HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-15-2014 PH4 Modification of Tract 2353 Prado Rd
-¤¤³¨¦ $ ³¤
April 15, 2014
)³¤¬ .´¬¡¤±
PH4
FROM
: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director
Prepared By:
Pam Ricci, Senior Planner
SUBJECT:
REVIEW REVISED VESTING TENTATIVE MAP 2353 AND AMEND
CONDITIONS RELATED TO PRADO ROAD (MOD/TR/ER 120-13; MANGANO HOMES)
RECOMMENDATION
As recommended by the Planning Commission, adopt the Resolution(Attachment 7), which
approves revisions to the Vesting Tentative Map, project conditions, and Mitigated Negative
Declaration of environmental impact, based on findings, and subject to mitigation measures and
conditions.
SITE DATA
Applicant Mangano Homes
Representative Steve Peck
Zoning O-SP, Office; R-1-SP, Low-Density
Residential; R-2-SP, Medium-Density
Residential; R-3-SP, Medium-High
Density Residential; and C/OS-SP,
Conservation Open Space (all with
the Specific Plan overlay)
General Plan Business Park/Office, Low-Density
Residential, Medium-Density
Residential, and Medium-High
Prado Road
Density Residential
Site Area 30 acres
Environmental A Tiered Mitigated Negative
Status Declaration of Environmental Impact
was prepared to document the
projects environmental impacts
relative to the Margarita Area
Specific Plan EIR and previous tiered
MND.
BACKGROUND
Approved Project
Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTM) 2353 is a 30-acre site located on the north side of Prado Road,
east of South Higuera Street. The VTM is located within the Western Enclave of the Margarita
Area Specific Plan (MASP) and includes a total of 133lots consisting of 121 single-family lots, 6
lots forBusiness Park uses, one lot for an affordable housing project, and fivelots for greenways
and open space. On March 7, 2006, the City Council approved VTM 2353 through Resolution No.
9777(Attachment 2), as well as VTM 2342 for the adjacent property to the west.
PH4 - 1
Current Requests
The modified project includes a request for a revised VTM that now includes a total of 134 lots, one
lot more than currently approved. The total number of single-family lots would be increased by two
from the currently approved 121 to 123. The two additional single-family lots would be created by
adding one (1) residential lot through lot reconfigurations and converting an open space lot, used for
drainage purposes,to a residential lot.The area of the riparian lot to the east of the converted open
space lot was increased in area so that there was no net loss in the amount of open space in the
project.
The applicant is also proposing revisions to the conditions of approval relative to the construction of
Prado Road, similar to those approved for VTM2342 by the City Council on February 19, 2013.
Other modifications to the conditions of approval are also being requested to address certain issues
that have arisen subsequent to the previous approval and to eliminate conditions that are no longer
applicable or viable. Due to the extent of the conditions needing revisions and because new
conditions are being included to address the applicant’s proposed changes to the tentative map, the
conditions of approval have been rewritten with new numbering therefore the attached version does
not necessarily correspond to the previous numbering system of the adopted conditions of approval.
Staff has prepared a matrix (Attachment 6) which summarizes changes to conditions and code
requirements.
In addition, due to the high cost of the initial phases of Prado Road, the applicant is requesting the
City Council enter into a reimbursement and credit agreement to provide quicker credit or
reimbursement for costs that exceed their fair share. The proposed credit and reimbursement of
development impact fees is consistent with MASP policies in Chapter 9 (Public Facilities
Financing) which anticipated the need for reimbursement agreements and specifically inter-fund
loans (Section 9.6.1) to fund the construction of the initial critical phases of public infrastructure
identified in the MASP. This item is also on tonight’s Council agenda and will follow the review of
the requested condition modifications.
DISCUSSION
Prado Road Development
Akey provision of the MASP is to extend Prado Road from its current easterly terminuslocated
approximately one-quarter mile east of its junction with South Higuera Street, east to Broad Street.
When the Tract 2342 condition changes were reviewed last year, the conclusion was that the
relatively small scale of the development, 56 single-family homes, would not result in significant
traffic impacts. However, with either of the remaining two tract maps coming on line that contain
significantly more dwellings (VTM 2353 with 121 single-family homes and 23 multi-family units,
and VTM 2428 with 165 single-family homes and 32 multi–family units), staff had informed the
applicants that a traffic analysis would need to be conducted to evaluate the carrying capacity of the
proposed and existing street system to handle the additional trips generated with the build-out of the
Western Enclave tracts without full development of Prado Road to Broad Street.
PH4 - 2
The new traffic study was performed by Central Coast Transportation Consulting dated January 6,
2014 (contained as Attachment 5to the MND), to consider the potential impacts of this deferment
from both a project-specific perspective and cumulative perspective. Basically, the traffic study
concluded that all of the analyzed intersections would continue tooperate at acceptable levels of
service with the added trips that would occur with development of the Western Enclave tracts.
However, a mitigation measure approved with the original MNDto address impacts to the South
Higuera/Prado intersection to require businesseswith more than 25 employees to prepare a
Transportation Demand Management (TDM)plan would be carried over.The purpose of the TDM
plan is to look at ways for workers to reduce vehicle trips such as riding the bus, carpooling, and
other similar strategies. In addition, the recent study recommends that the City amend area-specific
traffic impacts fees to include the cost of rectifying the additional deficiencies identified, andthat
Western Enclave projects pay the amended traffic impact fees. Mitigation measure T-02 is also
included which requires the subdivider to re-stripe the southbound left turn lane and install
pedestrian countdown heads at the South Higuera/Prado intersection.
The Draft Resolution (Attachment 7) includes Condition # 1 as the new Prado Road condition. The
applicant’s responsibilities with the extension of Prado Road are outlined in detail. Essentiallythe
applicant is required to construct full improvements on the north half of Prado Road along the
frontage of each phase of the final map. The improvements on the north half shall include a
minimum of two lanes of Prado Road, bike lane, curb, gutter, sidewalk, utilities, storm drainage,
landscaping, streetlights, and a center median. On the south half of Prado Road, the subdivider is
required to provide a minimum of one lane and a bike lane and reconstruct deficient pavement to
provide sufficient structural support for long-term use.
Planning Commission Review
On March 12, 2014, the Planning Commissionreviewed the project, and with their unanimous
support, has forwarded a recommendation for approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
requested map and condition modifications to the City Council,based on compliance with the
MASP andthe similar approval supported for Tract 2342(Attachment 4).The Planning
Commission staff report has been attached to provide a detailed analysis of both the tract map
amendments and condition modifications (Attachment 5).
The Planning Commission supported the minor map changes to create an additional lot within the
subdivision. While an open space lot for drainage purposes was converted to a residential lot, the
area of the riparian lot to the east was increased in area so that there was no net loss in the amount
of open space. The Commission found that the revised map resulted in a more efficient drainage
pattern and improved lot configuration.
The Planning Commission found that the applicant’s proposal to construct a reduced section of
Prado Road as part of Tract #2353 improvements, which is similar to the section approved for VTM
#2342, will provide adequate street improvements for the projected vehicle trips and would not
preclude construction of remaining Prado Road improvements in coordination with future projects.
A modified cross section of Prado will need to be installed at the eastern section of existing Prado
Road to provide sufficient channelization and access to the existing driveways located on the south
side of Prado Road as outlined in Condition # 1 of the Draft Resolution.
PH4 - 3
The Planning Commission’s review of the project modifications focused onthe revised Prado Road
segment on the south side as it transitions to the developed property owned by Alfred Martinelli.
The Commission concluded that some additional language that staff had suggested mayhave
allowed for additional flexibility in the design of the street section, but was concerned that it
weakened the condition and provided less clarity on the scope of the ultimate improvements.
Ultimately, the Planning Commission preferred the language originally included in Condition #1 of
the Draft Resolution, which is the language reflected in the Council’s Draft Resolution (Attachment
7).
Citizen Participation
Five members of the public spoke at the Planning Commission hearing as reflected in the attached
3-12-14 minutes(Attachment 4).Testimony provided at the Planning Commission meeting from
the property owner of the developed site to the south of VTM 2353, Alfred Martinelli, and one of
the business owners on the site, Mark Anderson,expressed concerns with the revised street section
on the south side of Prado Road and the transition to their property. The Commission took these
concerns into consideration in reviewing the precise language of Condition #1 of the resolution.
Environmental Review
A Tiered Mitigated Negative Declaration (Tiered MND) was prepared and adopted when Tract
#2353 was previously approved in 2006. The Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the
current request focuses on proposed changes to the project and any new information that has
become available that may alter environmental impact conclusions that were previously reached.
Mitigation measures adopted as part of the MASP EIR and Subsequent Tiered MND that are
applicable to the proposed project are carried forward and applied to the proposed project to
effectively mitigate the impacts that were previously identified. Three new mitigation measures are
included that relate directly to the new traffic study done to evaluate the potential traffic impacts
related to the full development of Prado Road to Broad Street not being a requirement of the
Western Enclave tract maps.
CONCURRENCES
The applicant’s requests to modify the tentative map and conditions of approval have been reviewed
with the Administration, Public Works, Utilities and Fire Departments, and all consulted
departments concur in the recommendation.
FISCAL & ECONOMIC IMPACT
The requested modifications to project conditions and related Prado Road Delivery Plan have
economic implications to the developer, adjacent property owners and the City. Therefore, the City
hired Goodwin Consulting Group in 2013 to prepare an impact fee reimbursement analysis related
to Prado Road extension costs, an economic impact analysis, and a fiscal impact analysis associated
with the Rescal parcels and the Margarita Area Specific Plan (MASP) area in total. These analyses
provided the basis for theReimbursement Agreement which is a companion item to the condition
modifications evaluated in this report.
PH4 - 4
ALTERNATIVES
1.The Council may deny the map changes and any of the requested modifications to prior
conditions of approval which would leave the mapand condition language as originally
approved.
2.The Council may continue review of the project, if more information is needed. Direction
should be given to staff and the applicant.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1:Vicinity Map
Attachment 2: Resolution No. No. 9777 (2006 Series) approving VTM 2353 on 3-7-06
Attachment 3: Revised VTM 2353
Attachment 4: 3-12-14 Planning Commission follow-up letter& minutes
Attachment 5: 3-12-14 Planning Commission staff report without attachments
Attachment 6: Summary of Changes to Conditions and Code Requirements
Attachment 7: Draft Resolution
Available on website & in Council reading File: Mitigated Negative Declaration
http://www.slocity.org/communitydevelopment/docsandforms/EIR%20Docs/VTM%202353%20MND.pdf
Distributed to Council: 11” x 17” VTM sheets
T:\Council Agenda Reports\2014\2014-04-15\Modification of Tract 2353 Prado Rd(Johnson-Ricci)\Council Agenda Report 4-15-14 (VTM 2353).docx
PH4 - 5
PH4 - 6
Attachment2
PH4 - 7
PH4 - 8
PH4 - 9
PH4 - 10
PH4 - 11
PH4 - 12
PH4 - 13
PH4 - 14
PH4 - 15
PH4 - 16
PH4 - 17
PH4 - 18
PH4 - 19
PH4 - 20
PH4 - 21
PH4 - 22
PH4 - 23
PH4 - 24
PH4 - 25
PH4 - 26
Attachment 3
Attachment 3
Attachment 3
Attachment 3
Attachment 3
Attachment 4
PH4 - 32
Attachment 4
PH4 - 33
Attachment 4
PH4 - 34
Attachment 4
PH4 - 35
Attachment 4
PH4 - 36
Meeting Date:
March 12, 2014
Item Number:
1
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT:
Request to revise Vesting Tentative Map (VTM) 2353 to add two (2) residential lots,
amend VTM conditions of approval, and review a Mitigated Negative Declaration
PROJECT ADDRESS: BY:
408 Prado Road Gary Kaiser, Senior Environmental
Project Manager, Rincon Consultants
Pam Ricci, Senior Planner
Phone Number: 781-7168
E-mail: pricci@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: FROM:
TR/ER 120-13 Doug Davidson, Deputy Director
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the Draft Resolution (Attachment 1), which recommends approval
of revisions to the Vesting Tentative Map, project conditions, and Mitigated Negative Declaration
of environmental impact to the City Council, based on findings, and subject to mitigation measures
and conditions.
SITE DATA
Applicant Mangano Homes
Representative Steve Peck
Zoning O-SP, Office; R-1-SP, Low-Density
Residential; R-2-SP, Medium-Density
Residential; R-3-SP, Medium-High
Density Residential; and C/OS-SP,
Conservation Open Space (all with
the Specific Plan overlay)
General Plan Business Park/Office, Low-Density
Residential, Medium-Density
Residential, and Medium-High
Prado Road
Density Residential
Site Area 30 acres
Environmental A Tiered Mitigated Negative
Status Declaration of Environmental Impact
was prepared to document the
relative to the Margarita Area
Specific Plan EIR and previous tiered
MND.
SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting revisions to the conditions of approval relative to the construction of
Prado Road, similar to revisions that were recently approved for the adjacent Tract 2342. The
applicant is also proposing revisions to the previously approved tentative map that would eliminate
an open space lot designated for drainage purposes and add two (2) residential lots, one in place of
the open space lot and another through the reconfiguration of previously approved residential lots.
PH4 - 37
Proposed Revisions to VTM 2353 (408 Prado Road)
Page 2
Other modifications to the conditions of approval are also being requested to address certain issues
that have arisen subsequent to the previous approval and to eliminate conditions that are no longer
applicable or viable. The applicant is proposing to phase the final map. Due to the extent of the
conditions needing revisions and because new conditions are being included to address the
nges to the tentative map, the conditions of approval have been rewritten
with new numbering therefore the attached version does not necessarily correspond to the previous
numbering system of the adopted conditions of approval.Staff has prepared a matrix (Attachment
5) which summarizes changes to conditions and code requirements.
