HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-07-2021 Agenda Packet - AMENDED (2)
City Council
REVISED AGENDA
Tuesday, September 7, 2021, 6:00 p.m.
Teleconference - Broadcast via Webinar
*Agenda amended to remove Item 3a, Study Session: Public Safety Center Program and Design
Update. This item is continued to a date uncertain.
*With removal of the 5:00 p.m. Study Session, the meeting start time has been amended to 6:00 p.m.
Due to the increasing number of COVID-19 cases in San Luis Obispo County, City Administration has
made the difficult decision to return to a virtual meeting format. There will be no physical location for
the Public to view the meeting. Below are instructions on how to view the meeting remotely and how
to leave public comment. Additionally, members of the City Council are allowed to attend the meeting
via teleconference and to participate in the meeting to the same extent as if they were present.
Using the most rapid means of communication available at this time, members of the public are
encouraged to participate in Council meetings in the following ways:
Remote Viewing - Members of the public who wish to watch the meeting can view:
View the Webinar (recommended for the best viewing quality):
URL: https://slocity-
org.zoom.us/j/89877668917?pwd=VWtVTFFLMWwvM2o1dHpsMjZIYlR3dz09
Telephone Attendee: +1 (669) 900-6833
Webinar ID: 898 7766 8917; Passcode: 865671
Note: The City utilizes Zoom Webinar for City Council Meetings. All attendees will enter
the meeting muted. An Attendee tutorial is available on YouTube; test your audio settings.
Televised live on Charter Cable Channel 20
View a livestream of the meeting on the City’s YouTube channel: http://youtube.slo.city
Public Comment - The City Council will still be accepting public comment. Public comment can be
submitted in the following ways:
Mail or Email Public Comment
Received by 3:00 PM on the day of meeting - Can be submitted via email to
emailcouncil@slocity.org or U.S. Mail to City Clerk at 990 Palm St. San Luis Obispo, CA
93401. All emails will be archived/distributed to councilmembers, however, submissions
after 3:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting may not be archived/distributed until the
following day. Emails will not be read aloud during the meeting.
Verbal Public Comment
In Advance of the Meeting - Call (805) 781-7164; state and spell your name, the agenda
item number you are calling about and leave your comment. The verbal comments must
be limited to 3 minutes. All voicemails will be forwarded to the Council Members and
saved as Agenda Correspondence. Voicemails will not be played during the meeting.
During the meeting - Join the webinar (instructions above). Once public comment for the
item you would like to speak on is called, please raise your virtual hand, your name will be
called, and your microphone will be unmuted. If you have questions, contact the office of
the City Clerk at cityclerk@slocity.org or (805) 781-7100.
Pages
1.CALL TO ORDER - CITY COUNCIL / GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY
AGENCY
Call to order the Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council, also
acting as the San Luis Obispo Groundwater Sustainability Agency.
2.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council Member Jan Marx will lead the Council in the Pledge of Allegiance.
*3.STUDY SESSION
*3.a.PUBLIC SAFETY CENTER PROGRAM AND DESIGN UPDATE
*This item has been removed and continued to a date uncertain.
4.PRESENTATIONS
4.a.CITY MANAGER REPORT
Receive a brief report from City Manager Derek Johnson.
4.b.NATIONAL MUSEUM DAY PROCLAMATION
Mayor Harmon will present a proclamation declaring September 18,
2021 as "National Museum Day."
5.PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Not to exceed 15 minutes. The Council welcomes your input. State law does not
allow the Council to discuss or take action on issues not on the agenda, except
that members of the Council or staff may briefly respond to statements made or
questions posed by persons exercising their public testimony rights (Gov. Code
sec. 54954.2). Staff may be asked to follow up on such items.
6.CONSENT AGENDA
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 Council to pull an item for discussion. Pulled items shall be heard at
the close of the Consent Agenda unless a majority of the Council chooses
another time. The public may comment on any and all items on the Consent
Agenda within the three-minute time limit.
Recommendation:
To approve Consent Calendar Items 6a to 6f.
6.a.WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND
ORDINANCES
Recommendation:
Waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate.
6.b.MINUTES REVIEW - AUGUST 24, 2021 COUNCIL MINUTES 7
Recommendation:
Approve the minutes of the City Council meeting held on August 24,
2021.
6.c.RECEIVE AND FILE THE PUBLIC DRAFT OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
VALLEY GROUNDWATER BASIN GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY PLAN
13
Recommendation:
Acting as the City of San Luis Obispo Groundwater Sustainability
Agency, receive and file the Public Draft of San Luis Obispo Valley
Groundwater Basin Groundwater Sustainability Plan.
6.d.A REQUEST TO INCLUDE THREE PROPERTIES IN THE CITY’S
INVENTORY OF HISTORIC RESOURCES AS MASTER LIST
RESOURCES (198 PASO ROBLES, 201 BUENA VISTA, AND 2424
SUNSET)
17
Recommendation:
As recommended by the Cultural Heritage Committee, adopt a
Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San
Luis Obispo, California, adding three properties to the Master List of
Historic Resources: 198 Paso Robles Drive (Pimentel-Orth House); 201
Buena Vista Avenue (Kenneth and Martha Schwartz House); and 2424
Sunset Drive (Page-Selkirk House).”
6.e.ADVISORY BODY APPOINTMENTS FOR UNSCHEDULED
VACANCIES
129
Recommendation:
Confirm the appointment of Stephanie Carlotti to the Human Relations
Commission (HRC) and Kris Roudebush to the Parks and Recreation
Commission (PRC), as recommended by the respective Advisory Body
Council Liaison Subcommittees.
6.f.AMENDMENT TO MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR CITY-
COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL COLLABORATION
133
Recommendation:
Approve an amendment to the existing Memorandum of Understanding
between the City of San Luis Obispo and the County of San Luis
Obispo, as administrator of the Zone 9 Flood Control and Water
Conservation District (“Zone 9”), in order to provide funding support in
the amount of $60,000 for additional vegetation management activities
in San Luis Obispo Creek Watershed.
7.PUBLIC HEARING AND BUSINESS ITEMS
7.a.PROCESS TO FILL A COUNCIL (MAYOR) VACANCY 157
Recommendation:
Approve a process to fill the vacancy on City Council resulting from the
resignation of Mayor Heidi Harmon, effective at the end of business
September 26, 2021.
7.b.REVIEW OF A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (TRACT 3157) TO CREATE
23 RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON A 4.98-ACRE SITE WITHIN THE LOW-
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) ZONE
173
Recommendation:
Adopt a Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, approving Tentative Tract Map No. 3157
to create twenty-three (23) residential lots in the Low-Density (R-1) Zone
and adopting the Associated Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Plan pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as represented in the staff report
and attachments dated September 7, 2021 (SBDV-0169-2020/EID-
0170-2020, 500 Westmont Drive).”
8.LIAISON REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
Not to exceed 15 minutes. Council Members report on conferences or other City
activities. At this time, any Council Member or the City Manager may ask a
question for clarification, make an announcement, or report briefly on their
activities. In addition, subject to Council Policies and Procedures, they may
provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information, request
staff to report back to the Council at a subsequent meeting concerning any
matter or take action to direct staff to place a matter of business on a future
agenda. (Gov. Code Sec. 54954.2)
9.ADJOURNMENT
The next Regular Meeting of the City Council will be held on September 21,
2021 at 6:00 p.m., via teleconference.
LISTENING ASSISTIVE DEVICES are available for the hearing impaired - see
the City 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) 781-7100 at least
48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications Device for the
Deaf (805) 781-7410.
City Council regular meetings are televised live on Charter Channel 20. Agenda
related writings or documents provided to the City Council are available for
public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California during normal business hours, and on the City’s website
www.slocity.org. Persons with questions concerning any agenda item may call
the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100.
1
Council Minutes
August 24, 2021, 6:00 p.m.
Teleconference - Broadcast via Webinar
Council Members
Present:
Mayor Heidi Harmon, Vice Mayor Erica A. Stewart, Council
Member Carlyn Christianson, Council Member Jan Marx,
Council Member Andy Pease
City Staff Present: Derek Johnson, City Manager, Christine Dietrick, City Attorney,
Teresa Purrington, City Clerk
_____________________________________________________________________
1. CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on
August 24, 2021, at 6:03 p.m. by Mayor Harmon, with all Members present via
teleconference.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Harmon led the Council in the Pledge of Allegiance.
3. PRESENTATIONS
3.a CITY MANAGER REPORT
City Manager Derek Johnson provided a report on upcoming projects and
a status update on COVID-19.
3.b WOMEN'S RIGHT TO VOTE MONTH PROCLAMATION
Mayor Harmon presented a proclamation declaring August as "Women's
Right to Vote Month" to Joe Benson on behalf of the San Luis Obispo
County Bar Association.
3.c INTRODUCTION OF WHITNEY SZENTESI, PUBLIC
COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER
Deputy City Manager Greg Hermann introduced Whitney Szentesi, Public
Communications Manager.
4. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Page 7 of 361
2
Public Comment:
None
--End of Public Comment--
5. CONSENT AGENDA
Motion By Council Member Pease
Second By Council Member Christianson
To approve Consent Calendar Items 5a through 5j, with Council Member Marx
recused on Item 5h.
Ayes (5): Mayor Heidi Harmon, Vice Mayor Stewart, Council Member
Christianson, Council Member Marx, and Council Member Pease
CARRIED (5 to 0)
5.a WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
Waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate.
5.b MINUTES REVIEW - JULY 20, 2021 COUNCIL MINUTES
Approve the minutes of the City Council meeting held on July 20, 2021.
5.c TRANSIT SERVICE AGREEMENT EXTENSION BETWEEN THE CITY
OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND CAL POLY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021-22
Authorize the City Manager to execute a Transit Services Agreement
Extension with Cal Poly for Fiscal Year 2021-22.
5.d A REQUEST TO INCLUDE THE PROPERTY AT 350 HIGH STREET IN
THE CITY’S INVENTORY OF HISTORIC RESOURCES AS A MASTER
LIST RESOURCE AS ‘THE TINY MART’
Adopt Resolution No. 11272 (2021 Series) entitled, “A Resolution of the
City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, adding the property
located at 350 High Street to the Master List of Historic Resources as ‘The
Tiny Mart’ (HIST 0208 2021).”
5.e JOB ORDER CONTRACT FOR STREETS AND SIDEWALK
MAINTENANCE 2021, SPECIFICATION NO. 1000199
1. Approve Special Provisions for Job Order Contract for Streets and
Sidewalk Maintenance 2021 Specification No. 1000199; and,
Page 8 of 361
3
2. Authorize staff to advertise for bids; and,
3. Authorize the City Manager to award the contract to the lowest
responsive bidder.
5.f FLEET SURPLUS DISPOSAL AUTHORIZATION
Authorize the designation and disposal of surplus items in accordance
with the City’s policies and procedures as prescribed in the Financial
Management Manual Sections 405-L, 480-A, and 480-B.
5.g AUTHORIZE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SAN LUIS OBISPO
COASTAL UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR RELEASE OF PUBLIC,
EDUCATION, AND GOVERNMENT ACCESS FUNDS
Authorize the Mayor to execute an Agreement by and between the City of
San Luis Obispo and San Luis Obispo Coastal Unified School District for
release of Public, Education, and Government (PEG) Access Funds
(education portion) for a term ending September 1, 2024.
5.h PARTIAL ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT
3096, SAN LUIS RANCH
Council Member Marx declared a conflict on this item. (Reused due to the
real estate transaction in the area.)
Adopt Resolution No 11273 (2021 Series) entitled, “A Resolution of the
City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, accepting the
completed Public Improvements of Tract 3096; certifying the completed
Private Subdivision Improvements of Tract 3096; releasing the Securities
for the completed portions of Tract 3096; and authorizing the Director of
Public Works to accept the remaining improvements and to release the
remaining Securities once all the improvements are deemed complete.”
5.i AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR MEADOW PARK
PATHWAYS MAINTENANCE PROJECT
1. Award the construction contract for the Meadow Park Pathways
Maintenance Project, Specification Number 1000021 to Souza
Engineering Contracting Inc. in the amount of $375,301; and
2. Approve the budget transfer of $82,584 from the Sewer Utility Cover
Adjustment Account (1000084) to the project account.
Page 9 of 361
4
5.j FY 2021-22 EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE
GRANT APPLICATION
1. Authorize staff to apply for a FY 2021-22 Edward Byrne Memorial
Justice Assistance Grant in the amount of $14,077; and
2. If the grant is awarded, authorize the City Manager or designee to
execute necessary grant documents and direct the appropriation of
monies into the accounts required to administer the grant.
6. PUBLIC HEARING AND BUSINESS ITEMS
6.a INTRODUCE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO
REVISE THE CITY'S PARKING PERMIT PROGRAM
Public Works Director Matt Horn, Parking Program Manager Gaven
Hussey, and Parking Services Supervisor Alexander Fuchs provided an
in-depth staff report and responded to Council questions.
Public Comments:
Mary Mitchell
---End of Public Comment---\
Motion By Council Member Christianson
Second By Council Member Pease
To not adopt the proposed Ordinance Amendment and direct staff to
return with a proposed ordinance amendment to facilitate business
parking districts for a one year period, build into the ordinance a way for
staff to make adjustments to the parking districts, as needed and make no
changes to the ordinance governing residential parking districts at this
time..
Ayes (5): Mayor Heidi Harmon, Vice Mayor Stewart, Council Member
Christianson, Council Member Marx, and Council Member Pease
CARRIED (5 to 0)
6.b MOBILE CRISIS UNIT (MCU) – MENTAL HEALTH CLINICIAN RFP AND
VAN PURCHASE
Council Member Christianson declared a conflict on this item. (Due to
conflict of interest due to her employment.)
Page 10 of 361
5
Fire Chief Keith Aggson provided an in-depth staff report and responded
to Council questions.
Public Comments:
Tim Jouet
---End of Public Comment---
Motion By Council Member Marx
Second By Council Member Pease
1. Authorize the issuance of Request for Proposals (RFP) for contractin g
services of a Mental Health Clinician for the City of San Luis Obispo’s
Pilot Mobile Crisis Unit; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with the
contractor that best responds to the RFP in terms of qualifications,
cost, and approach to program implementation; and
3. Authorize the purchase of the Pilot Mobile Crisis Unit vehicle by adding
the vehicle acquisition to the City’s Capital Improvement Program; and
4. Authorize the Finance Director to approve a Budget Amendment
Request moving approved vehicle purchase funding from the General
Fund to the Capital Outlay Fund.
Ayes (4): Mayor Heidi Harmon, Vice Mayor Stewart, Council Member
Marx, and Council Member Pease
CARRIED (4 to 0)
7. LIAISON REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
Council Member Marx provided an update regarding IWMA.
Council Member Pease indicated she attended the Countywide Mayor's meeting
on behalf of the Mayor.
Vice Mayor Stewart provided an updated on CAPSLO and 40 Prado and asked
that a Proclamation in honor of Family Court week be added to the November
agenda.
8. ADJOURNMENT
Page 11 of 361
6
The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m. The next Regular City Council Meeting
is scheduled for September 7, 2021 at 6:00 p.m., via teleconference.
APPROVED BY COUNCIL: XX/XX/202X
Page 12 of 361
Item 6c
Department: Utilities
Cost Center: 6001
For Agenda of: 9/7/2021
Placement: Consent
Estimated Time: NA
FROM: Aaron Floyd, Utilities Director
Prepared By: Mychal Boerman, Utilities Deputy Director - Water
SUBJECT: RECEIVE AND FILE THE PUBLIC DRAFT OF SAN LUIS OBISPO VALLEY
GROUNDWATER BASIN GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY PLAN
RECOMMENDATION
Acting as the City of San Luis Obispo Groundwater Sustainability Agency, r eceive and
file the Public Draft of San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin Groundwater
Sustainability Plan.
DISCUSSION
Background on the Groundwater Sustainability Plan
To comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), the City and
County of San Luis Obispo are working in collaboration to produce a Groundwater
Sustainability Plan (GSP) to address the long-term sustainable management of the San
Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin (SLO Basin). While not currently dependent on
groundwater, the utilization and proper management of available groundwater resources
is an important role in the further diversification and expansion of the City’s water supply
in the face of the impacts of climate change.
The ten-chapter draft GSP identifies the agencies responsible for sustainable
groundwater management within the SLO Basin, as well as the users and beneficiaries
of groundwater within the basin. The GSP also describes the land-uses and hydrologic
and geologic characteristics of the basin. The GSP identifies specific areas within the
SLO Basin where there is an ongoing imbalance of groundwater pumping and
groundwater recharge. Areas of the SLO Basin within City limits are shown to have stable
groundwater levels while areas outside of City limits, within the Edna Valley, have
continually declining groundwater levels, indicative of an imbalance of groundwater
supply and demand.
In addition to discussing basin characteristics, the GSP also defines groundwater
sustainability metrics for the SLO Basin and the actions that the City and County must
take to ensure the basin is utilized in a sustainable manner. These measures include
ongoing monitoring of groundwater wells and surface water flow, identification of water
supply augmentation projects, and the possible need for pumping reductions.
Page 13 of 361
Item 6c
Groundwater Sustainability Agency and Public Input on GSP
On July 20, 2021, the City Council, meeting as the City of San Luis Obispo Groundwater
Sustainability Agency (GSA), participated in a study session related to the draft GSP.
After receiving input from the City GSA, and reviewing comments provided by the public
during the previous public review periods for previously released chapters of the GSP, a
minimal number of significant changes were made to the GSP in advance of the Public
Draft release.
Most notable among these changes to the GSP was the removal of a project that identified
the sale of City of San Luis Obispo potable water supplies to the Golden State Water
Company. This project was removed due to its inconsistency with City policies prohibiting
the sale of potable water outside of City limits.
Additionally, minor modifications were made to chap ter 6, 7, and 8 to reflect changes to
ensure that groundwater pumping does not cause undesirable results to interconnected
surface water and groundwater, and associated Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems.
Alongside changes related to interconnected surface water and groundwater, climate
change scenarios were added to the plan, outlining the impacts of projected climate
change impacts within the region.
To aid the reader, the Public Draft GSP (Attachment A) is accompanied by a series of
appendices (Attachment B) that have been added to provide supporting documentation
used in the development of the GSP, and information which will be needed for its
implementation. An Executive Summary has also been added to the GSP.
GSP Public Draft Release
The Groundwater Sustainability Commission, comprised of the City, County, and several
stakeholders in the Basin, approved and recommended circulation of the Public Draft of
the GSP for review on August 18, 2021. The Public Draft will be open for comment for
thirty days, followed by staff review of any comments received and implementation of any
needed changes.
The final SLO Basin GSP will be brought before the City GSA for consideration of
adoption on December 7, 2021.
Previous City Council/City GSA Action
The City GSA has met on several occasions to satisfy administrative requirements
defined within the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act and to discuss elements of
the associated Groundwater Sustainability Plan.
On May 16, 2017, the City Council met to form the City of San Luis Obispo Groundwater
Sustainability Agency, one of the two governmental entities (alongside the County of San
Luis Obispo Groundwater Sustainability Agency) required to develop and implement a
GSP that will achieve sustainable management of the SLO Basin. This staff report can
be viewed in full here.
Page 14 of 361
Item 6c
On January 16, 2018, the City Council authorized the City to participate in a Memorandum
of Agreement (MOA) with the County of San Luis Obispo, Golden State Water Company,
Edna Ranch Mutual Water Company, Varian Ranch Mutual Water company, and Ed na
Valley Growers Mutual Water Company. This MOA defines the roles, responsibilities, and
financial contributions of each agency and also results in the formation of the
Groundwater Sustainability Commission (GSC), which acts as an advisory body to the
two GSAs. This staff report can be viewed in full here.
On December 8, 2020, the City GSA received an update on GSP production, including
draft chapters 1-6 of the GSP. This staff report can be viewed in full here.
On July 20, 2021, the City GSA received an update on draft chapters 7-10 of the GSP
and participated in a study session held to inform the City GSA on the contents of the
GSP and to receive input from the GSA on the contents of the plan. This staff report can
be viewed in full here.
Policy Context
The Draft San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Sustainability Plan is in alignment with
City policies related to management of City water supplies , including policies prohibiting
the sale of potable water outside of City limits.
Public Engagement
To encourage inclusive stakeholder outreach, the development of the Groundwater
Sustainability Plan has been guided by the Communication and Engagement Plan. This
plan outlines strategies and opportunities for inclusive stakeholder outreach to all users
and beneficiaries of groundwater within the SLO Basin. In alignment with this plan, the
City and County have hosted a series of in-person and digital stakeholder workshops,
public GSC meetings, and public GSA meetings throughout the development of the plan.
Additionally, slowaterbasin.org was created to act as a hub for GSP information and to
assist stakeholders in accessing information related to GSP development.
CONCURRENCE
The Groundwater Sustainability Commission concurs with the contents of the public draft
of the GSP and has recommended that the City GSA receive and file the public draft.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Receiving an update regarding the GSP does not constitute a “Project” under State CEQA
Guidelines Sec. 15378. No discretionary action will be taken by the City Council/City GSA
until the Groundwater Sustainability Plan is brought forward for consideration and
adoption on December 7, 2021. In addition, preparation and adoption of a Groundwater
Sustainability Plan is statutorily exempt from CEQA, pursuant to Water Code Division 6,
Page 15 of 361
Item 6c
Part 2.74, Chapter 6, Section 10728.6.1 Adoption of the Groundwater Sustainability Plan
would not authorize implementation of specific projects, and any project that would
implement actions taken pursuant to an adopted Groundwater Sustainability Plan will be
subject to CEQA review at the time the project is considered for approval and
implementation.
FISCAL IMPACT
As stated within the GSP, the City is not proposed to bear financial responsibility for the
projects and management actions needed within the Edna Valley subarea. Costs related
to the implementation of the GSP are proposed to be proportionally shared between the
City and other groundwater users within the entirety of the SLO Basin and are estimated
to be $965,000/year for 2022-2026. Costs and cost distribution are projected to be further
defined in the fee study scheduled for the first quarter of 2022.
Once known, all associated costs will be included in future budget proposals for the City’s
Water Enterprise fund.
ALTERNATIVES
The Groundwater Sustainability Agency could elect to have staff return with addition
information related to SGMA or the SLO Basin GSP.
ATTACHMENTS
A – SLO Basin Public Draft GSP
B – SLO Basin Public Draft GSP Appendices
1 California Water Code Section 10728.6 states: “Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public
Resources Code [CEQA] does not apply to the preparation and adoption of plans pursuant to this chapter.
Nothing in this part shall be interpreted as exempting from Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000)
of the Public Resources Code [CEQA] a project that would implement actions taken pursuant to a plan
adopted pursuant to this chapter.”
Page 16 of 361
Item 6d
Department: Community Development
Cost Center: 4003
For Agenda of: 9/7/2021
Placement: Consent
Estimated Time: N/A
FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Walter Oetzell, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: A REQUEST TO INCLUDE THREE PROPERTIES IN THE CITY’S
INVENTORY OF HISTORIC RESOURCES AS MASTER LIST
RESOURCES (198 PASO ROBLES, 201 BUENA VISTA, 2424 SUNSET)
RECOMMENDATION
As recommended by the Cultural Heritage Committee, adopt a Resolution entitled, “A
Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, adding three
properties to the Master List of Historic Resources: 198 Paso Robles Drive (Pimentel-
Orth House); 201 Buena Vista Avenue (Kenneth and Martha Schwartz House); and 2424
Sunset Drive (Page-Selkirk House).”
DISCUSSION
Background
The owners of the properties at 198 Paso Robles Drive, 201 Buena Vista Drive, and 2424
Sunset Drive have each requested that their propert ies be designated as Master List
Resources in the City’s Inventory of Historic Resources and have provided an evaluation
of each of the properties and its eligibility for historic listing (Master List Applications,
Attachment B, hereinafter referred to as “applicant’s Evaluation”),1 prepared by James
Papp, Architectural Historian. None of the properties is within an Historic District, and
none are currently included in the Inventory of Historic Resources.
Previous Council or Advisory Body Action
On July 26, 2021, the Cultural Heritage Committee considered this request and found
that the properties meet eligibility criteria for historical listing to a degree that qualifies
them for designation as Master List Resources and recommended that the City Council
designate the properties as such in the City’s Inventory of Historic Resources.
1 James Papp, PhD. Master List Applications – Peter and Carol Andre House, Pimentel-Orth House,
Kenneth and Martha Schwartz House, and Page-Selkirk House, (March 2021). Three of the properties
discussed in the evaluation have been grouped for consideration together, as designed by the s ame
architect, with similar setting and execution of design. The Peter and Carol Andre House at 1801 Woodland
Drive, also described in the applicant’s evaluation, is not under consideration at this time.
Page 17 of 361
Item 6d
Site and Setting
All three of the subject properties are within hillside residential areas characterized by
single family dwellings. Each is developed with a single -family dwelling designed by
Kenneth Schwartz, a formerly active local architect and public servant, (Papp, pg. 84),
and is described in the applicant’s property evaluation to have been specifically named
by the architect as worthy of designation as a historical resource (Papp pg. 3).
The City’s Historic Context Statement describes the representative forms and styles and
character-defining features of the style described as “Mid-Century Modern” (see excerpt,
Attachment C). The specific architectural characteristics of the building are more fully
discussed in the applicant’s Evaluation document (Attachment B) and summarized in the
Evaluation section of this report, below
Kenneth Schwartz
The Applicant’s Evaluation provides a comprehensive timeline
and description of the life and achievements, professional,
public, and private, of Kenneth Schwartz, local architect, Cal
Poly professor, City Planning Commissioner, Council
Member, and Mayor (Papp, pp. 10-67). Born and raised in Los
Angeles and trained in architecture through the University of
Southern California, he relocated to San Luis Obispo with his
wife and children to take up a teaching position in the
Department of Architectural Engineering at Cal Poly. As more
fully described in the applicant’s Evaluation, he would make
significant contributions to the City throughout his life and
career. Of particular note are his efforts contributing to the
establishment of the City’s first General Plan and the creation
of Mission Plaza (Papp, pg. 62).
Pimentel-Orth House (198 Paso Robles)
Figure 1: Kenneth Schwartz
Figure 2: Pimentel-Orth House
Page 18 of 361
Item 6d
The Applicant’s Evaluation notes that the dwelling on this property, designed in 1962,
“embodies Minimalism and Functionalism in an axial arrangement” that “descends down
the grade” (Papp, pp 84 85). The Evaluation d escribes the placement and orientation of
spaces within the house in greater detail (Papp, pp. 38 -40), and summarizes character
defining details (pg. 84):
V-groove vertical shiplap siding, exhibiting Minimalist subtlety;
Use of Masonite panels above and below windows to emphasize verticality and
define visual exterior planes;
Absence of eaves and horizontality (breaking with Mid-Century Modern
characteristics);
Kitchen island, west-facing corner window, hill-facing dogtooth skylight,
introducing the relaxed spirit of the Third Bay Tradition
Kenneth and Martha Schwartz House (201 Buena Vista)
As described in the Applicant’s Evaluation, the dwelling on this property, designed in
1966, “embodies Minimalism and Functionalism, particularly in their Southern Californian
and Neutraesque variant” (Papp, pp 87). The Evaluation describes the integration of the
building within its hillside context and the arrangement of and hierarchy of spaces within
the house in greater detail (Papp, pp. 40-42), and summarizes character defining details
(pg. 87):
A single level built out over a hillside location;
Continuous rectangular facade with offset wings under a continuous flat roofline;
Expanses of glass and vertical redwood siding rhythmically arranged;
Axial counterpoints between the house and stair tower; A Usonian hallway;
Integration between interior and exterior materials
Expression of structure through overall form rather than exposed structural
elements
Figure 3: Kenneth and Martha Schwartz House
Page 19 of 361
Item 6d
Page-Selkirk House (2424 Sunset)
The dwelling on this property, designed in 1966, is of a “hexagonal hub and spoke design”
that “embodies a combination of Minimalism, Functionalism, and Futurism” (Papp, pp 90).
The Evaluation describes the genesis and execution of the unusual form of the home in
greater detail (Papp, pp. 42 44), and summarizes its character defining details (pg. 90):
Hexagonal hub and spoke design, with pergola-covered “interstitial alcove areas”
(with views from each)
Exposed beams, plank ceilings, round skylight
Brick fireplace and freestanding chimney at the building “hub”
“Neutraesque” plywood siding outside and paneling inside
Large sliding glass doors
Evaluation of Eligibility
To be eligible for listing as a historic resource, a building must exhibit a high level of
historic integrity, be at least 50 years old, and meet one or more of the eligibility criteria
described in § 14.01.070 of the Historic Preservation Ordinance (see Attachment D).
These criteria are supplemented with more specific information about property types,
integrity considerations, and eligibility standards a ssociated with Mid-20th Century
Residential Development provided in the Citywide Historic Context Statement (see
excerpt, Attachment E).
Architectural Criteria
As described in the Applicant’s Evaluation, the dwellings exhibit characteristic features of
Mid-Century Modern architectural styles, consistent with listing criteria for “Style” and for
“Design.” In addition, consistent with listing criteria for “Architect,” it is observed that all of
these buildings were designed by Ken Schwartz, a noted local arc hitect trained at the
University of Southern California, “informed by direct contact with the intellectual cutting
edge of L.A.” (Papp, pg. 25). As more fully described in from page 23 of the Applicant’s
Evaluation (“Ken Schwartz as an Architect”) and from page 60 (“Ken Schwartz as
Politician”), Ken Schwartz, in addition to executing excellent examples of buildings in a
Mid-Century Modern style, also made significant contributions to the City through his work
as a Cal Poly professor, City Planning Commissio ner, City Council Member, Mayor, and
numerous civic functions and activities.
Figure 4: Page-Selkirk House
Page 20 of 361
Item 6d
Pimentel-Orth House (198 Paso Robles)
Minimalism and Functionalism
“Its interior and exterior axial arrangements formed of boxes; complex
use of materials, light, and views; and angular juxtaposition to the natural
landscape express the Corbusian notion of a machine for living” (Papp,
pg. 7)
The property and building retain their character defining features including: the V -groove
vertical siding; Masonite panels; absence of eaves and horizontality; west-facing corner
window, and hill-facing dogtooth skylight.
Kenneth and Martha Schwartz House (201 Buena Vista)
Minimalism and Functionalism
“The most Neutraesque of Schwartz’s work in exterior expression of
Minimalist form, it shows the influence of Mies in use of planes, Wright in
treatment of public and private space, and the Second Bay Tradition
(possibly through Neutra) in its use of materials, but it is distinctively the
work of Schwartz in its kinetic logic.” (Papp, pg. 8)
The building retains its character defining features including: its single level form;
rectangular facade and offset wings; flat roofline; glass expanses; rhythmic vertical
redwood siding; and expression of structure through overall form. Having been designed
by Ken Schwartz himself, a noted local architect as described above, it also satisfies
listing criteria for “Architect.”
Page-Selkirk House (2424 Sunset)
Minimalism, Functionalism, and Futurism
““It’s extraordinary hexagonal hub design leading to three wings of
different uses is a Functionalist breakthrough within a Minimalist
aesthetic clearly influenced by Futurism.” (Papp, pg. 8)
The building retains its character defining features including: its hexagonal hub and spoke
design, alcoves, exposed beams, plank ceilings, round skylight; “hub” brick fireplace and
freestanding chimney; plywood siding outside and paneling; and large sliding glass doors.
Criteria Related to History
Based on the significance of Kenneth Schwartz and his contributions to the local
community, the Applicant’s Evaluation also concludes that the Kenneth and Martha
Schwartz House (201 Buena Vista) qualifies for Master List designation by its association
with persons significant to the community as a public leader (History – Person):
Page 21 of 361
Item 6d
“… as the home of Ken Schwartz, a person significant in San Luis
Obispo’s past who made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of
our history as the most influential exponent of c ity planning in over six
decades of service as mayor, Planning Commission chair, and many
other roles. (pg. 8)
Criteria Related to Integrity
To demonstrate satisfaction of listing criteria for “Integrity,” the Applicant’s Evaluation
notes for each building the retention of the character-defining elements of the building,
and the minor nature of modifications, which were made by the original architect:
“The integrity of the Pimentel-Orth House in location, design, setting,
materials, workmanship, feeling, and association obtains after subtle
pushouts to augment interior spaces, executed by the architect within the
period of significance… (pg. 39)
“The 1962 design [of the Kenneth and Martha Schwartz House] has been
changed only in details, such as the reconfiguration of dining room
fenestration, the staining of exterior redwood to match the interior
paneling, and the addition of pergolas and a garage door. These changes
were brought about by Schwartz as refinements in aesthetic theory and
practice.” (pg. 39)
The 1966 design [of the Page-Selkirk House] has not been changed,
except for the barely noticeable addition of an elevator from garage level
at the front of the deck. Indeed, a pergola that had been removed was
rebuilt by Shirley Selkirk after Bruce Selkirk’s death in deference to the
original design “to please Ken.” (pg. 91)
Historic Resource Designation
According to the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance, those resources that maintain
their original or attained historic and architectural character and contribute either by
themselves or in conjunction with other structures to the unique or historic cha racter of a
neighborhood, district, or to the City as a whole may be designated as a “Contributing List
Resource”. The most unique and important resources and properties in terms of age,
architectural or historical significance, rarity, or association with important persons or
events in the City’s past may be designated as “Master List Resources” (HPO §
14.01.050).
The applicant’s Evaluation (Attachment B) notes that the subject properties are among a
select few identified by the architect himself to be among the most worthy of his works for
historical listing (pg. 3), and provides (from pg. 23) an in -depth description of the
architect’s Modernist influences, training, and design approach.
Page 22 of 361
Item 6d
Along with individual discussion of the characteristics of each of the subject properties, it
provides summary conclusions of eligibility under these criteria (pg. 6), noting each as
“one of the most unique and important properties” in terms of architectural significance,
“representing the work of a master,” and as havin g retained integrity of location, design,
setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association with the period of significance.
Conclusion
The information submitted by the applicants, documenting the architectural character and
integrity of each of the houses on these properties, and their attribution to Ken Schwartz,
provides a basis for the Committee to find that these properties satisfy Architectural
Criteria for Style, Design, and Architect (§ 14.01.070 (A), and Criteria for Integrity (§§
14.01.070 (C) (1) & (2)), and that their architectural significance qualifies them for
designation as a Master List Historic Resource. Furthermore, the association of the
Kenneth and Martha Schwartz House with Kenneth Schwartz, “who made a significant
contribution to the broad pattern of our history as the most influential exponent of city
planning in over six decades of service as mayor, Planning Commission chair, and many
other roles (Papp, pg. 8) satisfies listing criteria for History (§14.01.070 (B)).
Policy Context
The recommended action on this item is supported by historical preservation policies set
out in § 3.0 of the Conservation and Open Space Element of the City’s General Plan, and
with procedures and standards for listing of historic resources set out in the City’ s Historic
Preservation Ordinance §§ 14.01.060 & 14.01.070.
Public Engagement
Public notice of this hearing has been provided to owners and occupants of property near
the subject site, and published in a widely circulated local newspaper, and hearing
agendas for this meeting have been posted at City Hall, consistent with adopted
notification procedures. Public notice was also previously provided for the Cultural
Heritage Committee meeting of July 26, 2021.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). Inclusion of the subject properties on the City’s Inventory of Historic
Resources does not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment,
and so is covered by the general rule described in § 15061 (b) (3) of the CEQA Guidelines.
FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: No Budget Year: 2021
Funding Identified: No
Page 23 of 361
Item 6d
Fiscal Analysis:
Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
General Fund N/A $ $ $
State
Federal
Fees
Other:
Total $ $0 $ $0
Adding the properties to the Master List of Historic Resources will have no fiscal impacts.
Historic designation of property itself has no bearing on City fiscal resources. As a Master
List Resource, however, each property would be eligible for historic preservation
incentives under the “Mills Act.” Any subsequent request to enter into a “Mills Act
Contract” with the City would be considered under separate application. A separate fiscal
analysis would be reviewed by the City Council should any of the properties be proposed
for participation in the Mills Act Program.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Designate one or more of the properties as a Contributing List Resource in the
City’s Inventory of Historic Resources. This action would be based on finding that
one or more of the properties is not considered to be sufficiently unique or important,
or found to satisfy Evaluation Criteria for listing to a degree warranting designation as
a Master List Resource.
2. Decline to include any of the properties in the Inventory of Historic Resources.
This action would be based on finding that none of the properties satisfy Evaluation
Criteria for historical listing.
3. Continue consideration of the request for additional information or discussion.
ATTACHMENTS
A – Draft Resolution adding three properties to Master List of Historic Resources
B – Applicant’s Evaluation of Eligibility for Listing (James Papp, PhD)
C – Mid-Century Modern (Context Statement, Excerpt)
D – Evaluation Criteria (Historic Preservation Ordinance)
E – Mid-20th Century Residential Development (Context Statement, Excerpt)
Page 24 of 361
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2021 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, ADDING THREE PROPERTIES TO THE
MASTER LIST OF HISTORIC RESOURCES: “THE PIMENTEL-ORTH
HOUSE” AT 198 PASO ROBLES DRIVE (HIST-0083-2021); “THE
KENNETH AND MARTHA SCHWARTZ HOUSE” AT 201 BUENA VISTA
AVENUE (HIST-0084-2021); AND “THE PAGE-SELKIRK HOUSE” AT
2424 SUNSET DRIVE (HIST-0085-2021)
WHEREAS, the applicants, Pamela Orth, Lorraine Schwartz, and Shirley Selkirk,
filed applications on February 4, 2021, for review of the inclusion of the properties at 198
Paso Robles Drive, 201 Buena Vista Avenue, and 2424 Sunset Drive in the City’s Master
List of Historic Resources; and
WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San
Luis Obispo, California on July 26, 2021 and recommended that the City Council add the
properties at 198 Paso Robles Drive, 201 Buena Vista Avenue, and 2424 Sunset Drive
to the Master List of Historic Resources; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public
hearing on September 7, 2021 for the purpose of considering the requests to add the
properties to the Inventory of Historic Resources; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the
manner required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the record
of the Cultural Heritage Committee hearing and recommendation, testimony of the
applicant and interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendation presented by
staff.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the
following findings:
a) The subject properties are eligible for inclusion in the City’s Inventory of
Historic Resources as Master List Resources because the dwelling on each
of the properties satisfies at least one of the evaluation criteria for historic
resource listing described in § 14.01.070 of the City’s Historic Preservation
Ordinance (HPO), exhibits a high degree of historic integrity, and is more
than 50 years old.
Page 25 of 361
Resolution No. _____ (2021 Series) Page 2
R ______
b) The dwelling on each of the subject properties satisfies Architectural Criteria
for Style and Design (§§ 14.01.070 (A) (1) & (2)), and Criteria for Integrity
(§§ 14.01.070 (C) (1) & (2)) to a degree that qualifies each property for
designation as a Master List Historic Resource. The dwellings convey a
purity of style, exhibit attractiveness through detailing and craftsmanship,
and exhibit many characteristic features of Mid-Century Modern style of the
middle 20th Century in a manner that expresses interesting details with
notable attractiveness. They were designed by Kenneth Schwarz, a notable
local architect. The buildings occupy their original sites and retain their
characteristic design and materials. The property at 201 Buena Vista
Avenue (Kenneth and Marth Schwartz House) is also associated with
Kenneth Schwartz, significant to the community as a public leader, an
influential exponent of city planning in over six decades of service as Mayor,
City Council Member, Planning Commissioner, and many other roles
(Historic Criteria for “History-Person” (§14.01.070 (B) (2)).
SECTION 2. Environmental Determination. The project is categorically exempt
from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Inclusion of the
subject properties on the City’s Inventory of Historic Resources does not have the
potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, and so is covered by the
general rule described in § 15061 (b) (3) of the CEQA Guidelines.
Page 26 of 361
Resolution No. _____ (2021 Series) Page 3
R ______
SECTION 3. Action. The City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo does hereby
include the properties at 198 Paso Robles Drive, 201 Buena Vista Avenue, and 2424
Sunset Drive in the Master List of Historic Resources as “The Pimentel-Orth House,”
“Kenneth and Martha Schwartz House,” and Page-Selkirk House.”
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by
_______________________, and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this ____ day of ___________ 2021.
________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the
City of San Luis Obispo, California, on ______________________.
________________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
Page 27 of 361
Page 28 of 361
1
Master List Applications | Peter and Carol Andre House • 1801 Woodland Drive
Pimentel-Orth House • 198 Paso Robles Drive
Kenneth and Martha Schwartz House • 201 Buena Vista Avenue
Page-Selkirk House • 2424 Sunset Drive
Page 29 of 361
2
CONTENTS
Introduction
Summary Conclusions of Eligibility Under Master List Criteria
Mount Carmel Lutheran Church
Peter and Carol Andre House
Pimentel-Orth House
Ken and Martha Schwartz House
Page-Selkirk House
Timeline
Ken Schwartz as Architect
Influences: Calvin Straub and Garrett Eckbo; Gregory Ain and Richard Neutra; Mies
van der Rohe; Buckminster Fuller
Design Approach
Exterior Environment
Use
Resources
Materials
Construction
Interior Space
Interior-Exterior Interplay
Ken Schwartz as Politician
Peter and Carol Andre House
Period of Significance
Eligibility Under Master List Criteria: Significance
Eligibility Under Master List Criteria: Integrity
Pimentel-Orth House
Period of Significance
Eligibility Under Master List Criteria: Significance
Eligibility Under Master List Criteria: Integrity
Kenneth and Martha Schwartz House
Period of Significance
Eligibility Under Master List Criteria: Significance
Eligibility Under Master List Criteria: Integrity
Page-Selkirk House
Period of Significance
Eligibility Under Master List Criteria: Significance
Eligibility Under Master List Criteria: Integrity
Page 30 of 361
3
INTRODUCTION
A few weeks before his death in the fall of 2019, I talked with Ken Schwartz about the
buildings he had designed that he thought worthy of San Luis Obispo’s Master List of
Historic Resources. By then he was living at The Villages, so our conversation was
removed from the dramatic spaces and views of the Modernist aerie he built on Buena
Vista Avenue to house his own family; host his students, colleagues, and friends; and
demonstrate his ideals of aesthetics and comfort. Yet all five buildings he named were
clear in his mind’s eye, despite the fact that he had designed them fifty to sixty years
earlier. Also clear in his mind’s eye—and still irritating him—was what had been
altered subsequently without his permission. Ken Schwartz was a perfectionist.
The five he named were Mount Carmel Lutheran Church, designed with George
Hasslein (1957–58), and the Andre House (1959), Pimentel-Orth House (1962),
Schwartz House (1962), and Page-Selkirk House (1966). Mount Carmel is a
masterpiece lost under subsequent changes, but the four houses, each loved by their
occupants, retain their integrity. They embody movements that changed the world’s
way of understanding buildings and the Californian way of seeing, experiencing, and
extending into the natural environment. Far from the resources and cultural context of
big cities, they altered not just the fabric but the mindset of a small town.
The Context for Ken Schwartz’s Architecture
Wright’s Master List Kundert Clinic
Morgan’s unlisted Zegar Playhouse
San Luis Obispo has a history of attracting rare works of major twentieth-century
architects, built to small-town scale: Julia Morgan’s Federal Revival Monday Club, in
Spanish materials and a Minimal Traditional aesthetic, and her American Craftsman
Zegar Playhouse (the latter a favorite of Ken’s); Charles Lee’s Streamline Moderne–
Page 31 of 361
4
Greek Revival Fremont Theater; Frank Lloyd Wright’s Kundert Clinic, his only Usonian
office building; Richard Neutra’s National Youth Administration Center at Cal Poly;
Warren Leopold’s cantilevered Santa Rosa Medical Clinic and tent-like 661 Oakridge.
Our town has also attracted work inspired by the major architects, like the 1907 Leroy
and Isabel Anderson House at 1318 Mill Street, modeled by an unknown designer on
Wright’s turn-of-the-century work in the Midwest, and the 1914 Barneberg House,
designed by Charles McKenzie after Wright’s residential work from the late 1910s.
Lee’s Master List Fremont Theater
Leopold’s unlisted 661 Oakridge
Nestled in the confluence of the Chorro, Osos, and Edna Valleys, San Luis Obispo is
characterized by a high degree of eclectic architectural in a compact space of
geographic variety. As Palm Springs is distinguished for Mid-Century Modern and
Santa Barbara for Spanish Colonial, Mission, and Moorish Revival, we are distinguished
by Eclecticism, which may be why we have long been certain that San Luis Obispo has
a special architectural character but have struggled to define it.
The Schwartzes grew up in South Central LA’s vast gridiron of streets: endless rows of
knockoff California Bungalows and Spanish duplexes giving a dose of local flavor to
the Eastern, Western, and Midwestern immigrants who were their parents. Ken and
Martha soaked up San Luis eclectic in weekend drives through town to enjoy the
views, see what was building, and take Lorraine and Jan to Fosters Freeze.1 In one
drive, among houses in “the Mediterranean style popular in the late twenties and early
thirties,” they found two hillside sites for sale, and Ken would add our regional version
of the International Style—what Neutra called California Moderne—to the mix.
1. Kenneth Schwartz, Memoir, “Monterey Heights” (unpublished, no date).
Page 32 of 361
5
From 1959 to 1967 Ken Schwartz served on and from 1962 to 1967 chaired San Luis
Obispo’s Planning Commission. Once he was elected mayor in 1969—the same year
he became program leader for City and Regional Planning at Cal Poly—he was too
engrossed in the greater urban form for further essays in domestic or religious
architecture. He was made a fellow of the American Institute of Architects in 1979, his
tenth and final year as mayor, for public service in urban planning and education.
Leopold’s unlisted Santa Rosa Medical Clinic
What San Luis Obispo gained in planning it lost in the minimal, functional, and logical
structures Schwartz excelled in. The buildings he named are five chapters in his
engagement with exterior environment, interior use, and their interplay through
materials and structure, based on profound yet very human thought about twentieth
century architecture. Schwartz’s buildings converse with those of Neutra, Gregory Ain,
Mies van der Rohe, Buckminster Fuller, Charles and Henry Greene, William Becket,
Jack Ouzounian, and even Richard Upjohn, after whose 1851 tweak to a thirteenth-
century Cambridgeshire chapel St. Stephen’s Episcopal Church was designed.
As an assemblage, Schwartz’s buildings serve as a less counterculture but no less
innovative counterpoint to Warren Leopold. Landmarking the work of Schwartz,
Leopold, and other Modernists will allow us to not only preserve and honor but finally
understand the impact of the movement on the eclectic fabric of San Luis Obispo.
