commuter Train/Light Rail Transit System OR Two or More Planned/Current Bus Line Stops b. Outdoor Gathering Place of Compact Site Provides Natural Elements (mutually exclusive with AA5a) (Projects Must Be a Minimum of 50 du/acre) 4. ixe se evelop ents c. Public Outdoor Gathering Places have Direct Access to At Least Two Tier 1 Community Services (See AA3a) b. Half of the Non-Residential Floor Space is Dedicated to Community Services (See AA3a) a. Private or Semi-Public Outdoor Gathering Places for Residents (Minimum of 50 sf Per Unit) (mutually exclusive with AA5b) 5. Out oo at e in Places a. At least 2% of Development Floor Space Supports Mixed-Use (Non-Residential Tenants) b. All Main Entrances to the Building and Site are Prominent and Visible from the Street a. Residence Entries Have Views to Callers (Windows or Double Peep Holes) & Can Be Seen By Neighbors 6. esi n o Sa et an an alis ete ence 7. Passive Sola esi n b. Conserve Resources by Increasing Density -15 Units Per Acre or Greater (1 Point for every additional 5 dwelling units/acre) Enter Project Density Number (In du/acre) c. Project Includes the Redevelopment of At Least One Existing Building c. Provide Dedicated, Covered & Secure Bicycle Storage for 15% of Residents 3) Public Park 6) School ine on oc vie 1. evelop n ill Sites 3. Alte native anspo tation a. Project is an Urban Infill Development 2. esi n o al in Bic clin a. Sidewalks Are Buffered from Roadways & Are 5 Feet Wide (8 Feet in Retail Areas) b. Install Traffic Calming Strategies d. Build on Designated Brownfield Site or City-Designated Redevelopment Area a. Site has Pedestrian Access Within ½ Mile of Community Services: 12) Full Scale Supermarket 10) Convenience Store Where Meat & Produce are Sold 9) Medical/Dental d. Provide Secure Bicycle Storage for 5% of Non-Residential Tenant Employees & Visitors 9) After School Programs 3) Laundry/Cleaners 6) Fitness/Gym i. 5 Services Listed Above (Tier 2 Services Count as 1/2 Service Value) ii.10 Services Listed Above (Tier 2 Services Count as 1/2 Service Value) b. Proximity to Public Transit: Development is Located Within ii. Less than 1.0 Parking Spaces Per Unit The GreenPoint Rated checklist tracks green features incorporated into the home. A o e is onl eenPoint ate i all eatu es a e ve i ie b a Ce ti ie eenPoint ate t ou Buil t een. GreenPoint Rated is provided as a public service by Build It Green, a professional non-profit whose mission is to promote healthy, energy and resource efficient buildings in California. The minimum requirements for a GreenPoint Rated home are: Earn a total of 50 points or more; obtain the following minimum points per category: Community (6), Energy (30), Indoor Air Quality/Health (5), Resources (6), and Water (3); and meet the prerequisites A2a, E2a, H4a. (for 2008 permitted projects), J1a, N1. and Q0. This checklist accommodates the verification of mandatory CALGreen measures but does not signify compliance unless accepted by jurisdictional authority. All CALGreen measures within the checklist must be selected as "Yes" or "n/a" for compliance with GreenPoint Rated. Build It Green is not a code enforcement agency. The green building practices listed below are described in the GreenPoint Rated Multifamily Rating Manual. For more information please visit .buil it een.o eenpoint ate . ulti a il e o e 2.2 2008 itle 24 14 41 9 12 28 6 30 5 6 3 © Build It Green Multifamily Checklist version 2.2/1.9 ATTACHMENT 7 PC1 - 194 Points Ac ieve Co unit ne A ealt esou ces ateotes ine on oc vie No 0 2 No 0 1 Yes 2 2 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 Yes 1 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 Yes 1 1 No 0 1 12 A. S Yes 2 11 Yes 1 1 Yes Yes 2 2 No 0 2 Yes 1 1 No 0 1 Yes 1 1 Yes 1 1 8 B. LA SCAP Yes Yes 2 2 Yes 2 2 Yes 1 1 No 0 1 Yes 3 3 Yes 2 2 Yes 2 2 Yes 2 2 Yes 3 3 No 0 3 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 2 No 0 4 No 0 1 No 0 1 Yes 1 1 18 C. S CO S A O S b. Use Rainwater for Indoor and/or Outdoor Water Use a. Play Structures & Surfaces Have an Average Recycled Content 20% 3. Out oo Pla St uctu es an Out oo Fu nitu e 4. e uce Li t Pollution b S iel in Fixtu es an i ectin Li t o n a e. Install High-Efficiency Irrigation Systems a. Required: Divert 50% (by weight) of All Construction & Demolition Waste (Recycling or Reuse) (CALGreen code) b. Divert 100% of Asphalt and Concrete and 65% (by weight) of Remaining Materials c. Divert 100% of Asphalt and Concrete and 80% (by weight) of Remaining Materials 3. Const uction nvi on ental ualit ana e ent Plan, uct Sealin , an P e Occupanc Flus Out [*This credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] 4. se ec cle Content A e ate ini u 25 i. Turf Shall Not Be Installed on Slopes Exceeding 10% and No Overhead Sprinklers Installed in Areas Less than 8 Feet Wide a. Group Plants by Water Needs (Hydrozoning) Is the landscape 10% of the site area? Sites with less than 10% of the total site area dedicated to landscaping can only earn up to 4 points for measure B1a through B1g. Calculate the landscape area percentage by dividing the landscape area by the total site area. Include the building footprint(s) and all other developed portions of the site up to the site boundary. b. Environmentally Preferable Exterior Site Furnishings 2. Sou ce ate icienc h. Incorporate Community Garden Possible Points Possible Points Possible Points b. Live/Work Units Include A Dedicated Commercial Entrance b. Provide Appropriate Shading On All South-Facing Windows for Effective Passive Solar Control c. Provide Thermal Mass i. 50% of Units f. Incorporate Two Inches of Compost in the Top 6 to 12 Inches of Soil a. Provide Appropriate Orientation for Maximum Energy Efficiency i. 10% of All Units iii. 75% of Plants are Drought-tolerant, California Natives, Mediterranean or Other Appropriate Species b. Mulch All Planting Beds to the Greater of 3 Inches or Local Water Ordinance Requirement ii. No Plant Species will Require Shearing i. No Invasive Species Listed by Cal-IPC Are Planted c. Construct Resource-Efficient Landscapes Total Available Points in Community Design and Planning: 42 a. Duct openings and other related air distribution component openings shall be covered during construction. (CALGreen code if applicable) Total Available Points in Site: 11 2. ive t ec cle ob Site Const uction aste nclu in een aste an xistin St uctu es ii. System Has Smart (Weather-based) Controller (CALGreen code if applicable) d. Minimize Turf in Landscape Installed by Builder 5. Cool Site: e uce eat slan ect on Site ii. Turf Is 25% of Landscaped Area i. System Uses Only Low-Flow Drip, Bubblers or Sprinklers a. Protect Topsoil and Reuse After Construction 1. Lan scapin b. Full environmental quality management plan and pre-occupancy flush out is conducted (Prerequisite is A5a) 1. P otect opsoil an ini i e is uption o xistin Plants ees c. At least 20% of Units at 120% or Less of AMI are For-Sale b. Development Includes Multiple Bedroom Units (Minimum of 2 3-Bdrm Units At or Less Than 80% AMI) iii. 50% or More ii. 25% g. Design Landscape to Meet Water Budget ii. Install Irrigation System That Will Be Operated at <50% Reference ET (B1a., B1b. and B1ei. or B1eii. are Prerequisites for Credit) Total Available Points in Landscape: 33 a. Use Recycled Water for Indoor and/or Outdoor Water Use i. Install Irrigation System That Will Be Operated at <70% Reference ET (B1a. and B1b. are Prerequisites for Credit) ii. 80% of Units a. Include Universal Design Principles in Units b. Limit and Delineate Construction Footprint for Maximum Protection 9. A o abilit a. Units are Dedicated to Households Making 80% or Less of AMI 8. A aptable Buil in s © Build It Green Multifamily Checklist version 2.2/1.9 ATTACHMENT 7 PC1 - 195 Points Ac ieve Co unit ne A ealt esou ces ateotes ine on oc vie No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 0.5 No 0 0.5 No 0 0.5 No 0 0.5 No 0 2 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 11 No 0 2 No 0 11 0 . FO A O , S C AL F A B L LOP No 0 3 No 0 11 No 0 1 No 0 6 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 Yes 1 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 Yes 1 1 Yes 1 1 No 0 1 No 0 4 No 0 2 No 0 1 No 0 2 No 0 2 No 0 1 3 . O No 0 2 Yes 1 1 Yes No 0 1 No 0 4 1 F. S LA O No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 0 . PL B Yes 2 2 N/A N/A 0 N/A N/A 1i. Average Flush Rate is 0.5 gpf (CALGreen code if applicable) TIER 2: 1) Minimize Stair Impact Noise a. Develop Green Tenant Improvement Requirements for Build Outs 2. esi n, Buil an aintain St uctu al Pest an ot Cont ols o lo ise p o ects b. Commercial Loading Area Separated from Residential area 3) Minimize Trash Chute Noise a. Floors ii. In All Non-Residential Areas i. Studs at 24 Inch on Center at Interior Non-Bearing Walls and Top Floor c. Optimal Value Engineering 1. Acoustics: oise an ib ation Cont ol (minimum 2 points for credit, including 1 Tier 1 measure, maximum of 4 points) 1. eplace Po tlan Ce ent in Conc ete it ec cle Fl As an o Sla ini u 20 Total Available Points in Design Considerations: 14 c. Post-Construction Phase (Verify Compliance, Commissioning Report, Training and Warranty Review) 2) Minimize Floor Squeaks 5) Plumbing Noise and Vibration Reduction b. High Efficiency Urinals or No-Water Urinals Are Specified: 3. Const uction ate ial iciencies a. Wall and Floor Assemblies (excluding solid wall assemblies) are Delivered Panelized from Supplier (Minimum of 80% square feet) Possible Points Possible Points a. Walls Total Available Points in Exterior: 8 c. Floors b. Ceilings Total Available Points in Insulation: 3 Possible Points 1. nstall nsulation it 75 ec cle Content Possible Points 5. nsulate ea e s b. Panel Products (Minimum 40%) b. Use Durable and Fire Resistant Roofing Materials or Assembly a. Install High Efficiency Toilets (Dual Flush or 1.28 Gallons Per Flush (gpf)) (CALGreen code if applicable) TIER 1: 1) Exterior Noise Reduction 2) Loud Single-Event Noise Reduction in Noise-Sensitive Spaces a. Design Phase (Define Owner's Project Requirements, Basis of Design, and Develop Plan) b. Modular Components are Delivered Assembled to the Project (Minimum 25%) 7. ne eels on oo usses o Lo ise P o ects f. Oriented Strand Board for Wall and Roof Sheathing 6. se FSC Ce ti ie oo a. Dimensional Lumber, Studs and Timber (Minimum 40%) c. Engineered Lumber for Roof Rafters b. Wood I-Joists or Web Trusses for Floors ii. Door & Window Headers Sized for Load e. Oriented Strand Board for Subfloor i. In All Residences 3. e etate oo (2 points for 25%, 4 points for 50%) b. Walls Total Available Points in Foundation, Structural Frame & Building Envelope: 34 1. ate icient Fixtu es 8. se Soli all S ste s nclu es S PS, CFs, An on Stic F a e Asse bl a. Engineered Beams and Headers 3) Airborne and Structure-borne Noise Reduction (e.g., walls, floor-ceilings) iii. Use Only Cripple Studs Required for Load c. Separate Mechanical and Plumbing Systems 3. Co issionin 4) Mechanical Ventilation Noise and Vibration Control 4) Mixed-Use Noise and Vibration Reduction 2. u able oo in Options a. Required: All Roofing Has 3-Year Subcontractor Warranty and a 20-Year Manufacturer Warranty c. Roofs a. Install a Rain Screen Wall System 1. aina e Planes an u able Si in b. Use Durable and Non-Combustible Siding Materials 2. ixe se esi n St ate ies 4. se n inee e Lu be b. Construction Phase (Perform Functional Testing) d. Engineered or Finger-Jointed Studs for Vertical Applications © Build It Green Multifamily Checklist version 2.2/1.9 ATTACHMENT 7 PC1 - 196 Points Ac ieve Co unit ne A ealt esou ces ateotes ine on oc vie No 0 1 Yes 3 3 Yes 1 1 N/A N/A 0 Yes 1 1 N/A N/A 0 No 0 11 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 12 No 0 111 Yes 4 4 11 . A LA O A A CO O No 0 2 No 0 1 Yes 2 11 No 0 1 N/A N/A 1 Yes No 0 1 No 0 2 Yes 1 1 No 0 1 Yes 1 1 4 . ABL No 0 4 No 0 22 No 0 22 No 0 22 0 . B L P FO A C 2008 15 30 30+ 0%0 1+ No 0 1 No 0 2 No 0 1 No 0 6 Yes 1 1 No 0 1 iv. Non-Residential Areas: Bath Faucets - .5 gpm or .25 gal for meter faucets (CALGreen code if applicable) ii. Average Flush Rate is 0.1 gpf c. High Efficiency Showerheads Use 2.0 Gallons Per Minute (gpm) at 80 psi (CALGreen code if applicable) a. Energy Efficiency Program [*This credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] 2. O set a Pe centa e o t e P o ect s sti ate lect icit e an it Onsite ene able ene ation a. Required: Residences: Minimum 15% Better Than Title 24. 2 Points for Every 1% Better Than Title 24 Possible Points Possible Points a. 60% of Common Area Load a. Duct Testing Results in Leakage < 6% [*This credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] b. 90% of Common Area Load c. 10% or More of Residential Units Load 3. esi n an Buil ea e o ne o es (Enter number of points, minimum of 2 and maximum of 6 points) Possible Points d. ENERGY STAR Bathroom Fans on Timer or Humidistat (CALGreen code if applicable) 5. a a e entilation Fans A e Cont olle b Ca bon onoxi e Senso s (Passive Ventilation Not Eligible) [*This credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] 1. Buil in Pe o ance xcee s itle 24 2. Buil in nvelope ia nostic valuations b. Blower Door Testing Results for Air Change per Hour is < 3.5 ACH50 [*This credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] c. Verify Quality of Insulation Installation & Thermal Bypass Checklist before Drywall [*This credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] 5. Pa ticipation in tilit P o a it i Pa t Plan evie Is project permitted under 2005 Title 24 or 2008 Title 24? Total Available Points in Renewable Energy: 16 d. Flow Limiters Or Flow Control Valves Are Installed on All Faucets i. Residences: Kitchen - 1.8 gpm (CALGreen code if applicable) ii. Non-Residential Areas: Kitchen - 1.8 gpm (CALGreen code applicable) iii. Residences: Bathroom Faucets- 1.5 gpm at 60psi 3. A vance entilation P actices o Coolin b. Mechanical Ventilation System for Cooling: 2. ist ibute o estic ot ate icientl (G2a is a Prerequisite for credit for G2 b-e. Maximum 5 Points) 6. nstall Ca bon onoxi e Ala s (or No Combustion Appliances in Living Space and No Attached Garage) [*This credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] Total Available Points in Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning: 13 a. Required: Compliance with ASHRAE 62.2 Mechanical Ventilation Standard (As Adopted in Title 24 Part 6). N/A for projects permitted under 2005 Title 24. a. Insulate All Hot Water Pipes [*This credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] c. Outdoor Air Ducted to Bedroom and Living Areas of Home b. Use Engineered Parallel Plumbing 1. Sola ot ate S ste P e eats o estic ot ate 2. nstall i icienc Ai Con itionin it nvi on entall P e e able e i e ants c. Use Engineered Parallel Plumbing with Demand Controlled Circulation Loop(s) 3. ate Sub ete in : Bill enants o Actual sa e b. Advanced Ventilation Practices (Continuous Operation, Sone Limit, Minimum Efficiency, Minimum Ventilation Rate, Homeowner Instructions) b. Non-Residential Spaces: 1 Point for Every 1% Better Than Title 24, adjusted for square footage Total Available Points in Plumbing: 18 a. Operable Windows or Skylights Are Placed To Induce Cross Ventilation In At Least One Room In 80% of Units 1. nstall i Pe o in one a iant onic eatin 4. itle 24 P epa e an Si ne b a CAB C Ce ti ie ne Plans xa ine C P d. Use Traditional Trunk, Branch and Twig Plumbing with Demand Controlled Circulation Loop(s) e. Use Central Core Plumbing i. ENERGY STAR Ceiling Fans and Light Kits in Living Areas & All Bedrooms ii. Whole House Fan (CALGreen code if applicable) 4. A vance ec anical entilation o A Enter the Percent Better Than Title 24 for Residential and Non-Residential Portions of the Project. © Build It Green Multifamily Checklist version 2.2/1.9 ATTACHMENT 7 PC1 - 197 Points Ac ieve Co unit ne A ealt esou ces ateotes ine on oc vie No 0 1 31 . F S S No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 Yes 1 1 Yes 0 0 Yes 1 1 Yes 0 0 Yes 2 2 Yes 0 0 Yes 1 1 No 0 4 No 0 2 No 0 2 No 0 2 50%1 2 No 0 0 No 0 0 No 0 0 No 0 0 No 0 0 Yes Y 0 No 0 1 No 0 2 No 0 1 No 0 0 No 0 0 No 0 0 No 0 1 No 0 0 No 0 1 6 L. FLOO No 0 4 No 0 0 No 0 2 No 0 0 Yes Y 0 0 . APPL A C S L 3. All ca pet an 50 o esilient Floo in is lo e ittin . CAL een co e i applicable iii. Shelving 3. Lo o OC Paints Coatin s [*This credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] b. Permanent Walk-Off Systems Are Provided at All Main Building Entrances & In Common Areas ii. In All Non-Residential Areas ii. Interior Trim 4. se Lo OC Caul s, Const uction A esives an Sealants t at eet SCA ule 1168 CAL een co e i applicable v. Countertops a. Residences: At Least 50% of Each Material: iv. Doors i. In All Residences iii. Interior Trim and Shelving i. Cabinets 6. e uce Fo al e e in nte io Finis eet Cu ent CA B Ai bo ne oxic Cont ol easu e A C o Co posite oo Fo al e e Li its b an ato Co pliance ates CAL een co e i applicable is c e it is a e ui e ent associate it P 1: PA AP v. Countertops ii. In All Non-Residential Areas i. In All Residences c. Use Low-VOC Coatings That Meet SCAQMD Rule 1113 (CALGreen code if applicable) Possible Points 2. se ec cle Content Paint i. Cabinets iii. Interior Trim and Shelving b. Non-Residential Areas iii. Shelving iv. Doors a. Low-VOC Interior Wall/Ceiling Paints (<50 grams per liter (gpl) VOCs regardless of sheen) (CALGreen code if applicable) a. Design Entryways to Reduce Tracked-In Contaminants for All Home Entrances Possible Points 2. Lo ittin Floo in [*This credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] i. In All Residences a. Residences b. Non-Residential Areas Total Available Points in Flooring: 6 b. Non-Residential Areas: Low-Emitting Flooring (50% Minimum) (Section 01350, CRI Green Label Plus, Floorscore) 7. e uce Fo al e e in nte io Finis xcee Cu ent CA B A C o Co posite oo Fo al e e Li its P io to an ato Co pliance ates b. Non-Residential Areas: At Least 50% of Each Material: Possible Points Total Available Points in Building Performance: 43+ b. Renewable Energy Program with Min. 30% Better Than Title 24 (High Performing Home) ii. In All Non-Residential Areas 1. nt a s i. Doors b. Zero-VOC: Interior Wall/Ceiling Paints (<5 gpl regardless of sheen) 5. nvi on entall P e e able ate ials o nte io Finis : A) FSC-Certified Wood, B) Reclaimed Lumber, C) Rapidly Renewable, D) Recycled- Content, E) Finger-Jointed, or F) Local ii. Cabinets and Countertops a. Residences: At Least 90% of Each Material: ii. Interior Trim b. Non-Residential Areas: At Least 90% of Each Material i. Doors 8. u able Cabinets a. Residences 1. se nvi on entall P e e able Floo in ini u 15 o Floo A ea A) FSC-Certified Wood, B) Reclaimed or Refinished, C) Rapidly Renewable, D) Recycled- Content, E) Exposed Concrete, or F) Local. Flooring Adhesives Must Meet SCAQMD Rule 1168 for VOCs a. Residences: Low Emitting Flooring (50% Minimum) (Section 01350, CRI Green Label Plus, Floorscore) 9. At Least 25 o All e l Supplie nte io Fu nitu e as nvi on entall P e e able Att ibutes Total Available Points in Finishes: 26 1. S A Appliances ii. Cabinets and Countertops © Build It Green Multifamily Checklist version 2.2/1.9 ATTACHMENT 7 PC1 - 198 Points Ac ieve Co unit ne A ealt esou ces ateotes ine on oc vie Yes 2 11 No 0 12 No 0 2 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 Yes 1 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 3 . O Yes Yes 1 1 Yes 1 1 No 0 11 No 0 2 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 2 O. ot se P. O A O S No 0 1 No 0 2 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 0 No 0 3 No 0 2 No 0 2 No 0 2 Yes 1 1 Yes 4 4 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 2 No 0 2 No 0 1 No 0 11 No 0 5 Possible Points Perform a Soil Percolation Test and Capture and Treat 85% of Total Annual Runoff A. Site 5. ucational Si na e o P o ect s een Featu es c. Route Downspout Through Permeable Landscape 2. Stormwater Control: Performance Path (Mutually Exclusive With PA1): 1. Stormwater Control: Prescriptive Path (Maximum of 3 Points, Mutually Exclusive With PA2) b. Provide O&M Manual to Occupants and Orientation a. Provide O&M Manual to Building Maintenance Staff (CALGreen code if applicable) 4. esi ents A e O e e F ee o iscounte ansit Passes ii Meets ENERGY STAR and CEE Tier 3 Requirements (Modified Energy Factor 2.2; Water Factor 4.5) (Total 5 Points) a. Install High-Efficacy Lighting b. Install a Lighting System to IESNA Footcandle Standards or Hire Lighting Consultant 7. se an alis ete ence P actices an evelop an alis ana e ent Plan Possible Points b. install ENERGY STAR Clothes Washer 1. Use Moisture Resistant Material in Wet Areas: Kitchens, Bathrooms, Utility Rooms and Basements [*This credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] Total Available Points in Other: 9 . Finis es c. Install ENERGY STAR Refrigerators in All Locations a. Low-Mercury Products Are Installed Wherever Linear Fluorescent Lamps Are Used or Replaced i. ENERGY STAR-Qualified & < 25 Cubic Feet Capacity 3. P ovi e Built n ec clin Cente n ac esi ential nit 4. Lo e cu La ps ii. ENERGY STAR-Qualified & < 20 Cubic Feet Capacity 2. Co on Laun Facilities A e P ovi e o All Occupants a. Install ENERGY STAR Dishwasher (Must Meet Current Specifications) . Ot e a. Use Permeable Paving for 25% of Driveways, Patios and Walkways 2. P e Const uction ic O eetin it ate an Subs 1. Design and Install HVAC System to ACCA Manual J, D, and S Recommendations (CALGreen code if applicable) [*This credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] 2. Materials Meet SMaRT Criteria (Select number of points, up to 5 points) 1. Use Radon Resistant Construction [*This credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] 2. Install a Foundation Drainage System [*This credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] 3. Moisture Controlled Crawlspace [*For projects with crawlspaces, this credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] 1. Obtain EPA Indoor airPlus Certification (Total 39 possible points, not including Title 24 performance; read comment) 3. Install High Efficiency HVAC Filter (MERV 6+, Mutually exclusive with H1.) [*This credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] 2. Pressure Relieve the Ductwork System (Mutually exclusive with H1) [*For projects with ducted systems, this credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] . Foun ation, St uctu al F a e an Buil in nvelope Total Available Points in Appliances & Lighting: 16 6. ea less levato s A e nstalle 5. nstall i icac Li tin an esi n Li tin S ste 3. ENERGY STAR New Homes: High-Rise Pilot Program 3. Ope ations aintenance anuals an ainin [*This credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] 6. nstall o e Buil in S ste onito s . xte io . eatin entilation an Ai Con itionin 2. Third-Party Testing of Mechanical Ventilation Rates for IAQ (Meet ASHRAE 62.2) [*This credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] . Buil in Pe o ance b. Install Bio-Retention and Filtration Features i. Meets ENERGY STAR and CEE Tier 2 Requirements (Modified Energy Factor 2.0; Water Factor 6.0) (Total 3 Points) d. Use Non-Leaching Roofing Materials e. Include Smart Street/Driveway Design 1. Flashing Installation Techniques Specified and Third-Party Verified [*This credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] 1.Required: nco po ate eenPoint ate C ec list in Bluep ints [*This credit is a requirement associated with PJ1: EPA IAP] b. Low-Mercury Products Are Installed Wherever Compact Fluorescent Lamps Are Used or Replaced © Build It Green Multifamily Checklist version 2.2/1.9 ATTACHMENT 7 PC1 - 199 Points Ac ieve Co unit ne A ealt esou ces ateotes ine on oc vie No 0 No 0 No 0 No 0 No 0 5 . CAL een CO Yes TBD N TBD N TBD N TBD N TBD N TBD N TBD N TBD N 0 Su a 62 86 35 87 48 6305 6 3 104 14 41 9 12 28 P o ect as et All eco en e ini u e ui e ents - Total Project Score of At Least 50 Points - Required measures: -A2a: 50% waste diversion by weight -E2a: All Shingle Roofing Has 3-Yr Subcontractor Warranty & 20-Yr Manufacturer Warranty -H4a: Compliance with ASHRAE 62.2 Mechanical Ventilation Standards (2008 Title 24 projects) -J1a: 15% above Title 24 -N1: Incorporate GreenPoint Rated Checklist in Blueprints - Minimum points in specific categories: -Community (6 points) -Energy (30 points) -IAQ/Health (5 points) -Resources (6 points) -Water (3 points) Possible Points Total Available Points in CALGreen Code: 0 4. CALGreen 4.406.1 Joints and openings. Annular spaces around pipes, electric cables, conduits, or other openings in plates at exterior walls shall be protected 5. CALGreen4.503.1 Gas fireplace shall be a direct-vent sealed-combustion type. Woodstove or pellet stove shall comply with US EPA Phase II emission limits 6. CALGreen 4.505.2 Vapor retarder and capillary break is installed at slab on grade foundations. 7. CALGreen 4.505.3 19% moisture content of building framing materials The following measures are mandatory in the CALGreen code and do not earn points in the GreenPoint Rated Checklist but have been included in the Checklist for the convenience of jurisdictions. The GreenPoint Rater is not a code enforcement official. The measures in this section may be verified by the GreenPoint Rater at their own discretion and/or discretion of the building official. 2. CALGreen 4.106.3 Design for surface water drainage away from buildings. 1. CALGreen 4.106.2 Storm water management during construction. 0. o e eets all applicable CAL een easu es liste in above Sections A P o t e eenPoint ate c ec list. Innovation: Enter up to 4 Points in blue cells at right. Enter description here Innovation: Enter up to 4 Points in blue cells at right. Enter description here Innovation: Enter up to 4 Points in blue cells at right. Enter description here Innovation: Enter up to 4 Points in blue cells at right. Enter description here Innovation: Enter up to 4 Points in blue cells at right. Enter description here Total Available Points in Innovation: 26+ otal Points Ac ieve Total Available Points Minimum Points Required 1. Innovation: List innovative measures that meet green building objectives. Enter in the number of points in each category in the blue cells for a maximum of 4 points for the measure. The "points achieved" column will be automatically fill in based on the sum of the points in each category. Points and measures will be evaluated by Build It Green. 