HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-01-2014 PH1 LUCE DEIR - Joint Hearing with PCCity of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number
FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: PRESENTATION OF THE PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULE OF THE LAND
USE AND CIRCULATION ELEMENTS OF THE GENERAL PLAN (LUCE)
UPDATE AND DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (DEIR) TO
PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL.
RECOMMENDATION
Receive a presentation on the LUCE and DEIR, consider the proposed public hearing schedule,
and direct staff to proceed through the public review process.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
The LUCE update process has been underway for 2 ½ years and the Draft Environmental Impact
Report (DEIR) is now ready for public review. The Draft EIR evaluates the potential impacts of
the community’s growth as envisioned in both the policy and program changes as well as
through the areas of physical changes identified in the opportunity sites. While much work has
been conducted by the Task Force for the Land Use and Circulation Elements update (TF-
LUCE), the Planning Commission and the Council itself, the project now proceeds through the
public hearing process for further refinement. A schedule of proposed hearings moving forward
has been provided for Council review.
Key issues addressed as part of the update include: input from residents and others in the
community; preservation and enhancement of the City’s neighborhoods; opportunities for infill;
multi-modal transportation concepts; airport planning issues; policy gaps; evaluation of
consistency with regional and state planning efforts; legislative changes; and other items
included as part of the Strategic Growth Council grant which funded the effort. In particular the
issue of airport planning and how the local regulations compare to state guidance has been
especially relevant. Dependent upon the Airport Land Use Commission’s (ALUC) determination
of whether the LUCE update is consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan, the Council will need
to determine whether changes to the LUCE update will be acceptable, thereby complying with
the ALUC determination or whether the Council will act to overrule the ALUC.
The DEIR, has been released for public review. This review period (June 13, 2014 to July 28,
2014) is intended to ensure residents, other members of the community and other governmental
agencies have the opportunity to review and provide comments regarding impacts and
mitigations identified in the DEIR. The Final EIR will incorporate and respond to the submitted
comments and the document will be a more robust information source for the Planning
Commission and Council as the hearing process proceeds. An executive summary of the DEIR
has been attached (Attachment 11) to the staff report and the full document is available on the
LUCE project web site at www.slo2035.com, or on CDs at the Community Development
Department.
PH1 - 1
LUCE DEIR Introduction Page 2
Initial findings of the DEIR determined that there are significant and unavoidable impacts in
several areas in Air Quality (long term), Land Use (inconsistency with Airport Land Use Plan),
Noise, and Traffic and Circulation (roadway performance, intersections, and freeways). Other
significant impacts were identified but can be mitigated through implementation of policies and
programs. Those areas include Agriculture, Air Quality (short term), Cultural Resources and
Public Services.
No formal action is required of the Council or Commission regarding the DEIR at this meeting.
Council is asked to review the proposed hearing schedule and direct staff to pursue the public
review process.
DISCUSSION
Background
The City’s General Plan update was formally initiated in January 2012 with funding through a
grant from Strategic Growth Council augmented by General Funds for the environmental review
portion of the process. Since that time, the City has conducted a variety of outreach efforts (see
Attachment 10) to engage the community and generate ideas and input for the update project.
With the City Council direction that this update should be focused rather than a wholesale
overhaul of the Land Use and Circulation Elements, the work effort has responded to legislative
changes and identified opportunity areas for growth in the planning area and circulation
infrastructure to support the city’s buildout. The remaining areas of the work effort have
centered on updating policies to strengthen and protect residential communities; add policies and
sections Healthy Communities and Sustainability, provide policy direction/performance
standards for the opportunity areas; and update circulation policies and programs to facilitate all
modes of transportation.
The Task Force for the Land Use and Circulation Elements Update (TF-LUCE) worked through
the legislative drafts of the elements over the course of 15 meetings during the Fall of 2013.
Their work was reviewed by the Planning Commission, and both TF-LUCE and Planning
Commission recommendations were considered by the City Council in January 2014.
Tonight’s study session is intended to brief the Planning Commission and the City Council on
the proposed hearing schedule and to provide an overview of the impacts and mitigations
identified in the Draft EIR during the 45 day review period.
Public Hearing Schedule
With the publication of the DEIR, a public hearing schedule has been prepared for Council’s
consideration (Attachment 1). The schedule includes referral hearings at the Airport Land Use
Commission and city advisory body hearings including the Parks and Recreation Commission,
Bicycle Advisory Committee, Mass Transportation Commission, Cultural Heritage Committee
and Planning Commission. This schedule has been developed to meet the State Grant deadline
as well as Council direction to complete the LUCE update with the current Council composition
in order to retain the continuity of the process and knowledge base of the decision-makers. This
PH1 - 2
LUCE DEIR Introduction Page 3
objective may or may not be achievable, depending on the progress and input received as part of
the City’s public review and input process, as well as the Airport Land Use Commission public
review process.
Overview of the LUCE Update: Key Issues
1. Generalized Project Description
The LUCE Update Project (the “Project” or “proposed Update Project”) provides proposed
changes to the City’s existing Land Use Element and Circulation Elements of the General Plan.
The last comprehensive update to the existing Land Use and Circulation Elements occurred in
1994. The update includes policies and programs intended to guide the land use decision-
making process, balance population growth with infrastructure availability, and provide a true
multimodal transportation system that will guide the community over the next 20 years.
The LUCE Update reflects extensive efforts and input from community surveys, workshops and
open houses, advisory bodies, the Task Force for the Land Use and Circulation Element Update
(TF-LUCE), City staff, consultants, the Planning Commission, and City Council. Based on
direction from the City Council that the Update Project primarily address infill opportunities,
changes in legislation, and the need to update existing policy direction to reflect current values
and requirements, the LUCE Update focuses on updated policy language and several areas of the
City where “physical” land use changes are proposed. The proposed physical land use changes
apply to particular areas that over the next 20 years may have the potential to accommodate
changes in the land use type or intensity, or are in need of circulation and infrastructure
improvements. From a policy aspect, the LUCE Update proposes changes to existing policy and
program language, and new policies and programs where needed to protect neighborhoods and to
enhance the two Elements or cover items not previously addressed. The policies and programs
included in the LUCE Update are intended to respond to grant objectives:
• Address notable policy gaps that have been identified over time in the existing
LUCE;
• Provide new policy direction to address issues raised during the proposed Project’s
public participation process;
• Respond to changes in state law;
• Address topics or items that the City committed to addressing as part of the
Sustainable Communities grant that provided funding for the Update Project; and
• Address inconsistencies between the proposed project and the Airport Land Use Plan
for San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport.
The Land Use Element Update proposes to “preserve and enhance” neighborhoods and the
physical conditions of the City and focus changes in specific areas. The physical changes
proposed by the Land Use Element Update are limited to changes in land use type or intensity in
specific areas (Attachments 2-4). These changes include 1) proposed mixed use redevelopment
of some sites, 2) the infill of underutilized locations, and 3) four sites that will require modified
or new specific plans: potential modification of the Margarita Area Specific Plan to allow
increased residential densities; and new specific plans for the San Luis Ranch (formerly known
PH1 - 3
LUCE DEIR Introduction Page 4
as the Dalidio site), the Madonna property at Los Osos Valley Road (LOVR), and the Avila
Ranch. Policy direction was also refined relative to a set of “Special Planning Areas”
(Section 8.3.3 in the proposed Land Use Element Update) throughout the City. This policy
guidance provides statements regarding the City’s expectations for these sites of new
development, redevelopment, and infill opportunities.
The policy and program updates proposed in the Airport Chapter of the Land Use Element
reflect airport safety, noise, height and overflight considerations consistent with the purposes of
the State Aeronautics Act. Policies, programs, and Zoning Code implementation have been
drafted to create an Airport Overlay Zone to codify airport compatibility criteria for areas subject
to airport influence consistent with the requirements of Cal. Pub. Utilities Code Section 21670,
et. seq, the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, and other related federal and state
requirements relating to airport land use compatibility planning.
Neighborhood policies have been strengthened to incorporate input from residents. These
include new policies in the Land Use Element which describe neighborhood amenities,
neighborhood enhancement, and direction regarding compatibility of development within
existing neighborhoods. In the Circulation Element, neighborhood preservation is addressed
through new policies that direct the City to reduce and maintain vehicular speeds in residential
neighborhoods; to update the neighborhood traffic management guidelines; and to ensure that
quality of life and livability of existing residential neighborhoods is not worsened when new
development is proposed. In addition, several new neighborhood parking management policies
have been added to address spill-over parking from adjacent uses, and to direct an update of the
City’s Residential Parking District Program.
The Circulation Element Update describes how the City plans to provide for the transportation of
people and goods and services within San Luis Obispo with connections to other areas in San
Luis Obispo County and beyond. The Circulation Element Update recognizes the implications
of land use policy on all modes of movement, and establishes policies, standards, and
implementation measures that work with the Land Use Element to address both existing and
potential circulation opportunities and deficiencies. The Circulation Element update includes the
concept of “complete streets” (a circulation system that meets the needs of all modes of travel)
and looks to integrate and enhance all types of circulation in order to create a more
comprehensive and functional circulation system for all users.
The proposed Circulation Element provides policy language to address a variety of circulation-
related issues, including: traffic reduction; transit; encouraging the use of bicycles and walking;
traffic management; future street network changes; truck, air and rail transportation; parking
management in commercial areas and residential neighborhoods; and scenic roadways. A new
section added to the Circulation Element addresses multi-modal transportation, or the
development and maintenance of a circulation system that balances the needs of all modes of
travel.
PH1 - 4
LUCE DEIR Introduction Page 5
2. Legislative changes
Since the last update to the Land Use and Circulation Elements, several pieces of legislation have
been enacted that either directly or indirectly affect the update of the LUCE. Several key
changes are noted below:
AB 1358 Complete Streets Act (see description below)
SB 244 Disadvantaged Communities (The City does not have an island, fringe, or legacy
unincorporated community within the sphere of influence so this legislation does
not apply)
SB 1241 Fire Hazards – address fire risk in state responsibility areas in Safety Element
(already done) and make findings regarding available fire protection and
suppression services prior to approval of tentative or parcel map.
SB 18 Tribal consultation – notices provided and letters requesting consultation were
sent.
SB 375 Not a city directive but required SLOCOG to develop a sustainable communities’
strategy to link land use and transportation planning to achieve Greenhouse Gas
reductions.
AB 162 Requires city to address flood safety in the land use, conservation, safety, and
housing elements. For LUE – identify and annually review areas subject to
flooding. Consider location of natural resources used for groundwater recharge
and storm-water management.
The most impactful legislation listed above is AB 1358, the Complete Streets Act. This
legislation requires jurisdictions to explicitly address the circulation needs of all modes of travel
when updating the Circulation Element. Applicable policies and programs to address this
legislation have been drafted and are included in the updated Circulation Element.
3. Airport Issues
Perhaps one of the more complicated issues facing the LUCE update has been analyzing land use
capacity given the noise and safety standards contained in the San Luis Obispo Regional Airport
Land Use Plan (ALUP). The ALUP is developed and maintained by the Airport Land Use
Commission (ALUC), an independent body created by provisions in the Public Utilities Code.
The City hired an aviation expert consultant to advise the City in the technical data needed to
map and understand the basis for safety and noise regulations contained in the ALUP. The
City’s objective has been to work with the ALUC to ensure that airport safety zones are
reasonably and prudently mapped based on data and facts. This is intended to support the
continued operation and success of the airport consistent with State and Federal rules and
regulations as well as generally accepted noise and safety principles that aligns with the City’s
vision for future land use in the Airport Area.
The consultant, Johnson Aviation, provided an evaluation of the state and federal guidance and
laws that set the framework for developing Airport Land Use Plans, specifically as they apply to
the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport. This evaluation is documented in the Airport
Land Use Compatibility Report included in Volume IV, Appendix F to the EIR appendix, and
PH1 - 5
LUCE DEIR Introduction Page 6
concludes that the Caltrans Division of Aeronautics Airport Land Use Planning Handbook
(Handbook) safety zones and associated land use limits provide more than adequate safety
provisions for the community and related airport operations.
