HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-14-2024 PC Agenda Packet
Planning Commission
AGENDA
Wednesday, February 14, 2024, 6:00 p.m.
Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo
The Planning Commission holds in-person meetings. Zoom participation will not be supported at this
time. Planning Commission meetings can be viewed remotely on Channel 20 and the City’s YouTube
Channel: http://youtube.slo.city
INSTRUCTIONS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT:
Public Comment prior to the meeting (must be received 3 hours in advance of the meeting):
Mail - Delivered by the U.S. Postal Service. Address letters to the City Clerk's Office at 990
Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, 93401.
Email - Submit Public Comments via email to advisorybodies@slocity.org. In the body of your
email, please include the date of the meeting and the item number (if applicable). Emails will not
be read aloud during the meeting.
Voicemail - Call (805) 781-7164 and leave a voicemail. Please state and spell your name, the
agenda item number you are calling about, and leave your comment. Verbal comments must be
limited to 3 minutes. Voicemails will not be played during the meeting.
*All correspondence will be archived and distributed to members, however, submissions received
after the deadline may not be processed until the following day.
Public Comment during the meeting:
Meetings are held in-person. To provide public comment during the meeting, you must be
present at the meeting location.
Electronic Visual Aid Presentation. To conform with the City's Network Access and Use Policy,
Chapter 1.3.8 of the Council Policies & Procedures Manual, members of the public who desire
to utilize electronic visual aids to supplement their oral presentation are encouraged to provide
display-ready material to the City Clerk by 12:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. Contact the
City Clerk's Office at cityclerk@slocity.org or (805) 781-7114.
Pages
1.CALL TO ORDER
Chair Munoz-Morris will call the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission to
order.
2.PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
At this time, people may address the Commission about items not on the
agenda. Comments are limited to three minutes per person. Items raised at this
time are generally referred to staff and, if action by the Commission is
necessary, may be scheduled for a future meeting.
3.CONSENT
Matters appearing on the Consent Calendar are expected to be non-
controversial and will be acted upon at one time. A member of the public may
request the Planning Commission to pull an item for discussion. The public may
comment on any and all items on the Consent Agenda within the three-minute
time limit.
3.a CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES - JANUARY 24, 2024 PLANNING
COMMISSION MINUTES
5
Recommendation:
To approve the Planning Commission Minutes of January 24, 2024.
4.PUBLIC HEARINGS
Note: Any court challenge to the action taken on public hearing items on this
agenda may be limited to considering only those issues raised at the public
hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City of San Luis Obispo at,
or prior to, the public hearing. If you wish to speak, please give your name and
address for the record. Please limit your comments to three minutes; consultant
and project presentations limited to six minutes.
4.a 4240 AND 4280 EARTHWOOD LN, 165 CESSNA CT (ARCH-0197-
2023) REVIEW OF THE MULTI-FAMILY HIGH DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL (R-4) COMPONENT IN PHASE 3 OF THE AVILA
RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLAN
9
Recommendation:
Adopt the Draft Resolution approving the proposed site design and
layout for the R-4 component of the Avila Ranch Project to be
developed within Phase 3 of the Avila Ranch Development Plan
(ADRP), including a density bonus to increase the unit count of the R-4
component from 125 to 145 units, which includes 59 affordable units,
and Addendum #2 to the ARDP Final EIR, and incorporating the
recommendations of the Architectural Review Commission, including a
fence height exception, sign exception, and a parking exception, based
on findings and subject to the Conditions of Approval.
5.COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
5.a STAFF UPDATES AND AGENDA FORECAST
Receive a brief update from Deputy Community Development Director
Tyler Corey.
6.ADJOURNMENT
The next Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for
February 28, 2024 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 990 Palm
Street, San Luis Obispo.
LISTENING ASSISTIVE DEVICES for the hearing impaired--see the Clerk
The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible
to the public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate
alternative formats to persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who
requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting
should direct such request to the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7114 at least
48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications Device for the
Deaf (805) 781-7410.
Planning Commission meetings are televised live on Charter Channel 20 and on
the City's YouTube Channel: www.youtube.com/CityofSanLuisObispo. Agenda
related writings or documents provided to the Planning Commission are
available for public inspection on the City’s website:
https://www.slocity.org/government/mayor-and-city-council/agendas-and-
minutes.
1
Planning Commission Minutes
January 24, 2024, 6:00 p.m.
Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo
Planning
Commissioners
Present:
Commissioner Dave Houghton, Commissioner Bob Jorgensen,
Commissioner Steve Kahn, Chair Juan Munoz-Morris
Planning
Commissioners
Absent:
Commissioner Lindsay Ringer, Commissioner Eric Tolle, Vice
Chair Justin Cooley
City Staff Present: Housing Policy & Programs Manager Teresa McClish, Assistant
City Attorney Markie Kersten, Megan Wilbanks, Deputy City Clerk
_____________________________________________________________________
1. CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission was called to
order on January 24, 2024 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 990
Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, by Chair Munoz-Morris.
2. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Public Comment:
None
--End of Public Comment--
3. CONSENT
3.a CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES - DECEMBER 13, 2023 PLANNING
COMMISSION MINUTES
Motion By Commissioner Kahn
Second By Commissioner Jorgensen
To approve the Planning Commission Minutes of December 13, 2023.
Ayes (4): Commissioner Houghton, Commissioner Jorgensen, Commissioner
Kahn, and Chair Munoz-Morris
Absent (3): Commissioner Ringer, Commissioner Tolle, and Vice Chair Cooley
CARRIED (4 to 0)
Page 5 of 133
2
4. PUBLIC HEARING
4.a 40 PRADO ROAD (MOD-0578-2023) REVIEW OF REQUEST TO AMEND
THE EXISTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO INCREASE THE
NUMBER OF SAFE PARKING SPACES AND MODIFY HOURS OF
OPERATION AT 40 PRADO HOMELESS SERVICES CENTER
Homelessness Response Manager Daisy Wiberg and Homelessness
Response Administrative Specialist Sarah Cooper presented the staff
report and responded to Commission inquiries.
The Applicant, Jack Lahey and Nathan Rubinoff with CAPSLO, provided a
brief overview of the project and responded to questions raised.
Chair Munoz-Morris opened the Public Hearing
Public Comment:
None
--End of Public Comment--
Chair Munoz-Morris closed Public Comment
Motion By Commissioner Houghton
Second By Commissioner Kahn
Adopt a Resolution to amend the existing Conditional Use Permit (USE-
0413-2014) at 40 Prado Homeless Services Center to increase the
capacity of the Safe Parking Program from seven (7) vehicle spaces to
twelve (12) vehicle spaces and update the program hours from 4:45 p.m. -
8:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. - 8:00 a.m.
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO AN EXISTING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SAFE
PARKING SPACES AND MODIFY HOURS OF OPERATION AT 40
PRADO HOMELESS SERVICES CENTER THAT PROVIDES UNHOUSED
INDIVIDUALS AND FAMILIES A SAFE PLACE TO TEMPORARILY PARK
A VEHICLE OVERNIGHT TO FACILITATE THE TRANSITION TO
PERMANENT HOUSING; AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT
AND ATTACHMENTS DATED JANUARY 24, 2024 (MOD-0578-2023)"
Ayes (4): Commissioner Houghton, Commissioner Jorgensen, Commissioner
Kahn, and Chair Munoz-Morris
Absent (3): Commissioner Ringer, Commissioner Tolle, and Vice Chair Cooley
CARRIED (4 to 0)
Page 6 of 133
3
5. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
5.a STAFF UPDATES AND AGENDA FORECAST
Housing Policy & Programs Manager Teresa McClish provided the
following update of upcoming projects:
One item is currently scheduled for the February 14, 2024 meeting:
Review of the multi-family High Density Residential (R-4) component
in Phase 3 of the Avila Ranch Development project (4240 & 4280
Earthwood Lane and 165 Cessna Court, ARCH-0197-2023).
Currently, there are no items forecasted for the February 28, 2024
meeting. A cancellation notice will be published one week in
advance of the meeting date, if necessary.
Tentatively scheduled for the March 11, 2024 meeting, is review of
the General Plan Annual Report.
6. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6:48 p.m. The next Regular Meeting of the
Planning Commission is scheduled for February 14, 2024 at 6:00 p.m. in the
Council Chambers at City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo.
_________________________
APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION: XX/XX/2024
Page 7 of 133
Page 8 of 133
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Review of the multi-family High Density Residential (R-4) component in
Phase 3 of the Avila Ranch Development Plan (ADRP), consisting of a density bonus
housing development which would increase the density of the R-4 project component
from 125 to 145 unit , which includes 59 affordable units, and Addendum #2 to the ARDP
Final EIR, and incorporating the recommendations of the Architectural Review
Commission, including a fence height exception, sign exception, and a parking exception,
based on findings and subject to the Conditions of Approval
PROJECT ADDRESS: 4240 & 4280 Earthwood Lane; 165 Cessna Court
FILE NUMBER: ARCH-0197-2023
BY: John Rickenbach, Contract Planner FROM: Tyler Corey, Deputy Director
Phone Number: (805) 610-1109 Phone Number: (805) 781-7169
Email: JFRickenbach@aol.com Email: tcorey@slocity.org
APPLICANTS: Wathen Castanos Homes REPRESENTATIVE: Oasis Associates
and Avila Ranch, LP
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Draft Resolution approving the proposed site design and layout for the R -4
component of the Avila Ranch Project to be developed within Phase 3 of the Avila Ranch
Development Plan (ADRP), including a density bonus to increase the unit count of the R-
4 component from 125 to 145 units, which includes 59 affordable units, and Addendum
#2 to the ARDP Final EIR, and incorporating the recommendations of the Architectural
Review Commission, including a fence height exception, sign exception, and a parking
exception, based on findings and subject to the Conditions of Approval.
1.0 COMMISSION'S PURVIEW
The Planning Commission’s role is to consider approval of the proposed design of the R-
4 portion (Phase 3) of the approved Avila Ranch Development Plan , informed by the
recommendations of the Architectural Review Commission on design criteria. In arriving
at a decision, the Planning Commission should consider the proposal’s consistency with
the General Plan, Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP), Avila Ranch Development Plan
(ARDP), Zoning Regulations, Community Design Guidelines, and other applicable City
development standards.
2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND
In September 2017, the City Council approved the Avila Ranch project, which envisioned
phased development of up to 720 homes and 15,000 square feet of neighborhood -serving
commercial uses on a 150-acre site on three parcels in the southern portion of the City of
Meeting Date: 2/14/2024
Item Number: 4a
Time Estimate: 60 Minutes
Page 9 of 133
Item 4a
ARCH-0197-2023
Planning Commission Report – February 14, 2024
San Luis Obispo, generally northeast of Buckley Road and Vachell Lane (APNs 053-259-
004, -005 and -006). The project as approved was determined to be consistent with the
City’s General Plan, Airport Area Specific Plan (as amended), and the City’s Community
Design Guidelines. It was also determined to be consistent with the County’s Airport Land
Use Plan.
The following entitlements were included as part of original project approval to facilitate
development:
Resolution 1832 (2017 Series) certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report
for the project, amending both the Airport Area Specific Plan and General Plan,
and approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 3089.
Resolution 1638 (2017 Series) rezoning property at 175 Venture Drive (the
Project) from Business Park/Specific Plan Area (BP -SP) and Conservation /Open
Space/Specific Plan Area (C/OS/SP) to be consistent with the Project’s
Development Plan and with the General Plan and Airport Area Specific Plan, as
amended to enable development of 720 residential units and 15,000 square feet
of neighborhood commercial on a 150-acre site. The Project also includes 18 acres
of parks and 53 acres of designated open space.
Ordinance 1639 (2017 Series) approving the Development Agreement (DA)
between the City and Avila Ranch LLC. The Project was subsequently sold to
Wathen Castanos Homes, and with it, the rights and obligations associated with
the DA. The DA ensures phased and orderly development of the Project and
includes provisions for reimbursement for public infrastructure and improvements
beyond project requirements.
In addition, several other subsequent entitlements related to Avila Ranch have already
been approved or are currently under City review, including both onsite and offsite
improvements related to the originally approved project. These include the recordatio n of
the Phase 1 and Phase 2/3 Final Maps, various public improvements related to Phases
1-3, approval of 297 residential units within the R-2 component of the Development Plan
(Phases 1-3), approval of 101 residential units in the R-1 component of the Development
Plan (Phase 5), and a variety of resource regulatory permits. A complete list is included
on Page P-1.1 of the project plans (Attachment B).
The applicant now requests that the Planning Commission approve the proposed design
and layout for the High Density Residential (R-4) component of the project, which is a
portion of Phase 3 under the approved Avila Ranch Development Plan (ARDP).
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY
The proposed project includes 145 multi-family residential units in two developments
totaling just over 4 acres within the R-4 high-density portion of the 150-acre Avila Ranch
plan area. The approved Avila Ranch Development Plan envisions up to 125 dwelling
units, but the application is requesting a density bonus to allow an additi onal 20 dwelling
units. The applicability of a density bonus and issues related to the provision of affordable
housing are within the purview of the Planning Commission.
Page 10 of 133
Item 4a
ARCH-0197-2023
Planning Commission Report – February 14, 2024
The proposed application is for Planning Commission to consider approval of the design
of the R-4 component of the Avila Ranch project in terms of its consistency with the Airport
Area Specific Plan, Avila Ranch Development Plan, and Community Design Guidelines.
If approved, the R-4 product as envisioned would be developed in the framework of
existing project entitlements, subject to the policies of the General Plan, AASP, and
requirements of the ARDP.
General Location:
Generally north of Buckley
Road and east of Vachell
Lane.
Site Area: 150 acres for the
Avila Ranch project (current
application includes 4.05
acres within the R-4-SP
zone)
Present Use: Vacant land
Zoning: R-4-SP within the
Airport Area Specific Plan
General Plan: High Density
Residential
Surrounding Uses (outside
the Avila Ranch Planning Area):
East: County jurisdiction; Agriculture zoning
West: M-SP (Manufacturing); C-S (Service Commercial) further west across Vachell Lane
North: M (Manufacturing); BP-SP (Business Park); warehousing & industrial uses
South: County jurisdiction; Agriculture zoning
Zoning surrounding the R-4-SP zoned land includes R-2-SP and PF-SP within the Avila
Ranch project area, and BP-SP and M-SP outside the Avila Ranch area, but still within
the Airport Area Specific Plan (refer to Figure 1, Avila Ranch Project Site).
Development within the R-4 district will consist of two separate developments as
described in more detail below. The proposed “Anacapa” development includes 85
market-rate units and is located on the east side of Earthwood Lane (Lots 185 and 188).
The “Sendero” development would include 60 units to be constructed by an affordable
housing developer on the west side of Earthwood Lane (Lot 186). Table 1 summarizes
the essential characteristics of the two development sites, while Figure 1 shows their
location in the context of the approved Avila Ranch Development Plan . Figure 2 shows
an illustrative site plan that encompasses both parts of the development.
The R-4 district within Avila Ranch consists of three (3) parcels created as part of
recorded Tract Map 3089 Phase 1. The development of these parcels (Lots 185, 186 and
188) is shown as Phase 3 within the Avila Ranch Development Plan . Development can
occur non-sequentially provided that all infrastructure and mitigation requirements of
earlier phases are satisfied previously or concurrently with proposed development.
Figure 1. Avila Ranch Project Site
Project Site
Page 11 of 133
Item 4a
ARCH-0197-2023
Planning Commission Report – February 14, 2024
Table 1. Summary of Development Sites
Market-Rate Housing Development (“Anacapa”). The development on the east side
of Earthwood Lane consists of eighty-five (85) market rate unit apartments and includes
two separate free-standing three-story buildings. This development would be located on
two existing legal lots (Lots 185 and 188), which will be consolidated into a single lot as
part of the Tract 3089 Phase 2 and 3 final map.
Affordable Housing Development (“Sendero”). The proposed development on the
west side of Earthwood Lane consists of a three-story building with a large central
courtyard, and includes fifty-nine (59) affordable unit apartments and one (1) caretaker’s
unit. This includes forty (40) affordable units previously contemplated through the
approved ARDP and Development Agreement, plus an additional twenty (20) units being
added through a separate Density Bonus process. The Sendero portion of the project is
requesting a 20% density bonus, and therefore must provide at least 10% of the base
density (6 dwelling units) to be dedicated to low-income households. The applicant is
proposing a 100% affordable housing project (excluding the caretakers unit ) on the
Sendero development site, with 32 units available to low-income households and 27 units
available to moderate-income households, and is therefore providing affordable units far
in excess of the minimum requirements to meet the density bonus. The project applicant
is not requesting any waivers, concessions, or incentives under State Density Bonus law.
Table 2. Summary of Sendero Affordable Units
Affordable unit type - Sendero Number of units - Sendero
Low-income units 32
Moderate-income units 27
Caretaker’s unit 1
Total Units Sendero 60
59 affordable apartment dwelling units,
and 1 caretaker’s unit, in one building
Page 12 of 133
Item 4a
ARCH-0197-2023
Planning Commission Report – February 14, 2024
4.0 PREVIOUS REVIEW
As described in section 2.0 of this report, the Avila Ranch project was originally approved
by the City Council in September 2017. This included a Development Agreement,
Development Plan, VTTM 3089, and a certified Final EIR that addressed the entire
development, including the R-4 portion of the project. The approved project had been
previously reviewed by the Planning Commission, Architectural Review Commission,
Parks and Recreation Commission, Bicycle Advisory Committee, and Airport Land Use
Commission, all of which informed the City Council’s decision. Subsequent specific
development plans for each phase of the project were required to receive Architectural
Review and Planning Commission approval.
5.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
The proposed development must be consistent with the requirements of the General Plan,
Zoning Regulations, AASP, Development Agreement, and ARDP. Notably, upon its
approval in 2017, the project (including the Development Agreement and ARDP) was
found to be consistent with the General Plan and AASP, and is directly referenced in the
AASP. Therefore, consistency with the Development Agreement (DA) and ARDP are the
key considerations with respect to this project, as it implies consistency with the General
Plan and AASP for the reason described above, and are accordingly, the focus of the
analysis that follows. Therefore, consistency with the Development Agreement (DA) and
ARDP are the key considerations with respect to this project, as it implies consistency
with the General Plan and AASP, and are accordingly, the focus of the analysis that
follows.
The DA and ARDP were intended to work together to provide direction for the project,
with the City’s Zoning Regulations used to determine development parameters where the
ARDP is either silent or open to interpretation. The DA and ARDP were intended to work
together to provide direction for the project, with the City’s Zoning Regulations used to
determine development parameters where the ARDP is silent. The DA in particular is the
overarching guidance document, which specifies the re quired approach to a number of
topics, including infrastructure, affordable housing, energy use and others. As such, the
DA is useful for determining the intent of the ARDP when provisions of that document
require interpretation, especially as the ARDP wa s put together without the benefit of a
detailed project design and did not always anticipate situations that arise through the
design review process. For this reason, the analysis that follows is often framed in terms
of whether the project application meets the intent of the ARDP, rather than necessarily
follows all of the specific provisions described in that document, some of which may no
longer be applicable or appropriate based on updated citywide regulations (notably some
of the provisions related to energy use).
5.1 Development Agreement
Flexibility
The Development Agreement includes several relevant provisions with respect to project
design within the R-4 zone, the most important of which is Section 8.06, which recognizes
a need for flexibility during project implementation, and the need to potentially allow for
Page 13 of 133
Item 4a
ARCH-0197-2023
Planning Commission Report – February 14, 2024
minor deviations from the Development Plan if the project is consistent with the intent of
the Development Plan. Specifically, Section 8.06 states:
“…Implementation of the project may require minor modifications of the details of
the Development Plan and affect the performance of the Parties to this
Development Agreement. The anticipated refinements of the Project and the
development of the Property may require that appropriate clarifications and
refinements are made to this Development Agreement and Entitlements with
respect to the details of the performance of the City and the Developer. The
Parties desire a certain degree of flexibility with respect to those items covered in
general terms under this Development Agreement.”
In short, the DA recognized that in order to make a project implementable, some flexibility
in interpreting the intent of certain aspects of the Development Plan might be necessary.
The following sections analyze the proposed design of the R-4 portion (Phase 3) for
consistency with the Development Agreement.
5.2 Architectural Design Concept
In general, the two R-4 housing developments include many common design features,
notably Contemporary/Mid-Century architecture, which is a style anticipated under the
Avila Ranch Development Plan, and previously applied within a portion of the approved
R-2 development. The following narrative provides an overview of the design concept for
the two R-4 developments, highlighting their similarities and differences. Please refer to
the Agenda Report for the Architectural Review Commission meeting of October 2, 2023
for additional details.
Figure 2. Illustrative Site Plan
Page 14 of 133
Item 4a
ARCH-0197-2023
Planning Commission Report – February 14, 2024
Market-Rate Housing Development (“Anacapa”). Market-rate units will be designed within
two buildings (“Building A” and “Building B”) using a modern design theme based on the
Bauhaus style of contemporary design, which features clean lines and simple
functionality. The floor plans include studios/1 bath, 1-bedroom/1 bath, and 2-bedroom/2
bath units, ranging in size from 401 to 917 square feet (sf). Each unit includes a patio and
storage area.
The ground floor of Building A includes 13 dwelling units (one studio; five 1-bedroom; and
seven 2-bedroom). This building also includes community areas, such as a lobby,
manager’s office, kitchen, lounge, bike parking room, and outdoor patio. The second and
third floors of Building A each contain 15 dwelling units (one studio; six 1-bedroom; and
eight 2- bedroom). Each of the three floors of Building B has 14 dwelling units (two
studios, four 1-bedroom, and eight 2-bedroom). The second and third floors of both
buildings also contain a large, covered terrace with views toward the Irish Hills and
northwest toward Morro Bay. Table 3 summarizes the characteristics of the market-rate
units in the Anacapa development.
Table 3. Summary of Market-Rate Development (Anacapa)
Affordable Housing Development (“Sendero”). Similar to the market rate development,
the design intent for the affordable housing project (“Sendero”) is to include stylistically
similar modern building types. The Sendero side of the development includes a cluster of
three-story buildings surrounding an interior courtyard intended to appear as a single
structure. Following the Contemporary/Mid-Century architectural style that includes
contemporary Bauhaus-style design elements, Sendero has a simple and functional
design. The affordable housing project includes utilitarian features such as flat roofs that
produce a basic, geometric appearance.
This is a stacked flat development that includes a variety of unit sizes and floor plans,
with 1-, 2- and 3-bedroom units ranging in size from 748 to 935 sf. Each unit includes a
patio and storage area.
Page 15 of 133
Item 4a
ARCH-0197-2023
Planning Commission Report – February 14, 2024
On the ground floor, Sendero includes four 1-bedroom, seven 2-bedroom and seven 3-
bedroom units. The second and third floors each contain four 1-bedroom, seven 2-
bedroom and seven 3-bedroom units. A 5,200± sf interior courtyard area includes passive
and active areas for both adults and children. A 1,000 -sf community room also provides
access to the courtyard. Table 4 summarizes the development characteristics of the
affordable units in Sendero.
Table 4. Summary of Affordable Housing Development (Sendero)
Architectural Renderings: Anacapa and Sendero Figures 3 and 4 show architectural
elevations of the market rate and affordable buildings. Additional renderings and design
details are included in the project plans (Attachment B), Sheets A1.0 through A6.0. Also
please refer to Sheets AX-1.0 through AX-4.1 for additional details regarding colors and
materials, while Sheets L-1.3 through L-1.5 show the proposed landscape design of the
project. Additional drawings are included as Attachment G, which the applicant has
prepared to respond to ARC recommendations.
Figure 3. Earthwood Lane looking East, Market-Rate (Anacapa) Development
Figure 4. Earthwood Lane looking West, Affordable (Sendero) Development
Page 16 of 133
Item 4a
ARCH-0197-2023
Planning Commission Report – February 14, 2024
5.3 Proposed Fence Height Exception
Municipal Code section 17.70.070 allows a maximum wall/fence height of 6 feet along
rear and side setbacks or up to 9 feet when combined with a retaining wall. Exceptions to
these requirements can be granted for circumstances relating to topography, and as
allowed by the Zoning Regulations and the ARDP. Similar wall/fence height exceptions
in Avila Ranch have been previously approved by the Community Development Director
and the ARC/Planning Commission for other portions of the project.
A fence height exception is requested along the R-4 north and west tract boundaries
adjacent to the Manufacturing, Service Commercial, and Business Park zoned properties
to the north and west to allow for a concrete drainage channel. The requested maximum
total combined wall/fence height is proposed at 9.1 feet on the north property line and
13.1 feet on the west property line, which includes the depth of drainage channel below
grade. The visual part of the fence and wall, when viewed standing at grade, does not
exceed 10 feet. See Attachment C (Fence and Wall Height Exception Exhibits) for
proposed wall heights and locations with dimensions.