3. CALGreen 4.303.1 As an alternative to perscriptive compliance, a 20% reduction in baseline water use shall be demonstrated through calculation 8. CALGreen 702.1 HVAC system installers are trained and certified in the proper installation of HVAC systems. © Build It Green Multifamily Checklist version 2.2/1.9 ATTACHMENT 7 PC1 - 200 ,1,7,$/678'< (19,5210(17$/&+(&./,67)250 )RU(5 3URMHFW7LWOH 1LQHRQ5RFNYLHZ /RW&RPPRQ,QWHUHVW6XEGLYLVLRQ9HVWLQJ7HQWDWLYH7UDFW0DSZLWKFUHHNDQG\DUGVHWEDFN H[FHSWLRQUHTXHVWVRQDVLWHZLWK6SHFLDO&RQVLGHUDWLRQV &LW\)LOH$$5&75(5 /HDG$JHQF\1DPHDQG$GGUHVV &LW\RI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR 3DOP6WUHHW 6DQ/XLV2ELVSR&$ &RQWDFW3HUVRQDQG3KRQH1XPEHU 0DUFXV&DUORQL$VVRFLDWH 3ODQQHU 3URMHFW/RFDWLRQ 5RFNYLHZ3ODFH $31 3URMHFW6SRQVRU¶V1DPHDQG$GGUHVV &RYHORS,QF FR'DPLHQ0DYLV 3URMHFW5HSUHVHQWDWLYH 32%R[ 6DQ/XLV2ELVSR&$ *HQHUDO3ODQ'HVLJQDWLRQ 0HGLXP'HQVLW\ 5HVLGHQWLDO =RQLQJ 0HGLXP'HQVLW\5HVLGHQWLDOZLWK6SHFLDO&RQVLGHUDWLRQV2YHUOD\ 56 $WWDFKPHQW ATTACHMENT 8 PC1 - 201 'HVFULSWLRQRIWKH3URMHFW 7KHSURMHFWSURSRVHVWKHIROORZLQJ 1LQHORW&RPPRQ,QWHUHVW6XEGLYLVLRQ &RQVWUXFWLRQ RI QLQH GHWDFKHG VLQJOHIDPLO\ KRPHV DSSUR[LPDWHO\ VTXDUH IHHW HDFK LQFOXGLQJRQHXQLWDIIRUGDEOHWRPRGHUDWHLQFRPHKRXVHKROGVDQGUHO\LQJRQD GHQVLW\ERQXVDQGH[FHSWLRQWRDOORZUHGXFHGVHWEDFNV D 2QHEHGURRPUHVLGHQFH WKHGHVLJQDWHGDIIRUGDEOHXQLW E (LJKWEHGURRPUHVLGHQFHV &UHHNVHWEDFNUHGXFWLRQVWRDOORZDVPDOOEULGJHSURYLGLQJDFFHVVWR/RWV DQGERWK VWUXFWXUHVDQGXQFRYHUHGSDUNLQJRQORWVDQG 6WUHHWDQG2WKHU\DUGVHWEDFNUHGXFWLRQVWRDOORZUHGXFHGVHWEDFNVDWERWKLQWHUQDODQG H[WHUQDOSURSHUW\OLQHVRQORWV 7DQGHPSDUNLQJZLWKLQWKHVWUHHW\DUGRQ/RW &RPSOHWHURDGLPSURYHPHQWVDORQJ5RFNYLHZ3ODFH 7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWLQFOXGHVDQLQHORW&RPPRQ,QWHUHVW6XEGLYLVLRQFRQVWUXFWLRQRIDVLQJOH IDPLO\KRPHRQHDFKQHZORWDQGDVPDOOEULGJHGHVLJQHGWRSURYLGHDFFHVVWRVL[ORWV 3DUFHOV ZKLFKDUHDFURVVDGUDLQDJHFKDQQHO7KHSURMHFWDOVRLQFOXGHVUHVWRUDWLYHSODQWLQJVDORQJ FRQVWUXFWHG FUHHNEDQNDUHDVDORQJ WKHGUDLQDJHFKDQQHOZKLFKLVFODVVLILHGLQWKH*HQHUDO3ODQ DV³3HUHQQLDOFUHHNZLWKGHJUDGHG FRUULGRU KLJK HQFURDFKPHQW DQG GLIILFXOW\ LQ UHVWRULQJ´ $FFHVVWRHLJKWRIWKHQLQHSDUFHOV LVSURSRVHGYLDDFRPPRQGULYHZD\IURP5RFNYLHZ3ODFH /RWZRXOGWDNHDFFHVVGLUHFWO\IURP5RFNYLHZ3ODFH 7KHEULGJHLVDSSUR[LPDWHO\±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Žƚ EƵŵďĞƌ ;ŵŽĚĞůͿ ŝƌĞĐƚŝŽŶ ZŽŽĨ ,ĞŝŐŚƚ ;ŝŶĨĞĞƚͿ ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ^ĞƚďĂĐŬ ;ŝŶĨĞĞƚͿ WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ^ĞƚďĂĐŬ ;ŝŶĨĞĞƚͿ &ƵŶĐƚŝŽŶĂů^ĞƚďĂĐŬ ;ŝŶĨĞĞƚͿ >Žƚϭ ;ŵŽĚĞůĂͿ EŽƌƚŚϮϯ͘ϱϭϬϱϰ ĂƐƚϮϯ͘ϱͲϮϴ͘ϱ ϭϮ͘ϱϯϴϭϯͲϯϱ ^ŽƵƚŚΎϮϴ͘ϱϭϮ͘ϱϲϲ tĞƐƚ;ƐƚƌĞĞƚLJĂƌĚͿΎ Ϯϯ͘ϱͲϮϴ͘ϱϮϬ ϮϬ͕ƚĂŶĚĞŵƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ ϮϬ͕ƚĂŶĚĞŵƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ >ŽƚϮ ;ŵŽĚĞůĐͿ EŽƌƚŚΎϮϴ͘ϱϭϮ͘ϱϯϮϱͲϭϮ ĂƐƚϮϯ͘ϱͲϮϴ͘ϱϭϮ͘ϱϭϮϭϯ ^ŽƵƚŚϮϯ͘ϱϭϬϱϲ tĞƐƚ;ƐƚƌĞĞƚLJĂƌĚͿΎ Ϯϯ͘ϱͲϮϴ͘ϱϮϬ ϭϰ ϭϰ >Žƚϯ ;ŵŽĚĞůĂͿ EŽƌƚŚΎϮϮ͘ϱͲϮϳ͘ϱ ϭϮϮϳϰ ĂƐƚϮϳ͘ϱϭϮϭϯϮͲϭϮ ^ŽƵƚŚϮϮ͘ϱͲϮϳ͘ϱϭϮϲϯͲϴ tĞƐƚϮϮ͘ϱϭϬϭϲϭͲϭϬ ƌĞĞŬ;ĞĂƐƚͿϮϳ͘ϱϮϬϭϭŶͬĂ >Žƚϰ ;ŵŽĚĞůĂͿ EŽƌƚŚϮϮϵϱϯ ĂƐƚϮϮͲϮϳϭϭ͘ϱϱϵ ^ŽƵƚŚΎϮϳϭϭ͘ϱϭϬϭϬ tĞƐƚϮϮͲϮϳϭϭ͘ϱϲϬϭϬ ƌĞĞŬ;ǁĞƐƚͿϮϮͲϮϳϮϬϭϰŶͬĂ >Žƚϱ ;ŵŽĚĞůĚͿ EŽƌƚŚϮϭ͘ϱͲϮϲ͘ϱϭϭ͘ϱϵϱ ĂƐƚΎϮϲ͘ϱϭϭ͘ϱϭϬϭϬ ^ŽƵƚŚΎϮϭ͘ϱͲϮϲ͘ϱϭϭ͘ϱϵϵ tĞƐƚϮϭ͘ϱϵϯϬϴ >Žƚϲ ;ŵŽĚĞůĐͿ EŽƌƚŚϮϳ͘ϱϭϮϰϴ ĂƐƚΎϮϮ͘ϱͲϮϳ͘ϱϭϮϭϬϭϬ ^ŽƵƚŚϮϮ͘ϱϭϬϰϴ tĞƐƚϮϮ͘ϱͲϮϳ͘ϱϭϮϮϭϴ >Žƚϳ ;ŵŽĚĞůĐͿ EŽƌƚŚΎϮϭϵϭϬϭϬ ĂƐƚΎϮϭͲϮϲϭϭϭϬϭϬ ^ŽƵƚŚϮϲϭϭϮϱϱ tĞƐƚϮϭͲϮϲϭϭϭϮϭϮ >Žƚϴ ;ŵŽĚĞůĂͿ EŽƌƚŚΎϮϬͲϮϱϭϬ͘ϱϭϬϱ ĂƐƚϮϱϭϬ͘ϱϱϱ ^ŽƵƚŚϮϬͲϮϱϭϬ͘ϱϭϲϴ tĞƐƚΎϮϬϴ͘ϱϮϰϰ ƌĞĞŬ;ǁĞƐƚͿϮϬϮϬϭϰŶͬĂ >Žƚϵ ;ŵŽĚĞůĂͿ EŽƌƚŚϮϳϭϭ͘ϱϰϱͲϭϭ ĂƐƚϮϮͲϮϳϭϭ͘ϱϱϲ ^ŽƵƚŚϮϮϵϴϭϬ tĞƐƚϮϮͲϮϳϭϭ͘ϱϱϬϵ ƌĞĞŬ;ǁĞƐƚͿϮϮͲϮϳϮϬϳŶͬĂ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± JUDGLQJSHUPLWV $WWDFKPHQW ATTACHMENT 8 PC1 - 204 (19,5210(17$/)$&7256327(17,$//<$))(&7(' 7KHHQYLURQPHQWDOIDFWRUVFKHFNHGEHORZZRXOGEHSRWHQWLDOO\DIIHFWHGE\WKLVSURMHFWLQYROYLQJDW OHDVWRQHLPSDFWWKDWLVD³3RWHQWLDOO\6LJQLILFDQW,PSDFW´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³SRWHQWLDOO\VLJQLILFDQW´LPSDFW V RU³SRWHQWLDOO\ VLJQLILFDQWXQOHVVPLWLJDWHG´LPSDFW V RQWKHHQYLURQPHQWEXWDWOHDVWRQHHIIHFW KDVEHHQ DGHTXDWHO\DQDO\]HGLQDQHDUOLHUGRFXPHQWSXUVXDQWWRDSSOLFDEOHOHJDOVWDQGDUGVDQG KDV EHHQDGGUHVVHGE\PLWLJDWLRQPHDVXUHVEDVHGRQWKHHDUOLHUDQDO\VLVDVGHVFULEHGRQDWWDFKHG VKHHWV$Q(19,5210(17$/,03$&75(3257LVUHTXLUHGEXWLWPXVWDQDO\]HRQO\WKH HIIHFWVWKDWUHPDLQWREHDGGUHVVHG ,ILQGWKDWDOWKRXJKWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFWFRXOGKDYHDVLJQLILFDQWHIIHFWRQWKHHQYLURQPHQW EHFDXVHDOOSRWHQWLDOO\VLJQLILFDQWHIIHFWV KDYHEHHQDQDO\]HGDGHTXDWHO\LQDQHDUOLHU(,5 RU1(*$7,9('(&/$5$7,21SXUVXDQWWRDSSOLFDEOHVWDQGDUGVDQG KDYHEHHQDYRLGHG RUPLWLJDWHGSXUVXDQWWRWKDWHDUOLHU (,5RI1(*$7,9('(&/$5$7,21LQFOXGLQJUHYLVLRQV RUPLWLJDWLRQPHDVXUHVWKDWDUHLPSRVHGXSRQWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFWQRWKLQJIXUWKHULVUHTXLUHG 6LJQDWXUH'DWH )RU 'HUHN-RKQVRQ 3DP5LFFL$,&36HQLRU3ODQQHU&RPPXQLW\'HYHORSPHQW'LUHFWRU $WWDFKPHQW 0D\ ATTACHMENT 8 PC1 - 206 (9$/8$7,212)(19,5210(17$/,03$&76 $EULHIH[SODQDWLRQLVUHTXLUHGIRUDOODQVZHUVH[FHSW³1R,PSDFW´DQVZHUVWKDWDUHDGHTXDWHO\VXSSRUWHGE\WKH LQIRUPDWLRQVRXUFHVDOHDGDJHQF\FLWHVLQWKH SDUHQWKHVHV IROORZLQJHDFK TXHVWLRQ$³1R,PSDFW´DQVZHULV DGHTXDWHO\VXSSRUWHGLIWKHUHIHUHQFHGLQIRUPDWLRQVRXUFHVVKRZWKDWWKHLPSDFWVLPSO\GRHVQRWDSSO\WRSURMHFWV OLNHWKHRQHLQYROYHG HJWKHSURMHFWIDOOVRXWVLGHDIDXOWUXSWXUH]RQH $³1R,PSDFW´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³1HJDWLYH'HFODUDWLRQ /HVV7KDQ6LJQLILFDQW:LWK0LWLJDWLRQ,QFRUSRUDWHG´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³/HVVWKDQ6LJQLILFDQWZLWK0LWLJDWLRQ0HDVXUHV,QFRUSRUDWHG´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¶V 1DWXUDO5HVRXUFH0DQDJHUKDVYLVLWHGWKHVLWHDQGLGHQWLILHGQRELRORJLFDOLVVXHVDVVRFLDWHGZLWKWKHSURMHFW 1RKHULWDJHWUHHVRUVLJQLILFDQWQDWLYHYHJHWDWLRQH[LVWRQWKHVLWH$WULEXWDU\RI$FDFLD&UHHNUXQVWKURXJKWKHVLWH7KH GUDLQDJHZD\WKDWUXQVWKURXJKWKHSURSHUW\KDVEHHQKLJKO\GLVWXUEHGDQGLVLQDGHJUDGHGFRQGLWLRQ:KLOHWKHFUHHN¶VYDOXH DVDVLJQLILFDQWELRORJLFDOFRUULGRULVGLPLQLVKHGE\LWVSK\VLFDOVHSDUDWLRQIURPRWKHUVHJPHQWVRIWKHULSDULDQFRUULGRULWV FRQGLWLRQFRXOGEHLPSURYHGZLWKWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFWGHYHORSPHQW7KH&LW\¶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¶VZHVWHUO\ERXQGDU\%HFDXVHSRUWLRQVRIWKLV IDXOWKDYHGLVSODFHGVHGLPHQWVZLWKLQDJHRORJLFDOO\UHFHQWWLPH WKHODVW\HDUV SRUWLRQVRIWKH/RV2VRVIDXOWDUH FRQVLGHUHG³DFWLYH´2WKHUDFWLYHIDXOWVLQWKHUHJLRQLQFOXGH WKH6DQ$QGUHDVORFDWHGDERXWPLOHVWRWKHQRUWKHDVWWKH 1DFLPLHQWRORFDWHGDSSUR[LPDWHO\PLOHVWRWKHQRUWKHDVWDQGWKH6DQ6LPHRQ+RVJULIDXOW]RQHORFDWHGDSSUR[LPDWHO\ PLOHVWRWKHZHVW $OWKRXJKWKHUHDUHQRIDXOWOLQHVRQWKHSURMHFWVLWHRUZLWKLQFORVHSUR[LPLW\WKHVLWHLVORFDWHGLQDQDUHDRI³+LJK6HLVPLF +D]DUGV´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¶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¶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¶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¶LQFUHDVHGVWRUPZDWHUUXQRIILQDVXEVXUIDFHGHWHQWLRQUHWHQWLRQ V\VWHP7KHUHYHJHWDWHGFUHHNFRUULGRUZLOODOVRDFWDVDYHJHWDWHGELRVZDOHZKLFKZLOOIXUWKHUGHFUHDVHUXQRIIDQGVLOWDWLRQ FRPSDUHG WR WKH FXUUHQW GHJUDGHG FRQILJXUDWLRQ %LRVZDOHV ZLOO EH XVHG ZKHUH SRVVLEOH WR GLUHFW UXQRII LQWR WKH VLWHV VXEVXUIDFHV\VWHP ZKLFKFRPSOLHVZLWKWKH&LW\¶V/RZ,PSDFW'HYHORSPHQW /,' 7LHUVWDQGDUGVIRUVWRUPZDWHUUXQRII $WWDFKPHQW ATTACHMENT 8 PC1 - 214 ,VVXHV'LVFXVVLRQDQG6XSSRUWLQJ,QIRUPDWLRQ6RXUFHV (5 $$5&75(5 6RXUFHV 3RWHQWLDOO\ 6LJQLILFDQW ,VVXHV /HVV7KDQ 6LJQLILFDQW ZLWK 0LWLJDWLRQ ,QFRUSRUDWHG /HVV7KDQ 6LJQLILFDQW ,PSDFW 1R ,PSDFW 7KHSURMHFWZLOOFRPSO\ZLWK&LW\(QJLQHHULQJ6WDQGDUG%IRUZDWHUTXDOLW\WUHDWPHQWRIVWRUPZDWHUUXQRIIIURP H[SDQGHGVWUHHWSDYLQJ UHTXLULQJWKHWUHDWPHQWIRUVWRUPHYHQWV E 7KHSURMHFWZLOOEHVHUYHGE\WKH&LW\¶VVHZHUDQGZDWHUV\VWHPVDQGZLOOQRWGHSOHWHJURXQGZDWHUUHVRXUFHV F G H L 3K\VLFDOLPSURYHPHQWRIWKHSURMHFWVLWHZLOOEHUHTXLUHGWRFRPSO\ZLWKWKHGUDLQDJHUHTXLUHPHQWVRIWKH&LW\¶V :DWHUZD\V0DQDJHPHQW3ODQ7KLVSODQZDVDGRSWHGIRUWKHSXUSRVHRILQVXULQJZDWHUTXDOLW\DQGSURSHUGUDLQDJHZLWKLQWKH &LW\¶VZDWHUVKHG7KH:DWHUZD\V0DQDJHPHQW3ODQUHTXLUHVWKDWVLWHGHYHORSPHQWEHGHVLJQHGVRWKDWSRVWGHYHORSPHQW VLWHGUDLQDJHGRHVQRWVLJQLILFDQWO\H[FHHGSUHGHYHORSPHQWUXQRII7KHDSSOLFDQWSURSRVHVWRVWRUHDQGUHOHDVHWKHVLWHV LQFUHDVHGVWRUPZDWHUUXQRIILQDVXEVXUIDFHGHWHQWLRQUHWHQWLRQV\VWHP7KHUHYHJHWDWHGFUHHNFRUULGRUZLOODOVRDFWDVD YHJHWDWHGELRVZDOHZKLFKZLOOIXUWKHUGHFUHDVHUXQRIIDQGVLOWDWLRQFRPSDUHGWRWKHFXUUHQWGHJUDGHGFRQILJXUDWLRQ7KH 'UDLQDJH$QDO\VLV SUHSDUHGE\.HLWK9&URZH FRQFOXGHVWKHSURMHFW¶VZDWHUIORZVLQFUHDVH PLQLPDOO\ IURPSUHFRQVWUXFWLRQ WR SRVWFRQVWUXFWLRQ ZKLFK FRPSOLHV ZLWK WKH &LW\¶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¶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¶V1RLVH(OHPHQWUHJXODWHSRWHQWLDOQRLVHLPSDFWV1RLVHLQFUHDVHVWKDWZRXOGDIIHFWDPELHQWOHYHOVDUHWREHUHGXFHGWR WKUHVKROGVGHWHUPLQHGWREHDFFHSWDEOHLQUHVLGHQWLDODUHDV&RQVWUXFWLRQDFWLYLWLHVDOVRJHQHUDWHQRLVHDQGPD\WHPSRUDULO\ UDLVHWKHDPELHQWQRLVHOHYHOVDERYHDFFHSWDEOHOHYHOVIRUWKHGXUDWLRQRIFRQVWUXFWLRQLQFOXGLQJJURXQG ERUQHYLEUDWLRQDQG QRLVH&RQVWUXFWLRQQRLVHLVUHJXODWHGE\WKH&LW\¶V1RLVH2UGLQDQFHZKLFKUHJXODWHVWLPHRIFRQVWUXFWLRQDQGPD[LPXP QRLVHOHYHOVWKDWPD\EHJHQHUDWHG7KHSURMHFWZRXOGEHUHTXLUHGWRPHHWWKHQRLVHVWDQGDUGVFRQWDLQHGLQWKH2UGLQDQFH ZKLFKLQFOXGHVOLPLWDWLRQVRQWKHGD\VDQGKRXUVRIFRQVWUXFWLRQ $WWDFKPHQW ATTACHMENT 8 PC1 - 216 ,VVXHV'LVFXVVLRQDQG6XSSRUWLQJ,QIRUPDWLRQ6RXUFHV (5 $$5&75(5 6RXUFHV 3RWHQWLDOO\ 6LJQLILFDQW ,VVXHV /HVV7KDQ 6LJQLILFDQW ZLWK 0LWLJDWLRQ ,QFRUSRUDWHG /HVV7KDQ 6LJQLILFDQW ,PSDFW 1R ,PSDFW H I 7KHSURMHFWLVDSSUR[LPDWHO\PLOHVIURPWKHHQGRI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR$LUSRUW5XQZD\ DQGLVMXVWZLWKLQWKH ERXQGDU\RI$/83=RQHDQGLVEH\RQG$LUSRUW1RLVH&RQWRXUVSURMHFWLQJDG%DLUSRUWQRLVH7DEOHRIWKH*HQHUDO 3ODQ1RLVH(OHPHQWVWDWHVWKDWWKHPD[LPXPQRLVHH[SRVXUHIRURXWVLGHUHVLGHQWLDODFWLYLWLHVLVG%7KHSURMHFWZLOOQRW H[SHULHQFHQRLVHVRXUFHVZKLFKH[FHHGVLJQLILFDQFHWKUHVKROGV7KHSURMHFWLVQRWZLWKLQWKHYLFLQLW\RIDSULYDWHDLUVWULS &RQFOXVLRQ /HVVWKDQVLJQLILFDQWLPSDFW 3238/$7,21$1'+286,1*:RXOGWKHSURMHFW D ,QGXFHVXEVWDQWLDOSRSXODWLRQJURZWKLQDQDUHDHLWKHUGLUHFWO\ IRU H[DPSOH E\ SURSRVLQJ QHZ KRPHV DQG EXVLQHVVHV RU LQGLUHFWO\ IRU H[DPSOH WKURXJK H[WHQVLRQ RI URDGV RU RWKHU LQIUDVWUXFWXUH " ; E 'LVSODFHVXEVWDQWLDOQXPEHUVRIH[LVWLQJKRXVLQJQHFHVVLWDWLQJ WKHFRQVWUXFWLRQRIUHSODFHPHQWKRXVLQJHOVHZKHUH" F 'LVSODFH VXEVWDQWLDO QXPEHUV RI SHRSOH QHFHVVLWDWLQJ WKH FRQVWUXFWLRQRIUHSODFHPHQWKRXVLQJHOVHZKHUH" ; ; (YDOXDWLRQ D E F 7KHSURMHFWSURSRVHVWKHFRQVWUXFWLRQRIQLQH VLQJOHIDPLO\UHVLGHQFHV RQDYDFDQWLQILOOVLWH 7KH*HQHUDO3ODQ HQFRXUDJHV WKLV W\SH RI GHYHORSPHQW EHFDXVH HIILFLHQWO\ XWLOL]HV H[LVWLQJ IDFLOLWLHV IRU ZDWHU VHZHU VWRUP GUDLQDJH WUDQVSRUWDWLRQDQGSDUNV7KHDGGHGSRSXODWLRQJURZWKFDXVHGE\WKLVSURMHFWLVZLWKLQWKH*HQHUDO3ODQ¶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¶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¶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¶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¶VORFDWLRQZLWKLQWKH&LW\¶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¶VSURMHFWHGGHPDQGLQDGGLWLRQWR WKHSURYLGHU¶VH[LVWLQJFRPPLWPHQWV" ; I %HVHUYHGE\DODQGILOOZLWKVXIILFLHQWSHUPLWWHGFDSDFLW\WR DFFRPPRGDWHWKHSURMHFW¶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¶V8WLOLWLHV'HSDUWPHQWDQGQR UHVRXUFHLQIUDVWUXFWXUHGHILFLHQFLHVKDYHEHHQLGHQWLILHG 7KHGHYHORSHUZLOOEHUHTXLUHGWRFRQVWUXFWSULYDWHVHZHUIDFLOLWLHVWRFRQYH\ZDVWHZDWHUWRWKHQHDUHVWSXEOLFVHZHU 7KHRQ VLWHVHZHUIDFLOLWLHVZLOOEHUHTXLUHGWREHFRQVWUXFWHGDFFRUGLQJWRWKHVWDQGDUGVLQWKH8QLIRUP3OXPELQJ&RGHDQG&LW\ VWDQGDUGV ,PSDFW IHHV DUH FROOHFWHG DW WKH WLPH EXLOGLQJ SHUPLWV DUH LVVXHG WR SD\ IRU FDSDFLW\ DW WKH &LW\¶V :DWHU 5HFODPDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ :5) 7KHIHHVDUHVHWDWDOHYHOLQWHQGHGWRRIIVHWWKHSRWHQWLDOLPSDFWVRIHDFKQHZUHVLGHQWLDOXQLW LQWKHSURMHFW G 7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWZRXOGUHVXOWLQDQLQFUHPHQWDOLQFUHDVHLQGHPDQGRQZDWHUVXSSOLHVDVDQWLFLSDWHGE\WKH*HQHUDO 3ODQ 3HUWKH:DWHU5HVRXUFH6WDWXV5HSRUWWKH&LW\KDV VXIILFLHQWZDWHUVXSSOLHVIRUEXLOGRXWRIWKH&LW\¶V*HQHUDO 3ODQ7KHLQFUHPHQWDOFKDQJHLVQRWFRQVLGHUHGWREHVLJQLILFDQW7KLVSURMHFWKDVEHHQUHYLHZHGE\WKH&LW\¶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¶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¶V&RPPXQLW\'HYHORSPHQW'HSDUWPHQW E ,PSDFWVDGHTXDWHO\DGGUHVVHG,GHQWLI\ZKLFKHIIHFWVIURPWKHDERYHFKHFNOLVWZHUHZLWKLQWKHVFRSHRIDQGDGHTXDWHO\ DQDO\]HGLQDQHDUOLHUGRFXPHQWSXUVXDQWWRDSSOLFDEOHOHJDOVWDQGDUGVDQGVWDWHZKHWKHUVXFKHIIHFWVZHUHDGGUHVVHGE\ PLWLJDWLRQPHDVXUHVEDVHGRQWKHHDUOLHUDQDO\VLV 7KHHDUOLHU(QYLURQPHQWDO5HYLHZIRUWKLVVLWH (5 DOVRUHFRJQL]HGDQGDGGUHVVHGSRWHQWLDOVLJQLILFDQWLPSDFWVLQWKH DUHDVRI%LRORJLFDO DQG&XOWXUDO5HVRXUFHV F 0LWLJDWLRQPHDVXUHV)RUHIIHFWVWKDWDUH/HVVWKDQ6LJQLILFDQWZLWK0LWLJDWLRQ,QFRUSRUDWHGGHVFULEHWKHPLWLJDWLRQ $WWDFKPHQW ATTACHMENT 8 PC1 - 220 ,VVXHV'LVFXVVLRQDQG6XSSRUWLQJ,QIRUPDWLRQ6RXUFHV (5 $$5&75(5 6RXUFHV 3RWHQWLDOO\ 6LJQLILFDQW ,VVXHV /HVV7KDQ 6LJQLILFDQW ZLWK 0LWLJDWLRQ ,QFRUSRUDWHG /HVV7KDQ 6LJQLILFDQW ,PSDFW 1R ,PSDFW PHDVXUHVZKLFKZHUHLQFRUSRUDWHGRUUHILQHGIURPWKHHDUOLHUGRFXPHQWDQGWKHH[WHQWWRZKLFKWKH\DGGUHVVVLWHVSHFLILF FRQGLWLRQVRIWKHSURMHFW %HFDXVH WKHSRWHQWLDOO\VLJQLILFDQWLPSDFWVLGHQWLILHGLQ(5ZHUHUHODWHGWRWKHIHDWXUHVRIWKHVLWH DVRSSRVHGWRWKH SURSRVHGGHYHORSPHQWSURMHFW WKH\KDYHEHHQUHLQWURGXFHGLQWKLVGRFXPHQW3OHDVHVHH5HTXLUHG0LWLJDWLRQ0HDVXUHVDQG 0RQLWRULQJ3URJUDPEHORZ 6285&(5()(5(1&(6 &LW\RI6/2*HQHUDO3ODQ/DQG8VH(OHPHQW-XQH &LW\RI6/2*HQHUDO3ODQ&LUFXODWLRQ(OHPHQW$SULO &LW\RI6/2*HQHUDO3ODQ1RLVH(OHPHQW0D\ &LW\RI6/2*HQHUDO3ODQ6DIHW\(OHPHQW0DUFK &LW\RI6/2*HQHUDO3ODQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ 2SHQ6SDFH(OHPHQW$SULO &LW\RI6/2*HQHUDO3ODQ+RXVLQJ(OHPHQW$SULO &LW\RI6/2:DWHUDQG:DVWHZDWHU(OHPHQW-XO\ &LW\RI6/2*HQHUDO3ODQ(,5 IRU8SGDWHWRWKH/DQG8VHDQG&LUFXODWLRQ(OHPHQWV &LW\RI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR0XQLFLSDO&RGH &LW\RI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR/DQG8VH,QYHQWRU\'DWDEDVH 6LWH9LVLW &LW\RI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR6WDII.QRZOHGJH &LW\RI6/2&OLPDWH$FWLRQ3ODQ$XJXVW :HEVLWH RI WKH )DUPODQG 0DSSLQJ DQG 0RQLWRULQJ 3URJUDP RI WKH &DOLIRUQLD 5HVRXUFHV $JHQF\ KWWS ZZZFRQVUYFDJRYGOUS)003 8QXVHG &(4$$LU4XDOLW\+DQGERRN$LU3ROOXWLRQ&RQWURO'LVWULFW$SULO ,QVWLWXWH RI 7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ (QJLQHHUV 7ULS *HQHUDWLRQ 0DQXDO WK (GLWLRQ RQ ILOH LQ WKH &RPPXQLW\ 'HYHORSPHQW'HSDUWPHQW 6RLOV(QJLQHHULQJ5HSRUW*HR6ROXWLRQV,QF0D\ &LW\RI6/2:DWHUZD\V0DQDJHPHQW3ODQ :DWHU5HVRXUFHV6WDWXV5HSRUW-XO\RQILOHZLWKLQWKH8WLOLWLHV'HSDUWPHQW &LW\ RI 6DQ /XLV 2ELVSR $UFKDHRORJLFDO 5HVRXUFH 3UHVHUYDWLRQ *XLGHOLQHV RQ ILOH LQ WKH &RPPXQLW\ 'HYHORSPHQW'HSDUWPHQW &LW\RI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR+LVWRULF6LWH0DS &LW\RI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR%XULDO6HQVLWLYLW\0DS &LW\RI6/26RXUFH5HGXFWLRQDQG5HF\FOLQJ(OHPHQWRQILOHLQWKH8WLOLWLHV'HSDUWPHQW 'UDLQDJH$QDO\VLV .HLWK9&URZH&RQVXOWLQJ(QJLQHHU -DQXDU\ (QJLQHHULQJ*HRORJ\,QYHVWLJDWLRQ5HSRUW*HR6ROXWLRQV,QF1RYHPEHU 6DQ/XLV2ELVSR&RXQW\$LUSRUW/DQG8VH3ODQ &DOLIRUQLD%XLOGLQJ&RGH &LW\RI6DQ/XLV2ELVSR=RQLQJ5HJXODWLRQV$XJXVW 3URMHFW3ODQV $SSOLFDQWSURMHFWVWDWHPHQWGHVFULSWLRQ $WWDFKPHQWV 9LFLQLW\0DS 3URMHFW3ODQV $WWDFKPHQW ATTACHMENT 8 PC1 - 221 ,VVXHV'LVFXVVLRQDQG6XSSRUWLQJ,QIRUPDWLRQ6RXUFHV (5 $$5&75(5 6RXUFHV 3RWHQWLDOO\ 6LJQLILFDQW ,VVXHV /HVV7KDQ 6LJQLILFDQW ZLWK 0LWLJDWLRQ ,QFRUSRUDWHG /HVV7KDQ 6LJQLILFDQW ,PSDFW 1R ,PSDFW 5(48,5('0,7,*$7,21$1'021,725,1*352*5$06 0LWLJDWLRQ0HDVXUH $LU4XDOLW\ 'XULQJFRQVWUXFWLRQJURXQGGLVWXUELQJDFWLYLWLHVWKHDSSOLFDQWVKDOOLPSOHPHQWWKHIROORZLQJSDUWLFXODWH GXVW FRQWUROPHDVXUHV D 5HGXFHWKHDPRXQWRIGLVWXUEHGDUHDZKHUHSRVVLEOH E 8VHZDWHUWUXFNVRUVSULQNOHUV\VWHPVLQVXIILFLHQWTXDQWLWLHVWRSUHYHQWDLUERUQHGXVWIURP OHDYLQJWKHVLWH,QFUHDVHGZDWHULQJIUHTXHQF\ZLOOEHUHTXLUHGZKHQHYHUZLQGVSHHGVH[FHHG PSKDQGFHVVDWLRQRIJUDGLQJDFWLYLWLHVGXULQJSHULRGVRIZLQGVRYHUPSK5HFODLPHG QRQSRWDEOH ZDWHULVWREHXVHGLQDOOFRQVWUXFWLRQDQGGXVWFRQWUROZRUN F 'LUWVWRFNSLOHDUHDV LIDQ\ VKRXOGEHVSUD\HGGDLO\DVQHHGHG G 9HKLFOHVSHHGIRUDOOFRQVWUXFWLRQYHKLFOHVVKDOOQRWH[FHHGPSKRQDQ\XQSDYHGVXUIDFHDW WKHFRQVWUXFWLRQVLWH H $OOWUXFNVKDXOLQJGLUWVDQGVRLORURWKHUORRVHPDWHULDOVDUHWREHFRYHUHGRUVKRXOGPDLQWDLQ DWOHDVWWZRIHHWRIIUHHERDUG PLQLPXPYHUWLFDOGLVWDQFHEHWZHHQWRSRIORDGDQGWRSRIWUDLOHU LQDFFRUGDQFHZLWK&DOLIRUQLD9HKLFOH&RGH6HFWLRQ I 6FKHGXOLQJRIFRQVWUXFWLRQWUXFNWULSVGXULQJQRQSHDNKRXUVWRUHGXFHSHDNKRXUHPLVVLRQV J ,IGHWHUPLQHGWREHQHHGHGSHULRGLFZDVKGRZQVRUPHFKDQLFDO VWUHHWVZHHSLQJRIVWUHHWVLQWKH YLFLQLW\RIWKH FRQVWUXFWLRQVLWHVKDOOEHGRQH ¾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¾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¾0RQLWRULQJ3ODQ00 $OOFRQVWUXFWLRQDQGJUDGLQJSODQVHWVVKDOOFOHDUO\QRWHWKHDERYH PLWLJDWLRQ PHDVXUHV RQ DSSOLFDEOH VKHHWV DQG EH FOHDUO\ YLVLEOH WR FRQWUDFWRUV DQG &LW\ LQVSHFWRUV3ULRUWRLVVXDQFHRIEXLOGLQJSHUPLWVDSUHFRQVWUXFWLRQPHHWLQJLVUHTXLUHGEHWZHHQ $VVRFLDWH3ODQQHU0DUFXV&DUORQL RUDVVLJQHGSODQQHU DQGWKHSURMHFWFRQWUDFWRUVXSHUYLVRUWR HQVXUH WKH DERYH UHTXLUHPHQWV DUH XQGHUVWRRG DQG FRPSOLHG ZLWKDW DOO WLPHV &RPPXQLW\ 'HYHORSPHQW 'HSDUWPHQW VWDII DQG 3XEOLF :RUNV VWDII ZLOO SHULRGLFDOO\ LQVSHFW WKH VLWH IRU FRQWLQXHGFRPSOLDQFHZLWKWKHDERYHPLWLJDWLRQPHDVXUHV $WWDFKPHQW ATTACHMENT 8 PC1 - 223 RESOLUTION NO. XXXX-14 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF A VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP WITH EXCEPTIONS TO PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, A USE PERMIT ALLOWING DEVELOPMENT OF A NINE-UNIT COMMON INTEREST SUBDIVISION ON A SITE WITH SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS (R-2-S ZONING), AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AS REPRESENTED IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED AUGUST 27, 2014. 3080 ROCKVIEW PLACE; TR/A/ER 202-13 (TRACT 3057) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing on May 14, 2014, at which they reviewed the proposed project and provided direction to the applicant, continuing review to a date uncertain; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on August 27, 2014, for the purpose of considering application TR/A/ER 202-13, a request for a use permit to allow development of a site zoned Medium-Density Residential with a Special Considerations overlay with a nine-unit Common Interest Subdivision and Vesting Tentative Tract Map for a residential subdivision; and WHEREAS, said public hearing was for the purpose of formulating and forwarding recommendations to the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo regarding the project; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for the project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Planning Commission makes the following findings in support of approval of the request for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 3057, including support for exceptions to the property improvement standards for new common interest subdivisions, and Use Permit A 202-13 to allow development of a site with the Special Consideration overlay zoning: ATTACHMENT 9 PC1 - 224 Subdivision Findings 1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan and Airport Land Use Plan, including compatibility with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan for Medium Density Residential land uses. 2. As demonstrated by the Winter Solstice Shading Plan and Conceptual Landscape Plan, the design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision. 3. As conditioned, the subdivider will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers or employees to attach set aside, void or annul an approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff concerning a subdivision. 4. The proposed tentative tract map is consistent with the General Plan, including LUE Policies 2.2.11, 2.2.8 and 2.2.6, and HE Policies 4.2 and 6.14, because the subdivision will provide residential development anticipated by the General Plan and preserve and incorporate as amenities, natural site features, and sensitive natural resources. 5. The site is physically suited for the proposed type of development because the project has been designed to utilize available residential density while enhancing creek resources. 6. The project is consistent with the intent of the City’s Common Interest Subdivision standards, in that it provides for small ownership units with private and common amenities in a compact, cohesive manner. 7. With the incorporation of the recommended conditions and mitigation measures, the design of the subdivision and improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat because the project will create beneficial enhancement of degraded natural resources. 8. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, is not likely to cause serious public health or safety problems because the type of improvements are appropriate for the location and will be designed to meet existing building and safety codes. 9. The design of the subdivision, or the type of improvements, will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision because such easements will be maintained. Affordable Housing 10. The development of one home restricted for a moderate-income family on-site is consistent with the City’s inclusionary housing requirements which require that projects of this size provide one affordable unit on-site or pay the in-lieu housing fee. ATTACHMENT 9 PC1 - 225 Property Improvement Standards Exceptions 11. There are circumstances of the site, such as the unusual configuration and bifurcation by an open drainage channel, distinct from land in the same zoning, which would make compliance with all setbacks infeasible. 12. Strict adherence to the required property improvement standards would decrease the size or number of units within the project resulting in a significant loss of entitlement, and inability to provide for restricted affordable housing on-site. 13. The reduced setbacks will not constitute a grant of special privilege; an entitlement inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning, as dedication of one on-site affordable unit, or 12.5% of the project, entitles the project to at 7.5% density bonus and one incentive or concession. 14. No feasible alternative to authorizing the exception would satisfy the intent of the city policies and regulations. Final configuration of the homes, including setbacks, will be reviewed and approved by the Architectural Review Commission. Creek Setback Exceptions 15. The Location and design of the feature(s) receiving the exception will minimize impacts to scenic resources, water quality, and riparian habitat, including opportunities for wildlife habitation, rest, and movement, as it will facilitate the establishment of gradually-sloped, vegetated creek bank. 16. The exception will not limit the city’s design options for providing flood control measures that are needed to achieve adopted city flood policies, as the newly engineered creek channel has been designed to improve drainage through the site. 17. The exception will not prevent the implementation of city-adopted plans, nor increase the adverse environmental effects of implementing such plans, as the project includes reestablishment of a creek channel at this location at a preferred gradual slope-bank. 18. There are circumstances applying to the site, such as its unusual shape and the need to accommodate the existing culvert on neighboring properties, that does not apply generally to land in the vicinity with the same zoning that would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity with the same zoning. 19. The exception will not constitute a special privilege – an entitlement inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning, as the creek channel will be improved by the proposed project. 20. The exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the area of the project or downstream, as the project will improve the creek channel before it enters the existing culvert on the neighboring property. ATTACHMENT 9 PC1 - 226 21. Site development cannot be accomplished with a redesign of the project without reducing proposed density and a dedicated affordable unit. 22. Redesign of the project would deny the property owner reasonable use of the property and the ability to provide affordable housing on-site. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared by the Community Development Department on May 7, 2014. The Planning Commission finds and determines that the project’s Mitigated Negative Declaration adequately identifies that there is no foreseeable potential for significant environmental impacts by the proposed project. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend adoption of the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (ER 202-13) with incorporation of the following mitigation measures: Mitigation Measure 1: Air Quality 1. During construction/ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall implement the following particulate (dust) control measures. a. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible. b. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency will be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 m.p.h. and cessation of grading activities during periods of winds over 25 m.p.h. Reclaimed (non-potable) water is to be used in all construction and dust-control work. c. Dirt stock pile areas (if any) should be sprayed daily as needed. d. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 m.p.h. on any unpaved surface at the construction site. e. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with California Vehicle Code Section 23114. f. Scheduling of construction truck trips during non-peak hours to reduce peak hour emissions. g. If determined to be needed, periodic washdowns or mechanical streetsweeping of streets in the vicinity of the construction site shall be done. ¾Monitoring Plan, MM #1: These measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. Mitigation Measure 2: Biological Resources 2. The project shall incorporate the following erosion control measures for work in and around the riparian corridor: a. No heavy equipment should enter flowing water. ATTACHMENT 9 PC1 - 227 b. Equipment will be fuelled and maintained in an appropriate staging area removed from the riparian corridor. c. Restrict all heavy construction equipment to the project area or established staging areas. d. All project related spills of hazardous materials within or adjacent to the project area shall be cleaned up immediately. Spill prevention and clean up materials should be onsite at all times during construction. e. All spoils should be relocated to an upland location outside the creek channel area to prevent seepage of sediment in to the drainage/creek system. ¾Monitoring Plan, MM #2: All construction and grading plan sets shall clearly note the above mitigation measures on applicable sheets and be clearly visible to contractors and City inspectors. Prior to issuance of building permits, a pre- construction meeting is required between Associate Planner, Marcus Carloni (or assigned planner) and the project contractor supervisor to ensure the above requirements are understood and complied with at all times. Community Development Department staff and Public Works staff will periodically inspect the site for continued compliance with the above mitigation measures. Mitigation Measure 3: Cultural Resources 3. If materials (including but not limited to bedrock mortars, historical trash deposits, and human burials) are encountered during excavation, work shall cease until a qualified archaeologist makes determinations on possible significance, recommends appropriate measures to minimize impacts, and provides information on how to proceed in light of the discoveries. All specialist recommendations shall be communicated to the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department prior to resuming work to ensure the project continues within procedural parameters accepted by the City of San Luis Obispo and the State of California. ¾Monitoring Plan, MM #3: All construction and grading plan sets shall clearly note the above mitigation measures on applicable sheets and be clearly visible to contractors and City inspectors. Prior to issuance of building permits, a pre-construction meeting is required between Associate Planner, Marcus Carloni (or assigned planner) and the project contractor supervisor to ensure the above requirements are understood and complied with at all times. Community Development Department staff and Public Works staff will periodically inspect the site for continued compliance with the above mitigation measures. SECTION 3. Action. The Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Use Permit to allow development of a site with Special Considerations, and adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (TR/A/ER 202-13), with incorporation of the following project conditions: Community Development Department - Planning ATTACHMENT 9 PC1 - 228 1. All exceptions to setback standards and conditions of approval, including those required by the Architectural Review Commission, mitigation measures and easements shall be shown on the final map and/or subdivision improvement/building plans. 2. Lot 5 shall provide an affordable housing unit in compliance with Section 17.91 of the Municipal Code. An affordable housing agreement shall be recorded in compliance with the City’s Affordable Housing Standards. Community Development Department - Engineering 3. All easements shall be recorded on title with the individual lots. 4. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this subdivision, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review (“Indemnified Claims”). The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any Indemnified Claim upon being presented with the Indemnified Claim and City shall fully cooperate in the defense against an Indemnified Claim." 5. Some of the proposed lot lines are shown relatively close to the proposed building. Wall rating requirements and opening protective will apply per Table R302.1(2). Proposed setback dimensions shall be clearly shown on plans to assess the requirements based on Table as referenced. 6. Park in-lieu fees shall be paid for each lot prior to map recordation in accordance with the fee resolution in effect at the time of final map submittal/recordation. 7. Complete frontage improvements are required as a condition of the subdivision and development. All improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance the City Engineering Standards and Standard Specifications in effect at the time of submittal of said improvements. The required subdivision improvements shall be completed or covered by an appropriate surety prior to map recordation. 8. Grade and line shall be established by the developer for the new curb and gutter to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. A separate public improvement plan may be required where grades and alignment have not been established or where significant discrepancies are discovered. The developer is responsible for any required engineering and/or surveying. Record drawings shall be provided at the completion of construction. 