Land use restrictions based on noise associated with aircraft operations are also identified in the
ALUP. The current ALUP includes noise contours based on a hypothetical maximum use of
airport runways. This approach is inconsistent with the adopted Airport Master Plan forecasts
and dramatically over-estimates noise associated with aircraft operations. The ALUC is seeking
consultant assistance to provide extended forecasts based on projected growth anticipated in the
Airport Master Plan. While the growth anticipated in the Master Plan has not come to fruition,
the ALUC has indicated a desire to extend and “grow” the forecasted operations out to a forty
year horizon. Noise contours developed with the forecast will be used by the ALUC to
determine where residential uses are not allowed under the ALUP. The ALUC has indicated the
continued application of the 55 decibel Community Noise Equivalent Level (dB CNEL) noise
contour as the basis for limiting residential development in the City of San Luis Obispo, which is
more stringent than the City’s noise policies. This issue is significant in that it prohibits new
residential uses unless they are located within a mapped 55 dB CNEL or lower noise contour.
The ultimate decision on consistency will be made by the ALUC after review of the City’s
required referral of the LUCE update. In order to address ALUC by-laws that ask how the City
would implement updated LUCE policies, a draft version of associated Zoning Code provisions
is also being submitted for review by the ALUC. The draft standards comport with the
Handbook regulations and will accompany the LUCE update should Council wish to address
more detailed implementation in light of future action by the ALUC.
The LUCE update referral package was submitted to the ALUC staff on June 13th, the date the
Draft EIR was released to the public (a required referral item). After County staff that supports
the ALUC makes a completeness determination on the City’s application, the ALUC has 60 days
in which to review the City’s proposed update and provide a determination of consistency with
the adopted Airport Land Use Plan. The City has requested that County staff to expeditiously
make a completeness determination. Should the ALUC determine the proposed update is
inconsistent with the Airport Land Use Plan, the Council has two options: make changes to the
General Plan to make it consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan as outlined by the ALUC; or
determine that the LUCE update complies with and addresses provisions of the State Aeronautics
Act and take action to overrule the ALUC. The Council meeting to review the ALUC’s
determination has been scheduled for August 19, 2014. As noted above, this schedule is
dependent on the ALUC taking action within prescribed timelines and the progress and outcomes
of the City’s public review process.
If the Council overrules the ALUC, specific findings are required to be included in that action.
Once overruled, the ALUC no longer assumes liability related to those matters on which the
Council exercises it overrule authority. These findings must be transmitted to both the ALUC
and the State Division of Aeronautics and these agencies have 30 days in which to review the
findings and provide responses that the Council must consider prior to taking final action on the
LUCE update and implementation measures.
PH1 - 6
LUCE DEIR Introduction Page 7
4. Public Facilities Financing Plan
The Public Facilities Financing Plan will accompany the LUCE update later in the process.
Infrastructure costs associated with the implementation will be estimated and provided for
Council consideration as the project moves through the hearing process. These estimates will
help inform an AB 1600 fee study subsequent to LUCE adoption to ensure that future
improvements are incorporated into the City’s fee programs.
Draft EIR and Significant Impacts
1. Contents of the EIR
The Draft EIR contains an evaluation of the “Proposed Project” which includes the policy and
program changes proposed in the Land Use and Circulation Elements, as well as the potential
physical changes considered by the Council (Attachments 2-9). In addition to evaluating the
proposed project, the draft EIR considers alternatives to the proposed project to determine
whether different policy or physical development choices could lessen impacts. State law
requires that an EIR also include consideration of a “no project” alternative as part of this
evaluation. The “no project” alternative would retain the existing Land Use and Circulation
Elements without change, not imply that development would be precluded altogether.
The proposed project is evaluated in the greatest detail so that decision-makers understand
potential impacts and mitigations as the project moves through the hearing process. The
alternatives are also evaluated, but to a lesser degree of detail. The environmental document for
the LUCE update is a program-level EIR, meaning that it does not evaluate project-level, specific
details. Rather, it looks at the group of policies and programs and physical changes being
considered and provides an evaluation of how the City’s policies, programs, and practices
address the particular item of concern. Mitigations are also offered at the policy and program
level.
2. Classes of Impacts
The results of the environmental evaluation across the topics considered in an EIR are typically
grouped into “Classes” of impacts. The categorization of impacts into classes allows the
decision-makers and the community to understand the magnitude of impact.
• Class I impact = significant and unavoidable. This means that despite identifying ways to
address the impact (termed “mitigation”), the impact remains and cannot be avoided.
This category may include mitigations to lessen the impact but will discuss why the
impact remains significant.
• Class II impact = significant impact but one that can be addressed or mitigated to the
point where it is no longer significant. This category will list the mitigations necessary to
reduce the impacts identified to a level that does not exceed a threshold.
• Class III impact = less than significant impact. Typically, this last category does not
require mitigation because the change or impact does not rise to the level of needing to be
addressed. However, these impacts are often listed for informational purposes to be
PH1 - 7
LUCE DEIR Introduction Page 8
transparent in the process of how the potential impact was evaluated and also to identify
beneficial impacts.
3. Timing or Term of Impact
Impacts may either be short term or cumulative. “Short term” indicates that for a brief period of
time, an impact is identified for the category being discussed (i.e. air quality, hydrology, etc.).
Often short term impacts are associated with construction. For instance, in many cases,
construction activities generate dust, noise, and emissions from equipment that may, temporarily,
exceed thresholds. These may be identified as significant and unavoidable because there is no
way to not experience the impacts even though they may be lessened with special attention to
equipment maintenance and dust control (air quality) or limits to time of day of operation
(noise).
Cumulative impacts are those that may not be directly attributable to the project itself but are
related to the collective changes over time from the addition of the amendments envisioned in
the LUCE update to development that might nevertheless occur in the City, and development/
changes taking place in the region. The EIR considers how the changes anticipated in the LUCE
update (policies, programs and physical changes) when aggregated with other foreseeable
changes affect the EIR categories studied. Most analysis of the LUCE update is done with an
eye to cumulative impacts because by its very nature, a General Plan update envisions a
collection of changes over time.
4. Summary of Impacts
The Table below provides a brief summary of Significant Impacts identified through the EIR for
the LUCE update. A more complete summary of all impacts (including those listed as “less than
significant”) and proposed mitigations may be found in Attachment 11. Staff will provide an
overview of the impacts and a summary of the mitigations proposed for consideration at the
hearing.
Class I: Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
Topic Type of impact
Air Quality Emissions associated with long-term emissions of pollutants.
Land Use Potential inconsistency with Airport Land Use Plan
Noise Short Term construction noise associated with development could
exceed standards.
Traffic and Circulation 1 Cumulative development over time will cause roadway performance
to deteriorate in some locations.
Traffic and Circulation 2 Cumulative development over time will cause performance of
intersections at some locations to deteriorate.
Traffic and Circulation 3 Cumulative development over time will increase traffic on freeways
and state highways.
PH1 - 8
LUCE DEIR Introduction Page 9
Class II: Significant but Mitigable Impacts
Topic Type of impact
Agriculture Future development could occur on prime or unique farmland
Air Quality Short term impacts from construction projects could exceed
thresholds.
Cultural Resources Development could impact historical resources.
Public Services
Build-out of the City could increase the demand for fire protection.
Inadequate fire response times, especially in the southern part of the
City have been identified.
Next steps for EIR
Links to the Draft EIR have been distributed electronically to the full email list of interested
parties as well as to state and local agencies. There is a 45 day review period for the Draft EIR
during which comments regarding the conclusions or proposed mitigations are encouraged. This
period runs from June 13, 2014 to July 28, 2014. Any comments submitted during the 45 day
review period are included in the final EIR along with the responses to the comments. With the
community’s assistance, the final document becomes a much more informative and useful
document for the decision-makers to use to inform the update process.
CONCURRENCES
The LUCE and DEIR were reviewed by all City departments. The DEIR has been sent to the
State Clearinghouse and is being distributed to various California agencies for comment.
Comments on the DEIR will be addressed by the consultant in the Final EIR.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Public Review Draft Environmental Impact Report was released on June 13, 2014.
Comments are due by July 28, 2014, the end of the 45 day review period. Hard copies are
available for review at 919 Palm, at the City-County Public Library and at Cal Poly library. CDs
are available at the Community Development Department, 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo.
FISCAL IMPACT
The Update was made possible by a Sustainable Communities grant in the amount of $880,000
provided by the State of California Strategic Growth Council. Funding for the grant is from the
Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection
Act of 2006 (Proposition 84). General Funds in the amount of $467,500 were added to the grant
to fund the environmental review and additional support to address Public Works and Fire
Department staffing impacts.
In order to satisfy the grant requirements, copies of the draft Land Use and Circulation Elements
and the associated DEIR must be submitted to the State Department of Conservation along with
a final status report and invoice for funds. The City Council is required to adopt and certify as
PH1 - 9
LUCE DEIR Introduction Page 10
accurate the final report prior to submission to the State. The final report for grant close-out is
scheduled for consideration by Council on September 16, 2014.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Direct staff to make revisions to the proposed public hearing schedule.
2. Continue consideration of the proposed public hearing schedule and direct staff to
provide additional information to the City Council regarding the LUCE update and DEIR
at a future meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Hearing Schedule
2. Resolution 10466 – Physical Changes – eliminate Pacheco School
3. Resolution 10467 – Physical Changes - General Hospital Site
4. Resolution 10468 – Remaining Physical Changes
5. Resolution 10486 – Policy Changes – General Hospital Site
6. Resolution 10487 – Policy Changes – Bishop Knoll Site
7. Resolution 10490 – Policy Changes – Land Use Element without Chapter 7
8 Resolution 10491 – Policy Changes – Circulation Element
9. Resolution 10492 – Policy Changes – Chapter 7 Airport - LUE
10. Community Outreach summary
11. EIR Executive Summary
The Draft LUCE and Draft EIR are available for review and CDs area available at the
Community Development Department, 919 Palm Street. These documents can also be
downloaded here: http://www.slo2035.com
AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE
Full Copy of EIR and appendices (5 Volumes)
T:\Council Agenda Reports\2014\2014-07-01\LUCE DEIR (Johnson-Murry)\LUCE_EIR_CAR.docx
PH1 - 10
HEARING DATES FOR LUCE UPDATE
DATE BODY PROPOSED TOPIC
7-1 City Council / PC DEIR and Hearing Schedule
7-9 MTC DEIR Circulation system and Multi-Modal approaches
7-16 County ALUC Consistency of City’s LUCE update and associated Zoning Code
Implementation
7-17 BAC DEIR Circulation system and Multi-Modal approaches
7-21 ARC DEIR & LUE programs to update Community Design Guidelines
7-22 PRC DEIR Parks Impacts and proposed recommendations
7-23 PC DEIR & Draft LUE Chapters 7 – 8
7-24
Tentative PC Continued -DEIR & Draft LUE Chapters 7-8 / Zoning Code and LUE chapters
1-6 - Still to be confirmed
7-28 CHC DEIR Impacts to Cultural Resources
45 day review period for LUCE DEIR ends
7-30 County ALUC Consistency of City’s LUCE update and associated Zoning Code
Implementation
8-13 PC LUE Chapters 9-12 and CE Chapters 1-5
8-19 City Council Review of ALUC consistency determination and LUE Chapters 7-8
8-27 PC CE Chapters 6-16 / Introduce Financial info
FEIR Available
9-10 PC Financial Info, Final LUCE recommendation & FEIR recommendation
9-16 City Council Grant Close-out and Financial information
9-30 City Council LUE Chapters 1-6 and 9-12
10-7 City Council CE Chapters 1-16
10-21 City Council Finalize policy and program changes, resolutions, FEIR, implementation
ATTACHMENT 1
PH1 - 11
RESOLUTION NO. 10466 (2013 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ENDORSING THE
PHYSICAL ALTERNATIVES SET FOR THE LAND USE AND
CIRCULATION ELEMENTS UPDATB TO BE CONSIDERED THROUGH THE EIR
PROCESS (GPI 1s-12)
\ryHEREAS, the City received a Strategic Growth Council grant in the amount of
$880,000 with strict performance timeframes to update the City's Land Use and Circulation
Elements; and
\ryHEREAS, in June 2071, the City Council approved goals for the 2011-2013 Financial
Plan including additional funding to support the update of the Land Use and Circulation
Elements; and
\ryHEREAS, public participation has been a long tradition in land use issues in the City
of San Luis Obispo and public involvement is essential in updating the 1994 Land Use and
Circulation Elements; and
\ryHEREAS, to date input has been received through two different on-line tools, four
community workshops, one workshop at Cal Poly, 18 Task Force meetings, five Planning
Commission hearings, two traveling open houses in six locations, and a community survey
returned by over 2,000 respondents; and
WHEREAS, the public participation strategy calls for a Task Force for the Land Use and
Circulation Elements Update (TF-LUCE) to inform the update process at key milestones,
provide feedback and recommendations and disseminate information to each participant's circle
of influence; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed and recommended physical
alternatives based upon input from the community and the Task Force; and
WHEREAS, endorsing a set of physical alternatives to be considered through the
Environmental Impact Report process is an imporlant milestone step in the update of the City's
Land Use and Circulation Elements update; and
WHEREAS, the Council will have additional opportunities to fuilher review the physical
set of alternatives as part of the project description for the environmental review process of the
Land Use and Circulation Elements update; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony
of interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by the TF-LUCE, Planning
Commission, and staff presented at said hearing; and
\ryHEREAS, the City Council will review policy alternatives recommended by the TF-
LUCE and Planning Commission prior to beginning the Environmental Impact Reporl.