James Papp, PhD, Historicities, LLC; Historian and Architectural Historian, Secretary of
the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards; 27 March 2020
Representing Jim Andre, Pam Orth, Lorraine and Jan Schwartz, and Shirley Selkirk
Page 33 of 361
6
SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS OF ELIGIBILITY UNDER MASTER LIST CRITERIA
Mount Carmel Lutheran Church • 1957–58 Ken Schwartz and George Hasslein
designed Mount Carmel Lutheran Church as a multipurpose worship and social hall
with an adjunct classroom and office building. The assemblage at 1701 Fredericks
Street was a stunning embodiment of Minimalism and Functionalism in the California
context, the hall’s verticality referring to ancient ecclesiastical forms in a way that was
not overtly religious, the utilitarian building contrasting strongly with horizontality, and
wood cladding outside and in embodying a unifying California Modernist aesthetic.
Mount Carmel in 1958 and today with attached false-front annex expansion at right.
Extensive alteration to the adjunct building, however, particularly as viewed from the
street, and both buildings’ exterior resurfacing with stucco have caused sufficient loss
in integrity of design, materials, workmanship, and association that neither the
assemblage nor its parts are able to communicate their architectural significance and
hence qualify for the Master List of Historic Resources. While other clients worked with
Schwartz on changes, thus extending the period of significance of their buildings to
the architect’s death in 2019, Mount Carmel’s period of significance ends with its
extensive alterations before the 1970s.
Page 34 of 361
7
Peter and Carol Andre House • 1959 The Andre House qualifies for the Master
List as “one of the most unique and important historic properties and resources in
terms of … architectural … significance” as an embodiment of Mid-Century Modern
architecture, representing the work of a master. Its sophisticated treatment of
volumes, axes, sightlines, and materials lends the architectural drama characteristic of
Mid-Century Modernism in contrast with the preceding (and following) Minimalism
and Functionalism of the International Style. Its borrowing from Greene and Greene
also connects the Mid-Century Modern to the California Bungalow.
The Andre House
has virtually
perfect integrity
of location,
design, setting,
materials,
workmanship,
feeling, and
association from
its original
construction and
occupation by the
Andres, not only
outside but inside.
Pimentel-Orth House • 1961 • 1983 The
Pimentel-Orth House qualifies for the Master List
as “one of the most unique and important historic
properties and resources in terms of …
architectural … significance” as an embodiment of
Minimalism and Functionalism and representing
the work of a master. Its interior and exterior axial
arrangements formed of boxes; complex use of
materials, light, and views; and angular
juxtaposition to the natural landscape express the
Corbusian notion of a machine for living.
The integrity of the Pimentel-Orth House in location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling, and association obtains after subtle pushouts to augment
interior spaces, executed by the architect within the period of significance.
Page 35 of 361
8
Ken and Martha Schwartz House • 1962 The
Schwartz House qualifies for the Master List as “one of
the most unique and important historic properties and
resources in terms of … architectural … significance”
as an embodiment of California Minimalism and
Functionalism, representing the work of a master. The
most Neutraesque of Schwartz’s work in exterior
expression of Minimalist form, it shows the influence
of Mies in use of planes, Wright in treatment of public
and private space, and the Second Bay Tradition
(possibly through Neutra) in its use of materials, but it
is distinctively the work of Schwartz in its kinetic logic.
The house also qualifies for the Master
List as “one of the most unique and
important historic properties and
resources in terms of … historical
significance” as the home of Ken
Schwartz, a person significant in San Luis
Obispo’s past who made a significant
contribution to the broad pattern of our
history as the most influential exponent of
city planning in over six decades of
service as mayor, Planning Commission
chair, and many other roles.
Council Member Myron Graham and
Mayor Ken Schwartz, 1973
The Schwartz House has integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship,
feeling, and association within the 1962–2019 period of significance, both inside and
out. The refinements since its completion in 1962 were executed by the architect.
Page-Selkirk House • 1966 The Page-Selkirk House qualifies for the Master List
as “one of the most unique and important historic properties and resources in terms of
… architectural … significance” as an embodiment of California Minimalism and
Functionalism, representing the work of a master. It’s extraordinary hexagonal hub
design leading to three wings of different uses is a Functionalist breakthrough within a
Minimalist aesthetic clearly influenced by Futurism.
Page 36 of 361
9
The integrity of the Page Selkirk House in location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling, and association is near perfect from its original construction,
with only the addition of an exterior elevator from street level.
Page 37 of 361
10
TIMELINE
1925 Feb. 23 Kenneth Emery Schwartz is born at California Lutheran Hospital in Los
Angeles to Emery Schwartz of Minnesota and Florence Carlson
Schwartz of Kansas. Emery is a cabinetmaker for a contractor; the family
lives in a Neoclassic cottage at 3315 Baldwin St, Lincoln Heights.2
After his parents separate, Ken and his mother live with his paternal
grandparents (Schwartz, op. cit.) and, in an area of Craftsman
bungalows in Highland Park, his maternal aunt and uncle (1930 US
Census).
1935–37 After Florence and Ken move out on their own, Florence, a working
single mother, places Ken in the Lark Ellen Home for Boys, an new
Neoclassic edifice in Sawtelle, West Los Angeles (Schwartz, op. cit.,
“Life on Walton Avenue” and personal account, “Lark Ellen Home for
Boys,” sawtelle1897to1950.wordpress.com).
Lark Ellen Home for Boys, main facade, 1924. UCLA Special Collections.
1937–43 About to marry William Childs, a self-employed paint contractor from
Oklahoma, Ken’s mother brings Ken home from Lark Ellen (Schwartz,
Memoir, “New Family Life”). The family lives in houses and apartments
in Spanish Eclectic, Neoclassical, and Craftsman areas in Vermont and
South Central, including Walton Avenue, 1013 W. 65th Street (1940 US
2. California State Board of Health Standard Certificate of Birth
Page 38 of 361
11
Census), and 68th near Hoover Street (op. cit., “Life on Walton
Avenue,” “My Most Unexpected Christmas Gift”).
The Lark Ellen boys growing produce, 1924; Schwartz received eight cents for his first
crop of string beans and five for his Swiss chard. UCLA Special Collections.
1943 Schwartz graduates from Fremont High, where he’s taken architectural
drafting classes; is rejected in the physical for the naval officers cadet
program; and starts classes at Cal Tech (op. cit., “Years of Anguish”).
Struggling, he withdraws when his draft notice comes but fails the
Army physical. Ambitious to become an aeronautical engineer, he gets
a drafting job at Douglas Aircraft in El Segundo.
AD-1; Schwartz did the drawing for the arresting hook, bottom right. Too late for WWII,
it stayed in service through the early 1970s. Naval National Museum of Navy Aviation.
Page 39 of 361
12
1944 Disillusioned with aeronautical engineering, decides to pursue a career
in architecture and enrolls at the College of Arts and Architecture at
the University of Southern California (ibid.).
1945 After VJ Day, receives another draft notice and is declared fit for
service (ibid., op. cit., “You’re in the Army Now,” “My Army Days Are
Numbered”). While in basic training at Sheppard Field near Wichita
Falls, TX, becomes seriously ill and is diagnosed with double
pneumonia.
1946 Mar. 24 Marries Martha “Marty” Riggio, his high school sweetheart (op. cit.,
“Marriage”).
Ken receives a medical discharge from the Army as a result of
bronchiectasis, which qualifies him for the GI Bill and allows him to
complete his education (op. cit., “My Army Days Are Ending”).
Returns to USC when practicing architects are being hired part-time to
teach an influx of students (op. cit., “Homecoming”). Modernist
Gregory Ain becomes an influence and introduces him to Richard
Neutra, who with wife Dione will later become a family friend.
Gregory Ain, 1950, with his Museum of Modern Art exhibition house, New York. Homer
Page, MoMA Archives. Dione and Richard Neutra, 1950. Julius Shulman.
1947 Schwartz is diagnosed with tuberculosis and spends the next nineteen
months in the Birmingham VA Hospital, Van Nuys (op. cit.,
“Birmingham D-7-North,” “Birmingham—The Final Ten Months”).
Page 40 of 361
13
The Department of Architectural Engineering, offering a BS, is founded
at California Polytechnic.3 It graduates its first students in 1952.
1950 Simon Eisner, recent co-author with Arthur Gallion of The Urban
Pattern: City Planning and Design, teaches Schwartz in a two-year city
planning sequence and becomes a mentor and lifelong friend, later
influencing Schwartz to move into city and regional planning and seek
elective office (op. cit., “Return to USC”).
1952 May Schwartz receives his Bachelor of Architecture degree from USC.
Turning down an offer from William Periera, Schwartz works at the
small firm of Allison and Rible (op. cit., “Allison and Rible, Architects”).
Neutra’s 1939 National Youth Authority Center, which housed the Department of
Architectural Engineering when Ken Schwartz arrived. Cal Poly Special Collections.
Sep. On the recommendation of USC dean of Architecture Arthur Gallion,
George Hasslein, chair of California Polytechnic State College’s
Department of Architectural Engineering, offers Schwartz a teaching
position (ibid., op. cit., “A Grand New Adventure”). Ken, Martha, four-
year-old daughter Lorraine and two-year-old son Jan arrive on a mid-
October Saturday and look unsuccessfully for housing in San Luis
Sunday. Ken begins teaching Monday. An influx of servicemen at Camp
San Luis during the Korean War has caused a housing shortage. Martha
finds the family a small house at 202 Santa Fe Avenue in Shell Beach.
1952–54 Engineering Dean and Shell Beach neighbor Harold Hayes spearheads
FHA cooperative project: sixty-two houses for Cal Poly faculty and
3. Robert Chomitz, “Development of Cal Poly’s School of Architecture and
Environmental Design,” researchgate.net, 2018
Page 41 of 361
14
school district and state highway employees on tract subdivided by
Goldtree brothers from their vineyard in 1893 (op. cit., “Goldtree,”
“The Long Wait,” “The Wait Continues,” “2553 Santa Clara”). R. L.
Graves, Hasslein, and Schwartz design a $10,950, 1,090-square-foot,
three-bedroom house; variety is provided by different roof pitches, wall
surfaces, and colors. Schwartz professors Ain, Eisner, and Garrett
Eckbo have collaborated on FHA projects in the LA area.
Goldtree Vineyard Tract map circa 1893. History Center of San Luis Obispo County.
Cal Poly Department of Architectural Engineering, early 1950s: R. L. Graves, George
Hasslein, Ken Schwartz, Hans Mager, and Rudy Poly.
Page 42 of 361
15
1954 Newly created Port San Luis Harbor Commission turns to Architectural
Engineering for a development plan, allowing the department to
provide a “place-based, real-world” project for its students, the first of
a number solicited by cash-strapped local jurisdictions for which Ken
becomes faculty advisor (op. cit., “Our First Planning Project”).
1954 spring The Schwartzes move to 2553 Santa Clara Street in the Goldtree Tract.
1954–56 Ken serves as chair of Goldtree Homeowners Association.
1955 Mar. 28 Receives his license from the California Architects Board, after
presenting, uniquely, his teaching work rather than practice for the oral
section (op. cit., “Licensure”; California Architects Board, cab.ca.gov).
1956 Represents the Goldtree Homeowners Association to the Planning
Commission and City Council against rezoning of the land to the south
of Sinsheimer Elementary for industrial use for the General Fireproofing
metal furniture and Shadowline women’s underwear factories
(Schwartz, op. cit., “Goldtree Homeowners Association”). At Planning
Commission hearing Schwartz discovers the city has no long-range plan
for land use. With the support of arguments provided by the Chamber
of Commerce and city staff, the commission votes 7–0 and the council
5–0 against the Goldtree Homeowners. Cal Poly president Julian
McPhee writes to the City Council to support the rezoning, putting him
and Schwartz on opposite sides. General Fireproofing and Shadowline
pull out of their factories not long after they’re built.
Page 43 of 361
16
1956–71 Schwartz serves on the board of Natoma Council Campfire Girls,
leading the girls, with the assistance of Cal Poly architecture students,
in building projects at their campsite and in San Luis Obispo. This is an
activity he shares with Martha, who leads the Sinsheimer troop.
1955–83 Ken joins and from 1957 leads his department’s annual LA field trips
(op. cit., “Los Angeles Field Trips”).
1957 summer A two-week MIT course in city and regional planning introduces
Schwartz to the importance of city landmarks and the impact of
circulation systems on land values; it’s also his first trip to the East
Coast (op. cit., “Cross-Country to MIT”).
1957–58 Hasslein and Schwartz design Mount Carmel Lutheran Church on
Fredericks Street; it features in Arts and Architecture for simple design
and low building cost (op. cit., “Mount Carmel Lutheran Church”).
1959 Schwartz designs house for Peter Andre, local lawyer, political figure,
and scion of a ranching and business family (op. cit., “Peter Andre”).
1959–67 San Luis Obispo Mayor Fred Waters offers Schwartz a seat on the
Planning Commission because he’s been protesting rezoning: “If you
don't like things the way they are, you have to put up or shut up” (op.
cit., “A Life-Changing Appointment”). Schwartz serves for eight years.
1960 The Schwartz family takes
a road trip to the annual
Ken Schwartz as Planning Commission
chair, 1967, Telegram-Tribune
conference of the Association of
Collegiate Schools of Architecture at
Syracuse University, visiting Wright’s
Guggenheim Museum; Jefferson’s
Monticello; Skidmore, Owings, and
Merrill’s Air Force Chapel; and the
Chester Stem and Co. hardwood
plywood mill (op. cit., “A Family Foray to
the East Coast”). Taking a wrong turn,
they visit Canada, Ken’s first trip abroad.
1960–62 Serves as president of
Natoma Council Campfire
Girls.
Page 44 of 361
17
1961 At Schwartz’s urging, the
Planning Commission
produces the city’s first
general plan.
1961–1962 The Schwartzes and Santa
Clara Street neighbors
the Pimentels buy
adjoining losts, sold
together, on Buena Vista
Avenue and Paso Robles
Drive (op. cit., “Monterey
Heights”). Ken designs
houses for both sites. The
Pimentels build first, the
Schwartzes a year later.
1962–67 Ken Schwartz chairs the
Planning Commission.
1963 Joins Cal Poly group of George Hasslein and three professors from the
Agricultural School on a USAID survey mission to Argentina.
1964–65 Cal Poly adds a five-year Bachelor of Architecture degree to its BS in
Architectural Engineering, breaking the University of California’s Master
Plan monopoly on professional graduate programs.
1966 Schwartz designs Shirley and Hubert Page a house, 2424 Sunset Drive.
Takes summer class on planning and transportation at Renssaeler.
1967 Mayor Clell Whelchel proposes Schwartz, “regarded in planning circles
as perhaps the most outstanding commissioner in this county,” for third
four-year term on the Planning Commission.4 On a 3-2 vote the council
refuses; “area contractors have been perhaps the most vociferous
critics of Planning Commission decisions in recent years”; he has also
become linked with a two-decade long proposal to close Monterey
between Broad and Chorro for a plaza, opposed by merchants.
4. Gilbert Moore, “Plan Board Chief Ousted by Council,” San Luis Obispo County
Telegram-Tribune, 6 July 1967.
Page 45 of 361
18
Presents seismic- and radiation-resistant library–bomb shelter design at
the Pentagon, the result of a Penn State–DOD summer course
1967–69 Serves as founding chair of Obispo Beautiful Association
1968 Three Poly architecture students make Mission Plaza proposals their
senior project; a partial grant from the City Council is conditioned on
one proposal showing Monterey Street remaining open. Five minutes
into their closure proposal, Mayor Whelchel gavels the packed hearing
over and demands the city’s money back. Former city attorney George
Andre, Peter’s brother, offers to represent the students pro bono,
Whelchel storms out, and Schwartz decides to run for mayor.
Schwartz, George Andre, former council members R. L. Graves and
Margaret McNeill, and Peter Andre law partner Richard Woods
circulate a referendum petition to close Monterey Street for a plaza. It
qualifies, and San Luis voters approve it by a 2-1 margin.
The Department of
Architecture and
Architectural Engineering
becomes the School of
Architecture, with a new
city and regional planning
major added to
architecture and
architectural engineering.
1968–78 Schwartz serves as
director of curriculum for
School of Architecture.
1969–1979 Runs for mayor against
Clell Whelchel and serves
five two-year terms.
Ken Schwartz pictured in the Telegram-
Tribune during his first mayoral run.
1969 Nov. 17 Despite hesitating politically “to stir up a city apparently pleased with
its present status,” Schwartz sends a seven-page letter to the chair of
the Planning Commission on the nature of cities and San Luis Obispo’s
place in the larger economy, its resources, and how to develop its trade
and service, recreational and tourist, and industrial sectors. The letter,
Page 46 of 361
19
known as the Schwartz White Paper, circulates among advisory bodies,
civic groups, and citizens. Schwartz identifies “our magnificent scenic
resource” as “the single greatest resource that we have for building
future economic prosperity” and calls for turning San Luis from a “half-
way stop” into a tourist “mecca.” He focuses on making commerce
recreational and recreation commercial; creating an attractive city that’s
easy to get around; and attracting low-bulk, high-value industry.
Mayor Schwartz lays bricks for the plaza
Schwartz administration’s contributions
include quality-of-life, city beautification,
and user-friendliness: undergrounding
gasoline storage tanks and downtown
utility wires; sign regulation; waterways
planning; an Architectural Review
Commission; Historical and Architectural
Conservation Element; simple guides to
zoning, permitting, and architectural
review; tree-planting program; senior
center; consolidated city-county library,
Meadow Park; the Jack House and
Garden; bicycle lanes; a public
transportation system; cultural offerings
like the Mozart Festival and Mission Plaza
programing; and quashing Alex
Madonna’s Cerro San Luis development.
Initiates a capital improvements program
and water and land use, circulation,
economic, and growth policies.
1969–76 Serves as program leader for City and Regional Planning at Cal Poly.
1971 The School of Architecture becomes the School of Architecture and
Environmental Design (SAED).
Mission Plaza is completed.
Schwartz becomes a founding member of the California Council of
Architectural Education.
Receives Distinguished Teacher Award, Cal Poly
1972 California Polytechnic State College becomes California Polytechnic
State University.
Page 47 of 361
20
1972–80 Schwartz becomes a founding member of the Liaison Committee on
Architecture, Landscape Architecture, and City and Regional Planning
for the California Articulation Conference.
1974 Former client Peter Andre approaches Schwartz with the idea of the
city accepting the Jack House and Garden from the Jack heirs as a city
park and historic house; Schwartz convinces the council to agree.
Martha becomes the driving force behind the Jack House docents; the
Parks Department Volunteer of the Year Award will be named for her.
Mission Plaza wins the Landscape Award of the American Association
of Nurserymen, presented to Mayor Schwartz by First Lady Pat Nixon at
the White House.
1977–1998 Schwartz serves as a member of the Jack House Committee.
1978 Serves as president of the California Council of Architectural Education.
1979 Is made a Fellow of the American Institute of Architects for public
service in urban planning and education.
1979–83 Serves as SAED associate dean. Photograph by Dale Flynn.
1981–82 Serves on county grand
jury, whose report on
water resources leads to
complete revision of
master plan.
1983–84 Serves as interim dean.
1983–85 Develops SAED master
plan.
1985–96 Serves on Citizens
Advisory Committee,
California Men’s Colony.
1986 On sabbatical visits 44 US
and Canadian architecture
schools to examine
curriculum activities in
housing.
Page 48 of 361
21
1987–88 Architectural consultant for founding of Escuela de Agricultura de la
Region Tropical Humeda (EARTH) in Costa Rica
1988 Retires from SAED. The program has grown from 95 students when he
arrived to 1,700, the largest in the US. Having his Cal Poly salary
reduced by 10 percent for the 10 years he served as mayor reduces his
pension by a year.
1989 Chairs Citizens Advisory Committee, California Men’s Colony.
1989–97 Serves on County Planning Commission.
1991–92 Chairs County Planning Commission
1992 Member, San Luis Obispo Downtown Physical Design Concept Group
Ken’s annotations of a staff evaluation by Whitney McIlvaine and Glen Matteson of the
Conceptual Physical Plan for the City’s Center or Downtown Concept Plan. The note
before the exclamation “NUTS!!” reads, “The idea of DT plan was to develop new—
not necessarily ‘approved’—city policies.” Schwartz may have been, as Gilbert Moore
wrote for the Telegram-Tribune in 1969, “a master at drawing out people, giving
everyone his say, achieving consensus,” but he didn’t do it by pulling punches.
1992–94 Chairs Jack House Committee.
1995–96 Chairs County Planning Commission.
1996 Distinguished Leadership Award for an Elected Official, American
Planning Association
Page 49 of 361
22
1997 Receives National Planning Award for Distinguished Leadership as an
Elected Official, American Planning Association.
1998–2004 Appointed to an unexpired term and then elected to a full term on the
San Luis Obispo City Council.
2004 Death of Martha Schwartz after fifty-eight years of marriage.
2015 Dedication of Mission plaza plaque to Ken Schwartz.
2016 Schwartz serves on the Creative Vision Team, Downtown Concept Plan.
2019 Oct. 19 Death of Ken Schwartz in San Luis Obispo.
The stair tower entry to the Schwartz House: an inventive adaptation to the site that
subtly but dramatically communicated a sense of arrival to generations of activists and
politicians.
Page 50 of 361
23
KEN SCHWARTZ AS ARCHITECT
Schwartz’s father was a cabinetmaker for a contractor; his stepfather, a housepainter.
Yet, recounting his early years in his Memoir, he never recounts buildings, in contrast
to his vivid, detailed, and often loving descriptions of machines: the yellow streetcars
of the Los Angeles Railway; his piano teacher’s black Star; his new bike, whose coaster
brakes had thirty-two disks; and his first car: “a black 1933 Dodge coupe with a rumble
seat and two spare tires, one set in each of the two front fenders. A chrome ram
adorned the radiator cap. … The wheels were spoked and cream-colored. The
radiator and headlights were chrome-plated, as were the bumpers. The tires still had
tread on them” (Schwartz, op. cit., “Hey, Ken, Do You Have $75?”).
Schwartz records no Aha! moment, as the teenage Gregory Ain experienced looking
at a building by Schindler, that sparks his enthusiasm for the art of architecture. Even
in architecture school, when Ain organizes Schwartz’s’s first field trip, the description
brings out the sense of hunt—the students’ cars snaking through LA behind Ain’s big
Packard roadster—but doesn’t detail the quarry further than “projects that
represented his idea of ‘good architecture’” (“Homecoming”). Schwartz describes
Ain’s car but none of the buildings. Ending up at Neutra’s house, it’s the occasion,
“sitting on the living room floor of this much photographed house,” listening to Ain
and Neutra discuss design issues and the future of architecture, that stirs his blood.
That’s an understandable reaction to the aura of greatness for the stepson of a house
painter from slightly seedy South Central. But something lies deeper. Describing his
life as a latch-key kid on the 4200 block of Walton Avenue before he went to Lark
Ellen, Schwartz writes, “Lots of eyes watched the street” (“Walton Avenue”).
Jane Jacobs
This echo of Jane Jacobs’
famous phrase “there must
be eyes upon the street”
hints that people were at
the center not just of
Schwartz’s city planning
but his architecture.
Obsessed by machines (he
originally wanted to
become an aeronautical
engineer), he was to
fashion machines-à–
habiter, Le Corbusier’s
“machines for living.”
Le Corbusier
Page 51 of 361
24
In car-crossed California, the machine for living at the end of one’s journey was often
an afterthought: a production-line building that made sometimes an aesthetic nod to
local culture but rarely an accommodation to the external environment and internal
use. The nineteenth-century adobes and ranch houses had done so, but they were
quickly swamped by new houses for immigrants that were not much different from
their East Coast and Midwest counterparts. The California Bungalow—invented by the
St. Louis–raised, Boston-trained, Pasadena-transplanted Charles and Henry Greene—
was the first modern architectural reaction to the regional environment, one that was
picked up and modified by the First Bay Tradition to the north.
Hills, views, and verdant nature inspired the First Bay Tradition. Climate and flats
inspired the California Bungalow. Climate and hills, Schindler and Neutra and the Case
Study houses in LA. Architecture was less shelter or show than the means of creating a
porous membrane between inside and outside. In colder, rainier Northern California,
this often consisted of bringing woodiness—particularly redwoodiness—inside. In
Southern California, there were patios and plate glass for osmosis.
George Wyman’s Bradbury Building.
The buildings Schwartz finally explores in
his Memoir, those he visits over and over
again to show students on field trips, are
the 1890 Bradbury Building in downtown
LA, whose “space soared upward for five
stories to an enormous skylight that filled
the court with natural light” (“Los
Angeles Field Trip”); William Becket’s
hillside Jay and Lynne Livingston House
in Beverly Hills, with a floor to ceiling
glass-backed shower that had a view of
Catalina (“Field Trip Interlude: Buttons
and Bows”); the 1907 Blacker House by
Greene and Greene, its huge canopied
outdoor spaces and glazed indoor
spaces creating a medial environment
(“A Field Trip Interlude: The Blacker
House, a Greene and Greene
Gem”); Jack Ouzounian’s hillside house in Westwood, which emphasized its site’s
steepness with exterior stair flights, precipitous driveway, and overhangs (“A Field Trip
Interlude: A. C. Martin versus Jack Ouzounian”); and Richard Neutra’s Silver Lake
house and studio, which gradually revealed its secrets to Schwartz in the use of glass,
Page 52 of 361
25
mirror, water, light, street level privacy, upper level environmental openness, and
transitional interior stairs (“A Field Trip Interlude: Richard and Dione Neutra”).
With each of these buildings, however, Schwartz focuses on the occupants and their
use of the space: from the sweatshop garment workers in the Bradbury Building to
Lynne Becket showering behind a picture window; Margery Hill, owner of the Blacker,
exploring the cellars for forgotten fixtures; fear of driving up and down Ouzounian’s
precipitous drive and the architect answering questions about a one-man shop on his
sheltered rear lawn; and Dione Neutra singing and playing cello to her guests.
Greene and Greene’s 1907 Blacker House, Pasadena. Greene and Greene Archives,
Gamble House, USC.
Ken Schwartz’s work was informed by direct contact with the intellectual cutting edge
of LA: Richard Neutra’s Modernism and Gregory Ain’s small-house Modernism from
his USC training, kept fresh by the long friendship with Neutra and constant
reexamination of the best of old and new buildings in the LA field trips. Schwartz’s
aesthetic also flourished in the space between Southern California Modernism,
dominated by Neutra and Schindler, who had absorbed (as had Le Corbusier) the
Functionalism and Minimalism of Adolf Loos during their training in Vienna, and
Northern California Modernism, which grew out of the more environmentally organic
Second and ultimately First Bay Traditions. His aesthetic flourished within the small-
town constraints of San Luis, where not just economy but modesty were
considerations. And it migrated to the difficult hillside sites that have come to define
twentieth-century California architecture: at the confluence of seeing and being seen.
Influences: Calvin Straub and Garrett Eckbo Ken Schwartz had a number of
teachers he admired at USC, practicing architects who were in the classroom part time
as the university grappled with booming postwar enrollment. These included Calvin
Straub, who specialized in houses for individual clients and was “a proponent of wood
post and beam modular structural systems and liked using large expanses of glass to
invite outside gardens and vistas into the interiors” (“Return to USC”). This outlook
Page 53 of 361
26
oclearly influenced Schwartz’s 1959
Andre House and those beyond.
He was also taught by the distinguished
LA landscape architect Garrett Eckbo,
author of Landscape for Living (1950). “I
shall always remember Eckbo discussing
the advantages a landscape architect has
over an architect in designing spaces.
Because the landscape architect deals
with outdoor spaces, he/she has
advantages of the seasonal change
Right: Central post and beam module of
the Andre House opening through a
glass wall to the back patio
Left: Eckboesque garden at the stair top,
Schwartz House
of plant materials; the movement of
shade and shadows; the infinite palette
of colors and shapes of flowers, leaves,
and bark; the play of wind and rain and
snow; the use of scents—the perfumes of
blossoms; and the attraction a well
designed garden can have for birds and
animals, creating not only visual delight
but dynamic movement in and through
the garden” (“One More Year and
Graduation”). Eckbo even challenged his
students to design a garden without
plants.
Influences: Gregory Ain and Richard Neutra Schwartz’s chief faculty influences
were Ain in architecture and Simon Eisner in urban planning. Ain, a generation older
than his students, had dropped out of USC because of its Beaux Arts emphasis and
worked instead for Neutra and Schindler, who had relocated to Los Angeles to
become two of America’s leading exponents of the International Style. Ain “was one
of those practicing architects/part-time teachers who had a profound impact on my
early understanding of the architectural design process” (“Return to USC”).
Page 54 of 361
27
Ain followed Neutra in emphasis on the
affordable house: as a one-off (the 1939
Margaret and Harry Hay House in the
Hollywood Hills for the father of the
LGBT movement and his mother), a small
assemblage (the 1937 4-unit Dunsmuir
Flats in Mid-Wilshire and 1947 10-unit
Avenel Cooperative in Silver Lake), and
part of a larger project (the 1948 52-unit
Mar Vista Tract, in collaboration with
Eckbo). Ain worked with Eckbo and
Eisner on a proposed 280-unit modernist
cooperative project in Reseda, but
because it was mixed-race the FHA
rejected funding.
Ain’s Hay House, with view windows
reserved for the back—presciently, as
Harry Hay was under surveillance.
After Schwartz returned from the Army for his second year at USC in the fall of 1946,
Ain was one of his teachers, the one who introduced him to Neutra. Listening to them
in Neutra’s home “was an experience incapable of replication. If I had any doubts
about architecture as my profession, I was now firmly hooked” (“Homecoming”).
Ken and Martha were to become friends of Richard and Dione Neutra (who never let
on Ain loathed Richard), and Ken led field trips of Cal Poly architecture students to the
Neutras’ house and studio every year. “I was transported back to my undergraduate
days at USC when … Gregory Ain brought a handful of his students to visit his friend
Richard Neutra at this same place. … Would my students be as stimulated as I was?
Only time would tell. A close observer can tell that much of my own design shows the
influence of Neutra” (“Field Trip Interlude: Richard and Dione Neutra”).
Two decades after his first visit to the Neutra House, Dione, who regularly stayed with
the Schwartzes on her way to the Monterey Bach Festival, showed her husband
through Ken’s newly built house (“Monterey Heights”). Poignantly, Ken had built his
house just as the Neutras’ house had been destroyed by fire, though their son Dion
had since rebuilt it in collaboration with his father. One can feel Ken’s trepidation,
thrust back to an undergraduate project critique. “I said I hoped he could detect some
qualities that I had derived from his inspiration. He said he did and seemed pleased. It
would be the last time we saw Neutra alive.”
Mies van der Rohe Schwartz never met Mies, but he quotes him more than once
in his Memoir: “God is in the details” (a wonderful inversion of “the devil is in the
details”). Not just this outlook but Mies’s spectacular Minimalism, which make ill-
Page 55 of 361
28
thought detail impossible to cover up, influenced Ken. Mies’s glass Farnsworth House
(with its single level and facade plane and slightly lower deck) shows a greater impact
on the Schwartz house (with its single roofline and facade plane and slightly higher
bedroom wing floor line), than the designs of Neutra, who preferred more dramatic
variations in two and three dimensions.
Buckminster Fuller Fuller visited the Architectural Engineering Department at
Cal Poly in 1956, deeply impressing not only Schwartz but the department’s students,
who by 1957 had built the first geodesic dome not under Fuller’s direct supervision
and the first permanent one on the West Coast (op. cit., “Buckminster Fuller”;
“Geodesic Dome is Highlight of Architectural Displays,” El Mustang, 26 Apr. 1957, p.
7). The geodesic dome is formed of triangles that in turn form alternating hexagons
and pentagons (Pierre Cabrol’s 1963 Cinerama Dome in Hollywood, which was
intended to be the first of a chain of geodesic Cinerama theaters, uses precast
concrete hexagons and pentagons for its structure).
Schwartz never built a
geodesic dome, but in 1958
he proposed a hexagonal
roof for the expansion of St.
Stephen’s Episcopal Church,
and in 1966 he designed the
Page-Selkirk house around a
hexagonal hub.
Schwartz’s model for the St.
Stephen’s expansion
On a flat plane rather than a sphere, the Page-Selkirk House’s projecting rectangular
wings imply, in the spaces between, additional hexagons (as in a honeycomb) rather
than pentagons (as in the curvature of a geodesic dome), but Schwartz likely borrowed
this unusual building shape from Fuller rather than bees. That said, he may well have
been aware of Frank Lloyd Wright’s 1948 hexagonal Della Walker House in Monterey,
the architect’s only California coastal commission. He certainly admired Wright, and on
their first trip to New York, in 1960, the family took, “to humor Dad, a tour of Frank
Lloyd Wright’s new spiral Guggenheim Museum” (“A Family Foray to the East Coast”).
The angled forms of concrete block in the Andre House entrance, and the hallway-
ending master bedroom in the Schwartz House, are both Wrightian characteristics.
Design Approach In his memoirs, Schwartz does not espouse grand theories of
design. When he talks about buildings, either as a student or an architect, he talks
Page 56 of 361
29
about solving problems. He describes USC professor Harry Burge, who taught
Professional Practice, as “a favorite of mine”:
Harry taught about how buildings went together, how to keep water out, how
to properly detail windows and doors, how to specify appropriate materials and
workmanship, what constituted a proper set of contract documents, and how to
avoid malpractice lawsuits, et., etc., etc. I can’t remember Harry ever answering
a student’s question. He always answered by asking a question, which meant we
had to go out and find the answer. … We didn’t forget those things we had to
dig out for ourselves (“Return to USC”).
Yet Schwartz is clearly entranced by the aesthetics of Richard Neutra’s house, “set on
a postage-stamp-sized plot of land purchased during the Depression.”
A steep, ladder-like
stair accessed a small
guest room—the
only room on the
third level. The room
was so small it could
only hold three
people at a time. …
The roof of the
second level of the
house was flat and
was flooded with an
inch of water that
acted as insulation. The wall facing Silver Lake was floor to ceiling glass
protected by an overhanging roof. The bed was so low to the floor that when
one lay and looked to the lake, the water on the roof looked to be an extension
of the lake. It was difficult to tell where the roof water ended and the lake water
began—it appeared as if the lake came up to the edge of the window.
Reflections of starlight and moon glow made for additional visual illusions.
Fantastic effects! ("Field Trip Interlude: Richard and Dione Neutra”; the image
above is from the rebuilt house, the original having burnt in 1963)
Certainly Neutra had learned how practically to keep water out, but he also had
learned how aesthetically to bring water in. Ken had an eye for both practical and
aesthetic details, which is key for an architect. He had empathy for how people used
spaces and creativity about how to challenge their uses. But he also had a sense of
visual statement, as in gathering the levels of the Andre House under one sweeping
Page 57 of 361
30
roof, and audacious design, as in sorting people and functions down the spokes of the
Page-Selkirk House.
These showed when George Hasslein and Schwartz designed Mount Carmel Lutheran
Church. A T-shaped lot with a drainage swale—“a design nightmare”—running
through the T’s stem accompanied a “champagne appetite” with $45,000 “beer
budget.” The solution: a simple wood frame, a large flat-floor room without pews so it
could quadruple as a worship space and fellowship hall and for youth sports and
church suppers (a people-based response). Offices, restrooms, and classrooms would
be to the side. Placement in the T’s stem would allow a larger church to be built later.
A large truss running lengthwise would minimize wall loads to adapt to the swale.
Mount Carmel, 1958, contrasting vertical church with horizontal annex. The flat roof,
peaked at the truss, would later be replaced with a sloping roof, ancillary beam ends
cut off, and both cedar siding and concrete base covered with stucco.
Page 58 of 361
31
The aesthetics grew out of
this response. “Roof joists
[above right] would spring
off of the truss and in so
doing impart a unique
exterior expression to the
building. A continuous
skylight on each side of the
truss brought natural light
into the center of the room.
… The exterior wood frame
walls would … be clad
inside and out with vertical
cedar siding” (“Mount
Carmel Lutheran Church”).
Interior cedar remains exposed above concrete base—
between a Gothic chapel, church hall, and gym.
In 1958, when Schwartz was asked to design an expansion of St. Stephen’s, he
proposed it in horizontal redwood shiplap juxtaposed to the 1873 church’s vertical
redwood board and batten, the latter a Carpenter Gothic style that Richard
Page 59 of 361
32
Upjohn had adapted in 1851 for American churches that were based—like St.
Stephen’s—on St. Michael’s Longstanton, a small, elegant thirteenth-century church in
Cambridgeshire that the Ecclesiological Society promoted as an architectural model
for Anglican congregations in the British colonies and Episcopalian ones in the United
States. St. Stephen’s decided to use an architect from their own congregation instead,
but Schwartz later revived the proposed hexagonal roof for the Page-Selkirk House.
Exterior Environment All four houses Ken Schwartz wanted to be remembered
for were designed for hillside sites with stunning views. This California aesthetic is a
function partly of the state’s seismic and volcanic geography and partly of the
aesthetic movements that have accompanied its growth. Flats—easy to build and
productive to settle—were often surrounded by dramatic hills, occupied as a town
expanded: as bohemians looked for solitude, nature, and inexpensive land; as the
wealthy copied bohemians; as the population simply filled up everywhere available.
The iconic hillside retreat—painted repeatedly by William Keith—was the Rev. Joseph
Worcester’s house in Piedmont. Built by the Swedenborgian in 1876, it was the first
Shingle Style house on the West Coast and far more rustic, in style and site, than the
first on the East Coast: William Ralph Emerson’s 2½-story for a Boston gentleman at
the seaside resort of Mount Desert, Maine, published in American Architect in 1879.
William Keith, A View of the Rev. Joseph Worcester’s House, Piedmont, circa 1883
Page 60 of 361
33
Worcester, who was well
connected to architects on
both coasts, convinced a
parishioner around 1888 to
build three rustic shingle
houses on the remote top
of Russian Hill in San
Francisco and built a fourth
himself in 1890. Then in
1892 the architect Willis
Polk added a shingle
duplex, split down the
middle, for his family and
the artist Dora Norton
Williams, which rambled
dramatically down the hill in
six stories.
Williams-Polk House, 1890s. The street facade is to the
right. California Historical Society.
California hillside architecture invented the urban recluse: a citizen who was part of the
city, observed the city, and was distinct from the city. This cliff-dweller also had the
view of the city in its natural context of water and wasteland: the unbuilt areas.
Polk’s contemporary, Bernard Maybeck,
went on to design hillside houses for
himself and others in the Bay Area from
the 1890s to the Wallen Maybeck House,
Hilltop, in 1937. From 1919 to 1947,
Maybeck’s younger collaborator, Julia
Morgan, designed and supervised the
construction of California’s greatest
hilltop house, La Cuesta Encantada—
Hearst Castle.
A sketch by Morgan of La Cuesta
Encantanda. Cal Poly Special Collections.
Page 61 of 361
34
Hillside architecture made a different
mark in the desert, rocks, and chaparral
of Southern California, without the
chance to integrate into forest through
shingle walls and redwood interiors,
characteristics of Worcester’s cottage
and the subsequent First Bay Tradition.
Raymond Chandler’s 1940 novel
Farewell, My Lovely describes the LA
version: “Montemar Vista was a few
dozen houses of various sizes and shapes
hanging by their teeth and eyebrows to a
spur of mountain and looking as if a
good sneeze would drop them down
among the box lunches on the beach”
(Stories and Early Novels [New York:
Library of America, 1995], p. 799).
Schindler’s 1928 Wolfe Summer House,
Avalon, Catalina Island.
The Southern California hillside house was more artificial in angularity, material, and
landscaping. Neutra and Schindler’s houses looked less like bohemian retreats than
Modernist outposts. Their descendants—Pierre Koenig’s 1959 Case Study House #22,
John Lautner’s 1949 Sheats Apartments and 1960 Chemosphere, and Harry Gessner’s
1959 Boat Houses—look like futuristic space ships that have just landed.
Lautner’s Chemosphere, Hollywood Hills
San Luis Obispo was a midpoint between
these two traditions. Schwartz was more
inclined to employ wood and stone than
Southern California hillside architects,
who favored concrete, stucco, plastic,
and metal. He had no hesitation,
however, to use large expanses of plate
glass: to provide views, integrate indoors
with outdoors, and make a statement
about light and transparent building
fabric. “Neutra’s influence became
Page 62 of 361
35
evident as I tried to keep our floor areas minimal … but walls as open as possible to
enfold the magnificent views,” writes Schwartz of his own house, which integrated
wood and plastic in its dominating lighting fixtures (“Monterey Heights”).
The hexagonal, spoked Page-Selkirk House (above) looked like a space ship softened
with wood and functioning with the environment. As Shirley Selkirk says of the spaces
between the spokes, “You can pick your alcove depending on the time of day.”
Despite his Los Angeles origins, USC education, and leading of Cal Poly’s Los Angeles
field trips, Schwartz’s designs have commonality with Second Bay Tradition architects
like Joseph Esherick and Henry Hill—though perhaps naturally they remain closest to
Neutra’s Bay Area adaptations, like his 1937 Darling House in San Francisco, whose
street facade, with its arrangement of boxes and planes, is a precursor to the view
facade of the Pimentel-Orth House.
Darling House. Julius Shulman.
Pimentel-Orth House
Page 63 of 361
36
The unbuilt lot at 201 Buena Vista with the pepper tree growing out of the swale, the
Schwartzes’ 1960 Ford Falcon parked in front, and 201 today. Schwartz placed the
carport in the swale, the public rooms on a plane above, and the private wing raised on
the lateral incline of the hill. “The base of the gnarled old pepper tree would become
the point from which I established all the levels of the house. The tree would become a
major interest point captured in the views … “ (“Monterey Heights”).
Page 64 of 361
37
Use In Mount Carmel Lutheran Church, Hasslein and Schwartz created a form—
and convinced the congregation to accept it—that would have the unity of a
traditional church edifice from the outside but, without fixed furniture or overt
messaging, have multiple uses on the inside: the ecclesiastical equivalent of a family
room. The four tall, narrow windows on each side squared the lancet window but also
provided functional cross-ventilation; they and two taller, narrower stained glass
windows at each end, which reflected the church calendar in the colors of their glass,
provided a sense of sanctuary from the outside. A delicately attached wing of
classrooms, offices, kitchen, and restrooms, where greater numbers of smaller groups
would gather, telegraphed their lower status with shorter height but their sense of
purpose with emphasized breadth. Hasslein and Schwartz placed everything at the
front of the T lot to anticipate expansion at the back: planned obsolescence.
Shortly after Mount Carmel, Schwartz was called on to design a domestic space for the
Andre family. With a lot that could have accommodated half a dozen houses, he
placed the structure at the highest point that was closest to access and facing the
landmark of Cerro San Luis. Once again he thrust the private rooms (not offices and
classrooms now but bedrooms and bathrooms, kitchen and garage) to the sides.
Interior dining level leading to bedrooms
Sunken living room and balcony in front
He crossed this axis with another formed by a vast, almost church-like linear public
space running from the front to the back of the house under a single canopy: front
balcony, living room, dining area, and back dining patio. This time the public space
was transverse to the roof beam so it was able to descend down the hill, with a sunken
living room that created a separateness without walls from indoor and outdoor dining.
Floor-to-ceiling glass walls with glass doors to the front balcony and back patio made
indoor and outdoor space continuous.
Page 65 of 361
38
Schwartz borrowed from
Gregory Ain, installing a
floating line of kitchen
cabinets to allow eyes upon
the kids everywhere under
the canopy. The kitchen has
a lower beam extending to
the carports for a more
intimate space (unlike
Usonian kitchens, which
shared the high ceilings of
the public spaces, resulting
in inaccessible cabinets).
Schwartz also placed the bedroom wing under a lower beam, with children’s
bedrooms at the dining level and the master suite slightly higher up the hill—but still
under the same side roof canopy—in back. Because the view is out the front of the
hillside house with no privacy issues, that is where the big windows are, with higher
privacy windows for the bedroom wing as it looks onto the dining patio in back,
reversing Ain’s arrangement for the small city house. The master bedroom, however,
has a sliding glass door, which would become a Schwartz signature.
Lot 29 is 201 Buena Vista Avenue, the
Schwartzes’ lot.
With the Pimentel-Orth House, Schwartz communicated a greater degree of
informality and even eccentricity. “I didn’t even have to ask them how they lived, how
Page 66 of 361
39
many kids they had, or whether they liked to play poker. All that stuff I already knew”
(Monterey Heights).
It was a lot that descended rather than ascended from the street. (When the Pimentels
and Schwartzes bought the lots together, Ken wanted the south-facing lot on Buena
Vista Avenue; fortunately, the Pimentels wanted the west-facing one on Paso Robles
Drive.) Where the Andre carriage drive mounted directly to the wide, centrally-cresting
facade, Schwartz oriented the Pimentels’ house to the hill’s slope, at a 45-degree
angle from the street entrance, its initial appearance to visitors a carport, flat roof, and
view beyond.
Schwartz designed the house in two stories to maximize the steep, small lot, with two-
thirds of the floor space on the upper floor and a third on the lower. It would be about
50 percent larger than the Pimentels’ Goldtree Tract house, which they felt they’d
outgrown. As with such descending houses, the upper was the public floor (also
accommodating a master suite, later used as a den), and the lower was the children’s
floor with two bedrooms, a bathroom, and a “den” with a wardrobe (later used as a
bedroom). Key differences from Goldtree were one extra room (Dick Pimentel’s
parents liked to visit from San Jose) and an extra bathroom. The upper floor was also a
foot taller, with open beams and rafters, giving a sense of spaciousness.
Northwest facade: carport; above, window for master bedroom; below, window (later
sliding glass door) for bedroom 3 (later master bedroom); balcony at right
With Californian casualness and practicality, Schwartz placed the living room and
kitchen entries adjacent and parallel to each other but slightly offset under the carport
canopy. The living room entry presented first, but the visitor was left to choose, like a
Monty Hall contestant, which was the right door. (Schwartz also placed a sliding glass
door, screened from the driveway, on the southeast façade, communicating between
Page 67 of 361
40
the landings of exterior and interior flights of stairs, midway between upper and lower
floors, offering an out-of-the-way children’s entrance.)
On the southwest wall, opposite both kitchen and living room entrances, to draw the
eye and the person, Schwartz placed an elbow glass wall, which provided 25 linear
feet of near floor-to-ceiling light and views southwest (to Cerro San Luis) and
northwest (to Bishop Peak) and led to a viewing balcony, for the “spectacular sunsets
silhouetting the old morros before darkening behind the distant Irish Hills.” For
morning, the southeast wall had nearly another hundred square feet of glass including
and above the sliding glass door landing entrance. The master bedroom had an 8’
wide, 4’ tall window facing northwest, good for sunsets and also sleeping in late.
The effect was somewhat like a viewing platform on a tower, reminiscent of Irving
Gill’s 1919 Horatio West Court in Santa Monica, which placed the bedrooms on the
ground floor and living rooms on the second floor for the views through ribbon
windows. Horatio West Court was on urban flatland. The Pimentel-Orth tower, on a
hill, was entered from its porous upper instead of lower floor.
Lorraine and Jan’s Modernist backyard A-frame, 1961.