This exception is requested due to the site topography and to provide for dr ainage
between the R-4 site and the adjacent active commercial properties to the north and west.
The ARDP originally envisioned a landscaped drainage swale at this location to facilitate
drainage from the adjacent property (ARDP Standard 11.2), however, due to the grade
change, amount of drainage, and the need for a protective safety barrier between the
multi-family property and the active commercial and industrial uses, a natural swale is not
feasible.
Through the stormwater management and
subdivision improvement plan process
through the City’s Engineering
Department, a landscaped drainage swale
was determined to be insufficient to
convey the required 100-year storm event
capacity. The alternative solution is
proposed to incorporate a “catch and
convey” drainage channel system. The
design includes screening of the channel
where possible while providing access for
cleaning, repair, and maintenance. The
ARC reviewed and discussed the
proposed fence height exception and
recommends Planning Commission
approve the fence and wall combination
as proposed.
Figure 5. Proposed Wall/Fence Height
Exception on North and West Boundaries
Page 17 of 133
Item 4a
ARCH-0197-2023
Planning Commission Report – February 14, 2024
5.4 Proposed Monument Sign Exception
The applicant is proposing two (2) monument signs, one on each side of Earthwood at
the entrance to each side of the development. Each sign is proposed at 5 -foot 6-inches
in height, and 7-foot 6-inches in width, with a sign area of 20 square feet. The monument
signs are proposed to be externally illuminated.
The City’s Zoning Regulations do not allow monument signs in residential zones unless
an exception is approved. The applicant has proposed, and the Architectural Review
Commission has recommended, the two monument signs be allowed at the multifamily
site in order to help with wayfinding.
5.5 Energy Use
Section 7.07 of the Development Agreement addresses energy requirements for the
project, which could potentially affect project design . Specifically, Section 7.07 requires
that the project “shall provide for accelerated compliance with the City’s Energy
Conservation Goals and its Climate Action Plan by implementing energy conservation
measures significantly above City standards and norms.” In order to comply with Section
7.07 of the DA, and meet the intent of the Development Plan, the R -4 project must
demonstrate energy conservation in excess of 10% over the 2016 building codes, and it
must include sustainability features consistent with 2019 energy codes to the satisfaction
of the Community Development Director.
The proposed Section 7.07 of the DA also requires that the project shall provide
sustainability features including:
Figure 6. Proposed Wall/Fence Height
Exception on North and West Boundaries
Page 18 of 133
Item 4a
ARCH-0197-2023
Planning Commission Report – February 14, 2024
Thus, in order to comply with Section 7.07 of the DA, and meet the intent of the
Development Plan, the R-4 project must demonstrate energy conservation in excess of
15% over the 2016 building codes, and it must include sustainability features consistent
with 2019 energy codes to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. The
Development Agreement provides the list shown above, but because the 2019 building
code did not adopt net zero requirements as discussed below, it is ultimately the
Community Development Director’s decision to determine whether the proposed energy
design is sufficient to meet requirements. (See emphasized text of Section 7.07 above).
project is committed to all-electric units. This is a key commitment that ensures that as
the electricity grid continues to be rapidly decarbonized, buildings in the project will
achieve operational carbon neutrality. Additionally, the project proposes rooftop solar
system sizes beyond what would be minimally required by the California Energy Code.
This is important because the additional solar will help offset energy costs associated with
increased electricity use.
The applicant has provided a summary of Avila Ranch Energy Guidelines to show how
the R-4 multifamily residential complies with the intent of the DA and ARDP (Attachment
D). Solar will be provided on the roof of the three multifamily s tructures, rather than as
shade structures in the parking lot. PV systems are designed above code minimums. The
project is deigned to comply with the 2022 energy code and will implement the citywide
Clean Energy Choice Program. The City’s Sustainability Manager has reviewed the
applicant’s energy features and found it to be consistent with the intent of the ARDP and
the Development Agreement.
5.6 Affordable Housing Plan and Density Bonus
The City’s 2023-2025 Financial Plan identifies Housing and Homelessness as a Major
City Goal. The City’s Housing Element includes numerous policies and programs that
support incentives, such as density bonuses, to provide housing for low, very low and
extremely low-income households. The Department of Housing and Urban
Development’s Housing Accountability Act and Density Bonus Law provide protections
for housing development projects that include affordable housing and limit local agencies’
ability to deny qualifying projects or condition them in a manner that r ender them
infeasible.
Section 7.05 of the DA addresses the project’s affordable and workforce housing
requirements. The DA describes the intent of development within each zone, both in
terms of housing size and affordability. The DA includes design and development
strategies that serve to provide a range of additional affordable housing in excess of what
would otherwise be required under the City’s standard inclusionary ordinance. The DA
includes design and development strategies that serve to provide a range of additional
affordable housing in excess of what would otherwise be required under the City’s
standard inclusionary housing ordinance. These are contractual requirements of the
Affordable and Workforce Housing Plan set forth in the DA (Exhibit G of the DA). Table 5
shows what the DA and Development Plan specify for the R-4 zone, and compares those
to what is currently proposed with this project:
Page 19 of 133
Item 4a
ARCH-0197-2023
Planning Commission Report – February 14, 2024
Table 5. Comparison of Housing Requirements in the DA and ARDP to
Proposed
DA ARDP Proposed
Unit Count
Density Units 115 - *
Total (actual) Units 125 120-130 145
Unit Size
Range of Size 550-1,150 SF 550-1,150 SF 401-935 SF
Average Size 850 SF - 746 SF
Affordable Units
Number of Units 24 lower
income**
8 low income
8 moderate
- 32 low income
27 moderate
1 caretaker’s
unit
* See discussion of density bonus calculation for proposed project
**Lower-income includes acutely-low, extremely-low, very-low, or low income as defined
by the State Department of Housing and Community Development.
Although there are minor differences between the minimum and average size of the
housing units proposed within the project than what is described in the DA, the deviations
are minor and consistent with Section 8.06 of the DA that provides for flexibility. In
addition, the proposed development includes substantially more affordable housing than
was anticipated in the DA, with 59 units in the Sendero development specifically targeted
as affordable, as compared to a total of 40 units called for in the DA.
The Sendero portion of the project is requesting a 20% density bonus to increase the
density of the property from 52 density units to 63 density units. In accordance with
Density Bonus Law (Government Code Section 65915(f)(1)), to qualify for a 20% density
bonus, the project must provide at least 10% of the base density (6 dwelling units) to be
dedicated to low-income households. The project qualifies for a 20% density bonus
because the project provides 32 units available to low-income households and 27 units
available to moderate-income households, which exceeds the minimum requirements to
meet State Density Bonus Law. No waivers, concession, or incentives are proposed as
part of the project’s density bonus request. State Density Bonus Law requires cities and
counties to award a density bonus above a project's maximum allowable residential
density in exchange for the applicant’s agreement to dedicate the required number of
dwelling units to low-income households.
The DA identified Lot 300 of the VTTM (now Lot 186 of Phase 1 Final Map) of the R -4
properties to be dedicated to an affordable housing developer to provide 24 lower-income
units (Exhibit G of the DA). In addition, the DA required 8 low-income two-bedroom/one-
bath units and 8 moderate income two-bedroom/one-bath units as part of the market rate
development of Lot 301 of the VTTM (now Lots 185 & 188 of Phase 1 Final Map). A total
of 40 deed restricted affordable rental units are required by the DA to be developed in
Phase 3.
Page 20 of 133
Item 4a
ARCH-0197-2023
Planning Commission Report – February 14, 2024
On January 23, 2024, the City Council reviewed the Avila Ranch Phase 2/3 Final Map
and approved a Phase 3 Affordable Housing Agreement which outlines the location of the
affordable units and required timing for construction. This agreement is recorded in order
to put notice on the property title and to identify specific requiremen ts related to
implementation of affordable housing. With the Phase 3 agreement, the City Council
authorized all 40 low- and moderate-income rental units required by the DA in Phase 3 to
be located on Lot 186 to be developed by the affordable housing develo per. The City
Council found the proposal to be in substantial conformance with the Avila Ranch
Affordable Housing Plan (DA Exhibit G). In addition to the 40 units required by the DA,
the applicants are proposing a density bonus to construct an additional 1 9 moderate
income deed restricted units and one caretaker’s unit on Lot 186. With the density bonus,
a total of 59 units would be developed on Lot 186, and the site would be 100% affordable,
excluding the caretakers unit.
In the event the affordable housing developer fails to construct the affordable units on Lot
186, the obligation to provide the affordable units remains the responsibility of Avila
Ranch to complete, as required by the Avila Ranch Development Agreement. Timing
requirements in both the Phase 1 and the Phase 3 Affordable Housing Agreements
ensure that the for-rent affordable units will be constructed early in the project and not left
to the last phase. The units on the affordable housing site fulfill a large portion of the
project’s inclusionary housing requirement, and therefore, completion of these units is
required to fulfill Avila Ranch’s affordable housing obligations. The Phase 3 Affordable
Housing Agreement (Sections 5.4 and 5.5) includes a timing milestone that requires
building construction to commence on the affordable site prior to issuance of a building
permit for Avila Ranch’s 500th unit, and construction of the affordable for -rent units to be
substantially complete prior to the issuance of a building permit for Avila Ranch’s 550th
unit. These timing requirements were developed to give the affordable housing developer
enough time to acquire financing and permits for the project and to create measurable
milestones to ensure the affordable development moves forward in a timely manner.
5.7 ARDP, Zoning, and Design Guidelines
The ARDP was approved by the City Council as one of the key project entitlements in
2017. In general, it provides the blueprint for future development in the Avila Ranch
planning area and provides the standards and guidelines for such development pursuant
to that portion of the Airport Area Specific Plan, of which Avila Ranch is a part. The ARDP
also works in conjunction with the Development Agreement, and in some cases, th e City’s
Zoning Regulations, for project aspects that are not otherwise addressed in the ARDP.
The ARDP is available at the following link from the City’s website:
https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/15869/636323578303470000 .
Page 21 of 133
Item 4a
ARCH-0197-2023
Planning Commission Report – February 14, 2024
To accommodate the proposed project as designed, the applicant has requested a
change in the ARDP R-4 standard minimum front setback from 15 feet to 10 feet, which
is consistent with recently updated citywide Zoning Ordinance setback standards for the
Medium-High (R-3) and High (R-4) density residential zones. R-4 setback standards
included in the ARDP is shown in Attachment E. Please refer to Attachment F for a
discussion of the project’s consistency with City policies, including those within the ARDP.
Notably, some flexibility was built into the ARDP through the provisions of the
Development Agreement, as previously discussed. This is important, because it allows
for some deviation from Development Plan standards in project design, if such deviations
are determined to be consistent with the intent of both the Development Agreement and
ARDP as applicable.
Although the ARDP addresses a wide range of issues, the most important portion of the
document that relates to housing and site design is the Design Framework section (Avila
Ranch Development Plan, page 37). This section includes numerous standards and
guidelines that complement the City’s R-4 Zoning requirements, and in some cases
provide further direction or refinement as it relates to parameters such as building height,
setbacks, and minimum lot sizes. Table 6 summarizes the key proposed project
components within the R-4 zoned portion of the Avila Ranch project area, compared to
the regulations as set forth in both the Avila Ranch Development Plan and the City’s
Zoning regulations:
Table 6. Comparison of Proposed Development to City Regulations
Site Details Proposed Allowed/Required*
Setbacks
Front
Side
Rear
Street Corner Lot
Variable; up to
10 feet
10 feet
0 feet (at lot line)
15 feet
15 feet per ARDP, 10 feet per
Municipal Code
10 feet
0 feet (at lot line)
15 feet
Maximum Height of
Structures
33-38 feet, with 38’ at
architectural projections of
buildings (now revised to
37’10” in response to ARC)
35 feet (in R-4 zone per SLO
Municipal Code);
AASP & ARDP do not establish
R-4 building heights
Max Lot Coverage Sendero: 25%
Anacapa: 28%
No R-4 standard in ARDP (City
standard for R-4 is 60%)
Minimum Lot Area Sendero:1.81 ac, 60 units
Anacapa: 2.24 ac, 85 units
Lot sizes established in Tract Map
and ARDP
Vehicle and Bicycle Parking
Number of Vehicle
Spaces
EV Spaces
Sendero:
81 vehicle (13 accessible);
5 motorcycle
41 EV- capable spaces
Anacapa:
114 vehicle (10 accessible);
6 motorcycle
Sendero:
81 vehicle (13 accessible);
5 motorcycle
41 EV- capable spaces
Anacapa:
116 vehicle (10 accessible);
6 motorcycle
Page 22 of 133
Item 4a
ARCH-0197-2023
Planning Commission Report – February 14, 2024
Table 6. Comparison of Proposed Development to City Regulations
Site Details Proposed Allowed/Required*
57 EV-capable spaces 57 EV-capable spaces
Number of Bicycle
Long-Term
Short-Term
Long-Term
Short-Term
Sendero:
84
12 + 9 e-bike spaces
Anacapa:
180
20 + 9 e-bike spaces
(209 total with alternative
compliance for replacing 2
parking spaces with 10 bike
spaces as allowed by
17.72.050(F)(2))
Sendero:
105
Anacapa:
180
17
Residential Density Per ARDP; 125 units plus 20
additional density bonus
Per ARDP; 125 units
Environmental Status Actions covered by certified 2017 Avila Ranch Final EIR
* 2019 Zoning Regulations; Airport Area Specific Plan; Avila Ranch Development Plan
For further discussion on how the project elements shown above in Table 6 are consistent
with the intent of the ARDP, Community Design Guidelines (CDG), and Zoning
Regulations, see Attachment F (Development Plan and Community Design Guidelines
Consistency).
5.8 Architectural Review Commission
Project architecture design was previously reviewed by the ARC on October 2, 2023, and
found to be consistent with the intent of the ARDP. The ARC recommended approval to
the Planning Commission, with the following direction:
1. The proposed monument signs should be externally lit.
The applicant is in agreement with the ARC recommendation. Staff has
included Condition of Approval #5 in the attached resolution, which requires
monument signs on the R-4 site to be externally illuminated (not internally
lit).
2. Slightly reduce the height of the proposed roof projections to less than 38 feet, and
to make the tallest arched roof projections more rectilinear in design.
The applicant has provided revised elevations in response to ARC’s
recommendations. The height has been reduced to below 38 feet (37 feet
and 10 inches) and the roof projections have been redesigned with a
rectilinear shape. See Attachment G for revised elevations.
3. Include enhancements to the parking lot paving to provide visual cues for
wayfinding and to provide visual interest, including additional decorative pavement
between the two buildings on the Anacapa site.
Page 23 of 133
Item 4a
ARCH-0197-2023
Planning Commission Report – February 14, 2024
- The applicant has provided a revised exhibit (Attachment G) to show areas of
decorative stamped concrete at each of the four (4) driveway entrances, and
ADA striping through the parking lots to provide pedestrian connections
between the buildings and to bicycle storage areas.
The applicant team has prepared revised exhibits to address ARC’s directional items,
which are included in Attachment G. The ARC’s recommendations are also discussed as
appropriate in the Development Plan and Community Design Guidelines Consistency
table, provided as Attachment F to this report.
6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Avila Ranch project and associated Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) were
respectively approved and certified by the City Council on September 19, 2017, pursuant
to Resolution No. 10832 (2017 Series). On January 23, 2024, the Council approved a
FEIR Addendum to modify the timing of Mitigation Measure TRANS-11, which requires
bicycle bridges on Buckley Road. The update d mitigation requires the bicycle bridge to
be installed concurrently with installation of the adjacent bicycle lanes on Buckley Road.
In order to evaluate the impacts of the proposed density bonus units, a transportation
analysis has been prepared to analyze the trip generation of the additional 20 affordable
units on the Sendero site. The transportation analysis (Attachment G) finds that the
addition of 20 affordable housing units would not result in new impacts to Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT) and would not result in additional transportation impacts. The mitigation
measures incorporated with the original 2017 FEIR and the 2024 FEIR A ddendum are
sufficient to mitigate the impacts of the project as proposed. Based on this updated
analysis and the project documentation described above, the project is in substantial
conformance with the Final EIR, FEIR Addendum, and prior environmental determination.
In accordance with Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of San Luis
Obispo has determined that an Addendum #2 to the certified Final EIR is necessary to
document changes or additions that have occurred since the Final EIR was originally
certified, including the addition of an additional 20 density bonus units on the affordable
housing site (Addendum #2, Attachment H). As described in Addendum #2, the proposed
increase in development potential from 720 to 740 dwelling units represents a 2.8%
overall increase in the total number of residences under the Avila Ranch Development
Plan and would not create any new ground disturbance in any area within the ARDP that
was not already evaluated in the Final EIR. The density bonus would not result in any
new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified significant effects.
A transportation analysis has been prepared to analyze the trip generation of the
additional 20 affordable units on the Sendero site. The transportation analysis
(Attachment I) finds that the addition of 20 affordable housing units would not result in
new impacts to Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and would not result in additional
transportation impacts. The mitigation measures incorporated with the original 2017 FEIR
are sufficient to mitigate the impacts of the project as proposed. Based on this updated
analysis and the project documentation described above, the project is in substantial
Page 24 of 133
Item 4a
ARCH-0197-2023
Planning Commission Report – February 14, 2024
conformance with prior environmental determination. The FEIR and the two (2) FEIR
Addendums constitute the complete environmental determination for the project, which
included the Development Agreement, Development Plan, and approved VTTM 3089.
The proposed R-4 design complies with previously approved project documentation as
described above.
The City received agenda correspondence on January 22, 2024, from Mitchell M. Tsai
Law Firm, specifically Stephanie Papayanis, which included comments on the FEIR
Addendum, Final Map acceptance by City Council, and the current application ARCH-
0197-2023 related to the density bonus request. Section IV of the letter suggests that the
density bonus request must be denied because it will have specific adverse
environmental impacts. However, the local agency does not have discretion to deny a
request for a density bonus if the project satisfies the requirements set forth in
Government Code Section 65915, as this project does. By contrast, the local agency may
deny a requested incentive, concession, or waiver of development standards (different
than a request for a density bonus itself) if the agency finds the request would result in a
specific adverse impact as defined by the Density Bonus Law. Here, the applicant is not
requesting an incentive, concession, or waiver of development standards to
accommodate development at the increased density afforded by the bonus, and
therefore, Ms. Papaynis’ argument is misplaced.
Ms. Papayanis further commented that additional environmental review is required for
this project. A Statement of Overriding Considerations has been adopted by the City
Council with the Final EIR in 2017. A second Addendum to the Final EIR (Addendum #2)
has been prepared to address updated information related to the proposed density bonus
for an additional 20 units on the R-4 zoned affordable housing parcel. No Supplemental
Environmental Impact Report is required pursuant to Public Resources Code §21166 and
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 because: 1) the project does not include or require
any revisions to the certified FEIR; 2) no substantial changes would occur with respect to
the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken, and no revisions to the
FEIR are required; and 3) no new information of substantial importance is available that
was not already known at the time the FEIR was certified.
7.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
The project has been reviewed by various City departments and divisions including
Planning, Housing, Engineering, Transportation, Building, Utilities, Sustainability Division,
and Fire. While a number of code requirements will apply to the project review at the
building permit stage, minimal comments were provided for project-specific conditions of
approval since the project is consistent with the previously approved ARDP and tract map
which has included prior review for tract conditions and public improvements which are
not in the scope of this project review. Conditions of approval are included in the resolution
(Attachment A).
Page 25 of 133
Item 4a
ARCH-0197-2023
Planning Commission Report – February 14, 2024
8.0 ALTERNATIVES
1. Continue the project. An action continuing the application should include direction
to the applicant and staff on pertinent issues.
2. Deny the project. Deny the proposed R-4 design by finding the finding the project
inconsistent with the General Plan, AASP, previously approved Avila Ranch
Development Agreement, and/or the intent of the Development Plan when
considered in the context of the Development Agreement and City Zoning
regulations.
9.0 ATTACHMENTS
A - Draft PC Resolution approving the project
B - Avila Ranch Phase 3 R-4 Project Plans
C - Avila Ranch Fence and Wall Height Exception Exhibits
D - Avila Ranch Energy Guidelines for Phase 3 R-4 Multifamily Residential
E - ADRP R-4 Development Standards
F - Development Plan and Community Design Guidelines Consistency
G - Project Design Revisions to Address ARC Comments
H - Avila Ranch Final EIR Addendum #2
I - Transportation Analysis for proposed Density Bonus Units
J - Public Comment Letter – 1/22/2024, Mitchell M. Tsai Law Firm
Page 26 of 133
RESOLUTION NO. PC-XXXX-2024
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING SITE DESIGN AND LAYOUT
FOR 145 RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITH A DENSITY BONUS,
INCLUDING A TOTAL OF 59 AFFORDABLE UNITS WITHIN THE
R-4 COMPONENT OF THE AVILA RANCH PROJECT TO BE
DEVELOPED WITHIN PHASE 3 OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN,
INCLUDING A FENCE HEIGHT EXCEPTION, SIGN EXCEPTION,
PARKING EXCEPTION, AND FINDING THE PROJECT
CONSISTENT WITH THE AVILA RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AND AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, AND CERTIFIED 2017
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR AVILA RANCH
AND TWO FEIR ADDENDUMS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA); AS REPRESENTED IN
THE AGENDA REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED FEBRUARY
14, 2024, FOR THE PROJECT LOCATED AT 4240 AND 4280
EARTHWOOD LANE AND 165 CESSNA COURT (ARCH-0197-2023)
WHEREAS, this Resolution is adopted under the authority of Government Code §§ 65864
et seq. and San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 17.128; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approved the Avila Ranch
Project on September 19, 2017, including a General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment,
Rezone, Development Agreement, Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 3089 and
certified Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) on September 19, 2017; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo meeting
was conducted to consider the design of the R-4 portion of the Avila Ranch project on October 2,
2023, and made recommendations to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approved the Phase 2/3 Final
Map, a draft Phase 3 Affordable Housing Agreement, and a FEIR Addendum on January 23, 2024 ;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo meeting was
conducted to consider approval of the design of the R-4 portion of the Avila Ranch project on
February 14, 2024; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required
by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including the
testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff,
presented at said hearing.
Page 27 of 133
PC Resolution No. ________ (2024 Series) Avila Ranch Project Phase 3
Page 2 ARCH-0197-2023
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1: Findings. Based on the recitals above and the evidence contained in the record,
the Planning Commission hereby finds that:
1. The proposed action is consistent with applicable City planning regulations, including the
General Plan, Airport Area Specific Plan, Zoning Regulations, and Community Design
Guidelines; and
2. The proposed action is consistent with previously approved entitlements associated with the
Avila Ranch project, including the Development Agreement, Development Plan, and Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 3089; and
3. The project is consistent with Housing Element Policies 6.1 and 7.4 because the project
supports the development of more housing in accordance with the assigned Regional Housing
Needs Allocation and establishes a new neighborhood, with pedestrian and bicycle linkages
that provide direct, convenient, and safe access to adjacent neighborhoods consistent with the
Avila Ranch Development Plan; and
4. The project will not adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of persons living or working
in the surrounding area; and
5. The proposed building setbacks and heights are consistent with the intent of ARDP Standards
1.2 and 1.6, and related guidelines (Building Height and Setback relationship) as well as
ARDP Standard 7.3.5 (relationship between building height and setbacks). The proposed
front setback is consistent with the recently updated Citywide Zoning Ordinance setback
standards for the High-density Residential R-4 zone. The Avila Ranch Development
Agreement, Section 8.06, recognizes a need for flexibility during project implementation, and
the need to potentially allow for minor deviations from the Development Plan if the project
is consistent with the intent of the Development Plan. The proposed project design, including
project setbacks and building height, are consistent with the intent of the ARDP and Citywide
Zoning Ordinance where applicable, and are necessary to implement the density of the project
as identified in the ARDP and allowed by State Density Bonus and to comply with the Design
Framework as identified in the ARDP; and
6. The sign exception is warranted to facilitate identification of the two multi -family
developments, which will promote safety, especially for visitors unfamiliar with the
developments. The monument sign design is appropriate for the location, the exception is
consistent with the intent and purpose of the sign regulations, and the exception will not result
in: visual clutter; excessively sized signage in comparison to the building or surroundings;
signage that is inconsistent with the character of the surroundings; or approval of signs that
are prohibited by the Sign Ordinance. The monument sign designs were supported by the
Architectural Review Commission (ARC) with modifications that have since been made by
the project applicant; and
7. The fence/wall height exception is warranted as it is necessary due to circumstances relating
to drainage, topography and safety, and it allows for the development to be built at the density
specified under the Avila Ranch Development Plan. Landscape screening adjacent to the
fence will allow for adequate privacy of residential uses and provide a visual buffer to
adjacent non-residential uses; and
Page 28 of 133
PC Resolution No. ________ (2024 Series) Avila Ranch Project Phase 3
Page 3 ARCH-0197-2023
8. The parking exception to allow up to 50% of the onsite parking to be designed as compact
spaces may be approved by the Community Development Director, Architectural Review
Commission, or Planning Commission as identified in the Engineering Standards, when
proposed in residential apartment projects involving 10 or more units, and when justified by
unusual site circumstances such as using unusable spaces or development on a constrained
site.