R 10466
ATTACHMENT 2
PH1 - 12
Council Resolution No. 10466 (2013 Series)
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo that the set of physical alternatives presented at the hearing on October 15,2013 and
shown attached to this resolution shall be considered through the environmental review process
as parl of the Land Use and Circulation Elements Update.
SECTION 1. ALTERNATIVES. The physical alternatives to be considered as part of
the EIR process include the land use and circulation options shown as Exhibit A to this
resolution.
Upon motion of Council Member Ashbaugh, seconded by Council Member Christianson,
and on the following roll call vote:
Council Members Ashbaugh and Christianson, and Vice Mayor Smith
None
None
Council Member Carpenter and Mayor Marx
The foregoing resolution was adopted this I 5th day of October 201 3
Vice Smith
ATTEST:
yJ.
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
J.Dietrick
City Attorney
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
RECUSED:
ATTACHMENT 2
PH1 - 13
Council Resolution No. 10466 (2013 Series)
Page 3
EXHIBIT A
PAGE #LAND USE
ITEM
CITY COUNCIL DETERMINATION NOTES
PH1-193
c
Old Pacheco
School Site
Remove from consideration as part of
the LUCE ElR.
ATTACHMENT 2
PH1 - 14
RESOLUTION NO. 10467 (2013 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ENDORSING THE
PHYSICAL ALTERNATIVES SET FOR THE LAND USE AND
CIRCULATION ELEMENTS UPDATE TO BE CONSIDERED THROUGH THE EIR
PROCESS (GPI 1s-12)
\ryHEREAS, the City received a Strategic Growth Council grant in the amount of
$880,000 with strict performance timeframes to update the City's Land Use and Circulation
Elements; and
WHEREAS, in June 20II, the City Council approved goals for the 201I-2013 Financial
Plan including additional funding to support the update of the Land Use and Circulation
Elements; and
WHEREAS, public participation has been a long tradition in land use issues in the City
of San Luis Obispo and public involvement is essential in updating the 1994 Land Use and
Circulation Elements; and
WHERBAS, to date input has been received through two different on-line tools, four
community workshops, one workshop at Cal Poly, 18 Task Force meetings, fìve Planning
Commission hearings, two traveling open houses in six locations, and a community survey
returned by over 2,000 respondents; and
WHEREAS, the public participation strategy calls for a Task Force for the Land Use and
Circulation Elements Update (TF-LUCE) to inform the update process at key milestones,
provide feedback and recommendations and disseminate information to each participant's circle
of influence; and
WHBREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed and recommended physical
alternatives based upon input from the community and the Task Force; and
WHEREAS, endorsing a set of physical alternatives to be considered through the
Environmental Impact Report process is an important milestone step in the update of the City's
Land Use and Circulation Elements update; and
WHBREAS, the Council will have additional opportunities to further review the physical
set of alternatives as part of the project description for the environmental review process of the
Land Use and Circulation Elements update; and
\ryHBREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony
of interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by the TF-LUCE, Planning
Commission, and staff presented at said hearing; and
\ryHEREAS, the City Council will review policy alternatives recommended by the TF-
LUCE and Planning Commission prior to beginning the Environmental Impact Report.
R 10467
ATTACHMENT 3
PH1 - 15
Council Resolution No. 10467 (2013 Series)
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RBSOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo that the set of physical altematives presented at the hearing on October 15,2013 and
shown attached to this resolution shall be considered through the environmental review process
as part of the Land Use and Circulation Elements Update.
SECTION 1. ALTERNATIVES. The physical alternatives to be considered as part of
the EIR process include the land use and circulation options shown as Exhibit A to this
resolution.
Upon motion of Council Member Ashbaugh, seconded by Vice Mayor Smith, and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Members Ashbaugh and Christianson, Vice Mayor Smith and
Mayor Marx
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
RECUSED: Council Member Dan Carpenter
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 15th day of October 2013.
an
ATTEST:
yJ.
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
ATTACHMENT 3
PH1 - 16
Council Resolution No. 10467 (2013 Series)
Page 3
EXHIBIT A
PAGE #LAND USE
ITEM
CITY COUNCIL DETERMINATION NOTES
PH1-196
I
General
Hospital Site
Support additional residential
development on the site behind
existing structure but delete the
residential development proposed
between the URL and the City limit
line currently designated OS.
Policies should support flexibility so
that a range of residential uses can be
considered (i.e. residential care,
adjunct to transitional care use, other
residential uses consistent with area).
ATTACHMENT 3
PH1 - 17
RESOLUTION NO. 10468 (2013 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ENDORSING THE
PHYSICAL ALTBRNATIVES SET FOR THE LAND USB AND
CIRCULATION ELEMENTS UPDATE TO BE CONSIDERED THROUGH THE EIR
PROCESS (GPI 15-12)
WHEREAS, the City received a Strategic Growth Council grant in the amount of
$880,000 with strict performance timeframes to update the City's Land Use and Circulation
Elements; and
WHERBAS, in June 201I, the City Council approved goals for the 2011-2013 Financial
Plan including additional funding to Support consideration of the update of the Land Use and
Circulation Elements; and
WHEREAS, public participation has been a long tradition in land use issues in the City
of San Luis Obispo and public involvement is essential in updating the 1994 Land Use and
Circulation Elements; and
WHEREAS, to date input has been received through two different on-line tools, four
community workshops, one workshop at Cal Poly, 18 Task Force meetings, five Planning
Commission hearings, two traveling open houses in six locations, and a community survey
returned by over 2,000 respondents; and
WHBREAS, the public(participation strategy calls for a Task Force for the Land Use and
Circulation Elements Update (TF-LUCE) to inform the update process at key milestones,
provide feedback and recommendations and disseminate information to each participant's circle
of influence; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed and recommended physical
alternatives based upon input from the community and the Task Force; and
\ryHBRBAS, endorsing a set of physical alternatives to be considered through the
Environmental Impact Report process is an important milestone step in the update of the City's
Land Use and Circulation Elements update; and
WHEREAS, the Council will have additional opportunities to further review the physical
set of alternatives as part of the project description for the environmental review process of the
Land Use and Circulation Elements update; and
\ryHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony
of interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by the TF-LUCE, Planning
Commission, and staflpresented at said hearing; and
\ryHEREAS, the City Council will review policy alternatives recommended by the TF-
LUCE and Planning Commission prior to beginning the Environmental Impact Report.
R 10468
ATTACHMENT 4
PH1 - 18
Council Resolution No. 10468 (2013 Series)
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo that the set of physical alternatives presented at the hearing on October 15,2013 and
shown attached to this resolution shall be considered through the environmental review process
as part of the Land Use and Circulation Elements Update.
SECTION 1. ALTERNATMS. The physical alternatives to be considered as part of
the EIR process include the land use and circulation options shown as Exhibit A to this
resolution.
Upon motion of Council Member Ashbaugh, seconded by Vice Mayor Smith, and on the
following roll call vote:
Council Members Ashbaugh, Carpenter and Christianson, Vice Mayor
Smith and Mayor Marx
None
None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 15th day of October 2013.
an Marx
T
J. Mej
City Clerk
AS
stine Dietrick
City Attorney
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
CMC
ATTACHMENT 4
PH1 - 19
EXHIBIT A
PAGE #LAND USE
ITEM
CITY COUNCIL DETERMINATION NOTES
PH1-193
A
Nativity
Church Site
Remove from consideration
Deed restriction
prohibits anything
but church-related
USES.
PH1-193
B
Santa Rosa
and Foothill
Area
Consider mixed use for the area on
both sides of Foothill between Chorro
and Santa Rosa. Consider both
horizontal and vertical mixed use.
Emphasis on retail and housing near
campus. Policies to Support
consideration of parking and height
changes to facilitate mixed use.
PH1-193
D
Diocese
property
along Bressi
Remove from consideration
Steeper hillsides
and wildlife
corridor in COSE
Keep RSF and
OS designations.
PH1-195
E
Upper
Monterey
Area
No physical land use changes
proposed. Consider policies to
Support consideration of more
pedestrian -friendly development.
Consider policies for area that include
conference center, parking options, lot
assembly, addressing appearance of
properties in public ownership, and
addressing the transit center location.
Added potential to explore Form-
based codes for the area.
PH1-195
F
Downtown
Area
No physical land use changes
proposed. Consider policies and
desirability of plazas and public views
and a program to update the
Downtown Concept Plan.
ATTACHMENT 4
PH1 - 20
Council Resolution No. i0468 (2013 Series)
Page 4
PAGE #LAND USE
ITEM
CITY COUNCIL DETERMINATION NOTES
PH1-195
G
Mid-Higuera
Area
No changes proposed
PHl-195
H
Cal Trans
Site
Mixed use to include tourist
commercial, office and some
residential as shown in H-2 and H-4.
Site may be appropriate to review
height limit changes to accommodate
desired development.
Consider more public open space
uses to serve as gateway and uses
compatible with conference center.
PH1-196
J
Broad Street
Area Plan
I ncorporate physical alternative
described in South Broad Street Area
Plan endorsed by September 17,
2013 by Citv Council.
Council
Resolution 10460
PHI -198
K
Sunset Drive
in Area
Support consideration of mixed use.
Develop policies to address
appropriate mix of uses. Policy
discussion should address historic
nature of Sunset Drive in and ensure
site can still accommodate Homeless
Services center. Provide bike
connections as called for in bicycle
transportation plan.
PH1-197
L
Dalidio
Support consideration of a mix of uses
through LUE policies with significant
open space/agricultural (at least 50%)
component. Alt. L5 without specific
direction of pafticular sizes or shapes.
Residential component to be
consistent with applicable airpod
policies.
PH1-198
M
Pacific
Beach
School Site
Policy development to Support
consideration of Commercial Retail
fronting LOVR and Froom Ranch and
park to serve neiqhborhood.
ATTACHMENT 4
PH1 - 21
Council Resolution No. 10468 (2013 Series)
Page 5
PAGE #LAND USE
ITEM
CITY COUNCIL DETERMINATION NOTES
PH1-198
N
Calle
Joaquin
Auto Sales
Support consideration of mixed use in
the context with the Dalidio propefty
and the City's agricultural parcel and
focus on connectivity to the
neighborhoods to the north. Develop
policies to address appropriate mix of
USES.
PH1-198
o
Madonna
Property
Support consideration of policies to
address future development. These
should include viewshed, hillside and
open space protection, potential
height limits, wetland protection,
access to other connections, historic
farm buildings, mixed use to
accommodate workforce housing, and
neighborhood commercial type uses.
Develop policies to address
appropriate mix of uses.
PH1-199
P
LOVR near
overpass
Area
Support consideration of a modified
Alternative P-5 with medium high
density residential infill housing with
open space.
PH1-199
o
MASP
Policy to support consideration of
changes to MASP to allow increased
density on eastern portion of MASP
area,
PH1-199
R
Tank Farm
@ Broad
Support consideration of a mix of
commercial uses with limited
residential on upper floors.
Commercial uses should serve the
surrounding businesses and bicycle
and pedestrian connectivity must be
addressed.
ATTACHMENT 4
PH1 - 22
Council Resolution No. 10468 (2013 Series)
Page 6
PAGE #LAND USE
ITEM
CITY COUNCIL DETERMINATION NOTES
PH1-199
S
Avila Ranch
Area
Support consideration of a mix of
residential densities, connection to
shops to the north, connection to S,
Higuera and a mix of uses similar to
what is shown in owners' concept.
Respect creek/wildlife corridor.
Develop policies to direct future
development.
PH1-193
1
Boysen &
Santa Rosa
Support consideration of separated
crossing for bikes/peds of Santa
Rosa at Boysen. Consider all
vehicular alternatives for Boysen
intersection at SR 1 including full
closure, access restrictions, and
retaining its current configuration.
PH1-193
2
Realign
Ghorro,
Boysen, and
Broad
Support consideration of alternative
2-3 realignment of Chorro and Broad
and Boysen.