On flat Santa Clara Street,
Ken had built a ten-foot-tall
play structure with white
plywood shear wall. While
the Pimentels were on
vacation, he added two
blue eyes overlooking their
backyard with the legend
“Whacha doing
Pimentels?,” visible to all
houses down the line. He
offered to paint it out; Dick
Pimentel wanted it left.
With a site beneath a remote hillside street, with the surrounding houses below and
facing away from theirs, no one was watching the Pimentels now. As if in expiation for
his earlier A-frame, Schwartz gave full advantage to the fact that they were now
viewing without being viewed. Although their house was only about 1,500 square feet,
their architect had opened it up to the morros and their valleys.
When it came to designing his own house a year later, however, Schwartz made
numerous refinements to the machine for living. The Schwartz House was closer to
twice the size of a Goldtree house. Schwartz, like Jack Ouzounian, who also had a lot
upsloping from the street, put it all on a single axis on one level—almost. Three steps
Page 68 of 361
41
led up from the Schwartzes’ kitchen–dining room–living room square to the bedroom–
bathroom–den wing. Besides being a physical acknowledgement of the westerly
lateral rise, this gave the bedroom wing a more intimate height under the house’s
single flat roof and inverted the usual rhythm of such wings by pushing it up rather
than (as with the Andre house) down or (as with the Pimentel-Orth House) to a
separate floor. The three steps also gave greater differentiation to the height of the
public rooms than in the Pimentel-Orth House. Adding to the airiness was the fact that
the entire front wall of the living room was glass and two sides of the dining room.
Schwartz tucked carport and utilities below. He admired Jack Ouzounian’s departure
from his neighbors in building a steep hillside driveway to the back instead of digging
a garage out from under the house, but on a shallow gore lot Schwartz had little
choice in order to keep cars out of view of a largely glass house. Ken loved his cars,
but they were not to interfere with his meticulous landscape architecture, and
conveniently a swale ran through the property where the carport could go. This also
had the effect of raising the house rather than, as with the Pimentel House, dropping
it into the hillside, so there could be a set of rooms along the hill side of the private
wing’s hall, with natural lighting and ventilation.
Schwartz opened the long, narrow kitchen at one end to the dining room and at the
other toward the foyer, but he screened the bulk of it from the living room, with no
floating cabinets. Apparently Lorraine and Jan did not need watching. (“We like to live
informally but in an orderly way,” Ken revealed to Los Angeles Times Home Magazine
Page 69 of 361
42
in 1967.)5 A narrow hallway lit by a skylight and fluorescence above an opaque plastic
ceiling screen was lined on street side by children’s bedrooms and on hill side by den,
toilet (convenient for guests; the Pimentels’ only upstairs bathroom was in their
bedroom), and children’s bathroom; it opened to a master suite at the end (a Usonian
feature). Logically, and unlike the house of the Pimentels (who also has a girl and boy),
Lorraine and Jan’s rooms were identical in size and scarcely different in layout.
The Schwartz House is as close as San Luis Obispo could probably come, a house
fronting a suburban street would want to come, and the Schwartz family could afford
to come to Mies’s Farnsworth House (design exhibited in 1947, completed in 1951)
and Philip Johnson’s Glass House (1949). Schwartz installed floor-to-ceiling street- and
view-facing glass to front not only the whole of the living room but half of the master
bedroom and more than half of each of the children’s rooms. Floor to ceiling glass also
cornered the dining area, looked out into a back pocket garden as one reached the
top of the entry stairs, formed the stair tower’s clerestory, looked onto a side garden
from the master bedroom, and formed one wall of the master bathroom (though not,
like Lynne Livingston’s, with a view to Catalina but rather to an enclosure from the
neighbors). Privacy was provided in the front by drapes and on the back and sides by
hillside, plants, or fencing.
Schwartz had designed a house of light, lightness, and views—without the purism of
Mies or Johnson but with suburban livability, for the Farnsworth and Glass Houses
were both on secluded estates. Schwartz was more audacious that Ain or Neutra, who
avoided fronting their street facades with glass. But the Schwartz House would be the
perfect house for a mayor who strove to bring transparency to city government.
Schwartz wanted to build an ascending house for the steep upslope lot of Hubert and
Shirley Page, but they anticipated when they would be older they would want to live
on one level. (Arguably, Ken’s entry stairs in the Schwartz House kept him going into
his nineties, but they triumphed over him at the very end.)
After the Pages rejected his first design, Schwartz tucked garage and carport under a
viewing deck and put together a house on one level that rotated from a hexagon
(revived from his St. Stephen’s design) that combining kitchen, dining, and family
room. Three square, lower-ceilinged spokes consisted of (1) a children’s bedroom,
bathroom, and laundry wing; (2) a parents’ bedroom and bathroom wing; and (3) an
entry–living room–study wing with a deep overhang over its southwest-facing deck,
which from above makes it look longer than the others.
5. Douglas M. Simmonds, “Crisp Eye-Catcher … on a Site Too Bad to Be True,” Los
Angeles Times Home, 15 Oct. 1967, pp. 18–21.
Page 70 of 361
43
Between the hexagon’s twenty-foot-wide spokes were eight-food sides: one a kitchen
wall and window, one a sliding glass door, and the third with a brick fireplace and high
window above it. Shirley Page Selkirk did not want a sliding glass door there because
she did not want people peering in from the entry. The fireplace allowed a high
window by moving the chimney outside.
In the Page-Selkirk House, Schwartz rearranged the presentation of family life in a
virtuoso fashion while keeping it both practically and symbolically centered. Children
and parents were neither on separate floors (as with Pimentel-Orth House) nor in the
same wing on separate levels (as with the Andre House) nor in the same wing on the
Page 71 of 361
44
same level (as with Schwartz House). Uniquely among the four houses, Page-Selkirk
had two separate entertainment spaces, the less formal hub and the more formal living
room. There were also four logically and spatially distinct outdoor areas, the three
alcoves between the spokes and the viewing deck at the end of the living room spoke.
Schwartz was not doctrinaire about arranging openings to the outside world: the living
room spoke had a sliding glass door at the end; the parents’ spoke had one at the
side opening to an alcove; the boys’ room wing had none; and the hub had one on a
non-entrance alcove side.
The hexagonal hub echoed the octagon houses of the nineteenth century, but those
had interiors awkwardly divided into square and triangular rooms. Buckminster Fuller
visited the Cal Poly Architectural Engineering Department (and Ken’s Santa Clara
Street house) in 1957, and after he left, the students promptly built a geodesic dome,
the first without Fuller’s onsite inspection (“Buckminster Fuller”). But geodesic domes
were also awkward to divide into rooms. Schwartz came up with the solution, a
hexagonal hub and spokes: the centripetal family/public area, which centrifugal private
areas thrown out to the sides.
Resources Schwartz in his Memoir goes into some detail about the resources
available—slim—for Mount Carmel Lutheran Church and the fact that design and
materials were both predicated on the low budget. (With Ochs’ contractor’s bid it
came in under budget, which paid for the freestanding metal crosses.)
Schwartz was working in a small community that was not used to showing off where
housing was concerned. Even the Hollister-Jack family, one of the largest and richest
landowners in the state, built, in the Jack House—which Ken was to acquire for the city
at Peter Andre’s initiative—a modest Italianate villa with no servants’ quarters, though
it did boast a one-acre landscape fronting its utilitarian corral and orchard.
Apart from Ken’s own house, the Andre House—built for a civically active lawyer from
a prominent family—was the closest to a showplace, but it was also, indeed primarily,
designed to be a family home. The Andres had been living in a tract house but had a
horse property on Murray Hill. “A new home should incorporate the vistas and provide
ample space for an active family,” Ken wrote of this commission in his Memoir. “There
was to be a bedroom and bath for a maid and, importantly, patio space for
barbecuing and outdoor dining, which Peter was fond of” (“Peter Andre”).
Nielsen Construction built the house, employing “craftsmen who could attend to the
unique details” in Schwartz’s design. These included wall stonework and wall and floor
tilework in the living room; exposed beams, plank ceilings, and paneling in the public
areas; and decorative cuts in the rafter tails.
Page 72 of 361
45
Andre living room: exposed posts and beams, river
stone, plank soffits, matching rafter tail and balcony
joist carving, board and batten siding, glass corner, and
balustrade construction reminiscent of Gerrit Rietveld’s
1918 De Stijl Red and Blue Chair (right),
Yet the Andre House doesn’t come across as
pretentious; the craftsman details and structural
exposure confer a rustic warmth appropriate to a
lifestyle revolving around horses and barbecuing: a city
house for a ranching family. They also balance what
could have been coldness from the expanses of glass.
The Pimentel-Orth House was built for a Cal Poly professor also upgrading from a
tract house to a hillside house but necessarily a more modest house on a more modest
lot on a more modest income. It was more practically two stories because of the small
size of the lot. The effect of the Andres’ more expensive board and batten
Page 73 of 361
46
exterior, a siding popularized by Cliff
May, is achieved with V-groove vertical
shiplap. To good effect, Schwartz
reprised his Masonite panels above and
below windows, this time creating
aesthetic unity between upper and lower
floors. Schwartz exposed rafters topped
by plank ceilings on the upper floor, but
they are not carved at the end, and apart
from the carport and balcony overhang,
the house was eaveless, a Neutraesque
touch. The roof was flat, hence without a
huge central truss and cavernous space,
and there was no rustic but expensive
stone accent wall (indeed originally no
fireplace at all. The house was relaxed but
rational, with splendid views but austere
in itself.
Pimentel-Orth balcony above bathroom
and bedroom: effect depends on
arrangement, not rich material or detailing
The Schwartzes had as slender means as the Pimentels, but Ken’s house had to be a
showplace, though one for architects and architecture students—who might have a
similar experience to what he had had sitting on Richard Neutra’s floor—not the
center of a political machine. He built it when he was chair of the Planning
Commission, before he had any thoughts of running for mayor, and at any event,
lavish entertaining was not what mayors in San Luis Obispo did. He was the thinking
man and thinking woman’s mayor, and his den and orderly living room were the
carefully designed settings for rational discussions with individuals or small groups.
Jan with one of his retaining walls
Schwartz “fell in love with a steel-framed
structure … only to discover the design
was ahead of local contractors’ expertise”
(“Monterey Heights”), so it was back to
wood post and beam. He worked to limit
floor area to less than two thousand
square feet, but even so, the extended
family would have to do much of the
construction themselves to make the
house affordable. Martha’s father, Pop
Riggio, took care of the plumbing and
called in favors for the fixtures. Martha
Page 74 of 361
47
did 90 percent of the painting, following
the carpenters around to prime their
splices. Lorraine installed most of the
wiring, which the electrician connected.
Jan built broken-concrete retaining walls.
Everyone pitched in on insulation, hearth,
lighting soffits. They hung sheets in front
of the magnificent windows for months
before there was money to buy drapes—
a situation neither Mies nor Johnson had
to deal with in their glass houses. (When a
bridge access road was built 250 feet
from her famous weekend retreat, Edith
Farnsworth fled to her Italian villa.)
The Los Angeles Times Home Magazine
shot of Schwartz House living room, 15
October 1967. Douglas M. Simmonds.
Ken and Lorraine hanging shelves
Despite being homemade, there was
nothing rustic about the house, sleeker
than anything Schwartz designed before
or after, with plasterboard and hardwood
plywood paneling, textured ceilings,
panel lighting, built-in furniture, and glass
integrated wherever it could practicably
go. Outside it had complete economy of
form and musical rhythm, its vertical
redwood shiplap, shaped balcony
balusters, drapes, door frames, and even
(eventually) its pale eucalyptus trunks
creating variant but harmonious
repetitions between the horizontal white
fascia boards. The house looked layout
perfect and occupied multi-page spreads
in the Los Angeles Times in 1967 and
Perfect Home (a national real estate
magazine with local editions) in 1973.
For the last of these houses, the 1966 Page-Selkirk, Schwartz employed the simplest
siding possible: plain plywood sheathing. Vertical battens and horizontal boards to
cover seams produced a varied and harmonious grid. Like the Pimentel and Schwartz
Houses, the Page-Selkirk spokes were flat-roofed in asphalt and the interiors sheathed
with plasterboard. The hexagonal hub, however, sloping and shingled, was richer in
Page 75 of 361
48
interior fabric, with interior paneling of redwood plywood, a brick fireplace, and wood-
plank ceiling circling a central hexagonal skylight.
Again, there were homemade aspects.
Bruce Selkirk, who had built a Bitudobe
near Cayucos, and Shirley Page Selkirk
laid Mexican tile in the hexagonal hub,
pulling it up and re-relaying it when it was
clear it wasn’t going to come out right.
Shirley designed and constructed the
exterior lighting fixtures. She also
designed the first set of steps leading up
to the house; Bruce, the steps that
replaced them. Bruce took down the rear
pergola. After Bruce’s death, Shirley
rebuilt it in order to please Ken.
The Page-Selkirk House stands out not for extravagant resources but for resourceful
design and—as Shirley required—views in several directions. Its clever employment of
common materials and the involvement in design and construction of its owners
provides a substantial part of its organic charm.
Materials Ken Schwartz’s materials were not simply dictated by budgets and
availability, they were matters of vision. But for the LA Modernists that Schwartz most
admired—Neutra and Ain—making good architecture affordable was part of the
architect’s vision.
Neutra built showplaces for the film star Anna Sten and director Josef von Sternberg
in 1934 and 1935, but between 1933 and 1936 he also built twenty houses costing less
than $5,000.6 His middle-class clients included high school teachers, college
professors, retirees, a psychologist, a sales manager, and small businesspeople, and
the exterior materials included stucco, wood, and metal (Hines, op. cit., 115–126). His
metal house for a Cal Tech engineering professor won the small house category of the
Better Homes in America Competition, sponsored by Architectural Forum and CBS, in
1934; one that was sheathed with plywood inside and out (as Schwartz’s Page-Selkirk
House would be) won second place in General Electric’s 1935 Small House
Competition; and Neutra entered in the 1936 California House and Garden Exhibition
in Los Angeles another plywood house, which was won in a raffle and moved to
Westwood. In 1938 and ’39, Neutra did designs for the Bildcost series of Better
6. “Plywood House,” Architectural Forum, July 1936, p. 38.
Page 76 of 361
49
Homes and Gardens and the National Small House Competition of the Ladies’ Home
Journal, with plans of the latter obtainable for one dollar.
By 1937 Neutra had designed his first redwood-clad building, the clapboard Darling
House (pictured earlier), appropriately in San Francisco, where the First and Second
Bay Traditions held sway. Two years later his Davey House, clad with vertical redwood
planks (as Schwartz would clad his own family’s house) was built in Monterey, and in
the same year he completed three redwood houses in Los Angeles with horizontal
wood on the house walls and vertical on the garage doors. Schwartz would reverse
this arrangement on his own house when he finally installed garage doors.
Neutra’s plywood house, California House and Garden Exhibition, 1936, detail. Julius
Shulman.
Pitched roofs, exposed beams, plank ceilings, and brick fireplaces entered Neutra’s
idiom by the 1940s. Wood walls, ceilings, and exposed beams had been in Schindler’s
repertoire from the 1920s, heavy and juxtaposed with concrete in his more Brutalist
oeuvre. But in the 1940s Schindler even adopted the stone accent wall and Neutra the
board and batten exterior, both seen in Schwartz’s Andre House. The LA Minimalist
masters were edging away, for the time being, from the smooth-surfaced boxes of
Adolf Loos as they ceded ground to Cliff May, Sunset, and Mid-Century Modern. But
they and their clients would soon move back to Minimalism.
Schwartz took materials seriously, as evidenced by his irritation at the resurfacing of
Mount Carmel, after which he never again drove down Fredericks Street. The church’s
vertical natural wood planks were not just a light and economical structural solution,
they had aesthetic and environmental significance—from the First and Second Bay
Traditions; the board-and-batten Carpenter Gothic of Richard Upjohn, which Schwartz
saw at St. Stephen’s, for which he designed an expansion as soon as he was finished
Page 77 of 361
50
with Mount Carmel; even in Neutra’s
exterior board and batten and
contrasting horizontal parapet planking,
as well as interior vertical and horizontal
plank paneling, in the 1939 National
Youth Administration Center at Cal Poly,
where Schwartz and Hasslein’s
department was housed. (This Neutra
work has also been—insanely—covered in
stucco and refenestrated to banality.)
Neutra paneling and brickwork behind
cubicles, NYA Center, Cal Poly
Neutra’s 1939 National Youth Administration Center, Cal Poly. Julius Shulman.
In the Mount Carmel church, the vertical cedar planks provided a counterpoint to the
white horizontality of the annex’s deep eaves, beams, fascias, and extended
superstructure (with all of which Neutra experimented in the 1940s and ’50s) and of
the church’s own concrete base and massive truss. The planks provided a rhythmic
echo of the tall windows, themselves echoing the lancet windows of the ecclesiastical
past. Vertical cedar inside and out provided unity. “Ornament and Crime,“ Loos called
a 1910 essay. “God is in the details,” as Schwartz quoted Mies. Functionalism stripped
ornament so detail could be seen.
Page 78 of 361
51
Hasslein and Schwartz’s church with its classroom and office annex is a lost
masterpiece of the integration of materials and design. Sadly, the white stucco
suburban Modernist church would become a cliché when the First Methodist Church
of La Verne (Ladd and Kelsey, 1961) appeared in The Graduate (Mike Nichols, 1967).
Schwartz carried on his dedication to materials to his domestic buildings (Mount
Carmel wasn’t altered till they were built). Each of the four he wanted to be
remembered by has a wood and glass exterior, but in each the wood takes a different
rhythmic form: vertical board and batten for the Andre House (with one exterior and
interior stone accent wall for the fireplace), vertical V-groove shiplap for the Pimentel-
Orth House, vertical redwood nickel-gap shiplap for the Schwartz House, and plain
plywood for the Page-Selkirk House. (His St. Stephen’s proposal employed horizontal
redwood plank.)
Andre House: Brick,
concrete block,
board and batten,
masonite, opaque
glass, carved rafter
tail
Pimentel-Orth
House: Fixed glass,
sliding window,
Masonite, V-groove
shiplap
Schwartz House:
Nickel-gap shiplap,
stucco, tile, tree
Page-Selkirk House:
Plywood sheathing,
battens, fixed glass,
V-groove shiplap
soffit, plain beams,
wood-strip lamp
Wood, the most common material for nineteenth-century architecture in San Luis and
suited to its small-town, ranching-country nature (as Alex Madonna intuited in 1958 for
his supermotel), was also a favorite for the early twentieth-century American
Craftsman/California Bungalow style that derived from Greene and Greene. The
Greene brothers were masters of wood as an interior and exterior material and of
Page 79 of 361
52
creating wood-built spaces like porches, balconies, and pergolas that were medial to
the planted environment.
By the 1920s, however, wood was being supplanted by brick, stucco, concrete, and
metal in everything from Eclectic revivalisms to the Moderne. California Modernism—
interested in forging a connection between a house and the local environment but
also with a social interest in cost—ultimately turned to wood, finding that it also
softened the impact for clients of Minimalism, Functionalism, and walls of glass.7
The Schwartz House with its original natural redwood coloring and open carport, 1965
The nature of wood—its linearity combined with the subtle shading, graining, and
finishes that communicate warmth, as well as its history and tradition in building—
humanized the new, huge plates of glass moving from industrial and commercial to
domestic architecture, to machines for living. Schwartz took advantage of this
interplay by combining wood and glass for his exteriors and using wood selectively
and effectively in his interiors. His interiors have exposed beams and plank ceilings
7. “The … McIntoshes [in 1939] were willing to go only ‘so far’ toward the brave new
world of the International Style and gladly accepted Neutra’s suggestion of the more
familiar and ‘homey’ redwood as a compromise. He thereupon transferred the ribbon
windows and other Modernist trademarks to this medium. Schindler had already done
this with success, and Wright at the time was beginning his kindred series of Usonian
houses” (Thomas S. Hines, Richard Neutra and the Search for Modern Architecture
[Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994], p. 126 ).
Page 80 of 361
53
(Andre, Pimentel Orth, and Page-Selkirk), paneling (Andre, Schwartz, and Page-
Selkirk), doors and cabinetry (all four houses), lighting fixtures (Schwartz and [designed
and built by the client] Page-Selkirk), built-in furniture (Schwartz), and even (but very
rarely) floors (the revised Schwartz dining room, originally linoleum). Schwartz
juxtaposed glass to wood posts and wall beams, ran his beams and plank ceilings
outside above glass walls, used wood for exterior soffits and balcony floors, visible
from the inside, and drew the eye with wood balustrades for his balconies, pergolas
for his patios, which created a half-world between wood structure and living plant. The
exterior siding was even carried into the master bedroom in the Schwartz House.
Redwood plywood walls and soffits rise to a complex network of rafters with a plank
ceiling and hexagonal skylight in the Page-Selkirk house.
For Schwartz, glass introduced light and views: in the Pimentel-Orth and Page Selkirk
Houses in copious amounts, in the Andre and Schwartz Houses in spectacular
amounts. Today’s ubiquity of the metal-framed sliding glass door belies its
revolutionary appearance in Le Corbusier’s Villa Savoye in 1929, in Neutra’s buildings
in the thirties and forties, and in the work of more mainstream architects like Cliff May
after World War II. Even the glass doors of Mies’s 1947/1951 Farnsworth House in
Illinois and Johnson’s 1949 Glass House in Connecticut are standard size and hinged,
as are those of the 1949 Charles and Ray Eames House (Case Study House #8) in LA.
Page 81 of 361
54
Metal-framed sliding glass doors are rare in Case Study Houses before the 1950s. The
glass doors in Wright’s 1956 Kundert Clinic, the most avant-garde structure during
Schwartz’s early years in town, were framed in wood and turned on piano hinges.
Hence Schwartz’s huge metal-framed sliding glass doors set in a fixed glass wall in the
Andre House were a big deal, and they remained the cutting edge of Modernism in
the Pimentel-Orth, Schwartz, and Page-Selkirk Houses. The glass corners in the Andre
House and Pimentel-Orth House living rooms and Schwartz dining room were also a
big deal and two decades later were introduced to the Pimentel-Orth kitchen, now
with the corner post removed from the structure with a spider leg outrigger.
Would Schwartz have employed even more glass in his own house if he could have
used steel framing, like Pierre Koenig’s iconic 1959 Stahl House/Case Study House
#22? The Stahl, all wall from the street entrance, floats far above West Hollywood, to
which it presents all glass. But people who live in glass houses shouldn’t front them to
suburban streets. Schwartz, like Neutra, accented surroundings by creating partial
views and accented openness by creating partial privacy. Windows were a necessary
corollary of walls in premodernism, walls a necessary corollary of windows in
Modernism. But Ken Schwartz was not in the aquarium business.
Schwartz dining room in the Los Angeles Times, 1967: California Moderne as high tech
Spanish ramada. Douglas M. Simmonds.
Page 82 of 361
55
Construction Post and beam construction allowed small-scale architecture the
open floor plans; wide, floor-to-ceiling expanses of plate glass; and structural
expression that were key to Minimalism and Functionalism. For California, it was suited
to hillsides and resistant to earthquakes. (If you needed to protect against nuclear
fallout, Ken told the Pentagon, you could pile books against the walls.) Post and beam
was a throwback to the time before the balloon-frame and box frame, whose structural
soundness depended on walls—before even the load-bearing adobe—came to
dominate construction in the Old West because of their ability to be produced by non-
experts. Post and beam was a throwback to the earliest European structures in
California, the ramada and jacal, whose roofs provided protection from sun and rain
and whose walls, in the California climate, were an afterthought.
In the Andre House, Schwartz dramatically expressed the beams, including with
contrasting color, though he largely camouflaged the posts in walls, except for the
front and back walls made of glass. In the Pimentel-Orth House, Schwartz also
exposed beams, dark-stained against light wood ceilings, though in this flat-roofed,
boxlike structure, they appear functional rather than dramatic.
In his own house, Schwartz expressed the wall beams and posts in the living area in
sometimes dark stained wood and sometimes white painted wood, but for the first
time he covered up roof structure with a drop ceiling. The effect is the smooth
Neutraesque or Miesian box. He contrasted the two aesthetics in the Page-Selkirk
House: the wings smooth, white, and finished on the interior, contrasting with the
beamed, bricked, tiled, plank-ceilinged and plywood-paneled hexagonal hub, with the
same flavor of the great hall of manor.
Interior Space Ken Schwartz’s quote to the Los Angeles Times Home Magazine
in 1967 is key: “We like to live informally but in an orderly way.” Schwartz excelled in
open, informal living spaces, but he created these by keeping their focus strongly
formal in logic and geometry.
Mount Carmel Lutheran Church, designed as a multi-use hall, nonetheless was
elongated, with a massive truss flanked by skylights to emphasize its length and four
windows on either side of its midpoint to emphasize its breadth, in providing both
light and cross-breezes. Thus despite being a multi-use rectangle, in its interaction
with the environment, it was an implied cruciform.
In the Andre House, Schwartz also used these crossing axes, with the family’s private
or utilitarian aspects (carport, laundry, kitchen, bedrooms and bathrooms) distributed
along the side of the hill and its social aspects (dining, living, and viewing) descending
down the hill in indoor and outdoor spaces on two levels enclosed by their own vast
canopy. Having arrived by a sweeping carriage drive, one entered by a pathway along
Page 83 of 361
56
the utilitarian axis and was admitted into the social axis, which immediately pulled one
to the left or right, up- or downhill.
The Pimentel-Orth House presented a 45-degree angle to the entrance from the
street, but the drive curved under a carport/porte cochère that formed a right angle to
the axis running along the hillside. From the porte cochère one entered, through
either the front door or parallel but offset kitchen door, and faced the viewing balcony
with its three surfaces of floor-to-ceiling glass forming one interior and one exterior
angle, the one light and view source in the opposing wall.
The front door allowed one the choice to descend, to one’s left, the stairs to the lower
floor (or sliding glass landing door) or enter the upper living and dining area (by
making a jog to one’s right around a partial divider). The upstairs and downstairs
spaces ran perpendicular to this entry axis. Much as in the Andre House, one entered
at a right angle to the axis one was presented with, though unlike the Andre House,
one’s view of the feature of the room—the glass wall—was directly in front rather than
oblique to the left or right, and one was drawn to it by the line of the beams, while the
beam lines in the Andre House drew to either side.
Perhaps this arrangement was logical but ultimately too complex. The Orths
abandoned the front door and switched to the kitchen door for entry.
Page 84 of 361
57
The dining room–kitchen axis with the
kitchen’s full-length and -width, wood-
framed, opaque plastic light panel
Entry was more complex in the Schwartz
House but felicitously offered fewer
choices. One walked up exterior stairs to
the west, turned north,then east to face
the front door, was admitted into the stair
tower, and then turned north again to
mount the interior steps, confronted at
top through an impermeable floor-to-
ceiling window by an Eckboesque
garden: a private experience for the
entrant, as neither flanking den nor
kitchen opened to it.
At this point one might turn to west to
mount the three steps to the private wing
of bedrooms, bathrooms, and den
(obscured from visitors by a wall and coat
closet) or turn east to the living room
(which invited the gaze over a
balustrade).
The greater living area was divided into
three parallel east-west axes—living room
in the center, kitchen and dining room to
the north, balcony to the south—any of
which one might choose.
The living room balcony followed the same line as the bedrooms’ balcony, though
interrupted by the function of the laterally transparent stair tower and the bedroom
balconies’ privacy wall. The interior kitchen wall continued as the interior wall of den
and bathrooms along the private wing. Shared hallway and shared bedroom balcony
sandwiched the private bedrooms (boy’s, girl’s, and parents’) between them
somewhat like the interior hallway and exterior deck of a ship, allowing privacy but
providing connection. The stair tower and inaccessible garden crossed the main house
not only horizontally but vertically, a double cruciform. As the tower thrust to the
front, it pulled the garden from the back. Offset and thrusting out the back was the
den, the whole like a sliding tile puzzle.
The tripartite axes of the Page-Selkirk House upset all these right-angle notions of
logic. Again, the visitor entered through the side of one wing and could then turn right
into the more formal living room or left into the less formal living, dining, and cooking
hub. But no wing crossed another, and the house was randomly permeable by sliding
Page 85 of 361
58
glass doors at wing end (living room wing), wing side (master bedroom wing), and hub
(the one side occupied by neither fireplace, kitchen, or wings). It defied the right-
angled traffic grid, handed down from the ancient Athenian marketplace to the
American city plan from Manhattan to San Francisco to San Luis (which has two grids,
one oriented by the Spanish to the prevailing winds and the other by the Americans to
the compass points). It was a grid suited, inside and out, to the rectangularity of
buildings. Though the most complex of any of Schwartz’s houses, the Page-Selkirk
House is perhaps the only one whose informality invites disorder.
Page-Selkirk House from the street, showing stairs, living room spoke, and deck
Interior-Exterior Interplay Ken Schwartz designed California Dream houses:
clean, spacious, informal, modern, light-filled, view-endowed. It was a dream nurtured
by Greene and Greene, Maybeck, Morgan, Schindler, Neutra, Ain, Eckbo, the Second
Bay Tradition, the Case Study architects, and many others. Schwartz had a keen sense
not just of the landscape but of the landscape architecture that should surround a
house; of light not just from windows and glass walls but skylights, clerestories, and
panels; not just of portals and rooms but of the flow of people into and out of them.
Schwartz offered one way for the visitor to enter the house, carefully choreographed
by the architect, but there were myriad ways to then move into and back from the
surrounding landscapes, as one was subsumed into the family and its circle in informal
San Luis. Ken’s own house had seven glass doors: from dining room, living room, each
children’s room, both exterior sides of the master bedroom, and even the master
bathroom (over a footbridge above the sunken tub).
That is the essence of a Schwartz house: its interior-exterior interplay is not just that of
light and views but of people. People came to Ken’s houses—not just his own but all
the houses he designed—to see a different way of living: reasoned and reasonable,
minimal, functional, even futuristic, but above all centrifugal and centripetal.
Ken spent too many months and years in institutions—Lark Ellen, Army hospital,
Birmingham VA—not to have thought of the ideal dynamics of family space. What
Page 86 of 361
59
Jane Jacobs believed of the city—that it must make an asset out of the presence of
strangers by making a clear demarcation between public space and private space, put
eyes upon the public space, and have users in the public spaces fairly continuously—
was what Ken Schwartz believed of the house.8 He thought carefully of how to bring
people into the house; how and why (Jacobs: “You cannot make people use streets
they have no reason to use” [46]) to redistribute them along axes, among levels, and
through doors to specialized rooms and out doors to garden, patio, and balcony
areas; and how bring them together again. However many portals he provided to
surrounding landscapes, there was one way to depart the house at last. His slyest
architectural wit was his own front door, which was opaque from the outside but
whose inside was wholly visible through a picture window as one approached from the
driveway: the private always already public.
Apart from his own house, none of his houses had eyes upon the benign suburban
street. Their windows were on the foreground landscape architecture and background
natural landscape. But they were all carefully designed to keep eyes upon the people
inside, with unified spaces and unifying portals and sightlines for the family and its
circle to observe and connect with each other once they arrived at the house and once
they emerged from private spaces like bedroom, bathroom, and study. The
spectacular scenery and utopian climate was merely a backdrop, as was postwar
prosperity and suburban propriety.
An hour sitting on a living room floor listening to two people, who happened to be
Ain and Neutra, discuss great issues: It might have been “an experience incapable of
replication,” but Schwartz would create the built environment that could inspire it.
That was his California Dream. And his dream as a city planner and politician was to
recreate it outside the house.
8. Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities (New York: Modern
Library, 1993), pp. 44–45. For Jacobs the public space was street or sidewalk; for Ken,
living room, dining room, balcony, or patio. In the Schwartz House, kitchen, dining
room, and living room were literally a public square. In the Page-Selkirk House, the
squares were private, the hexagon public.
Page 87 of 361
60
KEN SCHWARTZ AS POLITICIAN
For six decades, Ken Schwartz was a major force—for much of that time the major
force—in the City of San Luis Obispo, a record no one else has matched or is likely to.
He was the right person at the right time: a teacher of urban planning as the age of
urban planning flourished. But he was something more. He became a force by the
force of his intellect; the detail of his observation and his observation of detail; and his
insistence on thinking, thinking things through, and thinking things through together.
Schwartz became a force
from his passion for not
only people-centered
urbanism but people-based
decision-making. He was,
as the Telegram-Tribune
wrote during the first of his
five successful runs for
mayor, “in planning matters
… very confident and …
does not hew to an
arbitrary division between
administration and policy-
making” but was “a master
at drawing out people,
giving everyone his say,
achieving a consensus.”
Judge Richard Harris roasts Schwartz at a 1975 Obispo
Beautiful dinner honoring the mayor. Telegram-Tribune.
The downside of urban planning is its tendency to ride roughshod over the people it
claims to be designing for in order to follow a concept. Schwartz gained his first
political power—membership on San Luis’s Planning Commission—in 1959, the year
after Jane Jacobs bested Robert Moses over the latter’s plan to run four lanes of Fifth
Avenue through Washington Square Park. Ken became chair of the commission in
1962, the year after Jacobs published The Death and Life of Great American Cities, the
book where she introduced her famous concept “eyes upon the street.”
Page 88 of 361
61
Schwartz combined the yin of Jacobs with
the yang of Moses: he made big plans
but introduced a robust citizen advisory
process so contrarian voices and nuance
could enter the picture. He welcomed the
marketplace of ideas in the way that
people do who are without intellectual
insecurity—people who have thought
things through but realize there are other
ways to think them through.
The neighborhood leader: from “Future
Neighbors Get Acquainted,” Telegram-
Tribune, 15 January 1954
The activist: Schwartz quoted in
“Rezoning Plan Under Criticism,”
Telegram-Tribune, 5 May 1956
It was characteristic that for the orals of
his architectural licensure Schwartz did
not, as was usual, present his own
projects but the projects of his students,
discussing how his input influenced their
development. He passed.
“After moving to San Luis Obispo,”
according to a 1974 special edition of the
AIA Memo, “Kenneth E. Schwartz
became an increasingly outspoken critic
of the city’s planning procedures”
(“Schwartz Helped Town Save Its Old
Mission”). He never ceased speaking out,
which came both from head and heart.
He never discouraged others from
speaking out, which he saw as the
foundation of not only democracy but
good decision-making.
Schwartz was not the only politician in San Luis Obispo who believed this. When
Mayor Fred Waters, a local mortician whom Schwartz had never met, called him up in
1959 to ask him to join the Planning Commission, this was Waters' explanation: "The
folks at City Hall tell me you have appeared before the Planning Commission and
former City Council protesting some rezones. I thought if you have better ideas on
land use zoning, you might welcome the opportunity to serve on the commission."
When Ken asked for a couple of days to consider, Waters said, "Sure, but just
remember, if you don't like things the way they are, you have to put up or shut up"
(Schwartz, op. cit., “A Life-Changing Appointment”).
Page 89 of 361
62
Schwartz joined the commission, which was accustomed to unanimous votes. Every
time it did ad hoc rezoning, he would vote against because there wasn't a general
plan. Finally, one night after 10 pm, Commissioner Scott, "who could have played
defensive tackle for the Chicago Bears" got out of his chair, came around the front of
the dais, and confronted him. "Schwartz, goddammit, just what is this general plan
thing you keep bitching about?" (ibid.).
"Quaking in my boots," Schwartz explained at length. "Scott had listened very
intently. He stood up straight and half to me and half to the rest of the commissioners
said, 'That makes a lot of sense. We ought to have a general plan.' …
The vote was unanimous. No such item had appeared on our agenda. There
was no public discussion because there was nobody in the audience. In those
days, those types of details didn't matter.
And that's the story behind San Luis Obispo's first general plan.
Within three years of his appointment,
Schwartz was chairing the Planning
Commission and would do so for five
years, until, renominated in 1967 by
mayor Clell Whelchel for a third four-year
term, he was refused reappointment by a
developer-oriented city council that was
also opposed to turning the block of
Monterey Street in front of the Mission
into a pedestrian plaza, which the
commission had begun to support.
Telegram-Tribune headline, 6 July 1967
It was not until 1968, however, that Schwartz decided to run for mayor—when three
Cal Poly students had their presentation on pedestrianizing the 700 block of Monterey
Street gaveled to an end after five minutes by Mayor Whelchel, who demanded grant
money back and walked out after former city attorney George Andre offered legal
representation to the students. Schwartz, Andre, two former council members, and
one more lawyer formed a Citizen’s Committee for Mission Plaza, circulated a
referendum petition, got Mission Plaza on the ballot, and won by almost two to one.
Ken Schwartz had been transformed from a political appointee to a community
activist. Taking power at the ballot box was the next logical step. But it was
characteristic that he should have been moved to this—even during the Vietnam era—
not as a firebrand for change but as a methodical champion for planning, process, and
community input. Ken was an Organization Man. But he was more particularly a
Page 90 of 361
63
Planning Man. He wanted problems worked out as they were in the classroom, by a
deliberative rather than political process: hence his emphasis on advisory bodies.
Endorsing Schwartz in his second reelection bid, the Telegram-Tribune listed nine
changes that were reason to vote for him. Listed first: “Has expanded citizen
participation in government.”9 The Trib also emphasized his contribution to the city’s
planning, appearance, downtown economic growth, and protection of its environment
from developers. These flowed from the first. One of Schwartz’s earliest actions as
mayor was sending a seven-page letter to the chair of the Planning Commission on
cities, San Luis, the national and regional economies, the city’s resources, and how to
develop its sectors in commerce and services, recreation and tourism, and industry.
This was circulated widely among advisory bodies and citizens. It was not a series of
campaign promises or an action template. It was an analysis; a basis for discussion.
This inclusive approach led to many specific improvements in the next ten years.
For his fifth and final mayoral run in 1977, Schwartz wrote in his manifesto (2,500
words long), “I strongly support the use of citizens on commissions and boards to
advise the city council. Conflicting viewpoints are worth the price of the process. Many
useful ideas are produced.”10 Characteristically, he hesitated to take individual credit
for anything, but he listed as changes during his eight years in office: the creation of
design, planning, and environmental documents, regulations, and advisory bodies; the
addition of 2,900 new housing units; adaptive reuse with new tenants of landmark
buildings; widening and asphalting of streets and creation of bike lanes and a public
transit system; improvement of numerous public services; and new public parks.
He included a long list of things he wanted to do in the next two years (mostly more
planning, including planned growth in the context of water). He also lauded the 256
citizens who, in the last eight years, had “served with distinction” on the city’s advisory
bodies. One could trust Ken to be precise about the number.
Under Ken Schwartz, the architectural practitioner and award-winning teacher, the city
became a master class where the citizens, like his Cal Poly students , learned by doing.
The Telegram-Tribune quoted him during his first run: “Anyone in a leadership
position is in part a teacher, whether he knows it or not. The question is, are you a
know-it-all teacher? I believe in making it as much self-teaching as possible.”11
9. “Another Term for Ken Schwartz,” Telegram-Tribune, Apr. 1973.
10. Kenneth Schwartz, “Agenda: The City of San Luis Obispo” (San Luis Obispo: Ken
Schwarz Reelection Committee, 1977).
11. Gilbert Moore, “Schwartz: An Architect for City,” San Luis Obispo Telegram-
Tribune, 1969.
Page 91 of 361
64
The voters made Schwartz, as a supporter of self-
teaching, responsible for shepherding the city from
the era of amateur, ad hoc rule dominated by
business interests to one of professional planning
and management that would not just allow but
actually foster citizen input and creativity. Although
the city engaged firms and hired staff to do planning,
Schwartz had no hesitation about becoming involved
with and pushing back on both, in being a strongman
in a weak-mayor system, for if business interests were
reined in, there would be nothing to prevent staff
interests from becoming dominant.
As the Telegram-Tribune said during his first run,
after eight years’ experience on the Planning
Commission, “he does not hew to an arbitrary
division between administration and policy-making.”
No detail was too small if it revealed a right way or a
wrong way, a good outcome or bad.
Ken Schwartz from the cover
of his campaign manifesto
Martha Schwartz, unstoppable
activist-recruiter, from Camp
Fire Girls and community
theater to the Jack House
Ken Schwartz’s criticisms were incisive, but he made
his agenda and assumptions clear, and he proceeded
with good humor, assisted by “his fun-loving,
effusive wife, Martha,” as former city manager John
Dunn described her in a letter to the Tribune after
Ken’s death (“Readers Remember Mission Plaza
Founder Ken Schwartz,” 30 Oct. 2019). Ken’s 1977
campaign manifesto included an analogy on city
planning from a Mickey Mouse and Goofy cartoon.
Ken Hampian, city manager under Ken, recalled him
sending a letter to Hampian’s wife: “Your husband is
as fiscally tight-fisted as they come. He seems to
believe that twenty computers, a police SUV, or a
new park lawnmower have a higher priority in the
scheme of things than an attractive and fun water
display. Is there a way to change his hidebound
attitude for the benefit of our otherwise attractive
community?” Naturally, Ken Hampian wrote back to
Martha (ibid.).
Page 92 of 361
65
Schwartz, in his manifesto, focused on Mission Plaza as a central accomplishment,
because “the Mission Plaza is responsible, at least in part, for restoring faith, vigor,
and public interest in our city center.” “It has precipitated changes in the human
structure of our downtown environment. The Beauty of the Mission Plaza would fall
short if it were not for people … . Thanks to Linnaea [Phillips], the Plaza is a people
place, and that’s what cities are all about—people.”
When all is said and done about Ken Schwartz’s accomplishments as mayor—including
the tougher accomplishments of ushering in new processes, not just new products—he
had an extraordinarily long and active term as a Cincinnatus. And his farm, much more
than the university, was the city and county.
A 1985 student project that Schwartz saved; Tod Fontana remakes the cultural center
of San Luis Obispo (with the destruction of numerous historic buildings, including the
Heyd Adobe, Leitcher House, Bello House, and half of the Morganti compound).
Schwartz ultimately relented on this Robert Moses–like plan.
After finishing his fifth term as mayor, Schwartz spent 5 years as associate dean and
interim dean of the School of Architecture and Environmental Design, another year
developing the school’s master plan, 2 more years as architectural consultant for the
Page 93 of 361
66
founding of Escuela de Agricultura de la Region Tropical Humeda (EARTH) in Costa
Rica, and finally retired from the faculty in 1988, 36 years after his arrival.
But by then he had served a year on the county grand jury dealing (further) with the
region’s water question, was serving his 21 years on the Jack House Committee and
11 on the Men’s Colony Citizen’s Advisory Committee, and he would soon start his 8
years on the County Planning Commission and, after that, 6 more years on the SLO
City Council (adding up to 16 years on the council in all). His service on the Downtown
Physical Design Concept Group in 1992—13 years after his retirement as mayor and 4
after his retirement from Cal Poly—would nonetheless be reprised when the group
was reassembled a quarter century later. That was in 2016, 57 years after his
appointment to the city’s Planning Commission, 60 years after he battled the
commission and the City Council for the Goldtree Homeowners Association.
Ken Schwartz has become the face of Mission Plaza, but—as he understood, said, and
enfolded into his politics—it took decades of the community working together to make
the plaza a physical reality and a human success thereafter. His effect on the city’s
planning, beautification, and services, as well as citizen input into all of these, was less
physically centered but far greater. The poster child for citizen input, he always
promoted that dialogue as council member and mayor.
Page 94 of 361
67
As tempting as it is to represent Ken Schwartz’s political career in numbers—the
number of years, the number of accomplishments, the number of people appointed to
advisory bodies—it is the consistent standard of thinking he demanded that is his
legacy. He demanded it of himself, of his political colleagues, of the city’s staff, and of
its citizens. This dialectic has influenced the health of the city for decades and, we can
only hope, will continue to do so for the decades to come.
As thoughtful as he was, Schwartz was always willing to admit when he was wrong.
Indeed his buildings serve as a metaphor for his politics (or vice versa): one has a
human problem to solve, a limited number of physical resources to solve it with, a
theory, a plan, but each time there is rethinking, tinkering, refinement to arrive at the
detail that provides a revolutionary solution. If Jane Jacobs and Robert Moses
provided Ken’s yin and yang, so, too, did his two favorite quotes: Daniel Burnham’s
Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood and probably
themselves will not be realized. Make big plans; aim high in hope and work,
remembering that a noble, logical diagram once recorded will never die, but
long after we are gone be a living thing, asserting itself with ever-growing
insistency.
And Mies’s
“God is in the details.”
Page 95 of 361
68
PETER AND CAROL ANDRE HOUSE
Period of Significance Throughout much of Ken Schwartz’s lifetime, he
continued to make refinements to his own house and the houses of his clients, or they
would seek approval from him for changes or restore to please him. Hence setting the
period of significance for each of these four houses from their date of construction to
Schwartz’s death in 2019 is a reasonable approach. This is in contrast to Mount Carmel
Lutheran Church, where changes already by the late 1960s were not approved by the
architects, hence only the original form was the significant one, and the period of
significance was brief.
In the case of the 1959 Andre House, the earliest built, this approach creates a sixty-
year period of significance. As the exterior of the Andre House is virtually unchanged
from the time of construction (the same is almost entirely true of the interior),
narrowing or expanding a period of significance between 1959 and 2019 would have
virtually no practical impact.
“City Building Permits $290,150 for Week,” Telegram-Tribune, 12 June 1959. The
other single-family house permits approved were for a mid-century modern, architect
unlisted, at $18,400 and thirteen tract houses styled in what Gloria Grahame in Fritz
Lang’s 1953 The Big Heat refers to as “early nothing,” value $14–16,000.
Eligibility Under Master List Criteria: Architectural Significance The
uniqueness and importance of the Andre House as an embodiment of Mid-Century
Modern architecture in San Luis Obispo depends in particular on its masterful handling
of space, both in its functional and aesthetic effects, but also the structure enclosing
the space; the materials the structure is made of; and the environment the materials
exclude, frame, and give access to.
New York–based architecture critic Lewis Mumford’s 1949 characterization of the “Bay
Region School” (now more commonly known as the Second Bay Tradition) could easily
be a description of the Mid-Century Modern: “though it was thoroughly modern, it
Page 96 of 361
69
was not tied to the tags and clichés of the so-called International Style: that it made no
fetish of the flat roof and did not deliberately avoid projections and overhangs: that it
made no effort to symbolize the machine, through a narrow choice of materials and
forms: that it had a place for personalities as different as Maybeck and [Gardner]
Dailey and [William] Wurster and [Ernest] Kump. What seemed to me admirable in the
style that had developed during the last half century was that it was a steady organic
growth, producing modern forms accepted as natural and appropriate by both client
and architect. Even the speculative suburban house in the Bay Region, during the last
fifteen years, has not been untouched by this movement. But in perspective, the work
of this style was part of a worldwide movement: a movement in which no single
country can claim preeminence.”12
12. Lewis Mumford, “The Architecture of the Bay Region,” in Ernest Born, Esther Born,
and Robert M. Church, eds., Domestic Architecture of the San Francisco Bay Region
(San Francisco: San Francisco Museum of Art, 1949).