1.0
The Planning Commissionreview the revised conditions of approval and the proposed
tentative tract map revisions and provide a recommendation to the City Council. The Commission
will also be reviewing the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact which
consistency with the Margarita Area Specific Plan (MASP) and
Programmatic MASP EIR.
2.0 BACKGROUND
2.1 Project History
On October 12, 2004 the City Council certified the Final EIR for and approved the Margarita Area
Specific Plan (MASP), by Resolution No. 9615 (2004 series). The MASP Final EIR contained
numerous mitigation measures that must be carried forward and incorporated into the tiered
environmental assessments prepared for site-specific projects within the Plan area. A Tiered
Mitigated Negative Declaration (Tiered MND) and a vesting tentative map for Tract #2353 was
approved by Council in 2006 by Resolution No. 9777 (2006 Series) (Attachment 2).
Vesting Tentative Tract Map # 2353 (VTM 2353) is currently a 133-lot subdivision, which was
designed and processed in coordination with two adjacent developments, VTM #2342 and VTM
#2428. Collectively, , because they
comprise the westerly portion of the MASP area.On March 7, 2006, the City Council approved
VTM 2342 & VTM 2353, and with the approval of a two-year time extension and automatic time
extensions approved by the State, the VTMs remain valid through March 7, 2015. VTM 2428 was
approved in 2007 and is also still valid. Initial submittals for improvement plans and final maps
were made by the previous property owners. However, with the downturn in the economy in 2008-
2009, the final map process was shelved and all three subdivisions have since been purchased by
new owners. The final map for Tract 2342 was recorded in July 2013 and the project is currently
under construction. Rescal, the owner ofTract 2342, is also the owner of VTM Tract 2353.
2.2 Situation
When the Western Enclave Tracts were originally approved in 2006 and 2007, they were
conditioned to complete a connection of Prado Road from its current easterly terminus to Broad
Street. The current conditions established in cooperation with prior project owners established
However, economic conditions have significantly
changed making if difficult, if not impossible, for any of these three tracts, a relatively small portion
of the overall MASP area, to be burdened with having to construct the length of Prado Road to
PH4 - 38
Proposed Revisions to VTM 2353 (408 Prado Road)
Page 3
Broad Street.
MASP Fees have been developed to assist with constructing major infrastructure improvements
such as Prado Road, but due to the same size of these developments, no single tract can cover the
entire costs of the roadway with their specific plan fees. Thus, any tract constructing the road would
long period of time. It is not likely that any of the WE Tracts would be able to satisfy this financial
obligation and instead, would likely remain idle until a future time when adjacent development
takes place and Prado is completed.
In 2012, the applicant submitted a request to modify VTM #2342 conditions related to Prado Road,
with the intention of requesting the same modifications for VTM #2353 in the next year. In
February 2013, the City Council considered and approved the modifications to VTM #2342
conditions related to Prado Road.
The approved revisions to conditions allowed phased improvements with a modified road section.
The applicant identified a funding methodology and proposed construction responsibility for
completing Prado Road in a manner that was more consistent with typical subdivision development
and could be completed within financial constraints. Revised conditions allowed the PRE-WE
beginning with VTM #2342. As expected, the applicant is now requesting similar modifications to
VTM #2353 conditions related to Prado Road requirements.
In addition, the applicant proposes minor lot reconfigurations to the tentative tract map that would
improve drainage flow and add area to the riparian corridor; these revisions result in two (2)
additional residential lots.
3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
3.1 Site Information/Setting
The project site is located in the southern
part of San Luis Obispo, within the
MASP area and consists of
approximately 30 acres.The site is
situated on the north side of Prado Road,
east of what is currently the easterly
terminus of Prado Road. Immediately to
the west of VTM #2353 is approved
VTM #2342, where single-family homes
are currently under construction per the
MASP. All three VTMs included in the
Western Enclave are highlighted on the
figure to the right. To the north of the
subject property is the approved VTM
#2428; to the east are lands owned by the
Damon and Garcia families; and to the
south are lands owned by L.J. and A.P.
Figure 1: The Locationsof the Western Enclave VTMs
PH4 - 39
Proposed Revisions to VTM 2353 (408 Prado Road)
Page 4
Martinelli. These lands are either undeveloped, underdeveloped, or used agriculturally, but they are
also within the MASP area and will eventually be developed pursuant to the MASP.
3.2Project Description
Currently, VTM #2353 has been approved for a total
of 133 lots and is being developed in accordance with
the MASP (see Figure 2) as follows:
121 lots for single family residential use (R-1-SP,
R-2-SP, & O-SP zones);
6 lots for exclusive business park-office use (O-
SP zone);
1 lot designated for higher density residential
development in the R-3-SP zone (a portion of the
required Affordable Housing Program; the other
portion is proposed in VTM #2428) to be
developed by the Housing Authority or other
appropriate entity;
-1- and R-
2-SP zones (within PG&E easement) for
common ownership by a Home Owners
Association; and
--
Prado Road
SP zone (drainage way) for common ownership
Figure 2:Previously Approved VTM 2353
by a Home Owners Association.
The modified project includes a request for a revised VTM that now includes a total of 134 lots, one
lot more than currently approved. The total number of single-family lots would be increased by two
from the currently approved 121 to 123. The two additional single-family lots would be created by
adding one (1) residential lot through lot reconfigurations and converting an open space lot to a
residential lot.
Other modifications to the conditions of approval are also being proposed to address certain issues
that have arisen subsequent to the previous approval and to eliminate conditions that are no longer
applicable or viable. For instance, the applicant has been denied approval from the Bureau of Real
Estate for a Master H
the corresponding conditions have been revised accordingly.
4.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
With an approved vesting tentativvested right to record a final
map and develop the subject property in substantial compliance with the ordinances, policies and
standards in effect when the application was determined complete on November 14, 2005, per
Municipal Code and Sections 66474.2 and
66498.1 of the California Government Code (Subdivision Map Act).
The Community Development Director has the authority to determine whether a final map is in
PH4 - 40
Proposed Revisions to VTM 2353 (408 Prado Road)
Page 5
substantial compliance with an approved tentative map and
Section 16.10.160 of the Subdivision Regulations. In this case, however,
the changes are not minor because additional building sites are proposed and the proposed revisions
to conditions of approval have economic implications that may affect other property owners.
Therefore, the proposed revisions must be reviewed by the Planning Commission and approved by
the City Council.
The analysis of the requested modifications to VTM 2353 focuses on the following:
1)Prado Road Conditions;
2)Proposed Lot Reconfigurations; and
3)Phasing
4.1 Prado Road Improvements
A key provision of the MASP is to extend Prado Road from its current easterly terminus located
approximately one-quarter mile east of its junction with South Higuera Street, east to Broad Street.
A detailed summary of the Prado Road requirements tied to the original VTM map approvals for the
Western Enclave properties in 2006 and 2007 is included on Pages 3-4 of the attached initial
study/MND (Attachment 3). As summarized in Section 2.2, the applicant is pursuing a request to
modify Conditions of Approval for VTM 2353 similar to those approved for Tract 2342 in February
of 2013.
When the Tract 2342 condition changes were reviewed last year, the conclusion was that the
relatively small scale of the development, 56 single-family homes, would not result in significant
traffic impacts. However, with either of the remaining two maps coming on line that contain
significantly more dwellings (VTM 2353 with 121 single-family homes and 23 multi-family units,
and VTM 2428 with 165 single-family homes and 32 multiple family units), staff had informed the
applicants that a traffic analysis would need to be conducted to evaluate the carrying capacity of the
proposed and existing street system to handle the additional trips generated with the build-out of the
Western Enclave tracts without full development of Prado Road to Broad Street.
Traffic Assessment. The new traffic study was performed by Central Coast Transportation
Consulting dated January 6, 2014 (contained as Attachment 5 to the MND, Attachment 3), to
consider the potential impacts of this deferment from both a project-specific perspective and
cumulative perspective. Scenario A, the project-specific analysis, evaluates potential impacts when
western enclave traffic is added to existing traffic volumes. Scenario B, the cumulative analysis,
also factors in other approved/pending/reasonably foreseeable development in the area.
Table 1: Projection of Traffic Volumes
Projected Increases in Traffic Volumes
SegmentExistingScenario AScenario B
Margarita Avenue1,1902,9002,900
Prado Road3,3026,1007,500
South Street14,85415,30017,300
Tank Farm Road19,57620,10023,700
PH4 - 41
Proposed Revisions to VTM 2353 (408 Prado Road)
Page 6
The study then analyzed the impact that this additional traffic would have on South Higuera Street
intersections (at South Street, Madonna, Margarita, Prado and Tank Farm), since a portion of the
project-generated traffic would no longer be diverted to Broad Street. Although traffic volumes
would increase at these intersections (especially under Scenario B), the intersections would all still
function at an acceptable Level of Service. However, when the Airport Area Specific Plan was
adopted by the City Council, almost a year after the adoption of the MASP, it was determined that
the Level of Service (LOS) at the intersection of Prado Road and South Higuera Street could
required additional mitigation (previously Mitigation Measure T-2.1; now listed as T-04 in the
current MND) to lessen impacts at this intersection. This mitigation lowered the threshold for
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) requirements to apply to employers with 25 or more
employees. Commercial development within the MASP area would be subject to this reduced
threshold.
Although the conclusions of the recent traffic study are similar to the conclusions of earlier studies,
additional infrastructure deficiencies were identified. The recent study therefore concludes that all
mitigation measures previously identified in the MASP/AASP should be carried forward and
applied to this project (except for the requirement that Prado Road be extended to Broad Street). In
addition, the recent study recommends that the City amend traffic impacts fees to include the cost of
rectifying the additional deficiencies identified, and that Western Enclave projects pay the amended
traffic impact fees. Mitigation measure T-02 is also included which requires the subdivider to re-
stripe the southbound left turn lane and install pedestrian countdown heads at the South
Higuera/Prado intersection.
Current Proposal
The Draft Resolution (Attachment 1) includes Condition # 1 as the new Prado Road condition. The
applicant is required to construct full improvements on the north half of Prado Road along the
frontage of each phase of the final map. The improvements on the north half shall include a
minimum of two lanes of Prado Road, bike lane, curb, gutter, sidewalk, utilities, storm drainage,
landscaping, street lights, and a center median. On the south half of Prado Road, the subdivider is
required to provide a minimum of one lane and a bike lane and reconstruct deficient pavement to
provide sufficient structural support for long-term use.
Based on the conclusions of the traffic analysis summarized above, staff supports the revised Prado
conditions for Tract 2342, the proposed modifications to the conditions of approval to allow
development to move forward and be a catalyst for additional development within the Margarita
Specific Plan area.
improvements, which is similar to the section approved for VTM #2342, will provide adequate
street improvements for the projected vehicle trips and would not preclude construction of
remaining Prado Road improvements in coordination with future projects. A modified cross section
of Prado will need to be installed at the eastern section of existing Prado Road to provide sufficient
PH4 - 42
Proposed Revisions to VTM 2353 (408 Prado Road)
Page 7
channelization and access to the existing driveways located on the south side of Prado Road as
outlined in Condition # 1.
4.2 Lot Reconfigurations (2 added residential lots)
Since VTM 2353 was approved in 2006, minor modifications to lot configurations as part of the
final map review were approved as being in substantial conformance to the original VTM.
Therefore, the numbering of the lots shown on the original VTM does not correspond directly with
the current version of the map. The lot configurations currently being requested are located in the
northwestern portion of the VTM.
The revised VTM adjusts Lots 43-49 in order to add area to the riparian corridor, more closely align
the corridor to the swale flow centerline, and orient the lots in a way that complements the
remainder of the neighborhood. The reconfiguration of these lots at the north end of Jasmine Street
also results in an additional residential lot. Figure 3 below shows the existing and proposed lot
configurations within this portion of the Tract.
Figure 3: Existing (left) and Proposed (right) Lot Configurations
In addition, the applicant proposes to reconfigure Lots 38, 39 and 40 and convert Lot 39 from an
open space lot (for drainage purposes) to a residential lot. This reconfiguration shown on Figure 3
above and conversion of Lot 39 from open space to residential is a beneficial change from a
drainage standpoint. Whereas the originally approved tentative tract map would have conveyed
runoff towards the existing development to the west, the revised map would capture the runoff and
convey it into a new storm drain system under the street.
Maintaining historic flows is generally preferred but in this case historic flows are undesired and
may cause damage to downstream development. Moreover, the proposed drainage plan would
divert runoff into the project detention basins and therefore help support the creation of wetland
habitats. These two lot reconfigurations would add one lot to the previously approved 133-lot tract,
PH4 - 43
Proposed Revisions to VTM 2353 (408 Prado Road)
Page 8
making it a 134-lot tract, and convert one of the open space lots to a residential lot, increasing the
number of residential units from 121 to 123.
4.3VTM Phasing
The applicant is proposing to record their final map in phases. The first phase consists of the
westerly 82 lots. The second phase consists of the remaining 52 lots including the affordable
housing lot. The construction of Prado Road will generally correspond with the phasing shown on
the revised tentative map.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
On October 12, 2004, the San Luis Obispo City Council adopted the Airport Area and Margarita
Area Specific Plans and Related Facilities Master Plan. Prior to taking such action, Council
certified a Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the Plans. For the
purposes of the current analysis, this document is referred to as the MASP EIR. In addition, a
Tiered Mitigated Negative Declaration (Tiered MND) was prepared and adopted when Tract #2353
was previously approved in 2007.
The Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the current request focuses on proposed changes
to the project and any new information that has become available that may alter environmental
impact conclusions that were previously reached. The document takes into account and accepts the
environmental conclusions of the prior CEQA documents, where circumstances remain the same.
As such, mitigation measures adopted as part of the MASP EIR and Subsequent Tiered MND that
are applicable to the proposed project are carried forward and applied to the proposed project to
effectively mitigate the impacts that were previously identified. Some of these mitigation measures
are applied verbatim from prior CEQA documents, while others have been refined to more
specifically apply to the proposed project either as mitigation measures or as Conditions of
Approval required for consistency with the MASP.