PH1-194
3
Potential
Ramp
closures at
HVVY 101 and
SR1
Support consideration of alternative
3-2 ramp closures and consolidated
SR1/HWY 101 interchange for further
evaluation including impacts to
residential streets and the need for a
signage/way-finding program.
Prior to full
implementation,
staff to focus on
low cosUlow
impact solutions
PH1-194
4
Broad & HWY
101 Ramp
closure
Support consideration of alternative
4-2 ramp closures at Broad with the
addition of bike and pedestrian
overpass.
Bike and
pedestrian
overpass at this
location is
currently in the
BTP.
PH1-194
5
Convert
Marsh &
Higuera to 2
Way (Santa
Rosa to Calif.)
Support consideration of two way
vehicular circulation of Marsh and
Higuera between Santa Rosa and
California.
ATTACHMENT 4
PH1 - 23
Council Resolution No. 10468 (2013 Series)
Page 7
PAGE #LAND USE
ITEM
CITY COUNCIL DETERMINATION NOTES
PH1-194
6
Transit Center
location on
Santa Rosa
and Higuera
Support consideration of site/block of
Higuera/Santa Rosa/Monterey for the
transit center location and consider
use of both public and private
property. lnclude ideas from student
projects and the Downtown Concept
Plan.
PH1-194
7
Mission Plaza
"dog leg"
Support consideration of alternatives
7-2 and 7-3 (varying degrees of
streets affected). Analyze full closure
of roadways. Develop policy direction
regarding desired outcomes and
nature and phasing of treatment for
the area.
PH1-194
I
Realign
Bianchi and
Pismo
Support consideration of alternative
8-3 realignment of street intersection
(Pismo to Bianchi).
PH1-195
9
Realign
Madonna to
Bridge St
instead of
Higuera
Consider appropriate connection from
Madonna to S. Higuera in concert
with redevelopment of Caltrans site.
Potential to realign Madonna to
connect with Bridge Street may better
address some pedestrian and bike
connections.
PH1-196
10
Bishop St.
Extension
Evaluate elimination of Bishop Street
bridge over railroad tracks and
consider road diet for Johnson Ave.
Current
Circulation
Element has
Bishop Street
extending over
railroad tracks via
bridqe.
PH1-196
11
Victoria
connection to
Emily
Support consideration of Victoria
connection to Emily.
Council
Resolution 10460
ATTACHMENT 4
PH1 - 24
Council Resolution No. 10468 (2013 Series)
Page 8
PAGE #LAND USE
ITEM
CITY COUNCIL DETERMINATION NOTES
PH1-196
12
Broad Street-
consolidate
access
Supporl consideration of Broad Street
consolidation of access points.
Council
Resolution 10460
PH1-196
13
Orcutt Road
Overpass
Keep facility as pad of Circulation
Element. Do not consider removing
facility due to concerns about
increasing rail traffic.
Overpass is
currently part of
Circulation
Element
PH1-198
14
Froom
connect to
Oceanaire
neighborhood
Provide pedestrian and bicycle
connectivity only.
Neighborhood
input opposed to
vehicular
connections and
is concerned
about culthrough
traffic
PH1-197
15
Prado Road
interchange
vs overpass
Evaluate both interchange and
overpass
lnterchange is
part of existing
Circulation
Element.
PH1-197
16
Connections
to Dalidio
from Froom
and/or Calle
Joaquin
Evaluate whether one or more
connections are needed to provide an
additional connection between LOVR
and Prado/Dalidio; whether an
internal east-west or loop road is
needed to connect these roads on
the Dalidio property; and minimizing
impact of road extensions on AG/OS
land.
PH1-199
17
Realign
Vachel Lane
Supporl consideration of alternative
17-2Vachel to Higuera connection as
a "back up" alternative in the event
Buckley Road does not connect to S.
Higuera.
ATTACHMENT 4
PH1 - 25
Council Resolution No. 10468 (2013 Series)
Page 9
PAGE #LAND USE
ITEM
CITY COUNCIL DETERMINATION NOTES
PH1-199
18
N-S
connect¡on
between Tank
Farm and
Buckley
Support consideration of alternative
18-2 creating a north-south
connection between Tank Farm and
Buckley for future connectivity.
PH1-199
19
Buckley to
LOVR
connections
Support consideration of alternatives
19-2 (Buckley to Higuera) and 19-3
(Higuera to LOVR behind Los Verdes
- 101 bypass)
ATTACHMENT 4
PH1 - 26
ATTACHMENT 5
PH1 - 27
ATTACHMENT 5
PH1 - 28
ATTACHMENT 5
PH1 - 29
ATTACHMENT 6
PH1 - 30
ATTACHMENT 6
PH1 - 31
ATTACHMENT 6
PH1 - 32
ATTACHMENT 7
PH1 - 33
ATTACHMENT 7
PH1 - 34
ATTACHMENT 8
PH1 - 35
ATTACHMENT 8
PH1 - 36
ATTACHMENT 9
PH1 - 37
ATTACHMENT 9
PH1 - 38
ATTACHMENT 9
PH1 - 39
ATTACHMENT 9
PH1 - 40
ATTACHMENT 9
PH1 - 41
ATTACHMENT 9
PH1 - 42
ATTACHMENT 9
PH1 - 43
ATTACHMENT 9
PH1 - 44
ATTACHMENT 9
PH1 - 45
O UTREACH O VERVIEW
JUNE 20, 2014
Community Survey
• 20,700 copies of the survey were printed for distribution. Distribution was primarily done
through an insert distributed with the City’s utility bills (during the weeks of April 9, 16, 23
and 30) and by direct mail to those that do not receive utility bills. In all, surveys were sent
to more than 25,000 homes and businesses in the City. Approximately 2,030 people
returned their completed surveys by mail with an additional; 161 opting to take the survey
online.
Public Workshops (#signed in does not include staff and consultant team)
• Future Fair 4 (May 31, 2014) > 88 signed-in
• Future Fair 3 (December 7, 2013) > 125 signed-in
• Future Fair 2 (June 1, 2013) > 130 signed-in
• Future Fair (December 1, 2012) > 120 signed-in
• Public Workshop #2 (September 27, 2012) > 40 signed-in
• Public Workshop #1 (May 16, 2012) > 95 signed-in
Attendance exceeded numbers shown as “signed in”.
Promotion done for each workshop
• Outreach at Thursday and Saturday Farmer’s Markets before events
• News Releases and Media outreach to all local print, radio, and television outlets
• Utility Bill Flyers – Ads/articles in advance of June and December 2013 Future Fairs and
separate flyer insert for May 2014 Future Fair
• Flyer to all San Luis Coastal Unified School District school children for Workshop #2
• Postcards for physical change areas for Workshop #5
• Channel 20 slide (PSAs)
• Posters on local buses
• Display ads in local newspapers – Tribune, SLO CITY NEWS, and New Times
• Community Calendar postings – KCBX and KSBY
• Banner on library (Future Fairs)
• Banner across Marsh Street for 2 weeks in advance of Future Fair 4
• e-Blasts for all workshops (minimum 2 per event)
• Media interviews with City Planning staff (most workshops, not all)
Neighborhood Open Houses
• Six neighborhood open houses (July and September 2012)
• Posters in 15+ locations within each sub-area
• Display ads in paper
• Request to Task Force members (posters provided) to inform neighbors and friends
Cal Poly Workshop
• November 7, 2012
ATTACHMENT 10
PH1 - 46
Outreach Overview 2014 06 20 KEM Page 2
City Council Meetings
• January 28, 2014
• January 14, 2014
• January 7, 2014
• October 15, 2013
• April 2, 2013
• October 16, 2012
• April 20, 2012
• March 20, 2012
• March 13, 2012
• March 6, 2012
• January 17, 2012
Planning Commission Meetings
• January 8, 2014
• December 16, 2013
• December 12, 2013
• August 14, 2013
• July 24, 2013
• May 8, 2013
• March 13, 2013
• February 22, 2012
Task Force Meetings
• #34, June 18, 2014
• #33, February 19, 2014
• #32, January 15, 2014
• #31, December 10, 2013
• #30, December 5, 2013
• #29, December 4, 2013
• #28, November 26, 2013
• #27, November 25, 2013
• #26, November 20, 2013
• #25, November 14, 2013
• #24, November 7, 2013
• #23, November 6, 2013
• #22, October 30, 2013
• #21, October 24, 2013
• #20, October 17, 2013
• #19, October 16, 2013
• #18, October 2, 2013
• #17, September 18, 2013
• #16, July 9, 2013
• #15, July 1, 2013
• #14, June 27, 2013
• #13, June 19, 2013
• #12, May 14, 2013
• #11, April 30, 2013
• #10, April 17, 2013
• #9, March 7, 2013
• #8, February 20, 2013
• #7, January 16, 2013
• #6, October 17, 2012
• #5, September 19, 2012
• #4, July 18, 2012
• #3, June 20, 2012
• #2, June 7, 2012
• #1, April 18, 2012
Advisory Committee Meetings
• Parks and Recreation Commission August 21,2013
• Bicycle Advisory Committee July 18, 2013
• Bicycle Advisory Committee September 19, 2013
• Mass Transportation Commission July 10, 2013
Organization Outreach
• Chamber of Commerce – LUCE sub-committee (City staff attended some)
• Downtown Association (1 meeting + City staff attended some + Downtown Blasts to
members)
• Latino Coalition (2 meetings)
• Residents for Quality Neighborhoods (2 meetings)
• Neighbors North of Foothill (1 meeting)
• Transition Towns (2 meetings)
• Rotary (promotion of meetings)
ATTACHMENT 10
PH1 - 47
Outreach Overview 2014 06 20 KEM Page 3
• SLO Green Energy (1 meeting)
• EcoSLO (1 meeting)
• Faith-based organizations (notices to all)
e-Blasts
• ~ 60 e-Blast have been sent
• ~ 3,500 e-mail address are on the mailing list
• Over 200,000 messages have been sent so far as part of the General Plan Update project
Newsletters
• Newsletter 1, General Plan Update Overview, May 2012
• Newsletter 2, Alternatives, June 2013
Website and Social Media
See attached summary.
MindMixer
• Ran for six months from Fall 2012 – May 2013
• 240 registered participants
• 1,039 unique visitors
• 18,000 page views
• > 230 ideas generated
Theater PSAs
• 12 weeks in Fall 2012 (November 2012 – January 2013)
• Cinemark downtown – all screens (~ 20,000 impressions)
Spanish Language Outreach
• Newsletter 1 translated into Spanish
• Univision Spanish language PSAs on survey and workshop
• Media releases to all area Spanish language outlets
• Website page on Update
• Outreach through Latino coalition
Interviews with City Leadership
• The Consulting Team developed a set of five questions to be used in interviews with City
Council and Planning Commission members. During the week of March 19 – 23, the
Consulting Team’s management group conducted these individual interviews.
• Interviews were conducted with City department heads to gain insight on SWOT.