Density Bonus Findings
9. The proposed project qualifies for a 20% density bonus by providing at least 6 two-bedroom
units (10% of the base density) as dedicated housing for low-income households. The project
will provide quality affordable housing, consistent with the intent of Chapter 17.140 of the
Zoning Regulations, including 32 units available to low-income households and 27 units
available to moderate-income households. The requested 20% density bonus is necessary to
facilitate the production of affordable housing units associated with the development project,
consistent with the intent of Housing Element Programs 2.17, 6.10, and 6.19.
SECTION 2: Environmental Determination. Environmental Review. The project is
consistent with the certified Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for The Avila Ranch Project
and the two 2024 FEIR Addendums, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15182(c) (Residential
Projects Implementing Specific Plans). On September 17, 2017, the City Council certified the FEIR
for the Avila Ranch Development Plan (ARDP) and approved the ARDP through Council
Resolutions 1638 and 1832 (2017 Series). On January 23, 2024, the City Council approved a FEIR
Addendum to modify the timing of Mitigation Measure TRANS-11 to require the south bicycle
bridge to be installed concurrently with the adjacent bicycle lanes on Buckley Road. All mitigation
measures adopted as part of the ARDP Certified FEIR that are applicable to the proposed project are
carried forward and applied to the proposed project to effectively mitigate the impacts that were
previously identified. A second Addendum to the Final EIR (Addendum #2) has been prepared to
address updated information related to the proposed density bonus for an additional 20 units on the
R-4 zoned affordable housing parcel. No Supplemental Environmental Impact Report is required
pursuant to Public Resources Code §21166 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 because: 1)
the project does not include or require any revisions to the certified FEIR; 2) no substantial changes
would occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken, and no
revisions to the FEIR are required; and 3) no new information of substantial importance is available
that was not already known at the time the FEIR was certified.
SECTION 3. Action. The project conditions of approval do not include mandatory code
requirements. Code compliance will be verified during the plan check process, which may include
additional requirements applicable to the project. The Planning Commission hereby grants final
approval to the project with incorporation of the following conditions, in addition to the applicable
conditions that were part of the original approval of the Avila Ranch project in 2017:
Planning Division
1. Final project design and construction drawings submitted for a building permit shall be in
substantial compliance with the project plans approved by the Planning Commission (ARCH-
0197-2023). A separate, full-size sheet shall be included in working drawings submitted for a
building permit that lists all conditions and code requirements of project approval listed as sheet
number 2. Reference shall be made in the margin of listed items as to where in plans requirements
Page 29 of 133
PC Resolution No. ________ (2024 Series) Avila Ranch Project Phase 3
Page 4 ARCH-0197-2023
are addressed and include all conditions, mitigation measures, and development agreement
provisions as noted in Condition #2. Any change to approved design, colors, materials,
landscaping, or other conditions of approval must be approved by the Director or Planning
Commission, as deemed appropriate.
2. The project shall comply and demonstrate full conformance with all mitigation measures and
conditions applicable to the project site, as established under previous development plan
approvals from the September 19, 2017, Avila Ranch project approval (City Council Resolution
No. 1832 (2017 Series) and 1638 (2017 Series) and Ordinance No 1639 (2017 Series). This
includes all applicable requirements that relate to Phases 1 through 3 of the approved Avila Ranch
Development Plan.
3. Plans submitted for construction permits shall include elevation and detail drawings of all walls
and fences. With the exception of fence and wall heights included in the fence height exception
approved by the Planning Commission, all other fences, walls, and hedges will comply with the
development standards described in the Zoning Regulations (§17.70.070 –Fences, Walls, and
Hedges).
4. The location of any required backflow preventer and double-check assembly shall be shown on
all site landscaping plans and pertinent building plans. Construction plans shall also include a
scaled diagram of the equipment proposed. Any back-flow preventers and double-check
assemblies shall be located in the street yard shall be screened using a combination of paint color,
and landscaping, and, if deemed appropriate by the Community Development Director, a low
wall.
5. Monument signs on the R-4 site shall be externally illuminated (not internally lit). Directory
signage and addresses shall be provided onsite for wayfinding throughout the multifamily site.
6. The height of the roof projections of the multi-family buildings shall be reduced to less than 38-
feet. The tallest elements shall be modified to be more rectilinear (not arched), as recommended
by ARC at their October 2, 2023 review.
7. Enhancements to the parking lot paving shall be incorporated to provide visual cues for
wayfinding and to provide visual interest. Decorative payment shall be included at crossing areas
connecting to bicycle barns, trash enclosures, and other pathways onsite, as well as at the
driveway entrances and exits. Additional decorative pavement shall be added between the two
buildings on the Anacapa site to help with traffic calming in this area.
8. Landscape screening shall be provided along the northern and western property lines at the edge
of the parking lot to provide visual screening between the residential site and the adjacent
industrial and commercial uses. Shade trees shall be incorporated to the greatest extent feasible.
Irrigated vines shall be planted along the property line fence on the subject site. Landscape
planters shall be provided with a minimum width and planting density as shown project plans
approved by the Planning Commission (ARCH-0197-2023) and shall include tree wells and
landscape fingers in the parking areas.
9. Plans submitted for building permits shall include a photometric plan, demonstrating compliance
with maximum light intensity standards not to exceed a maintained value of 10 foot-candles. The
locations of all site and building mounted lighting, including bollard style landscaping or path
Page 30 of 133
PC Resolution No. ________ (2024 Series) Avila Ranch Project Phase 3
Page 5 ARCH-0197-2023
lighting, shall be included in plans submitted for a building permit. All wall-mounted lighting
fixtures shall be clearly called out on building elevations included as part of construction
drawings for building permits. All wall-mounted lighting shall complement building architecture.
The lighting schedule for the building shall include a graphic representation of the proposed
lighting fixtures and cut-sheets on the submitted building plans. The selected fixture(s) shall be
shielded to ensure that light is directed downward consistent with the requirements of the City’s
Night Sky Preservation standards contained in Chapter § 17.70.100 of the Zoning Regulations.
10. Mechanical and electrical equipment shall be located internally to the buildings, or adequately
screened if located on the exterior of the building. Air conditioning units shall be screened, and
shall not be visible on exterior patios or balconies when viewed from the ground. With submittal
of working drawings, the applicant shall include sectional views of the buildings, which clearly
show the sizes of any proposed condensers and other mechanical equipment. If any condensers,
transformers, or other mechanical equipment are to be ground mounted or placed on the roof,
plans submitted for a building permit shall confirm that these features will be adequately
screened. A line-of-sight diagram may be required to confirm that proposed screening will be
adequate. This condition applies to initial construction and later improvements.
11. A final landscaping plan, including irrigation details and plans, shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department along with working drawings. The legend for the
landscaping plan shall include the sizes and species of all groundcovers, shrubs, and trees with
corresponding symbols for each plant material showing their specific locations on plans.
Landscaping plans shall include the following information, at a minimum:
a. The species, diameter at breast height, location, and condition of all existing trees;
b. Identification of trees that will be retained, removed, or relocated;
c. Location and size of plant and tree species proposed to be planted;
d. The location of proposed utilities, driveways, street tree locations, and the size and
species of proposed street trees; and
e. A reclaimed water irrigation plan.
12. Expiration of Entitlement. Discretionary approvals shall be subject to the timeframes for
expiration as identified in the Development Agreement, Section 8.04.
13. Prior to occupancy, an overflight notification shall be recorded and appear with the property deed.
The applicant shall also record a covenant with the City to ensure that disclosure is provided to
all buyers and lessees at the subject property. Notice form and content shall be to the satisfaction
of the Community Development Director and include the following language:
NOTICE OF AIRPORT IN VICINITY: This property is presently located in the vicinity
of an airport, within what is known as the airport influence area. For that reason, the
property may be subject to some of the annoyances or inconveniences associated with
proximity to airport operations (for example: noise, vibration, or odors). Individual
sensitivities to those annoyances can vary from person to person. You may wish to
consider what airport annoyances, if any, are associated with the property before you
complete your purchase and determine whether they are acceptable to you.
Page 31 of 133
PC Resolution No. ________ (2024 Series) Avila Ranch Project Phase 3
Page 6 ARCH-0197-2023
Housing Division
14. The project includes a request for a 20% Density Bonus for the portion of the project known as
Sendero (Lot 186), to increase the density of the site from 52 density units to 63 density units
based on bedroom counts (an increase of 20 multifamily units). The applicant is proposing a
100% affordable housing project (excluding the manager’s unit) and shall provide for a minimum
of 32 low-income and 27 moderate-income affordable housing units within the Sendero site as
proposed by the project applicant to qualify for the 20% density bonus, in compliance with
Density Bonus Law Section 65915(f)(1). The affordable units on the Sendero site shall fulfill the
R-4 high-density affordable and inclusionary housing component required by the Avila Ranch
Development Agreement, which identified a minimum of 40 affordable housing units in the High
Density Residential (R-4) zone of Avila Ranch (identified as Lots 185, 186, and 188 of the Phase
1 Final Map), including 24 units as lower-income, 8 two-bedroom/one-bath units as low-income,
and 8 two-bedroom/one-bath units as moderate income. A total of 59 affordable housing units
shall be constructed on the Sendero site for compliance with the Avila Ranch Development
Agreement and the density bonus.
15. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the City and the project owners of the Sendero site shall
enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement, to be recorded in the office of the County Recorder.
The agreement shall specify mechanisms or procedures to assure the continued affordability and
availability of 100% of the 60 residential units on the Sendero site (excluding the manager’s unit)
as affordable to the following household income levels: 8 two-bedroom/one-bath low-income, 8
two-bedroom/one-bath moderate income households, 24 lower-income (as required in the Avila
Ranch Development Agreement), an additional 19 moderate-income units as identified with the
applicant’s density bonus proposal, and one manager’s unit. The specific affordability levels of
the 19 moderate-income units and 24 lower-income units will be contingent upon application
requirements for the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) which have specific
thresholds pertaining to income levels for qualifying projects, subject to the satisfaction of the
Community Development Director. The agreement shall also set forth those items required by
Municipal Code Section 17.140.030(B). The agreement shall run with the land and shall be
binding upon all heirs, successors or assigns of the project or property owner, and shall ensure
affordability for a period of not less than fifty-five (55) years, or as otherwise required by State
law.
16. The affordable housing units shall be constructed in proportion to and concurrently with the
construction of the market rate units in the Avila Ranch Development Plan, as described in
Section 5 of the Avila Ranch Phase 3 Affordable Housing Agreement. In the event the affordable
housing developer fails to construct the 59 inclusionary affordable units on Lot 186 (Sendero),
the obligation to provide the affordable units remains the responsibility of Avila Ranch to
complete, as required by the Avila Ranch Development Agreement and subject to the satisfaction
of the Community Development Director.
Engineering Division
17. Prior to building permit issuance, a lot merger, lot line adjustment, or subdivision will be required
to eliminate the existing underlying property lines for Lots 185 and 188 as shown on the Avila
Ranch Phase 1 subdivision map (Tract 3089-1; Recorded Document No. 2021083388).
Page 32 of 133
PC Resolution No. ________ (2024 Series) Avila Ranch Project Phase 3
Page 7 ARCH-0197-2023
18. The building plan submittal shall show and note all existing property corner monumentation,
exterior property line dimensions, and bearings for reference. The plans shall show the
neighboring private property improvements and improvements with the adjoining public rights-
of-way for reference.
19. The plans and supporting documents shall show and label all existing and proposed easements.
Existing easements shall be honored, relocated, or otherwise extinguished. Unplottable
easements related to installed infrastructure shall be resolved to the satisfaction of the City prior
to building permit issuance.
20. The building and improvement plans shall include a complete site utility plan. The plans shall
show and note all existing and proposed utilities, abandonments, relocations, and new work.
21. The parking areas shall show and note compliance with the City’s Parking and Driveway
Standards and California Building Code.
22. The building plan submittal shall include a complete grading and drainage plan and any required
reports. The drainage plan and reports shall evaluate any run-on from the adjoining parcels, street
network, and drainage channel. The plans and reports shall show and note compliance with the
City Engineering Standard, Drainage Design Manual (DDM), Floodplain Management
Regulations, and Post-Construction Stormwater Requirements (PCRs).
23. The building plan submittal shall include a Stormwater Control Plan documenting compliance
with post-construction requirements pursuant to Regional Water Quality Control Board
Resolution R3-2013-0032. All stormwater control measures (SCMs) for onsite runoff shall be
located on private property. SCMs for any offsite improvements approved for location within the
public right-of-way shall be maintained by the property owner. A separate encroachment
agreement will be required in a format provided by the City.
24. The building plan submittal shall include a stormwater operations and maintenance manual
(O&M Manual) for all SCMs. The O&M Manual shall, at a minimum, describe the project and
drainage systems, include inspection frequency requirements, submittal instructions, and exhibits
as needed to illustrate each of the project’s Drainage Management Areas (DMAs) and SCMs.
Each SCM shall be assigned a unique number identification, and inspection forms shall be
included for each SCM.
25. An engineered drainage channel shall be provided along the north and west property lines as
shown on the project plans presented to Planning Commission. The engineered drainage channel
shall be installed in-lieu of the landscaped drainage swale identified in the ARDP Section 11.0.
Standard 11.2.
26. The building plan submittal shall include a site electrical plan prepared by an electrical engineer.
The required PG&E and tele-com wire utility plans shall be approved by the City. The required
PG&E application and memo shall be approved by the City prior to final design and development
of the PG&E handout package.
Page 33 of 133
PC Resolution No. ________ (2024 Series) Avila Ranch Project Phase 3
Page 8 ARCH-0197-2023
Transportation Division
27. Prior to issuance of each building permit, the applicant shall pay applicable Citywide and Los
Osos Valley Road (LOVR) Sub-Area transportation impact fees.
28. Prior to issuance of first building permits for Phase 3 development, the applicant shall pay its fair
share transportation mitigation fees for the following cumulative transportation impacts as
identified in the project EIR and Development Agreement:
a. Buckley Road & State Route 227 intersection improvements
b. Buckley Road & Vachell Lane intersection improvements
c. Buckley Road Corridor Improvements (at Devenport)
Fair share fee amounts are to be calculated to the satisfaction of the City Transportation Manager
and San Luis Obispo County (for Buckley/Highway 227 intersection).
29. Bicycle parking shall be provided in compliance with the design guidelines per the City’s Active
Transportation Plan and to the satisfaction of the City Transportation Manager. Indoor storage
rooms shall have adequate access and security control, be located in areas with proper lighting,
provide no more than 50% of bicycle parking via vertical hanging racks, provide sufficient area
for some larger bicycles (cargo bikes, recumbent bikes, etc.), and provide some form of access
to electrical charging for e-bikes. During building plan review, modifications to the mix of long-
term vs. short-term bicycle parking stalls may be approved by the Transportation Manger to (a)
accommodate sufficient number of larger cargo/recumbent bikes, and (b) minimize the number
of vertical or stacked racks that require physically lifting a bicycle to park. Any modifications to
mix of short-term vs. long-term bicycle parking shall retain the total number of required bicycle
parking stalls consistent with City Zoning Regulations.
30. Bicycle connectivity shall be provided between the Anacapa site and the Memphis Belle/Piper
Ln. knuckle to improve access for active transportation (bicycle and pedestrian) users between
the apartments and the nearby park. Design of this connection shall be approved to the satisfaction
of the Transportation Manager.
Utilities Department
31. The proposed utility infrastructure shall comply with the latest engineering design standards in
effect during the time a building permit is obtained and shall have reasonable alignments and
clearances needed for maintenance.
32. Building permit submittal shall include a site utility plan showing the size of existing and
proposed sewer services for the project, and existing and proposed and water services and water
meters for the project, including both potable and recycled water. Privately owned sub-meters
may be provided for residential apartments upon approval of the Utilities Director or their
designee. Any private hydrants shall be equipped with a reduced pressure detector assembly,
subject to the approval of the Utilities Director.
Page 34 of 133
PC Resolution No. ________ (2024 Series) Avila Ranch Project Phase 3
Page 9 ARCH-0197-2023
33. Building permit submittal shall demonstrate compliance with fire flow and fire sprinkler
requirements for all floors of the proposed project. Design plans shall be supported by
engineering calculations to be submitted with the building permit.
34. The existing well to be retained shall not be used for any domestic services. This note shall be
included on the plans submitted for a building permit.
35. Upon submittal of a building permit, plans shall include an interim temporary connection for
potable irrigation to be used to establish landscaping until completion of construction and
installation of the recycled water meter.
36. The irrigation system shall be designed and operated as described consistent with recycled water
standards in the City’s Procedures for Recycled Water Use, including the requirement that sites
utilizing recycled water shall provide backflow protection on all potable service connections. An
Application for Recycled Water Service and three sets of irrigation plans conforming to the City’s
Procedures shall be submitted to the Building Department for review during the City’s building
permit review process.
37. The building permit submittal shall include a final landscape design plan and irrigation plan that
includes all the criteria required in the City Engineering Standards Uniform Design Criteria for
Landscaping and Irrigation. Landscape and irrigation plans shall note that all recycled water
irrigation tubing shall be solid purple upon installation and for the life of the project.
38. Plans submitted for a building permit shall show adjacent single-family residential lots, and
where adjacent to single-family residential lots in order to ensure adequate separation and to
prevent or substantially minimize the potential for a future cross-connection between potable
water irrigation systems and recycled water irrigation systems, shall show the following subject
to the approval of the Utilities Director: 1) a five-foot horizontal clearance or a physical barrier
such as a sidewalk or fence between the project property line and project irrigated landscape
areas, or 2) installation of a backflow device on the adjacent single-family residential lot(s). A
reduced pressure backflow device may be required, subject to the review of the plans by the
Utilities Department Engineer. If a backflow device is installed, the applicant or designated
property manager or Home Owner’s Association (HOA) shall coordinate the installation of the
device with the single-family residential lot owner and shall be responsible for the installation
and future testing and maintenance of the device.
39. The project’s estimated total water use (ETWU) to support new ornamental landscaping shall not
exceed the project’s maximum applied water allowance (MAWA). Upon submittal of a building
permit, information shall be provided for review and approval by the Utilities Department that
supports the required project landscaping water demand. The building permit submittal shall
include a completed Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA) form based on the final
landscape design plan and a hydrozone table with a summary of Estimated Total Water Use
(ETWU) and the corresponding irrigation window.
40. The building permit submittal shall include solid waste services that follow the City’s
Development Standards for Solid Waste. The building permit submittal shall include a plan for
the disposal, storage, and collection of solid waste, organic waste, and recyclable materials.
Driveways and access routes to all discarded materials containers shall be designed to
accommodate the size and weight of the collection trucks and shall comply with the access
Page 35 of 133
PC Resolution No. ________ (2024 Series) Avila Ranch Project Phase 3
Page 10 ARCH-0197-2023
requirements and conditions of the San Luis Garbage Company. Bin enclosure(s) shall conform
to the requirements by the San Luis Garbage Company and discarded materials containers shall
be sized to provide a reasonable level of service. Building permit submittal shall include a letter
of service from San Luis Garbage Company pasted on the plans.
Additional Code Compliance Measures (Utilities)
41. Use of the existing well shall comply with Municipal Code Section 13.04.240 (Privately owned
water wells), the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), and the San Luis Obispo
Valley Basin Groundwater Sustainability Plan (October 2021). A well meter shall be installed at
the private owner’s expense at all properties where the private well water is used for any of the
following:
a. Nonresidential purposes in any quantity;
b. Irrigation of greater than one-half acre of landscaping;
c. Two acre-feet of usage annually.
The water meter shall be public and property owners shall enter into a private well metering
agreement with the city for meter reading.
42. Upon completion of the installation of the landscape and irrigation system and prior to the
issuance of the certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall submit a certificate of completion, an
irrigation schedule that assists in the water management of the project and utilizes the minimum
amount of water required to maintain plant health, and a regular maintenance schedule to the City
Utilities Department, consistent with Municipal Code Section 17.70.220.D.
Sustainability Division
43. Roof mounted solar shall be provided for compliance with ARDP Section 3.0. Standard 3.8. for
renewable energy requirements in lieu of installing solar canopies in the common parking lots.
44. The project shall comply with the Avila Ranch Energy Guidelines and Sustainability Measures
memorandum for Phase 3, submitted by Wathen Castanos on October 19, 2023.
Page 36 of 133
PC Resolution No. ________ (2024 Series) Avila Ranch Project Phase 3
Page 11 ARCH-0197-2023
Indemnification
45. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and
employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers or
employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this project, and all
actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review (“Indemnified
Claims”). The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Indemnified Claim upon being
presented with the Indemnified Claim and the City shall fully cooperate in the defense against
an Indemnified Claim.
On motion by Commissioner _______, seconded by Commissioner ______, and on the following
roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
REFRAIN:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 14th day of February 2024.
_____________________________
Tyler Corey, Secretary
Planning Commission
Page 37 of 133
Page 38 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
TITLE SHEET
T-1.0
Applicants:
Architectural Development Review
PHASE 3 APARTMENTS
T1.0 Title Sheet
P1.0 - P1.8 Project Description
SP1.0 Illustrative Site Plan
AS1.0 - AS1.1 Streetscape Elevations (A3)
L1.0 Overall Landscape Plan
SP1.1 Site Plan R-4 with Statistics (A15)
L1.1 R-4 Landscape Plan - Enlarged
L1.2 R-4 Landscape Paseo in Context - Enlarged
AS2.0 - AS2.3 R-4 Perspective Renderings (A17-19)
A1.0 R-4 Building A Elevations (A25)
A2.0- A2.3 R-4 Building A Floor Plans and Roof Plan (A21-A24)
A3.0 R-4 Building B Elevations (A30)
A4.0- A4.3 R-4 Building B Floor Plans and Roof Plan (A26-A29)
A5.0 R-4 Unit Plans (A20)
A6.0 R-4 Site Section (A16)
C1.0 R-4 Civil Grading Plan
C1.1 R-4 Civil Utility Plan
BUCKLEY RD.
AVILA RANCH
VA
C
H
E
L
L
L
N
.
HWY.101
Project
Site
SP1.2 Site Plan R-4A with Statistics (A4)
L1.3 R-4A Landscape Plan - Enlarged
L1.4 R-4A Courtyard Landscape Plan - Enlarged
AS3.0 - AS3.2 R-4A Perspective Renderings (A6-A7)
AA1.0- AA1.1 R-4A Building Elevations (A13-A14)
AA2.0- AA2.3 R-4A Building Floor Plans and Roof Plan (A9-A12)
AA3.0 R-4A Unit Plans (A8)
AA4.0 R-4A Site Section (A5)
C1.2 R-4A Civil Grading Plan
C1.3 R-4A Civil Utility Plan
AX1.0 Color and Materials (A28)
L1.5 Proposed Plant Material
AX2.0 Project Monument Signage
AX3.0 Trash Enclosure (A32)
AX4.0 R-4 Bike Parking (A34)
AX4.1 R-4A Bike Parking Details (A33)
ARCHITECT:
MURRAY DUNCAN, NCARB
150 CASTILLIAN DR. STE. 201
SANTA BARBARA, CA 93117
805-562-1270
PROJECT PLANNER:
C.M. FLORENCE, AICP
3427 MIGUELITO CT.
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
805-541-4509
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:
MICHAEL CRIPE, ASLA
CIVIL ENGINEER:
TRAVIS KOTCH, PE
1160 MARSH ST #150,
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
805-544-0707
SENDERO
C&C Development
14211 Yorba Street Ste 200
dƵƐƟŶ͕ϵϮϳϴϬ
ANACAPA
Wathen Castanos Homes
ϳϯϱdĂŶŬ&ĂƌŵZŽĂĚ^ƚĞϭϬϬ
^ĂŶ>ƵŝƐKďŝƐƉŽ͕ϵϯϰϬϭ
Page 39 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
WZK: d ^Z/Wd/KE
P-1.0
Supplement to the
ARCHITECTURAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
for the
r-4 high density residential component of
AVILA RANCH
26 April 2023, rev. 28 June 2023
I. PROJECT HISTORICAL OVERVIEW
Avila Ranch ( “Avila Ranch”), approved and fully entitled in 2017 (as detailed below), implements
the City’s vision for the Avila Ranch site as guided by the 2014 Land Use and Circulation Elements
of the General Plan (“LUCE”). The LUCE specifically identifies the Avila Ranch site as a Special
Focus Area that included planning and environmental design and analysis of the designation of
an appropriate land use mix, the need for a variety of housing types and levels of affordability,
provision of open space, parks and trails, restoration of Tank Farm Creek, protection and
mitigation of impacts to agricultural resources, a circulation network and linkages to the
surrounding community, and incorporation of utility and infrastructure.