It should be noted that many of the mitigation measures identified in the MASP EIR have been
incorporated by the applicant into -
instances. Finally, new impacts and mitigation measures were identified in the recent traffic study
prepared in support of this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. New mitigation measures
require the payment of increased traffic impact fees as discussed previously in Section 4.1 of this
report. With all of these prior and recent mitigation measures, the proposed revisions to VTM
#2353 would not have a significant adverse impact on the environment, as demonstrated throughout
the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
6.0 CONCLUSION
The current project before the Planning Commission which includes requests for a new VTM and
modifications to conditions of approval s support,will not have new or increased
significant environmental impacts, and will not compromise the integrity of the overall project
development plan or the goals of the MASP.It is encouraging that the applicant intends to move
forward with the project that fulfills multiple City goals including housing, economic development,
and the start of construction for a significant transportation facility (i.e. Prado Road), consistent
with the General Plan, MASP, and Economic Development Strategic Plan.
PH4 - 44
Proposed Revisions to VTM 2353 (408 Prado Road)
Page 9
7.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
The responses to the applicant's requests have been reviewed with the other departments and reflect
a unified City position.
8.0 ALTERNATIVES
8.1. Continue the project with direction to the applicant and staff on pertinent issues.
8.2 The Commission may deny the requested modifications to the VTM and prior conditions
of approval, based on findings of inconsistency with the MASP, General Plan, or
Economic Development Strategic Plan.
9.0 ATTACHMENTS not included
1.Draft Resolution
2.Resolution No. 9777 (2006 Series) with originally approved VTM 2353
3.Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for Proposed Revisions to VTM 2353
(including Traffic Study and Biological Assessment) Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.Revised Tentative Tract Map 2353
5.Summary of Changes to Conditions and Code Requirements
Included in PC packets: Full-size copy of VTM 2353
T:\Community Development\MODTR 120-13 (VTM 2353)\VTM 2353 PC report & attachments
PH4 - 45
RESOLUTION NO. (2014 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING A REVISED VESTING TENTATIVE MAP AND
MODIFICATIONS TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2353
(MOD/TR/ER 120-13;408PRADO ROAD)
WHEREAS,
the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
public hearingin the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, on March 12, 2014, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application
MOD/TR/ER 120-13, Mangano Homes Inc.,applicant,for the purpose of considering a request
for a revised tentative map and to amend conditions of approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map
2353 for an approximately 30-acre site located on the north side of Prado Road, east of South
Higuera Street; and
WHEREAS,
the Planning Commissionrecommended that the City Council approve the
revised tentative tract map and proposed modified conditions of Vesting Tentative Tract Map
2353, as well as the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact; and
WHEREAS
, the City Council 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 April 15,
2014,for the purpose of considering the proposed revised map and modified conditions of
Vesting Tentative Tract Map 2353originally approved through City Council Resolution No.
9777 (2006 Series); and
WHEREAS
, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS,
the City Council has considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration of
environmental impact as prepared by staff and reviewed by the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS
, the Council has duly considered all evidence, including the record of the
Planning Commission hearing and action,testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation and
recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,
by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1.
Findings. Based upon all the evidence, theCity Council makes the
following findings in support of the request to revise the tentative tract map and modify
conditions of approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 2353:
1.The proposed condition modifications are reasonably necessary to allow for the construction
of Prado Road improvements to serve the Western Enclave Development in the Margarita
Area Specific Plan given financing considerations and projected traffic levels.
PH4 - 47
2.The design of the revised vesting tentative tract map is consistent with the General Plan
because the proposed subdivision respects existing site constraints (slope, creeks, wetlands,
significant trees), improves drainage conditions, will incrementally add to the City’s
residential housing inventory, result in parcels that meet density standards, and will be
consistent with the density and lot sizes established by the Margarita Area Specific Plan.
3.The site is physically suited for the proposed type of development allowed in the R-1-SP, R-
2-SP, and O-SP zones.
4.The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements for access through (or use of
property within) the proposed subdivision.
5.The City Council finds that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the
environment as documented in the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project
with incorporation of the mitigation measures and monitoring program being incorporated
into the project, as listed hereinin Section 2.The proposed modifications to conditions do
not conflict with approved mitigation measuresand are consistent with previous
environmental studies for the extension of Prado Road.
6.Several Environmental Impact Reports have been certified that included the Prado Road
extension, including the 1994 Land Use and Circulation Elements, the 2000 Amendment to
the Circulation Element, and the Airport and Margarita Specific Plans. These EIRs have
analyzed the impacts associated with adding the road to the circulation system and
Circulation Element and its current alignment. Project specific impacts were addressed in
each environmental document prepared for Vesting Tract Maps.
SECTION 2.
Environmental Review.The City Council adopted the project’s Mitigated
Negative Declaration on March 7, 2006, which incorporated mitigation measures and monitoring
programs into the project. In addition, the Tiered Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative
Declaration prepared for the current revisions request (ER-120-13) brings forth additional
mitigation measures for impacts related to traffic. The following mitigation measures will
supersede in their entirety the previously approved mitigation measures approved by Council
Resolution No. 9777 (2006 Series). The following mitigation measures incorporate the originally
approved mitigation measures that are still applicable to this project along with the changes
necessitated by the proposed revisions to the project.
MitigationMeasures:
Reduction of Light and Glare
1.In order for MASP/AASP EIR Mitigation Measure LU-7.l as implemented by the MASP to
be carried through to lot-specific development stage, a lighting plan that demonstrates
compliance with Community Design Section 3.3 Lighting requirements of the MASP shall
be submitted with other required plans for both the residential and commercial components
of the project to the review and approval of the Architectural Review Commission (ARC).
The lighting plan shall propose specific measures to limit the amount of light trespass
associated with development within the project area including shielding and/or directional
PH4 - 48
lighting methods to ensure that spillover light does not exceed 0.5 foot-candles at adjacent
property lines.
Monitoring Program: The ARC will review development plans for both the
residential and commercial components of the project. City staff, including
Planning and other departments, will review plans to assure that all of the ARC’s
requirements related to lighting and compliant with the MASP provisions have
been incorporated into working drawings. City building inspectors will be
responsible for assuring that all lighting is installed pursuant to the approved
lighting plan.
Preparation and Implementation of “Comprehensive Biological Mitigation Program”
2.Mitigation for wetland impacts. Mitigation for wetland impacts will be through a
combination of on- and off-site mitigation, approved by the City, the DFW and the Army
Corps of Engineers. Further, in compliance with the MASP/AASP EIR, the subject VTM
#2342 proposes the creation of Lot Z in an area designated by the MASP for “Open Space-
Riparian” for the express purposes of achieving some of the necessary wetlands replacement
mitigation area, as well as preservation of related biological habitat benefits.
3.Mitigation for Impacts to Sensitive Species. None of these species are expected to be difficult
to establish. City staff will work with the project sponsors in developing the details of the
effort. Congdon Tarplant. Create compensating habitat in a suitable off-site location
approved by the City.
4.Mitigation for Impacts to Other Nesting Birds. Undertake surveys prior to initiation of
construction activities; avoid construction activities within 100 feet of active nest sites, or
within 300 feet for raptor nests, until after young have fledged.
5.Off Site Mitigation for Wetland Impacts. A further component of the biological mitigation
program is the applicant’s proposal to acquire (by fee, easement, or eminent domain) lands
outside the bounds of the Western Enclave (designated by the MASP as “Open Space
Riparian” lands). The targeted property (lying south of Prado Road and owned by Unocal) is
a low lying area that already naturally collects some area run-off and provides valuable
habitat for certain special concern and R-T-E (rare, threatened, and endangered) species, and
thus is beneficial to retain in its natural state. Pre-development run-off has resulted in
seasonal flooding of Prado Road due to the currently deficient collection/distribution system
to this natural drainage area south of Prado Road. The Western Enclave applicants propose to
acquire this off-site property designated for open space use by the MASP and utilize it
beneficially for biological mitigation as well as a detention basin for pre- and post-Western
Enclave development generated run-off. It is proposed that this basin be enhanced to
accommodate the greater project-generated and pre-project run-off flows, and to increase its
habitat value in the long term. The basin is proposed to be held and maintained by a Home
Owners Association (HOA) established initially for the Western Enclave area, and perhaps
ultimately for the entire MASP as stipulated be done by the MASP.
PH4 - 49
Monitoring Program: Prior to approval of the final map, the applicant shall
contact the City Natural Resource Manager for review and approval of the final
lot and street design to assure that on-site natural resources are protected and
preserved to the greatest extent required by the mitigation measures and
consistent with requirements of the MASP and MASP IAASP EIR. Said design
shall also be consistent with approvals required subsequent to this Tentative Map
from State Dept. of Fish and Game and Army Corps of Engineers. Prior to any
site preparation or construction activities, the applicant shall also initiate and
complete for approval by the City pre-construction surveys for nesting birds and
adhere to performance standard specified in the mitigation. Provisions for
required off-sitemitigation shall be coordinated with and approved by the City
Natural Resource Manager prior to recordation of the Final Map. Periodic field
inspections by City Staff during construction will be necessary to assure site
development conforms to mitigation measures and conditions of approval.
Preparation of Phase II Archaeological Subsurface Survey
6.In order to achieve complete mitigation for the archaeological resource found on the subject
site, this survey is required if the site cannot be avoided. The Phase II survey is to determine
if significance criteria of CEQA and/or NRHP are met. The surveymust be completed and
results submitted to City for determination whether mitigation measures below, as specified
in EIR, are needed.
1)A data recovery program consisting of archaeological excavation to retrieve the
important data from the archaeological site;
2)Development and implementation of public interpretation plans for both prehistoric
and historic sites;
3)Preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, or reconstruction of historic structures
according to the Secretary of Interior Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties;
4)Construction of new structures in a manner consistent with the historic character of
the region; and
5)Treatment of historic landscapes according to the Secretary of Interior Standards for
Treatment of Historic Landscapes.
If the project involves a federal agency, and is therefore subject to a MOA, the inventory,
evaluation, and treatment processes will be coordinated with that federal agency to
ensure that the work conducted will also comply with Section 106 of the National
HistoricPreservation Act.
Preparation and Implementation of a “Construction-Related Hazardous Materials
Management Plan”
7.As stipulated in the MASP / AASP EIR, this would be a plan identifying, when they are
known, site/development-specific construction activities that will involve the hazardous
materials. The plan shall be prepared before construction activities begin that involve
hazardous materials and shall discuss proper handling and disposal of materials used or
produced onsite, such as petroleum products, concrete, and sanitary waste. The plan will also
PH4 - 50
outline a specific protocol to identify health risks associated with the presence of chemical
compounds in the soil and/or groundwater and identify specific protective measures to be
followed by the workers entering the work area. If the presence of hazardous materials is
suspected or encountered during construction- related activities, the project proponent will
cause Mitigation Measure HAZ-1.2 to be activated. Mitigation Measure HAZ-I.2 states:
“The project proponent will complete a Phase Ienvironmental site assessment for each
proposed public facility (e.g. streets and buried infrastructure). If Phase Isite assessments
indicate a potential for soil and/or groundwater contamination within or adjacent to the road
or utility alignments, a Phase IIsite assessment will be completed. The following Phase II
environmental site assessments will be prepared specific to soil and/or groundwater
contamination.
Soil Contamination.
a.For soil contamination, the Phase IIsite assessment will
include soil sampling and analysis for anticipated contaminating substances. If
soil contamination is exposed during construction, the San Luis Obispo Fire
Department (SLOFD) will be notified and a work plan to characterize and
possibly remove contaminated soil will be prepared, submitted and approved.
Groundwater Contamination.
b.For groundwater contamination, the Phase II
assessment may include monitoring well installation, groundwater sampling, and
analysis for anticipated contaminating substances. If groundwater contaminated
by potentially hazardous materials is expected to be extracted during dewatering,
the SLOFD and the Central Coast RWQCB will be notified. A contingency plan to
dispose of contaminated groundwater will be developed in agreement with the
SLOFD and Central Coast RWQCB.”
Monitoring Program: The “Construction-Related Hazardous Materials
Management Plan” will be required to be submitted to the City Community
Development Department and Fire Department for review prior to
commencement of any site preparation or construction work involving hazardous
materials. No site preparation or construction work may commence before said
plan has been approved by the City. Any site work commenced without City
approval of said Plan willbe subject to “Stop Work” (cease and desist) orders as
may be issued under the authority of the City Fire Department.
Preparation and Implementation of an “Operations-Related Hazardous Materials
Management Plan”
8.As stipulated in the MASP/ AASP EIR, thiswould be a plan prepared by a project proponent
identifying hazardous materials management practices as might be required by state and local
laws and regulations regarding delivery, use, manufacture, and storage of any such regulated
materials might be present On site for any operations-related activities. This plan would
identify the proper handling and disposal of materials uses or produced onsite, such as
petroleum products, concrete, and sanitary waste. By the filing of said Plan, the City Fire
Department will be on notice to provide regular and routine fire and life-safety inspections to
determine compliance with applicable health and safety codes.
PH4 - 51
Monitoring Program: The “Operations-Related Hazardous Materials Management
Plan” will be required to be submitted by a project proponent to the City
Community Development Department and City Fire Department for review prior
to the establishment of any operations-related activities.
Air Quality
AQ-1 Fugitive Dust Control Measures.
9.The proposed project shall implement the
following dust control measures so as to reduce PM10 emissions in accordance with
SLOAPCD requirements.
a) Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible;
b) Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent
airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency would be
required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water
should be used whenever possible;
c) All dirt stock pile areas should be sprayed daily as needed;
d) Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation
and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible following
completion of any soil disturbing activities;
e)Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one
month after initial grading should be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive
grass seed and watered until vegetation is established;
f)All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using
approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in
advance by the APCD;
g)All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as
soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used;
h) Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any
unpaved surface at the construction site;
i)All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or
should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance
between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114;
j)Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets,
or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site;
k) Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto
adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used
where feasible;
l)All of these fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and
building plans; and
PH4 - 52
m)The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the
fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as
necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below 20
percent opacity, and to prevent transport of dust offsite. Their duties shall include
holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and
telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance
Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition.