Other Media
• 3-29-12 SLO CITY NEWS Article
• 4 -2012 City Staff interview aired on Channel 19 and Cal Poly Campus TV
• 11 -2012 California Edition – cable news channel interview re: LUCE Update
• 12-6-12 SLO CITY NEWS Article
ATTACHMENT 10
PH1 - 48
Outreach Overview 2014 06 20 KEM Page 4
• 6-6-13 SLO CITY NEWS Article
• 10-18-13 Tribune Article (Summary of Council Action on Alternatives)
• 10-24-13 SLO CITY NEWS Article
• 1-18-14 Tribune Article (Summary of Council Action on Draft LUE)
• 6-11-14 KSBY Google Alert
ATTACHMENT 10
PH1 - 49
Outreach Overview 2014 06 20 KEM Page 5
ATTACHMENT 10
PH1 - 50
Outreach Overview 2014 06 20 KEM Page 6
ATTACHMENT 10
PH1 - 51
Outreach Overview 2014 06 20 KEM Page 7
ATTACHMENT 10
PH1 - 52
Jul '12Jan '13Jul '13Jan '14
0
2
from January 1, 2012 - June 10, 2014
@SLO2035
SLO2035
slo2035.com
across all Twitter and Facebook accounts
Incoming Messages 161
Sent Messages 56
New Twitter Followers 7
New Facebook Fans 42
163 INTERACTIONS
BY 132 UNIQUE USERS
19,606 IMPRESSIONS
across all Twitter accounts
FOLLOWER DEMOGRAPHICS
33%
MALE FOLLOWERS
67%
FEMALE FOLLOWERS
18-20
21-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65+
TWITTER STATS
7
New Twitter Followers in this time period
0
Link Clicks
4
Mentions
2
Retweets
DAILY INTERACTIONS @MENTIONS 4 RETWEETS 2 OUTBOUND TWEET CONTENT
20 Plain Text
1 Links to Pages
0 Photo Links
ATTACHMENT 10
PH1 - 53
0
2.5
5
May '12Sep '12Jan '13May '13Sep '13Jan '14May '14
0
1
May '12Sep '12Jan '13May '13Sep '13Jan '14May '14
0
500
1000
1.5k
across all Facebook pages
My Facebook Pages
61 Total Likes, and 0 people talking about this
FAN GROWTH New Fans 42 Unliked your Page 1
PAGE IMPRESSIONS Impressions 10,577 by 3,540 users
IMPRESSIONS
Fan 1.9k
User Post 1.2k
Page Post 1.2k
Other 1.1k
Mention 147
Checkin 0
Question 0
Coupon 0
Paid 0
Organic 4.3k
Viral 5.9k
BY DAY OF WEEKAVGTOTAL
Sun
Mon
Tue
Wed
Thu
Fri
Sat
12.3
15
7.5
12.8
9.3
10.8
15.3
1.6k
1.9k
963
1.6k
1.2k
1.4k
1.9k
IMPRESSION DEMOGRAPHICS Here's a quick breakdown of people engaging with your Facebook Page
AGE & GENDER
13-17
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55+
2 / 4
133 / 187
75 / 164
119 / 179
189 / 340
106 / 270
35%
Male
65%
Female
TOP COUNTRIES
United States
United Kingdom
Italy
Canada
Spain
1.7k
6
4
3
3
TOP CITIES
San Luis Obispo, CA
Los Angeles, CA
Half Moon Bay, CA
Sacramento, CA
Los Osos, CA
506
69
43
40
27
ATTACHMENT 10
PH1 - 54
Stats across your web properties
Web Traffic 8,102
Social Traffic 133
Twitter Posts 7
Web Mentions 3,213
Leading Social Traffic Source
Facebook 128 views
TOP SOCIAL REFERRERS
ATTACHMENT 10
PH1 - 55
ES
Executive Summary
This section summarizes the characteristics of the proposed LUCE Update, alternatives considered in this EIR,
environmental impacts associated with the proposed project, recommended mitigation measures, and the level of
significance of project impacts after mitigation.
ES-1.1. Project Description
The LUCE Update Project (the “Project” or “proposed Update Project”) provides proposed changes to the City’s existing
Land Use Element and Circulation Elements of the General Plan (last updated in 1994). It is the intent of the proposed
Project to establish and implement a refined set of goals, policies, and programs for regulating development in the city,
guiding the land use decision-making process, balance population growth with infrastructure availability, and provide a
true multimodal transportation system that will guide the community over the next 20 years.
The LUCE Update reflects extensive efforts and input from community surveys, workshops and open houses, advisory
bodies, the Task Force for the Land Use and Circulation Element Update (TF-LUCE), City staff, consultants, the Planning
Commission, and City Council. Based on direction from the City Council that the Update Project primarily address infill
opportunities, changes in legislation, and the need to update existing policy direction to reflect current values and
requirements, the LUCE Update focuses on updated policy language and several areas of the City where “physical” land
use changes are proposed. The proposed physical land use changes would apply only to specified areas that over the next
20 years may have the potential to accommodate changes in the land use type or intensity or are in need of circulation
and infrastructure improvements. From a policy aspect, the LUCE Update proposes changes to existing policy and
program language, and new policies and programs where needed to enhance the two Elements or cover items not
previously addressed. The policies and programs included in the LUCE Update are intended to:
Address notable policy gaps that have been identified over time in the existing LUCE;
Provide new policy direction to address issues raised during the proposed Project’s public participation process;
Respond to changes in state law;
Address topics or items that the City committed to addressing as part of the Sustainable Communities grant that
provided funding for the Update Project; and
Address inconsistencies between the proposed project and the Airport Land Use Plan for San Luis Obispo County
Regional Airport.
The Land Use Element Update proposes to “preserve and enhance” existing conditions in most areas of the city. The
physical changes proposed by the Land Use Element Update are for the most part limited to changes in land use type or
intensity in specific areas. These changes include proposed mixed use redevelopment of some sites, the infill of
underutilized locations, and four sites that will require modified or new specific plans to addresses development
parameters such as the location and types of land uses, infrastructure needs, and designs to address environmental
constraints. These four sites include: Potential modification of the Margarita Area Specific Plan to allow increased
residential densities; and new specific plans for the San Luis Ranch (formerly known as the Dalidio site), the Madonna
property at Los Osos Valley Road (LOVR), and the Avila Ranch. Policy direction was also refined relative to a set of
“Special Planning Areas” (Section 8.3.3 in the proposed Land Use Element Update) throughout the City. This policy
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 56
guidance provides statements regarding the City’s expectations for these sites of new development, redevelopment, and
infill opportunities.
The following table lists each of the original 19 proposed “physical alternative” locations, identifies the sites dropped from
further consideration, the sites where no physical changes are proposed, and describes the type of development that
could occur at the proposed development sites. Throughout the Land Use Element Update process the 19 proposed
“physical alternative” sites were identified by the letters A through S.
Site Letter Site Description
Capacity
Units Population Non-Residential Sq. Ft.
Employment
A Nativity Church Site
Removed from consideration. -- -- -- --
B Foothill @ Santa Rosa Area
Consider mixed use for the area on both sides
of Foothill between Chorro and Santa Rosa.
Consider both horizontal and vertical mixed
use. Emphasis on retail and housing. Policies
to support consideration of parking and height
changes to facilitate mixed use.
80 183 -1,184 -3
C Pacheco Elementary Site
Removed from consideration. -- -- -- --
D Diocese Site near Bressi Pl. & Broad St.
Removed from consideration. -- -- -- --
E Upper Monterey Area
No physical land use changes proposed. No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
F Downtown Area
No physical land use changes proposed.
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
G Mid-Higuera Area
No physical land use changes proposed.
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
H Caltrans Site
Mixed use to include tourist commercial,
office and some residential. Site may be
appropriate to review height limit changes to
accommodate desired development.
Consider more public open space uses to
serve as gateway and uses compatible with
conference facilities.
53 121 101,943 185
I General Hospital Site
Residential development on the site behind
existing structure within the existing Urban
Reserve Line. Outside the Urban Reserve Line,
retain the current designation of Open Space.
Policies should support flexibility so that a
range of residential uses can be considered
(i.e. residential care, adjunct to transitional
care use, other residential uses consistent
with area) within the residential land use
designations.
41 94 48,788 89
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 57
Site Letter Site Description
Capacity
Units Population Non-
Residential Sq. Ft.
Employment
J Broad Street Area
Incorporate physical alternative described in
South Broad Street Area Plan endorsed on
September 17, 2013 by City Council (Council
Resolution 10460).
589 1,349 229,068 416
K Sunset Drive-In/Prado Road Site
Consideration of mixed use. Develop policies
to address appropriate mix of uses. Policy
discussion should address historic nature of
Sunset Drive in and ensure the site is able to
accommodate Homeless Services center.
Provide bike connections as called for in
bicycle transportation plan.
0 0 483,668 879
L San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area
Consideration of a mix of uses with a
substantial open space/agriculture
component. Residential uses to be consistent
with applicable airport policies.
500 1,145 470,000 855
M Pacific Beach Site
Policy development to support consideration
of Commercial Retail/mixed use fronting LOVR
and Froom Ranch and park to serve
neighborhood.
38 87 -37,352 -68
N Calle Joaquin Auto Sales Area
Consideration of mixed use in the context
with the Dalidio property and the City's
agricultural parcel and focus on connectivity
to the neighborhoods to the north. Develop
policies to address appropriate mix of uses.
0 0 200,066 364
O Madonna Specific Plan Area
Future development to consider viewsheds,
hillside and open space protection, height
limits, wetland protection, access to other
connections, historic farm buildings, mixed
use to accommodate workforce housing, and
neighborhood commercial type uses.
115 263 336,170 611
P LOVR Creekside Area
Consideration of medium high density
residential infill housing with open space.
159 364 0 0
Q Margarita Specific Plan
Policy to support consideration of changes to
the previously approved Specific Plan to allow
increased density on eastern portion of
specific plan site.
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
R Broad St. @ Tank Farm Rd. Site
Consideration of a mix of commercial uses
with limited residential on upper floors.
Commercial uses should serve the
surrounding businesses and bicycle and
pedestrian connectivity must be addressed.
41 94 135,906 247
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 58
Site Letter Site Description
Capacity
Units Population Non-
Residential Sq. Ft.
Employment
S Avila Ranch Specific Plan Area
Consider a mix of residential densities,
connections to shops to the north, connection
to S. Higuera and a mix of uses. Respect
creek/wildlife corridor.
700 1,603 25,000 45
The policy and program updates proposed in the Airport Chapter of the Land Use Element reflect airport safety, noise,
height and overflight considerations consistent with the purposes of the State Aeronautics Act. Policies, programs, and
Zoning Code implementation have been drafted to create an Airport Overlay Zone to codify airport compatibility criteria
for areas subject to airport influence consistent with the requirements of Cal. Pub. Utilities Code Section 21670, et. seq,
the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, and other related federal and state requirements relating to airport
land use compatibility planning. These include allowable uses and development standards such as density and intensity
limitations, identification of prohibited uses, infill development, height limitations, and other hazards to flight, noise
insulation, buyer awareness measures, airspace protection, nonconforming uses and reconstruction, and the process for
airport compatibility criteria reviews by the City.
The Circulation Element Update describes how the City plans to provide for the transportation of people and materials
within San Luis Obispo with connections to other areas in San Luis Obispo County and beyond. The Circulation Element
Update recognizes the implications of land use policy on all modes of movement, and establishes policies, standards, and
implementation measures that work with the Land Use Element to address both existing and potential circulation
opportunities and deficiencies. But beyond addressing changes in land use, the Circulation Element Update also looks at
the circulation system of the community as a whole. Introducing the concept of “complete streets”, the update looks to
integrate and enhance all types of circulation in order to create a more comprehensive and functional circulation system.
The proposed Circulation Element provides policy language to address a variety of circulation-related issues, including:
traffic reduction; transit; encouraging the use of bicycles and walking; traffic management; future street network changes;
truck, air and rail transportation; parking management in commercial areas and residential neighborhoods; and scenic
roadways. A new section added to the Circulation Element addresses multi-modal transportation, or the development
and maintenance of a circulation system that balances the needs of all modes of travel.
The table below lists the 17 proposed “physical alternative” street network modifications identified by the Circulation
Element Update public participation and Element preparation process.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 59
Site Number Site Description
1 Boysen Ave. and Santa Rosa St.
Consideration of separated crossing for bikes/pedestrians of Santa Rosa at Boysen. Consider all vehicular
alternatives for Boysen intersection at SR 1 including full closure, access restrictions, and retaining its current
configuration.
2 Realign Chorro St., Boysen Ave., and Board St.
Consideration of realignment of Chorro and Broad and Boysen.
3 Potential Ramp Closures at Highway 101 and State Route 1
Consideration of ramp closures and consolidated SR1/Highway 101 interchange including the need for a
signage/way-finding program.
4 Broad St. and Highway 101 Ramp Closures
Consideration of ramp closures at Broad with the addition of bike and pedestrian overpass.
5 Convert Marsh St. and Higuera St. to Two-way
(Santa Rosa St. to California Blvd.)
Consideration of two way vehicular circulation of Marsh and Higuera between Santa Rosa and California.
6 Transit Center Location on Santa Rosa St. and Higuera St.
Consideration of site/block of Higuera/Santa Rosa/Monterey for the transit center location and consider use
of both public and private property. Consider ideas from student projects and the Downtown Concept Plan.
7 Mission Plaza “Dog Leg”
Consideration of several design alternatives with varying degrees of streets affected. Analyze full closure of
roadways. Develop policy direction regarding desired outcomes and nature and phasing of treatment for the
area.
8 Realign Bianchi Ln. and Pismo St.
Consideration of realignment of street intersection (Pismo to Bianchi).
9 Realign Madonna Rd. to Bridge St Instead of Higuera St.
Consider appropriate connection from Madonna to S. Higuera associated with redevelopment of Caltrans site.
Potential to realign Madonna to connect with Bridge Street may better address some pedestrian and bike
connections.
10 Bishop St. Extension
Evaluate elimination of Bishop Street bridge over railroad tracks and consider reducing the width of Johnson
Ave.
11 Victoria Ave. Connection to Emily St.
Consideration of Victoria connection to Emily.