“Women Eagerly Anticipate Mission
Mothers’ Tour, Tea,” Telegram-Tribune,
27 Sep. 1960
Hence what Mumford identified as the
Bay Region School may simply have been
(as he acknowledges) a widespread
suburban style that, as a New Yorker, he
first noticed in the Bay Area when he was
being driven around in 1941 by William
Wurster to look at Maybeck buildings. Yet
the West Coast landscape and climate
and the architectural visionaries this edge
of the world attracted gave the California
version a particular prominence.
Page 97 of 361
70
The 1949 exhibition of Second Bay Tradition architects for which Mumford wrote this
introduction included a “Background Section” with the work of mostly First Bay
Tradition architects, including Joseph Worcester, Willis Polk, Maybeck, Julia Morgan,
and Greene and Greene.
Significantly, it was probably to Greene and Greene that Ken Schwartz owed the
exterior form of the Andre House. There appear to be no models for a roof with side
gables overtopping flanking side-gabled roofs in Neutra’s or Cliff May’s work.
Schindler’s 1946 Marian Toole House in Palm Desert nested three graduated gables in
one direction; Schwartz may have been aware of it. But he was certainly aware of the
garage of Greene and Green’s Blacker House, to which he took Cal Poly architectural
engineering students at least three times before designing the Andre House.
Greene and Green’s south elevation, Blacker Garage, 1907. The north facade had the
same arrangement originally, but a right-angle wing has since been added.
Page 98 of 361
71
Schwartz says in his Memoir that Cal Poly architecture students first visited the Blacker
House soon after it was “purchased by Mr. and Mrs. Hill, who were new arrivals from
Texas” (“A Field Trip interlude: The Blacker House, a Greene and Greene Gem”). Max
and Margery Hill moved into the house in the summer of 1955.13 So Schwartz must
have first seen the house (and its extant garage) in 1955 or more likely 1956. He
designed the Andre House in 1959.
What Schwartz—with his background in Functionalism—does to this varied and
attractive exterior arrangement is to change its interior functionality by extending the
central section to the front to accommodate a sunken living room and viewing balcony
and to the back to accommodate an outdoor dining area. He turns the areas under the
flanking gables into wings for the family’s private life. Hence he audaciously marries
Craftsman appearance and Functionalist space into Mid-Century Modern design.
Schwartz describes the process in his Memoir.
The slope of the site dictated the house should be terraced. The plan was
divided into three distinct levels: a living room level; an entry, kitchen, dining–
family room, kids’ bedroom level; and a master bedroom–bath–dressing suite
level. The living room opened to a balcony; the other rooms all opened to
outside terraces. Even though there were three floors, the roof was one long
sloping plane covering all of the areas. The roof over the master bedroom suite
had a reverse pitch. All of the roof beams would be exposed and set on a
uniform module. Only the bedrooms and bathrooms were enclosed with walls;
the other rooms flowed together spatially, giving a sense of openness to the
living portions of the home. (Schwartz, op. cit., “Peter Andre”)
William Wurster, writing in the San Francisco Bay Region exhibition’s catalogue how he
encountered the First Bay Tradition as a seventeen-year-old architecture freshman at
Berkeley in 1913, describes how “it meant giving up the idea of windows as holes in
the wall, of competing with the view with the triviality of fabric, color, or pattern. It
meant steering free of the ruffles of existence” (“A Personal View”). Notably, in the
public axis of the Andre House, the exterior walls are glass and there are no curtains
or accommodations for them, a frequent characteristic of the Mid-Century Modern
hillside view house. Other ways in which the Andre House embodies the Mid-Century
Modern have been discussed earlier in this application, but these aesthetic
connections to earlier California styles developed in a Functionalist context define the
region’s Mid-Century Modern.
13. (“Each of Her Hobbies Has a Room of Its Own,” Los Angeles Times, 11 Dec. 1955,
Part VI-S-SUN, p. 18.
Page 99 of 361
72
Joseph Esherick, Brooks Walker House,
Tahoe City. Roger Sturtevant.
Peter and Carol Andre House: use of the
non-right angle
The Andre House ends with the detailing of the rafter tails, which evokes Greene and
Greene’s aesthetic treatment of this structural element but also resembles the beam
ends in Joseph Esherick’s Second Bay Tradition (or Mid-Century Modern) Brooks
Walker House in Tahoe City, featured in the Domestic Architecture of the San
Francisco Bay Region. The exposed rafters support the deep overhangs that Mumford
mentions in the same catalogue but also symbolize rusticity in the suburban house of a
lawyer who does not want to forget he’s a rancher.
When Schwartz writes about the craftsmanship, he sounds like a Craftsman architect—
a Greene or a Morgan. “Peter engaged Nielsen construction to build the house. They
did a fine job. Nielsen, a Dane, paid attention to my plans and employed craftsmen
who could attend to the unique details in my design. Peter and Carol seemed as
pleased with the result as I was” (ibid.).
Page 100 of 361
73
Eligibility Under Master List Criteria: Association with an Important Person in the
City’s Past In defining “association with important persons … in the city’s past”
and the analogous NRHP qualification “lives of persons significant in our past,”
historians look to those who did not simply perform their jobs or show up in the group
portraits of significant events—like the figures in Velázquez’s Surrender of Breda—but
changed the course of a community in definable ways: ideally ways that represent “the
broad patterns of our history” rather than one-offs that hold no greater meaning.
In 1956 William H. Whyte published The Organization Man, a critique of postwar
corporate collectivism and the decline of individualism. Yet American small towns like
San Luis Obispo—the commercial, political, and cultural centers of more sparsely
populated areas—depended and still depend on community collectivism to get things
done in a mutually agreeable way. San Luis Obispo’s history has been altered by such
Organization Men and Women as much as by individual geniuses. For every poet like
Frances Margaret Milne or architect like Julia Morgan, there is a Nettie Sinsheimer or
Grace Barneberg who organized the collective will to employ them.
Peter Andre, Telegram-
Tribune, 12 Sep. 1952
George and Peter Andre
were San Luis Obispo’s
iconic Organization Men of
the post–World War II era:
sons of a local rancher,
lawyers educated in the
Bay Area and LA, melding
big city expertise and small
town credibility. George
led local Democrats and his
brother local Republicans,
but they steered numerous
other organizations as well:
ethnic, religious, social,
educational, commercial. A
better name for what they
were is Civic Man.
George Andre, Telegram-
Tribune, 19 May 1952
Their community ubiquity, and the brothers’ presence on both sides of the political
fence, created local comfort with political conflict and social change, which Peter
tirelessly explained in talks to a vast variety of groups. George and Peter Andre were
known as “civic leaders” when that term embodied a familiar concept of community
unity—even if it also embodied a notion of white, male, and propertied dominance.
Page 101 of 361
74
Peter Andre, as a conservative, spent much of his time trying to put the brakes on
progressive policy, though unlike associates like Caspar Weinberger and Bob Nimmo,
he did not leverage his California network to burst as a force for conservatism on the
national scene. He was determinedly local—unlike his brother George, who was the
statewide leader of both the Knights of Columbus and the Cabrillo Civic Club and who
ran (unsuccessfully) for State Assembly in 1952. George Andre’s Democratic campaign
statement could have been written equally for Peter (a three-part platform against
corruption, inefficiency, and waste), and Peter temporarily withdrew from the
Republican Central Committee to support his brother (“What I Stand For,” Telegram-
Tribune, 26 May 1952; Dan Krieger, “This Thanksgiving, Let’s Start Talking Again. We
Might Find More in Common Than Divides Us,” Tribune, 17 Nov. 2018).
Peter Andre’s definable, course-changing local effects were
• founding, in 1948, the county’s oldest law firm, now Andre, Morris and Buttery
• consolidating postwar Republicanism after the county had voted four times (albeit
with ever-decreasing enthusiasm) for Franklin Roosevelt
• building the early legal structures and political deals for historic preservation and
cultural enhancement. The History Center, Dallidet Adobe, Jack House and Garden,
Ramona Depot, and San Luis Obispo Museum of Art as public institutions are all partly
his legacy, as is the transfer of the Cholame land grant from almost a century of
Hollister-Jack family ownership to more than a half century of Hearst family ownership.
The Andre House is rare for a historic house in embodying the image of the client: an
“ultra-modern” structure (as it was described by the local paper in 1960) that was “rich
and luxurious” but communicated “ease of upkeep” and “relaxation” (“Women
Eagerly Anticipate Mission Mothers’ Tour, Tea,” Telegram- Tribune, 27 Sep. 1960).
With its stone and board and batten walls, open beams, barbeque, outdoor dining,
and adjoining corral, it was a “ranch-style split-level” for an actual rancher, but its view
took in the entire city that Peter (to use a ranching metaphor) greased the wheels of
(“City Building Permits $290,150 for Week,” op. cit., 12 June 1959).
Peter Andre was born in San Luis Obispo in 1918, the youngest son of Joseph Jorge
Andre and Lena Wolfsen. Joseph, though born in Boston in 1868, was the son of an
Azorean fishing family who regular sailed back and forth between those Portuguese
islands and New England.14 At eleven he returned to Boston, lived with his godmother
(who dropped his Freitas surname in favor of his third Christian name Andre), then
immigrated a year later to California to work as a sheepherder for an uncle.
14. Peter R. Andre, Memoirs of a Small Town Boy (San Luis Obispo: privately
published, 1994), pp. 3–4.
Page 102 of 361
75
A canny stockman, after more than two decades in the Kettleman Hills, J. J. Andre had
“accumulated his band of sheep” and moved to San Luis Obispo in 1902, buying
ranchland here while retaining a ranch at Hanford; marrying Lena, part of the Danish
diaspora from then-German-controlled Schleswig-Holstein; opening the J. J. Andre
grocery on Higuera Street; and living nearby at the end of Dana Street with his wife
and, ultimately, two daughters and four sons, born between 1904 and 1920 (“Pioneer
Merchant Joseph J. Andre Dies at Age 71,” Telegram-Tribune, 4 Nov. 1939). George
was the first born child and Peter the second to last, fourteen years later.
J. J. Andre, Telegram-Tribune,
4 Nov. 1939
Joseph Andre was active in Republican politics in
Kings County by 1902, being listed as a delegate of
the West End district in the county convention, and
after his move he became active in San Luis Obispo’s
party, a delegate to the county convention in 1910,
by which time he was also on the board of directors
of the city’s Chamber of Commerce (“The
Republicans,” Hanford Sentinel, 16 July 1902;
Tribune: “Report of Credential Committee,” 28 Aug.
1910; “Chamber of Commerce,” 29 Sep. 1910). In
1927 he was appointed to the board of directors of
the new County Chamber of Commerce; he also
served as an officer in the city’s Grocers’ Association
(“County C of C Organized,” Arroyo Grande Herald-
Recorder, 9 June 1927; “Association Elects Officers
for the Ensuing Year,” Tribune, 25 Sep. 1915).
Andre quickly became a major figure in San Luis Obispo’s Portuguese community as
president of the Sociedad da Irmandade do Divino Espirito Santo (IDES), organizing
fundraising for relief of San Francisco in the 1906 earthquake and fire, including taking
charge of tickets sales for a benefit by the Uniao Portugueza do Estado da California
(UPEC), of which he was also an officer (Tribune: “IDES Supreme Council to Be Held
Here in September,” 18 Feb. 1906; “Hearts of Our People Open,” 22 Apr. 1906; 13
May 1906). J. J. Andre also served as Grand Knight of the local Knights of Columbus
and always led the list of contributors to the Mission (Andre, op. cit., 20). In 1911 he
ran for the city’s Board of Trustees but came in eighth of thirteen candidates for the
four-member board (“Under the New Charter,” Tribune, 2 May 1911).
In other words, Joseph, with a formal education only to age twelve, was the Andre
family’s original Civic Man: the independently successful rancher who was a less
successful grocer (giving groceries away during the Great Depression and dying with
$35,000 on his books [Andre, op.cit., 10]) but a leader in the political, business, ethnic,
Page 103 of 361
76
and religious associations of his community (“Judge Ray B. Lyon stated that my father
had sponsored more people for citizenship than any other person he knew” [45]). He
gave his sons the one thing he lacked: an education. George and Peter got their
undergraduate degrees at Santa Clara University and law degrees, respectively, at
Loyola and USC in LA. Peter’s law school education was interrupted by artillery service
in Europe, including the D-Day invasion, the Battle of the Bulge, and a Bronze Star.
As soon as Peter Andre passed the bar in 1948, he returned to San Luis with his
wartime bride Carol McMillan, who had served as a nurse in Europe, and set up house
and office on Garden Street upstairs from KPIK, in partnership with George, who had
returned from lawyering in Manhattan Beach but was busy as rent director-attorney for
the Defense Rental Area of San Luis Obispo. Shortly after his arrival, Peter was invited
to join the Caballeros de San Luis Obispo as their secretary, which he remained for
almost thirty years (76). In the same year he also became secretary of the Fiesta de las
Flores (“New Officers, New Ideas for SLO Fiesta,” Telegram-Tribune, 17 Nov. 1948).
When I first came home and started practicing law, I got involved with
numerous organizations, among them the Lions, Elks, Knights of Columbus,
Native Sons, Chamber of Commerce, Caballeros de San Luis Obispo, American
Legion, VFW, Republicans, Young Republicans, etc. (Andre, op. cit., 99)
By 1950, he was also on the Lions board of directors; secretary-treasurer of SLO’s
Community Chest for Youth; president of chapter 15 of the Cabrillo Civic Club, an
ethnic Portuguese organization of which his brother George was statewide president;
county chair of the Nixon senatorial campaign; founding president of the county
Young Republicans; and elected to the county’s Republican Central Committee
(Telegram-Tribune: “Charter Talk Heard at Lions Meeting,” 4 Nov. 1949; “Youth Fund
Meet Called Tonight,” 8 June 1949; “Installation Rites Conducted for New Cabrillo
Officers,” 23 Nov. 1949; “Leaders of GOP Greet Nixon Visit Tomorrow,” 18 Apr. 1950;
“County Cast Record High Primary Vote,” 9 June 1960; Andre, op. cit., p. 91).
But this understates the situation. When the Korean War started, Andre, a reserve
officer, was called back into service in the judge advocate general’s office at Camp
Roberts—the sole lawyer on the base—in October 1950.
Actually, there were blessings to my being recalled to service. I had belonged
to twenty-seven different organizations and was driving myself crazy trying to
keep up with most of them. Now I had an excuse to get out of all non-military
activities. In fact, the commanding officer, when seeing my car on the post in
the early days, wanted to know who owned the car with the “Vote Republican—
Nixon for US Senator” bumper sticker on it. I was told to remove these stickers
immediately, which I did. (77)
Page 104 of 361
77
Peter Andre returned to civilian life in September 1951 and the same month became
unpaid deputy city attorney (to the city attorney, his brother George). He became
president of the Caballeros in 1952. The same year found him reelected to the county
Republican Central Committee; chairing the successful county election campaigns for
Senator William Knowland and the Eisenhower-Nixon ticket, a Cotillion Club dance
with Carol, ticket sales for the Lincoln Dinner and for a Chamber–Cal Poly dance;
recruiting for the Chamber in the Telegram-Tribune; and joining the board of the local
Bank of America (a position his father had held for many years) (Telegram-Tribune:
“Caballeros Will Plan Ride at Annual Barbeque,” 11 Jan. 1952; “Members of County
Central Committee,” 13 May 1952; “Andre Chairman for Knowland,” 3 Apr. 1952;
“Eisenhower-Nixon Committee Headed by Andre,” 12 Sep. 1952”; “Cotillion Club Has
Costume Dance,” 15 Oct. 1952; “Working Together,” 5 Apr. 1952; “What C of C
Means to Me,” 3 May 1952; ). Unlike big city Organization Man, small town Civic Man
does the most important to the most trivial tasks—as long as he draws people in.
Andre joined the Chamber board and chaired its Military Affairs Committee, in 1953
arranging the community center for part-time use by Camp San Luis troops and
leading Defense Housing Authorization negotiations with builders (Telegram-Tribune:
“Opening Date of May 2 Now Assured,” 10 Apr. 1953; “Demand for Defense Housing
Will Be Put to 30-Day Test,” 24 Apr. 1953). The same year, as acting city attorney, he
wrote legislation for a downtown traffic loop (later a Schwartz obsession), organized
funding to construct a community pool, and recruited for the Scouts (Telegram-
Tribune: “Seek to Cut Traffic Congestion,” 6 Oct. 1953; “Construction Costs to Be
Compared,” 3 Dec. 1953; “Lyon Announces Sign-Up Group,” 17 Feb. 1953).
Over the next few years he would serve as vice chair and acting chair of the county’s
Republican Central Committee, chair of the successful Eisenhower-Nixon reelection
campaign, county chair of some unsuccessful election campaigns (James Silliman for
lieutenant governor and Patrick Hillings for attorney general), a member of the
Citizens’ Centennial Committee, a statewide director of the Cabrillo Club, president of
the Mission School Boosters, and a team captain in a Natoma Council of Camp Fire
Girls fundraising drive (Telegram-Tribune: “Luncheon Here Friday for GOP
Campaign,” 29 Oct. 1956; “Jim Silliman Up Against Hard Fight, 28 May 1954; “GOP
Greets Knowland and Hillings,” 24 Oct. 1956; “Number 6 of a Series,” 14 May 1956;
“J. Quaresma Heads State Cabrillo Club,” 1 Feb. 1956; “Pete Andre Heads Mission
Boosters,” 15 July 1957; “Camp Fire Drive Opens in SLO,” 30 Oct. 1959). When the
Southern Pacific retired its steam engines, he tried to acquire the last one in San Luis
for a public park (suggesting it to the City Council during a hearing representing the
garbage company). Unfortunately, the Parks Commission turned it down (“Higher
Rates on Garbage Approved,” Telegram-Tribune, 2 Oct. 1956).
Page 105 of 361
78
In 1960, the year after he built his “ultra-modern” Kenneth Schwartz house, Peter
Andre was elected chair of the county’s Republic Central Committee, serving till 1966.
In 1960 he also served as county chair of Nixon’s unsuccessful presidential campaign,
but he did so again for his successful campaign in 1968. (Notably, Barry Goldwater was
the only Republican presidential candidate whose campaign Andre did not chair
between 1952 and 1968, and Goldwater was the only Republican presidential
candidate who lost San Luis Obispo County from 1948 to 1988.)
The Chamber of Commerce took a lot of time since I served on the board of
directors. Also, the Republican Party took an inordinately great amount of time.
… Sometimes I wonder how I ever practiced law. Well, in the early days I didn’t
have that many clients. (99)
One client was Donald
Turnupseed, whom Andre
represented in the James
Dean inquest (successfully; as
the turning driver, Turnupseed
was theoretically at fault) and
subsequent legal settlement.
He also represented anglers in
a long dispute over their right
to fish in the Whale Rock
Reservoir that was eventually
won by Ken Schwartz and the
reservoir’s commission.
Peter Andre generally supported property rights and business interests, including in
nine years, most of those as chair, on the county’s Air Pollution Control District
Hearing Board between 1970 and 1979. Although, like most small town lawyers, he
represented a variety of clients—and once avoided being the public defender of
accused cattle rustlers by showing up to court in a Stetson and being assumed by
them to be beholden to the rancher interest—he eventually migrated to estate law.
His lasting contributions, however, were in setting up the legal foundation for the
Historical Society of San Luis Obispo County, now the History Center, for which he
served as counsel from its inception and for many years after, and the San Luis Obispo
Art Association, now the San Luis Obispo Museum of Art (History Center archives;
“County Historical Society Reelects Mrs. Leroy Dart,” Pismo Times, 13 May 1965;
“Andre to Speak at Art Meeting Here Wednesday,” Telegram-Tribune 17 Feb 1958).
Page 106 of 361
79
The Dallidet Adobe
Andre also made the complicated legal arrangements for the transfer of the Dallidet
Adobe to the Historical Society with the continued occupation and maintenance of the
last family member, Paul Dallidet. The controversy over the transfer of the Ramona
Depot from Robert and Elizabeth Leitcher’s property on Higuera Street behind the
Jack House—where it had stood since R. E. Jack moved it from the Southern Pacific
tracks in 1908—to the grounds of the Dallidet Adobe in 1964 caused Andre’s
resignation as first vice-president of the Historical Society, but his actions preserved
the depot, the city’s last nineteenth-century railroad building, so that it may one day
be restored to its original setting next to the Union Pacific tracks.
It was Peter Andre who approached Mayor Ken Schwartz in 1974 with the prospect of
San Luis Obispo acquiring the Jack House and Garden from the seven heirs of Ethel
Jack and Andre who drew up the grant deed that set up the Jack House Committee
(Schwartz, op. cit., “Peter Andre”). The Italianate House and rare Gardenesque
landscape have served as a vibrant and popular historic house museum and city park
for almost a half century, hosting the public presentation of the city’s first (and so far
only) historic resources survey on 11 October 1982.15 Eight years earlier, Andre had
represented the Jack family in the sale of the 73,000 acres of the Rancho Cholame to
the Hearsts, making up for their loss of 158,000 acres of the Milpitas and Los Ojitos
Ranchos that W. R. Hearst sold the US Government in 1940 for Fort Hunter Liggett
(“Jack Ranch Purchased by Hearst Corporation,” Santa Maria Times, 3 Nov. 1966).
15. Cindy Lambert, “Saving San Luis Obispo County’s Identity With Preservation
Efforts,” La Vista, 2015, p. 59.
Page 107 of 361
80
Ramona Depot in its original location, pre-1908. History Center.
The Ramona Depot in the 1950s at 571
Higuera Street. History Center.
In the 1960s in the Dallidet Adobe
garden. Telegram-Tribune, 11 Aug. 1965.
Perhaps the most remarkable yet ephemeral thing in Andre’s role as Civic Man was his
community role explaining things. In 1948 nineteen propositions appeared on the
November ballot. During October, Andre explained them to the Cabrillo Civic Club,
Lions, Elks, Rotary, Native Sons of the Golden West, and anyone who showed up at
Cal Poly or the Edna or Nipomo Farm Centers (Telegram-Tribune, Oct. 1948: “Cabrillo
Civic Club to Hear Talk by Peter Andre,” 26; “County Park Work Planned,” 30; “Elks
Hear Andre,” 20; “Andre Summarizes Ballot Measures,” 19; “Class Initiated by Native
Sons,” 27; “Meeting at Cal Poly on Ballot Proposals,” 21; “Andre Reviews
Propositions,” 9; “Nipomo Center Meets Monday,” 28). This became a staple of
elections, and in 1988, four decades later, he was still explaining November ballot
propositions, to the Fair Oaks Civic Association (Times-Press-Recorder, 12 Oct. 1988).
Page 108 of 361
81
Andre spoke at the opening of Pacheco Elementary on the significance of Romualdo
Pacheco, on marriage at Mission Hall, wills to a missionary conference, Portuguese
pioneers to the Lions, Americanization to the Cabrillo Club, the Ah Louis Store to the
County Historical Society, “Friendship and Its Relationship to San Luis Obispo County
History” to the Native Sons, unknown topics to the graduates of Oceano Elementary
and the Grange (Telegram-Tribune: “Andre Tells Why Pacheco Honored Here,” 29
Oct. 1954; “Talk on Marriage,” 13 Jan. 1955; “Attorney Speaks on Pioneers at Lions
Meeting,” 18 Apr. 1958; “Cabrillo Club Picnics in Cayucos,” 2 July 1958; “Historical
Society Hears Talks on Landmark Stores,” 26 Sep. 1959; ”Parlors Install San Luisita
Officers Slate,” 25 July 1960; 29 Nov. 1958; “Open Door to Have a Missionary
Conference Sunday,” Times-Press-Recorder, 25 Mar. 1977; “Oceano to Graduate 67,”
Santa Maria Times, 3 June 1954). He presided over the opening of San Luis High and
the funeral of Walter Sing Louis (“San Luis to Dedicate High School Saturday,” Santa
Maria Times, 1 Nov. 1963; “Walter S. Louis,” Times-Press-Recorder, 30 June 1993).
Peter Andre never ran for public office. Expectations that the man known to the law
community as “Mr. Republican” would be raised to the bench were never fulfilled.
Andre’s destiny was as San Luis Obispo’s ultimate Civic Man: campaigner for others,
explainer to others, recruiter of others, leader of organizations, legal organizer of
organizations, and preserver of the community’s history—on his own time and dime.
Civic Man and Woman: Peter Andre and Nami and Mitz Sanbonmatsu campaign for
Evelle Younger for state district attorney (Times-Press-Recorder, 23 April 1970).
Page 109 of 361
82
Eligibility Under Master List Criteria: Integrity
• The Andre House retains its original location.
• Its exterior design has not been changed, and its interior design has been changed
only in the master bathroom.
The Andre House (center left) surrounded by its paddock with the house now above it
(top left) and other suburban neighbors. Google Map satellite 3D.
• In 1959 “they acquired a fine piece of land above Johnson Avenue. Nothing was
above them or likely to be” (ibid.). There is, now, one house above the Andre House,
but it does not substantially alter the setting of natural hillside above, suburban
development below, and “a splendid vista westward to Cerro San Luis and Bishop
Peak” (see satellite photograph above). The horse paddock surrounds the house on
two sides, but as the front facade faces the hill-mounting carriage drive, it is possible
this could be developed with low-built housing without substantially altering the
integrity of the setting.
• The Andre House’s exterior materials remain the same as in 1959: concrete and
concrete block, brick, stone, board and batten, posts, beams, and glass.
Page 110 of 361
83
• The workmanship from 1959 is still intact and apparent in everything from rafter tail
detailing to woodwork, stonework, brickwork, and tilework.
• The feeling on the upper edge of the city and lower edge of the hills is not
substantially different from 1959, with natural sounds and scents in abundance. Only
the reintroduction of horses would make it more authentic.
• The association with both the architect Schwartz and his clients the Andres remains
unmistakable in its design and integrity.
Page 111 of 361
84
PIMENTEL-ORTH HOUSE
Period of Significance The house was designed and built for Richard and
Thelma Pimentel in 1961 and remodeled for Michael and Pam Orth in 1983. Its period
of significance extends from 1961 to 2019.
Eligibility Under Master List Criteria: Significance In his Memoir, Schwartz
writes of the Pimentel-Orth House, “That house is one of my favorite designs”
(“Monterey Heights”). It embodies Minimalism and Functionalism in an axial
arrangement far more rationalist, less dramatic than the Andre House of only two
years before. It appears to be a plain, angular box dropped on a curving hillside, but,
like the Andre House, it descends down the grade—though on two graduated floors
rather than under a continuous canopy.
Access to the larger public top floor is by two entries parallel but offset: the first the
formal entry to the living room, the second the informal entry to the kitchen. Both
follow the exposed rafters from the carport through the enclosed areas through the
glass wall of the opposing balcony. Counter to the rafters run the roof planking above
Page 112 of 361
85
and wall beams below; also counter runs the long axis of living and dining room. The
top level is essentially cruciform.
The master suite is also on this floor, occupying the southwest side—possibly not a
felicitous arrangement as children grew to stay up later than their parents. (The Orths,
after they bought the house in the early seventies, switched the master bedroom to a
den and the downstairs den to a bedroom.)
The private bedroom and den wing is tucked under the public floor along the same
axis (the one that runs southwest to northeast along the hillside) and not, as with the
Andre or Schwartz Houses, to one side or, as with the Page-Selkirk House, two sides.
It is accessible by interior stairs. Its hallway on the hill side gives access to a den,
bedroom, and bathroom, then opens up to a larger bedroom at the end with (now) a
sliding glass door: a Usonian arrangement that Schwartz would repeat in his own
house but with the end bedroom designed as the master suite.
Axial treatment continues on the exterior. One feature that Schwartz did not borrow
from Neutra was the ribbon window. Schwartz’s windows in the horizontally oriented,
one-story Andre House provide contrasting verticality with, Masonite panels above
and below. In the two-story Pimentel-Orth House, the same window arrangement
emphasizes the building’s verticality, with the master bedroom’s window and Masonite
panels forming a plane with the third bedroom’s sliding glass door below and the
second bedroom and downstairs bathroom windows and panels forming a plane with
the balcony and its sliding glass doors above. Where the northeast facade cannot carry
this two-story arrangement, it makes a similar point with clerestory windows above a
openable sliding window and a sliding glass door that leads from the middle of the
exterior stairs to the middle of the interior stairs.
The V-groove shiplap siding lends verticality though with more Minimalist subtlety
than the board and batten siding of the Andre House. The absence of eaves and
horizontality makes a definitive break with the Mid-Century Modern and forges a
Page 113 of 361
86
connection both to Minimalism and the Third Bay Tradition that would shortly be on
display at Sea Ranch on the Sonoma Coastline. The porthole defying the strict logic of
the stacked window and door arrangements lends a whimsical Third Bay note, along
with the variety of pushouts. Just as the nineteenth-century asymmetric Italianate form
was recommended as a way to accommodate later additions, Schwartz, in 1983, was
able to extend the northwest kitchen wall, add storage to the carport, create room for
a top-floor fireplace, and enlarge the downstairs bathroom without upsetting the
building’s aesthetic. (Imagine such additions at the Farnsworth House.) The addition of
a kitchen island, west-facing corner window above a relocated sink, and hill-facing
dogtooth skylight introduced still more definitively the relaxed spirit (if relaxation can
be definitive) of the Third Bay Tradition. These are character-defining features along
with the Minimalism of 1961.
Eligibility Under Master List Criteria: Integrity
• The Pimentel-Orth House retains its original location.
• Its 1961 and 1983 overall design and individual features remain the same. Though
the kitchen was updated in 1983, for instance, the 1961 gap under the kitchen
cabinets for viewing (and doubtless dish) access to the dining area was retained.
• No development has been added since 1961 to the immediate natural surroundings
or distant views to impinge on the house’s original setting.
• With the exception of a larger downstairs bathroom window, new kitchen window,
downstairs sliding glass door, carport storage addition, and upstairs fireplace pushout,
1961 exterior materials remain the same, as does the workmanship.
• The feeling of the suburban-rural edge persists, with Paso Robles Drive as remote
and undeveloped as it was when, in the late 1950s, Ken and Martha Schwartz came
upon the two for-sale properties on this “well known lovers’ lane” where they would
sometimes drive to “sit and admire the grand vista” (ibid.).
• The house retains strong association with the architect and his clients, the Pimentels
and the Orths, given the integrity of all other factors. Schwartz lived next door for
nearly sixty years, maintaining a relationship with the house and its occupants, and
Pam Orth continues to live in the house.
Page 114 of 361
87
KENNETH AND MARTHA SCHWARTZ HOUSE
Period of Significance The period of significance for the Schwartz House’s
architectural significance and association with an important person in the city’s past
extends from construction in 1962 to Ken Schwartz’s death in 2019.
Eligibility Under Master List Criteria: Architectural Significance This building
was Ken Schwartz’s experimental and demonstration house: where he could apply his
theories and experience and where friends, colleagues, and students could visit and
learn about a different way of living, one with eyes upon and eyes from the street.
The Goldtree home at 2553 Santa Clara was a good home, we enjoyed living
there, and we invested in fixing it up. It was a good neighborhood for which we
were proud to have been active participants. But our Monterey Heights home
at 201 Buena Vista is my design. For good and for bad, I have learned much
from living in one of my own creations. Every architect should have to live with
his own success … and with his own failures—there are always a few things that
should have been done differently. (Ibid.)
The Schwartz House embodies
Minimalism and Functionalism,
particularly in their Southern Californian
and Neutraesque variant, and relates to
the Second Bay Tradition possibly
indirectly through Neutra. Its character-
defining features include a single level
built out over a hillside location;
continuous rectangular facade with
slightly offset public and private wings
under a continuous flat roofline; large
expanses of glass and vertical redwood
siding rhythmically arranged; axial
counterpoints between the house and
stair tower; a Usonian hallway; integration
between interior and exterior materials;
and expression of structure through
overall form rather than exposed
structural elements.
Schwartz House light panel featured in
Perfect Home, San Luis Obispo edition,
July 1969
Page 115 of 361
88
Eligibility Under Master List Criteria: Association with an Important Person in the
City’s Past The Schwartz House also qualifies for the Master List for its historical
significance as the home of Ken Schwartz during the bulk of his political career, its
construction coinciding with his accession to the chair of the Planning Commission and
its occupation continuing through his subsequent 5 years as chair, 10 years as mayor, 6
years as council member, and almost 60 years on a wide variety of city and county
bodies and involved in an astounding array of activities that transformed San Luis
Obispo from a town with little planning, beautification, or attention to public space
into a tourism and recreation destination and notoriously happy place. He did much of
the analysis and planning for this transformation from his den and much of the
discussion there and in his living room.
Eligibility Under Master List Criteria: Integrity
• The Schwartz House is in its original location.
• The 1962 design has been changed only in details, such as the reconfiguration of
dining room fenestration, the staining of exterior redwood to match the interior
paneling, and the addition of pergolas and a garage door. These changes were
brought about by Schwartz as refinements in aesthetic theory and practice.
Spider leg outrigger and carved pergola beam added in front after the 1970s
• The setting of “homes … in the Mediterranean style popular in the late twenties and
early thirties” (as well as several Mid-Century and Modern ones) persists, as does the
grand vista, though there are fewer vacant lots. Many of the homes originally
surrounding the Schwartz House are still there, and the additions are in keeping with
the upper middle class, individualistic, suburban character of the neighborhood. Ken
meticulously maintained his original landscape architecture, which has matured into
what the original plantings foreshadowed, as in the pale, linear eucalyptus. The
“gnarled old pepper tree” that became the point from which Schwartz “established all
the levels of the house” and “a major interest point captured in the views from within
the house” survives and thrives.
• The materials and workmanship survive, to a large degree testament to the
craftsmanship of the Schwartz and Riggio families, as well as to the hired carpenters.
Page 116 of 361
89
• The feeling of quiet, out-of-the-way Buena Vista Avenue, with its mix of interesting
newer and older houses and its green island down the hill, remains; as does the feeling
of San Luis Obispo—about twice the size as when the Schwartzes built their house but
with no traffic noise from the freeway.
• The house retains strong association with Ken Schwartz from his distinctive design
and subsequent refinements.
Ken, Martha, and unidentified child next to their 1960 Ford Falcon below the 201
Buena Vista lot. Four of the five Modernist and Mid-Century houses in the background
remain.
Page 117 of 361
90
PAGE-SELKIRK HOUSE
Period of Significance 1966–2019.
Eligibility Under Master List Criteria: Significance The Page-Selkirk House is
Ken Schwartz’s most audacious design. Its hexagonal hub and spoke design embodies
a combination of Minimalism, Functionalism, and Futurism that allowed for
experiments like the geodesic dome, the Chemosphere, and Rudolph Schindler’s 1949
Hollywood Hills house for his mistress, the Dunite poet Ellen Janson. Other character-
defining features include the exposed beams, plank ceilings, round skylight, and brick
fireplace and freestanding chimney of its hub, Neutraesque plywood siding outside
and paneling inside, large sliding glass doors, interstitial alcove areas, views from each
of them (Shirley Page Selkirk insisted on that aspect), and pergolas over each (which
make them more “sittable”).
Eligibility Under Master List Criteria: Integrity
• The Page-Selkirk House maintains its original location.
• The 1966 design has not been changed, except for the barely noticeable addition of
an elevator from garage level at the front of the deck. Indeed a pergola that had been
Page 118 of 361
91
removed was rebuilt by Shirley Selkirk after Bruce Selkirk’s death in deference to the
original design “to please Ken.”
• A pioneer house on the hillside when Hubert Page and Shirley Page Selkirk built it in
1966 on land they had purchased from the dairy-farming Mellos, the Page -Selkirk
House now has additional neighbors, including one up the hill. However, the slope of
the hill and landscaping retains the back view, and the front view and side view over
the Mello House are largely the same. The site retains its suburban setting, with a
number of original neighbors in period style.
• The materials and workmanship, including that of the owners, remains, apart from
double-paned sliding glass doors and windows with black frames replacing the single-
paned, metal-colored originals but without altering the fenestration’s form or
substantially altering the building’s appearance.
• 2424 Sunset Drive, like the Andre, Pimentel-Orth, and Schwartz Houses, is on a
hillside site at the edge of the city. Raised above and back from the street and
surrounded by alcoves, its seclusion and closeness to hillside nature maintains its
original feeling, with quietude and wildlife.
• Schwartz’s clients the Pages were very specific in their requirements, which Schwartz
responded to, including with redesign. The retention of the original design in both its
overall concept and details, additions such as exterior light fixtures made by the
clients, as well as the restoration of the missing pergola, contribute to a strong
association with Schwartz, his clients the Pages/Selkirks, and his client relationship.
Page 119 of 361
Page 120 of 361
City of San Luis Obispo Architectural Character
Citywide Historic Context Statement
HISTORIC RESOURCES GROUP
152
MID-CENTURY MODERN
Mid-century Modern is a term used to describe a post-World War II iteration of the International Style
in both residential and commercial design. The International Style was characterized by geometric
forms, smooth wall surfaces, and an absence of exterior decoration. Mid-century Modern represents
the adaptation of these elements to the local climate and topography, as well as to the postwar need
for efficiently-built, moderately-priced homes and buildings.
The Mid-century Modern building is characterized by its clear expression of structure and materials,
large expanses of glass, and open interior plan.
Character-defining Features
One or two-story configuration
Simple geometric forms
Expressed post-and-beam construction, in wood or steel
Flat roof with wide overhanging eaves and cantilevered canopies
Unadorned wall surfaces
Exterior panels of wood, stucco, brick or stone
Flush-mounted metal frame full-height and clerestory windows
Exterior staircases, decks, patios and balconies
Little or no exterior decorative detailing
Expressionistic/Organic subtype: sculptural forms and geometric shapes, including butterfly, A-
frame, folded plate or barrel vault roofs
2525 Augusta Street, 1951. Source: Historic Resources
Group.
201 Buena Vista Street, 1964.Source: Historic
Resources Group.
Page 121 of 361
Page 122 of 361
12
Zoning, or remove the property from historic listing if the structure on the property no longer
meets eligibility criteria for listing, following the process for listing set forth herein.
14.01.070. Evaluation Criteria for Historic Resource Listing
When determining if a property should be designated as a listed Historic or Cultural Resource,
the CHC and City Council shall consider this ordinance and State Historic Preservation Office
(“SHPO”) standards. In order to be eligible for designation, the resource shall exhibit a high
level of historic integrity, be at least fifty (50) years old (less than 50 if it can be demonstrated
that enough time has passed to understand its historical importance) and satisfy at least one of the
following criteria:
A. Architectural Criteria: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or
method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values.
(1) Style: Describes the form of a building, such as size, structural shape and details
within that form (e.g. arrangement of windows and doors, ornamentation, etc.). Building
style will be evaluated as a measure of:
a. The relative purity of a traditional style;
b. Rarity of existence at any time in the locale; and/or current rarity although the
structure reflects a once popular style;
c. Traditional, vernacular and/or eclectic influences that represent a particular social
milieu and period of the community; and/or the uniqueness of hybrid styles and how
these styles are put together.
(2) Design: Describes the architectural concept of a structure and the quality of artistic
merit and craftsmanship of the individual parts. Reflects how well a particular style or
combination of styles are expressed through compatibility and detailing of elements.
Also, suggests degree to which the designer (e.g., carpenter-builder) accurately
interpreted and conveyed the style(s). Building design will be evaluated as a measure of:
a. Notable attractiveness with aesthetic appeal because of its artistic merit, details and
craftsmanship (even if not necessarily unique);
b. An expression of interesting details and eclecticism among carpenter-builders,
although the craftsmanship and artistic quality may not be superior.
(3) Architect: Describes the professional (an individual or firm) directly responsible for
the building design and plans of the structure. The architect will be evaluated as a
reference to:
Page 123 of 361
13
a. A notable architect (e.g., Wright, Morgan), including architects who made
significant contributions to the state or region, or an architect whose work influenced
development of the city, state or nation.
b. An architect who, in terms of craftsmanship, made significant contributions to San
Luis Obispo (e.g., Abrahams who, according to local sources, designed the house at
810 Osos - Frank Avila's father's home - built between 1927 – 30).
B. Historic Criteria
(1) History – Person: Associated with the lives of persons important to local, California,
or national history. Historic person will be evaluated as a measure of the degree to which
a person or group was:
a. Significant to the community as a public leader (e.g., mayor, congress member,
etc.) or for his or her fame and outstanding recognition - locally, regionally, or
nationally.
b. Significant to the community as a public servant or person who made early, unique,
or outstanding contributions to the community, important local affairs or institutions
(e.g., council members, educators, medical professionals, clergymen, railroad
officials).
(2) History – Event: Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to
the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the
United States. Historic event will be evaluated as a measure of:
(i) A landmark, famous, or first-of-its-kind event for the city - regardless of whether
the impact of the event spread beyond the city.
(ii) A relatively unique, important or interesting contribution to the city (e.g., the Ah
Louis Store as the center for Chinese-American cultural activities in early San Luis
Obispo history).
(3) History-Context: Associated with and also a prime illustration of predominant
patterns of political, social, economic, cultural, medical, educational, governmental,
military, industrial, or religious history. Historic context will be evaluated as a measure
of the degree to which it reflects:
a. Early, first, or major patterns of local history, regardless of whether the historic
effects go beyond the city level, that are intimately connected with the building (e.g.,
County Museum).
b. Secondary patterns of local history, but closely associated with the building (e.g.,
Park Hotel).
Page 124 of 361
14
C. Integrity: Authenticity of an historical resource’s physical identity evidenced by the
survival of characteristics that existed during the resource’s period of significance. Integrity
will be evaluated by a measure of:
(1) Whether or not a structure occupies its original site and/or whether or not the
original foundation has been changed, if known.
(2) The degree to which the structure has maintained enough of its historic character
or appearance to be recognizable as an historic resource and to convey the reason(s)
for its significance.
(3) The degree to which the resource has retained its design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling and association.
14.01.080 Historic District Designation, Purpose and Application
A. Historic (H) District designation. All properties within historic districts shall be designated
by an “H” zoning. Properties zoned “H” shall be subject to the provisions and standards as
provided in Ordinance 17.54 (Zoning) of the Municipal Code.
B. Purposes of Historic Districts. The purposes of historic districts and H zone designation are
to:
(1) Implement cultural resource preservation policies of the General Plan, the
preservation provisions of adopted area plans, the Historic Preservation and
Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines, and
(2) Identify and preserve definable, unified geographical entities that possess a significant
concentration, linkage, or continuity of sites, buildings, structures, or objects united
historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development;
(3) Implement historic preservation provisions of adopted area and neighborhood
improvement plans;
(4) Enhance and preserve the setting of historic resources so that surrounding land uses
and structures do not detract from the historic or architectural integrity of designated
historic resources and districts; and
(5) Promote the public understanding and appreciation of historic resources.
C. Eligibility for incentives. Properties zoned as Historic Preservation (H) shall be eligible for
preservation incentive and benefit programs as established herein, in the Guidelines and other
local, state and federal programs.
Page 125 of 361
Page 126 of 361
City of San Luis Obispo Historic Context: Mid-20th Century
Citywide Historic Context Statement
HISTORIC RESOURCES GROUP
123
Mid-20th Century Residential Development: Associated Property
Types, Integrity Considerations & Eligibility Standards
Property Types
Single-family Residence; Multi-family Residence; Historic District
In general, tract houses are not individually significant, but a geographically-linked collection may be
eligible as a historic district. A post-World War II residential historic district may be eligible:
For playing an important role in the post-war suburbanization of San Luis Obispo; or for
collectively representing postwar planning and design principles – Criterion A/1/B.2 (Event).
An individual residential property from this period may be significant:
For its association with Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, and in particular for being a custom-designed
house influenced by a Cal Poly professor – Criterion A/1/B.2 (Event) and Criterion
C/3/A.1,A.2,A.3 (Design/Construction).
As an excellent example of a particular architectural style; or as the work of noted architect –
Criterion C/3/A.1,A.2,A.3 (Design/Construction).
Integrity Considerations
In order to be eligible for listing at the federal, state, or local levels, a property must retain sufficient
integrity to convey its historic significance under the Mid-20th Century Residential Development
theme.
Historic Districts eligible under Criteria A/1/B.2 (Event) should retain integrity of location, design,
setting, materials, and feeling. Some alterations to individual buildings, such as replacement
windows in original openings, replacement of roof materials, and replacement garage doors may
be acceptable as long as the district as a whole continues to convey its significance. The district
overall should convey a strong sense of time and place.
Individual residential properties significant under Criterion C/3/A.1,A.2,A.3 (Design/Construction)
should retain integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, and feeling.
ATTACHMENT 3
Page 127 of 361
City of San Luis Obispo Historic Context: Mid-20th Century
Citywide Historic Context Statement
HISTORIC RESOURCES GROUP
124
Eligibility Standards
To be eligible, a historic district must:
retain a majority of the contributors date from the period of significance;
reflect post-World War II planning and design principles;
display most of the character-defining features of a residential subdivision, including the original
layout, street plan, and other planning features; and
retain the essential aspects of integrity.
To be eligible, an individual property must:
date from the period of significance;
display most of the significant character-defining features of the style or property type; and
retain the essential aspects of integrity.
Extant Examples
1944 Corralitos, 1950. Photo 2013; source Historic Resources
Group.
2554 Greta Place, 1951.Photo 2013; source Historic
Resources Group.
314 San Miguel Avenue, c.1960. Photo 2013; source
Historic Resources Group.
Ken Schwartz House, 201 Buena Vista Avenue, 1964.
Photo 2013; source Historic Resources Group.
ATTACHMENT 3
Page 128 of 361
Item 6e
Department: Administration
Cost Center: 1021
For Agenda of: 9/7/2021
Placement: Consent
Estimated Time: N/A
FROM: Greg Hermann, Deputy City Manager
Prepared By: Kevin Christian, Deputy City Clerk
SUBJECT: ADVISORY BODY APPOINTMENTS FOR UNSCHEDULED VACANCIES
RECOMMENDATION
Confirm the appointment of Stephanie Carlotti to the Human Relations Commission
(HRC) and Kris Roudebush to the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC), as
recommended by the respective Advisory Body Council Liaison Subcommittees.
DISCUSSION
Annual appointments to the various City Advisory Body Committees were made at the
March 16, 2021 City Council meeting. The process for those appointments included
recruitment by the City Clerk’s office, interviews, and recommendations by the respective
City Council sub-committees, with final confirmation of those recommendations made by
the full Council. The applications of qualified candidates who are not chosen for
immediate appointment are held for one -year for possible consideration in the event an
unscheduled vacancy occurs.
Human Relations Commission:
The commission has an unscheduled vacancy due to a resignation in July. Using a
combination of applicants from the annual recruitment and additional outreach
recruitment for the position, four qualified candidates were considered for the positio n.
The Council Liaison Subcommittee members, Mayor Harmon and Vice Mayor Stewart,
recommend Stephanie Carlotti for appointment to fulfill the vacant four-year term, with the
term ending March 31, 2023.