AQ-2 Construction Equipment.
10.The proposed project shall implement the following
emissions control measures so as to reduce diesel particulate matter in accordance with
SLOAPCD requirements.
•Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer’s
specifications;
•Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment with ARB certified
motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for sue off-road);
•Use diesel construction equipment meeting ARB’s Tier 2 certified engines or
cleaner off-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road
Regulation;
•Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the ARB’s 2007 or cleaner certification
standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On-
Road Regulation;
•Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in their
fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g.
captive or NOx exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative
compliance;
•All on and off-road diesel equipment shall not idle for more than 5 minutes.
Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job sites to remind
drivers and operators of the 5 minute idling limit;
•Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted;
•Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive
receptors;
•Electrify equipment when feasible;
•Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where
feasible; and
•Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as
compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or
biodiesel.
AQ-3 Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan.
11.The applicant shall prepare an Asbestos Dust
Mitigation Plan in accordance with the requirements set for by ACTM to ensure that
asbestos does not create a significant health risk to construction workers and sensitive
receptors. The Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan shall be implemented at thebeginning and
maintained throughout the duration of the construction or grading activity. The Asbestos
Dust Mitigation Plan must specify dust mitigation practices which are sufficient to
ensure that no equipment or operation emits dust that is visible crossing the property
line, and must include one or more provisions addressing each of the following topics.
PH4 - 53
A.Track-out prevention and control measures which shall include:
1.Removal of any visible track-out from a paved public road at any
location where vehicles exit the work site; this shall be
accomplished using wet sweeping or a HEPA filter equipped
vacuum device at the end of the work day or at least one time per
day; and
2.Installation of one or more of the following track-out prevention
measures:
i.A gravel pad designed using good engineering practices to
clean the tires of exiting vehicles;
ii.A tire shaker;
iii.A wheel wash system;
iv.Pavement extending for not less than fifty (50) consecutive feet
from the intersection with the paved public road; or
v.Any other measure as effective as the measures listed above.
B.Keeping active storage piles adequately wetted or covered with
tarps.
C.Control for disturbed surface areas and storage piles that will remain
inactive for more than seven (7) days, which shall include one or more of
the following:
1.Keep the surface adequately wetted;
2.Establishment and maintenance of surface crusting sufficient to
satisfy the test in subsection (h)(6);
3.Application of chemical dust suppressants or chemical stabilizers
according to the manufacturers' recommendations;
4.Covering with tarp(s) or vegetative cover;
5.Installation of wind barriers of fifty (50) percent porosity around
three (3) sides of a storage pile;
6.Installation of wind barriers across open areas; or
7.Any other measure as effective as the measures listed above.
D.Control for traffic on on-site unpaved roads, parking lots, and
staging areas which shall include
1.A maximum vehicle speed limit of fifteen (15)miles per hour or
less; and
2.One or more of the following:
i.Watering every two hours of active operations or sufficiently
often to keep the area adequately wetted;
ii.Applying chemical dust suppressants consistent with
manufacturer's directions;
iii.Maintaining agravel cover with a silt content that is less than
five (5) percent and asbestos content that is less than 0.25
percent, as determined using an approved asbestos bulk test
method, to a depth of three (3) inches on the surface being used
for travel; or
iv.Anyother measure as effective as the measures listed above.
PH4 - 54
E.Control for earthmoving activities which shall include one or more
of the following:
1.Pre-wetting the ground to the depth of anticipated cuts;
2.Suspending grading operations when wind speeds are high enough
to result in dust emissions crossing the property line, despite the
application of dust mitigation measures;
3.Application of water prior to any land clearing; or
4.Any other measure as effective as the measures listed above.
F.Control for Off-Site Transport. The owner / operator shall ensure
that no trucks are allowed to transport excavated material off-site
unless:
1.Trucks are maintained such that no spillage can occur from holes
or other openings in cargo compartments; and
2.Loads are adequately wetted and either:
i.Covered with tarps; or
ii.Loaded such that the material does not touch the front,
back, or sides of the cargo compartment at any point less
than six inches from the top and that no point of the load
extends above the top of the cargo compartment.
G.Post Construction Stabilization of Disturbed Areas. Upon completion of
the project, disturbed surfaces shall be stabilized using one or more of the
following methods:
1.Establishment of a vegetative cover;
2.Placement of at least three (3.0) inches of non-asbestos-containing
material;
3.Any other measure deemed sufficient to prevent wind speeds of ten
(10) miles per hour or greater from causing visible dust emissions.
H.Air Monitoring for Asbestos (If Required by the SLOAPCD).
1.If required by SLOAPCD, the plan must include an air-monitoring
component.
2.The air monitoring component shall specify the following:
i.Type of air sampling device(s)
ii.Siting of air sampling device(s);
iii.Sampling duration and frequency; and
iv.Analytical method.
I.Frequency of Reporting: The plan shall state how often the items specified
in subsection (e)(5)(B), and any other items identified in the plan, will be
reported to the district.
Transportation/Traffic
The mitigation measures listed below will mitigate potential impacts to a less than significant
level. Mitigation Measures T-01, T-02, & T-03 are new recommended mitigation measures,
while Mitigation Measure T-04 is from prior MND ER 66-05.
PH4 - 55
T-01 Impact Fees.
12.The applicant shall pay traffic impact fees that are in effect at the
time of building permit issuance. If at the time of building permit issuance the City’s
TIF has not been amended to accommodate the improvements to the South
Higuera/Prado and South Higuera/Tank Farm intersections as identified in the traffic
study performed by Central Coast Transportation Consulting dated January 6, 2014, or
Prado Road has not been connected to Broad Street, the applicant will be responsible for
paying a pro rata share of said improvements subject to approval of the City’s Public
Work Director.
T-02 Traffic Mitigation.
13. The subdivider shall re-stripe the southbound left turn lane
and install pedestrian countdown heads at the South Higuera/Prado intersection as
identified in the traffic study performed by Central Coast Transportation Consulting
dated January 6, 2014.
T-03 Margarita Neighborhood.
14.Pursuant to the Margarita Area Specific Plan, traffic
volume and speeds shall be monitored after development. Prior to final map recordation,
the Subdivider shall deposit a faithful performance security in the amount of $130,000 to
retain a qualified traffic consultant to conduct traffic counts and speed measurements on
Margarita Avenue and on streets within and in the vicinity of the subdivision. The
counts and measurements will be conducted one-year after final occupancy of complete
build-out of the subdivision or acceptance of public improvements, whichever occurs
later. The locations of the counts and measurements shall be approved by the Public
Works Director. If the traffic volumes or speeds exceed City standards, the $130,000
security will be retained by the City to guarantee that Subdivider installs additional
City-approved traffic calming measures to reduce volume and speeds to comply with
City standards.
• Monitoring Program:
Community Development and Public Works staff will oversee impact fee payments,
traffic consultant counts and measurements, and review required restriping plans.
T-04 Preparation and Implementation of “Traffic Reduction Program.”
15.In order
for MASP/AASP EIR Mitigation Measure T-2.1 adopted with the certification of the
MASP/AASP EIR in conjunction with the approval of the AASP in August, 2005 (Ref.
City Council Resolution No. 9726, 2005 Series) to be brought forward to this site specific
project stage, a transportation demand management program that demonstrates reduction
of peak period travel by single-occupant vehicles shall be required of any employer
within the subdivision with 25 or more employees. Said program shall incorporate all
reasonably feasible measures or techniques, including those listed in the MASP/AASP
EIR/General Plan Circulation, that encourage alternate modes other than single-occupant
vehicles as the primary mode of transportation to the workplace and to travel during non-
peak times.
PH4 - 56
• Monitoring Program:
Each business owner, upon employment of 25 or more employees, shall immediately
prepare and submit, obtain approval from the City Public Works Director and
implement the provisions of a Traffic Reduction Plan which demonstrates reduction of
peak period travel consistent with requirements of the City General Plan Circulation
Element Policies and Programs. City Staff shall periodically inspect the business to
observe and assure that reduction techniques approved by the City are in place and
adhered to by the business. Staff shall take any corrective or enforcement actions
authorized by law to achieve compliance.
SECTION 3
.Action. The City Council hereby approves the revised tentative tract map
and requested modifications to conditions of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 2353.The following
conditions will supersede in their entirety the previously approved conditions approved by
Council Resolution No. 9777 (2006 Series) on March 7, 2006, and the amended conditions
approved by Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 5565-11 on September 28, 2011. The
following conditions incorporate the originally approved conditions that are still applicable to
this project along with the changes necessitated by the proposed revisions to the project.
Streets:
1.The subdivider shall construct full improvements on the north half of Prado Road along the
frontage of each phase of the final map. The improvements on the north half shall include a
minimum oftwo lanes of Prado Road, bike lane, curb, gutter, sidewalk, utilities, storm
drainage, landscaping, street lights, and a center median. The subdivider shall provide a
minimum of one lane and a bike lane on the south half of Prado Road. The subdivider shall
reconstruct deficient pavement on the south half of Prado Road
to provide sufficient structural
as approved by the Public Works Director
. The improvement plans
support for long-term use
for Prado Road shall be based on final design drawings for the MASPbuild-out of Prado Road to
the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
a.Appropriate transitions, as approved by the Public Works Director, shall be provided
between the new improvements and the existing improvements, including access to
existing driveways. Access to existing driveways may be restricted to right-in
right-out as approved by the City.
b.Access to the Damon-Garcia property east of Tract 2353 shall be provided at a
location approved by the City and property owners.
c.The subdivider may submit a reimbursement proposal for the costs associated with
the design and construction of the north half of Prado Road. Subject to final approval
by the City, the proposal may include fee credits and/or other appropriate
mechanisms that may be applied againstMargarita Area Add On Transportation
Impact Fees and Margarita Area Specific Plan Add On Park Impact Feesas
development occurs.
d.Prior to final map recordation, the property owner shall enter into an agreement
waiving his/her/their rights to oppose formationof an assessment district to fund the
PH4 - 57
portion of the MASP transportation improvements which are not funded by MASP
transportation impact fees. The agreement shall be binding on all future owners and
shall run with the land. In lieu of the agreement, prior to map recordation the
property owner may pay an amount approved by the City to cover their share of the
unfunded amount.
e.Prior to final map recordation, the subdivider shall submit a separate irrevocable offer
of dedication for public street purposes for all connecting streets to provide access
from VTM 2428 to Prado Road. The offer will be recorded in the event that the Tract
2353 public improvements have not yet been accepted by the City, but access is
needed for VTM 2428.
f.Prior to map recordation, the subdivider shall submit exhibits for Council
consideration of a plan line for Prado Road across the properties on the south side of
Prado Road to ensure development on the south side adheres to the ultimate
right-of-way of Prado Road.
2.Margarita Area Specific Plan Impact Fees, as adopted by the City of San Luis Obispo, shall
be paid prior to issuance of each building permit, subject to any approved reimbursement
agreements.
3.The public improvement plans for VTTM 2353, VTTM 2428 and VTTM 2342 shall
consider the proposed or required phasing to be completed by the combined development
known as Margarita Area Specific Plan western enclave. The public improvement plans for
each subdivision shall include any offsite improvements as considered necessary by the
Director of Public Works to provide a reasonable transition between the subdivisions in the
case that one project is developed before another. The scope of required improvements shall
be approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. Pursuant to Section 16.20.110
of the City Municipal Code, the subdivider may be eligible for reimbursement for
improvements that are in excess of the construction required for the subdivision, including,
but not limited to storm drainage, sewer, water and power.
4.The final subdivision design and improvements shall comply with the Margarita Area
Specific Plan and all other City of San Luis Obispo Design Standards, Engineering
Standards and Standard Plans and Specifications. The subdivision improvement plans and
the Prado Road improvement plans shall be approved by the City prior to final map
recordation.
5.The final design, location, and number of traffic calming measures including bulb-outs,
choke-downs, tabletops, roundabouts, neck-downs, etc. Shall be reviewed and approved by
the Public Works Director. Plans submitted for review shall include a truck turning diagram
demonstrating a truck’s ability to negotiate the traffic calming features. Additional or
alternative traffic control measures may be required to comply with’ the Specific Plan
objective to “foster traffic volumes and speeds that will be compatible with the
neighborhood.”
PH4 - 58
6.The tentative map is amended as follows:
a.The tract boundary shown on the tentative map is not correct. The final map shall
reflect the correct tract boundary, lot sizes, and Prado Road dedications.
b.Delete Margarita Avenue from the 60’ right-of-way typical street section and add
Aster Street.
c.The typical street section for Margarita Avenue and Prado Road shall be in
conformance with the MASP, unless otherwise approved by the Public Works
Director.
d.Width of the bike/ped trails shall be as approved by the Public Works Director.
e.Alley easements are to be measured to the back of curb.
f.The alley width across Lots 1 and 2 shall be a minimum of 24’
g.The alley width serving Lots 46 to 49 and Lot 134 shall be a minimum of 20’.
h.A 15’ PUE and Street Tree easement is required along all commercial frontage.
i.Lots 1 through 6 are incorrectly labeled as single-family on the Lot Table.
j.A bulb-out shall be provided at the intersection of Aster and Ceanothus.
k.Directional arrows on the section lines for the CMU walls and Gravity Walls are
facing the wrong direction.
l.The final configuration of the Margarita roundabout shall be as required bythe Public
Works Director.
m.Driveways and alleys in the vicinity of the roundabout median islands shall be
relocated to provide unimpeded left turn ingress/egress. Shared driveways may be
required to meet this requirement.
7.The subdivision design shall include directional curb ramps wherever possible. The
inclusion of bulb-outs at directional curb ramp locations is encouraged to decrease the
roadway width to be crossed by a pedestrian.