The Avila Ranch site encompassed three (3) original parcels (APN 053-259-008, 011, and 012)
totaling 150-acres. It is located at the northeast corner of Buckley Road and Vachell Lane. Tank
Farm Creek, a tributary to San Luis Obispo Creek, diagonally bisects Avila Ranch from northeast
to southwest and conveys storm water from the Chevron Tank Farm and adjacent properties to
San Luis Creek. Prior to its annexation to the City in 2008, the Avila Ranch site was zoned by the
County of San Luis Obispo (“County”) for Business Park and Conservation/Open Space (“COS”)
uses. The City’s 2005 AASP also designated the site for Business Park uses and the Avila Ranch
site remained zoned Business Park and COS since its annexation. However, the City’s 2014 Land
Use Element of the General Plan rejected past Business Park land use designations in favor of new
housing and designated the Avila Ranchsite as a Special Focus Area (SP-4) for provision of residential
units and small-scale neighborhood commercial uses, with associated policies and performance
standards that would guide future development.
The following represents the entitlements received for Avila Ranch to date (collectively
“Entitlements”).
x Resolution No. 10832 (2017 Series) certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report
(“EIR”) for Avila Ranch, approving the Avila Ranch Development Plan (“Development Plan”),
amending both the Airport Area Specific Plan and General Plan, and approving Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 3089 (“Tentative Map”).
x Resolution No. 1638 (2017 Series) rezoning property at 175 Venture Drive (Avila Ranch) from
Business Park/Specific Plan Area (BP-SP) and Conservation /Open Space/Specific Plan Area
(C/OS/SP) to be consistent with Avila Ranch’s Development Plan and with the General Plan
and Airport Area Specific Plan, as amended to enable development of 720 residential units and
15,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial on a 150-acres site. Avila Ranch also includes
18-acres of parks and 53-acres of designated open space.
x Ordinance No. 1639 (2017 Series)(amended by Ordinance No. 1662 (2019 Series) approving
the Development Agreement (“Development Agreement”) between the City and Avila Ranch
LLC. Avila Ranch has subsequently been sold to Avila Ranch Developers, Inc. , operating
under the marketing name of Wathen Castanos Homes.. The Development Agreement
represents a negotiated agreement between the parties establishing the rules for developing
Avila Ranch, including, but not limited to, duration of development, land uses (including
density and intensity of uses), phasing, affordable housing requirements, fee credits and
reimbursements, and public improvements. In the event of conflict, the terms of the
Development Agreement prevail.
x Resolution No. PC-1046-2021 approving the site design and layout for 297 residential units
with the R-2 component of Avila Ranch to be developed within Phases 1 – 3 of the
Development Plan, including a fence height exception adjacent to an industrial area and
finding the Avila Ranch is exempt from further environmental review under the California
Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).
x Resolution No. PC- 1065-2022 approving site design and layout for 101 residential units
within the R-1 component of Avila Ranch to be developed within Phase 5 of the Development
Plan, and finding the project is exempt from further environmental review under CEQA.
x Resolution No. PC-1065-2022 approving site design and layout for 101 residential units
within the R-1 component of Avila Ranch to be developed within Phase 5 of the Development
Plan, and finding Avila Ranch is exempt from further environmental review under CEQA.
A. Applicant’s Request
This application includes information for the Architectural Review Commission’s and Planning
Commission’s review and approval of the architectural elements (“Design Framework”) of the
High-Density Residential (R-4) component of the Avila Ranch (“R-4 District"). The R-4 District
consists of three (3) R-4 zoned parcels created as part of recorded Tract Map 3089 Phase 1. The
development of the properties (Lots 185, 186 and 188) is designated as Phase 3 of Avila Ranch .
The R-4 District will consist of two separate developments: Anacapa and Sendero (individually
“development”, collectively “developments”). The two (2) proposed developments have unique
site constraints and opportunities. The development on the west side of Earthwood Lane,
Sendero, owned by C & C Development, consists of forty (40) affordable unit apartments,
approved through the Entitlement, with an additional twenty (20) units being added through a
separate Bonus Density process and approval for a total of sixty (60) affordable units (“Sendero”)
in a three-story building with a large courtyard. The development on the east side of Earthwood
Lane, Anacapa, owned by Wathen Castanos Homes, consists of eighty-five (85) market rate unit
apartments (“Anacapa”) include two separate free-standing three-story buildings.
Table 1. Property Specifics
SENDERO ANACAPA
Affordable Housing Development Market-Rate Development
ADDRESS
(assessor assigned)
165 Cessna Court 4240 Earthwood Lane
4280 Earthwood Lane
ASSESSOR’S
PARCEL #
053-290-006 053-290-008
053-290-005
TENTATIVE
TRACT 3089
Lot 186 Lot 185
Lot 188
PARCEL SIZE 1.81 acres 2.24 acres
ZONING R-4-SF R-4-SF
PROPOSED
DEVELOPMENT
60 affordable apartment dwelling units. 85 market-rate apartment dwelling
units in two buildings.
Page 40 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
While the two developments (Anacapa and Sendero) are being designed, constructed, and
operated by two separate entities – Wathen Castanos Homes and C & C Development,
respectively, the goal is to present these developments together and provide a comprehensive
architectural approach to the highest density units in Avila Ranch, as guided by the Entitlements.
The Anacapa market-rate development is located on two existing legal lots (Lots 185 and 188).
Anacapa will function as one site and does not require separate lots for each of the buildings,
therefore these lots will be consolidated into a single parcel as part of the Tract 3089 Phase 2 and
3 final map. The final map has been submitted to the City and is currently in map check review
(See FMAP-0562-2022). The Development Review plans reflect the single lot configuration.
Figure 1. Existing Parcel Configuration
B. Subsequent Permits
In addition to the above described Entitlements, the following plans have been reviewed,
approved, and/or permitted to date.
x Conformance Determination by the County of San Luis Obispo Airport Land Use Plan,
Airport Land Use Commission,
x General Plan Parks & Recreation Element Consistency Determination, Parks &
Recreation Commission for the proposed seven (7) parks totaling 18-acres, 04 January
2017.
ggfg
^ĞŶĚĞƌŽ ŶĂĐĂƉĂ
WĂƌĐĞůƐ ϭϴϱĂŶĚϭϴϴ ƚŽďĞWĂƌĐĞůƐ ϭϴϱ ĂŶĚϭϴϴ ƚŽ ďĞ
ĐŽŶƐŽůŝĚĂƚĞĚďLJdƌĂĐƚĐŽŶƐŽůŝĚĂƚĞĚĐŽŶƐŽůŝĚĂƚĞĚ ďLJdƌĂĐƚďLJ dƌĂĐƚ
ϯϬϴϵWŚĂƐĞϮͬϯ&ŝŶĂůͬͬWŚĂƐĞϮͬϯͬWŚĂƐĞ Ϯͬϯ &&
EW
EW
Issued Permits:
x Avila Ranch Offsite Improvements - COA 114 - FMAP-1622-2018 - Tank Farm/South
Higuera
x Avila Ranch - Tract 3089 – Phase 1 Mass Grading Plans - FMAP-1844-2018 - Onsite
early grading and walls.
x Sidewalk on Higuera between Los Osos Valley Road and Vachell Lane - FMAP-1537-
2018 - Partial improvements along Vachell Lane regarding drainage management.
x Higuera Street to South Street Right-turn Extension - FMAP-1538-2018
x Avila Ranch Phase 1 Tract 3089 Improvement Plans - FMAP-1563-2018
x Miscellaneous Permits: These permits authorize work within the regulatory
jurisdiction of each entity.
Lake &Streambed Alteration Agreement – CA Department of Fish & Wildlife
Waste Discharge Permit 34018WQ35 – Regional Water Quality Control Board
x Phase 2-6 Tract Grading FMAP-0808-2021
x Various building permits for construction of R-2 residential dwellings.
Pending Permits (in process)
x Phase 4-6 Improvement Plans FMAP-0382-2022
x Phase 2-3 Improvement Plans FMAP-0488-2022
x Currently processing phase 2-6 jurisdictional permits including:
Conditional Letter of Map Revision (FEMA)
Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (CDFWS)
Waste Discharge Permit 34022wq09 (RWQCB)
II. ARCHITECTURAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUBMITTAL
A. Avila Ranch Development Plan
The Development Plan, dated May 2017, was prepared in collaboration with the applicant’s design
and environmental team, City staff, and City decision-makers. Subject to the terms of the
Development Agreement, the Development Plan provides the program for development of the site
in conformance with the General Plan’s objectives, policies, and standards. The actual enabling
framework for implementation of this development program is contained in the Airport Area
Specific Plan as amended.,
The focus of this application is the Design Framework. This section of the Development Plan
includes design standards and guidelines specific to Avila Ranch and are meant to work in
conjunction with the adopted goals, policies, standards, and guidelines found in the Airport Area
Specific Plan, the City’s Community Design Guidelines, the City’s Zoning Regulations (Chapter
17 of the Municipal Code) and related documents. The purpose of these guidelines is to establish
the expected level of design quality within the area while still maintaining project flexibility and
innovation. The objective of this framework is not to dictate a specific design but to establish
design expectations that can be implemented as various Avila Ranch components are proposed
for implementation. The Design Framework is intended to provide guidance on the integration of
the site-specific features such as building architecture, with area-wide elements such as
streetscape, recreation and open spaces resources, and architecture into the overall Avila Ranch
design. The design regulations provide conceptual guidance as individual projects are brought P-1.1
WZK: d ^Z/Wd/KE
Page 41 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
forward for implementation and are reviewed by the City staff and Architectural Review
Commission (ARC) in accordance with City regulations.
Standards define actions or requirements that must be fulfilled in the development of Avila Ranch,
while Guidelines refer to methods or approaches that may be used to achieve a stated goal but allow
for flexibility and interpretation given specific conditions.
The Design Framework section of the Development Plan (approved September 19, 2017) includes
the following design components and related narratives, including a table that identifies the
standard minimums for the high-density residential lot and building standards (e.g., lot
dimensions and setbacks).
The site planning and organization sections, listed below, note standards and/or guidelines
specific to the R-4 zone, that also informed the design of these high-density residential
developments. As with the previously approved Avila Ranch R-1 and R-2 products, there was an
acknowledgment that flexibility was built into the Development Plan through the provisions of
the Development Agreement. This is underscored here, as it allows for some deviation from the
Development Plan standards in project design, if such deviations are determined to be consistent
with the intent of both the Development Agreement and Development Plan, as applicable.
Building Orientation & Setbacks
1.8 references parking to be used as a buffer to adequately set back buildings from
the northern property line. See also MM NO 3a.
1.11 references noise compatibility with adjoining uses and sleeping/living areas
and balcony exposures. See also MM NO 3a.
Pedestrian Activity Areas
Parking
Outdoor Use Areas
Screening
Preservation of Views and Scenic Resources
Architecture, as related to character, scale, and massing, building heights, façade
treatment, materials, and colors.
7.1.4 references that the buildings be designed uniformly with one of the allowed
residential architectural styles.
7.1.10 references the design of porches, entries, or walkways that front onto the
street.
Landscape Architecture
8.1.10 references the inclusion of dense vegetation along the western property line
with the R-2 units.
Buildings, Signs, & Lighting
Drainage
11.2 references a drainage swale along the northern property lines to facilitate
drainage from adjacent properties to the north.
Energy Conservation
13.2.f. references on-site energy production.
B. Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval
Avila Ranch was approved under a certified EIR which described potential impacts to the
physical environment and related mitigation measures. While the majority of measures relate to
the physical environment (e.g., transportation improvements, biological considerations, public
services, etc.), there are measures that specifically address design aspects that are under the
purview of the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) and the Planning Commission (PC).
Avila Ranch’s Tentative Map was approved with a set of conditions of approval (“Conditions”)
that were created by all City departments, reviewed by the various City advisory bodies, and
ultimately approved by the City Council. Development of Avila Ranch should be consistent with
these Conditions, which will allow for a detailed review of the proposed R-4 development plans
to assure compliance with the applicable plans, policies, and standards. Again, while the majority
of the Conditions relate to major transportation and other improvements, there are conditions
that specifically address design components that are under the purview of the ARC and PC. Those
specific mitigation measures and Conditions are noted in the table below.
Table 2. Mitigation Measure and Conditions of Approval Conformance
MITIGATION MEASURE or
CONDITION OF APPROVAL
CONFORMANCE
COMMENT
32. Private street lightingmay be provided along the private
streets/alleys/parking areas, pocket parks, and linear parks
per City Engineering Standards and/or as approved in
conjunction with the final ARC approvals.
Private lighting is depicted on sheets L-1.1
and L-1.3. Shared driveway lighting
consists of wall light fixtures, as shown
on building elevations (See Architectural
Sheets)
43.Retaining wall and/or retaining wall/fence
combinations along property lines shall be approved to the
satisfaction of the Planning Division and shall conform with
the zoning regulations for allowed combined heights or
shall be approved through the ARC, Specific Plan, or
separate Fence Height exception process.
The Phase 3/R-4 wall/fence height
exception will be processed as a
standalone application.
44.The ARC plans and public improvement plans shall
show the location of the proposed mail receptacles or
mailbox units (MBU’s) to the satisfaction of the Postmaster
and the City Engineer. The subdivider shall provide a
mailbox unit or multiple units to serve all dwelling units
within this development as required by the Postmaster.
MBU’s shall not be located within the public right-of-way
or public sidewalk area unless specifically approved by the
City Engineer. Contact the Postmaster at 543-2605 to
establish any recommendations regarding the number, size,
location, and placement for any MBU’s to serve the several
neighborhoods and occupancies.
Mailboxes are located for the R-4 (@ the
southeast corner of Building B) and R-4A
multi-family units (in the breezeway near
the northwest corner of the building).
45.Porous concrete, pavers, or other surface treatments as
approved by the City Engineer shall be used for private
parking areas, V-gutters, private curb and gutter, etc. to the
extent feasible within the over-all drainage design for water
quality treatment/retention in accordance with the specific
plan and General Plan.
Based upon the engineering analysis, the
design includes the infiltration of all the
stormwater volume in a spread-out
manner in underground storage
chambers, such that decentralization of
infiltration is not necessary.
MM NO-3a.R-1 and R-2 residential units planned in the
area of the Avila Ranch site within 300 feet of Buckley Road
EIR Appendix O –Sound Level
Assessment for Avila Ranch, 45dB.com
WZK: d ^Z/Wd/KE
P-1.2
Page 42 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
and R-4 units in the northwest corner of the Avila Ranch
site shall include noise mitigation for any potential indoor
space and outdoor activity areas that are confirmed to be
above 60 dBA as indicated in Avila Ranch’s Sound Level
Assessment. The following shall be implemented for
residential units with noise levels exceeding 60 dBA:
x Outdoor Activity Area Noise Mitigation. Where exterior
sound levels exceed CNEL = 60 dBA, noise reduction
measures shall be implemented, including but not limited to:
x Exterior living spaces of residential units such as yards and
patios shall be oriented away from Avila Ranch boundaries
that are adjacent to noise-producing uses that exceed
exterior noise levels of CNEL = 60 dBA, such as roadways and
industrial/commercial activities.
x Construction of additional sound barriers/berms with noise-
reducing features for affected residences.
x Exterior Glazing. Exterior window glazing for residential
units exposed to potential noise above Ldn=60 dBA shall
achieve a minimum Outdoor-Indoor Transmission Class
(OITC) 24 / Sound Transmission Class (STC) 30. Glazing
systems with dissimilar thickness panes shall be used.
x Exterior Doors Facing Noise Source. According to Section
1207.7 of the California Building Code, residential unit entry
doors from interior spaces shall have a combined STC 28
rating for any door and frame assemblies. Any balcony and
ground floor entry doors located at bedrooms shall have an
STC 30 rating. Balconies shall be oriented away from the
northwest property line.
x Exterior Walls. Construction of exterior walls shall consist
of a stucco or engineered building skin system over
sheathing, with 4-inch to 6-inch-deep metal or wood studs,
fiberglass batt insulation in the stud cavity, and one or two
layers of 5/8-inch gypsum board on the interior face of the
wall. If possible, electrical outlets shall not be installed in
exterior walls exposed to noise. If not possible, outlet box
pads shall be applied to all electrical boxes and sealed with
non-hardening acoustical sealant.
x Supplemental Ventilation. According to the California
Building Code, supplemental ventilation adhering to
OITC/STC recommendations shall be provided for
residential units with habitable spaces facing noise levels
exceeding Ldn=60 dBA, so that the opening of windows is
not necessary to meet ventilation requirements.
Supplemental ventilation can also be provided by passive or
by fan-powered, ducted air inlets that extend from the
building’s rooftop into the units. If installed, ducted air inlets
shall be acoustically lined through the top-most 6 feet in
length and incorporate one or more 90-degree bends
between openings, so as not to compromise the noise
insulating performance of the residential unit’s exterior
envelope.
x Sound Walls. Sound walls shall be built on the north and
east property lines of Avila Ranch in Phase 3 that adjoin
Suburban Road. The barrier shall consist of mortared
masonry. Further, proposed carports with solar canopies
included an analysis of surrounding noise
levels from all sources that would have
potential impacts on noise sensitive uses.
For the multi-family aspect of Avila
Ranch, the analysis focused on the
commercial activities along the Avila
Ranch’s northwest property line bordered
by industrial uses.
Existing sound levels equaled 51 –53
dBA, while project noise levels (year
2035) would increase to 54 dBA.
All new multi-family housing must
comply with the CA Building Code,
which specifies the maximum level of
interior noise. The City’s Noise Element
specifies a maximum allowable interior
noise level of 45 dBA Ldn for multi-
family projects.
All units that may be impacted by
projected noise levels of 60 dBA or
greater will be acoustically constructed
utilizing Sound Transmission Class
(STC) rated materials (e.g., sealing &
weatherproofing, window, doors, walls,
ceilings, flooring, ventilations, etc.), as
noted in the mitigation measure.
The mitigation measure references sound
walls and suggests carports with solar
canopies be placed along the northern and
western perimeter of the R-4 units. Based
upon the existing and proposed noise
levels and including the building
construction noise level reduction
measures in the CA Building & Green
Code(s), Avila Ranch will be able to
achieve the requisite interior noise
threshold levels, accordingly. Therefore,
sound walls and carports are not
necessary to implement noise level
reductions.
shall be installed around the western and northern perimeter
of the R-4 units, and these units shall be setback a minimum
of 100 feet from the property line.
x Landscaping. Landscaping along the north and east Avila
Ranch boundaries that adjoin Suburban Road shall include
a line of closely space trees and shrubs with sufficient
vegetative density to help reduce sound transmission.
1. Noise & Acoustical Considerations
Based upon the acoustical analysis (Avila Ranch FEIR – Appendix O – Sound Level Assessment
for Avila Ranch, 45dB.com, 2017), existing noise levels at the northwest property lines of both
developments, adjacent to the Industrial zoned properties, range from 51- 53 dBA, with projected
noise levels for the year 2035 expected to be 54 dBA. In compliance with the Development Plan,
the R-4 District buildings are setback eighty-five (85) feet from the northern property line. While
there are bedrooms and balconies on the north side of the buildings, the existing and anticipated
noise levels are below the noise ordinance threshold levels. It is noteworthy that the noise
measurements in the EIR were taken at the northern property line of Avila Ranch, now the
northern property lines of Lots 186 and 188. Based upon noise transmission, each time a distance
is doubled, intensity is decreased by a factor of four, therefore, each time intensity is cut in half,
the sound level decreases 3 dB and that the doubling of distance reduces the sound level by 6 dB.
Given the existing and anticipated noise levels and the distance from the northern property line,
there is no apparent need for implementation of noise level reduction methodologies in either the
Anacapa or Sendora structures to mitigate exterior noise. This means the parking lot solar
canopies are not required as unmitigated noise levels are in compliance with the City
requirements. No solar canopies are being proposed, as Anacapa and Sendora, in the context of
the entirety of Avila Ranch, will comply with the City’s Clean Energy Programs for New Buildings
and Energy Reach Code (i.e., the minimum requirements of the CA State Energy Code Title 24,
Part 6). The applicanthas and will continue to coordinate with the Sustainability Manager, Chris
Read to ensure that the construction documents for the Phase 3, R-4 District comply with the
goals, objectives, and code requirements for energy efficiency. It is noteworthy that Avila Ranch
is committed to being “all electric” prior to promulgation of the City’s Clean Energy Program.
Finally, Anacapa and Sendero will comply with the CA Building Code, the CA Green Building
Code, and the City’s requirement for interior noise levels, via utilization of a robust package of
building related sound transmission class (STC) rated materials.
C. The R-4 District – Architecture & Landscape Architecture Narratives
To accompany the graphics in this submittal, the following narrative provides an overview of the
design from an architectural and landscape architectural perspectivefor the Anacapa and Sendero
developments. The Development Plan prescribes a Contemporary Mid-Century Architectural
Style in the R-4 District. As detailed below in subsections 1 (Anacapa) and 2 (Sendero) This style
is being applied to both the market rate and affordable buildings, as a unifying single design style.
WͲϭ͘ϯ
WZK: d ^Z/Wd/KE
Page 43 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
1. Architectural Design Concept – ANACAPA (Market Rate Multi-Family)
The proposed modern design theme of Anacapa pulls from the Ethos of Walter Gropius’ Bauhaus
School of International Contemporary Design1. The use of carefully placed repetitive building
elements allows for a unifying yet interesting theme that is well articulated and rhythmic as
represented in both the vertical and horizontal building massing, the variation of wall planes, and
roof heights. Each building has many distinctive architectural elements that add visual interest,
unity, and human scale with a variety of projecting and recessed patios, balconies, and community
verandas.
The careful placement and design of the many unit floor plan types allows for multiple building
modules that offers a nice variety of building details and helps break up the building massing,
while providing for individual unit identity and simultaneously allowing for an “Edgy Modern
Architectural Theme”, that blends the two (2) developments together and presents itself as a
cohesive multi-family apartment neighborhood.
The floor plans have been specifically designed to provide for a diversity of potential future
renters. This all-flats development contains studios/1 bath, 1-bedroom/1 bath, and 2-bedroom/2
bath units ranging in size from 401 square feet (SF) to 572 SF, and 917 SF, respectively. Patios and
storage areas for each unit type range in size from 92 SF to 69 SF, and 71 SF, respectively.
The ground floor of Building A includes 13 dwelling units: one (1) studio; five (5) 1-bedroom; and
seven (7) 2-bedroom units. Community areas are also included in this building: a lobby, manager’s
office, kitchen, lounge, bike parking room, and outdoor patio. The second and third floors of
Building A each contain 15 dwelling units: one (1) studio; six (6) 1-bedroom; and eight (8) 2-
bedroom units.)
Each of the three floors of Building B has 14 dwelling units: two (2) studios, four (4) one-bedroom,
and eight (8) two-bedroom units.
The second and third floors of both buildings also contain a large, covered terrace with fantastic
180-degree views toward the Irish Hills and the Seven Sisters. See Table 1. below for unit counts.
Table 3. Market Rate Multi-Family Units
UNIT TYPE SIZE (SF)QUANTITY
Building A
Studio 401 3
1-bedroom 572 17
2-bedrooms 917 23
3-bedrooms -
Bldg. A Total 43
Building B
Studio 401 6
1-bedroom 572 12
2-bedrooms 917 24
3-bedrooms -
Bldg. B Total 42
Total 85 units
ϭ The Bauhaus was founded in the city of Weimar by German architect Walter Gropius (1883±1969). Its core objective
was a radical concept: to reimagine the material world to reflect the unity of all the arts. The Proclamation of the Bauhaus
(1919) described a utopian craft guild combining architecture, sculpture, and painting into a single creative expression.
2. ANACAPA Parking –
Vehicle, motorcycle, and bicycle parking are integral components of this development and have
been designed concurrently with the evolution of the building and site plan. For ease of reference,
see Table 4 that describes the required and proposed unit, guest, and motorcycle parking. See
Table 5 for bicycle parking required and proposed.