Parks and Recreation Commission:
The commission has an unscheduled vacancy due to a resignation in July. Using qualified
applicants from the annual recruitment, the Council Liaison Subcommittee members, Vice
Mayor Stewart and Councilmember Marx, recommend Kris Roudebush for appointment
to fulfill the vacant four-year term which ends March 31, 2022, as well as appointment to
the full four-year term, April 1, 2022 - March 31, 2026.
Page 129 of 361
Item 6e
The following City Council Advisory Bodies have current vacancies with recruitment
ongoing:
Area Agency on Aging – Due to a resignation in August, there is an unscheduled vacancy.
Rather than a City Council Advisory Body, this is a regional advisory body, with the city
holding one appointed citizen seat.
Cultural Heritage Committee – Recruitment has been ongoing since April as there was
one unfilled position following the annual recruitment/appointment process.
Jack House Committee – Recruitment is ongoing for the Cal Poly College of Agriculture
position which was unable to be filled during the annual recruitment.
Promotional Coordinating Committee - Due to a resignation in July, there is an
unscheduled vacancy for this advisory body with recruitment currently ongoing.
Policy Context
The Advisory Body Handbook, last adopted by City Council in February 2018, outlines
the recruitment procedures, membership requirements, and term limits for all advisory
bodies. Additionally, the City Council Policies and Procedures Manual, last updated April
2021, describes the “Appointment Procedure” and “Process” for Advisory Body
appointments. Recruitment and appointment recommendations were performed in
conformance with all recruitment procedures, processes, and bylaws found in these
resources.
California Government Code Section 54972, Local Appointments List (Maddy Act),
requires that on or before December 31st of each year, each legislative body shall prepare
an appointments list for their boards, commissions, and committees whose members
serve at the pleasure of the legislative body. This obligation was met and is on -going.
Public Engagement
Notices that the city was accepting applications for City Advisory Bodies were placed in
The New Times, on the City’s website and “e-notification” service, listed in the annual
Local Appointments List (Maddy Act Notice – GC 54972) on the City Website and City
Information kiosk, and distributed via City social media outlets, in November 2020 for the
annual recruitment. Additional outreach for the HRC vacancy was done in June via email
lists provided by the Cal Poly American Indian and Indigenous, Asian and Pacific Islander,
Black, Chicanx Latinx, Disability, Pride, and Women’s, Faculty Staff Associations
CONCURRENCE
The Council Liaison Subcommittees concur with the recommendations.
Page 130 of 361
Item 6e
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to the recommended action in
this report, because the action does not constitute a “Project” under CEQA Guidelines
Sec. 15378.
FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: Yes/No Budget Year: 2021-22
Funding Identified: N/A
Fiscal Analysis:
Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
General Fund N/A $ $ $
State
Federal
Fees
Other:
Total $ $ $ $
Advisory body members for these bodies serve as volunteers and donate their time. The
costs related to recruitment is accounted for in the annual budget appropriation in the City
Clerk program.
ALTERNATIVES
Council could recommend changes to the sub-committee recommended
appointments or direct staff to re-open recruitment for additional candidates. This
is not recommended as there were sufficient qualified candidates for the positions, and
the Council Liaison Subcommittees feel that they have been quite thorough in their
consideration of applicants and the Council’s needs in their selection process.
Page 131 of 361
Page 132 of 361
Item 6f
Department: Administration
Cost Center: 5301
For Agenda of: 9/7/2021
Placement: Consent
Estimated Time: N/A
FROM: Greg Hermann, Deputy City Manager
Prepared By: Freddy Otte, City Biologist
SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR CITY-
COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL COLLABORATION
RECOMMENDATION
Approve an amendment to the existing Memorandum of Understanding between the City
of San Luis Obispo and the County of San Luis Obispo, as administrator of the Zone 9
Flood Control and Water Conservation District (“Zone 9”), in order to provide funding
support in the amount of $60,000 for additional vegetation management activities in San
Luis Obispo Creek Watershed.
DISCUSSION
Background
The Zone 9 Flood Control and Water Conservation District was formed in 1973 in
response to historic flooding events. It encompasses the entire San Luis Obispo Creek
watershed and its tributaries, which fall within the San Luis Obispo city limits. Zone 9
collects parcel tax revenue that is used to conduct flood control planning and projects, as
well as watershed management and enhancement projects. The County of San Luis
Obispo is the administrator for Zone 9 and enjoys active participation from the appointed
Advisory Committee (the “Committee”) and regular collaboration with the City.
The City has an existing vegetation management program funded through Zone 9 where
regular assessment of flood risks are identified and addressed to protect the public and
improve flows in the watershed. Recent flooding events that have occurred in the County,
but just downstream from the City, have highlighted the need to take an inter-jurisdictional
approach (Attachment C). Because the City has a pre-existing program, staffing, resource
agency permitting knowledge, and prioritizes regional resiliency, it is desirable for the
County and City to continue to collaborate and expand the vegetation management
program into County areas of Zone 9 immediately adjacent to City limits through the
proposed amendments to the existing MOU (Attachments A and B). The expansion of the
program will provide additional certainty to the City that appropriate mitigation efforts both
upstream and downstream of the City occur to help prevent flood events that could directly
impact the City.
Page 133 of 361
Item 6f
City staff developed the scope of this program with input from the Committee and County
staff. The City Biologist assisted in identifying the tasks that will help complete the
following efforts: setting up a baseline of creek conditions, identifying problematic
locations, and performing work to improve stream flows throughout the watershed.
This proposed program includes five main tasks with several subtasks (Attachment D).
These include:
Task 1 – Administrative tasks such as: assignment of duties for staff direction,
provide quarterly reports, secure Right of Entry and complete permitting
requirements as needed (County Staff Responsibility)
Task 2 – Conduct an Assessment and Develop Comprehe nsive Baseline (City
Staff Responsibility)
Task 3 – Identify Priority Locations and Develop Recommendations (City Staff
Responsibility)
Task 4 – Vegetation Maintenance and Removal Activities (City Staff
Responsibility)
Task 5 – Property Owner Assistance/Access (County Staff Responsibility)
Previous Council or Advisory Body Action
The proposed program was presented to, voted on, and approved by the Zone 9
Committee at the April 10, 2019, meeting. The attached amended MOU was presented
to the Committee and recommended for approval on August 11, 2021. The last
Memorandum of Understanding (Reimbursement Agreement) was approved by the City
Council on August 21, 2018. This updated Agreement is also going to the Board of
Supervisors on September 28th for consideration and approval.
Policy Context
General Plan Safety Element Policy: 2.1.A: The City shall develop and carry out
environmentally sensitive programs to reduce or eliminate the potential for flooding in
previously developed, flood prone areas of the City. City staff has worked with County
staff to identify these areas where work can be accomplished to advance and support this
policy. Flooding has occurred along Buckley Road many times in the past, where Prefumo
Creek comes out of the Irish Hills has experienced flooding in the past and as San Luis
Obispo Creek comes into City limits (Cuesta Park), has the potential to bring debris from
County jurisdictional areas that could impact City residents.
Public Engagement
The Zone 9 Committee is advisory body to the Board of Supervisors and has bi-monthly
meetings that are open to the public. Public comment has been received and recorded
from the Zone 9 meetings with members of the public expressing concerns about frequent
flooding in that part of the creek. Past flooding events have inundated portions of Buckley
Road near the confluence of East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek and one of its tributaries.
Additional proactive flood control surveys and debris removal efforts have been requested
to ensure safe passage for residents along Buckley Road (Attachment E).
Page 134 of 361
Item 6f
This item is on the agenda for the September 7, 2021, City Council meeting and will follow
all required postings and notifications. The public may have an opportunity to comment
on this item at or before the meeting.
CONCURRENCE
The Public Works Director and the City Engineer concur with this program.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The process of approving the Agreement is not a “project” as defined under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The County is the Lead Agency for this expanded
vegetation management program outside of City limits and is therefore responsible for
ensuring compliance with CEQA as stated in the MOU. For project implementation, the
City will follow typical streambed maintenance procedures as outlined in the Waterway
Management Plan by targeting dead and down material for the initial clean up and
trimming of vegetation as needed to increase capacity in the channels. These activities
do not require permitting from the resource agencies and can be completed by contracted
crews with oversight from City/County staff. If larger, more complex vegetation
management needs to be undertaken to alleviate a debris jam or constriction point, City
staff will inform County staff and they will develop a larger project to be completed under
their Routine Maintenance Agreement with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife
and any other necessary agency as needed.
FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: No Budget Year: 2021-22
Funding Identified: Yes
Fiscal Analysis:
County of San Luis Obispo staff identified three areas where creeks enter or exit County
jurisdictional areas and influence the City and identified additional funding (in addition to
the annual Zone 9 funding the City receives from the County for flood control activities) in
the amount of $60,000 for maintenance efforts. A portion of this funding will support the
City’s Flood Control Technicians to complete creek surveys, identify dead material to be
removed from the creeks and other threats County staff should be aware of. The majority
of this funding will be used to hire crews (the California Conservation Corps or tree
contractors) to remove dead and down material to ensure the creeks are clear and abl e
to handle winter flows.
Page 135 of 361
Item 6f
Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
General
Fund
State
Federal
Fees
Other (Zone
9):
$60,000
Total $60,000 N/A N/A N/A
ALTERNATIVES
1. Request additional information or clarification prior to taking action.
2. Request further changes to the MOU amendment.
3. Deny the MOU amendment. This action is not recommended as staff have worked
in good faith to develop the Annual Work Plan in coordination with the Zone 9 Advisory
Committee.
ATTACHMENTS
A – Redline of existing Memorandum of Understanding (Reimbursement Agreement) with
County of San Luis Obispo
B – Clean copy of Memorandum of Understanding (Reimbursement Agreement) with
County of San Luis Obispo
C – Vicinity Map of County Jurisdictional Area
D – 2021/22 Annual Work Plan
E – Zone 9 Meeting Minutes of April 10, 2019
Page 136 of 361
Page 1 of 5
REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FOR WATERSHED
MAINTENANCE AND EDUCATION PROGRAM
This Reimbursement Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into on _________________________
by and between the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
(“District”), acting on behalf of District Flood Control Zone 9 (“Zone 9”), and the City of San Luis
Obispo (“City”) (each a “Party” and collectively, “Parties”).
WHEREAS, Zone 9 includes the San Luis Obispo Creek (“Creek”) watershed (“Watershed”) and its
tributaries; and
WHEREAS, the City is located wholly within the Watershed and the Zone 9 boundaries; and
WHEREAS, by coordinating in Watershed maintenance and education activities, the City and District
can more economically address issues within the Watershed; and
WHEREAS, such a cooperative program has been successfully completed in the past pursuant to
prior reimbursement agreements between the District and City, including but not limited to the
reimbursement agreements dated September 6, 2013 and August 21, 2018 (collectively, “Prior
Agreements”) and in accordance with the Waterway Management Plan and associated
Environmental Impact Report certified by the District on February 10, 2004; and
WHEREAS, the Parties desire to continue in and expand their coordination with respect to
Watershed maintenance and education activities, both within and outside of City limits, as described
in this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, conditions, promises and agreements
herein set forth, the District and City mutually covenant and agree as follows:
A. REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
The City shall be eligible for reimbursement for expenses incurred by the City pursuant to the terms
and conditions set forth in this Agreement subject to the following:
1. Type of Activities Eligible for Reimbursement.
Only those activities within Zone 9 identified below are eligible for reimbursement:
Removal of debris, sediment and vegetation which adversely affect the capacity of waterways or
which might be more difficult or costly to remove if moved by flood flows to different locations
where they could cause damage to the Creek or flooding to adjacent improved property.
Removal and proper disposal of detrimental exotic plants from throughout the Watershed and any
re-vegetation project to minimize damage from flood flows or for restoration after removal of exotic
plants.
Page 137 of 361
Page 2 of 5
Stabilization of Creek banks to prevent erosion causing sedimentation or property damage.
Development and construction of projects identified in the Waterway Management Plan adopted
by the City on October 21, 2003 and District by Resolution 2004-51 on February 10, 2004.
Annual notice to property owners along the Creek, and wet weather flood prevention informa tion
distributed to the general public, including flyers, public service announcements and web sites.
2. Inclusion in Work Plan.
Only those work activities properly identified in the annual Work Plan (described below) prepared
by the City and included in the District’s current fiscal year budget as adopted by the District’s Board
of Supervisors (“Board”) are eligible for reimbursement.
3. Compliance with Agreement.
Only activities performed in compliance with the provisions of this Agreement are eligible for
reimbursement.
B. OBLIGATIONS OF CITY
The City shall submit a work plan to the District for each upcomin g fiscal year, prior to December 1
of each year (“Work Plan”). The Work Plan shall include a description and budget for the work
activities proposed by the City for the upcoming fiscal year.
The City shall act as the lead agency in complying with the California Environmental Quality Act
(“CEQA”) for all work done within the City limits with the following limited exception: the City shall
act as the responsible agency in complying with CEQA for the Mid-Higuera Bypass Project.
The City shall acquire all permits for work within its jurisdiction with the following limited exception:
the City shall not be responsible for providing staffing or other resources to acquire regulatory
environmental permits for the Mid-Higuera Bypass Project.
The City shall be responsible for acquiring any landowner permission needed to accomplish any
work within its jurisdiction.
Should any work within the City involve the abatement of nuisances, the removal of trees, or other
obstructions, such shall be performed in accordance wit h due process of law under the City’s
abatement ordinances or State law. The abatement of said nuisances shall be the sole responsibility
of the City.
Any streambed clearing work identified in the Work Plan shall be carried out prior to the rainy
season with follow-up work done during the rainy season as appropriate.
The City shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations in performing
any activities related to this Agreement.
The City shall provide quarterly statements to the District documenting the expenses for which the
City is seeking reimbursement. Said statements shall specify the activities related to the expenses
for which the City seeks reimbursement.
Page 138 of 361
Page 3 of 5
The City shall recognize and acknowledge the District’s financial contribution to the activities
identified in Section A of this Agreement through prominent mention during any oral presentation
or in writing on any signs, promotional materials, press releases, publications, advertisements, or
exhibits prepared in connection with or referring to the reimbursable activities.
C. OBLIGATIONS OF DISTRICT
District staff shall review the Work Plan submitted by the City and shall coordinate with the City to
refine the Work Plan, as appropriate, so that it is consistent with the intent of this Agreement and
the District’s budgetary plans. District staff thereafter shall prepare a draft Zone 9 budget request
for the upcoming fiscal year to include those activities that District staff considers consistent with
the intent of this Agreement and the District’s budgetary plans. The District shall include on an
agenda the draft budget request for review by the Zone 9 Advisory Committee (“Committee”) to
allow the Committee to make a recommendation to the Board regarding said budget request.
The District shall provide reimbursement to the City for eligible City expenses incurred pursuant to
this Agreement on a periodic basis as funds are available, within the budgetary limits approved by
the Board or its designee provided that the City submits satisfactory documentation of City’s
expenses and work performed.
The District shall act as the lead agency in complying CEQA for: (1) all work done by the City outside
of City limits; and (2) the Mid-Higuera Bypass Project.
The District shall be responsible for acquiring any landowner permission needed to accomplish any
work done by the City outside of City limits.
The District shall provide staffing and other resources to obtain all necessary permits for: (1) work
done by the City outside of City limits; and (2) the Mid-Higuera Bypass Project on behalf of the City
who shall be the permittee.
The City is under no obligation, and this Agreement does not contemplate, commencement of
formal nuisance abatement actions by the City outside of the City's jurisdiction.
The District shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations in
performing any activities related to this Agreement.
D. GENERAL TERMS
1. Term.
This Agreement shall become effective on the date fully executed by the Parties and shall have an
initial term of five (5) years. This Agreement shall renew automatically for four (4) successive five
(5) year terms. Notwithstanding the foregoing, either Party may terminate this Agreement at any
time by giving ninety (90) days written notice of termination to the other Party.
2. Indemnification for Conduct Within City Limits.
Each Party hereto shall defend, indemnify and save harm less the other Party and other Party’s
officers, agents and employees from and against all loss, claims, demands, liabilities, costs,
expenses, damages, including reasonable legal counsels’ fees and costs of litigation, causes of
action, including but not limited to inverse condemnation and judgments arising out of the
Deleted: The District shall act as the lead agency in complying
with CEQA for the Mid-Higuera Bypass Project.¶
Deleted: regulatory environmental permits
Deleted: Sole
Deleted: p
Page 139 of 361
Page 4 of 5
indemnifying party’s performance or attempt to perform its obligations pursuant to the provisions
of this Agreement, including both acts and omissions to act . However, neither Party shall be
indemnified hereunder for any loss, claims, demands, liabilities, costs, expenses, damages, or causes
of action resulting from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the other Party occurring within
City limits. .
3. Indemnification for Conduct Outside of City Limits.
4. To the fullest extent permitted by law (including, but not limited to California Civil Code
Sections 2782 and 2782.8), the District shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City,
and its elected officials, officers, employees, volunteers, and agents (“City Indemnitees”),
from and against any and all causes of action, claims, liabilities, obligations, judgments, or
damages, including reasonable legal counsels’ fees and costs of litigation, arising from all
conduct by either Party outside of City limits in furtherance of the Parties’ obligations
under this Agreement. In the event the City Indemnitees are made a party to any action,
lawsuit, or other adversarial proceeding arising from the either Party’s conduct outside of
City limits in furtherance of its obligations under this Agreement, the District shall provide
a defense to the City Indemnitees or at the City’s option, reimburse the City Indemnitees
their costs of defense, including reasonable legal fees, incurred in defense of such claims.
However, the City shall be responsible for any loss, claims, demands, liabilities, costs,
expenses, damages, or causes of action resulting from the sole negligence or willful
misconduct of the City occurring outside of City limits. Cooperation.
The District agrees to cooperate with the City in the defense of any such claims or litigation, and the
City agrees to cooperate with the District.
5. Full Agreement.
This Agreement encompasses the entire agreement of the Parties, and supersedes all previous
understandings and agreements between the Parties, whether oral or written, including but not
limited to the Prior Agreements.
Deleted: the sole negligence or sole intentional acts of the Party
or its officers, agents or employees or independent contractors
solely responsible to such Party in performing or attempting to
perform pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement, including
both acts and omissions to act.
Deleted: ¶
Indemnification for Joint Conduct between the District and the
City. ¶
The City shall defend, indemnify and save harmless the District, and
its officers, agents and employees from and against any and all
claims, demands, liabilities, costs, expenses, damages, causes of
action, including but not limited to inverse condemnation and
judgments arising out of the joint negligence or joint intentional
acts of the City and District and their officers, agents, employees or
independent contractors directly responsible to them in performing
or attempting to perform pursuant to the provisions of this
Agreement, including both acts and omissions to act, provided
however that the District shall be solely responsible for the amount
of judgment rendered solely against the District or one of its agents
or employees if such judgment is specifically rendered in court and
based on a finding of sole responsibility by the District or one of its
agents or employees; in the event said judgment is rendered, the
City shall not be required to indemnify the District for said
judgment
Deleted: ¶
Page 140 of 361
Page 5 of 5
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement on the dates set forth
below:
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
By: ______________________________ Date: __________________________
Chairperson of the Board
San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District
State of California
ATTEST:
By: ______________________________ Date: __________________________
County Clerk and Ex-Officio Clerk of the
Board of Supervisors, County of San Luis Obispo,
State of California
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL EFFECT:
By: ______________________________ Date: __________________________
Rita L. Neal
County Counsel
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
By: ______________________________ Date: __________________________
Derek Johnson
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL EFFECT:
By: ______________________________ Date: __________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
Page 141 of 361
Page 142 of 361
Attachment 3 - Clean copy of the updated Reimbursement Agreement
REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FOR
WATERSHED MAINTENANCE AND EDUCATION PROGRAM
This Reimbursement Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into on this _________ day of
_____________ 2021 by and between the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District (“District”), acting on behalf of District Flood Control Zone 9 (“Zone 9”),
and the City of San Luis Obispo (“City”) (each a “Party” and collectively, “Parties”).
WHEREAS, Zone 9 includes the San Luis Obispo Creek (“Creek”) watershed (“Watershed”) and
its tributaries; and
WHEREAS, the City is located wholly within the Watershed and the Zone 9 boundaries; and
WHEREAS, by coordinating in Watershed maintenance and education activities, the City and
District can more economically address issues within the Watershed; and
WHEREAS, such a cooperative program has been successfully completed in the past pursuant
to prior reimbursement agreements between the District and City, including but not limited to
the reimbursement agreements dated September 6, 2013 and August 21, 2018 (collectively,
“Prior Agreements”) and in accordance with the Waterway Management Plan and associated
Environmental Impact Report certified by the District on February 10, 2004; and
WHEREAS, the Parties desire to continue in and expand their coordination with respect to
Watershed maintenance and education activities, both within and outside of City limits,
as described in this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, conditions, promises and
agreements herein set forth, the District and City mutually covenant and agree as follows:
A. REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
The City shall be eligible for reimbursement for expenses incurred by the City pursuant to the
terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement subject to the following:
1. Type of Activities Eligible for Reimbursement.
Only those activities within Zone 9 identified below are eligible for reimbursement:
Removal of debris, sediment and vegetation which adversely affect the capacity of waterways
or which might be more difficult or costly to remove if moved by flood flows to different
locations where they could cause damage to the Creek or flooding to adjacent improved
property.
Page 1 of 5
Page 143 of 361
Page 2 of 5
Removal and proper disposal of detrimental exotic plants from throughout the Watershed and
any re-vegetation project to minimize damage from flood flows or for restoration after removal
of exotic plants.
Stabilization of Creek banks to prevent erosion causing sedimentation or property damage.
Development and construction of projects identified in the Waterway Management
Plan adopted by the City on October 21, 2003 and District by Resolution 2004-51 on
February 10, 2004.
Annual notice to property owners along the Creek, and wet weather flood prevention
information distributed to the general public, including flyers, public service announcements
and web sites.
2. Inclusion in Work Plan.
Only those work activities properly identified in the annual Work Plan (described below)
prepared by the City and included in the District’s current fiscal year budget as adopted by the
District’s Board of Supervisors (“Board”) are eligible for reimbursement.
3. Compliance with Agreement.
Only activities performed in compliance with the provisions of this Agreement are eligible for
reimbursement.
B. OBLIGATIONS OF CITY
The City shall submit a work plan to the District for each upcoming fiscal year, prior to
December 1 of each year (“Work Plan”). The Work Plan shall include a description and budget
for the work activities proposed by the City for the upcoming fiscal year.
The City shall act as the lead agency in complying with the California Environmental Quality Act
(“CEQA”) for all work done within the City limits with the following limited exception: the City
shall act as the responsible agency in complying with CEQA for the Mid-Higuera Bypass Project.
The City shall acquire all permits for work within its jurisdiction with the following limited
exception: the City shall not be responsible for providing staffing or other resources to acquire
regulatory environmental permits for the Mid-Higuera Bypass Project.
The City shall be responsible for acquiring any landowner permission needed to accomplish
any work within its jurisdiction.
Should any work within the City involve the abatement of nuisances, the removal of trees, or
other obstructions, such shall be performed in accordance with due process of law under the
City’s abatement ordinances or State law. The abatement of said nuisances shall be the sole
responsibility of the City.
Any streambed clearing work identified in the Work Plan shall be carried out prior to the rainy
season with follow-up work done during the rainy season as appropriate.
Page 144 of 361
Page 3 of 5
The City shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations in
performing any activities related to this Agreement.
The City shall provide quarterly statements to the District documenting the expenses for which
the City is seeking reimbursement. Said statements shall specify the activities related to the
expenses for which the City seeks reimbursement.
The City shall recognize and acknowledge the District’s financial contribution to the activities
identified in Section A of this Agreement through prominent mention during any oral
presentation or in writing on any signs, promotional materials, press releases, publications,
advertisements, or exhibits prepared in connection with or referring to the reimbursable
activities.
C. OBLIGATIONS OF DISTRICT
District staff shall review the Work Plan submitted by the City and shall coordinate with the City
to refine the Work Plan, as appropriate, so that it is consistent with the intent of this Agreement
and the District’s budgetary plans. District staff thereafter shall prepare a draft Zone 9 budget
request for the upcoming fiscal year to include those activities that District staff considers
consistent with the intent of this Agreement and the District’s budgetary plans. The District shall
include on an agenda the draft budget request for review by the Zone 9 Advisory Committee
(“Committee”) to allow the Committee to make a recommendation to the Board regarding said
budget request.
The District shall provide reimbursement to the City for eligible City expenses incurred pursuant
to this Agreement on a periodic basis as funds are available, within the budgetary limits
approved by the Board or its designee provided that the City submits satisfactory
documentation of City’s expenses and work performed.
The District shall act as the lead agency in complying CEQA for: (1) all work done by the City
outside of City limits; and (2) the Mid-Higuera Bypass Project.
The District shall be responsible for acquiring any landowner permissions and completing any
reporting and mitigation to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife that may be
necessary to accomplish work done by the City outside of City limits in furtherance of its
obligations under this Agreement.
The District shall provide staffing and other resources to obtain all necessary permits for: (1)
work done by the City outside of City limits; and (2) the Mid-Higuera Bypass Project on behalf
of the City who shall be the permittee.
The City is under no obligation, and this Agreement does not contemplate, commencement of
formal nuisance abatement actions by the City outside of the City's jurisdiction.
The District shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations in
performing any activities related to this Agreement.
Page 145 of 361
Page 4 of 5
D. GENERAL TERMS
1. Term.
This Agreement shall become effective on the date fully executed by the Parties and shall have
an initial term of five (5) years. This Agreement shall renew automatically for four (4) successive
five (5) year terms. Notwithstanding the foregoing, either Party may terminate this Agreement
at any time by giving ninety (90) days written notice of termination to the other Party.
2. Indemnification.
Each Party hereto shall defend, indemnify and save harmless the other Party and other Party’s
officers, agents and employees from and against all loss, claims, demands, liabilities, costs,
expenses, damages, causes of action, and judgments arising out of the indemnifying Party’s
performance or attempt to perform its obligations pursuant to the provisions of this
Agreement, including both acts and omissions to act, failure to secure necessary landowner
permissions and permits, and failure to complete any reporting and mitigation that may be
necessary to perform obligations pursuant to this Agreement both within and outside of City
limits.
3. Cooperation.
The District agrees to cooperate with the City in the defense of any such claims or litigation, and
the City agrees to cooperate with the District.
4. Full Agreement.
This Agreement encompasses the entire agreement of the Parties, and supersedes all previous
understandings and agreements between the Parties, whether oral or written, including but not
limited to the Prior Agreements.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement on the dates set forth
below:
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
By: ______________________________ Date: __________________________
Chairperson of the Board
San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District
State of California
ATTEST:
By: ______________________________ Date: __________________________
County Clerk and Ex-Officio Clerk of the
Board of Supervisors, County of San Luis Obispo,
State of California
Page 146 of 361
Page 147 of 361
Page 148 of 361
G:\GIS\ArcMap_Projects_Archive\WATER_RESOURCES\_Vicinity_Maps\Zone_9_with_inset_8.5x11.mxd
SanLuisLuisObispoCreek
PismoCreek
WestCorra
l
d
e
P
iedraCreek
Stenne r Cr ee k
E a st C o rralde
P i e d raCreek
SeeCanyonCreek
Brizzol
a
r
a
C
r
e
e
k
E a s t San L u i sObispoCreek
£¤101
|ÿ227
|ÿ1
Legend
Zone 9 Boundary
City Limits
Streams
US HIGHWAY
STATE HIGHWAY
¯
Flood Control Zone 9: San Luis Obispo Creek Watershed
County of San Luis ObispoPublic Works Water Resources Printed: 7/14/2021
0 2 41Miles
£¤101
Page 149 of 361
Page 150 of 361
City of San Luis Obispo, Public Works, 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401-3218, 805.781.7200, slocity.org
Date: October 1, 2020
To: Brenden Clark, Water Resources Engineer – County of San Luis Obispo
From: Matt Horn, Public Works Director - City of San Luis Obispo
Subject: 2021-2022 Zone 9 Budget Request
Based on the current status and future needs to continue making progress on several projects, the
City is requesting the following funding from Zone 9 for the 2021-2022 Fiscal Year.
Project Name Requested FY 2021/22
General Creek Maintenance $130,500
Silt Removal $130,000
Mid Higuera Bypass $40,000
Total $300,500
General Creek Maintenance
$130,500 to fund ongoing general creek maintenance which includes channel clearing, including
removal of trees, vegetation, and arundo from creeks. Funding is planned to be used as follows:
1. Contract Labor - Channel Clearing: $51,500
2. Channel Tree Removals: $46,000
3. Vegetation Disposal: $ 5,000
4. Arundo Removal: $28,000
Silt Removal
Existing funding to support Silt Removal is approximately $230,000. Available funding remains high
due to lower than expected design and construction costs for prior projects. As a result, these
remaining funds will support design and permitting work for 2021 silt removal locations.
Typically, silt removal projects address 1-2 locations per year. Existing funds, in addition to the
request of $130,000, will support an expansion of the program in 2021 and fund design, permitting,
and construction at up to five creek locations. Currently, the following locations are prioritized:
1. Prefumo ARM – Prefumo Creek at LOVR
2. Unnamed Tributary to Acacia Creek - Sacramento at Ricardo Court
3. Sydney Creek – East of Railroad Safety crossing, south of Sinsheimer Park
4. Prefumo Creek – South of Madonna at Laguna Lake outfall
5. San Luis Creek Bypass channel at LOVR and HWY 101
Page 151 of 361
Mid Higuera Bypass
$40,000 is requested for the Mid Higuera Bypass project for consultant work to negotiate with
adjacent property owners regarding project right of way, construction access, and demolition of the
“pinch-point” structure at 306 Higuera Street.
Page 152 of 361
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
ZONE 9 ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, April 10, 2019
Members Present
Wayne Peterson, Chairperson, Member, County At-Large
Carlyn Christianson, Member, City Council
Matt Horn, Vice Chairperson, Member, City Staff
Christine Mulholland, Member, City At-Large
Dave Romero, Alternate, City At-Large Alternate
Jon Hall, Alternate, County At-Large
1. Introductions and roll call
Wayne Peterson calls the meeting to order at 1:36 PM. Quorum established.
Introductions of attendees present.
2. Approval of Meeting Minutes - December 12, 2018
Motion by: Christine Mulholland
Second by: Matt Horn
The Committee approves the December 12, 2018 meeting minutes (5-0-0), as amended.
3. County at-large alternate appointments
Mladen Bandov, Secretary, received one application from Janet Andrews to fill the vacancy of the
County At-Large alternate position.
Motion by: Christine Mulholland
Second by: Jon Hall
The Committee approves the appointment of Janet Andrews as the County At-Large #2, Alternate
(5-0-0).
County Staff will take the appointment to an upcoming Board of Supervisors meeting for approval.
4. Officer elections
Mladen, Secretary, explains that although not included in the by-laws, the committee previously
requested to re-affirm officers or elect new at the first meeting of the year.
Motion by: Christine Mulholland
Second by: Carlyn Christianson
The Committee moves to maintain Wayne Peterson as Chairperson and Matt Horn as Vice
Chairperson (5-0-0).
Page 153 of 361
Mladen Bandov announces his intent to transition out of the role as the Committee Secretary role
after the June 12, 2019 meeting due to his transition out of the Region Unit Supervisor role. He
introduces Brendan Clark who is the new Supervising Engineer of the Regional Unit who would
now be more appropriate to serve as Secretary should the Committee choose to appoint him at
the June 12, 2019 meeting. The Chairperson requested a letter documenting the change in
Secretary including Brendan Clark’s contact information.
5. Reports
• Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) Update
Dick Tzou, County of San Luis Obispo, updates the Committee on the San Luis Obispo
Valley Groundwater Basin (SLOVGB) as it relates to SGMA. The Groundwater
Sustainability Plan (GSP) development kickoff meeting is on April 10, 2019 at 3:30 pm and
there will be additional public meetings and workshops in the future. Department of
Water Resources (DWR) awarded a grant to the County that included the development of
a GSP for the SLOVGB. The grant also applies to the GSP development for the areas of the
Santa Maria Basin within San Luis Obispo County jurisdiction. The total grant for the
development of GSPs for both basins is $1.3 million and approximately $850,000 is
allocated for the SLOVGB. The prioritization of the SLOVGB is currently designated as a
“high priority” basin.
• Mid-Higuera Bypass Project Updates
Brian Nelson, City of San Luis Obispo Engineer, reports that he and Freddy Otte, and the
Design Engineer performed a site walk in late January 2019 to identify trees to be moved,
confirm locations of bypass channels, and analyzed bench locations. A 70% Design
submittal was received during the week of April 1, 2019 and integrated findings from the
January 2019 site walk. The 70% Design also provided the design of rock slope protection
locations and the Bianchi Bridge crossing. The County and City will review the 70% Design
and will likely provide one joint set of comments to the consultant by the end of April
2019. Regarding the Madonna Family property, there is no written agreement, but parties
involved are continuously being engaged with the City and adjustments to bypass channel
alignment bench location was moved to the south to consider building locations.
• Creek Maintenance Updates
Freddy Otte, City of San Luis Obispo Biologist, reports about the two minor flooding
events during a January 17, 2019 storm cell that had an intensity of 5 inches/hour with a
duration of 20 minutes. One flooding event occurred when Prefumo Creek backed up at
the Windemere Condo complex at Los Osos Valley Road and Oceanaire. The other
flooding event was at apartments on Foothill adjacent to Old Garden Creek. The rest of
the creek system performed well during the winter storms that occurred since the
December 2018 meeting.
• Arundo Removal Updates
Jon Hall, Land Conservancy, reports that there are no additional updates since the
December 2018 meeting. Arundo removal efforts will resume in August starting with
property owner outreach efforts.
Page 154 of 361
Freddy Otte, City Biologist, reports that the City is continuing to with the property owner
of 12500 Los Osos Valley Road to resolve the issues of a large wall of Arundo growth and
significant transient populations in the creek. The Calle Joaquin sewer line replacement
project will address removal of the majority of the Arundo in Fall 2020 by a contractor.
Freddy will coordinate with the Land Conservancy for the removal smaller clumps where
possible.
6. Update on FEMA flood mapping efforts
Mladen Bandov, Secretary, reports on the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) update. Craig
Steward from FEMA’s modeling team STARR II is leading the FIRM map update. Staff has provided
Craig with requested information and has also submitted photographs and videos from received
from the public from the areas surrounding the East Fork of the San Luis Obispo Creek. Staff
reports that FEMA could not accommodate a request to provide an additional study of the East
Fork of the San Luis Obispo Creek.
Wayne Peterson, Chairperson, notes that the City and the County design standards do not correct
existing flooding problems with new developments, instead, they prevent flooding from getting
worse.
7. East Branch of San Luis Obispo Creek Site Visit and Update
Mladen Bandov, Secretary, reports that on January 3, 2019, a site visit was conducted near the
East Branch of the San Luis Obispo Creek to address flooding frequency that has been reported
by the public. Photographs and descriptions are included in the agenda packet. Matt Horn, Vice
Chairperson, reports that there were creek areas, downed trees, probably low frequency bridge
and low-water crossings and although there is a practical use of the land, the area does not convey
the necessary flood occurrence interval. Wayne Peterson, Chairperson, reports that on February
2, 2019, he photographed the properties in the area following a February 1, 2019 storm and there
was a substantial amount of water on fields, the creek on the north side of Buckley Road was full
and up to the road. Wayne also reports that on Drew Munster’s property the water in the creek
was up to the bridge on his access road and there was standing water on Drew’s fields. As of April
10, 2019, there is standing water on the Avila Ranch property at the corner of Vachell Lane and
Buckley Road.
Kathy Borland, Save the SLO Life, reports that something upstream on the Chevron has changed
because Buckley Road has not flooded this season. Kathy reports that from October 1, 2018 to
date, the San Luis Obispo Tribune shows 16.74 inches while the rain gauge on personal rain gauge
shows 29 inches of rain for the same timeframe.
8. Fiscal year 2019/20 budget update
• The $60,000 that was borrowed from Zone 1/1A was returned to Zone 9.
• Vegetation management program in County areas
Mladen Bandov, Secretary, summarizes the staff report in the agenda packet that details
the Vegetation Management program in the County areas with a proposed amount of
$90,000 that is addition to the City’s request for the 2019/20 budget. Freddy Otte, City
Biologist, reports that discussions with County and City staff are currently underway to
research modification of the existing reimbursement agreement that the City has with
Page 155 of 361
County. The details of this type of program are still being worked on. San Luis Bay Drive
would likely be the downstream limit of the program. Christine Mulholland, City At-Large
member, points out an area up Prefumo Canyon Road that has erosion washing into
Prefumo Creek that may need to be addressed. Freddy Otte notes that most of the
erosion does go to an area of Prefumo Creek where regular silt removal activities occur
annually and additional silt removal activities in this area will be researched.
• Limited study East Branch of San Luis Obispo Creek
Mladen Bandov describes the goals of the limited study of the East Branch of the San Luis
Obispo Creek that will serve as an update of the Waterway Management Plan. The budget
for developing this study is $87,000.
Motion by: Christine Mulholland
Second by: Carlyn Christianson
The Committee moves to endorse the two additional proposed activities- Vegetation
Management Program and East Branch limited study- for a total of $177,000 (5-0-0).
9. New Zone 9 website and mailing list
A new website has been set up for the Zone 9 Advisory Committee at
www.slocounty.ca.gov/pw/zone9 and all information has been transferred over from the
previous website. A mailing list is also available on the website.
10. Public Comment
Kathy Borland, Preserve the SLO Life, asks if the Advisory Committee should review new
development in the City for flooding. Matt Horn, City Engineer, responds that the Zone 9
Committee is a County Committee and that any development within the City goes through various
City Committees and design standards for review/approval with an environmental document
prepared including analysis of flooding and would not go to the Zone 9 Advisory Committee.
11. Future Agenda Items
Wayne Peterson adjourns the meeting at 2:50 PM
Page 156 of 361
City of San Luis Obispo, Council Memorandum
Council Agenda Correspondence
DATE: September 2, 2021
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Greg Hermann, Deputy City Manager
Prepared By: Teresa Purrington, City Clerk
VIA: Derek Johnson, City Manager
SUBJECT: Item 7a. – PROCESS TO FILL A COUNCIL (MAYOR) VACANCY
Staff received the following questions, regarding the process and timeline to fill the Mayor
vacancy:
1) If a sitting Council Member were appointed Mayor, what would be the timeline to fill
the then vacant Council appointment? Could a shortened timeline be presented?
Answer: As proposed in the Council Agenda Report, the appointment to a vacant
Council seat would be on October 19, 2021. After further review of the Charter and
Council Policies and Procedures, a consolidated/overlapping process could be
considered as an alternative, if noticed properly. Please see the chart below for the
consolidated/overlapping process timeline.
This process would require that the Notice of Council (Mayor) Vacancy also notice a
potential Council vacancy. If the Mayor’s seat was then filled by a seated Council
Member, the Oath of Office would be administered after a successfu l vote and would
be effective immediately. At that time, remaining Mayor applications that indicated
they were also interested in a Council seat, and Council Member specific applications,
could then be considered to make an appointment to the vacant Council Member seat.
Date Action
Tuesday, September 7, 2021 Council to adopt a process (i.e., appointment or direction to
call special election) to fill the unexpired term (Council
considers appointing a seated Council Member to fill the
Mayor vacancy at the October 5, 2021 meeting).
Thursday, September 9, 2021 Notice of Vacancy to fill vacant Mayor position and possible
vacant Council Member position (if a seated Council
Member is appointed as Mayor). Invite eligible persons to
submit an application for appointment for Mayor and/or
Council Member.
Page 157 of 361
Staff Agenda Correspondence – Process to Fill a Council (Mayor) Vacancy Page 2
Date Action
Friday, September 10, 2021,
8:00 AM through September
24, 2021, 5:00 PM
Applications for appointment are submitted to the City
Clerk’s Office.
Monday, September 27, 2021 City Clerk will verify residency and voter registration
requirements of applicants.
Tuesday, September 28, 2021,
no later than 5:00 PM
Publish City Council Agenda for October 5, 2021 meeting,
and post applications of validated applicants.
Wednesday, September 29,
2021, through October 5, 2021
Council Members individually evaluate the applications.
Tuesday, October 5, 2021 Written public comments regarding applications accepted in
the City Clerk’s Office until 5:00 p.m.
Tuesday, October 5, 2021 Council considers all applications for Mayor
o If Council appoints a seated Council Member, the
Oath of Office is administered to the new Mayor.
Council then considers applicants for vacated Council
Member seat.
o If Council appoints an applicant to fill the vacant
Council Member seat, the Oath of Office is
administered to the new Council Member.
October 19, 2021 Approval of Council Subcommittee Liaison Appointments for
remainder of 2021 and 2022.
2) If our current Vice Mayor were appointed to Mayor, could the Vice Mayor appointment
be handled during the same meeting as appointing the Mayor?
Answer: If this were to happen, a Vice Mayor appointment would be added to the
October 19, 2021, City Council meeting. It is staff’s recommendation that the term
be for the remainder of 2021 and 2022.
3) When would the new five-member Council make subcommittee appointments? It is
important that our City remains fully represented on regional boards and special
purposes committees.
Answer: This depends on if the end -to-end process or the overlapping process is
used. If the end-to-end process is used, the appointments would happen at the
November 2nd meeting. With the overlapping process, they would happen at the
October 19th meeting. Staff also recommends that these terms be for the remainder
of 2021 and 2022.
Page 158 of 361
Item 7a
Department: Administration
Cost Center: 1021
For Agenda of: 9/7/2021
Placement: Business
Estimated Time: 30 minutes
FROM: Greg Hermann, Deputy City Manager
Prepared By: Teresa Purrington, City Clerk and Megan Wilbanks, Deputy City Clerk
SUBJECT: PROCESS TO FILL A COUNCIL (MAYOR) VACANCY
RECOMMENDATION
Approve a process to fill the vacancy on City Council resulting from the resignation of
Mayor Heidi Harmon, effective at the end of business September 26, 2021.
REPORT IN BRIEF
Mayor Heidi Harmon announced on August 26, 2021, that her last day in office would be
September 26, 2021. The announcement creates a vacancy that must be filled by either
appointment or special election. This staff report provides the Charter and Council
Policies and Procedures requirements and some details about past practice.
Attachments include specific excerpts from the Charter and Council Policies and
Procedures Manual, and a draft application should Council elect to fill the vacancy via
appointment.
DISCUSSION
On August 26, 2021, Mayor Heidi Harmon announced her intention to resign her position
as Mayor effective at the end of business September 26, 2021. As a result, the Mayor’s
seat vacancy will exist on September 27, 2021.
City Authority
The City’s Charter and Council Policies and Procedures govern the process for filling City
Council vacancies.
Charter Section 406 states (Attachment A):
“… the Council by a majority vote of its remaining members shall appoint a qualified
person to fill the vacancy until the person elected to serve the remainder of the unexpired
term or new term takes office.”
“If the Council fails to fill the vacancy within thirty (30) days following its occurrence, it
shall call a special municipal election to fill the vacancy, to be held not sooner that ninety
(90) days or not later than one hundred and fifty (150) days following the occurrence of
the vacancy.”
Page 159 of 361
Item 7a
Section 3.3 of Council Policies and Procedures establishes a specific process for
conducting an appointment to the City Council, as follows: (Attachment B)
1. At least ten days before Council meets the first time to select a replacement
member for a vacancy, the City shall advertise the vacancy in a local newspaper.
2. The minimum qualifications for appointment are residency in the city at least 30
days prior to appointment and elector status at the time of appointment.
3. Each applicant shall submit a written statement of 500 words or less affirming the
amount of time available each week to devote to the Council; reasons for wanting
to be appointed; involvement in community affairs and organizations, especially in
the preceding 23-month period; personal qualifications for the position and prior
experience in government1, or areas associated with or doing business with
government.
4. Meetings to consider the selection of an applicant shall be open to the public.
5. Applications shall be given to the Council and be available to the public at least
four days before the opening of the meeting.
6. Members of the public may submit written comments regarding an application up
to 24-hours before the meeting begins.
7. At the meeting, each applicant is to be given five minutes to make a presentation
to Council and will be asked to verify their willingness to serve.
8. Thereafter, all discussion shall be confined to the Council except for questions
directed by the Council to staff or to members of the public.2
9. Upon conclusion of the discussion, Mayor/Vice Mayor shall open the floor to
nominations by the remaining Council Members
Details not specifically enumerated in the City Charter or Council Policies and Procedures
that the Council may wish to consider:
A. The format of an application is not set forth; therefore, staff suggests using the
Application for Appointment (Attachment C), which will provide a basic structure to
be followed by the applicants.
B. The application requests that the applicant attach a resume, as was requested in
the prior processes.
C. The City Clerk will review the applications for com pleteness and eligibility and
prepare copies for each Council Member. There is no direction regarding type of
coversheet desired by Council to be used in their review and deliberations of the
applications. The City Clerk offers the possibility of a spreadsheet with the names
of applicants running down the left side of the page and empty boxes to be used
by Council Members to write their own notes.
1 Such as working as a government affairs liaison or serving on committees, commissions, or other work in
government.
2 Public comment on the appointment should be accepted at any time prior to Council making nominations
and acting, in accordance with the Brown Act.
Page 160 of 361
Item 7a
D. While it is set forth that members of the public may submit written comments at
any time until 24-hours before the meeting, public comment on the appointment
should be accepted at any time prior to Council making nominations and taking
action, in accordance with the Brown Act.
E. Council may prescribe a set amount of time for public comment at the meeting if
there is a large applicant pool and Council wishes to manage the meeting time.
F. The Council Policies and Procedures do not specify the way Council is to narrow
the applicant pool to arrive at consensus, but staff’s review o f the records of past
appointments did identify a procedure that seemed to have been efficient and
effective. In previous processes, the Council followed a voting process as outlined
below.
G. Should the Council successfully nominate and appoint an applicant, the City Clerk
could immediately administer the Oath of Office to the newly appointed Council
Member.
Suggested Process
Proposed Timeline. The following table sets out a calendar of events for the proposed
appointment process. This calendar was created to afford potential applicants time to do
their due diligence, as well as maximize time the City Council has to consider the
applications received. This timeline can be modified to shorten some of the timeframes
such that the appointment could be made sooner and is at the discretion of the City
Council. Staff will be prepared to assist with mapping out alternative timelines should the
Council wish to consider other options.
Date Action
Tuesday, September 7, 2021 Council to adopt a process (i.e., appointment or
direction to call special election) to fill the unexpired
term.
Thursday, September 9, 2021 Publish Notice of Vacancy effective September 27,
2021, in Newspaper; post on City’s website
(slocity.org) and in the kiosk outside City Hall. Invite
eligible persons to complete and submit an
application for appointment.
Friday, September 10, 2021,
through September 24, 2021
Receive applications for appointment in the City
Clerk’s Office
Monday, September 27, 2021 City Clerk will verify residency and voter registration
requirements of applicants.