8.The subdivision design shall include curb extensions at locations where on-street parking
needs to be restricted for sight visibility reasons.
9.The subdivider shall dedicate easements and construct alleys and streets to full-width
adjacent to all lots being created in each phase.
10.Common areas, landscaped parkways and Class I pathways (other than Prado Road) shall be
owned and maintained in perpetuity for public use by a Homeowner’s Association. Water
meters for common landscape areas including but not limited to parkways, medians,
PH4 - 59
roundabouts and pathway corridors are subject to water impact fees and shall be paid for by
the subdivider.
11.All lots with alley access shall have vehicular access denial shown on the map for the public
streets fronting those lots, including Lots 46, 47, 48, 49, and 134.
On & Off-Site Improvements:
12.With respect to all off-site improvements, prior to filing of the Final Map, the Subdivider(s)
shall either:
a.Clearly demonstrate their right to construct the improvements by showing title or interest
in the property in a form acceptable to the City Engineer; or,
b.Demonstrate, in writing, that the subdivider has exhausted all reasonable efforts to
acquire interest to the subject property and request that the City assist in acquiring the
property required for the construction of such improvements and exercise itspower of
eminent domain in accordance with Government Code Section 66462.5 to do so, if
necessary. Subdivider shall also enter into an agreement with the City to pay all costs of
such acquisition including, but not limited to, all costs associated with condemnation.
Said agreement shall be in a form acceptable to the City Engineer and the City Attorney.
If condemnation proceedings are required, the Subdivider shall submit, in a form
acceptable to the City Engineer, the following documents regarding the property to be
acquired:
1)Property legal description and sketch stamped and signed by a Licensed Land
Surveyor or Civil Engineer authorized to practice land surveying in the State of
California;
2)Preliminary title report including chain of title and litigation guarantee;
3)Appraisal of the property by a City approved appraiser. In the course of obtaining
such appraisal, the property owner(s) must be given an opportunity to accompany
the appraiser during any inspection of the property or acknowledge in writing that
they knowingly waived the right to do so;
4)Copies of all written correspondence with off-site property owners including
purchase summary of formal offers and counter offers to purchase at the appraised
price.
5)Prior to submittal of the aforementioned documents for City Engineer approval,
the Subdivider shall deposit with the City all or a portion of the anticipated costs,
as determined by the City Attorney, of the condemnation proceedings. The City
does not and cannot guarantee that the necessary property rights can be acquired
or will, in fact, be acquired. All necessary procedures of law would apply and
would have to be followed.
PH4 - 60
13.The final subdivision design shall incorporate stormwater quality Best Management
Practices (BMPs) with themost current edition of the Engineering Standards, shall be
designed to treat the stormwater runoff from all developed surfaces excluding rooftops but
including all private and public streets, and shall be subject to the approval of the City
Engineer.
14.The finaldesign of any stormwater detention or treatment facilities shall incorporate all
recommendations from the final geotechnical report into the design of said facilities. The
final geotechnical report shall address the effect, if any, of detaining stormwaterin close
proximity to the existing soil contamination.
15.The design of any stormwater facilities shall be in compliance with the Waterway
Management Plan Drainage Design Manual requirement for construction.
16.The subdivider shall secure the rights for the regional stormwater detention basin in a form
acceptable to the Bureau of Real Estate and the City prior to or concurrently with the
recordation of the first final map. The stormwater detention basin shall be
privately-maintained. Should the subdivider be unsuccessfulin acquiring the rights to the
basin for storm drainage capacity, the subdivider shall revise the map and plans to
accommodate appropriately-sized on-site detention of stormwater pursuant to the City's
Waterway Management Plan Drainage Design Manual. Alternately, the City may elect, but
is not obligated, to secure the rights on behalf of the public. All costs associated with
securing said rights, including any necessary eminent domain process, shall be borne by the
subdivider.
17.To the degree feasible, shared driveways shall be utilized to reduce the number of driveway
curb cuts in the subdivision and increase the provision of on-street parking.
18.When a Class 1 bicycle path provides access across a public street, choke-downs, curb
ramps, and signage shall be provided and the street crossing shall be designed to direct
pedestrians across the roadway in a perpendicular manner.
19.Prior to final map approval, details of the proposed roadway choke-downs shall be provided.
Choke-downs adjacent to open space corridors shall be lengthened to include the entire
length of the open space corridor.
20.Prior to final map approval, the landscaped roundabout proposed at the terminus of
Margarita Avenue shall be designed to comply with Caltrans Standards Design Information
Bulletin 80 and FHWA roundabout guidelines and address pedestrian and bicycle crossing
areas. The proposed roundabout shall be landscaped and maintained by the homeowner’s
association.
21.Due to the potential circulation conflicts given the lot’s proximity to the proposed
roundabout, the subdivider shall dedicate vehicular access rights to the City of San Luis
Obispo for proposed Lot 32 onto Cherry Lane and said access restriction shall be shown on
the Final Map.
PH4 - 61
22.The final map shall include an irrevocable offer of dedication to the public for road purposes
across that portion of Lot 6 as necessary to provide an alternative alignment of Prado Road
to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. Said offer and final map shall recognize
access restrictions to Prado Road from Lot 6.
23.Prior to final map approval, Aster Street shall be designed and constructed to comply with
City standards which at a minimum include half-street improvements plus 12 feet. Off-site
improvements, temporary construction easements or slope bank easements may be required
in order to complete the necessary improvements.
24.Prior to final map approval, the design and location of the bus pullouts on Junipero Way
shall be coordinated with Tract 2342 and approved by the Public Works Director. Plans
submitted for review shall include a bus turning diagram demonstrating a bus's ability to
negotiate the turnout. The final design shall also include bus stop improvements and indicate
how access to adjacent parcels is provided. Unless otherwise approved by the Public Works
Director, the eastbound bus pullout shall be located on Junipero Way west of Cherry Lane
and the westbound bus pullout shall be located on Junipero Way east of Cherry Lane.
25.The Prado Road cross section shall be designed to comply with the MASP. The metric
conversions shall be as approved by the Public Works Director.
26.Private alleys shall be designed for use by emergency vehicles and garbage trucks and shall
be located within a public access easement. Sewer and storm drain lines within the private
alleys shall be privately-maintained. The subdivider shall show the alleys within a public
access easement on the Final Map.
27.Vehicular access rights along Prado Road shall be dedicated to the City.
28.The subdivider shall install private street lighting along the private internal streets per City
standards and off-site public street lighting along Prado Road leading to and from the
development, as determined by the Director of Public Works. All public street lighting on
Prado Road and on the other public streets shall be LED lighting per the most current or
interim City standards. Thepublic street lighting installed by the developer shall include the
luminaires as well as all wiring and conduit necessary to energize the light standards from
PG&E’s point of service.
Water, Sewer & Utilities:
29.The subdivider’s engineer shall submit water demand and wastewater generation
calculations so that the City can make a determination as to the adequacy of the supporting
infrastructure.
30.Water meters shall be grouped in manifold pairs wherever possible, to the satisfaction of the
Utilities Engineer.
31.The water mains, sewer mains, and sewer force mains when attached or included with a
bridge, shall be sleeved and encased within the bridge structure or located above the lowest
point so as to protect the pipelines from the high water flow.
PH4 - 62
32.Sewer backwater valves may be required on some lots. The subdivider’s engineer shall
apply the City’s criteria to the design to determine which lots will need backwater valves on
the sewer laterals, per City and UPC standards.
33.In areas where the pressure in the water system exceeds 80 psi, the service line shall include
a pressure regulator downstream of the water meter, where the water service enters the
building.
34.The sewer and water mains shall be located approximately 6’ on either side of the street
centerline. All final grades and alignments of all public water, sewer and storm drains
(including service laterals and meters) are subject to modifications to the satisfaction of the
Public Works Director and Utilities Engineer.
35.The subdivision layout and preliminary utility plans shall include provisions for irrigating
common areas, parks, detention basins, and other large landscape areas with recycled water.
Appropriately sized reclaimed water mains shall be designed and constructed from the
City’s trunk system to these irrigation areas. If other use areas exist beyond the proposed
subdivision, the mains shall be appropriately sized to provide for future use areas and
extended to the boundary of the tract. If reclaimed water is not available at the time the
recycled water is needed, the system shall be designed and constructed to reclaimed water
standards, and temporarily connected to the City’s potable water system in the area of the
anticipated connection to the reclaimed water system.
Grading & Drainage:
36.The final grading plan shall include provisions to comply with the soils engineer’s
recommendations, including mitigating cut slopes, debris flows uphill of the lots and truck
access. The soils engineer shall supervise all grading operations and certifythe stability of
the slopes prior to acceptance of the tract and/or issuance of building permits.
37.Clearing of any portion of the existing creek and drainage channels, including any required
tree removals, and any necessary erosion repairs shall be to done the satisfaction of the
Public Works Director, Corp. of Engineers and the Department of Fish & Game. Certain
trees may require safety pruning by a certified Arborist as determined by the City Arborist.
Homeowners’ Association:
38.The subdivider shall submit CC&R's with the Final Map that establishes a Homeowner's
Association (HOA). The HOA shall include the mandatory annexation of Tract 2342 and
Tract 2353. The HOA shall provide for maintenance of all common area drainage channels,
on-site and/or sub-regional drainage basins and conveyance improvements and the
Margarita median landscaping and trail network. The CC&R's shall be approved by the City
and shall be recorded prior to or concurrent with recordation of the Final Map. A Notice of
Annexation or other appropriate mechanism to annex Tract2353 into the HOA, including
all associated common area and the regional drainage basin, shall be recorded concurrently
with the map.
PH4 - 63
39.Prior to map recordation, the Serra Meadows Business-Professional Office Association shall
enter into an agreement with the Serra Meadows Residential Homeowners’ Association to
pay their prorata share of the cost to maintain the regional storm drain basin and related
facilities. The Agreement for Drainage Easement and Maintenance of Storm Water
Detention Basin between the Residential HOA and the Professional Office Association shall
be revised to specifically include the regional basin and appurtenances.
40.Prior to map recordation, the subdivider shall (a) reach an agreement with the property
owners of Prado Park LLC south of Prado Road and the property owners of VTM 2428
regarding use and maintenance of the regional basin, or (b) demonstrate to the city that they
have exhausted all reasonable efforts to reach an agreement. If an agreement cannot be
reached, these property owners will need to demonstrate to the city's satisfaction how they
will provide storm drainage mitigation, open space maintenance, and wetland mitigation
through their own subdivision design and maintenance association.
41.The Homeowners' Association (HOA) shall maintain all that portion of Lot 64 of Tract 2342
and the regional basin south of Prado Road. Maintenance responsibilities shall include
maintenance of any cut or fill slopes required to make the swale and berm. The storm
drainage system within the private streets shall be privately owned and maintained by the
HOA (to be included in CC&R's). Those open space areas that accommodate trails intended
for public use shall be maintained for public access in perpetuity.
42.Subdivider shall prepare conditions, covenants, and restrictions (CC&R's) to be approved by
the City. The CC&R's shall be recorded prior to or concurrent with recordation of the Final
Map. The CC&R's shall contain the following provisions that pertain to all lots:
a.Creation of an HOA or annexation into an HOA, if one exists.
b.No parking except in approved, designated spaces.
c.No change in city-required provisions of the CC&R's without prior City approval.
d.Provision for all of the maintenance responsibilities outlined in various conditions.
e.Provision for common driveway use, access, and maintenance for those lots with
shared access.
43.Prior to map recordation, the CC&R’s shall be amended and/or supplemental CC&R’s
created to address the following:
a.Include Lots 39 and 134 as residential lots.
b.Remove Lot 39 as a common area lot.
c.Include the new alley serving Lots 46 through 49 and Lot 134 as common area.
d.Include a maintenance plan for the regional basin.
PH4 - 64
e.Indicate who will be responsible for maintaining the gravity wall drainage lines in the
back and side yards of the private lots. These lines are continuous drain lines that
cross from lot to lot, so there needs to be some continuity in regards to maintenance.
f.Specifically include maintenance of the bike/pedestrian pathways by the HOA within
Lots 45 and Lots 131-133 in Exhibit E, Chart of Maintenance Obligations.
g.Revise Exhibit E to include “Sewer Collection and Storm Drain Linesin Alley
Easement Areas” as being maintained by the HOA.
h.Revise Exhibit E to include the parkway adjacent to Lots 5 and 6 to be maintained by
the Professional Office Association.
Paths/Open Space:
44.The multi-use paths should be 12 feet in width as called for in the Specific Plan, however,
the Natural Resource Manager and Public Works Director may approve a narrower path in
locations that will only be used by pedestrians only or where environmental conditions
warrant a narrower path based on in-the-field consideration.
45.Final design (including materials, location, width, bridging and lighting) ofpathways shall
be reviewed and approved by the Natural Resources Manager and Public Works Director.
46.Class I path crossings at public streets should be perpendicular to the street. A cross section
should be developed to show transition of path up to the roadway crossing. Choke-downs
and signage shall be provided and crossing shall be designed to direct pedestrians to cross
the roadway in a direct perpendicular manner.
Air Quality:
47.All activities associated with construction and operation for the subdivision map shall
comply at all times with all current APCD Rules and Regulations as applicable, including
but not limited to PM-10, NOX emissions, Best Available Control Technologies,
construction activity management plans, and phasing techniques
Housing Programs:
48.To provide the required affordable units for both Tentative Tract 2342 & 2353, Lot 108, the
R-3 zoned affordable housing site, shall be dedicated to the Housing Authority prior to, or in
conjunction with the recording of Phase 2 of Tract 2353. If the Housing Authority cannot
move forward with a project at the time that the project would be set to be built out, they
could formally pass on the opportunity thereby providing an option for another entity to
develop the site with an affordable project, subject to the review and approval of the
Community Development Director. Improvement plans for Phase 2 of Tract 2353 shall
include complete access and infrastructure (roads, water, sewer, and utilities) to serve the
Housing Authority site. Additional affordable housing requirements will be required if the
average residential unit size of the entire Tract 2353 exceeds 2,000 square feet as per Table
2A of the City Housing Element.