9. The required public and private subdivision improvements may be completed with a separate subdivision improvement plan submittal processed through the Public Works Department. As an alternate, the building plan submittal may be used to show all required improvements. Improvements located within the public right-of-way will require a separate ATTACHMENT 9 PC1 - 229 encroachment permit and associated inspection fees. A separate plan review fee based on the fee resolution in effect at the time of plan submittal will be required for the Public Works Department review of the subdivision improvements associated with the building plan submittal. 10. The final map shall show and note the offer of dedication for the sidewalk, public pedestrian easement for any ADA sidewalk extensions, a 10’ PUE, and a 10’ street tree easement. 11. Any required or proposed off-site easements or license agreements shall be secured or recorded prior to or concurrent with recordation of the map or prior to construction. 12. Private easements for access, parking, maneuverability, drainage, utilities, and open space shall be shown and noted on the final map. Some or all of the private easements may be in the form of a blanket easement. The common driveway and any maintenance agreements shall be recorded in conjunction with the map. 13. The open space easement, drainage easement, and any easement agreements shall be reviewed and approved to the satisfaction of city’s Natural Resource Manager and Public Works Department in conjunction with recordation of the map. Restoration planting within the open space and creek corridor shall be approved by the Natural Resource Manager. 14. The final map or additional map sheet shall show the limits of 100-year flood inundation in accordance with the drainage analysis and as generally shown on the tentative map. 15. The updated project soils report shall be referenced on the map or on an additional sheet. 16. The parcel map/final map preparation and monumentation shall be in accordance with the city’s Subdivision Regulations, Engineering Standards, and the Subdivision Map Act. 17. All boundary monuments, lot corners and centerline intersections, BC's, EC's, etc., shall be tied to the City's Horizontal Control Network. At least two control points shall be used and a tabulation of the coordinates shall be submitted with the final map or parcel map. All coordinates submitted shall be based on the City coordinate system. A 3.5" diameter computer floppy disk, containing the appropriate data compatible with Autocad (Digital Interchange Format, DXF) for Geographic Information System (GIS) purposes, shall be submitted to the City Engineer. On motion by _______________, seconded by __________, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: REFRAIN: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 27th day of August, 2014. ATTACHMENT 9 PC1 - 230 ___________________________ Doug Davidson, Secretary Planning Commission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pplicant City of San Luis Obispo Representative Gary Kaiser, Contract Planner Zoning Multiple General Plan Multiple Site Area ~13 square miles Application Complete February 1, 2012 Environmental Status Environmental Impact Report Draft released on 6-13-14 6800$5< 7KH&LW\¶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¶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¶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¶VFRQVLVWHQF\GHWHUPLQDWLRQ )RUPRUHEDFNJURXQGRQWKHEDVLVIRUWKH WHQWDWLYHRYHUUXOHGHWHUPLQDWLRQVHH$WWDFKPHQW&LW\&RXQFLO6WDII5HSRUW 2Q$XJXVW WKH&LW\&RXQFLODSSURYHGDUHVROXWLRQRILQWHQWWRRYHUUXOHWKH$/8&¶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¶VDFWLRQRQ$XJXVW ZDVQRWDGHWHUPLQDWLRQRIWKHILQDO/8&(SROLFLHV SURJUDPVRUPDSGHVLJQDWLRQFKDQJHVEXWUDWKHUDQLQGLFDWLRQRIWKH&LW\¶VLQWHQWWRDOORZWKH FRPPXQLW\3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQDQG&LW\&RXQFLOWRFRQVLGHUWKHGUDIW/8&(HYDOXDWHGLQ WKH (,5 7KH /8&( GRFXPHQWV ZLOO VHH DGGLWLRQDO HGLWV LQ UHVSRQVH WR FRPPXQLW\ DQG DGYLVRU\ERG\FRPPHQWVDQGLQSXWSULRUWREHLQJFRQVLGHUHGE\WKH&LW\&RXQFLO7RQLJKW¶V KHDULQJEHIRUHWKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQLVWKHILUVWVWHSLQWKDWSURFHVV 3URSRVHG3ROLF\&KDQJHV 7KHSURSRVHGSROLF\FKDQJHVLQWKH/DQG8VHDQG&LUFXODWLRQ(OHPHQWVDUHFRPLQJWRWKH 3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQIRUUHYLHZ DQGFRPPHQW7KHVHDUHDVRIWKH/8&(±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¶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¶VIRFXVRQFKDSWHUVLQHDFKHOHPHQW7KHLQFUHPHQWDOUHYLHZRIHDFKHOHPHQW 7KHLQWHQWDQGSXUSRVHRIWKH6$$ 38&&RGH D LVWRSURPRWHWKHJRDOVDQGREMHFWLYHVRI &DOLIRUQLDDLUSRUWQRLVHVWDQGDUGV SUHYHQWWKHFUHDWLRQRIQHZQRLVHDQGVDIHW\SUREOHPVDQGWRSURWHFWSXEOLF KHDOWKVDIHW\DQGZHOIDUHE\HQVXULQJRUGHUO\H[SDQVLRQDLUSRUWVDQGDGRSWLRQRIODQGXVHPHDVXUHVWKDW PLQLPL]HWKHSXEOLF¶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¶VDYLDWLRQFRQVXOWDQW -RKQVRQ$YLDWLRQDQGWRUHIOHFWWKHODUJHUJHRJUDSKLFDUHDRIWKHFLW\WKDWLVVXEMHFWWRDLUSRUW LQIOXHQFHEH\RQGWKHERXQGDULHVRIWKH$$63(GLWVUHIOHFWWKHGHVLUHWRDGGUHVVDSSURSULDWH QRLVHDQGVDIHW\FRQVWUDLQWVDVVRFLDWHGZLWKH[LVWLQJDQGIXWXUHDLUSRUWRSHUDWLRQVWRPHHWWKH LQWHQWRIWKH6WDWH$HURQDXWLFV$FW 7KH &RXQFLO 5HVROXWLRQ WR UHWDLQ WKH ULJKW WR RYHUUXOH WKH $LUSRUW /DQG 8VH &RPPLVVLRQ VXSSRUWVWKHGHVLUHWRKDYHODQGXVHOLPLWDWLRQVEDVHGRQ³IDFWEDVHGFRQVLGHUDWLRQRIDLUSRUW QRLVH DQG VDIHW\ ]RQHV´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¶VUROHLQWKRVHHIIRUWVDQGWRUHPRYHDGLUHFWUHIHUHQFHWRWKH$LUSRUW /DQG 8VH 3ODQ 7ZR SURJUDPV KDYH EHHQ XSGDWHG DQG WZR QHZ SURJUDPV DUH SURSRVHG &KDQJHV DUH RIIHUHG WR FRUUHFWO\ DVVLJQ UHVSRQVLELOLW\ IRU DLUSRUW RSHUDWLRQV WR WKH &RXQW\ LQVWHDGRIWKH$LUSRUW/DQG8VH&RPPLVVLRQDQGWRLQGLFDWHWKH&LW\¶VGHVLUHWRSDUWLFLSDWH ZLWKWKH$LUSRUW/DQG8VH&RPPLVVLRQDVLWXSGDWHVWKH$LUSRUW/DQG8VH3ODQ 7LWOH =RQLQJ&RGH±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¶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¶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ommunity Survey x 20,700 copies of the survey were printed for distribution. Distribution was primarily done through an insert distributed with the City’s utility bills (during the weeks of April 9, 16, 23 and 30) and by direct mail to those that do not receive utility bills. In all, surveys were sent to more than 25,000 homes and businesses in the City. Approximately 2,030 people returned their completed surveys by mail with an additional; 161 opting to take the survey online. Public Workshops (#signed in does not include staff and consultant team) x Future Fair 4 (May 31, 2014) > 88 signed-in x Future Fair 3 (December 7, 2013) > 125 signed-in x Future Fair 2 (June 1, 2013) > 130 signed-in x Future Fair (December 1, 2012) > 120 signed-in x Public Workshop #2 (September 27, 2012) > 40 signed-in x Public Workshop #1 (May 16, 2012) > 95 signed-in Attendance exceeded numbers shown as “signed in”. Promotion done for each workshop x Outreach at Thursday and Saturday Farmer’s Markets before events x News Releases and Media outreach to all local print, radio, and television outlets x Utility Bill Flyers – Ads/articles in advance of June and December 2013 Future Fairs and separate flyer insert for May 2014 Future Fair x Flyer to all San Luis Coastal Unified School District school children for Workshop #2 x Postcards for physical change areas for Workshop #5 x Channel 20 slide (PSAs) x Posters on local buses x Display ads in local newspapers – Tribune, SLO CITY NEWS, and New Times x Community Calendar postings – KCBX and KSBY x Banner on library (Future Fairs) x Banner across Marsh Street for 2 weeks in advance of Future Fair 4 x e-Blasts for all workshops (minimum 2 per event) x Media interviews with City Planning staff (most workshops, not all) Neighborhood Open Houses x Six neighborhood open houses (July and September 2012) x Posters in 15+ locations within each sub-area x Display ads in paper x Request to Task Force members (posters provided) to inform neighbors and friends Cal Poly Workshop x November 7, 2012 PC2 - 7 City Council Meetings x July 1, 2014 (joint with PC) x January 28, 2014 x January 14, 2014 x January 7, 2014 x October 15, 2013 x April 2, 2013 x October 16, 2012 x April 20, 2012 x March 20, 2012 x March 13, 2012 x March 6, 2012 x January 17, 2012 Planning Commission Meetings x July 1, 2014 (joint with CC) x January 8, 2014 x December 16, 2013 x December 12, 2013 x August 14, 2013 x July 24, 2013 x May 8, 2013 x March 13, 2013 x February 22, 2012 Task Force Meetings x #34, June 18, 2014 x #33, February 19, 2014 x #32, January 15, 2014 x #31, December 10, 2013 x #30, December 5, 2013 x #29, December 4, 2013 x #28, November 26, 2013 x #27, November 25, 2013 x #26, November 20, 2013 x #25, November 14, 2013 x #24, November 7, 2013 x #23, November 6, 2013 x #22, October 30, 2013 x #21, October 24, 2013 x #20, October 17, 2013 x #19, October 16, 2013 x #18, October 2, 2013 x #17, September 18, 2013 x #16, July 9, 2013 x #15, July 1, 2013 x #14, June 27, 2013 x #13, June 19, 2013 x #12, May 14, 2013 x #11, April 30, 2013 x #10, April 17, 2013 x #9, March 7, 2013 x #8, February 20, 2013 x #7, January 16, 2013 x #6, October 17, 2012 x #5, September 19, 2012 x #4, July 18, 2012 x #3, June 20, 2012 x #2, June 7, 2012 x #1, April 18, 2012 Advisory Committee Meetings x Parks and Recreation Commission August 21,2013 x Parks and Recreation Commission July 22, 2014 x Bicycle Advisory Committee July 18, 2013 x Bicycle Advisory Committee September 19, 2013 x Bicycle Advisory Committee July 17, 2014 x Mass Transportation Commission July 10, 2013 x Mass Transportation Commission July 9, 2014 x Cultural Heritage Committee July 28, 2014 Organization Outreach x Chamber of Commerce – LUCE sub-committee (City staff attended some) x Downtown Association (1 meeting + City staff attended several + Downtown Blasts to members) PC2 - 8 x Latino Coalition (2 meetings) x Residents for Quality Neighborhoods (2 meetings) x Neighbors North of Foothill (1 meeting) x Transition Towns (2 meetings) x Rotary (promotion of meetings) x SLO Green Energy (1 meeting) x EcoSLO (1 meeting) x Faith-based organizations (notices to all) e-Blasts x ~ 65 e-Blasts have been sent x ~ 3,500 e-mail address are on the mailing list x Over 225,000 messages have been sent so far as part of the General Plan Update project Newsletters x Newsletter 1, General Plan Update Overview, May 2012 x Newsletter 2, Alternatives, June 2013 Website and Social Media See attached summary. MindMixer x Ran for six months from Fall 2012 – May 2013 x 240 registered participants x 1,039 unique visitors x 18,000 page views x > 230 ideas generated Theater PSAs x 12 weeks in Fall 2012 (November 2012 – January 2013) x Cinemark downtown – all screens (~ 20,000 impressions) Spanish Language Outreach x Newsletter 1 translated into Spanish x Univision Spanish language PSAs on survey and workshop x Media releases to all area Spanish language outlets x Website page on Update x Outreach through Latino coalition Interviews with City Leadership x The Consulting Team developed a set of five questions to be used in interviews with City Council and Planning Commission members. During the week of March 19 – 23, the Consulting Team’s management group conducted these individual interviews. x Interviews were conducted with City department heads to gain insight on SWOT. PC2 - 9 Other Media x 3-29-12 SLO CITY NEWS Article x 4 -2012 City Staff interview aired on Channel 19 and Cal Poly Campus TV x 11 -2012 California Edition – cable news channel interview re: LUCE Update x 12-6-12 SLO CITY NEWS Article x 6-6-13 SLO CITY NEWS Article x 10-18-13 Tribune Article (Summary of Council Action on Alternatives) x 10-24-13 SLO CITY NEWS Article x 1-18-14 Tribune Article (Summary of Council Action on Draft LUE) x 6-11-14 KSBY Google Alert PC2 - 10 PC2 - 11 PC2 - 12 PC2 - 13 PC2 - 14 PC2 - 15 PC2 - 16 PC2 - 17 PC2 - 18 PC2 - 19 PC2 - 20 PC2 - 21 PC2 - 22 PC2 - 23 PC2 - 24 PC2 - 25 PC2 - 26 PC2 - 27 PC2 - 28 LUCEUpdate Page 92 Public Draft June 2014 7 AIRPORT AREA POLICIES Policies in this section apply to the Airport Area, as shown on Figure 9 and represent the Airport Influence Area subject to airport safety, noise, height, and overflight standards. 7.3.2 Regional Service The City shall support tThe airport’s will continued to serve service to the region, consistent with the approved Airport Master Plan. and FAA-approved Airport Layout Plan. 7.3.3 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, consistent with 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. Development should be permitted only if it is consistent with the San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan.Prospective buyers of property which is subject to airport influence should be so informed. Airport Safety Zones Airport Safety Zones shall be consistent with California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook guidelines and substantiated by the San Luis Obispo County Airport Master Plan activity forecasts as used for noise planning purposes. Airport Noise Compatibility The City shall use the aircraft noise analysis prepared for the Airport Master Plan Environmental Impact Report as an accurate mapping of the long term noise impact of the airport’s aviation activity that is tied to the ultimate facilities development depicted in the FAA-approved Airport Layout Plan. The City shall use the 60 dB CNEL aircraft noise contour (FAA and State aircraft noise planning standard) as the threshold for new urban residential areas. Interiors of new residential structures shall be constructed to meet a maximum 45 dB CNEL. 7.3.4 City Annexation and Services The City intends to shall actively pursue annexation of the Aairport Aarea as noted in the Airport Area Specific Plan. Airport Area land inside the urban reserve shall be considered for annexation if it meets the criteria stated in Policy 1.12.4 and provisions in the Airport Area Specific Plan.Annexation of areas that do not meet these interim annexation criteria may be annexed subject to completion of environmental and economic studies and a specific plan. Pending annexation: Any urban development approved by the County shall be consistent with City development standards; and Urban development and provision of adequate resources and services needed citywide shall be closely monitored. 7.3.5 Greenbelt Protection The City shall ensure aAnnexation of the Airport Area Specific Plan, whether it occurs as one action or several, shall be is consistent with the growth management objectives of maintaining areas outside the urban reserve line in rural, predominantly open space uses. An Airport Area aAnnexation shall not take effect unless the annexed area helps protect an appropriate part of the greenbelt near the Airport Area, through one or more of the following methods: A. Dedicating an open-space easement or fee ownership to the City or to a responsible land-conservation organization. B. Paying fees to the City in-lieu of dedication, which that shall be used within a reasonable time to secure greenbelt open space near the Airport Area. PC2 - 29 LandUseElement June 2014 Public Draft Page 93 Airport Area Figure 9 will be updated once airport section is complete. Currently doesn’t show full extent of area covered by AASP. PC2 - 30 LUCEUpdate Page 94 Public Draft June 2014 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!o £¤101 BROADOR C U T T BUCKLEY TANK FARM MILL HIGU E R A CHORROPISM O L O S O S O S V A L L E Y MADO N N A FOOTHILL HIGH MARS H LEFF F O O TH IL L W F LOR A T OR O PRADOOSOS SOUTHCAL I F ORN IA BUC H O N HIGUERASSANTAROSAELKSSANLUISELLA H IG HLA N D B ISHO P LAURELSLACK EVANS POI N S ETTIAHI L L HOOVERSOUTHWOOD BUL LOCK L U N ET A D E L R I OMO U NT BIS H O P PALM V A LLEVIS T A V IL L AGE G R A N D LAWR E N C EPOL YCANYONSYD N E YLIZZIE MEISSNER SUBURBAN M I OSSI G ATHEWOOD B R I D G E ROCK VIE W LONGBEEBEEDA N A HOPE DA LID I O SANTAFEELM MARGARITA BOND ISABE L L A BROAD£¤101 £¤1 Laguna Lake SLOEIR_Fig9_AirportAreaPlan_20140612a_JKC.pdf Figure 9 Legend Airport Influence Area Airport Area Specific Plan LUCE SOI Area !!!!City Limits Highway Roads Railroad o Airport Water Body Source: City of Sanu Luis Obispo, 2012 010.5 Miles Airport Influence Area PC2 - 31 LandUseElement June 2014 Public Draft Page 95 7.3.6 Internal Open Space The City shall ensure The areas designated for urban uses in the Airport Area Specific Plan, but not necessarily each parcel, should include open areas as site amenities and to protect resources, consistent with the Conservation and Open Space Element. In addition, the City shall ensure wildlife corridors across the Airport Area shall be identified and preserved. 7.3.7 Development Before Annexation A. Areas which are designated for eventual urban development in the Airport Area Specific Plan may be developed during the interim with rural residential or rural commercial uses. In such areas, County development standards and discretionary review should assure that projects will not preclude options for future urban development consistent with the City’s planning policies and standards. Before any discretionary County land-use or land-division approval for such areas, a development plan for the site should be prepared, showing that circulation, water and other utility, and drainage proposals will be compatible with future annexation and urban development; and conditions of approval should include payment of City fees required to mitigate traffic, housing, and open space impacts. B. Any development within the urban reserve approved by the County prior to annexation should comply with City standards for roadway cross-sections, bus stops, walking and bicycle paths, landscaping, view protection, setbacks, preferred site layouts, and architectural character. 7.3.8 Transit Service The City shall work with SLOCOG, the County, RTA, the Airport, and area businesses to extend tTransit service linking development sites with the citywide bus system should be provided concurrent with any additional urban development in the Airport Areato the airport and County areas south of the City. 7.3.9 Specific Plan The City will prepare a specific plan for land uses, habitat protection, circulation, utilities, and drainage within the Airport Area. 7.3.10 Business Parks 2 Location and Uses Business parks may be developed in areas designated for them. Business parks are to accommodate research and development and light manufacturing in a campus like setting. They should provide high quality design of public and private facilities. Land designated for a business park should not be further divided or developed until the City annexes the area and approves a master plan for the business park. 7.3.10.1 Building Intensity Building location and intensity standards will be provided in a specific plan for each business park. The ratio of building floor area to site area shall not exceed 1.0. The Zoning Regulations will establish maximum building height and lot coverage, and minimum setbacks from streets and other property lines, as well as procedures for exceptions to such standards in special circumstances. Dwellings may be provided only as caretaker quarters or as part of a specially approved mixed-use development. The appropriate residential density would be set considering the maximum residential density allowed in any neighboring residential area. (Also, see the residential section for policies on density bonuses for affordable housing.) PC2 - 32 LUCEUpdate Page 96 Public Draft June 2014 PROGRAMS 7.3.11 Specific Plan The City will work with Airport Area property owners to complete a specific plan. 7.3.127.3.9 Airline Service and Impacts The City will shall continue to work with the County and regional airlines to assure that regional airline services are continued and expanded to adequately serve the needs of the population in the service area of the airport.and conditions in the vicinity of the airport are consistent with the Circulation Element policies. 7.3.137.3.10 Growth Management The City will annex the Airport area denoted in the Airport Area Specific Plan and accommodate incremental development consistent with the growth management policies, including those concerning adequacy of resources and services and development paying its own way. 7.3.147.3.11 Open Space Dedication and In-lieu Fees In approving development proposals, the City will assure that Airport Area properties noted in the Airport Area Specific Plan secure protection for any on-site resources as identified in the Conservation and Open Space Element. These properties, to help maintain the greenbelt, shall also secure open space protection for any contiguous, commonly owned land outside the urban reserve. If it is not feasible to directly obtain protection for such land, fees in lieu of dedication shall be paid when the property is developed, to help secure the greenbelt in the area south of the City’s southerly urban reserve line. The City shall set fee levels that would be appropriate in-lieu of open space dedication. The following new policy will be moved into the policy section following public review. It is placed here to keep with associated two new programs that follow. New Policy: County Airport Land Use Plan The City shall continue to work with the County Airport Land Use Commission to strive to achieve consistency between the County Airport Land Use Plan and the City’s General Plan. If consistency cannot be achieved, the City shall preserve and maintain as a plausible alternative its constitutional land use authority to overrule the Airport Land Use Commission with regard to adopting General Plan policies that are consistent with the purposes of the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, State Aeronautics Act and State Law. Applicable sections of the Zoning Regulations and Specific Plans shall be amended accordingly. 7.3.12 Airport Overlay Zone The City shall create an Airport Overlay Zone category to codify airport compatibility criteria identified in the general plan for those areas located within the Airport Influence Area consistent with the requirements of the California State Aeronautics Act (Cal.Pub. Utilities Code, Section 21670, et. seq.) which establishes statewide requirements for airport land use compatibility planning, the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, which is published by the California Department of Transportation Division of Aeronautics to support and amplify the State Aeronautics Act requirements, and other related federal and state requirements relating to airport land use compatibility planning. Implementation of the compatibility policies will be accomplished through the Airport Land Use and Zoning Code. 7.3.13 Airport Land Use and Zoning Code The City shall update its Zoning Regulations to address allowable uses and development standards for areas located within the Airport Influence Area consistent with the requirements of the State Aeronautics Act, Caltrans Handbook and related state and federal requirements relating to airport land use compatibility. These development standards will include, but not limited to, intensity and density limitations, identification of prohibited uses, infill development, height limitations and other hazards to flight, noise insulation requirements, buyer awareness measures, nonconforming uses and reconstruction and the process for airport compatibility criteria reviews by the City consistent these development standards. PC2 - 33 LUCEUpdate Page 44 Public Draft June 2014 911 AIR TRANSPORTATION INTRODUCTION The City and County of San Luis Obispo city and county are served by the county-owned airport located off Broad Street near Buckley Road. The airport allows people to fly private aircraft and to use commercial carriers to connect with national and global commercial carriers. The following policies and programs address the continued use of the county airport. Additional policies and programs can be found in the City’s Land Use Element. 9.011.0 Policies 11.0.1 Interstate Air Service The City shall support and encourage expansion of air transportation services. Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan The City should respect the recommendations of theshall develop an Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan as it relates to address noise and safety concerns. 7.2.1 County Airport The County as well as protecting and improving circulation and public transit access to the airportshould provide for general aviation and commuter air service to San Luis Obispo. Compatible Land Uses The City and the County shouldshall regulate land use surrounding the airport so that it is compatible with airport operations and does not threaten the continued use of the airport. Development Projects The City will require development projects and subdivisions within Airport Planning Zones #1 through #4 to include measures that protect the health, safety and comfort of residents and employees. 11.0.2 County Aircraft Operations The City shouldshall work withencourage the County to continue to appropriately address aircraft operations so that noise and safety problems are not created in developed areas or areas targeted for future development by the City's Land Use Element. 11.0.3 Public Transit Service PublicThe City shall encourage improved public transit service should be encouraged to serve the countyCounty airport as soon as practical. 9.111.1 Programs 9.1.111.1.1 Environmentally Sensitive Aircraft The City shouldshall work with the County Airport Land Use Commission to encourage the use of quieter and more environmentally sensitive aircraft. PC2 - 34 CirculationElement June 2014 Public Draft Page 45 11.1.2 Airport Facilities Development The City shall work with the County Airport to support the further development of airport facilities and attract additional passenger airline services. Possible improvements include, but are not limited to: instrumented landing systems, radar, and improved passenger waiting facilities. 11.1.3 Airport Funding The City shall work with the County Airport to pursue additional funding opportunities, such as Airport Improvement Program grants. 11.1.4 Update of the Airport Land Use Plan The City shall encourage work with the County Airport Land Use Commission to complete its update of the Airport Land Use Plan for the San Luis Obispo County Airport in regard to significant changes in noise, adjacent land impacts, and safety zones. PC2 - 35 Chapter 17.22: Use Regulation 6HFWLRQ 17.22.010 Uses allowed by zones. 8VHVDOORZHGE\]RQHV $ 6WDWXVRI8VHVUses within zones shall be as provided in Table 9, subject to parts B through IJ. below. In Table 9, symbols shall have these meanings: A The use is allowed; D If the director approves an administrative use permit as provided in Sections 17.58.020 through 17.58.080, the use may be established; PC If the planning commission approves a use permit as provided in Sections 17.58.020 through 17.58.080, the use may be established; A/D The use is allowed above the ground floor. If the director approves an administrative use permit, it may be established on the ground floor. Special notes affecting the status of uses, indicated by number in Table 9, may be found at the end of the table. % $LUSRUW2YHUOD\=RQH $2= Uses within the Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ) as shown in Figure 10 are subject to requirements of Chapter 17.57. See Table 10 to verify allowed uses and special restrictions including density, overflight safety, and notification. Most areas within the Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ) are located within Specific Plan areas. Areas within the AOZ which are located in Specific Plans designated with SP zoning shall follow regulations within their respective Specific Plans. %&,QWHUSUHWDWLRQRI8VH/LVWLQJ These regulations are intended to permit similar types of uses within each zone. The director, subject to the appeal procedures of Chapter 17.66, shall determine whether uses which are not listed shall be deemed allowed or allowed subject to use permit approval in a certain zone. This interpretation procedure shall not be used as a substitute for the amendment D &'3ULQFLSDODQG$FFHVVRU\8VHV Listed uses are principal uses. Accessory uses are allowed with principal uses. '(3URGXFWLRQDQG6DOHV Where manufacturing is allowed, incidental sale of items made on the premises is allowed. When sale of a particular type of item is allowed, craftsman-type production of such an item for sale on the premises is allowed. () 3XEOLF 6FKRRO 8VHVSee Section 17.36.030 concerning uses which may be established within public schools. )*3URKLELWLRQRI'ULYHWKURXJK)DFLOLWLHVDrive-through facilities are not allowed in any zone. *+3URKLELWLRQRI9DFDWLRQ5HQWDOVVacation rentals are not allowed in any zone. +,3URKLELWLRQRI0LQHUDO([WUDFWLRQ Commercial mining is prohibited in City limits. (Ord. 1365 (2000 series)(part) ,-6SHFLILF3ODQ&RQVLVWHQF\Some land subject to City zoning is also subject to one of several Specific Plans, which are intended to provide additional direction for the development of those areas. Land within Specific Plans, designated by the SP zoning, may be subject to further restrictions. The list of uses and permit requirements in the Specific Plan shall prevail. PC2 - 36 - $LUSRUW/DQG8VH3ODQ&RQVLVWHQF\Some land subject to City zoning is also subject to the Airport Land Use Plan, which is adopted and amended from time to time by the San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Commission. The Airport Land Use Plan establishes additional limitations on uses, which do not apply to City-adopted zones outside the area subject to the Airport Land Use Plan. Table 9 is to be applied consistently with the Airport Land Use Plan on land subject to that plan. 1. Prohibited Uses. The following are examples of prohibited uses. The uses and requirements of the Airport Land Use Plan shall prevail. No use shall be established which: a. Entails installation, construction, or enlargement of a structure that would constitute an obstruction to air navigation, as defined in the Airport Land Use Plan, except as may be approved by the Airport Land Use Commission and the Federal Aviation Administration; b. Entails a risk of physical injury to operators or occupants of aircraft (such as outdoor laser light shows); c. Causes smoke or vapors, lighting, illumination, or reflective glare, or an electromagnetic disturbance that would interfere with aircraft navigation or communication; d. Attracts birds to the extent of creating a significant hazard of bird strikes (examples are outdoor storage or disposal of food or grain, or large, artificial water features; this provision is not intended to prevent enhancement or protection of existing wetlands or the mitigation of wetlands impacts); e. Is not allowed by the Airport Safety Areas and associated safety policies, subject to modified provisions for the Margarita Specific Plan Area; f. Is not allowed by the Airport Land Use Plan Noise Policies; 2. Notwithstanding section 17.22.010G. above, the provisions of this section are not intended to supersede the provisions of Article 3.5 of the Public Utilities Code commencing with section 21670. 