Page 161 of 361
Item 7a
Date Action
Tuesday, September 28, 2021 Publish City Council Agenda for October 5, 2021,
Regular Meeting, and post applications of validated
applicants. Applications will be available for public
review in the City Clerk’s office and on slocity.org.
Wednesday, September 29,
2021 through October 5, 2021
Council Members will individually evaluate the
applications and resumes. If a Council Member has a
question for one of the candidates, the question(s)
should be addressed to the individual applicant with
an understanding that each Council Member will
make a report at the public hearing about their
individual conversations with applicants.
Tuesday, October 5, 2021 Written public comments regarding applications to be
accepted in the City Clerk’s Office until 5:00 p.m.
Tuesday, October 5, 2021 If a candidate is appointed – the City Clerk will
administer the Oath of Office to the new Council
Member
Tuesday, October 12, 2021,
Tuesday October 19, 2021, or
Tuesday October 26, 2021
If no candidate is appointed on October 5, 2021, an
additional meeting(s) of the Council could be held
before Wednesday, October 27, 2021.
In no candidate is appointed by Wednesday, October
27, 2021, a Special Election would be triggered.
A special election will need to be held between 90
and 150 days of the vacancy (September 27, 2021).
(December 26, 2021 – February 24, 2022)
An election must be called 88 days before the date of
the election, therefore, the earliest the election could
be called if triggered by the September 27, 2021 date,
would be September 29, 2021 and as late as
November 28, 2021.
Page 162 of 361
Item 7a
Proposed process for the City Council Meeting on October 5, 2021.
The following steps are suggested in conducting the Regular Meeting on October 5, 2021,
should the Council determine to fill the vacancy via appointment. These steps are based
upon procedures followed during the previous appointment processes.
1. Council Members will be asked to disclose any ex-parte communications with
individual applicants including general explanation of the substance of any
communications.
2. Each candidate will make an oral presentation of no more than five minutes. There
will be no questions from Council Members of applicants, since there will have
been ample time for Council Members to have asked questions in the time
between the application deadline and the meeting.
3. Hear public comments at the meeting in accordance with the Brown Act.
4. After public testimony, the matter will be brought back to City Council for
deliberation.
5. Each Council Member will announce, and the City Clerk will record, a list of up to
three applicants that they can support, in alphabetical order.
a. If three (3) or more Council Members name the same applicant and only
one applicant received three (3) votes, the Mayor/Vice Mayor will call for a
motion to appoint that person.
b. If more than one applicant receives three (3) or more votes, these applicants
should be further discussed until an appointment is made (either via more
votes of a favored applicant from each Council Member or consensus from
deliberations).
c. If no candidate gets three (3) or more votes, the Council can expand the list
by engaging in additional rounds of listing applicants. Any applicants
identified in the first round would continue to be considered if there are two
or more straw votes in their favor.
d. At any time during the vote process a Council Member could change their
mind regarding an acceptable applicant and express support for any
applicant.
e. A Council Member can propose a motion in favor of any applicant at any
time.
6. If a candidate is appointed, the City Clerk shall administer the Oath of Office to the
new Council Member who would be seated immediately.
Policy Context
As indicated above the City’s Charter and Policies and Procedures outline the process
for Council appointments.
Page 163 of 361
Item 7a
Public Engagement
The notice of the vacancy was announced by the Mayor on August 26, 2021. A Notice of
Vacancy will be published no less than 10 days before the meeting where the Council will
consider the appointment if Council pursues this option. Members of the public can submit
public comment at any time prior to the meeting where the appointment will be
considered.
If a special election is preferred, staff will return prior to October 27, 2021, with a resolution
to call a special election and the projected costs to administe r a special election. A special
election is estimated to cost between $150,000-$200,000 in direct costs.
CONCURRENCE
The City Manager and City Attorney both concur with staff’s recommendation.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to the recommended action in
this report, because the action does not constitute a “Project” under CEQA Guidelines
sec. 15378.
FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: No Budget Year: 2021-22
Funding Identified: No
Fiscal Analysis:
Funding
Sources
Total
Budget
Available
Current Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
General Fund $ $150,000-$200,000 $ $
State
Federal
Fees
Other:
Total $ $ $ $
If the Council makes an appointment to fill this vacancy, there will be minimal fiscal
impacts. A special election, however, will result in an unbudgeted expense estimated to
be between $150,000-$200,000 that would need to be appropriated from unassigned fund
balance. This estimate does not include City staff time or additional assistance needed in
the City Clerk’s Office.
Page 164 of 361
Item 7a
ATTACHMENTS
A - Section 406. Vacancies of the San Luis Obispo Charter
B - Section 3.3.3 Appointment or Special Election from the Council Policies and
Procedures
C - Draft Application for Appointment
Page 165 of 361
Page 166 of 361
Attachment A
From City Charter
SECTION 406. Vacancies.
An elective office becomes vacant when the incumbent thereof dies, resigns, is
removed from office under recall proceedings, is adjudged insane, convicted of a felony,
or of an offense involving a violation of the Mayor or Council Member' s official duties, or
ceases to be a resident of the City, or has been absent from the State without leave
granted by the City Council for more than sixty (60) consecutive days, or fails to attend
the meetings of the Council for a like period without being excused there from by said
body.
A vacancy in the Council shall be filled for the remainder of the unexpired term, if any, at
the next regular municipal election following not less than seventy- two (72) days upon
the occurrence of the vacancy, but the Council by a majority vote of its remaining
members shall appoint a qualified person to fill the vacancy until the person elected to
serve the remainder of the unexpired term or new term takes office. If the term st ill has
two ( 2) years until expiration at the time of the next regular municipal election, the
election to that seat shall be separated from the election for the other Council
candidates . If the Council fails to fill the vacancy within thirty (30) days following its
occurrence, it shall call a special municipal election to fill the vacancy, to be held not
sooner than ninety (90) days or not later than one hundred and fifty (150) days following
the occurrence of the vacancy. The election shall be governed by the provisions of
Article III.
A person elected to fill a Council vacancy for an unexpired te rm shall take office on the
first Tuesday following his election. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Charter,
a minority of the members of the Council may fill vacancies on the Council by
appointment in the event that a majority of the Council seats becomes vacant.
Page 167 of 361
Page 168 of 361
Attachment B
Portion of Council Policies and Procedures
3.3 FILLING COUNCIL VACANCIES
3.3.1 APPOINTMENT OR SPECIAL ELECTION
Per City Charter Section 406, the Council shall by a majority vote of the remaining
Council Members, appoint a replacement member to the Council within 30 days of
the occurrence of the vacancy. If the Council fails to fill the vacancy within thirty (30)
days of its occurrence, it shall call a special municipal election to fill the vacancy, to
be held not sooner than ninety (90) days or not later than one hundred and fifty (150)
days following the occurrence of the vacancy.
3.3.2 PUBLIC APPOINTMENT
In order that the public may know how its business is being conducted, all phases of
the Council process to appoint a replacement member to a vacancy shall be
conducted in public.
3.3.3 ADVERTISE FOR APPLICANTS
At least ten days before Council meets the first time to select a replacement member
for a vacancy, the City shall advertise in a local newspaper of general circulation
describing the vacancy and term thereof, requesting applications from those persons
interested in being appointed. In the case of a vacancy due to a current Council
Member elected to the Mayor’s seat, the City Clerk may advertise the vacancy once
the County Registrar of Voters has certified the election results.
3.3.4 QUALIFICATIONS
Although the only two established minimum qualifications for appointment are (1)
residency in the City for at least 30 days prior to appointment, and (2) elector status
at the time of appointment (Charter § 403), each applicant shall submit a written
statement of 500 words or less covering at least the following areas:
3.3.4.1 The amount of time available each week to devote to the Council.
3.3.4.2 Reasons for wanting to be appointed.
3.3.4.3 Involvement in community affairs and organizations, especially in
the preceding 23-month period.
3.3.4.4 Personal qualifications for the position.
Page 169 of 361
3.3.4.5 Prior experience in government, or areas associated with or doing
business with government.
3.3.5 PUBLIC MEETING
3.3.5.1 At a time(s) selected by the Council, a meeting open to the public
shall be held by the Council to consider the selection of an applicant
to fill the vacancy.
3.3.5.2 The applications shall be given to the Council and be available to the
public at least four days before the opening of the meeting.
3.3.5.3 Members of the public may submit written comments regarding an
application at any time up to 24 hours before the meeting begins.
3.3.5.4 At the meeting, each applicant wishing to serve should be present
to verify that he/she would be willing to serve if appointed, and that
he/she is a resident of the City. Each candidate will be given five
minutes to make a presentation to Council.
3.3.5.5 Thereafter, all discussion shall be confined to the Council except for
questions directed by the Council to staff or to members of the public.
3.3.5.6 Upon the conclusion of such discussion, the Mayor shall open the
floor to nominations by the remaining Council Members. All
nominations, seconding, and voting shall be done audibly in public.
3.3.5.7 If Council is unable to reach consensus on the appointment and
further consideration is required, Council may adjourn the initial
meeting to a subsequent meeting within 30 days of the occurrence
of the vacancy to attempt to reach a decision.
Page 170 of 361
Application for Appointment
to City Council
Position: Mayor/City Council Member
Name: ___________________________________________________________
Residence Address: ____________________________________________________
Eligibility: Section 403 of the City Charter stipulates the following eligibility for office:
No person shall be eligible for election to, or to hold, the office of Mayor or Council Member of said
City unless said person is and shall have been a resident t hereof, or of territory legally annexed
thereto, on or prior to the date of such election or appointment, for at least thirty (30) days next
preceding said person’s election thereto or appointment to fill a vacancy therein and is an elector
thereof at the time of such election or appointment.
The Political Reform Act of 1974 stipulates that the appointed Council Member is required to file
a Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interest.
To Apply:
Section 3.3.4 of the Council Policies and Procedures Manual states that each applicant shall
submit a written statement of 500 words or less covering at least the following areas:
1. The amount of time available each week to devote to the Council.
2. Reasons for wanting to be appointed.
3. Involvement in community affairs and organizations, especially in the preceding 23-month
period.
4. Personal qualifications for the position.
5. Prior experience in government, or areas associated with or doing business with
government1.
Complete this page and attach it to the front of your su bmission of a written statement and resume.
I have read and herby certify that I meet the eligibility criteria for appointment stipulated under the
above City Charter Section 403 and will comply with all reporting requirements.
_________________________ _____________________
Signature Date
IN THE EVENT THAT THE MAYOR POSITION IS FILLED BY A SEATED
COUNCIL MEMBER, ARE YOU INTERESTED IN A COUNCIL SEAT?
APPLICATIONS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK, 990 PALM STREET, SAN
LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA NO LATER THAN 5:00 PM ON SEPTEMBER 24, 2021.
THE CITY COUNCIL WILL HOLD A PUBLIC MEETING ON OCTOBER 5, 2021, AT 6:00 PM TO CONSIDER THE
SELECTION OF AN APPLICANT TO FILL THE VACANCY. EACH CANDIDATE WILL BE GIVEN FIVE MINUTES
TO MAKE A PRESENTATION TO COUNCIL.
1 Such as working as a government affairs liaison or serving on committees, commissions, or other work in
government.
Yes ____
No ____
Page 171 of 361
Page 172 of 361
Item 7b
Department: Community Development
Cost Center: 4003
For Agenda of: 9/7/2021
Placement: Public Hearing
Estimated Time: 90 Minutes
FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Kyle Van Leeuwen, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (TRACT 3157) TO CREATE 23
RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON A 4.98-ACRE SITE WITHIN THE LOW -DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL (R-1) ZONE (500 WESTMONT DRIVE)
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, approving Tentative Tract Map No. 3157 to create twenty-three (23)
residential lots in the Low-Density (R-1) Zone and adopting the Associated Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Plan
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as represented in the staff
report and attachments dated September 7, 2021 (SBDV -0169-2020/EID-0170-2020,
500 Westmont Drive).”
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
The Planning Commission has recommended approval of the proposed project, which is
a Tentative Tract Map (Attachment B) that would subdivide a 4.98 -acre parcel into 23
residential lots. As conditioned, the proposed subdivision is consistent with Zoning and
Subdivision Regulations, and applicable engineering standards. No residential
development is proposed at this time; however, recordation of the map would require the
installation of public improvements, including new roads, water, wastewater, and
stormwater infrastructure (Attachment C, Tentative Tract Map & Phasing Plan). The
Planning Commission has also recommended adoption of an Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration, fulfilling requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) (Attachment D).
DISCUSSION
Background
The project proposes 23 residential lots on a 4.98-acre site zoned for residential use (R-
1). The proposed lots are consistent with the Subdivision Regulations standards for lot
size and dimensions and the proposed streets and other improvements are consis tent
with current engineering standards. No exceptions to the subdivision regulations are
proposed. The project site has a creek that crosses the western portion of the site.
Page 173 of 361
Item 7b
Lots have been proposed in an arrangement that allows for minimum 20-foot creek
setbacks to be applied to those lots adjacent to the creek (Lots 1-7) and allow for an
adequate buildable area outside those applied setbacks (Figure 1, Subdivision Design,
below). To accommodate the onsite improvements, 86 native and non-native trees would
be removed, 51 of which are subject compensatory planting requirements in the R-1 zone.
Figure 1: Subdivision Design
The project site is located adjacent to the northern city limit line just west of Highway 1.
The 4.98-acre site is located at the terminus of the east and west portions of Westmont
Avenue and the northern terminus of Cuesta Drive and Stanford Drive. Existi ng
development on the project site includes two residential structures and associated
accessory structures, a pool, and other site improvements. Vegetation on the property
includes a vegetated creek with associated riparian habitat that extends through the
western portion of the site. The site is generally comprised of developed land, riparian
habitat, and annual grassland. There are 177 ornamental and native trees throughout the
project site.
Surrounding land and Zoning are as follows:
West: Single-family homes, zoned Low-Density Residential (R-1).
North: Cal Fire San Luis Obispo Unit Headquarters (Fire Station #12), outside city limits,
zoned for Agricultural or Public Facility use.
East: Single- & multi-family homes, zoned Low-Density (R-1) and Medium-Density (R-2).
South: Single-family homes, zoned Low-Density Residential (R-1).
Page 174 of 361
Item 7b
Previous Council or Advisory Body Action
On July 28, 2021, the Planning Commission (PC) recommended approval of the TTM to
the City Council (Attachment E, Planning Commission Staff Report and Meeting Minutes,
7-28-21). The PC had previously reviewed the project on May 26, 2021. The result of the
May 26th hearing was a motion to continue the item to allow for the completion of the 30 -
day public comment period on the draft environmental document, and to allow additional
information and clarifications to be incorporated that address public comments
(Attachment F, Planning Commission Staff Report and Meeting Minutes, 5 -26-21). As a
part of the PC’s recommendation to approve the project, the commission added one
additional condition requiring the applicant to prepare and implement a Construction
Communication Plan. The PC also asked City staff to provide the City Council with its
analysis of alternative traffic and circulation options, which is included in this report.
The Planning Commission’s recommendation incorporated the recommendations of the
City’s Tree Committee, which reviewed the project on May 17, 2021, for consistency with
the Tree Regulations. The Tree Committee recommended the PC find the proposed tree
removals consistent with the City’s Tree Regulations, with the inclusion of the
recommended condition of approval (COA #5) for compensatory planting (Attachment E,
Tree Committee Staff Report and Meeting Minutes).
Policy Context
The project is evaluated against the standards and limitations of the Subdivision
Regulations and General Plan policies. The project aligns with the housing production
Major City Goal because it will result in 23 lots for single-family residential development
from one existing property.
1. Consistency with the General Plan
The General Plan Land Use Element (LUE), Circulation Element (CE), and Housing
Element (HE) provide policies for the conservation and development of residential
neighborhoods. The Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE) also provides
policies to preserve and protect natural resources on the project site. The project is
consistent with these policies in several aspects.
LUE Policy 2.2.3 Neighborhood Traffic: Neighborhoods should be protected
from intrusive traffic. All neighborhood street and circulation improvements should
favor pedestrians, bicyclists, and local traffic. Vehicle traffic on residential streets
should be slow. To foster suitable traffic speed, street design should include
measures such as narrow lanes, landscaped parkways, traffic circles, textured
crosswalks, and, if necessary, stop signs, speed humps, bollards, and on -street
parking and sidewalks.
Page 175 of 361
Item 7b
LUE Policy 2.2.4 Neighborhood Connections: The City shall provide all areas
with a pattern of streets, pedestrian network, and bicycle facilities that promote
neighborhood and community cohesiveness. There should be continuous
sidewalks or paths of adequate width, connecting neighborhoods with each other
and with public and commercial services and public open space to provide
continuous pedestrian paths throughout the city. Connectivity to nearby community
facilities (such as parks and schools), open space, and supporting commercial
areas shall also be enhanced, but shall not be done in a method that wo uld
increase cut-through traffic.
CE Policy 4.1.4 New Development: The City shall require that new development
provide bikeways, secure bicycle storage, parking facilities and showers consistent
with City plans and development standards. When evaluating transportation
impacts, the City shall use a Multimodal Level of Service analysis.
CE Policy 5.1.3 New Development: New development shall provide sidewalks
and pedestrian paths consistent with City policies, plans, programs, and standards.
When evaluating transportation impact, the City shall use a Multimodal Level of
Service analysis.
HE Policy 7.3: New residential developments should incorporate pedestrian and
bicycle linkages that provide direct, convenient and safe access to adjacent
neighborhoods, schools, parks, and shopping areas.
The design of the subdivision protects the existing neighborhood from intrusive traffic
by only connecting the two existing streets to the south, avoiding any increase in cut -
through traffic between other existing neighborhoods and Highway 1. The subdivision
design also incorporates a potential bicycle and pedestrian connection to the east, as
well as parkways, on-street parking, and sidewalks (Figure 2, Subdivision Design
Circulation Connections).
Page 176 of 361
Item 7b
Figure 2: Subdivision Design Circulation Connections
LUE Policy 2.3.5. Neighborhood Pattern: The City shall require that all new
residential development be integrated with existing neighborhoods. Where
physical features make this impossible, the new development should create new
neighborhoods.
The design of the subdivision integrates with the existing neighborhood by continuing
the street layout of Stanford and Cuesta Drive, including street width, sidewalks, and
parkways (see Figure 3 as example).
Figure 3: Cuesta Drive Street Design Connection to Existing
Page 177 of 361
Item 7b
LUE Policy 2.3.7. Natural Features: The City shall require residential
developments to preserve and incorporate as amenities natural site features, such
as landforms, views, creeks, wetlands, wildlife habitats, wildlife corridors, and
plants.
LUE Policy 2.3.10 Site Constraints: The City shall require new residential
developments to respect site constraints such as property size and shape, ground
slope, access, creeks and wetlands, wildlife habitats, wildlife corridors, native
vegetation, and significant trees.
COSE Policy 7.7.9 Creek Setback
A. The following items should be no closer to the wetland or creek than the setback
line: buildings, streets, driveways, parking lots, above-ground utilities, and outdoor
commercial storage or work areas.
B. Development approvals should respect the separation from creek banks and
protection of floodways and natural features identified in part A above (buildings,
streets, driveways, etc.), whether or not the setback line has been established.
The TTM identifies the dimensions of the creek and existing riparian area. The lots
proposed adjacent to the creek are a larger size (7,884 to 24,451 sf where 6,000 sf is
the standard minimum lot size in the R-1 zone) so that creek protection measures,
such as compliance with the applied 20-foot creek setback requirements, can be met
and still allow development of the created parcel. The TTM also proposes no
development or grading activities in the southwest corner of the site, where the creek
and associated vegetation is most prominent and established. In all, over 60 coast live
oaks, will be retained within the protected creek corridor area, as well as other native
species.
Page 178 of 361
Item 7b
Figure 4: Creek Corridor, tree #s in black within setbacks are retained
2. Consistency with Subdivision Regulations
Lots Size and Dimensions
The Subdivision Regulations regulates minimum lot sizes in the R-1 zone and sets
specific development standards. The minimum lot size allowed in the R -1 zone is
6,000 square feet with a minimum width of 50 feet and a minimum depth of 90 feet.
Lots are also required to have a minimum street frontage of 20 feet. All the lots within
the proposed subdivision meet these base requirements for size and dimension.
Additionally, the Subdivision Regulations states that any area between creek banks
shall be excluded from the calculation of minimum lot area. The TTM has also
demonstrated compliance with this requirement. The Subdivision Regulations also call
for natural contours of the site to be preserved to the greatest extent possible in new
subdivisions and for lot lines to be generally perpendicular to the street (§16.18). The
design of the subdivision is consistent with these standards.
Corner Lots
Lot 19 of the TTM is the only “corner lot” included in the proposed subdivision. Per
Table 3 of the Subdivision Regulations, corner lots in residential subdivisions shall
have a minimum area of 15% greater than otherwise required and shall be ten feet
wider that otherwise required. Lot 19 does provide a width of no less than 60 feet,
consistent with this standard, but is less than 15% larger than the minimum lot area.
Page 179 of 361
Item 7b
Staff has included in the proposed resolution condition #3 which requires the area of
lot 19 to be increased to no less than 6,900 square feet for final map recordation,
consistent with regulations standards for corner lots. This can be achieved by moving
the lot line between Lot 19 and lot 20 approximately 2 feet, without compromising Lot
20’s compliance with minimum lot size or dimension standards. Only minor changes
in site grading will be needed with this adjustment of lot lines.
3. Response to Planning Commission Direction
Traffic/Circulation
The Planning Commission directed staff to provide additional analysis of traffic and
circulation options for the project site. Four streets terminate into the project site,
including Westmont Avenue to the east and west, and Stanford and Cuesta Drives to
the south of the site. The project proposes to connect Stanford and Cuesta Drives,
which the City Transportation Division supports as the preferred option for this project
because it (a) funnels auto trips to Highland Drive where drivers can access Santa
Rosa Street (Highway 1) via the existing traffic signal, (b) minimizes potential for cut-
through traffic from Santa Rosa Street using existing local residential streets, (c)
improves emergency access for the proposed residences and existing homes on
Stanford and Cuesta (the existing dead -end streets make it difficult for SLO Fire to
access and turn around), and (d) this option is expected to maintain volumes and
speeds along Stanford and Cuesta that are within the neighborhood traffic thresholds
adopted in the General Plan Circulation Element for residentia l local streets.
Other circulation options considered, but not recommended due to policy
inconsistency, grading challenges, and property ownership limitations include:
Extend Westmont Ave East: Extend Westmont Avenue east of the project to
provide direct access to the new development, with no direct street
connection to Stanford or Cuesta
Connecting the new proposed lots to Westmont Avenue to the east would
increase the number of vehicles performing left-turn movements at the
unsignalized intersection of Santa Rosa (Highway 1)/Westmont
Avenue. Uncontrolled left-turns on high-speed roadways, such as Highway
1 (55 mph at Westmont), create higher potential for severe traffic collisions.
The City’s annual Traffic Safety Reports have documented this, whe re a
higher concentration of injury collisions for all users (autos, bikes,
pedestrians) tend to occur at locations on higher-speed streets without
dedicated left turn signals. Pursuant to the City’s adopted Vision Zero
Policy, Transportation staff would prefer to manage vehicular access for
new development in a manner that minimizes additional left turns at
uncontrolled, high-speed intersections.
Page 180 of 361
Item 7b
Additionally, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
maintains jurisdiction of Santa Rosa (Highway 1) within the vicinity of the
project. Caltrans would need to approve any proposals to modify the
intersection of Westmont/Highway 1 and should have the opportunity to
formally review any potential development proposals that would add more
auto trips to this intersection. While not related to this specific development
proposal, Caltrans submitted formal comments in February of 2020 as part
of the Cal Poly Master Plan Update EIR expressing concerns about a
proposal that would have increased auto traffic at a similar unsignalized
intersection to the north (Stenner Creek Road/Highway 1)—in these
comments, Caltrans specifically noted that they were not supportive of
installing a traffic signal or roundabout at that intersection. While a more
detailed warrant analysis would be required if considering signalizing the
Westmont/Highway 1 intersection, upon initial review by transportation staff
this intersection does not appear to meet warrants with or without the
additional traffic contemplated by this development if connected to
Westmont Ave to the east.
If Westmont Avenue (east) was extended to connect with the proposed
project and with the existing segments of Cuesta and/or Stanford Drive , this
could increase potential for cut-through traffic from Santa Rosa St.
(Highway 1) through the existing neighborhood. This would not only worsen
the potential issue of left-hand movements stated above but would also
create a new vehicle route that many of the residential lots to the northeast
of the site could utilize. This would conflict with Land Use Element Policy
2.2.4 sited above, which states that connections to existing streets should
not be done in a method that would increase cut-through traffic.
Extend Westmont Avenue West: Extend Westmont Avenue west of the
project to provide direct access to the new development, with no direct street
connection to Stanford or Cuesta
If Westmont Avenue to the west were extended to provide access to the
newly proposed lots, construction of a bridge crossing would be required,
which would impact the on-site creek. This conflicts with many General Plan
goals and policies to preserve creeks1.
1 Land Use Element:
Community Goal #4. Protect, sustain, and where it has been degraded, enhance wildlife habitat on land surrounding
the city, at Laguna Lake, along creeks and other wetlands, and on open hills and ridges within the city, so that
diverse, native plants, fish, and animals can continue to live within the area.
Community Goal #7. Protect and restore natural landforms and features in and near the city, such as the volcanic
morros, hillsides, marshes, and creeks.
Policy 2.3.10. Site Constraints. The City shall require new residential developments to respect site constraints such
as property size and shape, ground slope, access, creeks and wetlands, wildlife habitats, wildlife corridors, native
vegetation, and significant trees.
Page 181 of 361
Item 7b
If Westmont Avenue to the west were extended to provide access to the
newly proposed lots and connected to any of the other streets (i.e., Jeffrey
Drive), a “cut-through” route for traffic would also be provided to the existing
residential lots to the northwest. This would conflict with Land Use Element
Policy 2.2.4 sited above, which states that connections to existing street s
should not be done in a method that would increase cut-through traffic.
Connecting Stanford and Cuesta Drives is seen as the best option for the project for
the following reasons:
1. The existing street widths on Cuesta and Stanford Drive, as well as the
proposed new connection between the two, are consistent with City
Engineering Standards for local residential streets.
2. The connection of the two streets improves access for emergency services
and larger commercial vehicles (i.e., garbage trucks, delivery trucks, etc.),
where there is currently no appropriate turnaround where Cuesta and
Stanford dead end (there is a small cul-de-sac near the end of Stanford
Drive, but it does not meet the minimum width needed per current SLO Fire
and City Engineering Standards). With the two streets connected, residents
in the area will have a second means of evacuation, and emergency vehicle
response is improved.
3. The connection of Cuesta Drive or Stanford Drives does not create a new
“cut-through” route for other existing residential areas looking to access to
or from Highway 1.
4. Stanford and Cuesta Drive each carry approximately 200 -300 vehicles per
day currently and have prevailing auto speeds of under 25 mph. The
maximum neighborhood traffic thresholds for a residential local street per
the General Plan Circulation Element are 1,500 vehicles per day and
speeds of 25 mph or less. The proposed development is anticipated to
generate approximately 220 new daily auto trips. Even under a worst-case
assumption where 100% of the newly created auto traffic used only Cuesta
Drive or Stanford Drive, the resulting worst-case daily traffic volumes would
still be well under the max threshold established for residential local streets
in the Circulation Element. The worst-case result would be approximately
520 vehicle trips per day, where the max threshold for the street is 1,500
vehicle trips per day.
Page 182 of 361
Item 7b
The evaluation of the proposed street patterns for the project included analysis of Vehicle
Miles Traveled (VMT), consistency with the Circulation Element, potential hazards due to
a geometric design feature or incompatible uses, and emergency access. This analysis
by City Planning and Public Works/Transportation concludes that there are no significant
impacts related to transportation and traffic pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) (Attachment D, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration) and no
inconsistencies with the City’s Circulation Element. For these reasons, staff does not
recommend modifications to the project’s current street design and connections to
existing streets.
Public Engagement
Consistent with the City's Public Engagement and Noticing (PEN) Manual and the City's
Municipal Code, the project was noticed per the City's notification requirements for
Development Projects including Tentative Tract Maps for each public hearing associated
with the project. Newspaper legal advertisements were posted in the New Times ten days
prior to the hearing. While post card noticing was sent late for the Planning Commission
hearing on May 26th, the postcards for the second de novo Planning Commission hearing
and the September 7, 2021, City Council meeting were sent to both tenants and owners
of properties located within 300 feet of the project site ten days before the hearing. Email
notifications to individuals that provided digital correspondence has also been provided.
CONCURRENCE
The proposed project has been reviewed by the Community Develo pment Department
(Planning, Building, and Engineering), Public Works Department (Transportation),
Utilities Department, Fire Department, and the City’s Sustainability and Natural Resource
Officer and Biologist. Staff comments provided during review of the proposed project are
incorporated into the presented evaluation and conditions of approval.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed project has been analyzed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). An Initial Study -Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was prepared and
circulated from April 29, 2021, through June 29, 2021 (Attachment D, Initial Study/
Mitigated Negative Declaration). The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration has
been updated in certain areas in connection and in response to public comments received
prior to the July 28, 2021, Planning Commission hearing. These areas of evaluation, such
as Biological Resources and Hydrology and Water Quality, are further discussed in
Attachment E (Planning Commission Staff Repot and Minutes, July 28, 2021). These
modifications do not require recirculation of the IS/MND because the edits constitute
minor modifications and clarifications to an adequate MND and do not include significant
new information that would result in a new significant environmental impact or a
substantial increase in the severity of a significant environmental impact.
Page 183 of 361
Item 7b
Within the Initial Study document all new text is indicated by underlined, bold, and
italicized text. Deleted text is indicated by strike-through (Attachment D). The applicant
has agreed to all mitigation measures proposed specific to this project , which would
reduce all identified significant impacts to less than significant, and these measures are
incorporated into the Draft Resolution (Attachment A).
FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: Yes/No Budget Year: 2021-2022
Funding Identified: Yes/No
Fiscal Analysis:
Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
General Fund N/A $ $ $
State
Federal
Fees
Total N/A $ $ $
When the General Plan was prepared, it was accompanied by a fiscal impact analysis,
which found that overall, the General Plan was fiscally balance d. Since the project does
not propose to change the General Plan designation of the site, it has a neutral fiscal
impact.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Deny the Tentative Tract Map # 3157. Staff does not recommend this alternative,
because the project complies with the City' s Subdivision Regulations and Zoning
Regulations and would help meet the City' s housing objectives. An action denying
the application should include findings that cite the basis for denial and should
reference inconsistency with the General Plan, Subdivision Regulations, Zoning
Regulations or other policy documents, and make findings required by the Housing
Accountability Act (California Government Code Section 65589.5(j)(1)) that the project
either results in a “specific, adverse impact” and “there is no feasible method to
satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact.”
2. Continue the item. The Council may continue its review of the project if additional
information is needed to make a decision. If additional information is needed, direction
should be provided to staff so that it can be presented at that subsequent hearing. The
Council may direct staff and the applicant to make specific changes to the project. The
Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (California Government Code Section 95905.5(a)) limits
the number of public hearings a city can conduct if a housing development project
complies with the applicable, objective general plan and zoning standards . A motion
to continue this item would allow for one additional hearing by The Council, and only
one additional hearing, before the limit of five hearings is reached.
Page 184 of 361
Item 7b
ATTACHMENTS
A – Draft Resolution approving Tentative Tract Map 3157 and Mitigated Negative
Declaration
B – Planning Commission Resolution PC-1042-21 (SBDV-0169-2020, EID-0170-2020)
C – Tentative Tract Map 3157 and Phasing Plan
D – Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration of impacts of TTM 3157
E – Planning Commission Staff Report and Draft Meeting Minutes, 7-28-21
F – Planning Commission Staff Report and Meeting Minutes, 5-26-21
G – Tree Committee Staff Report and Meeting Minutes, 7-17-21
Page 185 of 361
Page 186 of 361
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2021 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.
3157 TO CREATE TWENTY-THREE (23) RESIDENTIAL LOTS IN THE
LOW-DENSITY (R-1) ZONE AND ADOPTING THE ASSOCIATED
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
MITIGATION, MONITORING, AND REPORTING PLAN PURSUANT TO
THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA), AS
REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED
SEPTEMBER 7, 2021 (SBDV-0169-2020, EID-0170-2020, 500
WESTMONT DRIVE)
WHEREAS, the Tree Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a web
based public hearing on May 17, 2021, recommending the Planning Commission find the
project consistent with the Tree Regulations Ordinance with recommended conditions,
pursuant to a proceeding instituted under SBDV-0169-2020 and EID-0170-2020, Alice Jo
Meinhold Survivors Trust, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
web based public hearing on May 26, 2021, and continued the review of the project to a
future date, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under SBDV -0169-2020 and EID-0170-
2020, Alice Jo Meinhold Survivors Trust, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
public hearing in the Council Chambers of City Hall, at 990 Palm Street, on July 28, 2021,
pursuant to a proceeding instituted under SBDV-0169-2020 and EID-0170-2020, Alice Jo
Meinhold Survivors Trust, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
recommended approval of Tentative Tract Map 3157, as conditioned, and recommended
the adoption of an Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-MND) associated with
the project, pursuant to said application; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted public
hearing in the Council Chambers of City Hall, at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, on
September 7, 2021, for the purpose of considering Tentative Tract Map 3157, subdividing
an approximately 4.98-acre site into 23 residential lots, and for the purpose of considering
an Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-MND) analyzing the proposed
tentative tract map, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and a proceeding
instituted under SBDV-0169-2020 and EID-0170-2020; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo has duly considered
all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and evaluation
and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing; and
Page 187 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 2
R _____
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the
manner required by law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. The City Council approve the project (SBDV-0169-2020,
& EID-0170-2020), based on the following findings:
1. As conditioned, the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare
of persons living or working at the site or in the vicinity because the project respects
site constraints and will be compatible with the scale and character of surrounding
neighborhoods.
2. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and
improvement, is consistent with the General Plan because:
a. The Land Use Element provides that the purpose of the Low-Density
Residential land use designation is to provide for single family detached
dwellings, which the subdivision is designed and intended to accommodate,
and complies with the maximum density limit of seven density units per
acre.
b. The project is consistent with Land Use Element Policies 2.2.3 and 2.2.4,
Circulation Element Policy 5.1.3, and Housing Element Policy 7.3 because
the design of the subdivision protects the existing neighborhood from
intrusive traffic by avoiding any increase in cut-through traffic between other
existing neighborhoods and Highway 1 and by incorporating a potential
bicycle and pedestrian connection to the east, as well as parkways, on -
street parking, and sidewalks with proposed streets.
c. The project is consistent with Land Use Element Policy 2.3.5 because the
design of the subdivision integrates with the existing neighborhood by
continuing the street layout of Stanford Drive and Cuesta Drive, including
street width, sidewalks, and parkways.
d. The project is consistent with Land Use Element Policy 4.2.1 because the
project respects the separation from creek banks by identifying the
dimensions of the creek and existing riparian area. The lots proposed
adjacent to the creek are a larger size (24,451 to 7,884 square feet) so that
creek protection measures, such as compliance with creek setback
requirements, can be met and still allow residential development within the
created parcels. The project also proposes no development or g rading
activities in the southwest corner of the site, where the creek and associated
vegetation is most prominent and established.
Page 188 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 3
R _____
e. The project is consistent with Housing Element Policy 6.8 because the
project will facilitate residential infill development.
f. The project is consistent with Conservation and Open Space Element Policy
7.7.9 because building envelopes, streets, and driveways, are separated
from the creek by the inclusion of a 20-foot creek setback applied to the
project for such improvements, even though the onsite creek is not subject
to creek setback standards.
3. The design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or
natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision because the project has
demonstrated that development of the proposed lots can be achieved in compliance
with the setback standards of the Zoning Regulations, which are intended to help
provide air circulation and exposure to sunlight.
4. As conditioned, the subdivision and associated tree remo vals are consistent with the
City’s Tree Regulations because the project will be required to provide compensatory
tree plantings at a rate consistent with Municipal Code requirements with a size and
species of tree found to be appropriate by the Tree Committee.
5. The design of the tentative map and proposed improvements are not likely to cause
serious health problems or substantial environmental damage since further
development or redevelopment of the proposed parcels will occur consistent with the
City’s Development Standards, Engineering Standards, Mitigation Measures, and
Conditions of Approval.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The City Council hereby adopts the proposed
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) of Environmental Impact, based on
incorporation of the following mitigation measures, which will reduce potential
environmental impacts to less than significant.
Air Quality
AQ -1 Idling Control Techniques. During all construction activities and use of diesel
vehicles, the applicant shall implement the following idling control techniques:
1. Idling Restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors for Both On- and Off-Road
Equipment.
a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet
of sensitive receptors if feasible;
b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be
permitted;
c. Use of alternative-fueled equipment shall be used whenever
possible; and
d. Signs that specify the no idling requirements shall be posted and
enforced at the construction site.
Page 189 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 4
R _____
2. California Diesel Idling Regulations. On-road diesel vehicles shall
comply with 13 CCR 2485. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled
commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more
than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operatio n on highways. It applies
to California- and non-California-based vehicles. In general, the
regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles:
a. Shall not idle the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than
5 minutes at any location, except as noted in Subsection (d) of
the regulation; and
b. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to
power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that
vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater
than 5 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of a
restricted area, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the
regulation.
Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind
drivers of the 5-minute idling limit. The specific requirements and exceptions in
the regulation can be reviewed at the following website:
www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/truck-idling/2485.pdf.
AQ -2 Particulate Matter Control Measures. During all construction and ground-
disturbing activities, the applicant shall implement the following particulate matter
control measures and detail each measure on the project grading and building
plans:
1. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible.
2. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to
prevent airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the
SLOAPCD’s limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60 -
minute period. Increased watering frequency would be required
whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour (mph). Reclaimed
(non-potable) water should be used whenever possible.
3. All dirt stockpile areas (if any) shall be sprayed daily and covered with
tarps or other dust barriers as needed.
4. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project
revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as
possible, following completion of any soil-disturbing activities.
5. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than
1 month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non-
invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established.
6. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized
using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other met hods
approved in advance by the SLOAPCD.
Page 190 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 5
R _____
7. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed
as soon as possible. In addition, building pads shall be laid as soon as
possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
8. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on
any unpaved surface at the construction site.
9. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be
covered or shall maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard (minimum vertical
distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 23114.
10. “Track out” is defined as sand or soil that adheres to and/or
agglomerates on the exterior surfaces of motor vehicles and/or
equipment (including tires) that may then fall onto any highway or street
as described in CVC Section 23113 and California Water Code (CWC)
Section 13304. To prevent track out, designate access points and
require all employees, subcontractors, and others to use them. Insta ll
and operate a “track-out prevention device” where vehicles enter and
exit unpaved roads onto paved streets. The track-out prevention device
can be any device or combination of devices that are effective at
preventing track out, located at the point of intersection of an unpaved
area and a paved road. Rumble strips or steel plate devices need
periodic cleaning to be effective. If paved roadways accumulate tracked-
out soils, the track-out prevention device may need to be modified.
11. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried
onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with
reclaimed water where feasible. Roads shall be pre -wetted prior to
sweeping when feasible.
12. All PM10 mitigation measures required should be shown on grading and
building plans.
13. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons whose
responsibility is to ensure any fugitive dust emissions do not result in a
nuisance and to enhance the implementation of the mitigation measures
as necessary to minimize dust complaints and reduce visible emissions
below the SLOAPCD’s limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in
any 60-minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend
periods when work may not be in progress (for example, win d-blown
dust could be generated on an open dirt lot). The name and telephone
number of such persons shall be provided to the SLOAPCD Compliance
Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork, or demolition
(Contact Tim Fuhs at 805-781-5912).
AQ -3 Geologic Evaluation. Prior to initiation of ground-disturbing activities, the
applicant shall retain a registered geologist to conduct a geologic evaluation of
the property, including sampling and testing for NOA in full compliance with
SLOAPCD requirements and the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading,
Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations (17 CCR 93105). This geologic
Page 191 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 6
R _____
evaluation shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department
upon completion. If the geologic evaluation determines that the project would not
have the potential to disturb NOA, the applicant must file an Asbestos ATCM
exemption request with the SLOAPCD.
AQ -4 Naturally Occurring Asbestos Control Measures. If NOA are determined to
be present onsite, proposed earthwork, demoliti on, and construction activities
shall be conducted in full compliance with the various regulatory jurisdictions
regarding NOA, including the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying,
and Surface Mining Operations (17 CCR 93105) and requirements stipu lated in
the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP; 40 Code
of Federal Regulations [CFR] Section 61, Subpart M – Asbestos). These
requirements include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities
commencing, to the SLOAPCD;
2. Preparation of an asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos
Consultant; and
3. Implementation of applicable removal and disposal protocol and
requirements for identified NOA.
AQ -5 Asbestos-Containing Material. Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the
applicant shall provide an asbestos report that was prepared by a certified
asbestos consultant. If ACM are determined to be present, at least 10 working
days prior to any demolition work the applicant shall provide notification to
SLOAPCD of such work. The notification shall include an asbestos report that
was prepared by a certified asbestos consultant. ACM removal and disposal shall
follow the requirements of the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants Regulation (NESHAP) Subpart M and of the SLOAPCD.
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated onto Final Map and project
grading/building plans for review and approval by the City Community Development
Department. Compliance shall be verified by the City during regular inspections, in
coordination with the SLOAPCD, as necessary.
Biological Resources
BIO-1 Implement a Rare Plant Mitigation Program that ensures no net loss of
Cambria morning glory on the project site. Prior to any tract improvements, a
Rare Plant Mitigation Program shall be implemented for Cambria morning glory
and shall be overseen by a qualified botanist approved by the City. As a
component of the program, seed shall be collected from C ambria morning glory
plants during the appropriate season prior to tract grading activities. Using
standard procedures, the qualified botanist shall clean and store the seeds until
the receiving sites shown on the project plans are ready. Suitable habitat of 2,180
square-feet in size outside of the development area (as designated on the site
Page 192 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 7
R _____
plans in the creek setback zone) shall be designated as the mitigation site that
will be maintained in a natural state and not be subject to mowing earlier than
June 1 each year. The areas will be maintained as grassland habitat and no
planting of ornamental species or other adverse modifications (such as grazing
activities) will be allowed. The mitigation site shown on the project plans is twice
the size as the areas currently occupied by the rare plant occurrences (2,180
square-feet of habitat created for 1,076 square -feet of habitat impacted). This
equates to a 2:1 mitigation ratio (habitat created to habitat impacted) to ensure a
minimum 1:1 replacement ratio is achieved. Topsoil from each of the four
occurrences will be collected in 6-inch lifts and stored for top-dressing the
mitigation site once grading of the pads is complete. As needed, the mitigation
site should be prepared for planting by removal of non -native species or other
measures as necessary, then applying the salvaged topsoil. Once topsoil has
been layered evenly through the area, collected seed should be hand -
broadcasted into suitable locations by the qualified botanist and covered with
compost. Seed may also be incorporated into the native erosion control seed mix
described in the Native Erosion Control Seed Mix table under Mitigation Measure
BIO-9 and applied to other grassy areas of the site as part of the erosion control
effort. Depending on the season when construction starts, the qualified botanist
may also potentially salvage plants (i.e., dig them up when soils are moist) and
transplant them to containers to be maintained until the mitigation sites are ready
for planting.
BIO-2 Conduct annual monitoring and implement adaptive management
measures for 5 years to ensure no net loss of Cambria morning glory
onsite. The Rare Plant Mitigation Program shall include annual monitoring and
maintenance of the mitigation site to ensure success of the program. Monitoring
by a qualified botanist shall occur during the spring growing season (between
April 15 and May 15 each year) to ensure successful establishment of planted
propagules. The established rare plants shall be mapped to evaluate the goal of
no net loss of the species onsite. The measurable objective shall be to have at
least 1,076 sf of occurrence comprised of approximately 300 Cambria morning
glory plants. Appropriate vegetation sampling techniques shall be used to assess
the areal cover of vegetation to evaluate the status of the established
occurrences. If the success criteria of having approximately 300 plants covering
1,076 sf within the creek setback zone is not reached by the third year of
monitoring, remedial actions such as collecting more seed and distributing it in
suitable areas should be employed, with a corresponding additional year of
monitoring. Other activities to increase the success of the rare plant mitigation
effort could include non-native plant species removal within the mitigation site to
reduce competition, additional seed application, or supplemental irrigation during
periods of prolonged drought. The qualified botanist shall prepare annual reports
for the applicant detailing the methods and results of the mitigation effort an d
monitoring effort. The applicant shall be responsible for submitting the report to
the City on an annual basis (by December 31 of each year) for the 5 -year
monitoring period or until the final success criteria described above are met.
Page 193 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 8
R _____
BIO-3 To the extent feasible, avoid initial site grading in the winter months. The
burrowing owl has been recorded in the vicinity of the project from October to the
end of April. If initial vegetation removal and site grading for the tract
improvements is conducted outside of this period, potential effects on this
species would be avoided and no further mitigation would be required.
Restricting the time period for earth-moving activities is also required to avoid or
minimize the potential for erosion and sedimentation (see Mitigation Measure
BIO-9). If initial grading work must commence during the time period that
burrowing owls may be present onsite, preconstruction surveys for this species
shall be included in the survey effort described in Mitigation Measure BIO-4 prior
to vegetation removal or tract improvements.
BIO-4 Conduct a preconstruction survey and avoid construction in areas
occupied by special-status wildlife species until relocated or they have left
the site. Within 7 days prior to the start of vegetation/tree removal, ground-
disturbing activities, or demolition of existing structures, a biologist approved by
the City shall survey the project impact area to identify whether nesting birds,
roosting bats, monarch butterfly overwintering populations, obscure bumble bee,
and/or California legless lizard are present on site. A separate survey shall be
conducted for any phase of the project not conducted concurrently or within 10
days of cessation of the previous phase (i.e., structure demolition conducted prior
to general site grading). The biologist shall use appropriate survey techniques
for the special-status species identified in the 2020 BRA as having potential to
occur onsite. For example, burrows shall be examined with binoculars or wildlife
cameras, and inspected for whitewash or prey remains. Leaf litter and cover
objects shall be searched for northern California legless lizards. Potential bat
roost sites shall be inspected for sign of roosting bats such as guano or prey
remains. If any of these species are found onsite, the biologist shall coordinate
with the City, and CDFW as appropriate, on methods to ensure the successful
relocation of individuals to suitable habitat nearby. In some cases, CDFW may
recommend creating structures for displaced woodrats and bats. Burrowing owls
can be discouraged from using burrows onsite, or occupied burrows can be
avoided until the owls have left the area. Bats can be restricted from roost sites
by placing netting over their entrances after they have left the roost for night-time
foraging. The wildlife protection measures to be employed will be based on the
results of the survey and the particular characteristics of their use of the site, in
coordination with CDFW and the construction engineer. If no special-status
animal species are found onsite during the preconstruction survey, work may
proceed with the implementation of the following Mitigation Measures BIO -5
through BIO-7.