12 Broad St. – Consolidate Access
Consideration of Broad Street consolidation of access points.
13 Orcutt Rd. Overpass
Keep facility as part of Circulation Element. Do not consider removing facility due to concerns about
increasing rail traffic.
14 Froom Rd. Connection to Oceanaire Neighborhood
Provide pedestrian and bicycle connectivity only.
15 Prado Rd. Interchange vs. Overpass
Evaluate both interchange and overpass
16 North-South Connection between Tank Farm Rd. and Buckley Rd.
Consideration creating a north-south connection between Tank Farm and Buckley for future connectivity.
17 Buckley Rd. to LOVR Connections
Consider (Buckley to Higuera connection and Higuera to LOVR behind Los Verdes - 101 bypass.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 60
ES-1.2. Project Objectives
Land Use Element Update
For the purposes of CEQA analysis, the objectives of the Land Use Element Update are to:
1. Respond to changed conditions in San Luis Obispo.
2. Incorporate sustainable practices and policies into the Land Use Element.
3. Respond to new State planning requirements.
4. Engage the community in a reaffirmation of the community’s vision and goals for the City’s future.
5. Provide residential infill opportunities.
6. Maintain a healthy and attractive natural environment within a compact urban form.
Circulation Element Update
For the purposes of CEQA analysis, the objectives of the Circulation Element Update are to:
1. Encourage better transportation habits.
2. Promote alternative forms of transportation.
3. Manage traffic by limiting population growth and economic development to the rates and levels stipulated by the
Land Use Element.
4. Support environmentally sound technological advancement.
5. Support a shift in modes of transportation.
6. Establish and maintain livable street corridors.
7. Support the development and maintenance of a circulation system that supports and balances the needs of all
circulation modes.
ES-1.3. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Table EX-1, at the end of this section, contains a detailed listing of the environmental impacts of the proposed project,
proposed mitigation measures, and residual impacts. Impacts are categorized by classes: Class I impacts are defined as
significant, unavoidable adverse impacts, which require a statement of overriding considerations pursuant to Section
15093 of the CEQA Guidelines if the project is approved. Class II impacts are significant adverse impacts that can be
feasibly mitigated to less than significant levels and which require findings to be made under Section 15091 of the CEQA
Guidelines. Class III impacts are adverse, but less than the identified significance thresholds.
ES-1.4. Alternatives
Section 15126.6(a) of the CEQA Guidelines states that:
“an EIR shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project or to the location of the project, which would
feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant
effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives.”
As stated above, the development on an EIR is to include consideration of a “reasonable range” of alternatives to foster
informed decision-making and public participation.
CEQA requires the EIR to identify feasible alternatives to the proposed project that will avoid, or at least lessen, significant
impacts associated with the project. CEQA defines “feasible” as follows:
“‘Feasible’ means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into
account economic, environmental, legal, social and technological factors.”
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 61
Three alternatives to the LUCE Update project have been evaluated in this EIR. Each alternative is described below.
No Project Alternative: This alternative evaluates environmental conditions that would result if the proposed LUCE
Update Project were not implemented and future development in the City was implemented consistent with the land use
and policy requirements of the existing 1994 Land Use Element and Circulation Elements.
Reduced Development Alternative: This alternative evaluates environmental conditions that would result if the
development capacity proposed by the Land Use Element Update were reduced by approximately 20 percent.
Maximum Circulation Improvements Alternative: This alternative evaluates the environmental conditions that would
result if three additional modifications were added to the proposed LUCE Update. The three additional street network
changes were options identified during the preliminary public review of potential street system changes but were not
included in the proposed Circulation Element.
Environmentally Preferred Alternative: Buildout of the No Project Alternative would generally reduce the environmental
impacts that would have the potential to occur if buildout of the City of San Luis Obispo was conducted in accordance
with the requirements of the existing 1994 Land Use and Circulation Elements of the general plan. Implementation of the
No Project Alternative, however, would not implement the beneficial policy revisions proposed by the LUCE Update.
Based on the potential for the No Project Alternative to reduce environmental impacts when compared to the impacts of
the proposed Project, it would be the environmentally superior alternative. The No Project alternative, however, would
not implement any of the proposed projects’ objectives. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2) indicates that “if the
environmentally superior alternative is the ‘no project’ alternative, the EIR shall also identify the environmentally superior
alternative among the other alternatives.”
The Reduced Development Alternative would generally have reduced or similar environmental impacts when compared
to the impacts of the proposed project. The Reduced Development Alternative, however, would not implement the
environmental objectives of the proposed LUCE Update. A reduction in development in the proposed specific plan areas
would be inconsistent with the objective to protect the environment within a compact urban form because developing
the specific plan areas at densities that are substantially less than their capacity could promote additional development in
other areas, such as unincorporated areas adjacent to the city. A reduction in development in the proposed special
planning areas would have the potential to reduce environmental impacts, however decreased development those areas
would not fully achieve the Land Use Element Update objective of promoting infill development. Reduced residential and
non-residential density could be inconsistent with the implementation of State-mandated planning requirements, such as
the requirements of Senate Bill (SB) 375. This bill provides a mechanism for more sustainable and efficiently-planned
transportation infrastructure, reduced greenhouse gas emissions and improved compatibility with land uses. A
substantial reduction in future development density may impede the attainment of requirements to provide
transportation-oriented development, would not respond to this State planning requirement, and would be inconsistent
with the Land Use Element objective of incorporating sustainable practices into the Land Use Element.
The Maximum Circulation Improvements Alternative would provide three street system modifications not included in the
proposed Circulation Element Update. This alternative would generally result in environmental impacts that are similar to
the proposed Project, but would have fewer air quality, greenhouse gas emission, and traffic impacts due to more free –
flowing traffic circulation conditions. This alternative would also have the potential to result in increased cultural
resource and noise impacts along portions of one of the alternative roadway system projects; however, it is likely that
those impacts could be reduced to a less than significant level with the implementation of appropriate design and other
mitigation measures. The Maximum Circulation Improvements Alternative would result in substantial and area-wide
environmental benefits and would not impede the implementation of proposed Land Use and Circulation Element Update
objectives. Therefore, the Maximum Circulation Improvements Alternative would be the environmentally superior
alternative to the proposed project that fulfills the basic objectives of the proposed LUCE Update.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 62
ES-1.5. Incorporation of Studies, Reports and Other Documents
This EIR contains references to studies, reports and other documents that were used as a basis for, or a source of,
information summarized in the body of the EIR. These documents are incorporated by reference in this EIR in accordance
with Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines. Where a study, report or document is briefly cited or referred to for
convenience in the body of this EIR, the reader should consult the “References and Preparers” section of this document
for the full citation. It is important to note that the bulk of the references used for this EIR are pulled forward from
Appendix D, Background Report (Volume III of this EIR).
ES-1.6. Areas of Public Controversy
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines § 15123(b)(2), this EIR acknowledges the areas of controversy and issues to be
resolved which are known to the City of San Luis Obispo or were raised during the scoping process. No areas of
substantial controversy were raised in response to the Notice of Preparation that was circulated Thursday, December 5,
2013 with a required comment period originally set to end on Friday, January 10, 2014, but extended by the City until
Friday, January 24, 2014. However, the City received comments letters identifying a number of issues of concern in
response to the NOP and the public scoping meeting held in association with the regularly scheduled Planning
Commission on Wednesday, January 8, 2014.
As a result of the publishing of the NOP and the City’s outreach to the public and regulatory agencies, the City received
valuable input on the contents of the proposed EIR (please refer to Appendix E, Volume IV, of this EIR for a copy of all NOP
comments received and associated responses). This includes:
Regulatory Agency Comments
APCD: General comments concerning the responsibility for future development under the LUCE Update to ensure the
proper construction and operational permits are received prior to development, and the necessary environmental
information is provided that will be needed for the APCD to make determinations on impacts resulting from potential
future development.
CalTrans: General comments concerning the responsibility to work with the Airport Land Use Commission on the
development of the LUCE Update, and the requirements to provide adequate environmental analysis for future projects
within the Airport Land Use Plan area.
ALUC: Comments concerning project consistency with the ALUP, recommendations for environmental issue areas that
should be addressed through the EIR process, a needs assessment for residential growth, and analysis of a limited growth
EIR alternative.
Other Agencies/Offices
San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce: Comments concerning a need to focus on the City’s jobs/housing balance and
recommendations for land use amendments to specific areas in the city related to increased residential development
opportunities. This includes general comments regarding the need for increased housing. No comments on the nature of
the environmental impact analysis.
Public Comments
General comments include area-specific concerns regarding various environmental issues effecting current city residents
and a general concern over the existing state of the city’s environmental resources. General concern about circulation
changes to the South Broad Street Area and concern regarding including impacts related to diverting collector traffic onto
residential streets. Comments also include a request for a complete impact assessment of a future extension of Prado
Road and an assessment of impacts relating to the Chevron Tank Farm Remediation and Redevelopment project as well as
the potential Johnson Avenue development project on SLCUSD property. Comments also include general
recommendations on development within the identified Specific Plan Areas.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 63
Table ES-1. Summary of Significant and Unavoidable Impacts, Mitigation Measures and Significance After
Mitigation
Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation
Class I: Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
Air Quality
Impact AQ-2 (Long-Term)
Implementation of the LUCE
Update would involve operation
of development projects that
generate long-term emissions of
criteria air pollutants and ozone
precursors. Implementation of
the LUCE Update would not
result in the exposure of
sensitive receptors to substantial
sources of local carbon
monoxide concentrations, odors,
or TACs. However, with regards
to criteria air pollutants and
precursors implementation of
the LUCE Update would not be
consistent with the assumptions
contained in the most recent
version of the APCD’s Clean Air
Plan even with the incorporation
of the proposed LUCE Update
policies and existing City policies.
Thus, long-term air quality
impacts are considered Class I,
significant and unavoidable.
With regards to criteria air pollutants and
precursors implementation of the LUCE Update
would not be consistent with the assumptions
contained in the most recent version of the APCD’s
Clean Air Plan even with the incorporation of the
proposed LUCE Update policies and existing City
policies. Thus, long-term air quality impacts are
considered Class I, significant and unavoidable.
APCD states that a Class 1 can be determined from
a qualitative analysis.
Significant and unavoidable.
Land Use
Impact LU-1
The proposed LUCE Update
would have the potential to
conflict with an applicable land
use plan of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project
adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect. With the
implementation of proposed
LUCE Update policies, potential
land use conflict impacts are
considered to be a Class I,
significant and unavoidable
impact.
No mitigation measures have been identified to
reduce potential inconsistencies with the existing
ALUP to a less than significant level.
The proposed Project has the
potential to be found inconsistent
with the existing ALUP by the
Airport Land Use Commission.
While physical environmental
impacts of safety and noise have
not been identified for the LUCE
update from existing or future
airport operations as described in
the adopted Airport Master Plan,
development envisioned in the
proposed Project presents a
conflict with the ALUP.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 64
Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation
Noise
Impact N-1
Short-Term Construction Noise
Levels. Implementation of
development projects under the
proposed LUCE Update would
involve construction that could
generate noise levels that exceed
applicable standards for mobile
construction equipment in the
City’s Noise Control Ordinance
and result in temporary
substantial increases in noise
levels primarily from the use of
heavy-duty construction
equipment (see thresholds a and
c). Even with the incorporation
of the proposed LUCE Update
policies and existing City policies,
short-term construction noise
levels are considered Class I,
significant and unavoidable.
Enforcement of the Noise Element and noise
control ordinance with respect to the existing
practice that accommodates infill construction
activity during the currently allowed hours of 7 AM
to 7 PM would reduce impacts to the extent
feasible.
With the implementation of
feasible construction noise
reduction measures and
exemptions, construction activities
could still exceed applicable
standards especially if activities are
near existing receptors and/or
occur during the nighttime. Thus,
short-term construction noise
levels are considered Class I,
significant and unavoidable.
Traffic And Circulation
Impact CIR-1
Development and street network
changes under the LUCE Update
will cause roadways currently
operating at LOS D or better to
deteriorate to LOS E or F, in
downtown San Luis Obispo,
roadways operating at LOS E or
better will deteriorate to LOS F,
or will add additional traffic to
roadways operating at LOS E
(outside of downtown) or F (in
downtown). This is considered a
Class I, significant and
unavoidable impact.
As future development under the LUCE Update is
proposed, the City will be required to ensure
consistency with the General Plan and the
policies/programs listed above. As such, with the
incorporation of the proposed project and
adherence to proposed and existing City policies
and programs discussed above, existing and
proposed City policies that contribute to reducing
volumes along roadways would partially mitigate
this impact. However, the impact would remain
potentially significant and unavoidable.