3. Avigation easements will be recorded for all properties involved in the proposed development. 4. 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. $ 5LJKWWR&RQWLQXH([LVWLQJ1RQ5HVLGHQWLDO8VHVLegal, conforming non-residential uses shall have the right to continue operation, subject to compliance with applicable Zoning Regulations when established prior to the development of housing on adjacent or nearby sites. City approvals of housing developments adjacent to or within 300 feet of such uses shall include a condition requiring written notice to new home buyers and/or renters of possible characteristics associated with non- residential uses, such as noise, odors, vibration, and lighting. PC2 - 37 Figure 10 Airport Overlay Zone Boundary 0.5 0 0.50.25 Miles City Limits Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP) Boundary Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ) Boundary Tank Farm Rd.Broad S t .S. Higuera St.£¤101 Buckley Rd. L o s O s o s V a l l e y R d . South St. AASP Downtown PC2 - 38 City of San Luis Obispo December 2013 Zoning Regulations 7$%/( 86(6$//2:('%<=21( Areas within AOZ shall comply with 17.57 & Table 10 or applicable Specific Plan 3HUPLW5HTXLUHPHQWE\=RQLQJ'LVWULFW 6SHFLILFXVH /DQG8VH $* &26 5 5 5 5 3) 2 &1 && &' &5 &7 &6 0 %3 5HJXODWLRQV $*5,&8/785( Crop production A A A D D Grazing A A Greenhouse/Plant Nursery, commercial PC PC Community Gardens D D D D D Livestock feed lot PC PC ,1'8675<0$18)$&785,1* 352&(66,1*:+2/(6$/,1* Bakery, wholesale AAPC DA Industrial research and development PC D D PC A A A A Laundry, dry cleaning plant AA Manufacturing - Heavy PC PC Manufacturing - Light DAA Petroleum product storage and distribution D Photo and film processing lab AA Printing and publishing AAA D D Recycling facilities - Small collection facility D D D A Storage - Personal storage facility AA Storage yard DA Warehousing, indoor storage AAPC Wholesaling and distribution AAPC /2'*,1* Bed and breakfast inn D PC PC A A A Homeless shelter PC PC A PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC 17.08.110 Hostel PC PC A A A Hotel, motel AAA PC Recreational vehicle (RV) park accessory to hotel, motel PC Vacation Rental 17.22.G .H\ $ = Allowed ' = Director's Use Permit approval required 3& = Planning Commission Use Permit approval required $' = Director's approval on ground floor, allowed on second floor or above 1RWH Footnotes affecting specific land uses follow the table. Furniture and fixtures manufacturing, cabinet shop Laboratory - Medical, analytical, research, testing Recycling facilities - Collection and processing facility Recycling facilities - Scrap and dismantling yard PC2 - 39 Page 95 City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations December 2013 7$%/( 86(6$//2:('%<=21(&RQWLQXHG Areas within AOZ shall comply with 17.57 & Table 10 or applicable Specific Plan 3HUPLW5HTXLUHPHQWE\=RQLQJ'LVWULFW 6SHFLILFXVH /DQG8VH $* &26 5 5 5 5 3) 2 &1 && &' &5 &7 &6 0 %3 5HJXODWLRQV 5(&5($7,21('8&$7,21 38%/,&$66(0%/<86(6 Club, lodge, private meeting hall D D A D A/D D D D Commercial recreation facility - Indoor PC D D D D D(12) PC D 17.08.060 Commercial recreation facility - Outdoor PC PC Educational conferences D D D D 17.08.010.C.6 Fitness/health facility DADDPCAAD Golf Course PC Library, museum PC D D D D Library, branch facility DDDD Night club D D D D D D Chapter 17.95 Park, playground D D A A A A D D A A A Public assembly facility PC D D D D PC Religious facility PC D D D D A D D D A D(7) D(7) D(7) PC PC School - College, university campus PC School - Elementary, middle, secondary PC PC D D PC D School - Specialized education/training PC A/D A/D A A A Special event D D D D D D D D D 17.08.010 Sports and active recreation facility PC PC PC PC Sports and entertainment assembly facility PC PC Studio - Art, dance, martial arts, music, etc.D D A/D A/D A PC A Theater PC(8)D D D D Chapter 17.95 Theater - Drive-in PC PC 5(6,'(17,$/86(6 Boarding/rooming house, dormitory PC D D D Chapter 17.20 Caretaker quarters A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A D Convents and monasteries PC A A D Fraternity, sorority PC PC High occupancy residential use D D Home occupation H H H H H H H H H H H H H H 17.08.090 Live/work units A A A A A 17.08.120 Mixed-use project AAAAAAPCPC 17.08.072 AAAAAA AA Mobile home park A A A A Multi-family dwellings A A A A D D A A A A A A A/D A/D A/D D AAAAA D A/DA/DD Residential hospice facility PC PC D PC PC D Rest home A A A A A D A/D A/D D Single-family dwellings A A A(2) A A A A D D Secondary dwelling units A A A A A Chapter 17.21 Work/live units D D 17.08.120 .H\ $ = Allowed ' = Director's Use Permit approval required 3& = Planning Commission Use Permit approval required $' = Director's approval on ground floor, allowed on second floor or above + = Home Occupation Permit required 1RWH Footnotes affecting specific land uses follow the table. Page 96 Mobile home as temporary residence at building site Residential care facilities - 6 or fewer residents Residential care facilities - 7 or more residents School - Boarding school, elementary, middle, secondary School - College, university - Satellite classroom facility PC2 - 40 City of San Luis Obispo December 2013 Zoning Regulations 7$%/( 86(6$//2:('%<=21(&RQWLQXHG Areas within AOZ shall comply with 17.57 & Table 10 or applicable Specific Plan 3HUPLW5HTXLUHPHQWE\=RQLQJ'LVWULFW 6SHFLILFXVH /DQG8VH $* &26 5 5 5 5 3) 2 &1 && &' &5 &7 &6 0 %3 5HJXODWLRQV 5(7$,/6$/(6 Auto and vehicle sales and rental DAPC Auto parts sales, with installation D(5) A A Auto parts sales, without installation ADA AA Bakery, retail AAAAADD Bar/Tavern DDDDDD Building and landscape materials sales, indoor A A A A A DDA AA DD Convenience store D D D A A A A A D D D 17.08.095 Extended hour retail DDDDDDDD Farm supply and feed store PC A A Fuel dealer (propane, etc)DA Furniture, furnishings, and appliance stores A A A A General retail - 2,000 sf or less A(3) A A A A D(3) D A A DAAD DAA PC PC PC Groceries, liquor, specialty foods A(10) A A A PC Mobile home, RV, and boat sales APC Office-supporting retail, 2,000 sf or less A A A A A D DDAA D Wine tasting room - off site DDDDDDD Outdoor temporary and/or seasonal sales See Section 17.08.020 17.08.020 Produce stand D D A A A A Restaurant AAAAADD Outdoor BBQ/Grill, accessory to restaurant D D D D D D D Service station (see also "vehicle services") D D D D A 17.08.030 Vending machine See Section 17.08.050 17.08.050 Warehouse stores - 45,000 sf or less gfa D D D Warehouse stores - more than 45,000 sf gfa PC PC PC .H\ $ = Allowed ' = Director's Use Permit approval required 3& = Planning Commission Use Permit approval required $' = Director's approval on ground floor, allowed on second floor or above 1RWH Footnotes affecting specific land uses follow the table. Building and landscape materials sales, outoor General retail - More than 60,000 sf, up to 140,000 sf General retail - More than 45,000 sf, up to 60,000 sf Office-supporting retail, More than 2,000, up to 5,000 sf Construction and heavy equipment sales and rental General retail - More than 2,000 sf, up to 15,000 sf General retail - More than 15,000 sf, up to 45,000 sf PC2 - 41 Page 97 City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations December 2013 7$%/( 86(6$//2:('%<=21(&RQWLQXHG Areas within AOZ shall comply with 17.57 & Table 10 or applicable Specific Plan 3HUPLW5HTXLUHPHQWE\=RQLQJ'LVWULFW 6SHFLILFXVH /DQG8VH $* &26 5 5 5 5 3) 2 &1 && &' &5 &7 &6 0 %3 5HJXODWLRQV 6(59,&(6%86,1(66),1$1&,$/ 352)(66,21$/ ATMs AAAAAAAAA Banks and financial services A A A A D(4) D(4) D Business support services A A A/D A A A A D D D A D(11) D(11) Medical service - Doctor office A A/D A/D A D(11) D(11) Medical service - Extended care PC PC D PC PC D Medical service - Hospital PC PC Convalescent hospital PC PC Office - Accessory AAAAAAAA Office - Business and service A A A/D A D (4) D(4) D Office - Government D PC A A PC Office - Processing D D D D(4) D(4) A Office - Production and administrative A A/D A/D A D(4) D(4) A Office - Professional AA/DA/DA D Office - Temporary See Section 17.08.010.C Photographer, photographic studio AA/DAPCA 6(59,&(6*(1(5$/ Catering service DDADAA Cemetery, mausoleum, columbarium PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC Copying and Quick Printer Service A A A A A A A A Day care - Day care center (child/adult) D(9) D(9) D(9) D(9) D(9) A A A A/D A D(9) D(9) D(9) D 17.08.100 Day care - Family day care home (small/large) A A A A A A A A A A A A 17.08.100 Equipment rental AAD DD Maintenance service, client site services AAPC Mortuary, funeral home D D A D Personal services AAAADA D Personal services - Restricted DD Public safety facilities PC PC Public utility facilities PC A A 17.08.080 AAD Residential Support Services AAAA Social service organization D A D A A A D D D AAD PC D A A D Vehicle services - Carwash DDPCDD PC PC DD DDAA/DA A D .H\ $ = Allowed ' = Director's Use Permit approval required 3& = Planning Commission Use Permit approval required $' = Director's approval on ground floor, allowed on second floor or above 1RWH Footnotes affecting specific land uses follow the table. Veterinary clinic/hospital, boarding, small animal, indoor Medical service - Clinic, laboratory, urgent care Vehicle services - Repair and maintenance - Major Food bank/packaged food distribution center Veterinary clinic/hospital, boarding, small animal, outdoor Veterinary clinic/hospital, boarding, large animal Vehicle services - Repair and maintenance - Minor Repair service - Equipment, large appliances, etc. PC2 - 42 Page 98 City of San Luis Obispo December 2013 Zoning Regulations 7$%/( 86(6$//2:('%<=21(&RQWLQXHG Areas within AOZ shall comply with 17.57 & Table 10 or applicable Specific Plan 3HUPLW5HTXLUHPHQWE\=RQLQJ'LVWULFW 6SHFLILFXVH /DQG8VH $* &26 5 5 5 5 3) 2 &1 && &' &5 &7 &6 0 %3 5HJXODWLRQV 75$163257$7,21 &20081,&$7,216 Airport PC PC PC D ADD Antennas and telecommunications facilities D D D D D D D D D D D 17.16.120 Media Production - Broadcast studio A A/D A A A A DDD Heliport PC PC PC Parking facility PC(6) PC(6) PC(6) D(6) D(6) D(6) Parking facility - Multi-level PC(6) PC(6) PC(6) PC(6) PC(6) PC(6) Parking facility - Temporary PC D D D D D D D D 17.08.010 Railroad facilities DA Transit station or terminal PC PC PC D A Transit stop AAAAAAAA Truck or freight terminal AAD PC PC .H\ $ = Allowed ' = Director's Use Permit approval required 3& = Planning Commission Use Permit approval required $' = Director's approval on ground floor, allowed on second floor or above 1RWH Footnotes affecting specific land uses follow the table. Page 99 Water and wastewater treatment plants and services Media Production - Backlots/outdoor facilities and soundstages Ambulance, taxi, and/or limousine dispatch facility PC2 - 43 Chapter 17.57: Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ) 6HFWLRQV 17.57.010 Purpose and Intent. 17.57.020 Applicability 17.57.030 Procedures 17.57.040 Development Standards and Uses 17.57.050 Overlay Zones 17.57.060 Airspace protection 17.57.070 Noise 17.57.080 Overflight Notice 17.57.090 Open Land 3XUSRVHDQGLQWHQW The purpose and intent of the Airport Overlay Zoning District is to: A.Implement the City’s General Plan policies to ensure that all land uses within the Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ) are consistent with the State Aeronautics Act, State Law, Federal Aviation Administration Regulations, and the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook guidelines. B. Ensure that land uses and development within the Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ) are compatible with existing and future airport operations. C. Prohibit the establishment of incompatible uses and further expansion of incompatible uses which could detrimentally affect long term economic vitality of the airport; and to avoid or minimize exposure of persons to potential hazards associated with current and future airport operations. D. Prohibit development, uses, or any installations or activities which could represent a hazard to existing and future flight operations. E. Recognize unique constraints and considerations which apply to properties which could be affected by airport operations by establishing regulations and review criteria for land use and development which apply specifically to properties within the Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ). $SSOLFDELOLW\ Regulations in this Chapter shall apply to all uses, activities, and existing and proposed development on properties within the Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ) as shown on Figure 10, Chapter 17.22, Use Regulations. A.6SHFLILF 3ODQV. For properties located within the AOZ which also are located within specific plans, development regulations, standards, and policies shall be followed per respective specific plans. In cases where policies or standards are not provided within the specific plan, the policies and standards within this Chapter will apply in addition to other applicable Zoning Regulations, General Plan, or other standards and regulations which apply to the project or land use. In no case will a land use, activity, or development be allowed to violate Airspace Protection Standards of 17.57.060. B.([LVWLQJ'HYHORSPHQWDQG/DQG8VHV Notwithstanding 17.57.060, these requirements apply to new development and land uses within the Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ). Non-conforming uses and structures shall comply with Airspace Protection Standards of 17.57.060 which prohibit any activities that pose a risk to flight operations within the Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ). Existing land ALL NEW SECTION PC2 - 44 uses that are not consistent with the Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ) are non-conforming uses and may continue. Existing land uses may not expand more than 10% beyond the permitted project size at the time of adoption of the AOZ. No increase in density for non-conforming residential land uses is permitted. Non-conforming uses shall comply with Zoning Regulations Chapters 17.10 and 17.14 (Non-conforming uses and Non-conforming structures) provisions for expiration of non- conforming status and proposed changes in land use which do not conform to the AOZ. In Zone 4, Non-conforming dwellings may be replaced or reconstructed provided density does not increase. Related residential uses such as work/live units, residential care, may be established in existing dwellings in Zone 4 if allowed in the underlying zone. Development or land uses shall be considered “existing” if one of the following conditions is met: 1. A vesting tentative map has been approved and has not expired or all discretionary approvals have been obtained and have not expired. 2. Building permits have been issued and have not expired. 3. The structures and site development have been legally established and physically exist. 3URFHGXUHV A.$SSURYDO All ministerial and discretionary actions within the Airport Overlay Zoning District (AOZ) shall be reviewed for consistency with this Chapter prior to approval. B.0DQGDWRU\ILQGLQJVIRUDSSURYDO. When a project or activity is subject to discretionary actions requiring a public hearing or notice, the applicable review authority shall make all of the following findings, as applicable: 1. The project or use complies with the noise compatibility policies of the Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ). 2. The project or use complies with residential and non-residential density standards of the Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ). 3. The project or use complies with compatibility policies of the applicable Airport Overlay Zone. 4. The project or use complies with the airspace protection policies of the Airport Overlay Zone. 5. The project or use complies with the overflight policies of the Airport Overlay Zone. C.$PHQGPHQWV. Other than General Plan, Specific Plan, or Zoning Code changes addressed through a previous referral to the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), proposed general plan land use amendments, zoning amendments, and specific plan amendments that impact density or intensity of development within the Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ) shall be referred to the Airport Land Use Commission for a determination of compatibility with requirements of the State of California Department of Transportation Division of Aeronautics and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements. D.2YHUUXOH3URYLVLRQV. Should the San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) update the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP), the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo shall review the updated ALUCP and either make changes to applicable General Plan sections, Zoning, and implementing ordinances, or the City Council may, pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676(b), overrule the ALUC. PC2 - 45 'HYHORSPHQW6WDQGDUGVDQG8VHV Land use compatibility standards are intended to minimize the risk to people and property on the ground as well as to people in an aircraft in the event of an accident or emergency landing occurring outside the airport boundary. A.$OORZDEOH8VHV 1RQ5HVLGHQWLDO'HQVLW\ Table 10 lists the uses that are appropriate in the respectively numbered Airport Overlay Zoning District 1-6. Proposed uses and development shall also comply with compatibility policies for Airport Overlay Zones per 17.57.050. Table 10 includes maximum density standards for each Airport Overlay Zoning District which shall be calculated in accordance with the following method: 1.1RQUHVLGHQWLDO GHQVLW\ FDOFXODWLRQCalculations of non-residential density shall be based on requirements of SLOMC 17.16.060. Parking Space Requirements with the assumption of 1.3 occupants per space and gross parcel size including adjacent roads to centerline of right-of-way. Non-residential density shall be calculated prior to reductions for shared use, trip reduction, bicycle, etc. In determining allowed persons per acre, all fractions shall be rounded to the nearest whole number. ([DPSOH3URSRVHG'HYHORSPHQW Two office buildings, each two stories and containing 20,000 square feet of floor area per building. Site size is 3.0 net acres. Counting the adjacent road to centerline of the right-of-way, 3.5 acres gross. The number of people on the property is assumed to equal 1.3 times the number of parking spaces. The average usage intensity would therefore be calculated as follows: (1) 40,000 sq. ft. floor area x 1.0 parking space per 300 sq. ft. = 134 (2) 134 parking spaces x 1.3 persons per space = 174 persons per acre. (3) 174 persons/3.5 acres gross site size = 50 persons per acre average for the site. 2.([FHSWLRQVSubject to approval of an administrative use permit, the Community Development Director may determine another method of density calculation is appropriate based on the particular characteristics of the proposed use and/or development. The method of calculation shall remain consistent with recommended methodologies of Appendix “G” of the California Airport Land Use Plann ing Handbook. B. ,QWHUSUHWDWLRQRIXVHOLVWLQJThe director, subject to the appeal procedures of Chapter 17.66, shall determine whether uses which are not listed shall be deemed allowed or allowed subject to use permit approval in a certain zone. This interpretation procedure shall not be used as a substitute for the amendment procedure as a means of adding new types of uses to an Airport Overlay zone. PC2 - 46 City of San Luis Obispo December 2013 Zoning Regulations 7$%/($,5325729(5/$<=21( $2= 0$;,080$//2:('3(56216 $UHDVZLWKLQ$2=DQGRXWVLGH6SHFLILF3ODQDUHDV% 0D[LPXP$OORZHG3HUVRQVSHU$FUH 2YHUOD\ =RQHV)LJXUH 6SHFLILF8VH 1RLVH 5HJXODWLRQV /DQG8VH $*5,&8/785( Crop production FAA 80 150 200 150 UZ Grazing FAA 80 150 200 150 UZ Greenhouse/Plant Nursery, commercial 80 150 200 150 UZ Community Gardens 80 150 200 150 UZ Livestock feed lot 80 150 200 150 UZ ,1'8675<0$18)$&785,1* 352&(66,1*:+2/(6$/,1* Bakery, wholesale 80 150 200 150 UZ 80 150 200 150 UZ Industrial research and development 80 150 200 150 UZ 80 150 200 150 UZ Laundry, dry cleaning plant 80 150 200 150 UZ Manufacturing - Heavy 80 150 200 150 UZ Manufacturing - Light 80 150 200 150 UZ Petroleum product storage and distribution 200 UZ Hazardous materials - 17.57.050 Photo and film processing lab 80 150 200 150 UZ Printing and publishing 80 150 200 150 UZ 80 150 200 150 UZ 80 150 200 150 UZ Recycling facilities - Small collection facility 80 150 200 150 UZ Storage - Personal storage facility 80 150 200 150 UZ Storage yard 80 150 200 150 UZ Hazardous materials - 17.57.050 Warehousing, indoor storage 80 150 200 150 UZ Wholesaling and distribution 80 150 200 150 UZ /2'*,1* Bed and breakfast inn 200 UZ NSLU Homeless shelter 200 UZ NSLU Hostel 200 UZ NSLU Hotel, motel 150 200 150 UZ NSLU Recreational vehicle (RV) park accessory to hotel, motel 200 UZ NSLU Vacation Rental 17.22.G .H\ 16/8= Noise Sensitive Land Use (if within 60 db CNEL contour - Figure 15 - See requirements of 17.57.070) )$$ Use subject to FAA standards and criteria 8= as allowed in underlying Zone or Specific Plan Furniture and fixtures manufacturing, cabinet shop Laboratory - Medical, analytical, research, testing Recycling facilities - Collection and processing facility Recycling facilities - Scrap and dismantling yard PC2 - 47 City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations 7$%/($,5325729(5/$<=21( $2= 0$;,080$//2:('3(56216 $UHDVZLWKLQ$2=DQGRXWVLGH6SHFLILF3ODQDUHDV% 0D[LPXP$OORZHG3HUVRQVSHU$FUH 2YHUOD\=RQHV )LJXUH 6SHFLILF8VH 1RLVH5HJXODWLRQV /DQG8VH 5(&5($7,21('8&$7,21 38%/,&$66(0%/<86(6 Club, lodge, private meeting hall 200 UZ NSLU Commercial recreation facility - Indoor UZ Commercial recreation facility - Outdoor UZ Educational conferences 200 UZ Fitness/health facility 200 UZ Golf Course 80 150 200 150 UZ Library, museum 200 UZ Library, branch facility 200 UZ Night club 200 UZ Park, playground 80 150 200 150 UZ NSLU Public assembly facility 200 UZ NSLU Religious facility 200 UZ NSLU UZ NSLU School - College, university campus 200 UZ NSLU 200 UZ NSLU School - Elementary, middle, secondary UZ NSLU School - Specialized education/training 200 UZ NSLU Special event 200 UZ NSLU Sports and active recreation facility 200 UZ NSLU Sports and entertainment assembly facility UZ Studio - Art, dance, martial arts, music, etc.200 UZ NSLU Theater UZ Theater - Drive-in UZ 5(6,'(17,$/86(6 Boarding/rooming house, dormitory UZ NSLU Caretaker quarters UZ NSLU Convents and monasteries UZ NSLU Fraternity, sorority UZ NSLU High occupancy residential use UZ NSLU Home occupation UZ NSLU Live/work units UZ NSLU Mixed-use project UZ NSLU UZ NSLU - 17.57.020.B. Mobile home park UZ NSLU Multi-family dwellings UZ NSLU - 17.57.020.B. UZ NSLU UZ NSLU Residential hospice facility UZ NSLU Rest home UZ NSLU Single-family dwellings UZ NSLU - 17.57.020.B. Secondary dwelling units UZ NSLU Work/live units UZ NSLU .H\ 16/8= Noise Sensitive Land Use (if within 60 db CNEL contour - Figure 15 - See requirements of 17.57.060) )$$ Use subject to FAA standards and criteria 8= as allowed in underlying Zone or Specific Plan Residential care facilities - 6 or fewer residents Residential care facilities - 7 or more residents School - Boarding school, elementary, middle, secondary School - College, university - Satellite classroom facility Mobile home as temporary residence at building site PC2 - 48 City of San Luis Obispo December 2013 Zoning Regulations 7$%/($,5325729(5/$<=21( $2= 0$;,080$//2:('3(56216 $UHDVZLWKLQ$2=DQGRXWVLGH6SHFLILF3ODQDUHDV% 0D[LPXP$OORZHG3HUVRQVSHU$FUH 2YHUOD\ =RQHV)LJXUH 6SHFLILF8VH 1RLVH5HJXODWLRQV /DQG8VH 5(7$,/6$/(6 Auto and vehicle sales and rental 150 200 150 UZ Auto parts sales, with installation 200 UZ Auto parts sales, without installation 200 UZ Bakery, retail 200 UZ Bar/Tavern 200 UZ Building and landscape materials sales, indoor 150 200 UZ 150 200 150 UZ 150 200 150 UZ Convenience store 200 UZ Extended hour retail 200 UZ Farm supply and feed store 200 UZ Fuel dealer (propane, etc)150 200 150 UZ Hazardous materials - 17.57.050 Furniture, furnishings, and appliance stores 200 UZ General retail - 2,000 sf or less 200 UZ 200 UZ 17.57.050.C 200 UZ 17.57.050.C 200 UZ 17.57.050.C 200 UZ 17.57.050.C Groceries, liquor, specialty foods 200 UZ 17.57.050.C Mobile home, RV, and boat sales 150 200 150 UZ Office-supporting retail, 2,000 sf or less 200 UZ 200 UZ Wine tasting room - off site 200 UZ Outdoor temporary and/or seasonal sales 150 200 150 UZ Produce stand 150 200 150 UZ Restaurant 200 UZ Outdoor BBQ/Grill, accessory to restaurant 200 UZ Service station (see also "vehicle services")200 UZ Vending machine 150 200 150 UZ Warehouse stores - 45,000 sf or less gfa 200 UZ Warehouse stores - more than 45,000 sf gfa 200 UZ .H\ 16/8= Noise Sensitive Land Use (if within 60 db CNEL contour - Figure 15 - See requirements of 17.57.060) )$$ Use subject to FAA standards and criteria 8= as allowed in underlying Zone or Specific Plan Office-supporting retail, More than 2,000, up to 5,000 sf Construction and heavy equipment sales and rental General retail - More than 2,000 sf, up to 15,000 sf General retail - More than 15,000 sf, up to 45,000 sf Building and landscape materials sales, outoor General retail - More than 60,000 sf, up to 140,000 sf General retail - More than 45,000 sf, up to 60,000 sf PC2 - 49 City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations 7$%/($,5325729(5/$<=21( $2= 0$;,080$//2:('3(56216 $UHDVZLWKLQ$2=DQGRXWVLGH6SHFLILF3ODQDUHDV% 0D[LPXP$OORZHG3HUVRQVSHU$FUH 2YHUOD\ =RQHV)LJXUH 6SHFLILFXVH 1RLVH5HJXODWLRQV /DQG8VH 6(59,&(6%86,1(66),1$1&,$/ 352)(66,21$/ ATMs 80 150 200 150 UZ Banks and financial services 150 200 150 UZ NSLU Business support services 80 150 200 150 UZ NSLU 150 200 150 UZ NSLU Medical service - Doctor office 150 200 150 UZ NSLU Medical service - Extended care UZ NSLU Medical service - Hospital UZ NSLU Convalescent hospital UZ NSLU Office - Accessory 80 150 200 150 UZ NSLU - 175.57.050.C. Office - Business and service 80 150 200 150 UZ NSLU - 175.57.050.C. Office - Government 80 150 200 150 UZ NSLU - 175.57.050.C. Office - Processing 80 150 200 150 UZ NSLU - 175.57.050.C. Office - Production and administrative 80 150 200 150 UZ NSLU - 175.57.050.C. Office - Professional 80 150 200 150 UZ NSLU - 175.57.050.C. Office - Temporary 80 150 200 150 UZ NSLU - 175.57.050.C. Photographer, photographic studio 