BIO-5 Prepare and present a Worker Environmental Awareness Program. Prior to
any vegetation removal or tract improvements, a qualified biologist shall prepare
a Worker Environmental Awareness Program that will be presented to all project
personnel. This program shall detail measures to avoid and minimize impacts on
Page 194 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 9
R _____
biological resources. It shall include a description of special-status species
potentially occurring on the project site and their natural history, the status of the
species and their protection under environmental laws and regulations, and the
penalties for take. Recommendations shall be given as to actions to avoid take
should a special-status species be found on the project site. Other aspects of the
training shall include a description of general measures to protect wildlife,
including:
1. Delineation of the allowable work area, staging areas, access points,
and limits to vehicle access;
2. Storage of all pipes, metal tubing, or similar materials stored or stacked
on the project site for one or more overnight periods shall be either
securely capped before storage or thoroughly inspected for wildlife
before the materials are moved, buried, capped, or otherwise used.
3. Inspection of materials stored onsite, such as lumber, plywood, and rolls
of silt fence, for wildlife that may have sheltered under or within the
materials;
4. Use of netting to exclude birds from nesting in construction materials;
5. Construction of escape ramps in all excavations and trenches more than
6 inches deep;
6. Contact information for the City-approved biologist and instructions
should any wildlife species be detected in the work site;
7. Dust suppression methods during construction activities when
necessary, to meet air quality standards and protect biological
resources; and
8. Methods for containment of food-related trash items (e.g., wrappers,
cans, bottles, food scraps), small construction debris (e.g., nails, bits of
metal and plastic), and other human generated debris (e.g., cigarette
butts) in animal-proof containers and removal from the site on a weekly
basis.
All project personnel who have attended the training shall sign an attendance
sheet. The program shall be repeated for any new crews that arrive
subsequently on the site.
BIO-6 Install high-visibility construction and silt fence along the creek corridor to
delineate the allowable work area, exclude wildlife from the site, and
protect the stream habitat. Prior to vegetation removal or tract improvements,
and during subsequent residential development for Lots 1 -7, a high-visibility
construction fence at least 4 feet tall together with a silt fence, or an approved
wildlife exclusion fence, shall be erected along the creek corridor to delineate the
limits of grading and vehicle access. If possible, the fence shall be erected along
the creek setback line, and encroachment into the setback shall be kept at a
minimum. In no case shall ground disturbance occur within the riparian habitat
or below the top of bank without obtaining proper permits from regulatory
Page 195 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 10
R _____
agencies. The type of fence used may be a combination of wildlife exclusion and
silt fence (i.e., ERTEC Triple-function E-fence) or similar materials that would
serve the purposes of safety/construction area delineation, wildlife exclusion, and
siltation prevention. The fence shall be checked weekly by construction
personnel for needed maintenance.
BIO-7 Conduct biological monitoring for special-status wildlife species while the
property is cleared and graded, and structures are removed. A qualified
biologist shall monitor the removal of structures, materials, and vegetation that
may provide cover for obscure bumble bee, northern California legless lizards,
and bat roosting sites. The biologist shall be onsite daily until all materials are
removed and all vegetation has been cleared. If any special-status species are
found, work shall be delayed until the individuals have left the work area or
CDFW shall be notified to obtain authorization for capture and relocation.
BIO-8 Avoid vegetation removal within the riparian habitat during the
overwintering season. Vegetation removal within the riparian area shall be
conducted outside of the overwintering season for monarch butterfly (late
October through February) and obscure bumble bee (late October through
January) to avoid disturbance to species potentially inhabiting riparian
vegetation.
BIO-9 Install erosion and sediment BMPs and revegetate graded areas. The
following erosion and sedimentation control BMPs are required to be
implemented during vegetation removal, tract improvements, during individual lot
construction, and after the construction phases of the project:
1. If possible, the potential for erosion and sedimentation shall be
minimized by scheduling construction to occur outside of the rainy
season, which is typically defined as October 15 through April 15.
Adherence to this measure would also serve as avoidance for the
burrowing owl, as described in Mitigation Measure BIO-3.
2. To minimize site disturbance, all construction related equipment shall be
restricted to established roads, construction areas, and other designated
staging areas. The creek setback zone shall be clearly marked as
described in Mitigation Measure BIO-6.
3. Prior to any site disturbance during tract improvements or individual lot
construction, a Sediment and Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared by
a qualified engineer. The use of silt fence, straw wattles, erosion control
blankets, straw bales, sandbags, fiber rolls, and other appropriate
techniques should be employed to protect the drainage features on and
off the property. Biotechnical approaches using native vegetation shall
be used as feasible. All areas with soil disturbance shall have
appropriate erosion controls and other stormwater protection BMPs
installed to prevent erosion potential. All sediment and erosion control
measures shall be installed per the engineer’s requirements prior to the
initiation of site grading if planned to occur within the rainy season.
Page 196 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 11
R _____
4. Spill kits shall be maintained on the site, and a Spill Response Plan shall
be in place.
5. No vehicles or equipment shall be refueled within 100 fe et of wetland
areas, riparian habitat and/or drainage features, and refueling areas
shall have a spill containment system installed. No vehicles or
construction equipment shall be stored overnight within 100 feet of these
areas unless drip pans or ground covers are used. All equipment and
vehicles shall be checked and maintained on a daily basis to ensure
proper operation and to avoid potential leaks or spills. Construction
staging areas shall be located in a location where spills would not drain
into aquatic habitats.
6. No concrete washout shall be conducted on the site outside of an
appropriate containment system. Washing of equipment, tools, etc.
should not be allowed in any location where the tainted water could enter
onsite drainages.
7. The use of chemicals, fuels, lubricants, or biocides shall be in
compliance with all local, state, and federal regulations. All uses of such
compounds shall observe label and other restrictions mandated by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, California Department of Food
and Agriculture, and other state and federal legislation.
8. All project-related spills of hazardous materials within or adjacent to the
project site should be cleaned up immediately.
9. All areas with soil disturbance shall have appropriate erosion controls
and other stormwater protection BMPs installed to prevent erosion
potential. Silt fencing, erosion control blankets, straw bales, sandbags,
fiber rolls, and/or other types of materials prescribed on the plan shall
be implemented to prevent erosion and sedimentation. Biotechnical
approaches using native vegetation shall be used as feasible.
10. Areas with disturbed soils shall be restored under the direction of the
project engineer in consultation with a qualified restoration ecologist as
detailed above. Methods may include recontouring graded areas to
blend in with existing natural contours, covering the areas with salvaged
topsoil containing native seedbank from the site, and/or applying the
native seed mix as described in the table below. Native seed mix shall
be applied to the graded areas in the creek setback area through either
direct hand seeding or hydroseeding methods. Seeding with the native
erosion control seed mix should be provided on all disturbed soil areas
prior to the onset of the rainy season (by October 15).
Page 197 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 12
R _____
Native Erosion Control Seed Mix
Species
Application
Rate
(lbs/acre)
California Brome (Bromus
carinatus) 10
purple needlegrass (Stipa
pulchra) 5
tomcat clover (Trifolium
wildenovii) 5
six weeks fescue (Vulpia
microstachys) 5
Total 25
BIO-10 Obtain necessary permits for impacts in jurisdictional areas, implement a
compensatory mitigation program, and monitor the success of the
program to ensure no net loss of Riparian/Wetland habitat or other waters
on the subject property. Prior to any vegetation removal or site disturbance
within the areas delineated as jurisdictional features (Figure 5, Aquatic
Resources Delineation 2021), the applicant shall provide documentation to the
City that a Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit from USACE, a Clean Water Act
Section 401 Water Quality Certification from RWQCB, and a California Fish and
Game Code Section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement from
CDFW have been obtained or have been determined by the regulatory agencies
to not be required.
Prior to the initiation of vegetation removal or tract improvements, the applicant
shall retain a qualified biological monitor to ensure compliance with all Clean
Water Act, City of San Luis Obispo stormwater and water quality requirements,
and If regulatory permits are required, prior to the initiation of vegetation removal
or tract improvements, the applicant shall retain a qualified biological monitor to
ensure compliance with all Clean Water Act and CDFW permit requirements
during work adjacent to the creek. The monitor shall be present during the
installation of the construction fencing delineating the limits of work in relation to
the edge of riparian, creek top of bank, and 20-foot creek setback buffer, as
described in Mitigation Measure BIO-6. Since the Cambria morning glory
compensatory mitigation site is to be located within this buffer, the monitor shall
direct appropriate wildlife exclusion and erosion control BMPs to protect riparian
habitat during site preparation for planting. The monitor shall be present during
construction of the rip rap pad and any other work within the creek setback area
on stormwater structures. The monitor shall also oversee removal of non -native
tree species and site preparation for tree planting within the setback. If a Habitat
Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) is required by the regulatory agencies,
the applicant shall provide a copy of the plan to the City and the biological monitor
shall be responsible for successful implementation of the plan.
Page 198 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 13
R _____
BIO-11 Record a Biological Easement and Biological Easement Agreement
protecting riparian area: A Biological Easement and Biological Easement
Agreement shall be recorded in conjunction with the final map recordation. The
easement agreement shall be developed by the applic ant in a format provided
by the City. The following activities are permitted within the biological easement,
subject to the review and approval by the City Sustainability and Natural
Resources Official:
1. Stormwater improvements.
2. Removal of non-native trees.
3. Restoration and creek bank stabilization activities.
No future paving or structures shall be permitted within the biological easement.
Creek setback standards shall be applied to the easement area, consistent with
municipal code requirements.
Monitoring Program: These conditions and measures shall be noted on Final Map and
all grading and construction plans. The City Community Development Department and
Natural Resources Manager shall verify compliance.
Cultural Resources
CR-1 Discovery of Previously Unidentified Cultural Resources. In the event that
historical or archaeological remains are discovered during ground -disturbing
activities associated with the project, an immediate halt work order shall be
issued, and the City Community Development Director shall be notified. A
qualified archaeologist shall conduct an assessment of the resources and
formulate proper mitigation measures, if necessary. After the find has been
appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. These requirements shall
be noted on the project’s final map and all improvement/construction plans.
CR-2 Discovery of Human Remains. In the event that human remains are exposed
during ground-disturbing activities associated with the project, an immediate halt
work order shall be issued, and the City Community Development Director shall
be notified. California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no
further disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie
adjacent human remains shall occur until the County Coroner has made the
necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98.
If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall
notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. These
requirements shall be noted on the project’s final map and all
improvement/construction plans.
Monitoring Program: These conditions shall be noted on Final Map and all grading and
construction plans. The City Community Development Department shall verify
compliance, including preparation and implementation of the Monitoring Plan, and review
and approval of cultural resources monitoring reports documenting compliance with
required Mitigation Measures.
Page 199 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 14
R _____
Noise
N-1 For the entire duration of the construction phase of the project, the following
BMPs shall be adhered to:
1. Stationary construction equipment that generates noise that exceeds 60
dBA at the project boundaries shall be shielded with the most modern
noise control devises (i.e., mufflers, lagging, and/or motor enclosures).
2. Impact tools (e.g., jack hammers, pavement breakers, rock drills, etc.)
used for project construction shall be hydraulically or electrically
powered wherever possible to avoid noise associated with compressed-
air exhaust from pneumatically powered tools.
3. Where use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the
compressed air exhaust shall be used.
4. All construction equipment shall have the manufacturers’ recommended
noise abatement methods installed, such as mufflers, engine
enclosures, and engine vibration insulators, intact and operational.
5. All construction equipment shall undergo inspection at periodic intervals
to ensure proper maintenance and presence of noise control devices
(e.g., mufflers, shrouding, etc.).
N-2 Construction plans shall note construction hours, truck routes, and all
construction noise BMP, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City
Community Development Department prior to issuance of grading/building
permits. The City shall provide and post signs stating these restrictions at
construction entry sites prior to commencement of construction and maintained
throughout the construction phase of the project. All construction workers shall
be briefed at a preconstruction meeting on construction hour limitations and how,
why, and where BMP measures are to be implemented.
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated into Final Map and project
grading and building plans for review and approval by the City Community Development
Department. Compliance shall be verified by the City during regular inspections . Tribal
Cultural Resources
Tribal Cultural Resources
TC-1 Culturally Affiliated Native American Monitor. A representative from the
Salinan Tribe shall be notified prior to any ground disturbing activities to provide
for on-site monitoring. If cultural resources are encountered during subsurface
earthwork activities, all ground disturbing activities within a 25 -foot radius of the
find shall cease and the City shall be notified immediately consistent with the
requirements of Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2.
Page 200 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 15
R _____
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated into Final Map and project
grading and building plans for review and approval by the City Community Development
Department. Compliance shall be verified by the City during regular inspections.
Wildfire
WF-1 Vegetation/Fuel Management Plan. Prior to issuance of any construction
permit, the applicant shall provide a vegetation/fuel management plan prepared
by a registered professional forester or certified arborist for each lot. The plan
shall identify fuel load reduction techniques, including vegetation removal and
trimming, to increase defensible space around residential structures and
driveways/access roads. The plan shall also identify appropriate standards for
installation of new landscaping, such as requirements for drought-tolerant and
fire-resistant species.
WF-2 Additional Fire Hazard Reductions. Future development would incorporate the
following fire reduction methods identified by the 2020 Wildland Fire Protection
Report (Neumann)to reduce wildland fire risk:
1. Rain gutters, when not adequately maintained, will collect leaf material
which becomes a receptive fuel bed for embers and sparks and can then
transmit fire underneath the non-combustible roof materials. Rain
gutters should be protected by noncombustible leaf shields or not
allowed.
2. Record on all lots a deed restriction that allows for only non -combustible
fences and decks in the subdivision.
3. Record on all lots a deed restriction that allows for fire resistant
landscaping in the back yards of the subdivision.
4. Require enclosed eves on all structures within the subdivision.
5. Install fireproof vents on all structures (fire -rated, flame and ember
resistant).
6. Working with the biologist, remove the non-native vegetation in the
creek, riparian area,
7. reduce the fuel load.
8. Install a non-combustible wall (block or steel stud /stucco) wall 36 inches
in height all around the northern perimeter of the subdivision. The wall
shall begin at the westernmost property line and continue to the 20-foot
setback at the west side of the creek and shall continue beginning at the
20-foot setback at the east side of the creek, terminating at the property
line of CAL FIRE Station #12. The purpose of this wall is to interrupt fire
progression from the north onto the proposed lots without obstructing
the very desirable view of the open space.
Page 201 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 16
R _____
Monitoring Program: This measure shall be incorporated into Final Map and noted on
all grading and construction plans. The City Community Development Department shall
verify compliance through initial and regular inspections.
SECTION 3. Action. The City Council hereby approves of the common interest
subdivision and project design with the incorporation of appropriate conditions. 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 City Council grants final approval, subject to the following
conditions:
Planning Division
1. Plans submitted for final map recordation shall label lots one through seven, sixteen,
and eighteen through twenty-three as “sensitive sites”. This status ensures that future
site development will respect existing site constraints, creek setback requirements,
privacy of occupants and neighbors of the project and be compatible with the scale
and character of the surrounding neighborhood. Prior to submittal of a building permit
application, development of these sensitive parcels shall require architectural review,
in accordance with Municipal Code Section 2.48.
2. Plans submitted for final map recordation shall state that lots one through seven are
subject to creek setback standards and requirements, consistent with Municipal Code
Section 17.70.030.
3. Plans submitted for final map recordation shall increase the lot size of lot 19 to be no
less than 6,900 square feet by reducing the size of lot 20, which shall be no less than
6,000 square feet, consistent with Subdivision Regulations requirem ents for corner
lots.
4. Plans submitted for final map recordation shall include the Biological Easement
required by mitigation measure BIO-11. This easement shall include all the area
between the creek top of bank, current riparian area, or replanted areas which are
planned directly adjacent to the creek, whichever is furthest from the centerline of the
creek. The easement shall also cover all areas identified for Cambria morning glory
replanting required by mitigation measure BIO-1.
5. Plans submitted for public improvements or grading of lots shall identify all trees
proposed for removal, their diameter at breast height, and the location of
compensatory tree planting. Compensatory tree planting shall be provided at a rate
of one-to-one for all onsite trees removed, or otherwise consistent with Municipal
Code Standards, unless the tree being removed is exempt from tree removal
permitting by Municipal Code section 12.24.090 (C.1.). Measurements of tree
diameters shall be consistent with forestry best practices, to the satisfaction of the
City Arborist. Compensatory tree plantings shall be an equal mix of 15-gallon and 24-
inch box size and consist of at least 50% native tree species. All compensatory trees
shall be irrigated and maintained by the property owner or subdivider until the tree is
established or the individual lot is sold.
Page 202 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 17
R _____
6. Plans submitted for public improvements shall include a Construction Communication
Plan. This plan shall specify how and when existing residents adjacent to the project
will be notified about the schedule for grading and construction activities. Notification
of the project schedule should include all residences within a 300 -foot radius of the
project site and all residences on Stanford Drive and Cuesta Drive.
Engineering Division – Public Works/Community Development - Subdivision Conditions
7. The subdivision shall be recorded with a final map. The map preparation and
monumentation shall be in accordance with the City’s Subdivision Regulations,
Engineering Standards, and the Subdivision Map Act. The map shall use U.S.
Customary Units in accordance with the current City Engineering Standards. A
separate application, checklist, and final map review fee shall be paid at the time of
final map processing.
8. The map and improvement plans shall be tied to the City’s vertical and horizontal
control network in accordance with the City Engineering Standards. Depending upon
the location of existing vertical control benchmark(s), a new benchmark may need to
be established within or adjoining the subdivision.
9. The final map submittal and improvement plans shall include a current title report.
An electronic copy of the title report with embedded links to referenced documents is
preferred. If not available, the submittal shall include a copy of each of the perti nent
referenced documents.
10. Park in-lieu fees shall be paid for each new single family dwelling lot prior to map
recordation. The fees shall be based on the fee resolution in effect at the time of final
map submittal. Credit for the removal of the exist ing residence will be applied to the
final fee.
11. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private utilities,
access, grading, drainage, slope banks, construction, common driveways, and
maintenance of the same shall be shown on the final map and/or shall be recorded
separately prior to map recordation if applicable. Said easements may be provided
for in part or in total as blanket easements.
12. The subdivider shall dedicate a 10’ wide street tree easement and public utility
easement (P.U.E.) across the frontage of each lot. This easement shall be clearly
shown on the final map submittal. Said easement shall be adjacent to and contiguous
with all public right-of-way lines bordering each lot.
13. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private utilities,
access, grading, drainage, slope banks, construction, common driveways, and
maintenance of the same shall be shown on the final map and/or shall be recorded
separately prior to map recordation if applicable. Said easements may be provided
for in part or in total as blanket easements.
Page 203 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 18
R _____
14. The final map shall include a public path easement connection from Westmont (east)
if attainable to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and Public
Works Director. The easement definition of either a public pedestrian or bikeway
easement shall be confirmed with the City prior to map recordation and in concert
with the subdivision improvement plans.
15. A creek/biological open space easement shall be s hown and noted on the map in
accordance with the mitigation measures. A creek maintenance Easement
Agreement, in a format approved by the City shall be recorded prior to or concurrent
with the recordation of the map. The agreement shall further clarify t he creek
maintenance responsibility and limits of improvements allowed within the creek
corridor. The agreement shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City’s
Sustainability and Natural Resources Official and Community Development Director.
16. The relocation, extinguishment, or quitclaim of any existing easements shall be
clearly identified on the final map or shall be completed separately prior to map
recordation if applicable.
17. The final map shall show and label the limits of the calculated 100 -year flood event.
The information may be included on an additional map sheet.
18. The project soils report shall be referenced on the final map in accordance with the
subdivision regulations. The soils engineer shall verify whether additional boring(s)
or exploratory trenching is required to cover the portions of the subdivision located
under the existing developed site. The final report shall complete the analysis and
any final recommendation regarding the potential for liquefaction.
19. The plans, map, and supporting documents shall show and note compliance with the
City’s Drainage Design Manual, Floodplain Management Regulations, and Post
Construction Stormwater Regulations.
20. Stormwater Control Measures (SCM’s) and piping within the public right -of-way
should be limited to the minimum extent feasible. All SCM’s shall be the maintenance
responsibility of the HOA or private property owners. SCM’s that are located within
the public right-of-way will require the recordation of an Encroachment Agreement in
a format provided by the City. The agreement shall be recorded in conjunction the
map recordation.
21. The stormwater strategy and subdivision improvement plans shall consider the
requirement for permanent irrigation to any bioremediation SCM’s. The irrigation
system could be provided from the adjoining domestic meter located along the lot
frontage. A common landscape meter could be provided at the commercial meter
water impact fee rate. Private service piping located within the public right-of-way
will require the recordation of an encroachment agreement. Cross-connection control
may be required for all future domestic meters for lots that are crossed with a private
common irrigation service.
Page 204 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 19
R _____
22. An Operation and Maintenance Manual and recorded Private Stormwater
Conveyance Agreement will be required as part of the Stormwater Control Plan
approval and map recordation.
23. The final map submittal shall include CCR’s to define the maintenance responsibility
of the several private and/or shared facilities.
24. All existing structures, private water supply, or private waste disposal system shall
be demolished or abandoned to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director, Building
Official, and County Health Department with proper permits prior to map recordation.
Existing structures or improvements may remain if specifically approved, are not
considered to be a nuisance or health hazard, and are shown to not be affected by
the proposed location of property lines and/or improvements.
25. The subdivision improvement plan submittal shall include the standard application,
checklist, engineer’s estimate of probable cost, a plan review fee/retainer, and all
supporting documents.
26. All new on-site and off-site subdivision improvements shall comply with the City
Engineering Standards and Standard Specifications in effect at the time of
subdivision plan approval.
27. The street paving shall comply with City Engineering Standards. If construction
phasing of the new street pavement is proposed, the phasing sh all provide for the
ultimate structural street section and pavement life per standard #7110. The
engineer of record shall detail this requirement in the public improvement plans, to
the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
28. The improvement plans shall clearly show and label the existing rights-of-way, street
improvements, and utility infrastructure located at the subdivision boundaries and
points of connection to Westmont (east), Cuesta, Stanford, and Westmont (west).
29. The transitions from the several sidewalk connections from the adjoining
neighborhood 4’ wide sidewalks to the new 5’ detached sidewalks and 6’ walking
path shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to map recordation. Limited off -site
sidewalk improvements may be required for the transitions and for the connection to
ADA compliant and competent material.
30. Sidewalk extensions and or terminations at the Westmont connections to the
subdivision shall be approved by the Public Works Department prior to final map
recordation. Unless otherwise approved for deferral or waiver by the Public Works
Department, the through connection from Westmont (east) will require a continuation
of the sidewalk along the street end to provide an accessible connection to the 6’
walking path.
Page 205 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 20
R _____
31. Westmont street termination improvements, storm drain capture, and utility
connections may require the removal of the existing parkway street tree. A
compensatory parkway tree may be required prior to final map recordation.
32. Plans submitted for public improvements shall show the proposed pathway
connection from Westmont (east) to Cuesta in compliance with City and ADA
standards unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director. Ramps and
landings may be required if the slope can’t be reduced to walkway gradien ts.
Handrails, if required may need to include a non -skateboard feature or may need to
be attached to a guardrail, fence, or other barrier to discourage the establishment of
a skateable feature.
33. The improvement plans shall show the location of a Mail Box Unit (MBU’s) per City
Engineering Standards and the approval of the Post Master. Unless otherwise
approved by the City, the MBU(s) shall be located outside of the public right -of-way.
A separate easement may need to be included on the map.
34. The subdivision plans shall show water, sewer, gas, electrical, phone, and cable
connections to each lot. Any proposal for the elimination of a gas main and/or gas
services shall be approved by the City and supplying utility company.
35. Plans submitted for public improvements shall show the final line and grade of all
sewer, water, and storm drain lines to the satisfaction of the Public Works and Utility
Departments. Utility separations shall be provided for all new and existing systems
unless a design exception is approved by the City and State, if applicable.
36. The utility plan shall include water services and meters to each lot. The service may
be provided as individual services or could be provided as a “U-branch” at the
common property line per City Engineering Standard #6260 and to the satisfaction of
the Utilities Department.
37. Unless specifically approved by the Building Official, and the directors of Community
Development, Public Works, and Utilities, the sewer service to Lots 1, 2, and 3 shall
be gravity sewers. The developer shall exhaust reasonable efforts to provide a
gravity sewer to each of the lots to either Westmont, Stanford, or through an
easement to Jeffrey. If sewer ejectors are required for one or more lots, a Notice of
Requirements shall include this item and shall be recorded in conjunction with the
final map.
38. Fire Hydrants shall be provided per City Engineering Standards. The final placement
shall consider the hydrant availability and distance from the tract boundary at all four
tract interfaces with the adjoining public streets. Off -site hydrants may be required.
Final hydrant locations and spacing shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Fire
Department and Utilities Department prior to final map recordation.
Page 206 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 21
R _____
39. A preliminary electrical service design/memo from PGE shall be provided prior to
approval of the subdivision improvement plans. The final PGE design/handout
package may be listed as a deferred submittal item on the cover sheet of the
improvement plans. Service to the subdivision shall be completed without a net
increase in the number of service poles located within the public right of way.
40. Prior to recordation of the final map, the subdivider shall install street lighting and all
associated facilities including but not limited to conduits, sidewalk vaults, fusing,
wiring, and luminaires per City Engineering Standards. Off -site street lighting
improvements, alterations, or upgrades may be required along roadways leading to
and from the proposed development to com plete the necessary public improvements.
41. Improvement plans shall include a complete tree summary show the diameter and
species of all trees. The plan shall clarify the trees to remain and the trees to be
removed. Trees to remain may require a tree preservation plan per City Engineering
Standards.
42. Prior to recordation of the final map, invasive plant species shall be removed or
eradicated along and within the Twin Ridge Creek corridor to the satisfaction of the
Planning Division and Sustainability and Natural Resources Official.
43. Agency permits required for any work within the creek corridor shall be secured prior
to commencing with any demolitions, grading, and construction within the
jurisdictional areas. Any jurisdictional permits from the Army Corp, Fish and Wildlife,
or Regional Water Quality Control Board required for the drainage, site
improvements, street and road improvements shall be issued prior to plan approval
and/or commencing with work within the respective waterways. Permit conditions
shall be reflected on the approved subdivision plans.
44. A SWPPP and Waste Discharger Identification Number (WDID) shall be issued and
referenced on the grading, erosion control, and stormwater control plan sheets prior
to plan approval and encroachment permit issuance.
45. The grading and drainage plan and reports shall clarify the limit of run-on from the
adjoining public streets and from any upslope private watershed. The upslope
watershed to the north (Cal Fire) shall be evaluated for the capacity of the current
drainage systems. The systems shall be shown t o be adequate to carry the design
storm, shall be upgraded, or subdivision improvements added to collect and convey
any run-on.
46. Prior to final map recordation, all proposed retaining walls shall be evaluated for
collecting and conveying any surface run-on that might be tributary to the back of
wall. Any concentrated drainage shall be conveyed and discharged in a non-erosive
manner.
Page 207 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 22
R _____
47. The proposed pad grades shall provide a minimum surface drainage design gradient
from a defined high point(s) to an appro ved drainage outlet. The pad grading and
drainage plan and build-out strategy shall not rely on subsurface drainage systems
without a safe overflow.
48. The proposed slope banks shall honor the top and toe of slope setbacks from the
adjoining property lines in accordance with the California Building Code unless
captured with a retaining wall or curb. Pad grading and drainage improvements plans
should consider the final grading and drainage proposed for the typical lot
development.
49. Street trees are required as a condition of development. The proposed trees may be
planted in conjunction with the subdivision improvements or could be deferred to
individual lot development. The proposed parkway planting or bio -remediation
improvements shall consider and honor the requirement for parkway tree planting at
the rate of approximately one tree per every 35 lineal feet of frontage.
Utilities Department
50. The proposed utility infrastructure shall comply with the latest engineering design
standards effective at the time the permit for public improvement is obtained and shall
have reasonable alignments needed for maintenance of public infrastructure along
public roads.
51. Any private sewer lateral improvement included with public improvement plans that
cross one proposed parcel for the benefit of another shall provide evidence that a
private utility easement appropriate for those facilities has been recorded prior to
issuance of a permit for such improvement.
52. Public improvement plans submitted shall show all utility easements dedicated to the
City in compliance with the latest engineering design standards and shall have
reasonable alignments needed for maintenance of public infrastructure.
53. Public improvement plans submitted shall show the existing terminal manhole in
Cuesta Drive to be abandoned and a new cleanout manhole shall be installed
upstream of the sewer lateral connection for Lot 16. The proposed sewer lateral for
Lot 16 shall connect to the new 6” sewer main extension downstream of the cleanout
manhole with a wye.
54. Public improvement plans submitted shall show the proposed public sewer main
extension and manhole in Westmont Avenue to be 6” PVC pipe and meet current
City Engineering Standards.
55. Public improvement plans submitted shall show water meters and private sewer
laterals with appropriate clearance from one another per City Standards.
Page 208 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 23
R _____
56. Public improvement plans submitted shall show a separate water meter provided for
each new parcel per Chapter 13.04.120 of the City’s Municipal Code.
57. Potable city water shall not be used for major construction activities, such as grading
and dust control, as required under Prohibited Water Uses; Chapter 13.07.070.C of
the City’s Municipal Code. Recycled water is available through the City’s Construction
Water Permit program.
58. The proposed 8” public water main within Stanford Drive shall meet the current City
Standards at the time of building permit submittal and shall maintain a minimum 12”
clearance above the proposed public sewer main, per City Standards.
Page 209 of 361
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 24
R _____
Indemnification
59. 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 Indemnifie d Claim
and the City shall fully cooperate in the defense against an Indemnified Claim .
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by
_______________________, and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 20 21.
________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the
City of San Luis Obispo, California, on ______________________.
________________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
Page 210 of 361
RESOLUTION NO. PC-1042-21
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY
COUNCIL ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 3157
TO CREATE TWENTY-THREE (23) RESIDENTIAL LOTS IN THE LOW-
DENSITY (R-1) ZONE (SBDV-0169-2020/EID-0170-2020)
WHEREAS, the Tree Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo meeting was conducted
via teleconference on May 17, 2021, recommending the Planning Commission find the project
consistent with the Tree Regulations Ordinance, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under SBDV-
0169-2020, Alice Jo Meinhold Survivors Trust, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo meeting was conducted
via teleconference May 26, 2021, continued the review of the project to a future date, pursuant to
a proceeding instituted under SBDV-0169-2020, Alice Jo Meinhold Survivors Trust, applicant ;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public
hearing in the Council Chambers of City Hall, at 990 Palm Street, on July 28, 2021, pursuant to a
proceeding instituted under SBDV-0169-2020, and EID-0170-2020, Alice Jo Meinhold Survivors
Trust, applicant; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo has duly considered
all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and evaluation and
recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of
San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. The Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council
approve the project (SBDV-0169-2020, & EID-0170-2020), based on the following findings:
1. As conditioned, the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons
living or working at the site or in the vicinity because the project respects site constraints and
will be compatible with the scale and character of surrounding neighborhoods.
2. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is
consistent with the General Plan because:
Page 211 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 2
a. The Land Use Element provides that the purpose of the Low-Density Residential
land use designation is to provide for single family detached dwellings, which the
subdivision is designed and intended to accommodate, and complies with the
maximum density limit of seven density units per acre.
b. The project is consistent with Land Use Element Policies 2.2.3 and 2.2.4,
Circulation Element Policy 5.1.3, and Housing Element Policy 7.3 because the
design of the subdivision protects the existing neighborhood from intrusive traffic
by avoiding any increase in cut-through traffic between other existing
neighborhoods and Highway 1 and by incorporating a potential bicycle and
pedestrian connection to the east, as well as parkways, on-street parking, and
sidewalks with proposed streets.
c. The project is consistent with Land Use Element Policy 2.3.5 because the design of
the subdivision integrates with the existing neighborhood by continuing the street
layout of Stanford Drive and Cuesta Drive, including street width, sidewalks, and
parkways.
d. The project is consistent with Land Use Element Policy 4.2.1 because the project
respects the separation from creek banks by identifying the dimensions of the creek
and existing riparian area. The lots proposed adjacent to the creek are a larger size
(24,451 to 7,884 square feet) so that creek protection measures, such as compliance
with creek setback requirements, can be met and still allow residential development
within the created parcels. The project also proposes no development or grading
activities in the southwest corner of the site, where the creek and associated
vegetation is most prominent and established.
e. The project is consistent with Housing Element Policy 6.8 because the project will
facilitate residential infill development.
3. The design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural
heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision because the project has demonstrated that
development of the proposed lots can be achieved in compliance with the setback standards
of the Zoning Regulations, which are intended to help provide air circulation and exposure to
sunlight.
4. As conditioned, the subdivision and associated tree removals are consistent with the City’s
Tree Regulations because the project will be required to provide compensatory tree plantings
at a rate consistent with Municipal Code requirements with a size and species of tree found
to be appropriate by the Tree Committee.
5. The design of the tentative map and proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious
health problems or substantial environmental damage since further development or
redevelopment of the proposed parcels will occur consistent with the City’s Development
Page 212 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 3
Standards, Engineering Standards, Mitigation Measures, and Conditions of Approval.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
(IS/MND) has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. The Planning
Commission hereby recommends the City Council adopt the IS/MND and Mitigation, Monitoring,
and Reporting Program, based on incorporation of the following mitigation measures, which will
reduce potential environmental impacts to less than significant.
Air Quality
AQ-1 Idling Control Techniques. During all construction activities and use of diesel vehicles,
the applicant shall implement the following idling control techniques:
1. Idling Restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors for Both On- and Off-Road
Equipment.
a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of
sensitive receptors if feasible;
b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be
permitted;
c. Use of alternative-fueled equipment shall be used whenever possible;
and
d. Signs that specify the no idling requirements shall be posted and
enforced at the construction site.
2. California Diesel Idling Regulations. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with
13 CCR 2485. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial
motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds
and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California- and non-
California-based vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that drivers of
said vehicles:
a. Shall not idle the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than 5
minutes at any location, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the
regulation; and
b. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power
a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle
during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater than 5 minutes
at any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area, except as
noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation.
Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers of
the 5-minute idling limit. The specific requirements and exceptions in the regulation
can be reviewed at the following website: www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/truck-
idling/2485.pdf.
Page 213 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 4
AQ-2 Particulate Matter Control Measures. During all construction and ground-disturbing
activities, the applicant shall implement the following particulate matter control measures
and detail each measure on the project grading and building plans:
1. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible.
2. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent
airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the SLOAPCD’s limit
of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Increased
watering frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles
per hour (mph). Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever
possible.
3. All dirt stockpile areas (if any) shall be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or
other dust barriers as needed.
4. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation
and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible, following
completion of any soil-disturbing activities.
5. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than 1 month
after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass
seed and watered until vegetation is established.
6. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using
approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in
advance by the SLOAPCD.
7. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as soon
as possible. In addition, building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after
grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
8. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any
unpaved surface at the construction site.
9. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or
shall maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between
top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with California Vehicle Code
(CVC) Section 23114.
10. “Track out” is defined as sand or soil that adheres to and/or agglomerates on
the exterior surfaces of motor vehicles and/or equipment (including tires) that
may then fall onto any highway or street as described in CVC Section 23113
and California Water Code (CWC) Section 13304. To prevent track out,
designate access points and require all employees, subcontractors, and others to
use them. Install and operate a “track-out prevention device” where vehicles
enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved streets. The track-out prevention
device can be any device or combination of devices that are effective at
preventing track out, located at the point of intersection of an unpaved area and
a paved road. Rumble strips or steel plate devices need periodic cleaning to be
effective. If paved roadways accumulate tracked-out soils, the track-out
prevention device may need to be modified.
Page 214 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 5
11. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto
adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water where
feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when feasible.
12. All PM10 mitigation measures required should be shown on grading and
building plans.
13. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons whose
responsibility is to ensure any fugitive dust emissions do not result in a nuisance
and to enhance the implementation of the mitigation measures as necessary to
minimize dust complaints and reduce visible emissions below the SLOAPCD’s
limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Their
duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in
progress (for example, wind-blown dust could be generated on an open dirt lot).
The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the
SLOAPCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork,
or demolition (Contact Tim Fuhs at 805-781-5912).
AQ-3 Geologic Evaluation. Prior to initiation of ground-disturbing activities, the applicant
shall retain a registered geologist to conduct a geologic evaluation of the property,
including sampling and testing for NOA in full compliance with SLOAPCD
requirements and the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface
Mining Operations (17 CCR 93105). This geologic evaluation shall be submitted to the
City Community Development Department upon completion. If the geologic evaluation
determines that the project would not have the potential to disturb NOA, the applicant
must file an Asbestos ATCM exemption request with the SLOAPCD.
AQ-4 Naturally Occurring Asbestos Control Measures. If NOA are determined to be present
onsite, proposed earthwork, demolition, and construction activities shall be conducted in
full compliance with the various regulatory jurisdictions regarding NOA, including the
CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations (17
CCR 93105) and requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP; 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Section 61,
Subpart M – Asbestos). These requirements include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities commencing,
to the SLOAPCD;
2. Preparation of an asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos
Consultant; and
3. Implementation of applicable removal and disposal protocol and requirements
for identified NOA.
AQ-5 Asbestos-Containing Material. Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the applicant
shall provide an asbestos report that was prepared by a certified asbestos consultant. If
ACM are determined to be present, at least 10 working days prior to any demolition work
the applicant shall provide notification to SLOAPCD of such work. The notification shall
Page 215 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 6
include an asbestos report that was prepared by a certified asbestos consultant. ACM
removal and disposal shall follow the requirements of the National Emission Standards
for Hazardous Air Pollutants Regulation (NESHAP) Subpart M and of the SLOAPCD.
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated onto Final Map and project
grading / building plans for review and approval by the City Community Development
Department. Compliance shall be verified by the City during regular inspections, in coordination
with the SLOAPCD, as necessary.
Biological Resources
BIO-1 Implement a Rare Plant Mitigation Program that ensures no net loss of Cambria
morning glory on the project site. Prior to any tract improvements, a Rare Plant
Mitigation Program shall be implemented for Cambria morning glory and shall be
overseen by a qualified botanist approved by the City. As a component of the program,
seed shall be collected from Cambria morning glory plants during the appropriate season
prior to tract grading activities. Using standard procedures, the qualified botanist shall
clean and store the seeds until the receiving sites shown on the project plans are ready.
Suitable habitat of 2,180 square-feet in size outside of the development area (as
designated on the site plans in the creek setback zone) shall be designated as the
mitigation site that will be maintained in a natural state and not be subject to mowing
earlier than June 1 each year. The areas will be maintained as grassland habitat and no
planting of ornamental species or other adverse modifications (such as grazing activities)
will be allowed. The mitigation site shown on the project plans is twice the size as the
areas currently occupied by the rare plant occurrences (2,180 square-feet of habitat
created for 1,076 square-feet of habitat impacted). This equates to a 2:1 mitigation ratio
(habitat created to habitat impacted) to ensure a minimum 1:1 replacement ratio is
achieved. Topsoil from each of the four occurrences will be collected in 6-inch lifts and
stored for top-dressing the mitigation site once grading of the pads is complete. As
needed, the mitigation site should be prepared for planting by removal of non-native
species or other measures as necessary, then applying the salvaged topsoil. Once topsoil
has been layered evenly through the area, collected seed should be hand-broadcasted into
suitable locations by the qualified botanist and covered with compost. Seed may also be
incorporated into the native erosion control seed mix described in the Native Erosion
Control Seed Mix table under Mitigation Measure BIO-9 and applied to other grassy
areas of the site as part of the erosion control effort. Depending on the season when
construction starts, the qualified botanist may also potentially salvage plants (i.e., dig
them up when soils are moist) and transplant them to containers to be maintained until
the mitigation sites are ready for planting.
BIO-2 Conduct annual monitoring and implement adaptive management measures for 5
years to ensure no net loss of Cambria morning glory onsite. The Rare Plant
Mitigation Program shall include annual monitoring and maintenance of the mitigation
site to ensure success of the program. Monitoring by a qualified botanist shall occur
Page 216 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 7
during the spring growing season (between April 15 and May 15 each year) to ensure
successful establishment of planted propagules. The established rare plants shall be
mapped to evaluate the goal of no net loss of the species onsite. The measurable objective
shall be to have at least 1,076 sf of occurrence comprised of approximately 300 Cambria
morning glory plants. Appropriate vegetation sampling techniques shall be used to assess
the areal cover of vegetation to evaluate the status of the established occurrences. If the
success criteria of having approximately 300 plants covering 1,076 sf within the creek
setback zone is not reached by the third year of monitoring, remedial actions such as
collecting more seed and distributing it in suitable areas should be employed, with a
corresponding additional year of monitoring. Other activities to increase the success of
the rare plant mitigation effort could include non-native plant species removal within the
mitigation site to reduce competition, additional seed application, or supplemental
irrigation during periods of prolonged drought. The qualified botanist shall prepare
annual reports for the applicant detailing the methods and results of the mitigation effort
and monitoring effort. The applicant shall be responsible for submitting the report to the
City on an annual basis (by December 31 of each year) for the 5-year monitoring period
or until the final success criteria described above are met.
BIO-3 To the extent feasible, avoid initial site grading in the winter months. The burrowing
owl has been recorded in the vicinity of the project from October to the end of April. If
initial vegetation removal and site grading for the tract improvements is conducted
outside of this period, potential effects on this species would be avoided and no further
mitigation would be required. Restricting the time period for earth-moving activities is
also required to avoid or minimize the potential for erosion and sedimentation (see
Mitigation Measure BIO-9). If initial grading work must commence during the time
period that burrowing owls may be present onsite, preconstruction surveys for this
species shall be included in the survey effort described in Mitigation Measure BIO-4
prior to vegetation removal or tract improvements.
BIO-4 Conduct a preconstruction survey and avoid construction in areas occupied by
special-status wildlife species until relocated or they have left the site. Within 7 days
prior to the start of vegetation/tree removal, ground-disturbing activities, or demolition
of existing structures, a biologist approved by the City shall survey the project impact
area to identify whether nesting birds, roosting bats, monarch butterfly overwintering
populations, obscure bumble bee, and/or California legless lizard are present on site. A
separate survey shall be conducted for any phase of the project not conducted
concurrently or within 10 days of cessation of the previous phase (i.e., structure
demolition conducted prior to general site grading). The biologist shall use appropriate
survey techniques for the special-status species identified in the 2020 BRA as having
potential to occur onsite. For example, burrows shall be examined with binoculars or
wildlife cameras, and inspected for whitewash or prey remains. Leaf litter and cover
objects shall be searched for northern California legless lizards. Potential bat roost sites
shall be inspected for sign of roosting bats such as guano or prey remains. If any of these
species are found onsite, the biologist shall coordinate with the City, and CDFW as
appropriate, on methods to ensure the successful relocation of individuals to suitable
Page 217 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 8
habitat nearby. In some cases, CDFW may recommend creating structures for displaced
woodrats and bats. Burrowing owls can be discouraged from using burrows onsite, or
occupied burrows can be avoided until the owls have left the area. Bats can be restricted
from roost sites by placing netting over their entrances after they have left the roost for
night-time foraging. The wildlife protection measures to be employed will be based on
the results of the survey and the particular characteristics of their use of the site, in
coordination with CDFW and the construction engineer. If no special-status animal
species are found onsite during the preconstruction survey, work may proceed with the
implementation of the following Mitigation Measures BIO-5 through BIO-7.
BIO-5 Prepare and present a Worker Environmental Awareness Program. Prior to any
vegetation removal or tract improvements, a qualified biologist shall prepare a Worker
Environmental Awareness Program that will be presented to all project personnel. This
program shall detail measures to avoid and minimize impacts on biological resources. It
shall include a description of special-status species potentially occurring on the project
site and their natural history, the status of the species and their protection under
environmental laws and regulations, and the penalties for take. Recommendations shall
be given as to actions to avoid take should a special-status species be found on the project
site. Other aspects of the training shall include a description of general measures to
protect wildlife, including:
1. Delineation of the allowable work area, staging areas, access points, and limits
to vehicle access;
2. Storage of all pipes, metal tubing, or similar materials stored or stacked on the
project site for one or more overnight periods shall be either securely capped
before storage or thoroughly inspected for wildlife before the materials are
moved, buried, capped, or otherwise used.
3. Inspection of materials stored onsite, such as lumber, plywood, and rolls of silt
fence, for wildlife that may have sheltered under or within the materials;
4. Use of netting to exclude birds from nesting in construction materials;
5. Construction of escape ramps in all excavations and trenches more than 6 inches
deep;
6. Contact information for the City-approved biologist and instructions should any
wildlife species be detected in the work site;
7. Dust suppression methods during construction activities when necessary, to
meet air quality standards and protect biological resources; and
8. Methods for containment of food-related trash items (e.g., wrappers, cans,
bottles, food scraps), small construction debris (e.g., nails, bits of metal and
plastic), and other human generated debris (e.g., cigarette butts) in animal-proof
containers and removal from the site on a weekly basis.
All project personnel who have attended the training shall sign an attendance sheet.
The program shall be repeated for any new crews that arrive subsequently on the site.
Page 218 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 9
BIO-6 Install high-visibility construction and silt fence along the creek corridor to
delineate the allowable work area, exclude wildlife from the site, and protect the
stream habitat. Prior to vegetation removal or tract improvements, and during
subsequent residential development for Lots 1-7, a high-visibility construction fence at
least 4 feet tall together with a silt fence, or an approved wildlife exclusion fence, shall
be erected along the creek corridor to delineate the limits of grading and vehicle access.
If possible, the fence shall be erected along the creek setback line, and encroachment into
the setback shall be kept at a minimum. In no case shall ground disturbance occur within
the riparian habitat or below the top of bank without obtaining proper permits from
regulatory agencies. The type of fence used may be a combination of wildlife exclusion
and silt fence (i.e., ERTEC Triple-function E-fence) or similar materials that would serve
the purposes of safety/construction area delineation, wildlife exclusion, and siltation
prevention. The fence shall be checked weekly by construction personnel for needed
maintenance.
BIO-7 Conduct biological monitoring for special-status wildlife species while the property
is cleared and graded, and structures are removed. A qualified biologist shall monitor
the removal of structures, materials, and vegetation that may provide cover for obscure
bumble bee, northern California legless lizards, and bat roosting sites. The biologist shall
be onsite daily until all materials are removed and all vegetation has been cleared. If any
special-status species are found, work shall be delayed until the individuals have left the
work area or CDFW shall be notified to obtain authorization for capture and relocation.