PH4 - 65
Planning Requirements:
49.Bulb outs at ‘T’ intersections need to be added to the straight leg “crossing the ‘T’” and
elongated such that pedestrian crossings are at 90 degrees to the opposing bulb out
transitions for the intersecting street leg.
50.Bulb-outs shall be provided at alley access points to street to provide line of sight where red
curbing would otherwise be needed.
51.Development of lots adjacent to El Camino Estates or the proposed VTM #2428 where pad
elevations differ by four or more feet shall be limited to single-story development and
increased rear yard setbacks of aminimum of 10 feet, or equivalent design techniques that
maximize privacy protection for the adjacent lot as approved by the Architectural Review
Commission.
52.For lots with slope banks 3:1 or steeper adjacent to the property line and drainage structures
in the rear yards, the subdivider shall designate the entire slope bank as a slope easement to
be maintained by the HOA. A deed restriction shall be placed on all lots with this situation
so that a 6 foot high privacy fence shall be installed and maintained at the top of the slope
53.All lighting within the subdivision shall comply with the lighting standards contained in the
San Luis Obispo Community Design Guidelines and as further stipulated in the Mitigation
Measures listed below.
54.In order to be consistent with the requirements of the Margarita Area Specific Plan and
County Airport Land Use Plan, the property owner shall grant an avigation easement for the
benefit and protection of the City of San Luis Obispo, the County of San Luis Obispo and
the San Luis Obispo County Airport via an avigation easement document prior to the
recordation of the final map.
55.In the event archaeological resources are discovered in conjunction with a construction
project, all activities shall cease and the Community DevelopmentDepartment shall be
notified so that the procedures required by state law may be applied.
56.New development shall implement all feasible measures to minimize the use of
conventional energy for space heating and cooling, water heating and illumination by means
of proper design and orientation, including the provision and protection of solar exposure.
57.As set forth in the Margarita Area Specific Plan, there shall be a minimum setback of 157
feet for new single family residential units from the centerline of Prado Road. Proposed
Live/Work units may be located within the 157-foot setback from Prado Road (60 dB noise
contour) subject to compliance with all of the requirements of the Sound Level Assessment
from David Lord of 45 dB dated 9-14-11.
58.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
PH4 - 66
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.The City shall promptly notify the
subdivider of any claim, action, or proceeding.
59.For interior streets (not Prado Road), a 15-foot public street yard shall be allowed for homes
and a 20-foot street yard for garages with doors facing the public street. Per the Margarita
Area Specific Plan, front porches are allowed to have a 10-foot setback.
60.The subdivider shall provide an appropriately sized recycled water main from the end of the
existing main in Margarita Avenue north on Cherry Lane to the north boundary of the tract
to serve the project’s linear park landscape irrigation as well as the adjacent VTM 2428.
Code Requirements:
1.Traffic impact and water and wastewater impact fees are required to be paid as a condition of
issuance of building permits.
2.Appropriate backflow prevention will be necessary on any connection to the City water
system if the property includes an active well.
3.EPA Requirement: General Construction Activity Storm Water Permits are required for all
storm water discharges associated with a construction activity where clearing, grading and
excavation results in land disturbance of five or more acres. Storm water discharges of less
than five acres, but which is part of a larger common plan of development or sale, also
require a permit. Permits are required until the construction is complete to be covered by a
General Construction Activity Permit;the owner(s) of land where construction activity
occurs must submit a completed “Notice of Intent” (NO I) form, with the appropriate fee, to
the State Water Board.
4.The subdivision design shall comply with the City’s grading ordinance.
5.Street trees shallbe planted along the private street per City Standards (the number of trees is
determined by one tree per 35 linear feet of street frontage).
6.All boundary monuments, lot comers 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. An electronic file
containing the appropriate data compatible with AutoCAD (Digital Interchange Format,
DXF) for Geographic Information System (GIS) purposes, shall be submitted to the City
Engineer.
7.Access shall be in accordance with Article 9 of the California Fire Code (CFC). Access roads
shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet and an unobstructed vertical
clearance of 13’ 6”. Access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed
PH4 - 67
loads of a 60,000 pound fire apparatus and shall be provided with a surface so as to provide
all-weather driving capabilities. All cul-de-sacs shall be minimum 40 foot radius.
8.Approved address numbers shall be placed on all new buildings in such a position to be
plainly visible and legible from the street fronting the property. Numbers shall be a minimum
of 5” high x’ “stroke and be on a contrasting background. [UFC 901 .4.4].
9.Water supplies and fire hydrants shall be provided in accordance with applicable articles of
the CFC. An approved water supply capable of providing the required fire flow for fire
protection is required. The fire flow shall be determined using applicable Appendices of the
CFC.
10.Fire protection systems shall be installed in accordance with the CFC and the California
Building Code. An approved NFPA system will be required for this project.
11.Fire hydrants shall be spaced per SLO-FD Guidelines (placement with Fire Department
approval) and shall be capable of supplying the required fire-flows.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________,
and on the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
th
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 15 day of April 2014.
____________________________________
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Anthony Mejia
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
PH4 - 68
Kremke, Kate
From: Mejia, Anthony
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 8:30 AM
To: Kremke, Kate
Subject: FW: Original speech to Planning Commission Re: Mangano Homes
Agenda Correspondence for 04/15/14 regarding Serra Meadows, Mangano Homes
Anthony J. Mejia I City Clerk
CItIV (11' SArl LUIS OBIS130
Sao PaIrn Street
San Lui, Obispo, Cara 9340
to (�3
APR 032014
AGENDA
CORRESPONDENCE
Date L± )item#
From: Chris Richardson [ mailto: chris @richardsonproperties.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2014 10:38 PM
To: Mila Vujovich -La Barre; Mejia, Anthony; Dietrick, Christine; Carpenter, Dan; Johnson, Derek; Marx, Jan; Lichtig, Katie;
Smith, Kathy; Codron, Michael; Christianson, Carlyn; Ashbaugh, John
Cc: Charles Richardson; Stephen Peck; Andy Mangano
Subject: Re: Original speech to Planning Commission Re: Mangano Homes
Mila,
As I mentioned last night at the council meeting, we've know each other for a long time, and while we often don't agree on
community development topics, I considered you a friend of my family. As such I would have appreciated you contacting me
directly to discuss any "concerns" you may have, prior to making unfounded, incorrect, and derogatory comments toward
Mangano Homes and my staff at a Council meeting.
With that said, let me set the record straight.
First, your insinuation that one of my sales agents didn't know that Prado Road would ultimately become connect to Broad, is
absurd. I called all three of my agents last night, and asked them to tell me what they say when they are asked about Prado
Road, all three answered that ultimately Prado Road will connect to Broad Street; however, the additional development of
Prado Road would occur as other properties are developed. I did not preempt their responses. Their accurate responses
were not a surprise to me.
I'm not sure who you talked to, because of the three agents that we have that work at Serra Meadows, only one is a male. He
has no recollection of anyone asking to be contacted by myself or Charlie Richardson. Maybe you talked to a sub contractor, I
don't know, all I know is you didn't talk to one of my sales agents.
Regarding the disclosure, here is a portion of our purchase agreement, which discloses to buyers in writing about the
surrounding land uses, future development of houses and commercial, and the extension of Prado Road.
ATTACHMENT 8 TO ADDENDUM "H"
SURROUNDING LAND USE DISCLOSURE
SURROUNDING USES. Uses and Improvements in the immediate vicinity of the Community as of the Effective Date include those
approximately depicted on the Contiguous Area Map attached as Exhibit A. Uses and conditions change over time. The Project and
Property are part of the Margarita Area Specific Plan ( "Specific Plan "), the land use diagram for which is shown on Exhibit B . The
Specific Plan which was adopted by the City of San Luis Obispo in , 20_. The Specific Plan contemplates the following
improvements and changes in the vicinity of the Property and Project:
1. Extension of Prado Road from Higuera to Broad Street.
2. Development of office uses and business parks on the south side of Prado Road totaling 750,000 square feet of building
space.
3. Development of up to 200 additional housing units north of the Property and Project, some of which are planned to use the
streets in the Project and Community.
4. Development of a Park and Greenbelt for general public use from the current terminus of Margarita Road to one -half mile
east of the Community.
5. Development of affordable housing north and east of the Community.
6. Development of the "Damon- Garcia" property to the east of the Property and Project with 500 dwelling units, retail
commercial facilities, parks and open space.
7. Preservation of the South Hills Open Space area.
City plans change from time to time, and there is no guarantee when or if any or all of the above facilities will be completed. Seller
has no control over uses of property lying outside the Community, nor any obligation to update the disclosures made hereby. Owners
are advised to contact the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Department at 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401, telephone
(805)781 -7170.
Dated:
SELLER:
RESCAL SLO 193, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
By
Print Name:
Title:
Dated:
BUYER:
Print Name:
Print
As you can clearly see, we disclose the extension of Prado Road, among many other things.
Also, I think the hyperbole that you use in your email below is not helpful or accurate. The words like "uproar" that you
believe will occur when Prado Road is extended further, and referring to it as a "Truck" route. Prado Road is a much needed
east west vehicle and bicycle connection, and long overdue, as evidenced by 80% of voters rejecting measure H in 2010.
Lastly, Mangano Homes representatives have met with Mr. Alfie Martinelli this week, I believe he did not have all the recent
accurate information prior to his comments at the last planning commission meeting. I'm not sure what Mr. Roy Garcia's
comments were.
Chris Richardson
MANAGING PARTNER
License # 01200458
FR_
I'ti, I Illv1 .1111 @7IklI ail
HRIST E'S
1 N F 1RNAJ rRJNAA- REILI, ENfall:
805 - 781 -8003 direct
805 - 801 -9091 mobile
805 - 548 -8393 fax
chris @richardsonproperties.com
735 Tank Farm Road, Suite 130
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
www.richardsonproperties.com
www.christiesrealestate.com
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any
review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended
recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. Richardson Properties, Inc. a
California Corporation.
From: Mila Vujovich -La Barre < milavu @hotmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 at 5:24 PM
To: "ameiia@slocity.org" <ameiia @slocity.org >, Christine Dietrick <cdietric @slocity.org >, clan carpenter
<dcarpent @slocity.org >, Derek Johnson <diohnson @slocity.org >, Jan Marx <imarx @slocity.org >, Katie Lichtig
<klichtig @slocity.org >, kathy smith <ksmith @slocity.org >, Michael Codron <mcodron @slocity.org >,
"cchristi @slocity.org" <cchristi @slocity.org >, "Ashbaugh, John" <iashbaug @slocity.org >, CHRIS RICHARDSON
< chris @richardsonproperties.com>
Subject: FW: Original speech to Planning Commission Re: Mangano Homes
> Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 16:16:43 -0700
> From: MVuiovic @slcusd.org
>To:.milavu@hotm il.com
> Subject: Original speech to Planning Commission Re: Mangano Homes
> Dear Chris Richardson -
> You will find below the original speech that I gave at the Planning
> Commission last month as per your request.
> These same concerns were raised before the City Council last night
> since this matter will be before them on April 15, 2014. 1 will be
> forwarding them another letter about my concerns soon.
> Last night, during the break at the City Council meeting, you mentioned
> to me that the agents of the development that you represent do disclose
> the future Prado Road development to buyers. You stated that you would
> forward to me the disclosure that is already in existence.
> Perhaps the sales people that I met with were inexperienced. I did
> leave them my name and number for you or your father to contact me and I
> never heard from anyone before the date of the Planning Commission
> meeting or last night's City Council meeting.
> I toured the homes for a friend that may move in to the area. They are
> indeed lovely and well- appointed. It just seems like there are some
> mitigation measures that could be taken now to avoid an uproar in the
> future if and when Prado Road becomes a 4 -lane truck route with
> round -a- bouts. The negative declaration on the EIR does not seem
> appropriate to me. I also question why Prado Road is constructed the way
> it is now when the LUCE master plan shows a 4 -lane truck route with
> round -a- abouts.
> So you are aware, members of the Martinelli family also spoke at that
> same Planning Commission meeting and they were extremely dismayed about
> the road construction. Mr. Garcia also spoke that night with concerns
> about Prado Road as well.
> Since you were active on the Land Use Circulation Element committee for
> the City of San Luis Obispo, I know that you are intimately aware of the
> proposed build out in that area. Perhaps you are in a position to
> contact the aforementioned parties before the meeting on April 15, 2014
> as a Realtor or a LUCE member.
• I look forward to seeing a copy of the disclosure. It will help me to
• comment accurately at the next meeting.
• Thank you for your consideration.
> Sincerely,
> Mila
• Mila Vujovich -La Barre
• E- mail:milavu @hotmail.com
• Mobile: 805 - 441 -5818
> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
> To: Whom it May Concern
> Re: Text of San Luis Obispo Planning Commission Speech for the 3 minute
> time period
> Date: Wednesday- March 12, 2014
> Good evening Planning Commissioners.
> My name is Mila Vujovich -La Barre.
> Over the last 13 years I have followed the development in and around
> the Damon Garcia Sports Fields, the Dalidio development, the Chevron
> remediation, the Margarita Area and more. I consider myself to be a
> smart growth advocate.
• In regard to Mangano Homes under discussion tonight, you can see by the
• handout on Page 1 that Prado Road is dedicated as a four -lane truck
• highway in the recent work done by the Land Use Circulation Element
• (LUCE) committee. The document that you have before you is from the most
• recent Circulation Plan. I have highlighted Prado Road for you in
• yellow. This road goes right past the Mangano home development. Notice
• it is from the document labeled "truck route."
> That plan completely contradicts what has already been built by the
> developers of Mangano homes. If you take the time to travel South on
> Higuera street and take a left onto Prado Road, you will see a two lane
> road with a simple roundabout. It has finished curbs and thankfully a
> generous bike path.