80 150 200 150 UZ NSLU 6(59,&(6*(1(5$/ Catering service 80 150 200 150 UZ Cemetery, mausoleum, columbarium 80 150 200 150 UZ 17.57.070.2.c. Copying and Quick Printer Service 80 150 200 150 UZ Day care - Day care center (child/adult)UZ NSLU Day care - Family day care home (small/large)UZ NSLU Equipment rental 80 150 200 150 UZ 80 150 200 150 UZ Maintenance service, client site services 80 150 200 150 UZ Mortuary, funeral home 80 150 200 150 UZ NSLU Personal services 80 150 200 150 UZ Personal services - Restricted 80 150 200 150 UZ Public safety facilities 80 150 200 150 UZ Public utility facilities 80 150 200 150 UZ 80 150 200 150 UZ Residential Support Services 80 150 200 150 UZ Social service organization 200 UZ 80 150 200 150 UZ 80 150 200 150 UZ Vehicle services - Carwash 80 150 200 150 UZ 200 UZ NSLU 200 UZ NSLU 200 UZ NSLU .H\ 16/8= Noise Sensitive Land Use (if within 60 db CNEL contour - Figure 15 - See requirements of 17.57.060) )$$ Use subject to FAA standards and criteria 8= as allowed in underlying Zone or Specific Plan Veterinary clinic/hospital, boarding, large animal Vehicle services - Repair and maintenance - Minor Repair service - Equipment, large appliances, etc. Veterinary clinic/hospital, boarding, small animal, indoor Medical service - Clinic, laboratory, urgent care Vehicle services - Repair and maintenance - Major Food bank/packaged food distribution center Veterinary clinic/hospital, boarding, small animal, outdoor PC2 - 50 City of San Luis Obispo December 2013 Zoning Regulations 7$%/($,5325729(5/$<=21( $2= 0$;,080$//2:('3(56216 $UHDVZLWKLQ$2=DQGRXWVLGH6SHFLILF3ODQDUHDV% 0D[LPXP$OORZHG3HUVRQVSHU$FUH 2YHUOD\ =RQHV)LJXUH 6SHFLILF8VH 1RLVH5HJXODWLRQV /DQG8VH 75$163257$7,21 &20081,&$7,216 Airport FAA FAA FAA FAA FAA FAA 80 150 200 150 UZ Antennas and telecommunications facilities FAA FAA FAA UZ Airspace Protection 17.57.070 Media Production - Broadcast studio 80 150 200 150 UZ NSLU 80 150 200 150 UZ NSLU Heliport FAA FAA FAA FAA FAA FAA Parking facility 80 150 200 150 UZ Parking facility - Multi-level 80 150 200 150 UZ Parking facility - Temporary 80 150 200 150 UZ Railroad facilities 80 150 200 150 UZ Transit station or terminal 80 150 200 150 UZ Transit stop 80 150 200 150 UZ Truck or freight terminal 80 150 200 150 UZ 80 150 200 150 UZ .H\ 16/8 = Noise Sensitive Land Use (if within 60 db CNEL contour - Figure 15 - See requirements of 17.57.060) )$$ Use subject to FAA standards and criteria 8= as allowed in underlying Zone or Specific Plan Ambulance, taxi, and/or limousine dispatch facility Water and wastewater treatment plants and services Media Production - Backlots/outdoor facilities and soundstages PC2 - 51 $LUSRUW2YHUOD\=RQHV The designation of Airport Overlay Zones as identified in Figure 13 is consistent with California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook Guidelines intended to minimize the risk to people and property on the ground as well as to people in an aircraft in the event of an accident or emergency landing occurring within, or in proximity of the airport boundary. The Airport Overlay Zone is based on the application of California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook Safety Zones for an airport with similar characteristics to San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport (SBP). The AOZ contains six overlay zones each with respective maximum non-residential intensity restrictions, maximum residential densities, and compatibility policies. Land uses which conform to standards for overlay zones in Table 10 shall also comply with compatibility policies in this section. A. 2YHUOD\=RQH±5XQZD\3URWHFWLRQ=RQH 53= Overlay Zone 1 is a very high risk area with aircraft on very close final approach or departure. No uses or buildings should be allowed in this area with the exception of the following uses which are subject to FAA standards and criteria: agricultural activities, roads, and automobile parking. Prohibit: Non-residential uses except if very low intensity in character and confined to the outer sides. Parking lots streets and roads. Residential uses are prohibited. B. 2YHUOD\=RQH±,QQHU$SSURDFK'HSDUWXUH=RQHOverlay Zone 2 involves aircraft flying at low altitudes on final approach and straight out departures and is a high risk area. Special Restrictions. Office buildings shall be limited to single-story structures and non- residential activities limited to activities that attract few people. Prohibit: Residential uses except as infill in developed areas; theatres, meeting halls and other assembly uses; office buildings greater than 3 stories, labor intensive industrial uses, Children’s schools, large daycare centers, hospitals, nursing homes, stadiums, group recreational uses, hazardous storage or uses (e.g. above ground bulk fuel storage). C.2YHUOD\=RQH±,QQHU7XUQLQJ=RQH Overlay Zone 3 is a moderate to high risk safety area used by aircraft (especially smaller piston powered aircraft) for final turning for landing approach or for initiating turns to en route direction on departure. Special Restrictions: Buildings may not exceed three above ground habitable floors. Prohibit: Commercial and other non-residential uses with higher usage intensities including: Major shopping centers, theaters, meeting halls, and other assembly facilities; children’s schools, large daycare centers, hospitals, nursing rooms. D.2YHUOD\=RQH±2XWHU$SSURDFK'HSDUWXUH=RQH Overlay Zone 4 is a moderate risk area with approaching aircraft usually less than traffic pattern altitude. Used for straight-in instrument approaches and straight-out flight paths. Special Restrictions: High Intensity retail or office buildings shall be avoided. Consider potential airspace protection hazards of certain energy/industrial projects. Prohibit: Children’s schools, large daycare centers, hospitals, nursing homes, stadiums, group recreational uses. E.2YHUOD\=RQH±6LGHOLQH=RQH Overlay Zone 5 is a low to moderate risk level area and is typically not overflown. The primary risk is with aircraft losing directional control on takeoff, excessive crosswind, gusts or engine torque. Special Restrictions: Avoid high intensity non-residential uses and residential uses since noise is normally a factor. Consider height limitations for airspace protection. Prohibit: Stadiums, group recreational uses, children’s schools, large daycare centers, PC2 - 52 hospitals, nursing homes. F.2YHUOD\=RQH±7UDIILF3DWWHUQ=RQH Overlay Zone 6 is a low risk area with aircraft using the zone for regular traffic pattern and pattern entry routes. Special Restrictions: Limit processing and storage of bulk quantities of highly hazardous materials. Outdoor stadiums and similar uses with very high intensities should be avoided. Prohibit: None. $LUVSDFH3URWHFWLRQ $LUVSDFH3URWHFWLRQAirspace protection standards are intended to reduce the risk of harm to people and property resulting from an aircraft accident by preventing the creation of land use features and prohibition of any activities that can pose hazards to the airspace used by aircraft in flight. 2EMHFWVDIIHFWLQJQDYLJDEOHDLUVSDFHFederal Aviation Regulation (FAR Part 77) and Public Utility Code (PUC) Section 21659 require that structures not penetrate the airspace protection surfaces of the airport without a permit from the California Department of Transportation or a determination by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that the object does not constitute a hazard to air navigation or would not create an unsafe condition for air navigation. The airspace surrounding an airport is divided into segments called “imaginary surfaces,” which identify height limits for objects that require further study by the FAA to avoid creating hazards to air navigation . Structures that have the potential to be considered an obstruction by the FAA shall be subject to the provisions listed in a-c below: a. Proponents of a project shall file a Notice of Construction or Alteration (Form 7460-1) with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) if a proposed structure is more than 200 feet above ground level or may exceed one foot in height for every 100 feet from the edge of the nearest point on the runway for a distance up to 20,000 feet. Filing Form 7460-1 with the FAA will initiate an aeronautical study that will ensure a proposed structure does not constitute a hazard to air navigation or would not create an unsafe condition for air navigation, including impeding any en route or terminal (airport) instrument procedures as per the United States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) described in FAA Order 8260.3B (Code of Federal Regulations §77.29 Evaluating Aeronautical Effect). b. Approvals for such projects may include the requirement for an avigation easement, marking or lighting of the structure, or modifications to the structure. The avigation easement shall be consistent with the form and content of Exhibit H1 in appendix H of the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook. c. Building permits shall not be issued for a project until a Determination of No Hazard has been issued by the FAA and any conditions in that Determination are met. 2WKHU)OLJKW+D]DUGV3URKLELWHG Any activities within the Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ) which could pose a hazard to flight operations including but not limited to the following: a. Glare or distracting lights that could be mistaken for airport lights; b. Sources of dust, heat, steam, or smoke that may impair pilot vision, or light shows, or laser shows or spotlights; c. Any emissions that may cause thermal plumes or other forms of unstable air that generate turbulence within the flight path; d. Sources of electrical interference with aircraft communications or navigation; and e. Features that create an increased attraction for wildlife that may be hazardous to airport PC2 - 53 operations such as attraction of birds to the extent of creating a significant hazard of bird strikes (examples are outdoor storage or disposal of food or grain, or large, artificial water features; this provision is not intended to prevent enhancement or protection of existing wetlands or the mitigation of wetlands impacts). Features which may pose these risks shall be reviewed for consistency with the FAA’s Advisory Circular 150/5200 -33B, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or Near Airports. f. Entails installation, construction, or enlargement of a structure that constitutes an obstruction to air navigation through penetration of FAA Part 77 surfaces except as may be approved by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 1RLVH $$LUSRUW5HODWHG1RLVH. Noise compatibility standards are intended to prevent the establishment of noise - sensitive land uses in portions of the airport environ that are exposed to significant levels of aircraft noise. Where permitted within the Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ), the following noise - sensitive land uses shall comply with applicable noise exposure criteria. 1. Noise analysis from the Airport Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (2006) shall be used for mapping of the long term noise impact of the airport’s aviation activity which includes future planned facilities development depicted in the FAA-approved Airport Layout Plan. These noise contours are shown in Figure 15. 1HZ5HVLGHQWLDO'HYHORSPHQW. New residential uses within the 60 db CNEL contour as depicted in Figure 15, shall demonstrate consistency with maximum noise levels by providing noise analysis, construction details, or other information deemed necessary by the Community Development Director to verify conformance with maximum interior noise levels. 2. Interior Noise Levels not to exceed 45db CNEL. For the following noise - sensitive land uses, aircraft -related, interior noise levels shall not exceed 45dB CNEL (with windows closed): a. Living or sleeping areas of single or multi -family residences; b. Hotels and motels; c. Hospitals and nursing homes; d. Place of Worship, meeting halls, and mortuaries; and e. Schools, libraries and museums. 3. Interior Noise Levels not to Exceed 50 dB CNEL. For the following noise - sensitive land uses, aircraft-related, interior noise levels shall not exceed 50dB CNEL (with windows closed): a. Office environments; b. Eating and drinking establishments; and c. Other miscellaneous commercial facilities. 2YHUIOLJKW1RWLFH $$LUFUDIW2YHUIOLJKW Aircraft overflight standards are intended to provide overflight notification for land uses near the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport. It shall be the responsibility of all owners of property offered for -sale or for -lease within the Airport Overlay Zoning District (AOZ) to provide the following disclosure prior to selling or leasing property in San Luis Obispo. 127,&(2)$,53257,19,&,1,7< Ordinance # XX of the City of San Luis Obispo identifies a San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport “Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ)”. Properties in this area are routinely subject to overflights by aircraft using this public-use airport and, as a result, residents may experience inconvenience, PC2 - 54 annoyance, or discomfort arising from the noise of such operations. State Law (Public Utilities Code Section 21670 et seq.) established the importance of public-use airports to protection of the public interest of the people of the state of California. Residents of property near such airports should therefore be prepared to accept the inconvenience, annoyance, or discomfort from normal aircraft operations. Residents also should be aware that the current volume of aircraft activity may increase in the future in response to San Luis Obispo County and City population and economic growth. Any subsequent deed conveying this parcel of subdivisions thereof shall contain a statement in substantially this form. All discretionary actions shall include a condition of approval requiring all owners of property offered for - sale or for -lease within the Airport Overlay Zoning District to provide the aforementioned disclosure prior to selling or leasing property. For new residential land uses, the overflight notification shall be recorded and appear with the property deed. 2SHQ/DQG $ 2SHQODQGOpen land areas are intended to increase the chances of a pilot successfully landing an aircraft in an emergency situation where they are unable to reach the runway. The City has identified properties to contain open land areas as follows: 1 Airport Area Specific Plan: 250 acres on the Chevron property with two areas specifically improved to meet ALUC standards; and a 300’ wide strip adjacent to Buckley Road (24 acres) on the Avila Ranch site. AOZ areas 1,2,3, and 6) 2. Margarita Area Specific Plan: two open land areas amid clustered development. AOZ areas 2, 3, and 6 3. Laguna Lake public park open area. Outside of AOZ but within the approach surface. 4. Brughelli property easement south of Buckley Road. AOZ areas 3, 4, and 6. 5. San Luis Ranch Specific Plan area, west of Highway 101 and south of Dalidio Drive. AOZ areas 4 and 6. 6. City open space areas within the Airport Overlay Zone. AOZ area 6. Where open space or conservation easements have been obtained and the topography supports it, the City shall not allow uses to be established that conflict with their availability to be used as a landing option in the event of an emergency. Where easements have yet to be obtained, the City shall incorporate the requirement for open land as part of the discretionary approval process. The following table provides the desired amount of open areas by safety zone consistent with the California Land Use Planning Handbook. $LUSRUW6DIHW\=RQH2SHQ/DQG2EMHFWLYHV AO1 Maintain all undeveloped land clear of objects in accordance with FAA standards AO2 Seek to preserve 25-30% of the overall area as usable open land. Preserve as much open land possible in locations close to the extended runway centerline. AO3 At least 15-20% of the zone should remain as open land. AO4 Seek to preserve 15-20% of the overall area as usable open land. Preserve as much open land possible in locations close to the extended runway centerline. AO5 Seek to preserve 25-30% of the overall area as usable open land. AO6 Seek to preserve open land approximately 100 ft by 300 ft in size every ½ mile. PC2 - 55 Figure 13 Airport Overlay Zones 0.5 0 0.50.25 Miles City Limits Airport Overlay Zones Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP) Boundary Tank Farm Rd.Broad S t .S. Higuera St.£¤101 Buckley Rd. LO V R South St. Prado Rd. Orcutt Rd.Or c u t t R d . AO-6 AO-6 AO-4 AO-2 AO-3 AO-1 AO-4 AO-4 AO-5 AO-1AO-1AO-2 AO-2 AO-3 AO-3 AO-3 AO-3 AO-5 AO-1 PC2 - 56 PC2 - 57 Figure 15 0.5 0 0.50.25 Miles Noise Contours (CNEL)55 60 65 70 75 Prado Rd. Buckley Rd. Tank Farm Rd. £¤101 Broad S t .S. Higuera St.Margarita A v e . Tank F a r m R d. Suburban Rd. Orcutt Rd. ")55 ")60 ")65 ")70 75 (from Airport Master Plan EIR) City Limits Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP) Boundary Noise Contours PC2 - 58 PC2 - 59 PC2 - 60 PC2 - 61 PC2 - 62 PC2 - 63 PC2 - 64 PC2 - 65 PC2 - 66 PC2 - 67 PC2 - 68 PC2 - 69 PC2 - 70 PC2 - 71 PC2 - 72 PC2 - 73 PC2 - 74 PC2 - 75 PC2 - 76 PC2 - 77 “Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation system to enhance California’s economy and livability” S T A T E O F C A L I F O R N I A ------- C A L I F O R N I A S T A T E T R A N S P O R T A T I O N AG E N C Y E D M U N D G . B R O W N J r . , G o ve r n o r DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS P. O. BOX 942874, MS-40 SACRAMENTO, CA 94274-0001 PHONE (916) 654-4959 FAX (916) 653-9531 TTY 711 www.dot.ca.gov Serious drought. Help save water! July 18, 2014 Ms. Kim Murry City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Dear Ms. Murry: Re: Draft Environmental Impact Report for the City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements Update; SCH Number: 2013121019 The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Division of Aeronautics (Division), reviewed the above-referenced document with respect to airport-related noise and safety impacts and regional aviation land use planning issues pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Division has technical expertise in the areas of airport operations safety and airport land use compatibility. We are a funding agency for airport projects and we have permit authority for public-use and special-use airports and heliports. The following comments are offered for your consideration. The proposed project is for an update to the City of San Luis Obispo (City) General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE). In accordance with California Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 21676 et seq., prior to the amendment of a general plan or specific plan, or the adoption or approval of a zoning ordinance or building regulation within the planning boundary established by the airport land use commission (ALUC), the local agency shall first refer the proposed action to the ALUC. If the ALUC determines that the proposed action is inconsistent with the airport land use compatibility plan, the referring agency shall be notified. The local agency may, after a public hearing, propose to overrule the ALUC by a two-thirds vote of its governing body after it makes specific findings. At least 45 days prior to the decision to overrule the ALUC, the local agency’s governing body shall provide to the ALUC and the Division a copy of the proposed decision and findings. The Division reviews and comments on the specific findings a local government intends to use when proposing to overrule an ALUC. The Division specifically looks at the proposed findings to gauge their relationship to the overrule. Also, pursuant to the PUC 21670 et seq., findings should show evidence that the local agency is minimizing “…the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses.” PC2 - 78 Ms. Kim Murry July 18, 2014 Page 2 “Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation system to enhance California’s economy and livability” General Plan and Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan Consistency California Government Code Section 65302.3(a)(b) requires each local agency having jurisdiction over land uses within the ALUC’s planning area to modify its general plan and any affected specific plans to be consistent with the ALUC’s airport land use compatibility plan (ALUCP). A general plan doesn’t need to be identical to the ALUCP to be considered consistent, however, general plans and elements must clearly demonstrate intent to adhere to ALUC policies to ensure compliance with compatibility criteria. Direct conflicts between mapped land use designations in a general plan and the ALUC criteria must be eliminated. A general plan needs to include (at the very least) policies committing the local agency to adopt compatibility criteria essential to ensuring that such conflicts will be avoided. The general plan also must acknowledge that until ALUC compatibility criteria are incorporated into the general plan, individual development projects within the airport influence area must be submitted to the ALUC for review. These provisions must be included in the general plan at a minimum for it to be considered consistent with the ALUCP. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the LUCE update does not indicate that the City will comply with Government Code Section 65302.3(a)(b) with regard to general plan and ALUCP consistency. With the LUCE updates, Caltrans’ interpretation is that the City proposes to create their own new policies and programs for airport land use, noise and safety hazards instead of making the updates consistent with the adopted ALUCP, as required. Therefore, prior to the certification of this project DEIR, the City must overrule the ALUC if it decides the new land use and circulation element policies and programs are inconsistent with the ALUCP, as required by Government Code Section 65302.3(c). Caltrans also believes that if the City has no intension to comply with this section of the Government Code then it must be included in the range of reasonable alternatives to the project where its comparative merits can be evaluated. General Plan and ALUCP consistency is a feasible alternative that would go a long way towards honoring the public’s expectation that local agencies are protecting them from new noise and safety impacts in the vicinity of airports. Even if the time and expense of an overrule is pursued by the City, the proposed airport programs and policies in the LUCE are so comprehensive that they have the net effect of amending the ALUCP and its policies, circumventing the ALUC’s project review process, and nearly establishing a separate airport land use commission that would replace the County’s. State law does not support such a wholesale transfer of airport land use compatibility planning to any another entity. State law specifically authorizes the establishment of ALUCs in a manner consistent with the law, and authorizes only them to formulate and adopt ALUCPs. California ALUC law recognizes that countywide land use planning near airports is regionally important and that ALUCs exist in order to balance competing local interests. The law can also prevent local economic interests from outweighing the broader statewide interest in maintaining public airports. Land uses that encroach on airports markedly increases the possibility of new noise and safety problems that can lead to political pressure to restrict or even close the facilities. PC2 - 79 Ms. Kim Murry July 18, 2014 Page 3 “Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation system to enhance California’s economy and livability” Mitigation Measures for Impact LU-2; Impact N-4; and Impact HAZ-2 The LUCE update mitigation measures for land use compatibility (LU-2); airport noise exposure (N-4); and hazards (HAZ-2), state that implementation of the general plan’s new airport area polices and programs will reduce these impacts to less than significant. These mitigation measures cannot be implemented by the City for purposes of reducing impacts to less than significant because here again, there has been no overrule of the ALUCP completed by the City. These impacts should still be considered significant environmental effects of the project. The DEIR does not adequately analyze the significant effects the project might cause by bringing future development and people into the airport planning area. Handbook Public Resources Code 21096, requires the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (Handbook) be utilized as a resource in the preparation of environmental documents for projects within airport land use compatibility plan boundaries or if such a plan has not been adopted, within two nautical miles of an airport. The Handbook provides a “General Plan Consistency Checklist” in Table 5A and a “Possible Airport Combining Zone Components” in Table 5B. The Handbook is a resource that should be applied to all public use airports and is available on-line at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/planning/aeronaut/documents/alucp/AirportLandUsePlanningHandbook.pdf Structural Hazards near Airports PUC Section 21659 prohibits structural hazards near airports. The planned height of buildings, antennas, and other objects should be checked with respect to Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77 criteria if development is close to the airport, particularly if situated within the runway approach corridors. General plans must include policies restricting the heights of structures to protect airport airspace. To ensure compliance with FAR Part 77 “Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace” submission of a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration (Form 7460-1) to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) may be required. Form 7460-1 is available on-line at https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/portal.jsp and should be submitted electronically. PUC Section 21688 states that “no payments shall be made from the Aeronautics Account for expenditure on any airport or for the acquisition or development of any airport, if the department determines that the height restrictions around the airport are inadequate to provide reasonable assurance that the landing and taking off of aircraft at the airport will be conducted without obstruction or will be otherwise free from hazards.” The airport-owner must have sufficient control over obstructions in the airspace in the vicinity of the airport to assure that height restrictions can be maintained. This control may be in the form of ownership of any land from which obstructions may rise, air navigation (avigation) easements to guarantee maintenance of restrictions, or height limitation or land use zoning which will prohibit obstructions which would violate the obstruction standards. The protection of airports from incompatible land use encroachment is vital to California’s economic future. San Luis Obispo Airport is an economic asset that should be protected through effective airport land use compatibility planning and awareness. Although the need for PC2 - 80 Ms. Kim Murry July 18, 2014 Page 4 “Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation system to enhance California’s economy and livability” compatible and safe land uses near airports is both a local and State issue, airport land use commissions and airport land use compatibility plans are key to protecting an airport and the people residing and working in the vicinity of an airport. Consideration given to the issue of compatible land uses in the vicinity of an airport should help to relieve future conflicts between airports and their neighbors. These comments reflect the areas of concern to the Division with respect to airport-related noise, safety, and regional land use planning issues. We advise you to contact our District 5 office concerning surface transportation issues. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this proposal. If you have any questions, please contact me at (916) 654-6223, or by email at philip_crimmins@dot.ca.gov. Sincerely, Original Signed by PHILIP CRIMMINS Aviation Environmental Specialist c: State Clearinghouse, San Luis Obispo County ALUC, San Luis Obispo Airport PC2 - 81 DRAFT RESPONSE TO COMMENTS Individual Responses – Public Agencies Letter A8. Airport Land Use Commission Response to Comment A8-1: The commenter notes the City referred the project to the ALUC in accordance with Public Utilities Code Section 21676 et seq. and the ALUC subsequently found the project inconsistent with the Airport Land Use Plan. The comment includes the notice of ALUC action including the findings. The City has followed the process described in PUC 21676 et seq. by referring the LUCE update and implementation to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for a determination of consistency with the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP). Response to Comment A8-2: The commenter references California Government Code Section 65302 (a)(b) which requires local jurisdictions to modify its general plan to be consistent with the ALUP and comments that the proposed project does not include criteria that demonstrate compliance with the ALUP. The commenter does not include the subsequent section Government Code Section 65302(c) which expressly allows for the legislative body to overrule the ALUC by adopting findings that demonstrate how the action will still satisfy the intent of the State Aeronautics Act. In the absence of substantial evidence indicating that the overrule may have a significant impact relative to safety, noise, or airport land use compatibility, there is no persuasive evidence that changes to the project are required to avoid an environmental impact. As such, altering the project description to an ALUP-compliant alternative is not required nor would it be of any environmental value. The City is acting in compliance with Government Code Section 65302(c) and PUC §21676 et seq. through the LUCE update process. Response to Comment A8-3: The commenter questions the adequacy of the DEIR because consideration of an alternative that demonstrated consistency with the ALUP was not evaluated. An EIR must describe a reasonable range of alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, that could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project while avoiding or substantially lessening any of the significant effects of the project. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a), (f). The Final EIR determines, based on substantial evidence in the record, that the overrule will not have a significant impact relative to safety, noise, airport land use compatibility or any other component of the environment; therefore, the Final EIR characterizes the policy conflict between the LUCE update and the ALUP as Class 3, less than significant. CEQA requires an EIR to evaluate alternatives that might eliminate or reduce the Project’s significant adverse environmental effects. Because the EIR determines that the policy conflict between the LUCE Update and the ALUP is not a significant impact, CEQA does not require the EIR to evaluate an ALUP-compliant alternative. In other words, an ALUP compliant alternative is not required to be considered by the City because it has determined that the policy conflict between the LUCE and the ALUCP is not significant. The City is acting in PC2 - 82 compliance with Government Code Section 65302(c) and PUC §21676 et seq. through the LUCE update process. Additionally, the DEIR considered two land use alternatives – a reduced development alternative and the no project alternative. Both alternatives could be said to provide potential consistency with the ALUP but neither meets the project objectives nor do they result in lessening environmental impacts to air quality and circulation to less than significant levels. Response to Comment A8-4: The commenter questions the adequacy of the DEIR because mitigation measures identified for land use compatibility (LU-2); airport noise exposure (N-4); and hazards (HAZ-2), are based on the assumption that the implementation of the proposed zoning ordinance amendment will reduce those impacts to less than significant. The commenter goes on to state that the mitigation measures cannot be implemented because they are in conflict with the ALUP and the City has not undergone the process to overrule the ALUC’s determination of inconsistency. The commenter is incorrect that the LUCE EIR identified Impact LU-2, N-4, and HAZ-2 as mitigation measures. The EIR in fact, found that with the implementation of policies and programs contained in the LUCE Update, impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are required. Extensive evaluation of potential physical impacts occurred through the DEIR process. Appendix F of the DEIR provided in-depth analysis of noise, hazard, obstruction, and safety concerns associated with on-going and future operations of the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport as reflected in the adopted Airport Master Plan. CEQA section 15002(g) defines a significant effect on the environment as “a substantial adverse change in the physical conditions which exist in the area affected by the proposed project.” Appendix F of Volume IV the DEIR evaluates potential physical constraints associated with current and future operations of the Airport and determined that significant physical impacts associated with the proposed project would be addressed by adherence to the State Aeronautics Act, FAA regulations, and guidance contained in the Caltans Airport Land Use Planning Handbook. The LUCE update includes policies and programs to adhere to state and federal guidelines and standards. The Airport Compatibility Report (Appendix F of Volume IV of the EIR) describes the flaws in the existing ALUP such as: safety zones not aligned with the runway and not reflective of runway length changes constructed in recent years and depicted on the FAA-approved Airport Layout Plan; and the ALUP is not consistent with the Airport Master Plan, the Airport Layout Plan, and the FAA-approved Terminal Area Forecast of operations as required by state law. Therefore the evaluation of physical impacts and associated implementation was based on the policy sources and state and federal standards. The City is not required to overrule the ALUC to evaluate physical impacts and identify potential implementation or mitigations. CEQA Section 21096 indicates that an EIR prepared for a project within an ALUP shall use the Airport Land Use Planning Handbook published by the Division of Aeronautics in compliance with Section 21674.5 of the Public Utilities Code as a technical resource to assist in the EIR preparation as it relates to airport related safety hazards and noise problems. The commenter indicates the potential impacts associated with single noise events from aircraft should be evaluated. The information for single noise events related to aircraft PC2 - 83 operations is contained in Appendix O of the Airport Master Plan EIR and has been included in the LUCE EIR errata for informational purposes, but requires no further response. Neither the AMP EIR nor the ALUP included standards or mitigations associated with single noise events. Page 4-10 of the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook indicates that application of single-event peak noise criteria poses questions in defining the number of events considered to be significant. The AMP EIR includes single event descriptors for informational purposes only and did not use them to determine the significance of impacts. Page 4-5 of the Handbook describes normalization factors and recommended adjustment factors to the baseline criteria of 65 dB set by the FAA to consider when setting land use compatibility factors. The California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook discusses land use compatibility criteria related to noise in Chapter 4 and discusses noise as a particular issue for noise sensitive uses such as residential, school, and hospital types of land uses. Chapter 4 of the Handbook indicates “for the purposes of land use or building design criteria, cumulative noise exposure metrics are the easiest to implement in that exterior noise is most often measured in these terms.” In addition, the same section of the Handbook indicates, “Given the noise level reduction provided by standard residential construction, interior noise level standards can generally be satisfied without the need for special sound insulation measures in locations where exterior noise exposure is less than 60-65 dB CNEL.” The LUCE update policies, programs, and implementation are designed to demonstrate compliance with Section 3.5 of the State Aeronautics Act, as stated in Section 21670 to protect the public’s “exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses.” The assumptions regarding aircraft operations amounts, types, spatial and temporal distribution is reflected in Figure 5.1-6 of the AMP EIR. The AMP EIR operations assumptions were entered into the Integrated Noise Model version 7.0d and generated noise contours that were compared to the AMP EIR on page 52 of the Compatibility Report (Appendix F in Volume IV of the LUCE EIR). The resultant noise contours confirmed the AMP EIR information as an accurate mapping of the long term noise impact of the airport’s aviation activity that is tied to the ultimate facilities development depicted in the FAA-approved Airport Layout Plan. The City’s use of the Airport Master Plan noise contours for purposes of development of its LUCE Update noise contours and the application of a 60 dB CNEL exterior noise standard and 45 dB CNEL interior noise standard for new residential uses is appropriate and is consistent with FAA and State aircraft noise planning standards (Handbook, Page 4-46). PC2 - 84 DRAFT RESPONSE TO COMMENTS Individual Responses – Public Agencies Letter A5. California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics Response to Comment A5-1: The commenter provides information related to the California Public Utilities Code (PUC) sections that govern referrals and process required of the LUCE update and action by the City of San Luis Obispo to comply with the California State Aeronautics Act (SSA) and the overrule provisions in the SSA. The City has followed the process called out in PUC 21676 et seq. by referring the LUCE update and implementation to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for a determination of consistency with the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP). On July 16, 2014, the ALUC found the LUCE update inconsistent with the ALUP. Various sections of the SSA (see, e.g., SAA 21676, 21676.5 and 21677) provide for the City to overrule the ALUC decision. The overruling process involves four mandatory steps: (1) at least 45 days prior to any decision to overrule the ALUC, the City must provide the ALUC and the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics (Caltrans) a copy of the proposed decision and findings; (2) the holding of a public hearing; (3) the making of specific findings that the action proposed is consistent with the SAA; and (4) Approval of the proposed action by a two-thirds vote of the City Council. On August 19, 2014, the City Council considered the ALUC’s inconsistency determination and considered a draft resolution to reserve the right to overrule the ALUC’s inconsistency finding. That draft resolution (proposed decision) with associated draft findings has been transmitted to the ALUC and Caltrans in compliance with PUC 21676 et seq. The ALUC and Caltrans may provide comments on the proposed overrule decision and findings within 30 days of receiving the documents from the City. If the ALUC and Caltrans fail to act within that time frame, the City may proceed with the overrule. All comments received from the ALUC and Caltrans will be included in the final record of decision and, consistent with the requirements of the SSA, final action on the project will not occur until 45 days after the draft resolution with draft findings has been transmitted to Caltrans and the ALUC in order to provide time for the City Council to consider any subsequent response from both the ALUC and Caltrans. Response to Comment A5-2: The commenter provides information regarding Government Code Section 65302(a)-(b) requirements for local agencies to make their General Plans consistent with Airport Land Use Plans. The commenter also indicates that comprehensiveness of proposed LUCE policies circumvent the ALUC review process and establish a separate airport land use commission that essentially replaces the ALUC in conflict with State Law. Contrary to the commenter’s assertion, Government Code Section 65302.3(c) expressly allows for the legislative body to overrule the ALUC by adopting specific findings pursuant to SAA 21676 that demonstrate that the action proposed is consistent with the purposes of the SAA. Therefore, the City has not circumvented the ALUC review process; rather, the City has complied with the specific procedures provided in the SAA that allow local agencies to take steps necessary to overrule all or a part of the ALUP. Government Code Section 65302.3(c). PC2 - 85 The LUCE update policies, programs, and implementation are designed to demonstrate compliance with Section 3.5 of the State Aeronautics Act, as stated in Section 21670 to protect the public’s “exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses.” Demonstrating compliance with the State Aeronautics Act requires the City to describe in detail how procedures, development standards and uses, overlay zones, airspace protection, noise, overflight notice and open land objectives will be addressed, however, the City’s proposed policies, programs and implementation do not replace or usurp the ALUC’s authority because the LUCE policies and programs only apply within the City limits and for areas considered under the LUCE update. Local agencies must refer any proposal to adopt or amend a local plan, including general plans and specific plans, to the ALUC for review if the proposal involves land within an airport influence area defined by the ALUC. SAA 21676(b). In addition, proposed zoning ordinances and building regulations must be submitted for ALUC review before being acted upon by the local agency if they affect the compatibility of land uses located within an airport influence area. SAA 21676(b). Therefore, consistent with these requirements, all future projects involving a legislative act, such as a general plan amendment, specific plan or zone change, will be referred to the ALUC for an ALUP consistency determination as reflected in the implementing Airport Overlay Zone section 17.57.030(c). The City’s action does not change approved Specific Plans, which the ALUC found to be consistent with the ALUP such as the Margarita Area Specific Plan. An EIR must describe a reasonable range of alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, that could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project while avoiding or substantially lessening any of the significant effects of the project. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a), (f). The Final EIR determines, based on substantial evidence in the record, that the overrule will not have a significant impact relative to safety, noise, airport land use compatibility or any other component of the environment; therefore, the Final EIR characterizes the policy conflict between the LUCE update and the ALUP as Class 3, less than significant. CEQA requires an EIR to evaluate alternatives that might eliminate or reduce the Project’s significant adverse environmental effects. Because the EIR determines that the policy conflict between the LUCE Update and the ALUP is not a significant impact, CEQA does not require the EIR to evaluate an ALUP-compliant alternative. In other words, an ALUCP compliant alternative is not required to be considered by the City because it has determined that the policy conflict between the LUCE and the ALUCP is not significant. The City is acting in compliance with Government Code Section 65302(c) and PUC §21676 et seq. through the LUCE update process. California ALUC law recognizes that countywide land use planning near airports is regionally important and that ALUCs exist in order to balance competing local interests. The law can also prevent local economic interests from outweighing the broader statewide interest in maintaining public airports. Land uses that encroach on airports markedly increase the possibility of new noise and safety problems that can lead to political pressure to restrict or even close the facilities). PC2 - 86 As stated in the Caltrans Handbook, “[e]ffective airport land use compatibility planning is not and cannot be solely a function of airport land use commissions .... Ideally, airport land use compatibility planning recognizes the objectives of the local municipal agency which has ultimate authority for land use planning and regulation.....Indeed, ... state law specifically limits ALUC authority over various actions that directly affect compatibility. Much of the responsibility for airport land use compatibility clearly remains with local agencies ...” Caltrans Handbook, pg. 5-1. ALUC consistency determinations for local agency plans and projects are subject to overrule by the local agency. The overrule process preserves local government’s constitutional land use authority and local government’s ability to implement its plans and projects. Caltrans Handbook, pg. 1-9. Therefore, essentially, and contrary to the commenter’s assertions, the overrule process provides for the important balancing of competing local interests that may not have been adequately taken into account by the ALUC in connection with its ALUP policies. Response to Comment A5-3: The commenter asserts that mitigation measures LU-2, N-4 and HAZ-2 cannot be implemented by the City for purposes of reducing impacts to less than significant because no overrule of the ALUP has been completed and significant effects have not been adequately analyzed. The commenter is incorrect that the LUCE EIR identified Impact LU-2, N-4, and HAZ-2 as mitigation measures. The EIR in fact, found that with the implementation of policies and programs contained in the LUCE Update, impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are required. It is important to distinguish the CEQA process for evaluating and analyzing significant environmental impacts and adopting mitigation measures from the overrule process provided for in the California State Aeronautics Act (SAA). For purposes of CEQA, Public Resources Code Section 21002 requires agencies to adopt feasible mitigation measures in order to substantially lessen or avoid otherwise significant adverse environmental impacts. To effectuate this requirement, an EIR must set forth mitigation measures that decision makers can adopt at the findings stage of the CEQA process. CEQA 21100(b)(3), CEQA Guidelines 15126(e). The DEIR provides a complete analysis of the potentially significant impacts relating to land use compatibility, airport noise exposure and hazards based on substantial evidence in the record (as summarized, in part, below). The City will consider adoption of policies (along with any recommended mitigation) when considering certification of the EIR and approval of the project. If approved, the City will be required through implementation of the mitigation monitoring and reporting program to implement the adopted mitigation measures. This CEQA process is independent from the ALUC overrule process PC2 - 87 Noise related to current or future airport operations was not identified as a significant impact. Section §15002(g) defines significant effect as “a substantial adverse change in the physical conditions which exist in the area affected by the proposed project.” The DEIR provides detailed evaluation of potential physical impacts to the environment in the form of noise and hazards as required by CEQA. Technical appendix F (Airport Compatibility Report prepared by Johnson Aviation) supports the EIR with information related to the adopted Airport Master Plan (AMP) and approved FAA operational forecast contained therein. The aircraft noise analysis prepared for the Airport Master Plan Environmental Impact Report is documented in Chapter 5 of the Airport Master Plan EIR. The assumptions regarding aircraft operations amounts, types, spatial and temporal distribution is reflected in Figure 5.1-6 of the AMP EIR. The AMP EIR operations assumptions were entered into the Integrated Noise Model version 7.0d and generated noise contours that were compared to the AMP EIR on page 52 of the Compatibility Report. The resultant noise contours confirmed the AMP EIR information as an accurate mapping of the long term noise impact of the airport’s aviation activity that is tied to the ultimate facilities development depicted in the FAA-approved Airport Layout Plan. The City’s use of the Airport Master Plan noise contours for purposes of development of its LUCE Update noise contours and the application of a 60 dB CNEL exterior noise standard and 45 dB CNEL interior noise standard for new residential uses is appropriate and is consistent with FAA and State aircraft noise planning standards (Handbook, Page 4-46). Separate and apart from CEQA requirements, the City is required to comply with the requirements of the SAA. CEQA allows, but does not require, an agency overrule of the ALUP to mitigate potential physical effects identified in the EIR. In this case, the Final EIR does not identify a significant impact related to the inconsistencies between the ALUP and the LUCE update so no mitigation is necessary. Specifically, the analysis provided in the DEIR indicates that land use development patterns provided in the LUCE Update (based on guidance in the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook and FAA standards) will not generate significant physical environmental safety impacts. LUCE Policies and implementation through an Airport Overlay Zone provide both a policy frame work and standards for development to ensure that development is consistent with allowable densities, height limitation, allowable uses, and other safety standards to ensure that development is evaluated for consistency with the State Aeronautics’ Act requirements. The LUCE Update policies and implementing Airport Overlay Zone Regulations require compliance with State law, Caltrans Aeronautics guidance for planning land uses around the airport, and Federal Aviation Administration requirements relating to height and safety issues. LUCE update policies included in the EIR require compliance with State and Federal guidance and laws. The City went through an extensive effort to ensure that the City’s LUCE policies: (1) are consistent with the purposes of the State Aeronautics Act, as stated in Section 21670: (2) are consistent with the Caltrans Handbook’s policies and recommendations relating to safety, overflight, airspace protection and noise; and (3) that the LUCE policies do not adversely impact the public health, welfare and safety or airport operations. All of the policies in the LUCE are based on substantial evidence provided in the EIR, including information in the Airport Land Use Compatibility Report included as a technical appendix to the LUCE Update EIR and incorporated by reference. This report includes a careful examination of the existing and proposed airport facilities, operations, and local PC2 - 88 procedures; weather, topography, aircraft accidents and incidents. The report also includes a careful examination of the County approved Airport Master Plan, FAA-approved Airport Layout Plan and application of Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77 obstruction analysis. The report also includes recommendations for LUCE policies consistent with the purposes of the State Aeronautics Act and guidelines provided in the Caltrans Handbook. Therefore, the LUCE policies and programs and associated implementation through creation of an Airport Overlay Zone is based on substantial evidence and is consistent with the purposes of Article 3.5 of the State Aeronautics Act as stated in Section 21670, to minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards and to not impact public health, welfare and safety or existing and future airport operations. All of this information has been taken into account in connection with the draft findings (provided to the ALUC and Caltrans) that show that the proposed adoption of the LUCE Update is consistent with the purposes of Section 21670 of the SAA. The purpose of the findings and the proposed overrule is to assure compliance with state law separate and apart from the compliance requirements of CEQA. Response to Comment A5-4: The commenter provides information regarding the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook. Technical Appendix F of the EIR used this document extensively in evaluating potential physical effects of the LUCE update and proposed implementation through an Airport Overlay Zone. Comment noted. Response to Comment A5-5: Commenter notes that General plans must include policies restricting the heights of structures to protect airport airspace and notes PUC §21688 which prohibits payments from the Aeronautics Account for airport improvements if there are inadequate restrictions regarding obstructions and hazards. Review processes and height restrictions supported through the LUCE and Airport Overlay Zone require compliance with the FAR Part 77 federal standards as stated in draft Program 7.3.12, Airport Overlay Zone. Therefore, the Draft LUCE update and associated implementation through an Airport Overlay Zone, which reflect the Handbook guidance for the most recent Airport Master Plan, will protect airspace and will not impact the Airport’s ability to qualify for payments from the Aeronautics Account to support airport development as stated in PUC Section 21659. Airport Overlay Zone Section 17.57.060 contains Airspace Protection standards to reduce the risk of harm to people and property resulting from an aircraft accident by preventing the creation of land use features and prohibition of any activities that can pose hazards to the airspace used by aircraft in flight, consistent with recommendations beginning on Page 4-34 of the Handbook. Pursuant to Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR Part 77) and Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 21659, the Airport Overlay Zone 17.57.060 ensures that no structures shall penetrate the airspace protection surfaces of the airport without a permit from the California Department of Transportation, or a determination by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that the object does not constitute a hazard to air navigation or would not create an unsafe condition for air navigation. The LUCE and associated Airport Overlay Zone implement this guidance in compliance with Handbook Chapter 3. Building permits for such structures shall not be issued until a Determination of No Hazard has been issued by the FAA and any conditions in that PC2 - 89 Determination are met. Approvals for such projects may include the requirement for an avigation easement, marking or lighting of the structure, or modifications to the structure. Implementation of the LUCE in the form of overlay zone standards provides details, however to augment policy clarity regarding federal standards, an additional policy is recommended for Chapter 7 of the Land Use Element to read as follows: 7.X Airspace Protection The City shall use the Airport Master Plan Update and FAA airport design standards and Part 77 surfaces to keep the airspace surrounding the airport free of objects where required by the FAA or shall limit the height of objects as required by the FAA. The City shall also ensure obstruction clearance is provided for all en route and terminal (airport) instrument procedures as per the United States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) to avert modifications to any planned or published instrument approach or instrument departure procedures at SBP. To help ensure protection of the airspace essential to the safe operation of aircraft at and around the Airport, the FAA has established a process that requires project sponsors to inform the agency about proposed construction that could affect navigable airspace. The standards by which the FAA conducts these aeronautical studies are set forth in FAR Part 77, Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace. Consistent with these airspace protection policy foundations, the City will use information in the Airport Master Plan Update as well as FAA airport design standards and Part 77 surfaces to keep the airspace surrounding the airport free of objects where required by the FAA or shall limit the height of objects as required by the FAA. In addition to the FAR Part 77 surfaces, there are other airspace surfaces that are evaluated by the FAA for obstructions. The United States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS), as described in FAA Order 8260.3B, establishes clearance requirements for all en-route and terminal (airport) instrument procedures including approach, landing, missed approach and departure. The TERPS clearance surfaces exactly match the instrument procedures in effect at the Airport. Unlike FAR Part 77 surfaces, the elevations of which are set relative to the runway end elevations irrespective of surrounding terrain and obstacles, the TERPS surface elevations are directly determined by the location and elevation of critical obstacles. By design, neither the ground nor any obstacles can penetrate a TERPS surface. Consistent with information provided in the EIR and supporting technical report, the LUCE Update policies will ensure compliance with the TERPS clearance surfaces. PC2 - 90 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director Prepared by: Gary Kaiser, Contract Planner SUBJECT:INITIAL STEPS TO CONSIDER OVERRULE OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION’S DETERMINATION THAT THE DRAFT LAND USE AND CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE AND IMPLEMENTING ZONING REGULATIONS ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE PLAN. RECOMMENDATION 1. Review the County Airport Land Use Commission’s (ALUC) determination (Attachment 1) that the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) Update and implementing zoning regulations are inconsistent with the County Airport Land Use Plan; and 2. Consider a draft resolution (Attachment 5) of intent to overrule the inconsistency determination, and direct staff to forward draft overrule findings to the ALUC and to the State (Caltrans) Division of Aeronautics for review and comment pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676(b)1. REPORT-IN-BRIEF The City has been in the process of updating the Land Use and Circulation Elements of its General Plan for over two years. During this time, the City has been aware that the 2005 ALUP was not adopted consistent with State law requirements and is not based on verifiable technical data or accurate airport operations data. As a result of significant technical analysis, City staff concluded that the ALUP is flawed and contains policies and programs that unnecessarily restrict development within the City in a manner that is not reasonably related to noise, safety or airport operations concerns. Since 2012, the City has met extensively with the ALUC and encouraged the ALUC to update the ALUP based on objective data and verifiable airport operations assumptions. Staff and City consultants have provided extensive technical and policy comments to the ALUC along with offers of modern, accurate GIS mapping, FAA-required noise model expertise and other related services in anticipation of the City’s long projected timeline for completion of its LUCE Update process. Regrettably, the ALUP update has not proceeded. As part of the LUCE Update process, the City retained a qualified airport land use compatibility consultant to prepare an Airport Land Use Compatibility Report. The purpose of the Compatibility Report is to ensure that the policies and programs contained in the LUCE Update 1 PUC Section 21676(b) requires the local agency to provide a copy of the proposed decision and findings to the Airport Land Use Commission and the Division of Aeronautics of the Department of Transportation. 