Table 4. Market Rate Multi-Family Unit Vehicle Parking
NOTE: 1) A two percent (2%) parking reduction is requested with additional bike parking provided.
Table 5. Market Rate Multi-Family Unit Bicycle Parking
BICYCLE PARKING TYPE UNIT
QTY.
PARKING
REQUIRED
PARKING
PROPOSED
Resident /Long Term (2/ unit)85 170.0+101)180.02)
Guest Parking (1 sp/5 units) 17.0 20.03)
Bike Share* see text 9.0
TOTAL 0 197 209
* per Avila Ranch Trip Reduction and Implementation Plan
NOTE: 1) Additional 10 spaces are required/provided for requested vehicle parking reduction.
2) In storage area or in unit;
3) As bike racks.
Anacapa includes the required specialty vehicle parking spaces for ADA accessibility, EV charging
stalls, EV capable, and EV ready, which are identified on the site plan. Six (6) motorcycle parking
spaces are also provided.
Anacapa’s design has utilized compact spaces for a more efficient design. The City’s Engineering
Standard 2230 notes that for residential apartment projects, with 10 or more units, up to 50
percent of parking spaces may be compact. For this development 30 percent, or 34 spaces, are
compact spaces with dimensions of 8 feet wide by 16 feet in length. Additionally, to maintain the
greatest amount of operational functionality, a modified compact dimension has been utilized,
where possible. Modified compact spaces account for 17 percent (%) or 19 spaces. These spaces
provide the standard 9-foot width and include the compact 16-foot length.
The provided vehicle parking is two (2) spaces less than the requirement. To fulfill the 2 percent
parking reduction, Anacapa includes ten (10) additional bike spaces beyond the requirement for
multi-family developments. The Avila Ranch Trip Reduction and Implementation Program, dated August
UNIT TYPE UNIT
QTY.
BEDROOM
QTY.
PARKING
REQUIRED
PARKING
PROVIDED
0.75/bedroom
Studio 9 9 6.75
One-bedroom 29 29 21.75
Two-bedroom 47 94 70.5
Subtotal 85 132 99.0
Guest Parking
(1 sp/5 units) 17.0
TOTAL 116.0 114.01
Motorcycle
(1 per 20 vehicle spaces) 6.0 6.0
WZK: d ^Z/Wd/KE
P-1.4
Page 44 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
19, 2022, identifies a bike share program for the apartments with a pool of eighteen (18) bikes. The
bike share racks and docks are divided between the Anacapa (market rate) and Sendero
(affordable) with Anacapa providing nine (9) docked and shared bikes. This provides additional
access to bicycles as an alternative transportation for the two (2) vehicle spaceparking reduction.
Long term and short-term bicycle parking is provided, as required. Racks for guest parking are
provided at each building. The twenty-seven (27) ground floor units include two bike parking
locations within each unit. Long-term bike storage for the upper floors is provided at various
locations on the ground floor in secure and enclosed areas with a total of 126 spaces at these
locations. This includes two (2) standalone bike storage buildings located near interior property
lines. The setback for these structures is a minimum of three (3) feet.
3. Architectural Design Concept – SENDERO (Affordable Multi-Family)
As noted above under the Architectural Design Concept – Anacapa (Market Rate Multi-Family)
section, the design intent is to develop these different building types, representing the the R-4
District of Avila Ranch , as stylistically similar yet uniquely individual. This building has been
designed to appear as a single structure, although a cluster of three-story buildings that surround
an interior courtyard.
Following the “Contemporary/Mid-Century Architectural Style” and strengthened with the
contemporary Bauhaus-style design elements, Sendero focuses on a simple, rational, and
functional design. A key component of the design is the use of familiar abstract forms that are at
once elegantly functional and utilitarian (e.g., flat roofs that produce a basic, geometric
appearance).
The floor plans have been designed to provide a variety of unit sizes and floor plans to meet the
program requirements and, in turn, the individual needs of the future tenants. This, too, is a
stacked flat development containing units that range from a one (1) bedroom/1 bath at 529 square
feet (SF), a two (2) bedroom/1 bath at 748 SF, and a three (3) bedroom/2 bath at 935 SF. Patios
and storage areas for each unit type range in size from 68 SF to 69 SF, and 93 SF, respectively.
On the ground floor, Sendero includes: four (4) 1-bedroom; seven (7) 2-bedroom; and seven (7) 3-
bedroom units. A larger 5,200± SF courtyard area includes passive and active areas for adults and
children (age ranges from 2-year-olds to teenagers). A 1,000 SF community room also provides
access to the courtyard. The second and third floors each contain: four (4) 1-bedroom; seven (7)
2-bedroom; and seven (7) 3-bedroom units. See Table 3. Below for unit counts.
Table 6. Sendero Units
UNIT TYPE SIZE (SF)QUANTITY
Studio -
1-bedroom 529 18
2-bedrooms 748 21
3-bedrooms 935 21
Total 60 units
4. SENDERO Parking
Vehicle, motorcycle, and bicycle parking are integral components of Sendero and have been
designed concurrently with the evolution of the building and site plan. For ease of reference, see
Table 6. That describes the required and proposed unit, guest, and motorcycle parking. See Table
7. for bicycle parking required and proposed.
Table 7. Sendero Parking
UNIT TYPE UNIT
QTY.
BEDROOM
QTY.
PARKING
REQUIRED1
PARKING
PROVIDED
1.0/unit
One-bedroom 18 18 18.0
Two-bedroom 21 42 31.5
Three-bedroom 21 63 31.5
Guest Parking (N/A) --
TOTAL 60 123 81.0 81.0
Motorcycle (N/A) 5.0
NOTE: 1) Pursuant to CA Government Code 65915(p), maximum parking requirements for a density bonus
project is 1 space per Studio/1 bedroom unit; 1.5 spaces per 2/3-bedroom unit)
Table 8. Sendero Bicycle Parking
BICYCLE PARKING TYPE UNIT
QTY.
PARKING
REQUIRED
PARKING
PROPOSED
Resident /Long Term (2/unit) 60 120.01)84.02)
Guest Parking (1 sp/5 units) 12.0 12.03)
Bike Share * see text 9.0
Subtotal 132
20% Alternative compliance reduction -27
TOTAL 105 105
* per Avila Ranch Trip Reduction and Implementation Plan
NOTE: 1) Alternative compliance pursuance to §17.72.070 is requested.
2) In storage area or in unit;
3) As bike racks.
Sendero includes the required specialty vehicle parking spaces for ADA accessibility, EV charging
stalls, and EV capable, and EV ready which are identified on the site plan. Five (5) motorcycle parking
spaces are also provided.
Sendero’s design has utilized compact spaces for a more efficient design. The City’s Engineering
Standard 2230 notes that for residential apartment projects, with 10 or more units, up to 50 percent
of parking spaces may be compact. For this development 28 percent, or 23spaces, are compact spaces
with dimensions of 8 feet wide by 16 feet in length.
Long term and short-term bicycle parking is provided, with an alternative compliance request as
discussed in subsection 5 below. Racks for guest parking are provided. The eighteen (18) ground floor
units includes storage fortwo (2) bicycles within each unit. Long-term bike storage for the upper floor
units is provided at two enclosed and secured areas on the ground floor with a total of 48 spaces.
WͲϭ͘ϱ
WZK: d ^Z/Wd/KE
Page 45 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
The Avila Ranch Trip Reduction and Implementation Program, dated August 19, 2022, identifies a bike- share
program for the apartments with a pool of eighteen (18) bikes. The bike-share racks and docks are
divided between the Anacapa and Sendero sites with Sendero providing nine (9) docked and shared
bikes.
5. Bike Parking Alternative Compliance Request (§17.72.070.D)
The City’s affordable housing incentives §17.140.040.K.2 provides specific parking regulations for
projects that are 100% low-income units. This standard incentive requires one (1) long-term
bicycle parking space per unit and no requirements for short term or guest parking. Since the
Sendero site includes eight (8) moderate income units (as prescribed by the Development
Agreement) this bike parking standard incentive is not afforded to this development. The
applicant is requesting alternative compliance approval pursuant §17.72.070.D for the provided
long-term bicycle parking. The requested determination is for approval of 84 long-term bicycle
parking spaces where 120 spaces would be required for a typical multi-family residential
development. Since the Sendero provides nine (9) rideshare bicycles, this is a reduction of 27
spaces (or 20%) based on the following considerations:
Pursuant to the Active Transportation Plan Appendix C Design Guidelines §7.30.g2, every effort
has been made to provide ground-floor bike storage for the upper floor units. Based upon City
Transportation Department staff direction, upper floor storage areas suitable for bike storage are
not included or counted toward the long-term bike parking provided. Therefore, while alternative
compliance is requested to approve a reduction in the quantity of bike storage, the provided
parking is well secured, convenient, and practical.
The proposed (84) long-term bicycle parking spaces provide at least two (2) storage spaces for
the (40) “base” dwelling units at the site.
The Sendero development will provide enhanced bicycle facilities with a dock of nine (9) ride-
share bicycles available for use by Sendero’s residents. Additionally, the residence will have access
to the nine (9) ride share bikes located in the Anacapa (R-4) project area. These standard and e-
bikes are docked in a separate area and not in the long-term bike storage areas.
6. Color and Material Boards -
In keeping with the Bauhaus style, the proposed colors strive for unity and simplicity with
architectural color palettes restricted to contemporary “industrial” hues such as gray, white, and
beige with a 21st century pop of muted plum. Materials emphasize minimalism with the intent of
blending the multi-colored stucco elements, metal roofing and handrails with architectural
columns wrapped in composite wood appearance siding and highlighted with accent lighting.
The architectural columns provide a visual focal point and queuing to the many building entries
and activity areas. The standing seam metal roof and metal mesh handrails as well as the modern
architectural style provides the materials and detailing reminiscent of the Bauhaus style and,
interestingly, the transition to the existing industrial development adjacent to and north of
Sendero.
Attached, separately, are the physical color and material boards for both developments.
Ϯ ĞƐŝŐŶ'ƵŝĚĞůŝŶĞƐΑϳ͘ϯϬ͘Ő͗͞dŽƚŚĞĞdžƚĞŶƚƉŽƐƐŝďůĞ͕ŝŶƚĞƌŝŽƌďŝĐLJĐůĞƐƚŽƌĂŐĞĂƌĞĂƐƐŚŽƵůĚďĞŽŶƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚĨůŽŽƌ͕
ĨĞĂƚƵƌĞĂǁŝĚĞƌĚŽŽƌ͕ĂŶĚĞŶĚĞĂǀŽƌƚŽŚĂǀĞĂƵƚŽŵĂƚŝĐĚŽŽƌŽƉĞŶĞƌƐƚŽĂĐĐŽŵŵŽĚĂƚĞďĞƚƚĞƌŝŶŐƌĞƐƐĂŶĚĞŐƌĞƐƐ͘͟
7. Landscape Architectural Design Concept – ANACAPA
The proposed contemporary landscape, designed to reflect and accentuate the urban aesthetic
represented by the three-story apartment buildings, includes a varying textural and colorful array
of flowering and evergreen trees and shrubs. Anacapa showcases the drought-tolerant,
Mediterranean-style plant palette along vegetated streetscapes, pedestrian paseos, exterior
patios, and in perimeter plantings.
A mixture of deciduous and evergreen canopy street trees, including colorful shrub and perennial
plantings, is planned for the streetscape along Earthwood Lane and Piper Lane. These plantings
provide a protective buffer between pedestrian pathways and vehicular travel. A massing of evergreen
trees and shrubs along the northern edge of the property provides a vegetative buffer between the site
and the neighboring commercial property, with canopy trees providing shade to parking lots.
A paseo pathway, located within a fully landscaped 20-foot-wide easement, meanders along the
southerly portion of the site and links pedestrian circulation to the neighborhood park to the east and
Earthwood Lane to the west. The community’s focal hub of activity is at the community room and
associated exterior patio, with table seating, and arbor feature.
The proposed landscape architectural design complements the overall Avila Ranch plant and
landscape materials aesthetic and conforms to the Avila Ranch Development Plan and is in accordance
with the City’s Community Design Guidelines (§6.2 – Landscaping) and Municipal Code (§12.38.90 –
Landscaping Standards and §17.70.220 – Water Efficient Landscape Standards).
Water conservation and stormwater management measures include various low impact development
(LID) and best management practices (BMPs) through energy conservation, stormwater collection,
soil regeneration, integrated pest management, mulching and species diversity. Additionally, the
design of efficient automatic irrigation systems reflects the latest technology and are designed
specifically for individual plant species water demand, soils, and exposure.
8. Landscape Architectural Design Concept – SENDERO
The proposed contemporary landscape, designed to reflect and accentuate the urban aesthetic
represented by the three-story apartment building, includes a varying textural and colorful array
of flowering and evergreen trees and shrubs. Sendero showcases the drought-tolerant,
Mediterranean-style plant palette along vegetated streetscapes, exterior patios, and in perimeter
plantings.
A mixture of deciduous and evergreen canopy street trees with colorful shrubs and perennial
plantings is planned for the streetscape along Earthwood Lane, to help provide a protective buffer
between pedestrian pathways and vehicular travel. A massing of evergreen trees and shrubs along
the northern and western edge of the property provides a vegetative screen between the site and
the neighboring commercial property, with canopy trees providing shade in parking lots.
The community’s focal hub of recreation and activity is centered around the community room and
associated exterior patio, complete with BBQ island and table seating. To satisfy the requirements
of the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee’s (CTCAC) low-income housing tax credit
program, other site amenities include the following: synthetic lawn play area, children’s
playground, hammocks, ping pong, chess tables, and assorted bench and table seating.
The proposed landscape architectural design complements the overall Avila Ranch plant and
landscape materials aesthetic and conforms to the Avila Ranch Development Plan and is in
WZK: d ^Z/Wd/KE
P-1.6
Page 46 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
accordance with the City’s Community Design Guidelines (§6.2 – Landscaping) and Municipal
Code (§12.38.90 –Landscaping Standards and §17.70.220 –Water Efficient Landscape Standards).
Water conservation and stormwater management measures include various low impact
development (LID) and best management practices (BMPs) through energy conservation,
stormwater collection, soil regeneration, integrated pest management, mulching and species
diversity. Additionally, the design of efficient automatic irrigation systems reflects the latest
technology and are designed specifically for individual plant species water demand, soils, and
exposure.
9. Drainage Considerations/Post Construction Stormwater Management
Drainage and stormwatermanagement are an integral part of both developments, as they must be
considered concurrently with the site and building design. The Anacapa site consists of
approximately 2.2± acres, while the Sendero site consists of approximately 1.8± acres. Both sites
arecurrently undeveloped. The proposed sites drain to a regional detention facility that mitigates
peak flows from the proposed development sites. The two development sites include water
quality storage facilities. The proposed storm drain system will be designed to convey the 25-year
storm event flow. Grading for positive drainage across the site will be designed such that overland
release for the 100-year peak flow is provided while maintaining 1-foot of freeboard to the
proposed structures finished floor elevations. This assumes that no flow is intercepted by the
proposed storm drain system. The two development sites are shown on the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) number 06079C1331G, effective
November 16, 2012. The Avila Ranch siteis shown in FEMA Zone X (un-shaded), areas of minimal
flood hazard.
Both proposed developments create more than 22,500 square feet of new and replaced impervious
surface and, thereforeanticipated to be required to comply with Post Construction Requirements
1 through 4 per the County of San Luis Obispo Post Construction Requirements Handbook, dated
March 2017. The two development sites drain to a regional detention facility that mitigates peak
flows from the proposed development sites to comply with PCR 4, peak management. The
proposed developments will each include multiple underground infiltration facilities through
both sites to comply with the water quality treatment and runoff retention requirements.
III. AFFORDABLE (INCLUSIONARY) HOUSING –
The Development Agreement prescribes the long-term housing affordability component of Avila
Ranch, including design and development strategies to provide lower cost housing. These
strategies include the design and construction of a range of housing sizes and types, while
providing a greater number of inclusionary housing units than required by the City’s Inclusionary
Housing Ordinance.
The Development Agreement requires a dedication of a 1.2-acre± portion of the R-4 District
(originally designated as lot 300 of the VTTM; now Lot 186 of Phase 1 Final Map) to an affordable
housing provider to construct twenty-four (24) low-income units. The applicant has dedicated
Lot 186, now a slightly larger parcel totaling 1.81-acres, to C & C Development, an affordable
housing provider.
As a result of the affordable viability assessment for Sendero, the Wathen Castanos and C & C
Development are proposing to include the (8) low-income and (8) moderate-income units,
originally intended to be mingled in an otherwise market-rate portion of be included in lot 186
along with the other affordable units.Consequently, C & C Development will construct a total of
forty (40) units – 32 low-income + 8 moderate units.
C & C Development will take advantage of the State’s Density Bonus Law (CA Gov’t. Code §
65915 –65918) by requesting, under separate application,a density bonus of twenty (20) units for
a total of sixty (60) affordable units. California Density Bonus Law allows a developer to increase
density on a property above the maximum set under a jurisdiction’s General Plan land use plan,
ordinances, and development agreements. See also Title 17 – Zoning Regulations Chapter 17.140.
The developerwill dedicate 5% (equal to six (6) dwelling units) of the total 125 R-4 units as very-
low income to allow for a 16% bonus (equal to twenty (20) dwelling units). The project
description and design concepts for the R-4 development review package include and depict the
density bonus units with a development design totaling 145 units dwelling units in the Avila
Ranch R-4 zone.
Ultimately, C & C Development will enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement, specific to Lot
186, to establish the terms and conditions under which the sixty (60) affordable units will be
constructed, encumbered, and rented.
WͲϭ͘ϳ
WZK: d ^Z/Wd/KE
Page 47 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
WZK: d ^Z/Wd/KE
WͲϭ͘ϴ
Avila Ranch Specific Plan Development Standards
Pu
b
l
i
c
S
t
r
e
e
t
Medium - High Density Residential Lot and Building
Standards (R-3)
EXAMPLES
These sketches shows a site
layouts that would follow
from the standards. Not all
features shown in the sketch are
standards.
STANDARDS (minimums)
Lot Area
Lot Width
Lot Depth
N/A
N/A
N/A
Front Setback
Dwelling
Front Porch
15 ft
10 ft
Rear Setback
Dwelling
Parking
10 ft
0 ft
Side Setback (A)
(applies to any structure,
including covered parking)
Street (corner lot)
as provided in R-2 zone
15 ft
1,000 ft
20 ft
40 ft
N/A
N/A
N/A
10 ft*
10 ft
10 ft
0 ft
10 ft
0 ft
as provided in R-2 zone
15 ft
as provided in R-2 zone
15 ft
10 ft*
10 ft
* Updated to reflect City zoning regulations for R-3 and R-4 setbacks, §17.20.20 and §17.22.010.
Excerpt of updated R-3 and R-4 development standards from the Avila Ranch Development Plan. The design of the R-4 product is consistent with the
applicable standards.
AVILA RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Page 48 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
/>>h^dZd/s ^/d
W>E
SP-1.0SCALE: 1”=50’
0 25’ 50’ 75’
EA
R
T
H
W
O
O
D
L
N
.
PI
P
E
R
L
N
.
CESSNA CT.
FUTURE FIRE STATION
‘SENDERO‘AFFORDABLE APARTMENTS
‘ANACAPA’MARKET-RATEAPARTMENTS
BUILDING B
BUILDING A
SINGLE
FAMILY
LOTS
PARK ‘E’
SINGLE
FAMILY
LOTS
KITTY HAWK CT.
MEMPHIS BELLE WY.
Page 49 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
^dZ d^W
> sd/KE^
AS-1.0
EARTHWOOD LANE LOOKING WEST
NOT TO SCALEB
EARTHWOOD LANE LOOKING NORTH
NOT TO SCALEA
AFFORDABLE APARTMENTS BUILDING 1 MARKET RATE APARTMENTS BUILDING A
AFFORDABLE APARTMENTS BUILDING 1
B
A
EA
R
T
H
W
O
O
D
L
N
Page 50 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
^dZ d^W
> sd/KE^
AS-1.1
EARTHWOOD LANE LOOKING EAST
NOT TO SCALED
EARTHWOOD LANE LOOKING SOUTH
NOT TO SCALEC
MARKET RATE APARTMENTS BUILDING B AFFORDABLE APARTMENTS BUILDING 1
D
C
MARKET RATE APARTMENTS BUILDING B MARKET RATE APARTMENTS BUILDING A
EA
R
T
H
W
O
O
D
L
N
Page 51 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Ks Z>>>E^W
W>E
L-1.0
FUTURE FIRE STATION
EA
R
T
H
W
O
O
D
D
R
.
PI
P
E
R
L
N
.
PARK ‘E’ -
NOT A PART
SCALE: 1”=50’
0 25’ 50’ 75’
PEDESTRIAN PASEO & COMMUNITY ROOM PATIOSEE SHEET L-1.2
AFFORDABLE HOUSING APARTMENTSSEE SHEET L-1.3
COMMON RECREATIONAL AMENITYSEE SHEET L-1.4
MAILBOX KIOSKS
KIOSKS ARE EQUIPPED
WITH UP TO 19 FRONT
LOADING TENANT
MAIL COMPARTMENTS,
2 PARCEL LOCKER
COMPARTMENTS, AND
1 DROP SLOT. THERE
MAY BE MORE THAN
ONE UNIT AT EACH
LOCATION, DEPENDING
ON ADDRESSES SERVED.
FINAL MAILBOX KIOSK
LOCATIONS SHALL
BE APPROVED BY THE
POSTMASTER AND BE
ADA COMPLIANT.
M
COMCOMOMOMOMOMOMOMOMMMMMMMMMMMOMMMOMMMOMOMOOOMOMOOMONONMONMONMMOOMMONMOMOMOMOMOOMMM RERERREECRECRCRCRECRECRATATAATATATIATITITITITIIATATTIATTITTAIATATAOONNOONONONAONNAONANANANANANANANANANAONNAONONNOONNOLL AMEAMEAMAMAMNITNNNITYYYSEE SHEET L-1.4
PI
P
ER
LN
.
PI
P
ER
LN
.
PEDPEPEPEDEDESTESTSRIARIAAAN PN PNPNPNPNPNPNNPPPPN PN PNPNPNPPPPAASASASASASASESASEASEASEASAAAAASAAO&O &&& COMCOMCOMCOMOMMUNMUNMUNMUNITYITYY ROROROROOOM OM OMOO PATPATIOIOSEE SHEET L-1.2
MARKET RATE APARTMENTSSEE SHEET L-1.1
MEMPHIS BELLE WY.
PHASE 3
SINGLE
FAMILY
LOTS
PHASE 3
SINGLE
FAMILY
LOTS
M
10 FT PEDESTRIAN
PASEO EASEMENT
PROPOSED
ILLUMINATED
MONUMENT
SIGN
PROPOSED
ILLUMINATED
MONUMENT
SIGN
TREE LEGEND
EXISTING PHASE 1 P.I.P. TREES
CITY-APPROVED STREET TREES
PARKING LOT TREES
PERIMETER TREES
INTERIOR TREES
ACCENT TREES
PALMS
CESSNA CT.
Page 52 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
^/d W>EZͳϰt/d,
^dd/^d/^
SP-1.1
Page 53 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰ>E^W W>E
E>Z'
L-1.1
SCALE: 1”=40’
0 20’ 40’ 60’
KEYNOTE LEGEND
1 PASEO LANDSCAPING, TREES, SHRUBS, GROUNDCOVERS
2 PEDESTRIAN CROSS WALK
3A 6’ TALL DECORATIVE METAL FENCE
3B 3.5’ TALL DECORATIVE METAL FENCE
4 6’ TALL WOOD FENCE
5 MEANDERING CONCRETE PASEO WALK
6 APPROVED PARKWAY LANDSCAPING AS PART OF
PHASE 1 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PLANS
7 CLUSTER MAILBOX UNITS
8 PROPOSED ILLUMINATED MONUMENT SIGN, SEE SHEET L-1.1
9 10’ LANDSCAPED PASEO AS PART OF PH. 3 S.F. HOMES
10 PEDESTRIAN BENCHES
11 LONG TERM BIKE PARKING
12 CITY APPROVED STREET TREES
13 SHADE ARBOR
14 COMMUNITY CLUBHOUSE PATIO WITH
TABLE SEATING AND DECORATIVE PAVING
15 LOW-MEDIUM HEIGHT PERIMETER PLANTING MASS
16 PERIMETER SCREENING TREES
17 SHORT TERM BIKE PARKING
18 E-BIKE PARKING
19 DECORATIVE POLE LIGHTS
20 BIKE PATH CONNECTION
#
EA
R
T
H
W
O
O
D
D
R
.