Implementation of proposed and
existing policies would not fully
mitigate the impact, so the impact
would remain potentially
significant and unavoidable.
Impact CIR-2
Development and street network
changes under the LUCE Update
will cause intersections currently
operating at LOS D or better to
deteriorate to LOS E or F, in
downtown San Luis Obispo,
intersections operating at LOS E
or better will deteriorate to LOS
F, or will add additional traffic to
intersections operating at LOS E
(outside of downtown) or F (in
downtown). Impact is considered
to be Class I, significant and
unavoidable.
The following mitigation measures would be
options to mitigate impacts for these intersections
to meet the LOS standard. It should be noted that
installing a signal to mitigate an LOS impact would
be contingent on the intersection meeting signal
warrants per the MUTCD under future year
conditions. However, the decision to install a traffic
signal should not be based solely upon a single
warrant. Delay, congestion, driver confusion, future
land use or other evidence for right of way
assignment beyond that provided by stop controls
must be demonstrated. The City will adhere to
Caltrans’ process for intersection control
evaluation.
Implementation of proposed and
existing policies and reliance on
establishment of project-specific
mitigation measures where
appropriate would reduce
potential impacts to a less than
significant level. However, many of
the proposed mitigations are
infeasible due to right-of-way or
funding constraints. Therefore, the
impact remains significant and
unavoidable.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 65
Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation
CIR-1. Grand & Slack (#8)
Install increased traffic control (traffic signal or
roundabout).
CIR-2. California & Taft (#12)
Install increased traffic control (traffic signal or
roundabout).
CIR-3. Grand & US 101 SB on-ramp (#13)
Install dedicated WB right-turn lane.
CIR-4. San Luis & California (#55)
Install increased traffic control (traffic signal or
roundabout).
CIR-5. Higuera & Tank Farm (#85)
Add NB right-turn lane, WB dual right-turn lanes,
two-way left-turn lane on Tank Farm between
Higuera and Long.
CIR-6. Broad & High (#89)
Install increased traffic control (traffic signal or
roundabout).
Augment bicycle facilities and improve transit
headways on Broad Street.
CIR-7 Broad & Rockview (#94)
Install downstream signal at Broad & Capitolio.
Augment bicycle facilities and improve transit
headways on Broad Street.
CIR-8. Broad & Capitolio (#95)
Install increased traffic control (traffic signal or
roundabout).
Augment bicycle facilities and improve transit
headways on Broad Street.
CIR-9. Johnson & Orcutt (#96)
Install roundabout.
CIR-10. Broad & Tank Farm (#98)
Establish time-of-day timing plans.
Add SB dual left-turn lane, NB dedicated right-turn
lane and WB dedicated right-turn lane.
Augment Bicycle facilities and improve transit
headways on Broad Street.
CIR-11. Broad & Airport (#102)
Install TWLTL north of intersection.
Augment Bicycle facilities and improve transit
headways on Broad Street.
Impact CIR-3
Development under the LUCE
Update will increase traffic on
freeway facilities. Impact is
considered to be Class I,
significant and unavoidable.
As future development under the LUCE Update is
proposed, the City will be required to ensure
consistency with the General Plan and the
policies/programs listed above. However, with the
incorporation of the Proposed Project, adherence
to proposed and existing City policies and programs
discussed above, and continued support of
Caltrans’ and SLOCOG’s efforts to address demand
on US 101 in the vicinity of San Luis Obispo, these
mitigation measures would not mitigate the
impacts and widening to 6-lanes is not feasible.
Given that there are no feasible
mitigation measures under the
City’s purview apart from
implementation of the Proposed
Project policies and programs, or
no enforceable plan or program
that is sufficiently tied to the actual
mitigation of the traffic impacts at
issue, this impact is significant and
unavoidable.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 66
Table ES-2. Summary of Significant but Mitigable Impacts, Mitigation Measures and Significance After Mitigation
Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation
Class II: Significant but Mitigable Impacts
Agricultural Resources
Impact AG-2
Future development in
accordance with the LUCE Update
could occur on prime farmland,
unique farmland, and/or
farmland of statewide
importance. Buildout within the
City Limits would result in Class II,
significant but mitigable impacts
to agricultural conversion.
In order to ensure that prime farmland is
protected upon implementation of the
proposed LUCE Update, the following LUCE
Update policy edits shall be required:
AG-1 1.7.1 Open Space Protection
Within the City's planning area and outside the
urban reserve line, undeveloped land should be
kept open. Prime agricultural land, productive
agricultural land, and potentially productive
agricultural land should/shall be protected for
farming. Scenic lands, sensitive wildlife habitat,
and undeveloped prime agricultural land
should/shall be permanently protected as open
space.
Implementation of proposed and
existing policies and reliance on
establishment of project-specific
mitigation measures where
appropriate would reduce potential
impacts to a less than significant level.
Air Quality
Impact AQ-1 (Short-Term)
Implementation of the LUCE
Update would involve
construction of development
projects that generate short-term
emissions of criteria air pollutants
and ozone precursors. Emissions
from individual construction
projects could exceed APCD’s
project-level significance
thresholds. Thus,
implementation of the LUCE
Update could result in
construction-generated emissions
that violate or contribute
substantially to an existing or
projected air quality violation,
contribute a cumulatively
considerable net increase of
criteria air pollutants for which
the region is designated as non-
attainment, and/or expose
sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations.
Adherence to relevant policies
and implementation of APCD-
recommended project-specific
mitigation measures would
reduce potential short-term
impacts to a less-than-significant
level. Thus, construction-
generated air quality impacts are
considered Class II, significant but
mitigable.
APCD specifies construction mitigation
measures designed to reduce emissions of ROG,
NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 (both fugitive and
exhaust). These include standard mitigation
measures, best available control technology
(BACT), and construction activity management
plan (CAMP) and off-site mitigation for
construction equipment emissions; along with
short and expanded lists for fugitive dust
emissions.
The City shall ensure the implementation of the
most current APCD-recommended construction
mitigation measures to reduce construction-
generated emissions to less-significant levels as
defined by APCD.
Individual development would be
required to undergo separate
environmental review, which may
result in specific impacts that require
project specific mitigation consistent
with the most current APCD-
recommended construction
mitigation measures. As stated in
APCD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook, if
estimated construction emissions are
expected to exceed either of the
APCD Quarterly Tier 2 thresholds of
significance after the standard and
BACT measures are accounted for,
then an APCD approved CAMP and
off-site mitigation would need to be
implemented to reduce air quality
impacts to a less-than-significant
level. In addition, all fugitive dust
sources shall be managed to ensure
adequate control below 20% opacity
as identified by Rule 401, for which
compliance is required by law.
Adherence to relevant policies and
implementation of APCD-
recommended project-specific
mitigation measures would reduce
potential impacts to a less-than-
significant level. Thus, construction-
generated air quality impacts are
considered Class II, significant but
mitigable.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 67
Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation
Cultural Resources
Impact CR-1
Development allowed by the
LUCE update could cause a
substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical
resource which is either listed or
eligible for listing on the National
Register of Historic Places, the
California Register of Historic
Resources, or a local register of
historic resources. This impact is
considered to be Class II,
significant but mitigable.
Development facilitated by the LUCE Update
could adversely affect historical resources. In
order to better facilitate the protection of the
city’s historical resources and reduce potential
impacts to less than significant levels, the
following changes to the City’s General Plan
Conservation and Open Space Element
policies/programs shall be required:
CR-1 3.3.2 Demolitions
Historically or architecturally significant
buildings should shall not be demolished or
substantially changed in outward appearance,
unless doing so is necessary to remove a threat
to health and safety and other means to
eliminate or reduce the threat to acceptable
levels are infeasible.
CR-2 3.3.5
Historic districts and neighborhoods. In
evaluating new public or private development,
the City should shall identify and protect
neighborhoods or districts having historical
character due to the collective effect of
Contributing or Master List historic properties.
CR-3 3.5.10 Southern Pacific Water Tower
The historic Southern Pacific Water Tower and
adjoining City-owned land should shall be
maintained as open space or parkland.
Implementation of proposed and
existing policies, reliance on
establishment of project-specific
mitigation measures where
appropriate, and incorporation of the
required policy/program language
changes will reduce potential impacts
to a less than significant level.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 68
Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation
Public Services
Impact PS-1
Buildout of the proposed Land
Use Element would increase the
demand for fire protection
services by increasing population
and the number of structures in
the city. This is a Class II,
potentially significant but
mitigable impact.
The following policy shall be added to the
proposed Land Use Element prior to adoption:
PS-1 New Policy
Development should shall be approved only
when adequate fire suppression services and
facilities are available or will be made available
concurrent with development, considering the
setting, type, intensity, and form of the
proposed development.
Implementation of the proposed
mitigation measure and Land Use
Element policy would require the
development of a new fire station in
the southern portion of the city prior
to or in conjunction with the
development of the Avila Ranch
Specific Plan. The construction and
operation of a new fire station would
be required to comply with applicable
regulatory requirements, City
development review policies and
requirements, and may be subject to
the implementation of additional
mitigation measures identified by a
project-specific environmental
review. With the implementation of
the proposed mitigation measure and
existing development review
requirements, the proposed Land Use
Element Update would result in less
than significant adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision
of new or altered facilities needed to
achieve consistency with the City’s
fire response standard.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 69
Table ES-3. Less Than Significant Impacts, Mitigation Measures and Significance After Mitigation
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After Mitigation
Class III: Less Than Significant Impacts
Aesthetics
Impact AES-1
Development under the LUCE Update would introduce new
development along viewing corridors and scenic roadways,
including state scenic highways, in the San Luis Obispo area. This
could have a substantial adverse effect on scenic resources or an
identified visual resource or scenic vista from a public viewing
area. With the incorporation of the proposed LUCE Update
policies and existing City policies, potential impacts to such views
are considered Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact AES-2
The LUCE Update emphasizes both reuse of existing urbanized
lands, infill development on vacant parcels, and new
development on vacant parcels near urban areas. The
development of such areas could degrade the existing visual
character and its surroundings. With the incorporation of the
proposed LUCE Update and existing City policies and programs,
potential impacts related to existing visual character changes are
considered Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact AES-3
Proposed development in accordance with the LUCE Update
would introduce new sources of light and glare. However,
adherence to policies included in the Zoning Ordinance and
Community Design Guidelines would reduce potential impacts to
a Class III, less than significant, level.
None required. Less than significant.
Agricultural Resources
Impact AG-1
The LUCE Update could alter the existing land use and zoning on
sites throughout the city and may result in incompatibilities with
adjacent urban and agricultural uses. However, the General Plan
reduces land use conflicts through policies and plan review.
Therefore, impacts that would occur from development would be
Class III, less than significant.
None required Less than significant.
Biological Resources
Impact BIO-1
Development under the LUCE Update has potential to impact
common habitat types including non-native annual grasslands
and disturbed/ruderal areas that provide habitat for common
wildlife and plant species. With the incorporation of the
proposed LUCE Update policies and existing governing policies,
potential impacts to these common habitats are considered Class
III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 70
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After Mitigation
Impact BIO-2
Development consistent with the LUCE Update has potential to
impact four Natural Communities of Special Concern present
within the LUCE SOI Planning Subarea including Serpentine
Bunchgrass, Northern Interior Cypress Stand, Central Maritime
Chaparral, and Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh. With the
incorporation of the proposed and existing City policies, and the
requirements of regulatory and oversight agencies, potential
impacts to sensitive habitats are considered Class III, less than
significant.
None required. Less than significant
Impact BIO-3
Development consistent with the LUCE Update has the potential
to impact special-status plant species within the LUCE SOI
Planning Subarea. With the incorporation of the proposed and
existing City policies, and the requirements of regulatory and
oversight agencies, potential impacts to special-status plant
species are considered Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact BIO-4
Development consistent with the LUCE Update has potential to
impact special-status wildlife species within the LUCE SOI
Planning Subarea. With the incorporation of the proposed and
existing City policies, and the requirements of regulatory and
oversight agencies, potential impacts to special-status wildlife
species are considered Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact BIO-5
Development consistent with the LUCE Update has potential to
impact common wildlife species and species of local concern
within the LUCE SOI Planning Subarea. With the incorporation of
the proposed and existing City policies, and the requirements of
regulatory and oversight agencies, potential impacts to common
and species of local concern are considered Class III, less than
significant.