8-19-14 PH4 PC2 - 91 will not negatively impact public health, safety and welfare and that the policies and programs will not be incompatible with existing and planned airport operations. The Compatibility Report finds that the policies and programs contained in the LUCE Update are in compliance with and consistent with Article 3.5 of the State Aeronautics Act as stated in Section 21670 of the Public Utilities Code2 and the Caltrans Division of Aeronautics’ California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, which specifically and effectively address these issues. On July 16, 2014, the Draft LUCE Update referral package was determined by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) to be inconsistent with the Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) with regard to the types and densities of development that would be supported by the proposed LUCE land use designations within the current ALUP boundaries (Attachments 1 & 2). The City provided a detailed response to each of the ALUC’s findings, which outlines the draft LUCE Update project’s consistency with the State Aeronautics Act (Attachment 3). Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676(a), the City may, after a public hearing on the matter, propose to overrule the ALUC’s determination by a two-thirds vote of the City Council. In order to overrule, the City Council must make specific findings that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes set forth in Section 21670 of the California Public Utilities Code to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, and minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports. At least 45 days prior to such an overrule, the City must provide the ALUC and Caltrans Division of Aeronautics with notice of the Council’s intent to overrule and draft findings, pursuant to Section 21676(b)3 of the Public Utilities Code. In order to advance and promote the policies and programs contained within the LUCE Update, staff seeks authorization from Council to notify the ALUC and Caltrans Division of Aeronautics of the City’s intent to overrule the ALUC’s determination of inconsistency and to provide ALUC and Caltrans with the opportunity to provide comments on the draft findings. Any comments received during the required review period will be duly considered and presented to Council for consideration, along with staff’s analysis and recommendations. Should the Council decide to proceed with the overrule process, findings will be finalized and included in the final record of decision. DISCUSSION Background California state law requires each city and county to adopt a general plan “for the physical development of the county or city, and any land outside its boundaries which bears relation to its planning” (Government Code § 65300). Referred to by the California Supreme Court as the “constitution for future development,” the general plan expresses the community’s development goals and embodies public policy relative to the distribution of future land uses, both public and private. A general plan is required to address the specified provisions of each of the seven 2 The purpose of the Act is to protect the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around pubic airports. 3 The Airport Land Use Commission and Division of Aeronautics may provide comments within 30 days of receiving the proposed decision and findings. The local agency may act without consideration of the comments if they are not provided within 30 days. PC2 - 92 mandated Elements: land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, noise, and safety. The City of San Luis Obispo is currently in the process of updating its Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE), with a 20-year planning horizon to approximately the year 2035. Several factors will determine the actual final implementation or “buildout” date for the LUCE Update, including but not limited to economic conditions. The City’s LUCE Update was formally initiated in January 2012 with funding through a grant from the Strategic Growth Council augmented by General Funds for the environmental review portion of the process. The Land Use and Circulation Elements of the General Plan provide a framework for development in the City and will guide the land-use decision making process over the next 20 years. The LUCE update project refines existing policies of the Land Use and Circulation Elements and provides proposed areas of “physical changes” to guide land use changes while balancing population growth with infrastructure availability. The “physical changes” include identifying locations and establishing policy guidance for the formation of specific plans and special planning areas which will outline future growth areas of the City. The LUCE update also provides for a multi-modal transportation system which considers the needs of different modes of transportation including pedestrians, bicycles, transit, and vehicles. Coordination with the Airport Land Use Commission The City of San Luis Obispo has a long history of working closely with the Airport Land Use Commission on airport compatibility issues. The last major planning efforts occurred in 2004 and 2005 with updates to the Airport Land Use Plan. In support of the 2004 update, the City Council appointed a subcommittee to work with the Airport Land Use Commission on land use issues in the Margarita Area. This resulted in a chapter of the Airport Land Use Plan dedicated specifically to development in this area. Subsequently, the City adopted its Airport Area Specific Plan and the Orcutt Area Specific Plan, which were both deemed consistent with the ALUP by the Airport Land Use Commission. In this spirit of cooperation, the City of San Luis Obispo engaged with the Airport Land Use Commission early on during the City’s LUCE update process. Initially, the City was eager to develop a better understanding of the basis for the current ALUP safety zones, noise contours, and policy requirements. To assist the City in this effort, technical expertise was sought and City staff began to work with Johnson Aviation principal, Nick Johnson, who has worked on similar issues throughout California. Airport Land Use Compatibility Planning During the preparation of the LUCE, it was important that the effort be fully informed by accurate technical information regarding noise and safety related to existing and future operations of the airport. With consideration of land use scenarios that would support residential development in the southern portion of the City, including sites such as south Broad Street, Avila Ranch, San Luis Ranch, and Madonna (off Los Osos Valley Road), it was necessary for the City to have technical information (Johnson Aviation) to evaluate potential impacts associated with airport operations and to offer this information to the ALUC in an effort to try to resolve differences of opinion regarding technical compatibility issues. Early on during this process, problems were discovered due to a few key factors, including: PC2 - 93 1. The maps of the safety zones included in the Airport Land Use Plan are inaccurate and the zone boundaries could not be re-created based on the information provided to the City by the Airport Land Use Commission. 2. The safety zones included in the Airport Land Use Plan differ greatly from the guidelines provided by Cal Trans in the Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, and the justifications provided by the ALUC for these deviations are not supported by factors that are unique to SLO Regional Airport and which have not been considered in the CalTrans guidelines so as to warrant such significant deviations. 3. Neither the Airport Land Use Commission, nor its staff at the County of San Luis Obispo, could produce the noise study that is purported to have been the basis for the contours and noise policies included in the Airport Land Use Plan. 4. The Airport Land Use Plan’s noise contour threshold of 55 dB CNEL is a standard for rural areas that should not apply within the City limits of San Luis Obispo, which is designated by the US Census as an urban area. The City of San Luis Obispo communicated these issues to the Airport Land Use Commission in an effort to work with the Commission to correct the mapping errors and address the other issues, including the City’s land use planning objectives, in a cooperative manner (Attachment 4). The City made its technical experts available to the ALUC to help it as the ALUC realized the significance of the issues at hand, and began an effort of its own to update the Airport Land Use Plan. However, progress was not made on these important matters. The Airport Land Use Commission appointed a subcommittee that began to meet in private, excluding City staff and our issue area experts. As the Airport Land Use Commission continued to work on its update, it would not engage with the City on the land use issues being worked on by the City Planning Commission and LUCE Task Force to help the City understand where refinements might be desirable from the ALUC’s perspective. Referral of the LUCE to the Airport Land Use Commission On Friday, June 13, 2014 a Draft EIR (DEIR) was released for public review. The DEIR included an evaluation of the potentially significant impacts that could result from implementation of the proposed LUCE Update changes. One of the potential impacts identified by the DEIR was inconsistency with the County Airport Land Use Plan. The DEIR identified this as an impact that would be addressed by existing and proposed LUCE policies and therefore did not require mitigation. The public review period for the DEIR closed on Monday, July 28, 2014 and a Final EIR is currently being prepared. As required by Public Utilities Code Section 21676(b)4, the City referred the proposed LUCE Update to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). On July 16, 2014, the ALUC determined that the proposed LUCE Update was inconsistent with the Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP). A follow-up letter from the ALUC is attached hereto (Attachment 1). Tonight’s hearing is an opportunity to review and discuss the Airport Land Use Commission’s findings of inconsistency 4 Referall to the ALUC for a determination of consistency is required for amendments to the general plan. PC2 - 94 with the County Airport Land Use Plan and to indicate whether the Council intends to consider an overrule of the ALUC as part of the LUCE update. Staff is requesting that the Council provide direction to pursue one of two paths: (1) revise the draft element with a goal to propose uses and densities/intensities supported by the existing County Airport Land Use Plan, prepare a revised EIR, and refer the revised update to the ALUC for a consistency determination; or (2) submit draft findings to the ALUC and State Division of Aeronautics indicating that the Council intends to exercise its statutory authority to overrule the ALUC’s determination. The Public Utilities Code contains provisions which allow local agencies to overrule the ALUC’s determination of inconsistency. An overrule would allow the Council to adopt the LUCE update even though portions of the project have been found inconsistent with the Airport Land Use Plan. However, the Public Utilities Code requires that draft findings (Attachment 5, Exhibit A) be submitted to the ALUC and Caltrans Division of Aeronautics at least 45 days prior to taking the overrule action5, so that the Council can have the benefit of their comments as it considers a final overrule decision. Airport Compatibility is Carefully Addressed in the LUCE Update Public Utilities Code §21676.5(b)6 recognizes that land use authority is retained by the local jurisdiction and provides a process by which a local jurisdiction can adopt land use regulations within an airport area that are inconsistent with an adopted ALUP by overruling the ALUC’s determination. If done at the General Plan level, subsequent review by the ALUC of individual development projects that are consistent with the General Plan and development standards that were the subject of the overrule is not required. However, subsequent General Plan Amendments, Specific Plans, and zone changes and individual development proposals requiring variances from adopted standards not addressed through an overrule action would still be referred to the ALUC for a determination of consistency with the Airport Land Use Plan in effect at the time. The referral submitted to the ALUC provided the draft LUCE update, the supporting Draft EIR, and a draft of an implementing zoning code which would establish an Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ). The intent of drafting an Airport Overlay Zone would be to establish City development criteria that ensure approvals are in compliance with the safety, noise, and land use compatibility criteria in the State Aeronautics Act, the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, and Federal Aviation regulations. While this approach is not typical, it provides the City with the ability to establish overlay zones which have regulations that have a rational nexus to operational, noise, and safety data associated with the airport. The Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ) would also provide a method for aligning the appropriate safety, noise and land use considerations with the City’s zoning maps and designations, thereby providing more accurate information and certainty for the community and most importantly, providing a policy framework for ongoing consistency with the State Aeronautics Act. The draft Airport Overlay Zone has not been reviewed nor endorsed by the Planning Commission or the City Council. If the Council determines that an overrule may be desirable, 5 Public Utilities Code 2176(b) 6 The action included in the local agency overrule would not be subject to further commission review. PC2 - 95 staff will schedule review of the draft Zoning Code through public hearings with the Planning Commission so that the Commission and the community have an opportunity to discuss and provide input and a recommendation prior to Council taking action on the LUCE update. Draft EIR Findings The Draft LUCE Update, which includes the proposed policies and programs in the airport area, is currently undergoing environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A Draft EIR was prepared and made available for public review from June 13, 2014 to July 28, 2014. A Final EIR is currently being prepared and will be available prior to adoption of the LUCE Update and prior to any final decision to overrule the ALUC. The Draft EIR includes, as a technical appendix, the November 22, 2013 Airport Land Use Compatibility Report by Johnson Aviation. Although potential inconsistency with the Airport Land Use Plan is identified in the Draft EIR as a significant and unavoidable (Class 1) impact, the Draft EIR does not identify significant and unavoidable airport-related noise or safety impacts. The Draft EIR evaluated and discussed airport compatibility in two ways: Compliance with the actual County Airport Land Use Plan, and exposure to noise or safety hazards for the uses supported by the policy and physical changes being considered. The DEIR determined that the LUCE update had the potential to be inconsistent with the current ALUP (Class 1 Impact). It further determined that the LUCE update (including proposed policy, physical changes, and Airport Overlay Zone implementation) would minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards consistent with the State Aeronautics Act (Class 3 Impact). The ALUP is developed and maintained by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), an independent body created by provisions in the Public Utilities Code Section 21670. The City hired an aviation expert consultant to advise the City in the technical data needed to map and understand the basis for safety and noise regulations associated with the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport. The City’s objective has been to work with the ALUC to ensure that airport safety zones are reasonably and prudently mapped based on data and facts. This effort is intended to support the continued operation and success of the airport consistent with State and Federal rules and regulations as well as generally accepted noise and safety principles that aligns with the City’s vision for future land use in the Airport Area. The consultant, Johnson Aviation, provided an evaluation of the state and federal guidance and laws that set the framework for developing Airport Land Use Plans, specifically as they apply to the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport. This evaluation is documented in the Airport Land Use Compatibility Report included in Volume IV, Appendix F to the EIR appendix, and concludes that the Caltrans Division of Aeronautics Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (Handbook) safety zones and associated land use limits provide more than adequate safety provisions for the community and related airport operations and that there is no factually supported or data driven basis for significant deviation from the standards included in the guidelines. PC2 - 96 Land use restrictions based on noise associated with aircraft operations are also identified in the ALUP. The current ALUP includes noise contours based on a hypothetical maximum use of airport runways. This approach is inconsistent with the adopted Airport Master Plan forecast and state requirements, and over-estimates noise associated with aircraft operations. The ALUC is seeking consultant assistance to provide extended forecasts based on projected growth anticipated in the Airport Master Plan. While the growth anticipated in the Master Plan has not come to fruition, the ALUC has indicated a desire to assume current conditions that do not reflect real current operations numbers extend and “grow” the forecasted operations out to a forty year horizon. Noise contours developed with the forecast will be used by the ALUC to limit where residential uses are allowed under the ALUP. The ALUC has indicated the continued application of the 55 decibel Community Noise Equivalent Level (dB CNEL) noise contour as the basis for limiting residential development in the City of San Luis Obispo, which is more stringent than the City’s noise policies. This issue is substantial in that it prohibits new residential uses unless they are located within a mapped 55 dB CNEL or lower noise contour (Attachment 6). This is inconsistent with the Handbook and not required in order to preclude a significant impact. Overrule Process The ALUC determined the proposed update is inconsistent with the Airport Land Use Plan; therefore, the Council has two options: (1) revise the draft element with a goal to propose uses and densities/intensities supported by the existing County Airport Land Use Plan and prepare a revised EIR and refer the revised update to the ALUC for a consistency determination; or (2) submit draft findings to the ALUC and State Division of Aeronautics indicating that the Council intends to overrule the ALUC. Once overruled, the ALUC no longer assumes liability related to those matters on which the Council exercises its overruling authority. If the Council overrules the ALUC, specific findings must be included in that action. These findings must be transmitted to both the ALUC and the State Division of Aeronautics at least 45 days prior to the Council making a final decision on the LUCE. The agencies have 30 days in which to review the findings and provide responses that the Council must consider prior to taking final action on the LUCE update and implementation measures. CONCURRENCES The LUCE and DEIR were reviewed by all City departments and were distributed to various California agencies for comment. The public comment period on the DEIR closed on July 28, 2014 and comments are currently being addressed by the consultant for the Final EIR. FISCAL IMPACT The LUCE Update was made possible by a Sustainable Communities grant in the amount of $880,000 provided by the State of California Strategic Growth Council. Funding for the grant is from the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Act of 2006 (Proposition 84). General Funds in the amount of $467,500 were added to the grant to fund the environmental review and additional support to address Public Works and Fire Department staffing impacts. PC2 - 97 In order to satisfy the grant requirements, copies of the draft Land Use and Circulation Elements and the associated DEIR must be submitted to the State Department of Conservation along with a final status report and invoice for funds. The City Council is required to adopt and certify as accurate the final report prior to submission to the State. The final report for grant close-out is scheduled for consideration by Council on September 16, 2014. However, there is no requirement that the Council certify the final report by a date certain and a Council decision to direct further study or revision would not jeopardize the City grant. With the circulation of the draft EIR, the City has met the only firm timing requirement associated with the grant funds. ALTERNATIVES 1. Direct staff to work with the Planning Commission to comprehensively change the land uses envisioned by the LUCE update to be consistent with the ALUP. 2. Continue consideration of the proposed public hearing schedule and direct staff to provide additional information to the City Council at a future meeting. ATTACHMENTS 1. Notice of ALUC Action (determination of inconsistency), July 16, 2014 2. Airport Land Use Commission Staff Report, July 16, 2014 3. City response to ALUC findings of inconsistency, July 16, 2014 4. Mayor’s Letter to ALUC dated March 20, 2013 5. Draft Resolution of Intent to Override, including Draft Findings (Exhibit A) 6. Noise Contour Map from Draft LUCE EIR The Draft LUCE and Draft EIR are available for review and CDs area available at the Community Development Department, 919 Palm Street. These documents can also be downloaded here: http://www.slo2035.com AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE Airport Land Use Compatibility Report Full Copy of Draft EIR and appendices (5 Volumes) T:\Council Agenda Reports\2014\2014-08-19\LUCE DEIR (Johnson-Murry)\CAR LUCE Update (ALUC determination) PC2 - 98 City of San Luis Obispo, Community Development, 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401-3218, 805.781.7170, slocity.org Date: August 13, 2014 To: Jeff Oliveira, Oliveira Planning From: Derek Johnson, Director SUBJECT: Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) Update Final EIR -- Conflicts between Policies and Programs contained in the LUCE Update and those contained in the Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) The purpose of this memorandum is to document our determination that conflicts between the policies and programs contained in the LUCE Update and those contained in the ALUP should be characterized in the Final EIR as Class 3 (less than significant) rather than Class 1 (significant and unavoidable). This determination is based on substantial evidence contained in the record, including but not limited to the Draft EIR analysis and Airport Land Use Compatibility Report by Johnson Aviation, and lack of substantial evidence in the record to the contrary. Having reviewed all comments received during the public review period for the Draft EIR and correspondence received from the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) in connection with the LUCE referral process, we have concluded that the policy consistency “impact” identified in the Draft EIR is merely a policy impact that does not have the potential for significant impacts on the physical environment. All development within the airport area would have to comply with the policies and programs of the LUCE Update and implementing zoning regulations, which satisfy the intent of the State Aeronautics Act and provide adequate protection relative to noise, safety and airport land use compatibility as evidenced in the airport compatibility study which was included as an appendix in the DEIR. Section 15064 of the CEQA Guidelines provides guidance as to the determination of impact significance and includes the following: “The determination of whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment calls for careful judgment on the part of the public agency involved, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data.” [Sec. 15064(b)] “In evaluating the significance of the environmental effect of a project, the Lead Agency shall consider direct physical changes in the environment which may be caused by the project and reasonably foreseeable indirect physical changes in the environment which may be caused by the project.” [Sec. 15064(d)] “A change which is speculative or unlikely to occur is not reasonably foreseeable.” [Sec. 15064(d)(3)] PC2 - 99 “The decision as to whether a project may have one or more significant effects shall be based on substantial evidence in the record of the lead agency.” [Sec. 15064(f)] The existence of public controversy over the environmental effects of a project will not require preparation of an EIR if there is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. [Sec. 15064(f)] Argument, speculation, unsubstantiated opinion or