6’ TALL WOOD
PROPOSED FENCING TYPES
6’ and 3.5’ TALL METAL
8
6
6
PARK ‘E’ -
NOT A PART
PI
P
E
R
L
N
.
MEMPHIS BELLE WY.
PHASE 3SINGLE FAMILY LOTS
PHASE 3
SINGLE
FAMILY
LOTS
2
2
4
3A
7
16 16
12
14
15
15
15
15
20
9
17
3 4
14
PEDESTRIAN PASEO & COMMUNITY ROOM PATIOSEE SHEET L-1.2
TREE LEGEND
EXISTING PHASE 1 P.I.P. TREES
CITY-APPROVED STREET TREES
PARKING LOT TREES
PERIMETER TREES
INTERIOR TREES
ACCENT TREES
PALMS
113 10 45
20
3B
11
11
18
17
17
17
POLE LIGHT EXAMPLE
SCREENING NOTE:
ALL GROUND-LEVEL MECHANICAL
EQUIPMENT SHALL BE SCREENED
FROM PUBLIC VIEW BY PLANTING
OR FENCING, TO THE GREATEST
EXTENT POSSIBLE.
Page 54 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰ>E^W
W^ K/EKEd yd
E>Z'
L-1.2
SCALE: 1”=20’
0 10’ 20’ 30’
1. PLANT MATERIAL WAS CHOSEN FOR
ITS COMPATABILITY WITH THE MACRO/
MICROCLIMATIC CONDITIONS OF THE
REGION AND SITE; TOLERANCE OF WIND;
TOLERANCE OF DROUGHT CONDITIONS;
LONGEVITY; SCREENING CAPABILITIES; AND
OVERALL ATTRACTIVENESS.
2. IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE DESIGNED
FOR MAXIMUM WATER EFFICIENCY
AND SHALL INCLUDE AN AUTOMATIC
CONTROLLER, BACKFLOW PREVENTION
DEVICE, AND LOW-GALLONAGE HEADS FOR
TURF AND LARGE GROUND COVER AREAS.
A DRIP-TYPE SYSTEM SHALL BE USED WHERE
APPROPRIATE. TREES SHALL BE IRRIGATED
ON SEPARATE BUBBLER SYSTEMS.
3. PLANT MATERIAL QUANTITIES, NARRATIVE
SPECIFICATIONS, SITE DETAILS, AND
MATERIAL DEFINITIONS WILL BE DETERMINED
AND NOTED ON THE CONSTRUCTION
DRAWINGS.
THE CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN EMBRACES
THE FOLLOWING CURRENT WATER CONSERVATION
TECHNOLOGY AND METHODOLOGIES:
1. UTILIZATION OF STATE OF THE ART
IRRIGATION CONTROLLER(S) ALLOWING
FOR PRECISION INCREMENTAL WATER
SCHEDULING IN ALL HYDROZONES.
2. USE OF DRIP-TYPE AND/OR MICROSPRAY
SYSTEMS ONLY.
3. INTEGRATED PLANT DESIGN. PLANT PALETTES
HAVE BEEN FORMED TO REFLECT PARALLEL
WATERING REQUIREMENTS WITHIN EACH
HYDROZONE GROUP.
4. PLANTS INSTALLED WITH MOISTURE RETENTIVE
SOIL AMENDMENTS, ENABLING STRONG
ROOT AND PLANT GROWTH, WITH THE USE
OF LESS WATER.
5. 3” DEEP MULCHING OF ALL PLANT BASINS
AND PLANTING AREAS, INHIBITING
EVAPORATION.
6. USE OF LOW WATER USE PLANTS.
PLANTING NOTES WATER CONSERVATION NOTES KEYNOTE LEGEND
1 PASEO LANDSCAPING, TREES, SHRUBS, GROUNDCOVERS
2 MEANDERING CONCRETE PASEO WALK
3 6’ TALL WOOD FENCE
4 PEDESTRIAN BENCHES
5 SHADE ARBOR ATTACHED TO LOW WALL
6 TABLE SEATING
7 EHANCED PAVING
8 LOW-MEDIUM HEIGHT PERIMETER PLANTING MASS
9 PRIVATE APARTMENT UNIT PATIOS
10 LONG TERM BIKE PARKING
11 EBIKE PARKING
12 PATHWAY LIGHT BOLLARD
#
5 1 12 4 2 10
6
7
889
PHASE 3
SINGLE FAMILY LOTS
6
5
11
3
4
1
SCREENING NOTE:
ALL GROUND-LEVEL MECHANICAL
EQUIPMENT SHALL BE SCREENED
FROM PUBLIC VIEW BY PLANTING
OR FENCING, TO THE GREATEST
EXTENT POSSIBLE.
12
12
Page 55 of 133
Z,/d dhZ>
W Z^W d/s ^ͳZϰ
AS-2.0
EA
R
T
H
W
O
O
D
L
N
KITTY HAWK CT.CESSNA CT.
PI
P
E
R
L
N
Page 56 of 133
Z,/d dhZ>
W Z^W d/s ^ͳZϰ
^ͳϮ͘ϭ
EA
R
T
H
W
O
O
D
L
N
KITTY HAWK CT.CESSNA CT.
PI
P
E
R
L
N
Page 57 of 133
Z,/d dhZ>
W Z^W d/s ^ͳZϰ
^ͳϮ͘Ϯ
EA
R
T
H
W
O
O
D
L
N
KITTY HAWK CT.CESSNA CT.
PI
P
E
R
L
N
Page 58 of 133
Z,/d dhZ>
W Z^W d/s ^ͳZϰ
^ͳϮ͘ϯ
EA
R
T
H
W
O
O
D
L
N
KITTY HAWK CT.CESSNA CT.
PI
P
E
R
L
N
Page 59 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰh/>/E'
> sd/KE^
ͳϭ͘Ϭ
Page 60 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰh/>/E'&/Z^d
&>KKZW>E
ͳϮ͘Ϭ
Page 61 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰh/>/E'
^ KE&>KKZW>E
ͳϮ͘ϭ
Page 62 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰh/>/E'd,/Z
&>KKZW>E
ͳϮ͘Ϯ
Page 63 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰh/>/E'ZKK&
W>E
ͳϮ͘ϯ
Page 64 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰh/>/E'
> sd/KE^
ͳϯ͘Ϭ
Page 65 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰh/>/E'&/Z^d
&>KKZW>E
ͳϰ͘Ϭ
Page 66 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
ͳϰ͘ϭ
Zͳϰh/>/E'
^ KE&>KKZW>E
Page 67 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰh/>/E'd,/Z
&>KKZW>E
ͳϰ͘Ϯ
Page 68 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰh/>/E'ZKK&
W>E
ͳϰ͘ϯ
Page 69 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
ZͳϰhE/dW>E^
ͳϱ͘Ϭ
Page 70 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰ^/d ^ d/KE
ͳϲ͘Ϭ
Page 71 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰ/s/>'Z/E'
W>E
ͳϭ͘Ϭ
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
'
33
33
6
'
'
6
'
PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN
AVILA RANCH PHASE 3MARKET RATE APARTMENTS
REDUCED DRAWING, NOT TO SCALE
Page 72 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰ/s/>hd/>/dzW>E
ͳϭ͘ϭ
6'
66
66
PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN
AVILA RANCH PHASE 3MARKET RATE APARTMENTS
REDUCED DRAWING, NOT TO SCALE
Page 73 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
^/d W>EZͳϰt/d,
^dd/^d/^
SP-1.2
Page 74 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰ>E^W W>E
E>Z'
>Ͳϭ͘ϯ
11
SCALE: 1”=40’
0 20’ 40’ 60’
EA
R
T
H
W
O
O
D
D
R
.
KEYNOTE LEGEND
1 PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK
2A 6’ TALL DECORATIVE METAL FENCE
2B 42” TALL DECORATIVE METAL FENCE
3 6’ TALL WOOD FENCE
4 APPROVED PARKWAY LANDSCAPING AS PART OF
PHASE 1 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PLANS
5 NOT USED
6 MAILBOX UNITS, SEE ARCH PLANS
7 PROPOSED ILLUMINATED MONUMENT PROJECT SIGN
8 VINE ATTACHED TO TRASH ENCLOSURE WALL
9 COMMUNITY CLUBHOUSE
10 SHORT TERM BIKE PARKING
11 BUS STOP
12 LOW-MEDIUM HEIGHT INTERIOR PLANTING MASS
13 MEDIUM HEIGHT PERIMETER PLANTING MASS
14 PREIMETER SCREENING TREES
15 LONG TERM BIKE PARKING
16 DECORATIVE POLE LIGHTS
#
COMMON RECREATIONAL AMENITYSEE SHEET L-1.4
1
3
14
2A
4
4
4
5
7
8
9
10
6
10
12
12
13
13
14
14
13
6’ TALL WOODINTERIOR.
PROPOSED FENCING TYPES
6’ TALL METALPERIMETER.
TREE LEGEND
EXISTING PHASE 1 P.I.P. TREES
CITY-APPROVED STREET TREES
PARKING LOT TREES
PERIMETER TREES
INTERIOR TREES
ACCENT TREES
PALMS
FUTURE FIRE STATION
COMCOMCOMCOMMONMOOONMMN RERERRCRECRRATIA ONAAAL LLLAMEMMAMEANITIITYYSEESEES SHEETEEE L-L-L 1.41.44
3
14
2AA
5
8
9
10
6
10
12
12
13
13
14
14
13
FUTURE FIREFUTURE FIRESTATION
10 16 POLE LIGHT EXAMPLEBIKE RACK EXAMPLE
2B2A
2B
15
8
SCREENING NOTE:
ALL GROUND-LEVEL MECHANICAL
EQUIPMENT SHALL BE SCREENED
FROM PUBLIC VIEW BY PLANTING
OR FENCING, TO THE GREATEST
EXTENT POSSIBLE.
Page 75 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
ZͳϰKhZdzZ
>E^W W>E
E>Z'
L-1.4SCALE: 1”=20’
0 10’ 20’ 30’
KEYNOTE LEGEND
1 COMMUNITY CLUBHOUSE
2 PATIO WITH EHANCED PAVING
3 TABLE SEATING
4 ELECTRIC BBQ
5 DECORATIVE CONCRETE BAND
6 18” TALL CONCRETE SEAT WALL
7 MOVABLE LAWN CHAIR SEATING
8 PING PONG TABLE
9 CHESS/CHECKERS TABLES
10 HAMMOCKS
11 SYNTHETIC TURF PLAY MOUND WITH
CLIMBING STEPS
12 PLAY EQUIPMENT (AGE 2-5) WITH SAFETY
SURFACING
13 SYNTHETIC TURF
14 LOW-MEDIUM HEIGHT PLANTING MASS
15 VERTICAL PALMS
#
1
3
4
6
10
14
14
14
14
2
2
5
8
9
6
6
6
7
12
11
13
13
10
11
12
9
18
8
Page 76 of 133
Z,/d dhZ>
W Z^W d/s ^ͳZϰ
^ͳϯ͘Ϭ
EA
R
T
H
W
O
O
D
L
N
KITTY HAWK CT.CESSNA CT.
PI
P
E
R
L
N
Page 77 of 133
Z,/d dhZ>
W Z^W d/s ^ͳZϰ
^ͳϯ͘ϭ
EA
R
T
H
W
O
O
D
L
N
KITTY HAWK CT.CESSNA CT.
PI
P
E
R
L
N
Page 78 of 133
Z,/d dhZ>
W Z^W d/s ^ͳZϰ
^ͳϯ͘Ϯ
EA
R
T
H
W
O
O
D
L
N
KITTY HAWK CT.CESSNA CT.
PI
P
E
R
L
N
Page 79 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰh/>/E'
> sd/KE^
ͳϭ͘Ϭ
Page 80 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰh/>/E'
> sd/KE^
ͳϭ͘ϭ
Page 81 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰh/>/E'&/Z^d
&>KKZW>E
ͳϮ͘Ϭ
Page 82 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
ͳϮ͘ϭ
Zͳϰh/>/E'
^ KE&>KKZW>E
Page 83 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
ͳϮ͘Ϯ
Zͳϰh/>/E'd,/Z
&>KKZW>E
Page 84 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
ͳϮ͘ϯ
Zͳϰh/>/E'ZKK&
W>E
Page 85 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
ZͳϰhE/dW>E^
ͳϯ͘Ϭ
Page 86 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰ^/d ^ d/KE
AA4.0
Page 87 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰ/s/>'Z/E'
W>E
ͳϭ͘Ϯ
D
///
///
/////////////////////////////////
CH
E
C
K
IN
T
HIS
R
E
C
T
A
N
G
L
E
T
H
E
F
E
A
T
U
R
E
L
I
N
E
S
A
N
D
P
O
L
CH
E
C
K
CHE
C
K
CO
N
C
-
L
?
K
E
E
P
CH
E
C
K
ANO
T
H
E
R
T
OW, U
N
S
U
RE
I
F
I
S
H
O
U
L
D
K
E
E
P
ANO
T
H
E
R T
O
W
,
UN
S
U
R
E
I
F
I
S
H
O
U
L
D
K
E
E
P
LOO
KS
LIK
E
IT
I
S
T
H
E IN
S
ID
E O
F T
OW
P
LA
NT
E
R
, S
HOU
LD KE
E
PEG
LIN
E
?EG
L
I
N
E
?
DRA
F
T
C
O
N
C
,
C
R
E
A
T
E
F
E
A
T
U
R
E
L
I
N
E
S
,
C
O
N
N
E
C
T
W
I
T
H
B
S
W
S
D
//////
///
///
PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN
AVILA RANCH PHASE 3AFFORDABLE HOUSING
REDUCED DRAWING, NOT TO SCALE
Page 88 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰ/s/>hd/>/dz
W>E
ͳϭ͘ϯ
6'
6'
66
66
PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN
AVILA RANCH PHASE 3AFFORDABLE HOUSING
REDUCED DRAWING, NOT TO SCALE
Page 89 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
WZKWK^ W>Ed
Dd Z/>
>Ͳϭ͘ϱ
PROPOSED PLANT LIST - APARTMENTS
EVERGREEN TREES
ARBUTUS ‘MARINA’ / MARINA STRAWBERRY 24” BOX L LOW-BRANCH, FLOWERING
MAGNOLIA GRAND. ‘MAJESTIC BEAUTY’ / MAGNOLIA 15 GAL M WHITE FLOWERS
OLEA EUROPAEA ‘SWAN HILL’ / FRUITLESS OLIVE 24” BOX L ROUNDED FORM
MELALEUCA QUINQUENERVIA / CAJEPUT TREE 24” BOX L UPRIGHT. WHITE BARK
AFROCARPUS GRACILIOR / FERN PINE 15 GAL M LACY GREEN FOLIAGE
DECIDUOUS TREES
CERCIS OCCIDENTALIS / WESTERN REDBUD 24” BOX L LOW-BRANCH, FLOWERING
COTINUS COGGYGRIA / SMOKEBUSH 24” BOX L SMALL COLOR ACCENT
PYRUS CALLERYANA ‘CHANTICLEER’ / ORNAMENTAL PEAR 15 GAL M WHITE FLOWERS
CASSIA LEPTOPHYLLA / GOLD MEDALLION TREE 24” BOX L YELLOW FLOWERS
LAGERSTROEMIA INDICA CTVS. / CRAPE MYRTLE 24” BOX L FLOWERING
MEDIUM SHRUBS
PITTOSPORUM ‘SILVER SHEEN’ / TAWHIWHI 5 GAL M UPRIGHT GROWTH
LOROPETALUM ‘BURGUNDY’ / CHINESE FRINGE FLOWER 5 GAL L BURGUNDY FOLIAGE
CARPENTERIA CALIFORNICA / BUSH ANENOME 5 GAL L CA. NATIVE, WHITE FLOWERS
LEUCADENDRON ‘SAFARI SUNSET’ / SAFARI CONEBUSH 5 GAL L RED NEW GROWTH
OLEA ‘LITTLE OLLIE’ / DWARF OLIVE 5 GAL L ROUNDED FORM
COPROSMA REPENS ‘PICTURATA’ / MIRROR PLANT 5 GAL L VARIEGATED FOLIAGE
SMALL SHRUBS
NANDINA DOMESTICA ‘GULFSTREAM’ / HEAVENLY BAMBOO 5 GAL L RED/ORANGE NEW GROWTH
POLYGALA FRUTIC. ‘PETITE BUTTERFLIES’/ SWEET PEA SHRUB 5 GAL L PURPLE FLOWERS
ROSA ‘FLOWER CARPET’ / FLOWER CARPET ROSE 5 GAL M FLOWERING
TEUCRIUM X LUCIDRYS / GERMANDER 5 GAL L LAVENDER FLOWERS
WESTRINGIA FRUIT. ‘MORNING LIGHT’ / COAST ROSEMARY 5 GAL L YELLOW/GREEN FOLIAGE
PERENNIALS
ANIGOZANTHOS CTVS. / KANGAROO PAW 1 GAL L FLOWERING
KNIPHOFIA ‘SHINING SCEPTER’ / RED HOT POKER 1 GAL M ORANGE FLOWERS
LAVANDULA SPS. / LAVENDER 1 GAL L PURPLE FLOWERS
LIMONIUM PEREZII / SEA LAVENDER 1 GAL L PURPLE FLOWERS
ACCENTS / SUCCULENTS
AGAVE ATTENUATA / FOXTAIL AGAVE 5 GAL L SUCCULENT
AGAVE ‘BLUE FLAME’ / BLUE FLAME AGAVE 5 GAL L SUCCULENT
ALOE SPECIES / ALOE 1 GAL L SUCCULENT. ORANGE FLOWERS
CORDYLINE ‘RED STAR’ / CABBAGE PALM 15 GAL L RED FOLIAGE, VERTICAL
PHORMIUM CLTVS. / NEW ZEALAND FLAX 5 GAL L STRAP-SHAPED LEAVES
YUCCA ‘COLOR GUARD’ / VARIEGATED ADAM’S NEEDLE 5 GAL L YELLOW/GREEN LEAVES
ORNAMENTAL GRASSES
LOMANDRA LONGIFOLIA ‘BREEZE’ / BLUE OAT GRASS 1 GAL L GREEN FOLIAGE
CAREX DIVULSA / BERKELEY SEDGE 1 GAL L GREEN FOLIAGE
HELICTOTRICHON SEMPERVIRENS / BLUE OAT GRASS 1 GAL L BLUE FOLIAGE
CALAMAGROSTIS ‘KARL FOERSTER’ / FEATHER REED GRASS 1 GAL L VERTICAL TAN STALKS
GROUNDCOVER
ARCTOSTAPHYLOS ‘EMERALD CARPET’ / MANZANITA 1 GAL L WHITE FLOWERS
LANTANA MONTEVIDENSIS / TRAILING LANTANA 1 GAL L WHITE FLOWERS
COPROSMA KIRKII / KIRK’S COPROSMA 1 GAL L GREEN FOLIAGE
ROSMARINUS OFFIC. ‘PROSTRATUS’ / TRAILING ROSEMARY 1 GAL L BLUE FLOWERS
SENECIO MANDRALISCAE / BLUE CHALKSTICKS 1 GAL L BLUE SUCCULENT
*WUCOLS (WATER USE CLASSIFICATIONS OF LANDSCAPE SPECIES) IS A GUIDE TO HELP IDENTIFY IRRIGATION WATER NEEDS
OF PLANT SPECIES. DEVELOPED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA COOPERATIVE EXTENSION, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT
OF WATER RESOURCES, 2000.
FINAL PLANT MATERIAL SECECTION WILL INCLUDE FIRE-RESISTIVE TREE, SHRUB AND GROUNDCOVER SPECIES.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
Y
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
X
S
T
U
V
W
SIZE WUCOLS* NOTES
PROPOSED PLANT PHOTOS
A
G
M
S
B
H
N
T
C
I
O
U
D
J
P
V
E
K
Q
W
F
L
R
X Y
MAWA / ETWU WATER USE - PRELIMINARY CALCULATIONS - OVERALL PROJECT
Page 90 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
K>KZE
Dd Z/>^
yϭ͘Ϭ
Page 91 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
yͳϮ͘Ϭ
WZK: dDKEhD Ed
^/'E' ͳZͳϰнZͳϰ
SCALE: 1”=40’
SIGNAGE AREA:
7.5’ X 2.66’ = 19.95 S.F.
SIGNAGE AREA:
7.5’ X 2.66’ = 19.95 S.F.
COMPOSITE WOOD
APPEARANCE SIDING
SMOOTH STUCCO
FINISH, COLORS TO
MATCH BUILDINGS
7” TALL PVC OR METAL LASER-CUT
RAISED LETTING WITH LED BACKLIGHTS
COMPOSITE WOOD
APPEARANCE SIDING
SMOOTH STUCCO
FINISH, COLORS TO
MATCH BUILDINGS
7” TALL PVC OR METAL LASER-CUT
RAISED LETTING WITH LED BACKLIGHTS
“ANACAPA” ILLUMINATED
SINGLE-SIDED
MONUMENT SIGN
“SENDERO” ILLUMINATED
SINGLE-SIDED
MONUMENT SIGN
ANACAPA
MONUMENT SIGN
SENDERO
MONUMENT
SIGN
EA
R
T
H
W
O
O
D
D
R
.
Page 92 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
yͳϯ͘Ϭ
dZ^, E>K^hZ
Page 93 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰ/< WZ</E'
d/>^
yϰ͘Ϭ
Page 94 of 133
ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
26 April 2023
Rev. 28 June 2023
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
DZ< dͳZd
Dh>d/ͳ&D/>zWZdD Ed^
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
&&KZ> Dh>d/ͳ&D/>z
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Zͳϰ/< WZ</E'
d/>^
yϰ͘ϭ
Page 95 of 133
Page 96 of 133
PHASES 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 - WALL/FENCE HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 6/13/23
OVERALL PLAN L-1
WALL #5 WALL #6
WALL #7
WALL #13
SHEET L-2
SHEET L-6
SHEET L-4
SHEET L-5
SHEET L-3
SHEET L-7
MULTI PURPOSE TRAIL
VENTURE DR.
VENTURE DR.
KITTY HAWK CT.
PHASE 1
PHASE 5
PHASE 6
PHASE 6
PHASE 2 & 3
PHASE 2 & 3
APARTMENTS
APARTMENTS
PHASE 4
MULTI-FAMILY
PHASE 4
MULTI-FAMILY
WRIGHT BROS. WY.
CESSNA CT.
J
E
S
P
E
R
S
E
N
R
D
.
MEMPHIS BELLE WY.
FOXTROT CT.
EA
R
T
H
W
O
O
D
L
N
.
PI
P
E
R
L
N
.
EA
R
H
E
A
R
T
W
Y
.
YE
A
G
E
R
C
T
.
WALL #2 WALL #16
ALL
EE
CESSNA CTCT HW
LL
Page 97 of 133
PHASES 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 - WALL/FENCE HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 6/13/23
WALL #2A L-2
WALL #2
Page 98 of 133
PHASES 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 - WALL/FENCE HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 6/13/23
WALL #13 L-6
DR
A
I
N
A
G
E
C
H
A
N
N
E
L
WALL #13
Fencing Note:
A 6’ tall decorative metal
fence to be used at multi-
family lot, and a 6’ tall solid
wood fence to be used at
single family lots.
Page 99 of 133
Page 100 of 133
August 2023 1 | P a g e
AVILA RANCH ENERGY GUIDELINES
PHASE 3 R-4 MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
The Avila Ranch Energy Guidelines promote sustainability, affordability, and a healthy home
environment for our tenants. The approved Avila Ranch Development P lan contains some
inconsistencies with current codes updates; for instance, the 2019 code update did not adopt a
ZERO NET ENERGY threshold (section 13 pg. 66 of DP). The California Energy Commission (CEC)
did not deem ZERO NET ENERGY to be a cost-effective solution for homebuyers and instead
focused on Green House Gases (GHG). In conjunction with California’s focus, the City has
implemented the Clean Energy Choice P rogram which focuses on ALL ELECTRIC BUILDINGS and a
reduction in GHG’s versus ZERO NET ENERGY . Below is a description of the Avila Ranch ’s
compliance with the intent of the D evelopment Agreement and D evelopment P lan (DP).
DP Section 13
This section references the 2019 Energy codes to be a ZERO NET ENERGY. While not
promulgated, the CEC focused on the reduction of Green House Gases.
o Avila Ranch Multi-Family i s an All -Electric Apartment Complex in compliance with the
City’s Clean Energy Choice Program.