None required. Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 71
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After Mitigation
Cultural Resources
Impact CR-2
Development facilitated by Land Use and Circulation Element
Update could adversely affect identified and previously
unidentified archaeological and paleontological resources. This
includes potential disturbance of human remains. General Plan
policies would ensure that such impacts are addressed on a case-
by-case basis. Impacts would be considered Class III, less than
significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Geology and Soils
Impact GEO-1
New development under the LUCE Update could be susceptible to
impacts from future seismic events, creating the potential for
structural damage or health and safety risks. However,
compliance with required building codes and implementation of
General Plan polices would result in a Class III, less than
significant impact.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact GEO-2
Future seismic events could result in liquefaction of soils near San
Luis Obispo Creek, Prefumo Creek and other low-lying areas.
Development in these areas could be subject to liquefaction
hazards. The compliance of future development projects with the
California Building Code (CBC) and General Plan policies would
result in Class III, less than significant impacts.
None required.
Less than significant.
Impact GEO-3
Development facilitated by the LUCE Update could occur on soils
that have the potential to present natural hazards (expansive
soils, erosive soils, and differential settlement) to structures and
roadways. Development could also result in the loss of a unique
geologic feature. However, compliance of future development
projects with the California Building Code and adopted General
Plan policies would ensure that resulting impacts are Class III, less
than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact GEO-4
Steep slopes outside of the existing city limits present potential
on- or off-site landslide hazards. In addition to human safety
impacts, a landslide has the potential to damage or destroy
structures, roadways and other improvements as well as to
deflect and block drainage channels, causing further damage and
erosion, including loss of topsoil. The compliance of future
development projects with the California Building Code (CBC) and
General Plan policies would result in Class III, less than significant
impacts.
None required. Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 72
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After Mitigation
Global Climate Change
Impact GCC-1
Implementation of the proposed LUCE Update could result in an
increase in GHG emissions due to short-term construction and
long-term operational activities associated with new housing and
commercial development, resulting in a cumulatively
considerable contribution to the impact of global climate change.
However, because the proposed LUCE Update would be
consistent with the City’s CAP and incorporates applicable CAP
policies and programs that would reduce GHG emissions, this
impact would be considered Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact HAZ-1
Development facilitated by the LUCE Update could occur near
known hazardous material users or result in construction in areas
with existing hazardous materials. Implementation of the LUCE
Update could expose individuals to health risks due to
soil/groundwater contamination or emission of hazardous
materials into the air and could impact an adopted emergency
response/evacuation plan. With the incorporation of the
proposed LUCE Update policies and existing City policies,
potential impacts are considered Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact HAZ-2
Development consistent with the proposed LUCE Update could
introduce incompatible residential and commercial land uses into
safety zones established through the Airport Land Use Plan and
may result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in
these areas. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact HAZ-3
Development consistent with the proposed LUCE Update would
introduce residential land uses into areas designated as having a
Moderate or High Wildland Fire Hazard, introducing the potential
to expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss and/or
injury. However, compliance with existing policies and state and
local regulations would reduce impacts to a Class III, less than
significant level.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact HAZ-4
Development facilitated by the LUCE Update could introduce
sensitive receptors to additional hazards related to exposure to
radiation, electromagnetic fields and hazardous trees. With the
incorporation of the proposed LUCE Update policies and existing
City policies, potential impacts are considered Class III, less than
significant.
None required. Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 73
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After Mitigation
Impact HAZ-5
Development under the proposed LUCE Update could potentially
introduce sensitive receptors to areas in direct proximity to
hazardous materials transportation corridors including the Union
Pacific Railroad and Highway 101 and could potentially create a
public safety hazard. This is a Class III, less than significant impact.
None required. Less than significant.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Impact HWQ-1
New development under the LUCE Update within the 100-year
flood plain could be subject to flooding and have the potential to
impede or redirect flood flows. However, with implementation of
General Plan policies and adherence to the City’s Floodplain
Management Regulation impacts related to flooding would be
Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact HWQ-2
Development facilitated by the LUCE Update has the potential to
increase the amount of impervious surfaces within the city. This
could result in a decrease in percolation to the Groundwater
Basin, the alteration of drainage patterns and increases in the
volume of surface runoff. Compliance with the City’s Stormwater
Management Plan (SWMP) would reduce impacts to a Class III,
less than significant level.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact HWQ-3
Point and non-point sources of contamination could affect water
quality in San Luis Obispo Creek, Prefumo Creek as well as other
surface waters and groundwater in the city. However,
compliance with existing regulations and implementation of
General Plan policies and the City’s Stormwater Management
Plan (SWMP) would result in Class III, less than significant
impacts.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact HWQ-4
Development facilitated by the LUCE Update has the potential to
create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems,
resulting in increased stormwater runoff and has the potential to
result in the need for additional stormwater infrastructure.
Compliance with the City’s Stormwater Management Plan
(SWMP), and State regulatory requirements, would reduce
impacts to a Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Land Use
Impact LU-2
The proposed LUCE Update would have the potential to result in
land use conflicts between existing and proposed land uses. With
the implementation of proposed LUCE Update policies, potential
land use conflict impacts are considered Class III, less than
significant.
None required. Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 74
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After Mitigation
Impact LU-3
The proposed Land Use Element Update would result in conflicts
with applicable habitat conservation plans or natural community
conservation plans. With the implementation of proposed LUCE
Update policies, potential plan and policy conflict impacts are
considered Class III, less than significant.
None required.
Less than significant.
Impact LU-3
The proposed Circulation Element Update identifies future
roadway improvements that would have the potential to result in
a significant impact if the improvements would physically divide
an established community. This impact is considered Class III, less
than significant.
None required.
Less than significant.
Noise
Impact N-2
Long-Term Roadway and Railroad Traffic Noise Levels
Implementation of the proposed LUCE Update would increase
traffic volumes and associated noise levels along major
transportation routes. In some instances, traffic-related noise
increases could be more than 3 dB, the level typically audible to
the human ear and; therefore, considered a substantial increase
in noise.
New development associated with the proposed LUCE Update
could also result in the siting of new sensitive receptors in close
proximity to transportation noise sources such as the railroad,
with potential to exceed the land use compatibility and
transportation noise exposure standards in the existing Noise
Element. However, because the City’s Noise Element contains
policies and programs that would address and mitigate potential
site-specific impacts for individual projects in the future, this
impact would be considered Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact N-3
Exposure of Noise Sensitive Receptors to Stationary Sources.
Implementation of the proposed LUCE Update could increase
stationary source noise levels from new development. New
development associated with the proposed LUCE Update could
also result in the siting of new sensitive receptors in close
proximity to these source types, with potential to exceed the land
use compatibility and stationary noise exposure standards in the
existing Noise Element. However, because the City’s Noise
Element contains policies and programs that would address and
mitigate potential site-specific impacts for individual projects in
the future, this impact would be considered Class III, less than
significant.
None required. Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 75
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After Mitigation
Impact N-4
Airport Noise Exposure. Implementation of the proposed LUCE
Update would result in the designation of noise-sensitive land
uses located within or near the 55 dBA and 60 dBA noise contours
of the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport Land Use Plan.
This could result in exposure of people to excessive noise levels.
However, with the incorporation of the proposed LUCE Update
policies that address airport noise compatibility and consistency
with the adopted ALUP, this impact would be considered Class III,
less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact N-5
Exposure to Excessive Vibration Levels. Implementation of the
proposed LUCE Update could increase exposure to vibration
levels. However, because the City’s ordinance contains and that
these sources (existing and proposed) would be anticipated to be
minor, this impact would be considered Class III, less than
significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Population and Housing
Impact PH-1
The LUCE Update would not result in residential unit
development or associated population growth that exceeds an
adopted average annual growth rate threshold. Potential
population and housing impacts are considered Class III, less than
significant.
None required.
Less than significant.
Impact PH-2
The LUCE Update would not result in a substantial displacement
of residents or existing housing units. This impact is considered
Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Public Services
Impact PS-2
Buildout of the proposed Land Use Element Update would
increase the demand for police protection services by increasing
population and development in the city. This is a Class III, less
than significant impact.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact PS-3
Buildout of the proposed Land Use Element Update would
increase enrollment in public schools by increasing the population
of the city. This is a Class III, less than significant impact.
None required. Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 76
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After Mitigation
Recreation
Impact REC-1
Buildout of the proposed LUCE Update would increase the
population of the city and would facilitate the development of
additional parkland. Buildout of the proposed LUCE Update
would result in a small increase in total per capita parkland in the
city when compared to existing conditions. Although the LUCE
Update would not comply with the City’s per capita parkland
standard, this would not result in a physical effect. Therefore the
LUCE Update would result in a Class III, less than significant
environmental impact related to the increased use of existing
park and recreation facilities.
The proposed LUCE Update
would result in less than
significant recreation-related
environmental impacts and
no mitigation measures are
required. Although the LUCE
Update would result in less
than significant
environmental impacts
related to the provision of
parkland in the city, the
existing condition where the
City’s per capita parkland
standard is not achieved
would continue to exist. The
City’s per capita parkland
ratio goal is intended to meet
the community’s desire for
increased recreational
opportunities, and is not
considered to be a policy
adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect.
Therefore the identified
inconsistency is not
considered to be a significant
environmental impact and no
mitigation is required.
Recommendations to address
the City’s goals for meeting
the per capita parkland ratio
include, but are not limited
to, the following additions to
the Parks and Recreation
Element:
Development may be
required to fund or dedicate
parkland greater than what is
required through the Quimby
Act in order to meet the
community’s needs and goals
for parkland.
The City shall pursue a gift of
Cuesta Park from the County
to the City as part of the City’s
parkland system.
Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 77
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After Mitigation
Impact REC-2
Buildout of the proposed Land Use Element would potentially
provide up to 52.4 acres of new park facilities in the city. The
construction and use of the proposed parks would have the
potential to result in significant environmental impacts. This is
considered a Class III impact, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Traffic and Circulation
Impact CIR-4
Development under the LUCE Update may increase traffic
volumes or traffic speed in designated neighborhood traffic
management areas. Impact is considered to be Class III, less than
significant.
As future development under
the LUCE Update is proposed,
the City will be required to
ensure consistency with the
General Plan and the
policies/programs listed
above. Therefore, mitigation
measures are not required.
Less than significant.
Impact CIR-5
Development under the LUCE Update may encourage increased
heavy vehicle traffic on non-designated truck routes. Impact is
considered to be Class III, less than significant.
As development under the
LUCE Update is proposed, the
City will be required to ensure
consistency with the General
Plan and the
policies/programs listed
above. Therefore, mitigation
measures are not required.
Less than significant.
Impact CIR-6
Development under the LUCE Update will cause increased activity
at San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport that may lead to
changes in traffic volumes or traffic patterns that result in
deteriorated safety conditions. Impact is considered to be Class
III, less than significant.
As development under the
LUCE Update is proposed, the
City will be required to ensure
consistency with the General
Plan and the
policies/programs listed
above. Therefore, mitigation
measures are not required.
Less than significant.
Impact CIR-7
Development and street network changes and adoption of the
policies and programs under the LUCE Update would not conflict
with adopted policies that are supportive of increased active
transportation. Impact is considered to be Class III, less than
significant.
The LUCE Update significantly
strengthens the City’s policies
on active transportation
which will lead to reduced
traffic congestion and a
healthier population.
Therefore, no mitigation
measures are required.
Less than significant.
Impact CIR-8
Development and adoption of the policies and programs under
the LUCE Update would not conflict with adopted policies that
are supportive of increased transit ridership and provision of
services. Impact is considered to be Class III, less than significant.
As future development under
the LUCE Update is proposed,
the City will be required to
ensure consistency with the
General Plan and the
policies/programs listed
above. Therefore, mitigation
measures are not required.
Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 78
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After Mitigation
Utilities and Service Systems
Impact USS-1
New development that could occur as a result of the proposed
LUCE Update would increase existing water demand. This is a
Class III, less than significant impact.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact USS-2
New development that could occur as a result of the LUCE Update
would generate wastewater flows that exceed the existing
capacity of the City’s Water Resource Recovery Facility. This is a
Class III, less than significant impact.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact USS-3
New development that could be facilitated by the LUCE Update
would require the construction of new water and wastewater
infrastructure or the replacement of existing infrastructure. The
construction or replacement of infrastructure has the potential to
result in significant environmental effects. This is a Class III, less
than significant impact.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact USS-4
New development that could be facilitated by the LUCE Update
would increase the demand for solid waste disposal at county
landfills. Potential new development would also comply with
applicable regulations related to the management of solid waste.
As such, solid waste disposal impacts of the LUCE Update are
Class III, less than significant impact.
None required. Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 11
PH1 - 79
Page intentionally left
blank.
PH1 - 80