narrative, or evidence that is clearly inaccurate or erroneous, or evidence that is not credible, shall not constitute substantial evidence. Substantial evidence shall include facts, reasonable assumptions predicated upon facts, and expert opinion support by facts. [Sec. 15064(f)] During preparation of the Draft EIR, a clear conflict was discovered between the land use restrictions in the currently adopted ALUP and the policies and programs being proposed in the LUCE Update. On that basis, and with the absence of information demonstrating the factual support for the ALUP safety zones and noise contours making the City’s analysis difficult, the City conservatively identified the impact as potentially Class I (significant and unavoidable). This was an exercise of caution pending the July 16, 2014 ALUP consistency hearing and pending any evidence that would potentially be added into the record during the public review period for the Draft EIR. Comments were received from the ALUC and Caltrans Division of Aeronautics but no substantial evidence based on facts was presented to indicate that implementation of the LUCE policies and programs and implementing zoning regulations could have a significant impact on noise, safety, airport compatibility or any other component of the environment. Further review and technical analysis demonstrates that, while the conflict remains on paper, it is only a paper conflict because: a. The existing ALUP is admittedly outdated and non-compliant with statutory requirements that it be based on the Airport Master Plan. b. The adopted plan zones and contours are not supported by the operations data in the adopted Airport Master Plan, FAA forecasts, technical compatibility analyses, or the Land Use Planning Handbook, nor do the adopted zones further the objectives of the State Aeronautics Act (SAA) based on any objective, verifiable data or standard. c. The City has developed data-supported zones, contours and standards that do further the objectives of the SAA, while not unreasonably restricting compatible development. In effect, on further review and in light of comments and information from Caltrans and the ALUC, there is no objective verifiable data supporting the adopted ALUP. Staff has therefore concluded that a paper or policy conflict with an objectively inaccurate and fundamentally flawed plan is not a significant impact under CEQA. Staff has further concluded that the changes in the policies and programs that would support increased development in certain areas have been adequately studied and there are no unidentified, unmitigated real environmental impacts of any of the City’s proposed actions in this arena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¶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lanning Commission Resolution # XXXX-14 GPI/ER 15-12, LUE Chapter 7, CE Chapter 11, Noise & Safety Elements Page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lanning Commission Resolution # XXXX-14 GPI/ER 15-12, LUE Chapter 7, CE Chapter 11, Noise & Safety Elements Page 3 LQWKH/8&(XSGDWHDQGIRXQGOHVVWKDQVLJQLILFDQWLPSDFWVLQQRLVHDQGVDIHW\,QDGGLWLRQGXH WRWKHODFNRISHUVXDVLYHHYLGHQFHRIIHUHGLQUHVSRQVHWRWKHGUDIW(,5WKH)(,5ZLOOEHDPHQGHG WRUHIOHFWWKDWWKH/8&(XSGDWHZLOOQRWUHVXOWLQVLJQLILFDQWSK\VLFDOLPSDFWVGXHWR/DQG8VH FRQIOLFWVDQGWKH&ODVV,/DQG8VHLPSDFWRIIHUHGLQWKHGUDIW(,5ZLOOEHDPHQGHGWRUHIOHFWD &ODVV ,,, LPSDFW ±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he San Luis Obispo County Airport provides commuter, charter, and private service to the area (Figure 7). The primary hazard associated with the airport is the risk of aircraft crashing on approach and take-off Aircraft flight operations are determined largely by the physical layout of the airport and rules of the Federal Aviation Administration. Activities on the airport property are managed by the County. In April 1998, a private plane made an emergency landing on Los Osos Valley Road west of Foothill Boulevard, narrowly missing power lines and cars. Existing land uses under the approach and take-off paths include agriculture and businesses close to the airport, and shopping centers, dwellings, and schools at greater distances. State law requires the independent, countywide Airport Land Use Commission to adopt an Airport Land Use Plan for each airport. This plan establishes zones based on flight patterns, with the aim of having future development be compatible with airport operations, considering safety and noise exposure. State and County policies encourage future development to be consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan. The City’s General Plan Land Use Element designates land -use categories that are meant to be consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan. When the City comprehensively updated its Land Use Element in 1994, the Airport Land Use Commission was preparing an update of the Airport Land Use Plan. When this Safety Element was adopted in 2000, the Airport Land Use Plan update had not been completed. The Airport Land Use Plan was last amended in 2005 and is in process of being updated again.There were some discrepancies between the City’s Land Use Element and the Airport Land Use Plan, mainly affecting potential residential development in the Margarita Specific Plan Area. Changes to one or both of the plans will be needed to resolve the inconsistencies. With the most recent update to the Land Use and Circulation Elements, the City went through an exhaustive process to evaluate safety, hazard, obstruction, and noise concerns associated with the current and future operation of the airport. Proposed development associated with the Land Use and Circulation Elements update is consistent with direction in the State Aeronautics Act, the FAA regulations concerning obstructions and notification, and guidance provided in the Caltrans Division of Aeronautics Airport Land Use Planning Handbook. The City will continue to work with the Airport Land Use Commission as it updates the Airport Land Use Plan for San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport to strive to achieve consistency between the Airport Land Use Plan and the City’s General Plan. 3ROLF\ 8VHVLQWKH$LUSRUW/DQG8VH3ODQ$UHD Development should be permitted only if it is consistent with the requirements of the California State Aeronautics Act (Public Utilities Code §21670, et. seq.), the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, and other related federal and state requirements relating to airport land use compatibility planning.San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan. Prospective buyers of property that is subject to airport influence should be so informed. PC2 - 104 )LJXUH $LUSRUW+D]DUGV PC2 - 105 PC2 - 106 PC2 - 107 5(62/87,2112;;;; $5(62/87,212)7+(6$1/8,62%,6323/$11,1* &200,66,215(&200(1',1*7+(&,7<&281&,/$33529( =21,1*5(*8/$7,216$0(1'0(176$1'$'237 $,5325729(5/$<=21,1*5(*8/$7,216 7,7/(±=21,1*5(*8/$7,216 *3,(5 :+(5($6WKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQRIWKH&LW\RI6DQ/XLV2ELVSRFRQGXFWHGSXEOLF KHDULQJVLQWKH&RXQFLO&KDPEHURI&LW\+DOO 3DOP6WUHHW6DQ/XLV2ELVSR&DOLIRUQLDRQ 'HFHPEHUWKDQGWKIRUWKHSXUSRVHRIUHYLHZLQJUHFRPPHQGDWLRQVRIWKH7DVN)RUFH IRUWKH /DQG8VHDQG &LUFXODWLRQ (OHPHQWV 8SGDWH 7)/8&( DQGUHFRPPHQGLQJDVHW RI SROLF\FKDQJHVIRUWKH/DQG8VHDQG&LUFXODWLRQ(OHPHQWV /8&( WREHVWXGLHGWKURXJKWKH HQYLURQPHQWDOUHYLHZSURFHVV DQG :+(5($6 WKH &LW\ &RXQFLO RI WKH &LW\ RI 6DQ /XLV 2ELVSR UHYLHZHG WKH UHFRPPHQGDWLRQVRIWKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQDWSXEOLFKHDULQJVFRQGXFWHG-DQXDU\WKDQG WKLQWKH&RXQFLO&KDPEHURI&LW\+DOO 3DOP6WUHHW6DQ/XLV2ELVSR&DOLIRUQLD IRUWKHSXUSRVHRIHQGRUVLQJD/8&(XSGDWHSURMHFWGHVFULSWLRQWREHFRQVLGHUHGWKURXJKWKH (QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFW5HSRUW (,5 SURFHVV DQG :+(5($6WKH'UDIW(,5ZDVUHOHDVHGRQ-XQHZLWKDGD\FRPPHQWSHULRG WKDWFORVHGRQ-XO\ DQG :+(5($6FRPPHQWVSURYLGHGE\WKH&DOWUDQV'LYLVLRQRI$HURQDXWLFVDQG6DQ/XLV 2ELVSR&RXQW\$LUSRUW/DQG8VH&RPPLVVLRQLQUHVSRQVHWRWKH'UDIW(,5KDYHQRWUDLVHG VLJQLILFDQW LVVXHV RUSURYLGHGSHUVXDVLYH HYLGHQFHWR LQGLFDWHGHYHORSPHQW VXSSRUWHGE\WKH /8&(XSGDWHZLOOUHVXOWLQVLJQLILFDQWLPSDFWV DQG :+(5($6WKH&LW\&RXQFLOHQGRUVHGFRQVLGHUDWLRQRIDQRYHUUXOHRIWKH$LUSRUW/DQG 8VH&RPPLVVLRQ¶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lanning Commission Resolution # XXXX-14 GPI/ER 15-12, Airport Overlay Zone Page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¶VLQWHQWWRXSGDWHWKH*HQHUDO3ODQ/DQG8VHDQG&LUFXODWLRQ(OHPHQWVZLWK SROLFLHVWKDWEDODQFHJRDOVIRUDYLEUDQWHFRQRP\DQGVXSSRUWRIKRXVLQJRSSRUWXQLWLHV ZLWKFRQVHUYDWLRQRIWKH&LW\¶VQDWXUDOHQYLURQPHQWDQGSURWHFWLRQRIWKH&LW\¶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lanning Commission Resolution # XXXX-14 GPI/ER 15-12, Airport Overlay Zone Page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±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lanning Commission Resolution # XXXX-14 GPI/ER 15-12, Airport Overlay Zone Page 4 BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 'RXJ'DYLGVRQ6HFUHWDU\ 3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQE\ PC2 - 111 DRAFT SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 13, 2014 CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL:Commissioners Hemalata Dandekar, Michael Draze, John Fowler, Ronald Malak, William Riggs, Vice-Chairperson Michael Multari, and Chairperson John Larson Absent:Commr. Fowler Staff:Community Development Deputy Director Doug Davidson, Assistant Planner Erik Berg-Johansen, Assistant Planner Joanna Kaufman, Assistant City Attorney Jon Ansolabehere, and Recording Secretary Diane Clement ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented. MINUTES: Minutes of July 23, 2014, were approved as presented. Minutes of July 30, 2014, were approved as amended. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS: There were no comments made from the public. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1.625 Cuesta Street.AP-PC 105-14: Appeal of the Director’s decision to uphold a Notice to Correct a Code Violation regarding front-yard parking; R-1-zone; Joan Byrnes, applicant and appellant. (Erik Berg-Johansen) Assistant Planner Berg-Johansen presented the staff report, recommending adoption of the Draft Resolution denying the appeal and supporting the Director’s decision to uphold the citation. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Appellant Joan Byrnes stated that her mother and stepfather never violated City rules and her stepfather did not cut the curb; but instead, used metal vehicle ramps. She stated that the property had not been used for parking for about four years but, recently, a disgruntled neighbor began giving the student residents on the street a hard time about parking too many cars. She added that the students who live two houses down received multiple citations for too many cars so one of them asked her if he could park on the pad on her property. She stated she made stipulations about no disruption or Draft Planning Commission Minutes August 13, 2014 Page 2 noise that might affect the neighbors. She noted that he put the boards down as a ramp which she did not know was against regulations. She added that there is compliance with the 72-hour parking rule. She asked for copies of the regulations and stated she knows there are grandfather clauses for parking on the pad. Genevieve Czech, SLO, stated that she wanted to address the bigger picture of a commitment to the environment and rationality. She noted that each home on Cuesta, Stanford, and Princeton is allowed to park four cars. She added that students comprise almost a majority in the neighborhood, there is a bus stop at the bottom of Cuesta Drive, and students get free passes to ride. She maintained that the neighborhood roads are no longer safe for children who used to bike and skate, due to the number of cars. Michelle Tasseff, SLO, supported denial of the appeal. She noted that an added driveway would be dangerously close to an adjacent driveway and that allowing the number of parked cars to increase would allow an increase in the number of residents. She added that approving the appeal would allow others to request exceptions. Anthony Haddad, SLO, supported granting the appeal. He noted that the appellant's mother uses a walker and the appellant has to move a car to have space to help her mother in and out of her car and that allowing a car to park on the pad would remove one car from parking on the street. There were no further comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Draze stated that the sidewalk is not designed for the weight of cars, and that an additional curb cut to serve the concrete pad would be impractical and not allowed by the City. He added that the appellant's property has adequate parking and that there are strict regulations about parking for non-residents. In response to a question from Commr. Larson about possible alternatives to make the pad a legal parking space, Community Development Deputy Director Davidson stated that staff looked at alternatives but only one curb cut per property is allowed unless street frontage is over 70 feet, and beyond that, the property exceeds the allowable paved area with the pad. He noted that the issue is not the existence of the pad, but the use of the pad for parking purposes. Commr. Draze noted that, since the City does not mark residential street parking, he is sure that someone has parked on the street blocking vehicle access to the pad. Commr. Multari asked if this street is in a residential parking district. Assistant Planner Berg-Johansen responded that it is not. Commr. Malak stated he did a site survey and saw signs with parking hours. He asked how students who are not residents could use this street as parking for using the bus to Cal Poly if the streets are monitored. Commr. Larson also asked about parking restrictions on this street. Draft Planning Commission Minutes August 13, 2014 Page 3 Applicant Byrnes stated that no parking is allowed from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. without a parking permit and that each residence is allowed two street parking permits. She asked if she can allow a neighboring resident to park on her permitted driveway; then can a resident pay for a parking permit and give it to someone else in the neighborhood. Commr. Malak stated that you get two per household and can give them to whomever you wish. Commr. Riggs stated that Cuesta is in an overnight parking district and that the City is running an experimental program funneling overnight parking into parking structures downtown. Commr. Multari stated that he has observed throughout the City the use of 2” x 4” boards put down to drive over curbs in order to park boats or RVs on properties. He noted that the boards are put away when not in use. He stated that it is unfortunate that the City has a policy to pursue violations when there is no complaint from a neighbor. He added that, despite this, he would vote to deny the appeal. Commr. Riggs stated that this appeal brings up another much bigger issue about the parking policies of Cal Poly in relation to the City. He predicted that the City will see much more push on this type of issue because he does not see the University doing much to incentivize people getting out of their cars. Commr. Larson stated the particular zoning code that applies to this appeal was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission recently but that this use would probably have been a violation with the prior parking regulations, too. He added that this relatively new proactive parking enforcement was designed to catch problems before they become severe although it was understood that gray-area issues would come up. Commr. Dandekar stated that Donald Shoup, a parking expert at UCLA, pointed out that this kind of parking occurs across the country as a source of extra income. She noted that residents allow and charge for parking on their lawns, for football games at the University of Michigan but that this is not currently authorized in the City and the Commission hears from neighbors that this diminishes their quality of life. She stated that, if this appeal is approved, then there is a need to change the regulations. Commr. Malak stated it is a question of fairness and noted that the pad is 30 years old but the parking regulations were set up in 2013. Now, this family has to appeal because there is no alternative. He added that there is minimal traffic here. Commr. Riggs stated that the property could eventually sell which could result in an excessive number of cars. Commr. Draze stated that this kind of parking has not been allowed for many years, not just since 2013. He also noted that proactive enforcement is a City Council policy and to not deny the appeal would be saying the Commission does not support the Council. Draft Planning Commission Minutes August 13, 2014 Page 4 Commr. Draze offered a motion denying the appeal that was seconded by Commr. Riggs. See wording below, following the discussion. Assistant City Attorney Ansolabehere recommended striking “subject to the following conditions:” since no conditions are necessary with a denial of the appeal. Deputy Director Davidson stated that each residence has the right to four parking spots on a property plus two permits for street parking. Commr. Dandekar stated that this is very generous and the parking for this property should conform to the law. Commr. Larson stated that City-initiated enforcement was discussed and approved by the Commission as being good for the City with the realization that there would be appeals. He stated that he likes to strictly interpret whether staff did the right thing and here the staff action has been clear. He noted that this is a gray area and that there are strong arguments on both sides. Commr. Multari stated he will support the motion but that, when the new parking standards and proactive enforcement was approved, he thought they were not good ideas. He added that he would be more sympathetic if it was a boat or RV being stored and used only periodically. Commr. Dandekar stated she is sympathetic to the appellant but will support the motion. She noted that cities are prone to having excessive parking which results in an overall degradation of the façades and fronts of homes where student occupancy is high. Commr. Larson stated that we do want to have good neighborhoods and not creeping degradation. He noted that even though staff has done everything correctly and he cannot find any legal argument to oppose the motion, this one does not feel right. He stated that he wished another solution could be identified and he has difficulty voting for the motion. There were no further comments made from the Commission. On motion by Commr. Draze, seconded by Commr. Riggs, to adopt the Draft Resolution denying the appeal and supporting the Director’s decision to uphold the citation with the deletion of the condition that “the subject parking pad may not be used for the parking and/or storage of any vehicle, trailer, or other item of similar size.” AYES:Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Malak, Multari, and Riggs NOES:Commr. Larson RECUSED:None ABSENT:Commr. Fowler The motion passed on a 5:1 vote. Draft Planning Commission Minutes August 13, 2014 Page 5 2.2701 Augusta.U 97-14; Review of conversion of an existing guest house to a secondary dwelling unit exceeding 450 square feet, including Class 3 categorical exemption from CEQA for conversion of existing small structures; R-1 zone; Eric and Helen Zeeb, applicant. (Erik Berg-Johansen) Commr. Riggs recused himself for this item. Assistant Planner Berg-Johansen presented the staff report, recommending adoption of the Draft Resolution allowing a guest house conversion to a secondary dwelling unit that exceeds 450 square feet, subject to conditions which he outlined. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Bill Isamen, Isamen Design, Inc., represented the applicant. In response to questions from Commr. Multari, he stated that the property was purchased with the understanding that this structure was a guest house and that the kitchen was removed to comply with City regulations. He added that, rather than immediately imposing a restriction limiting use of the second floor loft space to storage, it should be a condition of sale and, if the immediate restriction is imposed, he requests a reduction in fees. After consulting with the applicants, he stated that they bought it with that much square footage so restricting the loft use would not be their first choice. Assistant City Attorney Ansolabehere stated that it would be complicated to write that kind of condition of sale because many legal factors would be at play. Vincent Crooks, SLO, who built the main house on this lot, stated he had no problem with use of the guest house as a secondary dwelling unit (SDU) and that there are no traffic issues. He noted that he would have a problem with the deed restriction for the loft. He added that he is the neighbor who has the most contact with this property. There were no further comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Draze stated he did a site visit. He noted that he wants the important language in Finding #2 – Compliance with Size Limitation (from the Zoning Regulations) to be included in the Resolution findings. He noted that he was impressed that the proposed SDU almost cannot be seen behind the office structure on this very large lot. He added that there is plenty of parking and that all the structures are architecturally compatible. He stated that he would be satisfied if the loft is simply restricted to not being a sleeping area and that restricting it to storage only is overzealous. Commr. Larson stated that he interpreted Condition 2 of the Resolution to mean that if new owners wanted to use this property as a rental, they could rent either the second unit or the primary residence, but not both. He noted that the concern is that there might be an attempt to have a lot of people residing on this property if two units were allowed when it is not owner-occupied. Draft Planning Commission Minutes August 13, 2014 Page 6 Commr. Malak wondered if it hurts the interest of the current owners to try to prevent this property from becoming a rental that would degrade the neighborhood in 15-20 years. He stated it was a decision between now or the future. Commr. Draze responded to Commr. Malak’s comment by stating that he tries to view decisions as being about uses, not personalities, so he is not dealing with the present owners or future ones, but instead the use of the structure as a secondary dwelling unit. Commr. Larson asked Commr. Multari if he thinks an amendment to the conditions is necessary to deal with the loft issue, or if Condition 2 would be sufficient. Condition 2 terminatesuse of the secondary dwelling unit if the primary house becomes a rental. Commr. Multari stated that he agrees with Commr. Draze about dealing with property uses. He noted that an illegal kitchen was bootlegged in and violated the intent of having the guest house. He stated that if there is not sentiment for the restricted use of the loft, then Condition 2 is closest to the intent of the code. Commr. Malak stated that he has a problem with depriving the current owners from using their own property as they wish by only looking at preventing a future problem. Commr. Multari stated that one of the primary functions and responsibilities of the Commission is to maintain the quality of life in R-1 zones but, at same time, the Commission has to consider that there is State law allowing secondary units under certain circumstances. He added that he is looking to the future and, while sympathetic toward the owners, the intent is that the SDU be kept small. He added that the owners are not going to live there forever so he is concerned that the Commission would be approving a duplex in an R-1 zone. He stated that it is better to have a restriction so that, if there are problems, there is something the City or residents can refer to. Commr. Malak stated that he wants a compromise. Assistant City Attorney Ansolabehere stated that drafting something that would be triggered by a sale at a later date would be difficult and it is better to either add a restriction now or not at all. Commr. Multari agreed with the attorney. A motion was made by Commr. Draze to approve the Draft Resolution with the addition of language in Finding #2 on page PC2-4 about strict compliance with size limitations, and creation of a new Condition 8 with language acceptable to the City Attorney. Assistant City Attorney Ansolabehere suggested this wording: “shall record the deed restriction prohibiting a bedroom use on the second floor.” This wording was accepted by Commr. Draze. Commr. Larson stated he is not sure Condition 8 is even necessary because the only way the SDU could be a rental is if a landowner lives in the primary residence which seems to take care of the concern. Draft Planning Commission Minutes August 13, 2014 Page 7 Commr. Multari seconded the motion. Commr. Multari stated that the reason he is uncomfortable is because the living room could become a bedroom and the upstairs could be used as a living room but, given it is next to a kitchen, he thinks he is OK with the motion. Commr. Dandekar supported the two additions to the Resolution and noted that this is a difficult issue but that the project is well designed. She added that the concern with the two cases tonight is a need to be consistent about how the rules are applied. She stated that she thinks this is a workable compromise but appreciates Commr. Multari’s concern and that the next case might not be as compelling or aesthetically pleasing. Commr. Draze stated he appreciates Commr. Multari’s ability to look at these issues analytically and he did not think of the possibility that use of the loft as a bedroom could negatively impact neighbors in the future. He added that he did not agree that the two items at this meeting were similar because this applicant is just requesting a larger building size than is normally allowed. Commr. Malak stated that there is nothing in the Resolution that stops the main residence from being rented out. He asked if modification of the second floor would have to go through the planning process. Commr. Multari replied that there had already been an illegal kitchen. He stated that he is concerned about renting to students and, if caught by a neighbor’s complaint, a deed restriction would mean the City would have better enforcement authority. He added that future buyers will see the deed restrictions and will not have an excuse. Commr. Malak stated if the language was strengthened, he would support the motion. Assistant City Attorney Ansolabehere suggested wording stating that a bedroom is a room with a closet. One other issue: this application is trying to change the characterization of the unit itself by adding a kitchen. Commr. Dandekar stated that the only difference between a guest house and a SDU is the kitchen and layout. She added that the Commission wants to reduce the size. Commr. Malak suggested changing Condition 8 to state that the second floor could never be used as a rental. Commr. Draze responded that that cannot be done. There were no further comments made from the Commission. On motion by Commr. Draze, seconded by Commr. Multari, to adopt the Draft Resolution allowing a guest house conversion to a secondary dwelling unit that exceeds 450 square feet with additional language in Finding 2 stating that strict compliance with the regulations would require significant structural modifications, and the new Condition Draft Planning Commission Minutes August 13, 2014 Page 8 8, with language acceptable to the City Attorney, stating that a deed restriction will be recorded prohibiting a bedroom use on the second floor. AYES:Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Larson, Malak, and Multari NOES:None RECUSED:Commr. Riggs ABSENT:Commr. Fowler The motion passed on a 5:0 vote. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 3.Staff a. Agenda Forecast by Deputy Director Davidson x August 27, 2014: early start at 5 p.m. 1) Rockview project 2) LUCE Chapters7 and 11, and the Airport Overlay x September 10, 2014: LUCE x September 11, 2014: LUCE - special meeting x September 17, 2014: LUCE - special meeting x September 18, 2014, LUCE special meeting, if needed. b. Standard Conditions and Key Performance Indicators presented by Deputy Director Davidson and Assistant Planner Kaufman 4.Commission There were no comments from the Commission. ADJOURNMENT:The meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Diane Clement Recording Secretary