The overall intent of the recommendations, standards and guidelines of the D P is to
improve the energy conservation measures by 10% over the 2016 code requirements or
meet the 2019 code.
o While i t is not possible to compare the same building using the 2016 software to
current 2022 software, current code and City-wide policies are meeting the intent of
the Development Plan and Development Agreement goals and , ultimately, providing
better energy efficiency and reductions in GHG.
DP Section 13 Guidelines
A- Advanced Framing Techniques
o The project design will use a combination of insulated corners and pre-cut framing
packages to reduce waste and minimizing lumber use while still meeting any structural
requirements.
B- Quality Insulation Installation (QII)
o QII will be implemented on th e project, and it will be detailed in the Title 24 energy
calculation and be submitted on the final compliance forms.
Page 101 of 133
August 2023 2 | P a g e
C- Compact Plumbing Strategies
o Unlike most apartment buildings that use a central boiler room, the project will use
highly efficient heat pump water heaters located in each unit. Additionally, the size of
the units are small enough that the total runs from heater to fixture is minimal and will
use less water.
D - Water Use
o All plumbing fixtures are WATER SENSE labeled products and comply with CalGreen
Standards.
E - Rain/Stormwater Management
o Project will comply with approved Post Construction Stormwater R egulations and
utilize best management practices, accordingly.
F - Passive Solar
o The glazing on this project is designed to maximize the windows/doors insulating
properties while allowing the suns energy to provide solar heat gain if desired.
G - City Infrastructure
o Project is complying with the Clean Energy Choice Program .
o On -site and off -site i mprovement p lans have been approved and in many cases
constructed.
H – Electric Landscape Maintenance & Exterior Outlets.
o All irrigation controls are tied to the project’s electric meters.
o Patios and balconies will be equipped with exterior outlets.
I- Bike Storage
o See below for an outline of the on-site bike storage.
J – Electric Appliances
o Energy Star Rated Appliances
o Rheem Hybrid Heat Pump Water Heater
Up to 4x efficient as a std electric tanked heater , meaning, it uses 75% less
energy.
Can save on average up to $490 per year in energy costs per unit.
Most efficient water heater on the market with up to a 4.07 UEF
o High Performance Heat Pumps
Ducted and non ducted heat pumps.
Up to 25 SEER
Up to 12 HSPF
K – Electric Vehicles
o Project complies with updated green building codes which has increased electric
vehicle charging requirements. Project will have EV Ready, EV Capable and EV Level 2
Charging Stations throughout. See below for outline of EV parking program.
DP Section 3 Standard 3.8
Based upon the acoustical analysis (Avila Ranch EIR – Appendix O – Sound Level Assessment for
Avila Ranch, 45dB.com, 2017), existing noise levels at the northwest property line, adjacent to
the Industrial zoned properties, range from 51- 53 dB A, with projected noise levels for the year
2035 expected to be 54 dBA. In compliance with the Development Plan, the R -4 buildings are
Page 102 of 133
August 2023 3 | P a g e
setback eighty-five (85) feet from the northern property line. While there are bedrooms and
balconies on the north side o f the buildings, the existing and anticipated noise levels are below
the noise ordinance threshold levels. It is noteworthy that the noise measurements in the EIR
were taken at the property line. Based upon noise transmission, each time a distance is doubl ed,
intensity is decreased by a factor of four, therefore, each time intensity is cut in half, the sound
level decreases 3 dB and that the doubling of distance reduces the sound level by 6 dB.
Given the existing and anticipated noise levels and the distan ce from the northern property,
there is no apparent need for implementation of noise level reduction methodologies in either
the R -4 or R -4A structures to mitigate exterior noise. Additionally, the project will comply with
the CA Building Code, the CA Green Building Code, and the City’s requirement for interior noise
levels, via utilization of a robust package of building related sound transmission class (STC) rated
materials.
The available surrounding space around the exterior parking lots will be planted with trees which
will also help provide screening from the north and west.
13.2 Onsite Energy Production
The solar requirements in the DP and DA reflect the expectation that the new energy codes in
2019 would have been ZERO NET ENERGY and provide requirements for increased electrical
offsets. As noted, the CEC changed their stance on ZERO NET ENERGY to focus on a reduction
in GHG. Avila Ranch Phase 3 Multi Family is an ALL ELECTRIC COMUNNITY and is intending to
meet the solar demands required in the 2022 code update.
Systems are above code minimums.
System sizes are currently designed and submitted to PGE , we have increased them as much as
possible. A change in size would require us to RESUBMIT to PGE and would kick this project
out of NEM 2.0. Changing from NEM 2.0 to NEM 3.0 would result in higher utility costs for all
occupants in this project.
Development Plans Section 7.07. Energy
(a) Avila Ranch , in coordination with City staff, has committed to comply with the City’s
policies on energy efficiency and has, in each phase, complied with the CLEAN ENERGY
CHOICE PROGRAM, and has made a commitment to be an ALL -ELECTRIC COMMUNITY.
ZERO NET ENERGY was never adopted and , therefore, the language in the DA regarding
100 % electrical offset s is not applicable since this is an all electric design and not mixed
fuels. The project meets the current code requirements, which meets the intent of the DA
and DP. We also wanted to see how much the electrical offset would have been if we did in
fact build a mixed fuel project, see below.
(b) Below you will see both Anacapa and Sendero PV/Electric Offset with ALL ELECTRIC and
MIXED FUEL DESIGNS scenarios.
a. Anacapa All El ectric
i. Solar Size: 146KW
ii. Solar Production: 251,630 KWh
iii. Avg. Production by Unit /Month: 246.7KWh
iv. Avg. Estimated Usage by Unit /Month: 320 KWh
v. Potential Offset by Unit: 77%
Page 103 of 133
August 2023 4 | P a g e
b. Anacapa With Mixed Fuel Design
i. Roughly 60,000 KWh Export Per Y ear, Per B uilding
ii. Total KWh export: 120,000 KWh
iii. Potential Offset with M ixed F uel Design: 210 %
c. Sendero All Electric
i. Solar System Size: 70 KW
ii. Solar Production: 120,644KWH
iii. Avg Production by Unit: 167KWh
iv. Avg Estimated Usage by Unit: 377 kWh
v. Potential offset: 45%
d. Sen dero Mixed Fuel Design
i. Roughly 99,000 kWh of export per year
ii. Current PV Design PV Production: 120,644 kWh
iii. Potential Offset: 121%
Avila Ranch Multi Family Phase 3 is following standards set in section 13 (listed above). While the code
update cycle is now well beyond 2019 , the project will comply with the new updated 2022 energy code.
Avila Ranch has is also implementing the City-wide Clean Energy Choice Program, including the
provision of PV solar, electric vehicle charging, as well as an E -Bike sharing program. ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION ON BUILDING AND SITE DESIGNS
Building Systems
o High Efficiency Heat Pump Water Heaters
o Electric Heat Pumps/Mini Splits
o LED Lighting
ELECTRIC VEHICLE PARKING FEATURES
o ANACAPA SITE
6 stalls provided with Level 2 EVSE charging equipment
22 stalls will be EV capable (Conduit from panel to parking space)
29 stalls will be EV ready (Fully Wired And Ready for use 240/volt plug)
o SENDERO SITE
5 stalls provided with Level 2 EVSE charging equipment
15 stalls will be EV capable (Conduit from panel to parking space)
2 1 stalls will be EV ready (Fully Wired And Ready for use 240/volt plug)
ELECTRIC BIKE AND REGULAR BIKE SHARING PROGRAMS
o Anancapa site has 9 E-Bikes along the front of the community center , while Sendero offers
9 regular bikes provided for community shari ng.
BICYCLE STORAGE AREAS
o ANACAPA
180 long term bike parking spaces available on site
Page 104 of 133
August 2023 5 | P a g e
2 detached bike barns conveniently located around both buildings for easy access
and safe storage.
An additional bike storage room is located at the community center.
o SENDERO
105 long - and short-term parking spots provided in bike barn and internal storage
facility.
Page 105 of 133
Page 106 of 133
Page 107 of 133
Page 108 of 133
Development Plan and Community Design Guidelines Consistency
Highlighted Sections Discussion Items
Avila Ranch Development Plan – Design Framework
ARDP Standard 1.1: Adherence to
AASP Building Orientation and
Setback Standards
The proposed application includes setbacks that are based on
recently updated aspects of the City’s Zoning Regulations as
they apply to R-3 and R-4 zones. Specifically, instead of a
minimum 15-foot front setback, as required in the ARDP, the
application shows a 10-foot front setback, which is consistent
with City zoning requirements. The applicant has included this
modified setback standard as Sheet P-1.8 in the proposed
project plans.
Discussion Item:
ARC recommended approval of the 10-foot front setback,
which is consistent with Citywide zoning requirements in the R-
4 zone. Staff is supportive of applying the less restrictive
setback, in part because it is consistent with setback
requirements elsewhere in the City, but also because of limited
design options that would achieve the City’s housing goals on a
relatively small site. The Avila Ranch Development Agreement,
Section 8.06, recognizes a need for flexibility during project
implementation, and the need to potentially allow for minor
deviations from the Development Plan if the project is
consistent with the intent of the Development Plan.
ARDP Standards 1.2 and 1.6, and
related guidelines: Building Height
and Setback relationship; driveway
orientation.
ARDP Standard 7.3.5: The
relationship between building height
and setbacks
The intent of this standard is to avoid blocking distant views of
the background topography through the relationship of
setbacks to building height. The ARDP builds on the streetscape
and pedestrian orientation standards included in the AASP, and
follows the intent of setback requirements included in the
Municipal Code related to the R-4 zone. As designed, the
project would adhere to the intent of the setback requirements
of the R-4 zone as described in the ARDP (see Attachment E,
ADRP R-4 Development Standards). Many multi-family units
orient away from Earthwood Lane, which addresses potential
impacts related to road noise and aesthetics.
Discussion Item:
The maximum building height in R-4 is 35 feet per Municipal
Code standards, however, the ARDP does not include a
maximum building height. While the ARDP does not include
maximum building heights, it does include standards that limit
the height of buildings in relation to setbacks to ensure
adequate sunlight, preservation of distant views, and building
portions are accommodated. With respect to Standard 7.3.5,
the project as designed includes building heights that are
Page 109 of 133
Highlighted Sections Discussion Items
consistent with the language that building heights be “equal to
or at least 2/3 of the distance of the street centerline to the face
of the building.” Strict compliance with the remainder of the
standard (i.e., that 75% of the units to have one foot of building
height for each 1.5 feet of distance from the street centerline)
would require building heights to be no more than 26 feet,
which is not practical from a design standpoint for multi-family
housing of the density anticipated under the ARDP for this site.
The applicant proposes a building height ranging from
approximately 33 feet to 38 feet, with varying architectural
projections within this range. When considered in the context
of the need to accomplish multiple General Plan goals related
to housing and environmental protection, the proposed design
is consistent with the intent of these requirements related to
setbacks and building heights. The proposed building height of
slightly less than 38-feet is at locations of architectural
projections on vertical building elements, and is proposed to
enhance the design by varying heights of architectural features.
The Avila Ranch Development Agreement, Section 8.06,
recognizes a need for flexibility during project implementation,
and the need to potentially allow for minor deviations from the
Development Plan if the project is consistent with the intent of
the Development Plan. ARC recommended that roof
projections should be allowed to extend above 35 feet, but
should be slightly below the 38 feet originally proposed, and be
more rectilinear in form. In response, the applicant has
prepared exhibits that redesign the projections to be more
rectilinear, and no higher than 37’10”. These are included in
Attachment G on Sheets AC-1.0 and AC-1.1.
ARDP Standards 7.1.1-7.1.4 and 7.4:
Required Architectural Styles,
Architectural character, styles,
facades and treatment
The intent of these standards is to ensure that architectural
styles are designed to be appropriate for each land use within
Avila Ranch, and to ensure consistency with the overall project
vision. Contemporary style is identified in the ARDP as a
permitted architectural type, and has been previously applied
within the R-2 portion of Avila Ranch.
Discussion Item:
ARC recommended approval of the proposed
Contemporary/Mid-Century architectural style, and found it
appropriate in the context of the project’s location at the north
end of the Avila Ranch project area, where it provides a design
transition between the Avila Ranch development and nearby
commercial and industrial buildings to the north and west. The
Page 110 of 133
Highlighted Sections Discussion Items
style is identified in the ARDP as an appropriate architectural
style for Avila Ranch.
ARDP Standard 7.1.10: Buildings
within R-4 zones shall have covered
porches, entries, or walkways that
front onto the street.
The architecture for the R-4 development has integrated
articulation of the building facades to enhance entry points,
change in materials, windows, exterior balcony placement and
varying roof lines. Individual unit porches and entries that front
onto the street would not be feasible with an apartment
complex of this density.
Discussion Item:
ARC recommended potential pavement enhancements within
the parking lots. Colored and stamped concrete at key
locations throughout the parking lots would provide visual cues
for areas of pedestrian crossing and entry/exit features. The
applicant has prepared a revised exhibit that shows stamped
concrete treatment in key locations at driveway entrances and
ADA striping through the parking lot. Applicant’s exhibit is
included on Sheet AC-2.0 in Attachment G.
ARDP Standards 8.1.1-8.1.4:
Landscaping
The proposed project responds to these standards with a
landscape plan that enhances and complements the
architectural design, as shown on several project sheets,
notably Sheets L1.3, L1.4, and L1.5, and the renderings shown
on Sheets AS2.0, AS2.1, AS2.2, AS2.3, AS3.0, AS3.1 and AS3.2.
ARDP Standard 9.2: Signs
The applicant is proposing two (2) monument signs at 5-foot 6-
inches in height and 7-foot 6-inches in width, with a sign area
of 20 square feet. City Zoning Regulations do not allow
monument signs in residential zones, however, an exception
can be approved by Planning Commission.
Discussion Item:
ARC recommended approval of the proposed monument sign
exception and the overall design of the proposed monument
signs to identify each development, provided that the signs are
externally lit. Condition of Approval #5 has been included in the
draft resolution to require the monument sign to be externally
lit, not internally illuminated.
ARDP Standards 9.3.2-9.3.8: Lighting
Pole light locations and styles are shown in the landscape plans
(Attachment B, sheets L-1.1-1.3). Also refer to applicant
revisions prepared in response to ARC comments related to
lighting and landscaping, which are included in Attachment G.
Page 111 of 133
Highlighted Sections Discussion Items
Discussion Item:
ARC discussed the proposed lighting plan, which includes
standard utilitarian LED pole light fixtures throughout the site.
In response to ARC comments, the applicant has revised Exhibit
AC-2.0 to show more detail about different lighting concepts
that are proposed, which are intended to be pedestrian scale
and to minimize offsite glare and impacts to nearby residences.
This exhibit is included in Attachment G of this agenda report.
Condition #9 has been added in the draft resolution to require
a photometric plan with maximum light intensity standards to
ensure appropriate lighting levels at the time of building
permits. Staff recommends approval of the lighting as designed
and conditioned.
ARDP Standard 11.2: Drainage
Design
This standard requires that a landscaped drainage swale be
included along northern property line of Avila Ranch to
facilitate drainage from adjacent property, and to provide
screening to the light industrial properties to the north. A
concrete drainage channel is proposed with current plans.
Through the stormwater management and design review
process, a landscaped drainage swale was determined to be
insufficient to convey the required 100-year storm event
capacity. The alternative solution was to incorporate a “catch
and convey” concrete drainage channel system. A wall/fence
height exception is included with the proposed project which
includes the concrete channel.
Discussion Item:
The ARC recommended approval of the drainage design,
including the fence height exemption in recognition of the need
for safety related to drainage and to minimize the potential for
flooding. Condition #8 has been added which requires
landscape screening along the northern and western property
lines to provide visual appearance at this location along the
edge of parking lots.
Fence Design
A fence height exception is proposed in order to construct
wall/fence combination up to 13-feet in height, where 9 feet is
the standard.
Discussion Item:
As proposed, the additional fence height and overall design of
the retaining wall and fences is supportable because it allows
the for the property to be developed at the density allowed by
the ARDP and to address drainage and safety at this location.
Page 112 of 133
Highlighted Sections Discussion Items
Parking Design
The applicant has designed parking areas to meet the minimum
standards of Municipal Code Section 17.72.050 including
bicycle parking. Compact parking spaces are proposed, which
may be approved by Planning Commission.
Discussion Item:
As allowed by Municipal Code section 17.72.050(F) 2 parking
spaces have been replaced with 10 additional bike parking
storage. Both short- and long-term bicycle storage is designed
to meet the standards of the City’s Active Transportation Plan.
Compact parking spaces are proposed in compliance with the
City’s Engineering Standards, which allow up to 50% compact
spaces with Planning Commission approval.
ARDP Standards 13.1.1 and 13.1.2:
Energy
The ARDP was adopted prior to the 2019 energy conservation
standards, and thus refers to outdated standards. However, as
noted previously, the DA includes performance standards to
exceed citywide requirements as they were in place at the time
of project approval. An analysis of the consistency with the
intent with the DA and the intent of the ARDP is included in the
Planning Commission Agenda Report and in Attachment D.
CDG Chapter 5 – Residential Project Design Guidelines
§ Section 5.2: Subdivision Design and
General Residential Design Principles
This section of the CDG includes several key principles related
to integrating open space into the design, project scale, and
pedestrian orientation. More specifically related to
architectural review, the section also calls for durable and low
maintenance finishes, the use of a variety of materials, building
articulation, and garage orientation. The project is responsive
to these issues, and consistent with the intent of these
principles. Sheet AX1.0 of the project plans (Attachment B)
illustrates a variety of complementary colors and materials that
would be applied to the varied design details shown on project
renderings in the applicant’s package referenced elsewhere in
this agenda report.
§ Section 5.4: Multi-Family and
Clustered Housing Design
The ARDP was previously found to be consistent with the CDG,
and reflects and expands on many of the same principles
articulated in the CDG. Among the principles articulated in this
section of the CDG include:
1. Site planning should consider the character of
surrounding development;
2. Multi-family units should be clustered but separated
Page 113 of 133
Highlighted Sections Discussion Items
into smaller buildings if possible;
3. Pedestrian access should be ensured;
4. Parking and driveways should be safe, visible,
functional, and aesthetically pleasing through
landscaping;
5. Architecture should be compatible with nearby
development, with particular attention given to façade
and roof articulation, scale, and features such as
balconies and porches to the extent possible;
6. Access to dwelling units should be in small clusters
rather than long corridors;
7. Exterior stairways, if needed, should be safe and
protected from weather elements; and
8. Accessory structures should be designed to be integral
to the project, and not separated or otherwise
inconsistent in color or materials used.
The project is responsive to these principles. Sheets SP1.0,
L1.1-L1.4 of the project plans (Attachment B) show how units
are integrated into and have access to pedestrian paseos and
common open space. Also see the previous discussion related
to architecture, setbacks, and project design with regard to
consistency with the ARDP.
Page 114 of 133
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
MARKETͳRATE
MULTIͳFAMILY APARTMENTS
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
AFFORDABLE MULTIͳFAMILY
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
STREET SCENE
ELEVATIONS
ACͳ1.0
EARTHWOOD LANE LOOKING WEST
NOT TO SCALEB
EARTHWOOD LANE LOOKING NORTH
NOT TO SCALEA
AFFORDABLE APARTMENTS BUILDING 1 MARKET RATE APARTMENTS BUILDING A
AFFORDABLE APARTMENTS BUILDING 1
B
A
EA
R
T
H
W
O
O
D
L
N
37
’
-
1
0
”
37
’
-
1
0
”
37
’
-
1
0
”
26 April 2023
Rev. 12 October 2023
POST ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
COMMENTS
Page 115 of 133
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
MARKETͳRATE
MULTIͳFAMILY APARTMENTS
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
AFFORDABLE MULTIͳFAMILY
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
STREET SCENE
ELEVATIONS
ACͳ1.1
EARTHWOOD LANE LOOKING EAST
NOT TO SCALED
EARTHWOOD LANE LOOKING SOUTH
NOT TO SCALEC
MARKET RATE APARTMENTS BUILDING B AFFORDABLE APARTMENTS BUILDING 1
D
C
MARKET RATE APARTMENTS BUILDING B MARKET RATE APARTMENTS BUILDING A
EA
R
T
H
W
O
O
D
L
N
37
’
-
1
0
”
37
’
-
1
0
”
37
’
-
1
0
”
26 April 2023
Rev. 12 October 2023
POST ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
COMMENTS
Page 116 of 133
TRACT 3089 - PHASE 3
ANACAPA
MARKETͳRATE
MULTIͳFAMILY APARTMENTS
4240 EARTHWOOD LANE
4280 EARTHWOOD LANE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
SENDERO
AFFORDABLE MULTIͳFAMILY
DEVELOPMENT
165 CESSNA COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
LIGHTING AND
ENHANCED
WAYFINDING
TREATMENT PLAN
ACͳ2.0
FUTURE FIRE STATION
EA
R
T
H
W
O
O
D
D
R
.
PI
P
E
R
L
N
.
PARK ‘E’ -
NOT A PART
SCALE: 1”=50’
0 25’ 50’ 75’
LIGHTING LEGEND
AREA LIGHTING (16FT TALL)
MEMPHIS BELLE WY.
PHASE 3
SINGLE
FAMILY
LOTS
PHASE 3
SINGLE
FAMILY
LOTS
CESSNA CT.
BUILDING LIGHTING BOLLARD LIGHTING MONUMENT LIGHTING
‘SENDERO‘AFFORDABLE APARTMENTS
‘ANACAPA’MARKET-RATEAPARTMENTS
BUILDING B
BUILDING A
ENHANCED WAYFINDING
PAVEMENT TREATMENT
KEYNOTE LEGEND
ADA STRIPING
COLORED & STAMPED CONCRETE
#
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
POST ARCHITECTURAL &
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
COMMENTS
26 April 2023
Rev. 12 October 2023
Page 117 of 133
Page 118 of 133
Second Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the
Avila Ranch Development Plan
1. Project Title:
Avila Ranch Development Plan
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Callie Taylor, Associate Planner
805-781-7016
4. Project Location:
175 Venture Drive
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
5. Project Applicant and Representative Name and address:
Avila Ranch
WCP Developers, LLC
Dan Garson, Director of Land Development
735 Tank Farm Rd Suite 100, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
6. General Plan Designation:
Special Focus Area SP-4. Per Avila Ranch Development Plan: Low-Density Residential,
Medium-Density Residential, Medium-High Density Residential, High-Density
Residential, Neighborhood Commercial, Open Space, Park
7. Zoning:
Per Avila Ranch Development Plan: R-1 Low-Density Residential, R-2 Medium-Density
Residential, R-3 Medium-High Density Residential, R-4 High-Density Residential, C-N
Page 119 of 133
Neighborhood Commercial, Conservation/Open Space C/OS, PF Public Facility, Airport
Area Specific Plan
8. Description of the Project:
The Avila Ranch Development Plan was approved by the San Luis Obispo City Council
on September 19, 2017. Project entitlements included certification of the Final EIR,
approval of the Avila Ranch Development Plan, Airport Area Specific Plan Amendment,
General Plan Amendment, Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Zone Change, Development
Agreement, and establishment of a Community Facilities District. The project includes
720 residential units, 15,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial, open space, and
parks on a 150-acre area which is to be developed within six (6) phases of development
with a phased final map.
9. Project Entitlements Requested:
Previously approved by the City Council on September 19, 2017. Project implementation,
permits, and construction are in process.
10. Previous Environmental Review :
The Avila Ranch Development Plan (ARDP) and associated Final Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) were approved and certified by the City Council on September 19, 2017,
pursuant to Resolution No. 10832 (2017 Series). The significance of each impact resulting
from implementation of the Project was determined based on impact significance criteria
and applicable CEQA Guidelines for each impact topic. The EIR found that the Project
would result in significant and unavoidable construction-related and long-term impacts to
air quality, construction-related noise, and long-term transportation and traffic impacts.
mitigation measures were adopted to reduce the potential impacts where feasible, and
the City Council adopted CEQA findings and a Statement of Overriding Conditions to
address the identified significant and unavoidable impacts described in the Final EIR.
An Addendum to the Final EIR (“First Addendum”) was prepared in January 2024 to
address a change in timing of the implementation of Mitigation Measure TRANS -11,
which established an obligation for the project to install two separated bicycle bridges on
each side of Buckley Road at Tank Farm Creek to improve access to safe bicycle routing
along Buckley Road. The City Council approved that Addendum on January 23, 2024.
Buildout of the project is currently underway. The Phase 1 Final Map was recorded in
December 2018, and the Phase 1 residential units are currently under construction. On -
and off-site improvements have been constructed as part of Phase 1, including
transportation improvements to mitigate for the increase in traffic generated by the Tract
3096 development.