• As a citizen, I took a tour of the new model homes. When I talked to
• the salesperson, he did not know about the City plan for Prado Road. He
• said a few potential buyers had asked about it but he was not aware of
• it or how it might affect the homeowners.
• I believe that the builders and agents should perform due diligence and
• divulge the master plan of the City to potential buyers. The now bucolic
• country road will eventually be replaced by a 4- lane truck highway.
• I also think that if a portion of the road is being built, that is
• should be built according to the proposed master plan- a 4 -lane truck
> highway.
> In tonight's staff report, Doug Davidson signs off on the document
> stating that this proposal does not require an EIR. I believe that is in
> error and is a gross oversight.
> An EIR should be done on the Mangano Homes project. The cumulative
> traffic study should be executed taking in to consideration the total
> number of cars, trucks and bikers that will eventually be using that
> road.
> Ultimately the traffic numbers will be much higher when the traffic
> from the Margarita homes, the housing tracts by the Damon and Garcia
> families and others are built. One also must consider the one million
> square feet of commercial development that is penciled in between those
> aforementioned developments and the one that Chevron has proposed.
> All of the cumulative effects of Prado Road should be studied,
> disclosed and mitigated for Mangano Homes development. There is not a
> question in my mind that the noise and emissions from backed up idling
> cars and trucks at the stoplight at Prado and South Higuera will have an
> impact on the quality of life and on the health of the residents in
> those homes.
> The impacts will be even more severe if the on ramp at Prado and
> Highway 101 remains a one lane on ramp.
> Not only do I think that this Mangano Homes project needs an EIR but
> there should be a comprehensive EIR for all of Prado Road completed from
> Broad Street to Madonna Road.
> If it can be done now that would give developers and constituents a
> clear vision of the cost of development.
> I believe that building Prado Road the way that we are doing it is in
> violation of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
> The Southern area of town is indeed the last part of town to be built
> out. It will be very lucrative for builders and current property owners,
> and increase our tax base and provide for workforce housing. I
> understand that.
> Prado Road is a development driven road. Most people now realize that.
> However, it should not be segmented. The developers should be working
> together to build it in a uniform fashion, to share the costs and to
> make it safe for trucks, cars, and cyclists and to ensure that any
> environmental impacts are mitigated.
> I am hoping tonight that you will all have the courage and vision to
> call for an EIR for this project and ultimately the comprehensive EIR
> that I have requested.
> THANK YOU.
> Mila Vujovich -La Barre
> 650 Skyline Drive
> San Luis Obispo, California 93405
> Mobile: 805 - 441 -5818
To: Mayor !an Marx and the San Luis Obispo City Council
Re: Mangano Homes in San Luis Obispo
Date: Tuesday, April 15, 2014
COUNCIL MEETING: QLA I Vs I ZoI cj
ITEM NO.: V"-(-%
Good evening Mayor Marx and City Council Members, APR 16 2014
My name is Mila Vujovich -La Barre.
As an advocate of smart growth, I am here tonight out of concern for the negative
declaration on the environmental impact report (EIR) of the Mangano Homes project
that is bordered by Prado Road.
Prado Road is a four -lane truck highway according to the Land Use Circulation Element
(LUCE) committee. The document that you have before you is from the most recent
Circulation Plan. I have highlighted Prado Road for you in yellow. This road goes right
past the Mangano homes development. Notice it is from the City document labeled
"truck route."
Most people now realize that Prado Road is a development driven road. However, it is
being segmented which will have disastrous consequences. It is also in my opinion in
violation of CEQA guidelines since Prado Road is shown as an entire project from Broad
Street to Madonna Road.
Developers should be working together to build Prado Road in a uniform fashion, to
share the costs and to make it safe for trucks, cars, and cyclists and to ensure that any
environmental impacts are mitigated.
An EIR for Mangano Homes should be completed. It does not merit the negative
declaration that it has been granted. One of your options tonight is to keep this item
under review and ask for an EIR for this development.
An EIR would produce a cumulative traffic study that would take into consideration the
total number of cars, trucks and bikers that will eventually be using that road because
ultimately the traffic numbers will be much higher when the traffic from the Margarita
homes, the housing tracts by the Damon and Garcia families and others are built. One
also must consider the one million square feet of commercial development that is
penciled in between those aforementioned developments and the one that Chevron has
proposed.
There is not a question in my mind that the noise and emissions from backed up, idling
cars and trucks at the stoplight at Prado and South Higuera will have an impact on the
quality of life and on the health of the residents in those new homes.
The impacts will be even more severe if the on ramp at Prado and Highway 101 remains
a one -lane on ramp.
The other reason for keeping this item under review and completing an EIR on it is that
next month the Chevron remediation will come under discussion. The most recent draft,
shown to me at my request by City staff, shows that roads that originally were
presented in the Airport Area Specific plan and the Margarita Area Specific Plan will no
longer be feasible according to Chevron. Those roads have been highlighted for you in
orange on the map before you.
This new information would present environmental impacts to be mitigated along Prado
Road since a certain degree of gridlock will be created that was previously unforeseen.
Although I have requested numerous times for a comprehensive EIR for all of Prado
Road from Broad Street to Madonna Road, one has not been ordered. As a constituent,
I continue to believe that would give developers the best vision of the cost of
development. I do not think that taxpayers should be paying the bill of the developers.
Also, for clarification, I did express a concern publicly after I toured the properties as a
consumer in February. The sales people did not have knowledge of Prado Road, the 4-
lane truck highway on the City's current LUCE documents.
Since then, I have been contacted by the individuals who are selling and marketing the
homes. They have forwarded me the written disclosures that are presented to all
potential buyers. I have concluded that the day I toured the homes must have been a
day when one of the subcontractors were taking "floor time." I was delighted to see that
future homeowners are indeed made aware of the 4 -lane truck highway being adjacent
to their homes and that it will not always be a bucolic country road.
In closing, I do understand that building out this area of town will be very lucrative for
builders and current property owners increase our tax base and provide for workforce
housing.
I just believe that all of the cumulative effects of Prado Road should be studied,
disclosed and mitigated for Mangano homes development through an EIR, especially
given the new information contained in the Chevron remediation report.
Thank you.
Ma,a/Vby&v6dv -Lcv3a rrev
Mila Vujovich -La Barre
650 Skyline Drive
San Luis Obispo, California 93405
Mobile: 805 - 441 -5818
crtyor Circulation
fl s M Luis omspo
THE GENERAL PLAN
Truck Route Legend Figure 5 - Truck Route Map
EXISTING TRUCK ROUTE
�■ FUTURE TRUCK ROUTE -5 1 2
-- City Limits MapGea�adbyCityo(SanW&CIbkpo: GIs DIVISIO
1 r.we
2 -51
>
:HORT
L4
it K;
..... ........
Fin
JESPERSOjq
.... .... ...
m
r. is ¢ r w WtT
1:.j
LA M
., ii
-E V-E E :A
v
jr
.. .... 10
13,
DAVENPORT CREEI
M rn
<
�7- =r e
'0
-.
i Ni�
i
(D
IIL
>
0
K:
co
m
X-
-u
0)
3
CD
Z
2:
m
(1)
CL
-
V)
::1-.
-0
D3
CL
N
2
S�,
0)
<D
-n
(n
-00)
E
CD
cn
23
O
U,,
=1
(D
C:
0
a
(D
-0
w
,u
0
CL
70
N.
th
CD
—
>
:3.
(33
3
CD
M
M
0
M
Z!
CD
—
CD
p
-n
Eb
-P
0)
-<
W
=)
&)
Cssnnn
N
�0
1<
CD
cn
APR 032014
Kremke, Kate
From: Mejia, Anthony --
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 8:29 AM f�CE1�1w'E: -
To: Kremke, Kate 1
Subject: FW: Original speech to Planning Commission Re: Mangano Homes APR 0 4 2014
CLE
Agenda Correspondence for 04/15/14 regarding Serra Meadows, Mangano Homes.
Anthony J. Mejia I City Clerk
clt.v 01, ;, \rl Im", onsspo
990 Palm Street
Sain Luis Obispo, CA 9,3401
tEd 180S 7817102
AGENDA
CORRESPONDENCE
Date 3-155 4 Item
From: Mila Vujovich- LaBarre [mailto:milavu @hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2014 6:25 PM
To: Mejia, Anthony; Dietrick, Christine; Carpenter, Dan; Johnson, Derek; Marx, Jan; Lichtig, Katie; Smith, Kathy; Codron,
Michael; Christianson, Carlyn; Ashbaugh, John; chris @richardsonproperties.com
Subject: FW: Original speech to Planning Commission Re: Mangano Homes
> Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 16:16:43 -0700
> From: MVuiovic @slcusd.or�
> To: milavu @hotmaii.com
> Subject: Original speech to Planning Commission Re: Mangano Homes
• Dear Chris Richardson-
• You will find below the original speech that I gave at the Planning
• Commission last month as per your request.
> These same concerns were raised before the City Council last night
> since this matter will be before them on April 15, 2014. 1 will be
> forwarding them another letter about my concerns soon.
> Last night, during the break at the City Council meeting, you mentioned
> to me that the agents of the development that you represent do disclose
> the future Prado Road development to buyers. You stated that you would
> forward to me the disclosure that is already in existence.
• Perhaps the sales people that I met with were inexperienced. I did
• leave them my name and number for you or your father to contact me and I
• never heard from anyone before the date of the Planning Commission
• meeting or last night's City Council meeting.
> I toured the homes for a friend that may move in to the area. They are
> indeed lovely and well- appointed. It just seems like there are some
> mitigation measures that could be taken now to avoid an uproar in the
> future if and when Prado Road becomes a 4 -lane truck route with
> round -a- bouts. The negative declaration on the EIR does not seem
> appropriate to me. I also question why Prado Road is constructed the way
> it is now when the LUCE master plan shows a 4 -lane truck route with
> round -a- abouts.
> So you are aware, members of the Martinelli family also spoke at that
> same Planning Commission meeting and they were extremely dismayed about
> the road construction. Mr. Garcia also spoke that night with concerns
> about Prado Road as well.
> Since you were active on the Land Use Circulation Element committee for
> the City of San Luis Obispo, I know that you are intimately aware of the
> proposed build out in that area. Perhaps you are in a position to
> contact the aforementioned parties before the meeting on April 15, 2014
> as a Realtor or a LUCE member.
> I look forward to seeing a copy of the disclosure. It will help me to
> comment accurately at the next meeting.
> Thank you for your consideration.
> Sincerely,
> Mila
> Mila Vujovich -La Barre
> E- mail:milavu @hotmail.com
> Mobile: 805 - 441 -5818
> XX XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
> To: Whom it May Concern
> Re: Text of San Luis Obispo Planning Commission Speech for the 3 minute
> time period
> Date: Wednesday- March 12, 2014
> Good evening Planning Commissioners.
> My name is Mila Vujovich -La Barre.
> Over the last 13 years I have followed the development in and around
> the Damon Garcia Sports Fields, the Dalidio development, the Chevron
> remediation, the Margarita Area and more. I consider myself to be a
> smart growth advocate.
> In regard to Mangano Homes under discussion tonight, you can see by the
2
> handout on Page 1 that Prado Road is dedicated as a four -lane truck
> highway in the recent work done by the Land Use Circulation Element
> (LUCE) committee. The document that you have before you is from the most
> recent Circulation Plan. I have highlighted Prado Road for you in
> yellow. This road goes right past the Mangano home development. Notice
> it is from the document labeled "truck route."
> That plan completely contradicts what has already been built by the
> developers of Mangano homes. If you take the time to travel South on
> Higuera street and take a left onto Prado Road, you will see a two lane
> road with a simple roundabout. It has finished curbs and thankfully a
> generous bike path.
> As a citizen, I took a tour of the new model homes. When I talked to
> the salesperson, he did not know about the City plan for Prado Road. He
> said a few potential buyers had asked about it but he was not aware of
> it or how it might affect the homeowners.
> I believe that the builders and agents should perform due diligence and
> divulge the master plan of the City to potential buyers. The now bucolic
> country road will eventually be replaced by a 4- lane truck highway.
> I also think that if a portion of the road is being built, that is
> should be built according to the proposed master plan- a 4 -lane truck
> highway.
> In tonight's staff report, Doug Davidson signs off on the document
> stating that this proposal does not require an EIR. I believe that is in
> error and is a gross oversight.
> An EIR should be done on the Mangano Homes project. The cumulative
> traffic study should be executed taking in to consideration the total
> number of cars, trucks and bikers that will eventually be using that
> road.
> Ultimately the traffic numbers will be much higher when the traffic
> from the Margarita homes, the housing tracts by the Damon and Garcia
> families and others are built. One also must consider the one million
> square feet of commercial development that is penciled in between those
> aforementioned developments and the one that Chevron has proposed.
> All of the cumulative effects of Prado Road should be studied,
> disclosed and mitigated for Mangano Homes development. There is not a
> question in my mind that the noise and emissions from backed up idling
> cars and trucks at the stoplight at Prado and South Higuera will have an
> impact on the quality of life and on the health of the residents in
> those homes.
> The impacts will be even more severe if the on ramp at Prado and
> Highway 101 remains a one lane on ramp.
> Not only do I think that this Mangano Homes project needs an EIR but
> there should be a comprehensive EIR for all of Prado Road completed from
> Broad Street to Madonna Road.
> If it can be done now that would give developers and constituents a
> clear vision of the cost of development.
> I believe that building Prado Road the way that we are doing it is in
> violation of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
> The Southern area of town is indeed the last part of town to be built
> out. It will be very lucrative for builders and current property owners,
> and increase our tax base and provide for workforce housing. I
> understand that.
> Prado Road is a development driven road. Most people now realize that.
> However, it should not be segmented. The developers should be working
> together to build it in a uniform fashion, to share the costs and to
> make it safe for trucks, cars, and cyclists and to ensure that any
> environmental impacts are mitigated.