Page 120 of 133
11. Purpose of the Second Addendum:
Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines allows a lead agency to prepare an
addendum to a Final EIR when only “minor technical changes or additions” are necessary
to address the effects of a minor change to the approved project since the Final EIR was
certified. In addition, the lead agency is required to explain its decision not to prepare a
subsequent EIR pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, which requires
subsequent EIRs when proposed changes would require major revisions to the previous
EIR “due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.”
Subsequent to certification of the ARDP Final EIR, additional information has been
identified which would apply a density bonus to the R-4 portion of the Avila Ranch project,
and would consequently allow for an additional 20 dwelling units to be constructed in that
area. This would raise the total potential buildout of the entire Avila Ranch project are a
from 720 to 740 dwelling units. These additional units were not considered in the original
Final EIR. The purpose of this Addendum is to document th is change to the original
project, and to discuss the potential effects associated with this change , if any. The
Second Addendum concludes that this change would not result in any new or more severe
significant environmental effects not previously analyzed in the Final EIR, nor any new or
modified mitigation measures. The evaluation below discusses the issue areas that are
relevant to this Addendum and covered by the previously approved Final EIR.
12. Addendum Requirements:
Pursuant to Section 21166 of CEQA and Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines,
when a lead agency has adopted an EIR for a project, a subsequent EIR does not need
to be prepared for the project unless the lead agency determines that one or more of the
following conditions are met:
1. Substantial project changes are proposed that will require major revisions of the
previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
2. Substantial changes would occur with respect to the circumstances under which the
project is undertaken that require major revisions to the previous EIR due to the
involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the
severity of previously identified significant effects; or
3. New information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have
been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR
was adopted shows any of the following:
a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
previous EIR; or
Page 121 of 133
b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than
identified in the previous EIR; or
c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in
fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significan t effects
of the project, but the project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation
measures or alternatives; or
d. Mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those
analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant
effects on the environment, but the project proponent declines to adopt the
mitigation measures or alternatives.
Preparation of an Addendum to an EIR is appropriate when none of the conditions
specified in Section 15162 (above) are present and some minor technical changes to the
previously certified EIR are necessary to address minor changes to an approved project.
Because the new information would not result in any new or more severe significant
impacts, an Addendum is the appropriate CEQA document.
NEW INFORMATION AND UPDATED PROJECT ELEMENTS
NEW INFORMATION NOT CONSIDERED IN THE FINAL EIR
As originally approved in 2017, the Avila Ranch Development Plan allowed up to 720 dwelling
units, including 125 units within the R-4 portion of the plan area. The 150-acre plan area was to
be developed in phases, with the design of each project component within the plan area to be
reviewed by the Planning Commission. The R-1 and R-2 portions of the project, for example,
have been previously reviewed by the Planning Commission, were found consistent with the
parameters of the ARDP, and are currently under construction. Now th e 4.05-acre R-4 (multi-
family) portion of the ARDP is undergoing a similar review. In this case, the developer is seeking
an allowable density bonus that would increase the development potential of that area from 125
to 145 units. These additional 20 dwelling units were not considered in the Final EIR for the
Avila Ranch Development Plan in 2017, and are thus the subject of this Addendum.
CHANGED BASELINE CONDITIONS AND UPDATED PROJECT ELEMENTS
This Addendum considers the potential effects of increasing the overall buildout potential of the
ARDP from 720 to 740 units, as a result of applying a density bonus to the R-4 portion of the
plan area that would increase the development potential in that area from 125 to 145 units. The
location of these 20 additional units would not change from the area where R-4 development
had been previously anticipated in the FEIR, nor would any other project elements, including
roadways, backbone infrastructure, or other public improvements identified in the ARDP. This
increase in development potential would not alter the substance or timing of any existing project
conditions or mitigation measures associated with the original project approval. This proposed
Page 122 of 133
action would not alter any portion of the ARDP that was intended to be left in open space or
agriculture under the original 2017 approval.
The proposed increase in development potential from 720 to 740 dwelling units represents a
2.8% overall increase in the total number of residences under the Avila Ranch Development
Plan. However, this increased development would still be subject to the City’s policies regarding
the timing of growth, as well as the constraints of the housing market.
MINOR TECHNICAL CHANGES TO THE FINAL EIR
The proposed project revisions noted above would result in minor changes to the Final EIR and
are therefore evaluated in this Addendum in the analysis that follows.
Environmental Issues for Consideration
The proposed change to the project does not anticipate any new development or ground
disturbance in any area within the ARDP that was not already evaluated in the Final EIR. For
that reason, impacts associated with issues related to ground disturbance will not change from
what was described in the FEIR, including agricultural resources, biological resources, cultural
resources, hazards, and hydrology/water quality. These issues will not be analyzed further in
this Addendum.
Other impacts that are driven by an increase in the number or residents anticipated in the area
are discussed in the paragraphs that follow. These include the issues of air quality and
greenhouse gas emissions, noise, population and housing, public services, transportation and
traffic, and utilities.
Analysis
For all issues, there were no new significant impacts, no increase in the severity of a previously
identified significant impact, nor any new or modified mitigation measures required. The
following analysis of each issue discusses this in more detail, and provides support for this
conclusion.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The FEIR identified the following significant
impacts that could be affected by an increase in population or housing:
AQ-1. Construction-related air quality impacts.
AQ-2. Long-Term air quality impacts.
AQ-4. Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
AQ-5. Inconsistency with Clean Air Plan.
With respect to Impacts AQ-1 and AQ-2, both construction and operational air quality impacts
were found to be significant and unavoidable. A series of programmatic mitigation measures
were proposed to address impacts related to all future development in the area, either in terms
Page 123 of 133
of construction practices or project design. The proposed project modifica tion would increase
buildout within the area by 20 dwelling units, a 2.8% increase in residential development potential
within the ARDP. This minor increase would not change the severity of the identified impacts,
nor any mitigation measures to address those impacts, which would still remain significant and
unavoidable.
In the FEIR, impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions (Impact AQ-4) were found to be
significant but mitigable. The minor increase in housing would not change this conclusion, nor
would it change the programmatic mitigation measures related to reducing emissions, nor any
of the measures related to requiring alternative forms of transportation, such as bicycle and
pedestrian facilities.
With respect to Clean Air Plan consistency (Impact AQ-5), the FEIR determined that impacts are
potentially significant and unavoidable, but mitigation measures related to air quality and transit
were required. These conclusions would still be true with the minor increase in housing
development within the ARDP.
Also refer to the discussion of transportation/traffic for additional information related to that issue,
which tangentially relates to air quality impacts.
Noise. The FEIR identified the following significant impacts that could be affected by an increase
in population or housing:
NO-1. Construction noise impacts.
NO-3. Noise generation from increased traffic.
Construction-related noise (Impact NO-1) was determined to be significant and unavoidable,
although a series of programmatic mitigation measures were required to reduce the severity of
possible impacts, which included limiting construction hours and the use of noise attenuation
measures at construction sites. After all construction is completed, this impact would cease.
The incremental increase in development would not increase the severity of this impact, nor
would it alter any of the required mitigation measures.
Long-term noise impacts (Impact NO-3) are primarily a function of increased traffic, and were
determined to be significant but mitigable to future project residents. No offsite impacts were
identified. Mitigation measures related to individual project design were required to reduce
impacts to project residents. The incremental increase in development would not a lter these
conclusions. Also refer to the discussion of transportation/traffic for additional information
related to that issue, which tangentially relates to noise impacts.
Population and Housing. The FEIR did not identify any significant impacts relat ed to this issue.
Its conclusion that development will occur within the City’s adopted growth rate (Impact PH-1) is
still true for the proposed project modification, because development would still be subject to the
City’s policies related to growth, and subject to market constraints, as it is part of a long-term
phased buildout of the ARDP. As a project that provides housing, other impacts related to
Page 124 of 133
improving jobs-housing balance and the provision of affordable housing were found to be
beneficial. Increased housing opportunities would tend to reinforce these conclusions.
Public Services. The FEIR did not identify any significant impacts related to this issue. Increased
demand for police and fire services (Impacts PS -1 and PS-2) were found to be significant but
mitigable with the payment of required fees to offset potential impacts, and in the case of impacts
to law enforcement, the creation of a Security Plan for the ARDP. The small increase in
development potential would still be subject to the same mitigation requirements. No increase
in severity of impacts or new mitigation measures would be required.
Impacts related to schools and public parks (Impacts PS-3 and PS-4) were found to be less than
significant, and with an incremental increase in population from these 20 additional units,
impacts would remain less than significant.
Transportation and Traffic. The FEIR identified the following significant transportation impacts
that could be affected by an increase in population or housing:
TRANS-1. Short-term construction traffic.
TRANS-2. Transportation deficiencies.
TRANS-3. Turning movement conflicts and intersections and driveways.
TRANS-4. Transportation volume threshold exceedances on certain roads.
TRANS-5. Buckley/227 Operation.
TRANS-6. South Street/Higuera impacts.
TRANS-7. S. Higuera intersections impacts.
TRANS-8. LOVR intersections.
TRANS-10. Pedestrian level of service.
TRANS-11. Bicycle facility demand.
TRANS-12. Transit demand.
TRANS-13. Near-term Buckley/227 Operation.
TRANS-14. Near-term bike and pedestrian facility demand.
TRANS-15. Cumulative impacts to intersections.
Some of these impacts were found to be significant and unavoidable, including those related to
the operation of the intersection of Buckley Road/SR 227 (Impacts TRANS-5 and TRANS-13).
All other impacts were all found to be significant but mitigable, either through the payment of
appropriate fees toward future improvements, or by making some of those roadway
improvements directly as requirements of project approval. These improvements are
programmed into the approved Development Agreement for the project. The impact to
operations on US 101 (Impact TRANS-9) was found to be less than significant.
The incremental increase in development wo uld not change any of the conclusions or required
mitigation measures described in the FEIR. Please refer to the attached October 2023
memorandum prepared by Central Coast Transportation Consulting and reviewed by City staff
for more information about trip generation and related potential effects from these additional 20
units not addressed in the FEIR. That memorandum concludes that no new impacts would
occur, nor would any new or modified mitigation measures be required.
Page 125 of 133
Utilities. The FEIR did not identify any significant impacts related to this issue. Increased
demand for utility infrastructure (Impact UT -2) was found to be significant but mitigable with a
variety of mitigation measures to offset potential impacts, including city review and approval of
infrastructure plans. The small increase in development potential would still be subject to the
same mitigation requirements. No increase in severity of impacts or new mitigation measures
would be required.
Impacts related wastewater collection (Impact UT-1) were found to be less than significant, and
with an incremental increase in population from these 20 additional units, impacts would remain
less than significant.
DETERMINATION
In accordance with Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of San Luis Obispo
has determined that this Addendum to the certified Final EIR is necessary to document changes
or additions that have occurred since the Final EIR was originally certified. The changes
proposed are relatively minor in nature and, as documented above, would not result in any new
significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant effects. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known
and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous
Final EIR was adopted has been identified.
The preparation of a subsequent environmental document is not necessary because:
1. None of the circumstances included in Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines have
occurred which require a subsequent environmental document:
a. The project changes do not result in new or substantially more se vere
environmental impacts.
b. The circumstances under which the project is undertaken will not require major
changes to the IS/MND.
c. The modified project does not require any substantive changes to previously
approved mitigation measures.
2. The changes are consistent with City General Plan goals and polices that promote
provision of additional housing within the City.
The City has reviewed and considered the information contained in this Addendum and finds
that the preparation of subsequent CEQA analysis that would require public circulation is not
necessary. This Addendum does not require circulation because it does not provide significant
new information that changes the adopted Final EIR in a way that deprives the public of a
meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the
project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect. The City shall consider this
Page 126 of 133
Addendum with the certified Final EIR as part of the basis for potential approval of on- and off-
site subdivision improvements for the Avila Ranch Project.
Attachment: Avila Ranch Transportation Analysis, October 19, 2023
Page 127 of 133
Page 128 of 133
(805) 316-0101
895 Napa Avenue, Suite A-6, Morro Bay, CA 93442
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 19, 2023
To: Carol Florence, Oasis Associates, Inc.
From: Joe Fernandez and Summer Merrill, CCTC
Subject: Avila Ranch Density Bonus Units –Transportation Analysis
This memorandum summarizes our transportation analysis for the revised project description under
consideration for Avila Ranch Affordable Housing Apartments.
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
The revised project description would add 20 new low-income housing units, resulting in a total of 60 affordable
housing units, under the State’s Density Bonus Law. Two land uses were considered for the trip generation
estimate, Affordable Housing and Mid-Rise Multi-Family Housing. The latter option produced fewer trips and
is therefore used in this analysis. The trip generation estimate is shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Trip Generation
The proposed units would generate 91 daily trips, seven AM peak hour trips, and eight PM peak hour trips.
CEQA ANALYSIS
This section presents analysis relevant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), notably analysis
of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and impacts in the project’s Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR).
Vehicle Miles Traveled
The City of San Luis Obispo provides guidelines for VMT analysis in the 2020 document Multimodal
Transportation Impact Guidelines. They describe screening criteria for projects consistent with the General Plan
presumed to have a less-than-significant impact based on project type, intensity, or location. Affordable housing
can be pre-screened; generally, developments are assumed to improve the jobs-housing balance and
consequently reduce commutes and vehicle use. The document states that if the project is in an area with low-
VMT, per City guidelines, and shows evidence of low VMT-generating traits then it can be assumed to have a
less than significant impact on VMT in the region. Small projects that generate fewer than 110 daily trips are
assumed to have little to no impact. As seen in Table 1, this project produces 91 peak hour trips and is therefore
would prescreened from further VMT analysis if the previously approved project is the CEQA baseline.
The Avila Ranch project’s FEIR estimates VMT in Table 3.12-10. The addition of 20 affordable housing units
would not result in new impacts to VMT, as affordable housing is generally presumed to be less impactful to
VMT than market-rate housing per OPR guidance. Therefore, if the additional units had been included in the
In Out Total In Out Total
Multi-Family Housing (Mid-Rise)1 20 units 91 2 5 7 5 3 8
Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, 2017; CCTC, 2023.
1. ITE Land Use Code #221, Multi-Family Housing (Mid-Rise). Average rates used.
Project Trip Generation
Land Use Size Daily
AM PM
Page 129 of 133
2 Avila Ranch Density Bonus Units –Transportation Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting October 19, 2023
previous project description the impacts to residential VMT per capita would have been lower than the
approved project.
Mitigation Measures
The FEIR identified numerous CEQA mitigation measures associated with transportation impacts. The tables
below summarize the project impacts, mitigation measures, and how the 20 affordable housing units would
affect both.
Table 2: Project Mitigation Measures
IMPACTS MITIGATION MEASURE SUMMARY EFFECT OF 20 AFFORDABLE UNITS
TRANS-1
The Applicant shall prepare a Construction Transportation Management Plan for
all phases of the proposed Project for review and approval by the City prior to
issuance of grading or building permits to address and manage traffic during
construction.
No effect.
TRANS-2a
The Applicant shall create and submit a Transportation Improvement Phasing
Plan to the City for review and approval, and shall ensure that construction of the
Project follows the sequential phasing order utilized in the TIS for such
improvements. The Plan shall address the timing and general design of all on and
offsite transportation improvements.
No effect.
TRANS-3a
Project roadway and driveway design shall be reviewed and approved by the City
to ensure compliance with City engineering standards and not conflict with
intersection functional areas (e.g., aligning driveways on opposite sides of the
roadway, position driveways as far upstream from intersections as possible).
No effect.
TRANS-3b
The Applicant shall install traffic calming measures (e.g., speed bumps, pedestrian
bulb outs, etc.) to control speed levels along internal roadways of the Project site,
including the extensions of Venture Drive, Horizon Lane, and Jespersen Road as
required by Policy 8.1.3.
No effect.
TRANS-4
The Applicant shall prepare an improvement plan for Horizon Lane, Earthwood
Lane, and Suburban Road, including roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian
improvements. Improvements shall be constructed by the Applicant in
coordination with the phasing plan required by MM TRANS-2a, to ensure the
Applicant constructs all offsite roadway improvements in a timely manner
consistent with Project phasing.
No effect.
TRANS-5
The Applicant shall pay a pro-rata fair share fee to fund the installation of a
roundabout at the Buckley Road/SR 227 intersection as identified in the
SLOCOG SR 227 Operations Study. The City shall collect the fair share fee and
coordinate payment of Project fair share fees to help fund improvements with the
County. Alternatively, the City should consider an amendment of the AASP
impact fee program to establish a new areawide fee to help fund improvements to
the intersection to offset cumulative development impacts. If an amended AASP
fee is created by the City it will suffice as appropriate mitigation for the Project's
participation in these improvements.
Of total 8 PM peak hour trips, 5% will use the
Buckley/227 corridor. This amounts to less than
one peak hour trip using this intersection as a result
of this project. The single added peak hour trip was
conservatively assumed to go south on SR 227,
traveling through the SR 227 intersections with
Buckley Road, Crestmont Drive, and Los Ranchos
Road. The combined County SR 227 road
improvement fee cost for an additional peak hour
trip through these three intersections is $2,508.
Page 130 of 133
3 Avila Ranch Density Bonus Units –Transportation Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting October 19, 2023
IMPACTS MITIGATION MEASURE SUMMARY EFFECT OF 20 AFFORDABLE UNITS
TRANS-6
The Applicant shall design and construct the extension of the northbound right
turn-lane at the South Street/Higuera Street intersection, to provide more storage
capacity.
Completed, no effect.
TRANS-7a
The Applicant shall design and construct a second northbound left-turn lane at
the intersection of South Higuera Street/Prado Road. The Applicant shall also
pay a fair share fee for the widening of Prado Road Creek Bridge west of South
Higuera Street by participating in the citywide transportation impact fee program.
Project payment of TIF constitutes fair share
contribution. Of total 8 PM peak hour trips, 6% will use
South Higuera Street/Prado Road. This amounts to less
than one peak hour trip using this intersection as a result
of this project.
TRANS-7b The Applicant shall design and construct a second southbound left-tum lane at
the Tank Farm Road/South Higuera Street intersection.Completed, no effect.
TRANS-8a
The Project is located within the Los Osos Valley Road interchange Sub Area fee
program, and, as such, the Applicant shall pay the Los Osos Valley Road subarea
fee, for the cost of reconstructing the Los Osos Valley Road/U.S. Highway 101
interchange project and improvements along Los Osos Valley Road. The fee shall
be associated with the number of dwelling units and the square footage of
commercial development in the Project site and shall be paid the time of building
permit issuance.
Project payment of TIF constitutes fair share
contribution.
TRANS-8b
In coordination with the Applicant, the City shall retime the traffic signal at Los
Osos Valley Road/South Higuera Street intersection and installation of signage at
the South Higuera Street/Buckley Road intersection (terminus of the Buckley
Road Extension) to inform drivers of additional access to U.S. Highway 101 at
Ontario Road. The City Public Works Department shall ensure the improvements
and signage meet safety criteria.
Completed, no effect.
TRANS-10a
The Applicant shall design and construct ADA-compliant sidewalks and ADA
ramps on the east side of South Higuera Street to provide continuous paths of
travel from the City limit line to Los Osos Valley Road.
No effect.
TRANS-10b
The Applicant shall design and construct continuous sidewalks along the east
side of South Higuera Street from Vachell Lane to Los Osos Valley Road
including ADA ramps at the Vachell Lane and South Higuera Street intersection,
as illustrated in Figure 3.12-6 in the FEIR.
No effect.
TRANS-10c
The Applicant shall design and construct continuous ADA-compliant sidewalks
and ADA ramps along the south side of Suburban Road from South Higuera
Street to Earthwood Lane. A receiving ramp shall be installed on the north side
of Suburban Road at Earthwood Lane.
No effect.
Page 131 of 133
4 Avila Ranch Density Bonus Units –Transportation Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting October 19, 2023
IMPACTS MITIGATION MEASURE SUMMARY EFFECT OF 20 AFFORDABLE UNITS
TRANS-11
The Applicant shall construct two (2) separated bicycle bridges on each side of
Buckley Road at Tank Farm Creek and provide connections to Buckley Road so
as to provide continuous and safe bicycle routing along Buckley Road. These
sections of roadway and creek crossings are under the jurisdiction of the County
and would need to meet both City and County design standards to the greatest
extent feasible and are subject to approval of the City's Public Works Director.
No effect.
TRANS-12
The Applicant shall coordinate with SLO Transit to ensure that adequate service
would be provide to the two proposed bus stops and Project area. The bus stops
shall be constructed by the Applicant within the respective phase's development
area. To assure adequate service is provided to the two new bus stops onsite, the
Applicant shall pay for and install any physical improvements to Earthwood Lane
and Suburban Road needed to accommodate future service to the site. In
addition, the proposed transit service onsite shall meet standards stated in Policy
3.1.6, Service Standards.
No effect.
TRANS-13
The City shall amend the Citywide TIF to include a fee program for the
installation of a second southbound right-turn lane at the Los Osos Valley
Road/South Higuera Street intersection, or create a separate mitigation fee for
this purpose. The Applicant shall pay its fair share of the improvement costs
through the payment of the Citywide TIF or the ad hoc mitigation fees, as
appropriate, to the City prior to issuance of building permits.
No effect.
TRANS-14
If approved by City Council, the City shall amend the TIF, or some other fee
program, to include a fee program for the installation of a Class I bicycle path
from Buckley Road/South Higuera Street intersection to Los Osos Valley Road/
U.S. Highway 101 southbound ramps intersection, connecting to the Bob Jones
Trail. The Applicant shall pay its fair share fee to fund the improvement through
the adopted fee program. Alternatively, the City may establish a special or ad hoc
mitigation fee program to fund the Project's share of these improvements.
No effect.
TRANS-15a
The Applicant shall pay its fair share fee to the City to fund the widening of the
Prado Road/South Higuera Street intersection to accommodate a dual left-turn
lane, dual thru-lanes, and a right-turn lane on all approaches. Part of this share
may be contained within existing fee programs or ultimately incorporated into the
Citywide TIF program. If amended into the Citywide TIF an impact fee program,
payment of those fees will address project impacts.
Project payment of TIF constitutes fair share
contribution.
TRANS-15b
The Applicant shall pay its fair share mitigation fees to fund improvements to the
intersection of Higuera/Tank Farm Road to provide: 1) the installation of a
"pork chop" island to assist pedestrian crossings, and 2) widening on the south
side of Tank Farm to provide a slip lane for right turning traffic. The City should
consider incorporating this improvement into the AASP Fee program.
Project payment of TIF constitutes fair share
contribution.
TRANS-15c
The City shall review the cross sections for improvements to Tank Farm
Road/Horizon Lane intersection as proposed within AASP to ensure long-term
geometrics meet the objectives of the General Plan. The Applicant shall pay fair
share mitigation fees to fund the installation of an additional northbound right-
tum lane or a roundabout at the Tank Farm Road/Horizon Lane intersection.
The City should consider incorporating this improvement into the AASP fee
program.
No effect.
TRANS-15d
The Applicant shall pay its fair share fees to fund the installation of a traffic signal
or a single-lane roundabout at the Buckley Road/Vachell Lane intersection.
While not required, this work may be implemented as part of the Buckley Road
extension being installed as part of Phase 2 of the Project. The City should
consider incorporating this improvement into the AASP fee program.
The previous fair share fee per the Development
Agreement was $107,250. The previously approved
project generated 554 PM peak hour trips, corresponding
to $193.59 per peak hour trip. The 20 affordable units
will generate eight PM peak hour trips, corresponding to
an additional fee of $1,548.74. The Development
Agreement also included a fair share mitigation fee of
$230,000 for future Buckley Road improvements (at
Davenport). This corresponds to $415.16 per PM peak
hour trip, or $3,321.30 for the eight additional trips
generated by the 20 affordable housing units.
Page 132 of 133
5 Avila Ranch Density Bonus Units –Transportation Analysis
Central Coast Transportation Consulting October 19, 2023
The 20 affordable housing units would not result in additional transportation impacts and would not require
additional mitigation measures.
The transportation analysis in the FEIR was also reviewed to determine if the 20 proposed affordable units
would trigger new impacts beyond those described above. The review found that due to the low trip generation
of the additional units no new impacts to automobile, transit, bicycle, or pedestrian operations would result
from the additional units.
Please let us know if you have any questions.
REFERENCES
City of San Luis Obispo. 2020. Multimodal Transportation Impact Guidelines, 2nd Edition.
______. 2016. Avila Ranch Development Project Final EIR, Section 3.12 Transportation and Traffic.
Murray Duncan Architects, et al. 2023. Architectural Development Review, Avila Ranch Phase 3 Apartments.
Page 133 of 133