> I am hoping tonight that you will all have the courage and vision to
> call for an EIR for this project and ultimately the comprehensive EIR
> that I have requested.
> THANK YOU.
> Mila Vujovich -La Barre
> 650 Skyline Drive
> San Luis Obispo, California 93405
> Mobile: 805 - 441 -5818
l� L4
Kremke, Kate
From: Mejia, Anthony
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 8:30 AM
To: Kremke, Kate
Subject: FW: Original speech to Planning Commission Re: Mangano Homes
Agenda Correspondence for 04/15/14
Anthony J. Mejia I City Clerk
99(.) Palm Street
`.acv n Luis Obj5 o, CA 9,34 3,
tel j 800 781,7302
AGENDA
CORRESPONDENCE
Date r `� Item# !-1
From: Mila Vujovich- LaBarre [mailto:milavu @hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 8:00 AM
To: Chris Richardson; Mejia, Anthony; Dietrick, Christine; Carpenter, Dan; Johnson, Derek; Marx, Jan; Lichtig, Katie;
Smith, Kathy; Codron, Michael; Christianson, Carlyn; Ashbaugh, John
Cc: Charlie Richardson (Ashley) SLO; Stephen Peck; Andy Mangano
Subject: RE: Original speech to Planning Commission Re: Mangano Homes
Chris -
To my knowledge, there is only one thing we disagree on and that is Prado Road and how it is being addressed
in the City. I still feel like it is being piecemealed or illegally segmented. The aftermath of this type of planning
has negative effects.
As you know, I was a licensed Realtor, my father went into commercial development after he retired from
teaching and my mom is still a Realtor in La Jolla. I understand that selling homes and facilitating development
is how you keep a roof over your head.
My concern is that I never heard from you or your father. I left a note with the sales people. The sales people
there when I toured the homes were not forthcoming or well- versed on the long term master plan of the area.
I do recall the one gentlemen stated that he was originally from the Fresno area. Maybe it was a sub-
contractor. It was raining that day and it was a weekend.
Thank you for forwarding me the disclosure below. That would have resolved some of my concerns before I
initially spoke at the Planning Commission meeting last month.
In short, I still feel that this area needs some environmental impacts mitigated. When there are semi - trucks,
cars, pedestrians and bicyclists backed up at the stop light at Prado Road and South Higuera Street, I think that
there are going to be some problems with air quality, noise and transit in general.
Maybe somebody from the City staff can address these concerns prior to the April 15, 2014 City Council
meeting on this same matter?
Also, although Measure H was approved by the vote of the public, the Northern Alignment has never had an
EIR done on it. The 23.5 acres of land was originally purchased for "recreation and open space" which made it
exempt from an EIR according to the documents in my possession. If there are City documents that state the
opposite, I have never seen them. I do have a statement from City staff in 2003 that states an EIR was never
done. I do not think anything has changed since then, with the exception of the City vote.
Take care.
Mila
From: chris @richardsonproperties.com
To: t -nilavu hotmail.com; ameiia @slocity.or ; cdietric @slocity.org; dcarpent @slocity.org;
diohnson @slocity.org; jmarx @slocity.org; klichtig @slocity.org; ksmith @slocity.org; mcodron @slocity.org;
cchristi@slocity.org; iashbau� @slocity.or�
CC: charlie@richardsonproperties.com; steve @manganoltd.com; andy @manganoltd.com
Subject: Re: Original speech to Planning Commission Re: Mangano Homes
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 05:37:56 +0000
Mila,
As I mentioned last night at the council meeting, we've know each other for a long time, and while we often
don't agree on community development topics, I considered you a friend of my family. As such I would have
appreciated you contacting me directly to discuss any "concerns" you may have, prior to making unfounded,
incorrect, and derogatory comments toward Mangano Homes and my staff at a Council meeting.
With that said, let me set the record straight.
First, your insinuation that one of my sales agents didn't know that Prado Road would ultimately
become connect to Broad, is absurd. I called all three of my agents last night, and asked them to tell me what
they say when they are asked about Prado Road, all three answered that ultimately Prado Road will connect to
Broad Street; however, the additional development of Prado Road would occur as other properties are
developed. I did not preempt their responses. Their accurate responses were not a surprise to me.
I'm not sure who you talked to, because of the three agents that we have that work at Serra Meadows, only
one is a male. He has no recollection of anyone asking to be contacted by myself or Charlie
Richardson. Maybe you talked to a sub contractor, I don't know, all I know is you didn't talk to one of my sales
agents.
Regarding the disclosure, here is a portion of our purchase agreement, which discloses to buyers in writing
about the surrounding land uses, future development of houses and commercial, and the extension of Prado
Road.
ATTACHMENT 8 TO ADDENDUM "H"
SURROUNDING LAND USE DISCLOSURE
SURROUNDING USES. Uses and Improvements in the immediate vicinity of the Community as of the Effective Date include those
approximately depicted on the Contiguous Area Map attached as Exhibit A. Uses and conditions change over time. The Project and
Property are part of the Margarita Area Specific Plan ( "Specific Plan "), the land use diagram for which is shown on Exhibit B The
Specific Plan which was adopted by the City of San Luis Obispo in , 20_. The Specific Plan contemplates the following
improvements and changes in the vicinity of the Property and Project:
1 Extension of Prado Road from Higuera to Broad Street.
2 Development of office uses and business parks on the south side of Prado Road totaling 750,000 square feet of building
space.
3. Development of up to 200 additional housing units north of the Property and Project, some of which are planned to use the
streets in the Project and Community.
4. Development of a Park and Greenbelt for general public use from the current terminus of Margarita Road to one -half mile
east of the Community.
5. Development of affordable housing north and east of the Community.
6. Development of the "Damon- Garcia" property to the east of the Property and Project with 500 dwelling units, retail
commercial facilities, parks and open space.
7. Preservation of the South Hills Open Space area.
City plans change from time to time, and there is no guarantee when or if any or all of the above facilities will be completed. Seller
has no control over uses of property lying outside the Community, nor any obligation to update the disclosures made hereby. Owners
are advised to contact the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Department at 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401, telephone
(805) 781 -7170.
Dated:
SELLER:
RESCAL SLO 193, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
By
Print Name:
Title:
Dated:
BUYER:
Print Name:
Print
As you can clearly see, we disclose the extension of Prado Road, among many other things.
Also, I think the hyperbole that you use in your email below is not helpful or accurate. The words like "uproar"
that you believe will occur when Prado Road is extended further, and referring to it as a "Truck" route. Prado
Road is a much needed east west vehicle and bicycle connection, and long overdue, as evidenced by 80% of
voters rejecting measure H in 2010.
Lastly, Mangano Homes representatives have met with Mr. Alfie Martinelli this week, I believe he did not have
all the recent accurate information prior to his comments at the last planning commission meeting. I'm not
sure what Mr. Roy Garcia's comments were.
Chris Richardson
MANAGING PARTNER
License # 01200458
[7R]
11011, 11�I Ao 11Y S•161 111
IN I I r NAI [I) N A I kAI 8,NVAI F
805 - 781 -8003 direct
805 - 801 -9091 mobile
805 - 548 -8393 fax
chris @richardsonproperties.com
735 Tank Farm Road, Suite 130
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
www.richardsonproperties.com
www.christiesrealestate.com
The inliormalion transmitted is intended only lirr the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential andlorprivileged material, Any
review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended
recipient is prohibited. if you received this in error. please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. Richardson Properties, Inc. a
California Corporation,
From: Mila Vujovich -La Barre < milavu @hotmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 at 5:24 PM
To: "ameiia @slocity.org" <ameiia @slocity.org >, Christine Dietrick <cdietric @slocity.org >, clan carpenter
<dcarpent @slocity.org >, Derek Johnson <diohnson @slocity.orR >, Jan Marx <imarx @slocity.org >, Katie Lichtig
<klichtig @slocity.org >, kathy smith <ksmith @slocity.org >, Michael Codron <mcodron @slocity.org >,
"cchristi @slocity.org" <cchristi @slocity.org >, "Ashbaugh, John" <iashbaug @slocity.org >, CHRIS RICHARDSON
< chris @richardsonproperties.com>
Subject: FW: Original speech to Planning Commission Re: Mangano Homes
> Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 16:16:43 -0700
> From: MVuiovic @slcusd.org
> To: milavu @hotmail.com
> Subject: Original speech to Planning Commission Re: Mangano Homes
> Dear Chris Richardson -
> You will find below the original speech that I gave at the Planning
> Commission last month as per your request.
• These same concerns were raised before the City Council last night
• since this matter will be before them on April 15, 2014. 1 will be
• forwarding them another letter about my concerns soon.
> Last night, during the break at the City Council meeting, you mentioned
> to me that the agents of the development that you represent do disclose
> the future Prado Road development to buyers. You stated that you would
> forward to me the disclosure that is already in existence.
> Perhaps the sales people that I met with were inexperienced. I did
> leave them my name and number for you or your father to contact me and I
> never heard from anyone before the date of the Planning Commission
> meeting or last night's City Council meeting.
> I toured the homes for a friend that may move in to the area. They are
> indeed lovely and well- appointed. It just seems like there are some
> mitigation measures that could be taken now to avoid an uproar in the
> future if and when Prado Road becomes a 4 -lane truck route with
> round -a- bouts. The negative declaration on the EIR does not seem
> appropriate to me. I also question why Prado Road is constructed the way
> it is now when the LUCE master plan shows a 4 -lane truck route with
> round -a- abouts.
• So you are aware, members of the Martinelli family also spoke at that
• same Planning Commission meeting and they were extremely dismayed about
• the road construction. Mr. Garcia also spoke that night with concerns
> about Prado Road as well.
> Since you were active on the Land Use Circulation Element committee for
> the City of San Luis Obispo, I know that you are intimately aware of the
> proposed build out in that area. Perhaps you are in a position to
> contact the aforementioned parties before the meeting on April 15, 2014
> as a Realtor or a LUCE member.
> I look forward to seeing a copy of the disclosure. It will help me to
> comment accurately at the next meeting.
> Thank you for your consideration.
> Sincerely,
> Mila
> Mila Vujovich -La Barre
> E- mail:milavu @hotmail.com
> Mobile: 805 - 441 -5818
> XXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXX?( XXXiC7CX7CXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX1{1 XXXXXXXXX?CXXXXXXXXXX
> To: Whom it May Concern
> Re: Text of San Luis Obispo Planning Commission Speech for the 3 minute
> time period
> Date: Wednesday- March 12, 2014
> Good evening Planning Commissioners.
> My name is Mila Vujovich -La Barre.
> Over the last 13 years I have followed the development in and around
> the Damon Garcia Sports Fields, the Dalidio development, the Chevron
> remediation, the Margarita Area and more. I consider myself to be a
> smart growth advocate.
> In regard to Mangano Homes under discussion tonight, you can see by the
> handout on Page 1 that Prado Road is dedicated as a four -lane truck
> highway in the recent work done by the Land Use Circulation Element
> (LUCE) committee. The document that you have before you is from the most
> recent Circulation Plan. I have highlighted Prado Road for you in
> yellow. This road goes right past the Mangano home development. Notice
> it is from the document labeled "truck route."
> That plan completely contradicts what has already been built by the
> developers of Mangano homes. If you take the time to travel South on
> Higuera street and take a left onto Prado Road, you will see a two lane
> road with a simple roundabout. It has finished curbs and thankfully a
> generous bike path.
> As a citizen, I took a tour of the new model homes. When I talked to
> the salesperson, he did not know about the City plan for Prado Road. He
> said a few potential buyers had asked about it but he was not aware of
> it or how it might affect the homeowners.
• I believe that the builders and agents should perform due diligence and
• divulge the master plan of the City to potential buyers. The now bucolic
• country road will eventually be replaced by a 4- lane truck highway.
> I also think that if a portion of the road is being built, that is
> should be built according to the proposed master plan- a 4 -lane truck
> highway.
• In tonight's staff report, Doug Davidson signs off on the document
• stating that this proposal does not require an EIR. I believe that is in
• error and is a gross oversight.
> An EIR should be done on the Mangano Homes project. The cumulative
> traffic study should be executed taking in to consideration the total
> number of cars, trucks and bikers that will eventually be using that
> road.
> Ultimately the traffic numbers will be much higher when the traffic
> from the Margarita homes, the housing tracts by the Damon and Garcia
> families and others are built. One also must consider the one million
> square feet of commercial development that is penciled in between those
> aforementioned developments and the one that Chevron has proposed.
> All of the cumulative effects of Prado Road should be studied,
> disclosed and mitigated for Mangano Homes development. There is not a
> question in my mind that the noise and emissions from backed up idling
> cars and trucks at the stoplight at Prado and South Higuera will have an
> impact on the quality of life and on the health of the residents in
> those homes.
> The impacts will be even more severe if the on ramp at Prado and
> Highway 101 remains a one lane on ramp.
• Not only do I think that this Mangano Homes project needs an EIR but
• there should be a comprehensive EIR for all of Prado Road completed from
> Broad Street to Madonna Road.
• If it can be done now that would give developers and constituents a
• clear vision of the cost of development.
> I believe that building Prado Road the way that we are doing it is in
6
> violation of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
> The Southern area of town is indeed the last part of town to be built
> out. It will be very lucrative for builders and current property owners,
> and increase our tax base and provide for workforce housing. I
> understand that.
> Prado Road is a development driven road. Most people now realize that.
> However, it should not be segmented. The developers should be working
> together to build it in a uniform fashion, to share the costs and to
> make it safe for trucks, cars, and cyclists and to ensure that any
> environmental impacts are mitigated.
> I am hoping tonight that you will all have the courage and vision to
> call for an EIR for this project and ultimately the comprehensive EIR
> that I have requested.
> THANK YOU.
> Mila Vujovich -La Barre
> 650 Skyline Drive
> San Luis Obispo, California 93405
> Mobile: 805 - 441 -5818