BIO-8 Avoid vegetation removal within the riparian habitat during the overwintering
season. Vegetation removal within the riparian area shall be conducted outside of the
overwintering season for monarch butterfly (late October through February) and obscure
bumble bee (late October through January) to avoid disturbance to species potentially
inhabiting riparian vegetation.
BIO-9 Install erosion and sediment BMPs and revegetate graded areas. The following
erosion and sedimentation control BMPs are required to be implemented during
vegetation removal, tract improvements, during individual lot construction, and after the
construction phases of the project:
1. If possible, the potential for erosion and sedimentation shall be minimized by
scheduling construction to occur outside of the rainy season, which is typically
defined as October 15 through April 15. Adherence to this measure would also
serve as avoidance for the burrowing owl, as described in Mitigation Measure
BIO-3.
2. To minimize site disturbance, all construction related equipment shall be
restricted to established roads, construction areas, and other designated staging
areas. The creek setback zone shall be clearly marked as described in Mitigation
Measure BIO-6.
Page 219 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 10
3. Prior to any site disturbance during tract improvements or individual lot
construction, a Sediment and Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared by a
qualified engineer. The use of silt fence, straw wattles, erosion control blankets,
straw bales, sandbags, fiber rolls, and other appropriate techniques should be
employed to protect the drainage features on and off the property. Biotechnical
approaches using native vegetation shall be used as feasible. All areas with soil
disturbance shall have appropriate erosion controls and other stormwater
protection BMPs installed to prevent erosion potential. All sediment and
erosion control measures shall be installed per the engineer’s requirements prior
to the initiation of site grading if planned to occur within the rainy season.
4. Spill kits shall be maintained on the site, and a Spill Response Plan shall be in
place.
5. No vehicles or equipment shall be refueled within 100 feet of wetland areas,
riparian habitat and/or drainage features, and refueling areas shall have a spill
containment system installed. No vehicles or construction equipment shall be
stored overnight within 100 feet of these areas unless drip pans or ground covers
are used. All equipment and vehicles shall be checked and maintained on a daily
basis to ensure proper operation and to avoid potential leaks or spills.
Construction staging areas shall be located in a location where spills would not
drain into aquatic habitats.
6. No concrete washout shall be conducted on the site outside of an appropriate
containment system. Washing of equipment, tools, etc. should not be allowed
in any location where the tainted water could enter onsite drainages.
7. The use of chemicals, fuels, lubricants, or biocides shall be in compliance with
all local, state, and federal regulations. All uses of such compounds shall
observe label and other restrictions mandated by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, California Department of Food and Agriculture, and other
state and federal legislation.
8. All project-related spills of hazardous materials within or adjacent to the project
site should be cleaned up immediately.
9. All areas with soil disturbance shall have appropriate erosion controls and other
stormwater protection BMPs installed to prevent erosion potential. Silt fencing,
erosion control blankets, straw bales, sandbags, fiber rolls, and/or other types
of materials prescribed on the plan shall be implemented to prevent erosion and
sedimentation. Biotechnical approaches using native vegetation shall be used
as feasible.
10. Areas with disturbed soils shall be restored under the direction of the project
engineer in consultation with a qualified restoration ecologist as detailed above.
Methods may include recontouring graded areas to blend in with existing
natural contours, covering the areas with salvaged topsoil containing native
seedbank from the site, and/or applying the native seed mix as described in the
table below. Native seed mix shall be applied to the graded areas in the creek
setback area through either direct hand seeding or hydroseeding methods.
Page 220 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 11
Seeding with the native erosion control seed mix should be provided on all
disturbed soil areas prior to the onset of the rainy season (by October 15).
Native Erosion Control Seed Mix
Species
Application
Rate
(lbs/acre)
California Brome (Bromus
carinatus) 10
purple needlegrass (Stipa pulchra) 5
tomcat clover (Trifolium wildenovii) 5
six weeks fescue (Vulpia
microstachys) 5
Total 25
BIO-10 Obtain necessary permits for impacts in jurisdictional areas, implement a
compensatory mitigation program, and monitor the success of the program to
ensure no net loss of Riparian/Wetland habitat or other waters on the subject
property. Prior to any vegetation removal or site disturbance within the areas delineated
as jurisdictional features (Figure 5, Aquatic Resources Delineation 2021), the applicant
shall provide documentation to the City that a Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit from
USACE, a Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification from RWQCB, and
a California Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration
Agreement from CDFW have been obtained or have been determined by the regulatory
agencies to not be required.
Prior to the initiation of vegetation removal or tract improvements, the applicant shall
retain a qualified biological monitor to ensure compliance with all Clean Water Act, City
of San Luis Obispo stormwater and water quality requirements, and If regulatory permits
are required, prior to the initiation of vegetation removal or tract improvements, the
applicant shall retain a qualified biological monitor to ensure compliance with all Clean
Water Act and CDFW permit requirements during work adjacent to the creek. The
monitor shall be present during the installation of the construction fencing delineating
the limits of work in relation to the edge of riparian, creek top of bank, and 20-foot creek
setback buffer, as described in Mitigation Measure BIO-6. Since the Cambria morning
glory compensatory mitigation site is to be located within this buffer, the monitor shall
direct appropriate wildlife exclusion and erosion control BMPs to protect riparian habitat
during site preparation for planting. The monitor shall be present during construction of
the rip rap pad and any other work within the creek setback area on stormwater structures.
The monitor shall also oversee removal of non-native tree species and site preparation
for tree planting within the setback. If a Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP)
is required by the regulatory agencies, the applicant shall provide a copy of the plan to
Page 221 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 12
the City and the biological monitor shall be responsible for successful implementation of
the plan.
BIO-11 Record a Biological Easement and Biological Easement Agreement protecting
riparian area: A Biological Easement and Biological Easement Agreement shall be
recorded in conjunction with the final map recordation. The easement agreement shall
be developed by the applicant in a format provided by the City. The following activities
are permitted within the biological easement, subject to the review and approval by the
City Sustainability and Natural Resources Official:
1. Stormwater improvements.
2. Removal of non-native trees.
3. Restoration and creek bank stabilization activities.
No future paving or structures shall be permitted within the biological easement. Creek
setback standards shall be applied to the easement area, consistent with municipal code
requirements.
Monitoring Program: These conditions and measures shall be noted on Final Map and all
grading and construction plans. The City Community Development Department and Natural
Resources Manager shall verify compliance.
Cultural Resources
CR-1 Discovery of Previously Unidentified Cultural Resources. In the event that historical
or archaeological remains are discovered during ground-disturbing activities associated
with the project, an immediate halt work order shall be issued, and the City Community
Development Director shall be notified. A qualified archaeologist shall conduct an
assessment of the resources and formulate proper mitigation measures, if necessary. After
the find has been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. These
requirements shall be noted on the project’s final map and all improvement/construction
plans.
CR-2 Discovery of Human Remains. In the event that human remains are exposed during
ground-disturbing activities associated with the project, an immediate halt work order
shall be issued, and the City Community Development Director shall be notified.
California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance of
the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains shall
occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and
disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of
Native American descent, the coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. These requirements shall be noted on the project’s
final map and all improvement/construction plans.
Page 222 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 13
Monitoring Program: These conditions shall be noted on Final Map and all grading and
construction plans. The City Community Development Department shall verify compliance,
including preparation and implementation of the Monitoring Plan, and review and approval of
cultural resources monitoring reports documenting compliance with required Mitigation Measures.
Noise
N-1 For the entire duration of the construction phase of the project, the following BMPs shall
be adhered to:
1. Stationary construction equipment that generates noise that exceeds 60 dBA at
the project boundaries shall be shielded with the most modern noise control
devises (i.e., mufflers, lagging, and/or motor enclosures).
2. Impact tools (e.g., jack hammers, pavement breakers, rock drills, etc.) used for
project construction shall be hydraulically or electrically powered wherever
possible to avoid noise associated with compressed-air exhaust from
pneumatically powered tools.
3. Where use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the
compressed air exhaust shall be used.
4. All construction equipment shall have the manufacturers’ recommended noise
abatement methods installed, such as mufflers, engine enclosures, and engine
vibration insulators, intact and operational.
5. All construction equipment shall undergo inspection at periodic intervals to
ensure proper maintenance and presence of noise control devices (e.g.,
mufflers, shrouding, etc.).
N-2 Construction plans shall note construction hours, truck routes, and all construction noise
BMP, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Community Development
Department prior to issuance of grading/building permits. The City shall provide and post
signs stating these restrictions at construction entry sites prior to commencement of
construction and maintained throughout the construction phase of the project. All
construction workers shall be briefed at a preconstruction meeting on construction hour
limitations and how, why, and where BMP measures are to be implemented.
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated into Final Map and project
grading and building plans for review and approval by the City Community Development
Department. Compliance shall be verified by the City during regular inspections. Tribal Cultural
Resources
Tribal Cultural Resources
TC-1 Culturally Affiliated Native American Monitor. A representative from the Salinan
Tribe shall be notified prior to any ground disturbing activities to provide for on-site
Page 223 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 14
monitoring. If cultural resources are encountered during subsurface earthwork activities,
all ground disturbing activities within a 25-foot radius of the find shall cease and the City
shall be notified immediately consistent with the requirements of Mitigation Measures
CR-1 and CR-2.
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated into Final Map and project
grading and building plans for review and approval by the City Community Development
Department. Compliance shall be verified by the City during regular inspections.
Wildfire
WF-1 Vegetation/Fuel Management Plan. Prior to issuance of any construction permit, the
applicant shall provide a vegetation/fuel management plan prepared by a registered
professional forester or certified arborist for each lot. The plan shall identify fuel load
reduction techniques, including vegetation removal and trimming, to increase defensible
space around residential structures and driveways/access roads. The plan shall also
identify appropriate standards for installation of new landscaping, such as requirements
for drought-tolerant and fire-resistant species.
WF-2 Additional Fire Hazard Reductions. Future development would incorporate the
following fire reduction methods identified by the 2020 Wildland Fire Protection Report
(Neumann)to reduce wildland fire risk:
1. Rain gutters, when not adequately maintained, will collect leaf material which
becomes a receptive fuel bed for embers and sparks and can then transmit fire
underneath the non-combustible roof materials. Rain gutters should be
protected by noncombustible leaf shields or not allowed.
2. Record on all lots a deed restriction that allows for only non-combustible fences
and decks in the subdivision.
3. Record on all lots a deed restriction that allows for fire resistant landscaping in
the back yards of the subdivision.
4. Require enclosed eves on all structures within the subdivision.
5. Install fireproof vents on all structures (fire-rated, flame and ember resistant).
6. Working with the biologist, remove the non-native vegetation in the creek,
riparian area,
7. reduce the fuel load.
8. Install a non-combustible wall (block or steel stud /stucco) wall 36 inches in
height all around the northern perimeter of the subdivision. The wall shall begin
at the westernmost property line and continue to the 20-foot setback at the west
side of the creek and shall continue beginning at the 20-foot setback at the east
side of the creek, terminating at the property line of CAL FIRE Station #12.
Page 224 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 15
The purpose of this wall is to interrupt fire progression from the north onto the
proposed lots without obstructing the very desirable view of the open space.
Monitoring Program: This measure shall be incorporated into Final Map and noted on all
grading and construction plans. The City Community Development Department shall verify
compliance through initial and regular inspections.
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 (PC) hereby
recommends the City Council approve the project with incorporation of the following conditions:
Planning Division
1. Plans submitted for final map recordation shall label lots one through seven, sixteen, and
eighteen through twenty-three as “sensitive sites”. This status ensures that future site
development will respect existing site constraints, creek setback requirements, privacy of
occupants and neighbors of the project and be compatible with the scale and character of the
surrounding neighborhood. Prior to submittal of a building permit application, development
of these sensitive parcels shall require architectural review, in accordance with Municipal
Code Section 2.48.
2. Plans submitted for final map recordation shall state that lots one through seven are subject to
creek setback standards and requirements, consistent with Municipal Code Section 17.70.030.
3. Plans submitted for final map recordation shall increase the lot size of lot 19 to be no less than
6,900 square feet by reducing the size of lot 20, which shall be no less than 6,000 square feet,
consistent with Subdivision Regulations requirements for corner lots.
4. Plans submitted for final map recordation shall include the Biological Easement required by
mitigation measure BIO-11. This easement shall include all the area between the creek top of
bank, or current riparian area, or replanted areas which are planned directly adjacent to the
creek, whichever is furthest from the centerline of the creek. The easement shall also cover
all areas identified for Cambria morning glory replanting required by mitigation measure
BIO-1.
5. Plans submitted for public improvements or grading of lots shall identify all trees proposed
for removal, their diameter at breast height, and the location of compensatory tree planting.
Compensatory tree planting shall be provided at a rate of one-to-one for all onsite trees
removed, or otherwise consistent with Municipal Code Standards, unless the tree being
removed is exempt from tree removal permitting by Municipal Code section 12.24.090 (C.1.).
Measurements of tree diameters shall be consistent with forestry best practices, to the
satisfaction of the City Arborist. Compensatory tree plantings shall be an equal mix of 15-
gallon and 24-inch box size and consist of at least 50% native tree species. All compensatory
Page 225 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 16
trees shall be irrigated and maintained by the property owner or subdivider until the tree is
established or the individual lot is sold.
6. Plans submitted for public improvements shall include a Construction Communication Plan.
This plan shall specify how and when existing residents adjacent to the project will be notified
about the schedule for grading and construction activities. Notification of the project schedule
should include all residences within a 300-foot radius of the project site and all residences on
Stanford Drive and Cuesta Drive.
Engineering Division – Public Works/Community Development - Subdivision Conditions
7. The subdivision shall be recorded with a final map. The map preparation and monumentation
shall be in accordance with the City’s Subdivision Regulations, Engineering Standards, and
the Subdivision Map Act. The map shall use U.S. Customary Units in accordance with the
current City Engineering Standards. A separate application, checklist, and final map review
fee shall be paid at the time of final map processing.
8. The map and improvement plans shall be tied to the City’s vertical and horizontal control
network in accordance with the City Engineering Standards. Depending upon the location of
existing vertical control benchmark(s), a new benchmark may need to be established within
or adjoining the subdivision.
9. The final map submittal and improvement plans shall include a current title report. An
electronic copy of the title report with embedded links to referenced documents is preferred.
If not available, the submittal shall include a copy of each of the pertinent referenced
documents.
10. Park in-lieu fees shall be paid for each new single family dwelling lot prior to map recordation.
The fees shall be based on the fee resolution in effect at the time of final map submittal. Credit
for the removal of the existing residence will be applied to the final fee.
11. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private utilities,
access, grading, drainage, slope banks, construction, common driveways, and maintenance of
the same shall be shown on the final map and/or shall be recorded separately prior to map
recordation if applicable. Said easements may be provided for in part or in total as blanket
easements.
12. The subdivider shall dedicate a 10’ wide street tree easement and public utility easement
(P.U.E.) across the frontage of each lot. This easement shall be clearly shown on the final map
submittal. Said easement shall be adjacent to and contiguous with all public right-of-way lines
bordering each lot.
13. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private utilities,
access, grading, drainage, slope banks, construction, common driveways, and maintenance of
the same shall be shown on the final map and/or shall be recorded separately prior to map
Page 226 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 17
recordation if applicable. Said easements may be provided for in part or in total as blanket
easements.
14. The final map shall include a public path easement connection from Westmont (east) if
attainable to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and Public Works
Director. The easement definition of either a public pedestrian or bikeway easement shall be
confirmed with the City prior to map recordation and in concert with the subdivision
improvement plans.
15. A creek/biological open space easement shall be shown and noted on the map in accordance
with the mitigation measures. A creek maintenance Easement Agreement, in a format
approved by the City shall be recorded prior to or concurrent with the recordation of the map.
The agreement shall further clarify the creek maintenance responsibility and limits of
improvements allowed within the creek corridor. The agreement shall be approved to the
satisfaction of the City’s Sustainability and Natural Resources Official and Community
Development Director.
16. The relocation, extinguishment, or quitclaim of any existing easements shall be clearly
identified on the final map or shall be completed separately prior to map recordation if
applicable.
17. The final map shall show and label the limits of the calculated 100-year flood event. The
information may be included on an additional map sheet.
18. The project soils report shall be referenced on the final map in accordance with the subdivision
regulations. The soils engineer shall verify whether additional boring(s) or exploratory
trenching is required to cover the portions of the subdivision located under the existing
developed site. The final report shall complete the analysis and any final recommendation
regarding the potential for liquefaction.
19. The plans, map, and supporting documents shall show and note compliance with the City’s
Drainage Design Manual, Floodplain Management Regulations, and Post Construction
Stormwater Regulations.
20. Stormwater Control Measures (SCM’s) and piping within the public right-of-way should be
limited to the minimum extent feasible. All SCM’s shall be the maintenance responsibility
of the HOA or private property owners. SCM’s that are located within the public right-of-
way will require the recordation of an Encroachment Agreement in a format provided by the
City. The agreement shall be recorded in conjunction the map recordation.
21. The stormwater strategy and subdivision improvement plans shall consider the requirement
for permanent irrigation to any bio-remediation SCM’s. The irrigation system could be
provided from the adjoining domestic meter located along the lot frontage. A common
landscape meter could be provided at the commercial meter water impact fee rate. Private
service piping located within the public right-of-way will require the recordation of an
Page 227 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 18
encroachment agreement. Cross-connection control may be required for all future domestic
meters for lots that are crossed with a private common irrigation service.
22. An Operation and Maintenance Manual and recorded Private Stormwater Conveyance
Agreement will be required as part of the Stormwater Control Plan approval and map
recordation.
23. The final map submittal shall include CCR’s to define the maintenance responsibility of the
several private and/or shared facilities.
24. All existing structures, private water supply, or private waste disposal system shall be
demolished or abandoned to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director, Building Official,
and County Health Department with proper permits prior to map recordation. Existing
structures or improvements may remain if specifically approved, are not considered to be a
nuisance or health hazard, and are shown to not be affected by the proposed location of
property lines and/or improvements.
25. The subdivision improvement plan submittal shall include the standard application, checklist,
engineer’s estimate of probable cost, a plan review fee/retainer, and all supporting documents.
26. All new on-site and off-site subdivision improvements shall comply with the City Engineering
Standards and Standard Specifications in effect at the time of subdivision plan approval.
27. The street paving shall comply with City Engineering Standards. If construction phasing of
the new street pavement is proposed, the phasing shall provide for the ultimate structural street
section and pavement life per standard #7110. The engineer of record shall detail this
requirement in the public improvement plans, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
28. The improvement plans shall clearly show and label the existing rights-of-way, street
improvements, and utility infrastructure located at the subdivision boundaries and points of
connection to Westmont (east), Cuesta, Stanford, and Westmont (west).
29. The transitions from the several sidewalk connections from the adjoining neighborhood 4’
wide sidewalks to the new 5’ detached sidewalks and 6’ walking path shall be approved by
the City Engineer prior to map recordation. Limited off-site sidewalk improvements may be
required for the transitions and for the connection to ADA compliant and competent material.
30. Sidewalk extensions and or terminations at the Westmont connections to the subdivision shall
be approved by the Public Works Department prior to final map recordation. Unless
otherwise approved for deferral or waiver by the Public Works Department, the through
connection from Westmont (east) will require a continuation of the sidewalk along the street
end to provide an accessible connection to the 6’ walking path.
Page 228 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 19
31. Westmont street termination improvements, storm drain capture, and utility connections may
require the removal of the existing parkway street tree. A compensatory parkway tree may
be required prior to final map recordation.
32. Plans submitted for public improvements shall show the proposed pathway connection from
Westmont (east) to Cuesta in compliance with City and ADA standards unless otherwise
approved by the Public Works Director. Ramps and landings may be required if the slope
can’t be reduced to walkway gradients. Handrails, if required may need to include a non-
skateboard feature or may need to be attached to a guardrail, fence, or other barrier to
discourage the establishment of a skateable feature.
33. The improvement plans shall show the location of a Mail Box Unit (MBU’s) per City
Engineering Standards and the approval of the Post Master. Unless otherwise approved by
the City, the MBU(s) shall be located outside of the public right-of-way. A separate easement
may need to be included on the map.
34. The subdivision plans shall show water, sewer, gas, electrical, phone, and cable connections
to each lot. Any proposal for the elimination of a gas main and/or gas services shall be
approved by the City and supplying utility company.
35. Plans submitted for public improvements shall show the final line and grade of all sewer,
water, and storm drain lines to the satisfaction of the Public Works and Utility Departments.
Utility separations shall be provided for all new and existing systems unless a design
exception is approved by the City and State, if applicable.
36. The utility plan shall include water services and meters to each lot. The service may be
provided as individual services or could be provided as a “U-branch” at the common property
line per City Engineering Standard #6260 and to the satisfaction of the Utilities Department.
37. Unless specifically approved by the Building Official, and the directors of Community
Development, Public Works, and Utilities, the sewer service to Lots 1, 2, and 3 shall be gravity
sewers. The developer shall exhaust reasonable efforts to provide a gravity sewer to each of
the lots to either Westmont, Stanford, or through an easement to Jeffrey. If sewer ejectors are
required for one or more lots, a Notice of Requirements shall include this item and shall be
recorded in conjunction with the final map.
38. Fire Hydrants shall be provided per City Engineering Standards. The final placement shall
consider the hydrant availability and distance from the tract boundary at all four tract
interfaces with the adjoining public streets. Off-site hydrants may be required. Final hydrant
locations and spacing shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Fire Department and Utilities
Department prior to final map recordation.
39. A preliminary electrical service design/memo from PGE shall be provided prior to approval
of the subdivision improvement plans. The final PGE design/handout package may be listed
as a deferred submittal item on the cover sheet of the improvement plans. Service to the
Page 229 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 20
subdivision shall be completed without a net increase in the number of service poles located
within the public right of way.
40. Prior to recordation of the final map, the subdivider shall install street lighting and all
associated facilities including but not limited to conduits, sidewalk vaults, fusing, wiring, and
luminaires per City Engineering Standards. Off-site street lighting improvements, alterations,
or upgrades may be required along roadways leading to and from the proposed development
to complete the necessary public improvements.
41. Improvement plans shall include a complete tree summary show the diameter and species of
all trees. The plan shall clarify the trees to remain and the trees to be removed. Trees to
remain may require a tree preservation plan per City Engineering Standards.
42. Prior to recordation of the final map, invasive plant species shall be removed or eradicated
along and within the Twin Ridge Creek corridor to the satisfaction of the Planning Division
and Sustainability and Natural Resources Official .
43. Agency permits required for any work within the creek corridor shall be secured prior to
commencing with any demolitions, grading, and construction within the jurisdictional areas.
Any jurisdictional permits from the Army Corp, Fish and Wildlife, or Regional Water Quality
Control Board required for the drainage, site improvements, street and road improvements
shall be issued prior to plan approval and/or commencing with work within the respective
waterways. Permit conditions shall be reflected on the approved subdivision plans.
44. A SWPPP and Waste Discharger Identification Number (WDID) shall be issued and
referenced on the grading, erosion control, and stormwater control plan sheets prior to plan
approval and encroachment permit issuance.
45. The grading and drainage plan and reports shall clarify the limit of run-on from the adjoining
public streets and from any upslope private watershed. The upslope watershed to the north
(Cal Fire) shall be evaluated for the capacity of the current drainage systems. The systems
shall be shown to be adequate to carry the design storm, shall be upgraded, or subdivision
improvements added to collect and convey any run-on.
46. Prior to final map recordation, all proposed retaining walls shall be evaluated for collecting
and conveying any surface run-on that might be tributary to the back of wall. Any
concentrated drainage shall be conveyed and discharged in a non-erosive manner.
47. The proposed pad grades shall provide a minimum surface drainage design gradient from a
defined high point(s) to an approved drainage outlet. The pad grading and drainage plan and
build-out strategy shall not rely on subsurface drainage systems without a safe overflow.
48. The proposed slope banks shall honor the top and toe of slope setbacks from the adjoining
property lines in accordance with the California Building Code unless captured with a
Page 230 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 21
retaining wall or curb. Pad grading and drainage improvements plans should consider the
final grading and drainage proposed for the typical lot development.
49. Street trees are required as a condition of development. The proposed trees may be planted
in conjunction with the subdivision improvements or could be deferred to individual lot
development. The proposed parkway planting or bio-remediation improvements shall
consider and honor the requirement for parkway tree planting at the rate of approximately one
tree per every 35 lineal feet of frontage.
Utilities Department
50. The proposed utility infrastructure shall comply with the latest engineering design standards
effective at the time the permit for public improvement is obtained and shall have reasonable
alignments needed for maintenance of public infrastructure along public roads.
51. Any private sewer lateral improvement included with public improvement plans that crosses
one proposed parcel for the benefit of another shall provide evidence that a private utility
easement appropriate for those facilities has been recorded prior to issuance of a permit for
such improvement.
52. Public improvement plans submitted shall show all utility easements dedicated to the City in
compliance with the latest engineering design standards and shall have reasonable alignments
needed for maintenance of public infrastructure.
53. Public improvement plans submitted shall show the existing terminal manhole in Cuesta
Drive to be abandoned and a new cleanout manhole shall be installed upstream of the sewer
lateral connection for Lot 16. The proposed sewer lateral for Lot 16 shall connect to the new
6” sewer main extension downstream of the cleanout manhole with a wye.
54. Public improvement plans submitted shall show the proposed public sewer main extension
and manhole in Westmont Avenue to be 6” PVC pipe and meet current City Engineering
Standards.
55. Public improvement plans submitted shall show water meters and private sewer laterals with
appropriate clearance from one another per City Standards.
56. Public improvement plans submitted shall show a separate water meter provided for each new
parcel per Chapter 13.04.120 of the City’s Municipal Code.
57. Potable city water shall not be used for major construction activities, such as grading and dust
control, as required under Prohibited Water Uses; Chapter 13.07.070.C of the City’s
Municipal Code. Recycled water is available through the City’s Construction Water Permit
program.
Page 231 of 361
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 22
58. The proposed 8” public water main within Stanford Drive shall meet the current City
Standards at the time of building permit submittal and shall maintain a minimum 12”
clearance above the proposed public sewer main, per City Standards.
Indemnification
59. 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 Hopkins, seconded by Commissioner Shoresman, and on the final
roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Hopkins and Shoresman, Vice-Chair Quincey, Chair Jorgensen
NOES: Commissioner Dandekar
REFRAIN: Commissioner Kahn
ABSENT: Commissioner Wulkan
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 28th day of July, 2021.
_____________________________
Tyler Corey, Secretary
Planning Commission
Page 232 of 361
Page 233 of 361
6
66666
Page 234 of 361
Page 235 of 361
6
6
Page 236 of 361
Page 237 of 361
Page 238 of 361
Page 239 of 361
Page 240 of 361
Page 241 of 361
Page 242 of 361
INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
For ER # EID-0170-2020
Minor modifications have been made to this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) in response to
public comments about the proposed project. These modifications do not require recirculation of this IS/MND
because the edits regarding biological resources and hydrology constitute minor modifications and clarifications to
an adequate MND, provide evidence substantiating the conclusions of the IS/MND, and do not include significant
new information that would result in a new significant environmental impact or a substantial increase in the
severity of a significant environmental impact. All new text is indicated by: underlined, bold, and italicized text.
Deleted text is indicated by: strike-through.
1. Project Title:
468-500 Westmont Drive Tentative Tract Map
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of San Luis Obispo
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Kyle Van Leeuwen, Assistant Planner
(805) 781-7091
4. Project Location:
468 and 500 Westmont Drive (APN 052-496-001), San Luis Obispo, CA (project site)
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:
Andrew Gareth Meinhold and Timothy James Meinhold
1950 Bridle Ridge Trail
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
6. General Plan Designations:
Low Density Residential
7. Zoning:
R-1 (Low Density Residential)
8. Description of the Project:
The 468-500 Westmont Drive Tentative Tract Map Project (project) is a request to the City of San Luis Obispo
(City) for a Tentative Tract Map (TR 3157) for the subdivision of one existing parcel (Assessor’s Parcel Number
[APN] 052-496-001) totaling 4.98 acres into 23 individual parcels meant to facilitate residential development on
land in the R-1 (Low Density Residential) zone. The new parcels would range in size from 6,000 to 22,78324,451
square feet (sf) and would be located at 468 and 500 Westmont Drive, at the northern edge of the city limits (Figure
1). Access improvements would include a proposed 54- to 60-foot-wide access road beginning at the existing
Page 243 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 2 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
terminus of Stanford Drive and looping east to connect with the existing terminus of Cuesta Drive. The variation
in the road width accounts for existing widths of Cuesta and Stanford Drives. This access road would provide
access to Lots 4–16 and 19–23. Lots 1–3 would take access from a shared driveway off the western terminus of
Westmont Avenue and Lots 17 and18 would be accessed from the eastern terminus of Westmont Avenue. Parking
for the tract would be provided onsite, and each residential lot is designed to accommodate the required two parking
spaces for each lot. The development proposes a connection to the existing waterline on Stanford Drive and looping
it around to Cuesta Drive. An additional water line from Westmont Avenue would connect to Cuesta Drive through
an easement across Lot 15. A 17-foot-wide, asphalt-concrete (AC) easement across Lot 15 from Westmont Avenue
to Cuesta Drive is proposed for drainage, utility, and bicycle/pedestrians. A drainage basin is also proposed within
the easement. A design exception for the easement (bicycle pathway) is requested as the current slope is 9 percent,
which exceeds the standard of 8 percent. A proposed 15-foot-wide sewer line easement is proposed along the
western property line of Lot 10. There is an existing sewer line that extends across Lot 10 that would be relocated
within the proposed easement. A fire lane easement is proposed across Lots 1–3 that would be used for emergency
vehicle access and would contain a sewer line that serves Lots 1-3. A 10-foot-wide public utility easement is
proposed along the frontages of Lots 4–16 and 19–23. A 10-foot-wide Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E)
easement is proposed along the rear yards of Lots 3 and 7–18 and an additional PG&E easement is proposed along
the western edge of Lots 1–3. Drainage easements are proposed along Lots 4, 15, and 19–23 and would be designed
to comply with the City’s Low Impact Development (LID) requirements. Proposed drainage measures include an
85th percentile retention area, a 95th percentile retention area, and Filterra and Biofiltration treatment. Four-foot
retaining walls located in the rear or side yards would be provided for slope stability on Lots 1-5 and 8-23.
Additional 3-foot retaining walls would be provided on Lots 8 and 9 for wildland protection. (See Attachment 2.)
The project includes a phasing plan that would allow for the final map recordation into three phases, as allowed
under Section 66456.1 of the Government Code. Phase one would include Lot 1, Lot 2, Lot 3, Lot 17, and Lot 18.
Phase two would include Lots 4 through 10 and Lots 21 through 23. Phase three would include Lot 11 through 16,
Lot 19, and Lot 20.
Table 1 summarizes existing and proposed characteristics for the proposed lots.
Table 1. Existing and Proposed Parcel Characteristics
Parcel Size (total) Slope Site Conditions and Improvements
Existing
Parcel
4.98 acres 8% • Two residential units with a shared carport
• Accessed by a private driveway from Stanford
Drive
• Ornamental/ruderal vegetation associated with
the developed area
• Onsite creek with associated wetland and riparian
areas in the western portion of the property
• Annual grassland with Cambria morning glory
(Calystegia subacaulis ssp. episcopalis)
(300 plants)
Proposed Lots
1–3
1.044 acres
(45,484 sf)
8% • Three proposed lots located on the western
portion of the property
• Accessed by a proposed common driveway from
Westmont Avenue from the east
• Proposed 20-foot setback from the riparian edge
• Proposed 4-foot retaining wall in rear or side
yards
Page 244 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 3 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
• Two proposed stormwater chambers with 95th
percentile retention area (assume 1 foot of
ponding)
• Proposed 10-foot-wide PG&E easement along the
rear portion of Lot 3
• Proposed fire lane easement across Lots 1–3
• Existing onsite creek with associated riparian and
wetland vegetation
• Existing rock outcropping between Lots 1 and 2
• Existing trees, annual grassland, and occurrences
of Cambria morning glory
Proposed Lots
4–7
0.619 acres
(26,984 sf)
8% • Four proposed lots located on the central western
portion of the property
• Accessed by a proposed 54- to 60-foot interior
road from Stanford Drive to Cuesta Drive
• Proposed 20-foot setback from the riparian edge
• Proposed 4-foot retaining wall in rear or side
yards of Lots 4 and 5
• Proposed Biofiltration treatment within proposed
road
• Existing onsite creek with associated riparian and
wetland areas
• Existing occurrences of Cambria morning glory
and annual grassland
Proposed Lots
8–14
0.836 acres
(36,434 sf)
8% • Seven proposed lots located in the central
northern portion of the property
• Accessed from a proposed 54- to 60-foot interior
road from Stanford Drive to Cuesta Drive
• Proposed Filterra system within the proposed
road
• Proposed 15-foot-wide sewer easement on Lot 10
for sewer lines and emergency access
• Proposed 10-foot-wide PG&E easement along the
rear portion of Lots 7–14
• Proposed 4-foot retaining wall in rear or side
yards with an additional 3-foot wall for Lots 8 and
9
• Existing residential units with common carport
and ruderal vegetation
• Existing annual grassland and trees
Proposed Lots
15–16
0.275 acres
(12,000 sf)
9% • Two proposed lots located in the eastern portion
of the property
• Accessed from a proposed 54- to 60-foot interior
road from Stanford Drive to Cuesta Drive
Page 245 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 4 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
• Proposed 17-foot-wide utility, drainage, and
bicycle/pedestrian easement across Lot 15
• Proposed 85th percentile retention area within the
proposed easement
• Proposed Filterra system adjacent to Lot 16
within the proposed road
• Proposed 10-foot-wide PG&E easement along the
rear portion of lots
• Proposed 4-foot retaining wall in rear or side
yards
• Existing annual grassland and trees
Proposed Lots
17–18
0.288 acres
(12,534 sf)
8-9% • Two proposed lots located in the eastern portion
of the property
• Accessed from Westmont Avenue from the west
• Proposed connection to the existing water main in
Westmont Avenue
• Proposed 10-foot-wide PG&E easement along the
rear portion of Lots 7–14
• Proposed 4-foot retaining wall in rear or side
yards
• Existing annual grassland and trees
Proposed Lots
19–23
0.789 acres
(34,389 sf)
8% • Five proposed lots located in the central southern
portion of the property
• Accessed from a proposed 54- to 60-foot interior
road from Stanford Drive to Cuesta Drive
• Proposed 85th percentile retention area at the rear
end of the lots
• Proposed Filterra system adjacent to Lot 23 and a
separate system located adjacent to Lot 19 within
the proposed road
• Proposed 4-foot retaining wall in rear or side
yards
• Existing annual grassland and trees
Note: Refer to Figure 3 for proposed lot locations.
The project site is generally surrounded by one- and two-story residential units to the south, east and west. There
is undeveloped residential land to the north of the project site and California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection (CAL FIRE) Station #12 located directly northeast.
There is a freshwater forested/shrub wetland with an associated riparian habitat that extends through the western
portion of the project area that would be located at the rear (eastern) end of Lots 1–3 and the rear (western) end of
Lots 4–8. The freshwater forested/shrub wetland connects to a freshwater emergent wetland located on
undeveloped land to the north of the project site. The site is generally comprised of developed/ruderal land, riparian
habitat, and annual grassland. There are 177 ornamental and native trees throughout the project site, a rock
outcropping between Lots 1 and 2, and presence of Cambria morning glory (Calystegia subacaulis ssp. episcopalis;
a rare plant species) on Lots 3–6.
Page 246 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 5 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
The project would demolish two existing residential structures and several accessory structures to accommodate
the tract improvements.
To accommodate the onsite improvements, 86 ornamental and native trees would be removed. Acacia trees located
in riparian areas would be removed; however, the project proposes to replace Acacia trees with native vegetation,
including toyon (Heteromelis arbutifolia) or oaks. Proposed improvements would result in 4.27 acres of
groundwork, which includes 7,900 cubic yards (cy) of cut and 4,760 cy of fill.
No residential development on the new parcels is proposed at this time, but it is anticipated that each new parcel
will be developed as a single-family residential use, for a total of 23 single-family residential units. Each single-
family residential property has the potential to include an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) and a junior accessory
dwelling unit (JADU), as an accessory use to the single-family residential use.
9. Project Entitlements:
Development Review
Tree Removal Permit
10. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings:
Surrounding uses and stories of surrounding buildings are summarized below:
• North: undeveloped residential land and CAL FIRE Station #12
• East: one- and two-story single-family residences; apartments beyond
• South: one- and two-story single-family residences
• West: one- and two-story single-family residences
11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area
requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for
consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural
resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
Native American tribes were notified about the project consistent with City and State of California (State)
regulations including, but not limited to, Assembly Bill (AB) 52. A representative from the Salinan tribe requested
a cultural resource specialist from their tribe be onsite to monitor all ground disturbing activities, and this measure
has been included as a mitigation requirement (see Section 18, Tribal Cultural Resources).
12. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD)
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Regional Water Quality Control Board
U.S Army Corp of Engineers
Page 247 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 6 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map
Page 248 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 7 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Figure 2. Project Site Map
Page 249 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 8 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Figure 3. Site Plan Map
Page 250 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 9 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a
“Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Note: This revised Initial Study does not identify any new significant impacts and this table has been amended to correctly
reflect the determinations identified in the initial analysis.
☐ Aesthetics ☐ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ☐ Public Services
☐ Agriculture and Forestry
Resources ☒ Hazards and Hazardous Materials ☐ Recreation
☒ Air Quality Hydrology and Water Quality ☐ Transportation
☒ Biological Resources ☒ Land Use and Planning ☒ Tribal Cultural Resources
☒ Cultural Resources ☐ Mineral Resources ☒ Utilities and Service Systems
☐ Energy ☒ Noise ☒ Wildfire
Geology and Soils ☐ Population and Housing ☒ Mandatory Findings of
Significance
FISH AND WILDLIFE FEES
☐
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife has reviewed the CEQA document and written no effect
determination request and has determined that the project will not have a potential effect on fish, wildlife, or
habitat (see attached determination).
☒
The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish and
Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code. This initial study has been
circulated to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for review and comment.
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
☒
This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more State
agencies (e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Department of Housing and Community
Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines 15073(a)).
Page 251 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 10 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency):
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared. ☐
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a
significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made, by or agreed to by the project
proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
☒
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required. ☐
I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant” impact(s) or “potentially significant unless
mitigated” impact(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the
earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it
must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed
☐
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially
significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant
to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing
further is required.
☐
Signature Date
For: Michael Codron,
Printed Name Community Development Director
Page 252 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 11 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the
information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is
adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like
the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where
it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors
to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on-site, cumulative as well
as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must
indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant.
"Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there
are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of
mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact."
The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than
significant level (mitigation measures from Section 19, "Earlier Analysis," as described in (5) below, may be cross-
referenced).
5. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration (Section 15063 (c) (3) (D)). In this case, a brief
discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such
effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,”
describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent
to which they addressed site-specific conditions for the project.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts
(e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where
appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted
should be cited in the discussion.
8. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance
Page 253 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 12 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
1. AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would
the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 1, 4 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, open space, and historic
buildings within a local or state scenic highway?
1, 4, 5,
6 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from
publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable
zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
1, 4, 7 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 1, 7 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE) identifies specific goals and policies
intended to protect and enhance the city’s visual quality and character. Policies in the COSE include, but are not limited to,
promoting the creation of “streetscapes” and linear scenic parkways during construction or modification of major roadways,
designing new development to be consistent with the surrounding architectural context, and preserving natural and agricultural
landscapes. The COSE and City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Circulation Element assign scenic value ratings of “moderate”
and “high” to several roadways in the city, based on the availability of views of scenic resources from these public viewpoints.
According to the Circulation Element, the segment of U.S. Route 101 (US 101) through the city of San Luis Obispo is identified
as having moderate and high scenic value. The COSE also identifies Santa Rosa Street, as having moderate to high scenic value;
however, neither Westmont Avenue, Stanford Drive, or Cuesta Drive have any scenic designation. The COSE does not identify
any “cones of view” or other important scenic vistas in the project site vicinity.
The project is located on land that is zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential) near the northern city limit. The surrounding land
uses include one- and two-story residences to the south, east, and west, undeveloped land to the north, and CAL FIRE Station
#12 to the northeast. Bishop Peak is prominent to the northwest. The existing parcel supports two existing residential units and
a common carport that is accessed by a private Driveway off Stanford Drive. Ruderal vegetation is present onsite surrounding
the existing development. The project site includes a freshwater forested/shrub wetland with associated riparian habitat in the
western portion of the project site. The project site also includes a rock outcropping and presence of Cambria morning glory, a
rare plant species, in the western portion of the project site. The remainder of the site is primarily comprised of annual grassland
and ornamental and native trees.
While no specific development proposal has been identified for the site, based on the underlying zoning and proposed parcel
sizes, this analysis assumes that future development would consist of residential development. Such development would be
subject to development standards identified in Chapter 17.16 Low-Density Residential (R-1) Development Standards and the
City’s Community Design Guidelines, which are intended to provide for infill projects of high architectural quality that are
compatible with existing development.
A scenic vista is generally defined as a high-quality view displaying good aesthetic and compositional values that can
be seen from public viewpoints. A substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista would occur if the proposed project would
significantly degrade the scenic landscape as viewed from public roads or other public areas. Some scenic vistas are
officially or informally designated by public agencies or other organizations. Based on the COSE map of scenic
roadways and vistas, the project site is not directly located along roadways considered to be of moderate or high scenic
value or within the cone of view of a scenic roadway. Santa Rosa Street is the nearest road of scenic value, located
Page 254 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 13 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
approximately 415 feet east of the project site. Existing development including an apartment complex located at the
corner of Westmont Avenue and Santa Rosa Street as well as other residential units would block views of the project
from Santa Rosa Street. Residential development is not currently proposed; however, future development would be
consistent with existing residential units and would comply with City design and zoning standards; therefore, the project
would not affect adversely affect a scenic vista and potential impacts would be less than significant.
The section of US 101 that extends through the city of San Luis Obispo is classified as an eligible State Scenic Highway
but is not officially designated by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Santa Rosa Street eventually
turns into State Route (SR) 1 north of the project site, which extends along California’s coast. The portion of SR 1 north
of the project site is an officially designated Scenic Highway by Caltrans. However, the project site is not visible from
either US 101 or SR 1; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
The State and City have designated highways that offer scenic views as Scenic Highways. The City has identified
US 101 from the southern city limit to Marsh Street as a highway with high scenic value, and between Marsh and Broad
Streets and north of California Street as a highway with moderate scenic value. Santa Rosa Street north of Foothill
Boulevard and past the northern city limit is designated as having moderate to high scenic value.
The project site is accessed from Santa Rosa Street to Westmont Avenue from the east, Stanford Drive from the
southwest, and Westmont Avenue from the west. The Patricia Drive Entrance to the Bishop Peak Trailhead is located
0.5 mile northwest of the proposed project site. Views of the proposed housing tract from Bishop Peak and associated
trails would be consistent with current existing views of developed residential units.
Currently, there is no specific development planned for the parcels. It can be assumed that each parcel will be developed
as a single-family residential use, with an ADUs and JADUs as potential accessory uses in accordance with State law.
Construction of future residences, ADUs, and JADUs may result in additional tree removal, potential earthwork, and
impervious surface area; however, the specifics of which are not known at this time. The project currently proposes a
subdivision of a single parcel (APN 052-496-001) into 23 lots; grading of the project site; development of a road to
connect Stanford and Cuesta Drives; installment of necessary utility, drainage, and bicycle/pedestrian easement; and
necessary tree removal. Future residential development on these parcels would need to comply with City ordinances for
R-1 (Low Density Residential) development outlined in Sections 17.16 and 17.70 of the City Municipal Code and with
the COSE, which outlines view guidelines regarding urban development (Policy 9.1.2). The COSE states that urban
development should reflect its architectural context. This does not necessarily prescribe a specific style, but requires
deliberate design choices that acknowledge human scale, natural site features, and neighboring urban development, and
that are compatible with historical and architectural resources.
As mentioned above, improvements would require the removal of trees and a potential removal of a rock outcropping
located on the western portion of the project site. The COSE states that scenic and unique landforms, including
significant trees or outcroppings, should be preserved. Proposed tree removal would be consistent with the City’s Tree
Ordinance, which establishes requirements for compensatory planting (1:1) and preservation requirements for retaining
trees with historic or unusual value. The rock outcropping is located between proposed Lots 1 and 2 and depending on
final construction plans would likely be removed. The outcropping is neither scenic or unique (such as those of the
Morros) and any impacts or removal of it as a result of the project would be insignificant and not in conflict with policies
of the COSE. Additionally, none of the trees onsite have historic or unusual value.
Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with applicable zoning and the City of San Luis Obispo General Plan, and
impacts would be considered less than significant.
The project is not currently proposing the development of outdoor lighting sources that could create a new source of
light or glare. Future development plans have not been specified; however, if new light sources are proposed, they must
adhere to the COSE (Policy 9.2.3), which states outdoor lighting shall avoid operating at unnecessary locations, levels,
and times; spillage into areas not needing or wanting illumination; glare; and frequencies that interfere with astronomical
viewing. Outdoor lighting standards include, but are not limited to, a requirement for outdoor light sources to be shielded
and directed away from adjacent properties and public rights-of-way, minimum levels of lighting consistent with public
safety standards, and limits to hours of lighting operation. Future residential development would be required to comply
with the Lighting and Night Sky Preservation Ordinance (Section 17.70.100). The project would also be subject to
Page 255 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 14 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
review and approval by the City Community Development Director to ensure compliance with these standards prior to
final approval. Therefore, impacts from new sources of light or glare would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Conclusion
The project site is not located within a scenic vista or within the viewshed of a designated State Scenic Highway and is consistent
with existing views visible from Santa Rosa Street. The project does not propose any design features that are inconsistent with
the current zoning regulations or other applicable regulations. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
2. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model
(1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an
optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and
farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources,
including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to information compiled by the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s
inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment
Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon
measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by
the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significan
t Impact No Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
2, 9 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract? 2, 10 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest
land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526),
or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104(g))?
2, 3, 8 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to
non-forest use? 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland,
to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
1, 2, 9,
10 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
The California Department of Conservation (CDOC) classifies and maps agricultural lands in the state in the Farmland Mapping
and Monitoring Program (FMMP). The FMMP identifies five farmland categories: Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide
Page 256 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 15 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Importance, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Local Importance, and Farmland of Local Potential. The project site is designated
as Urban and Built-Up Land by the FMMP.
No portion of the project site or immediately surrounding areas support active agricultural uses. The project site is not loc ated
within or immediately adjacent to land zoned for agricultural uses. Based on Figure 6 in the COSE, the project site is not located
within or immediately adjacent to land under an active Williamson Act contract.
According to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 12220(g), forest land is defined as land that can support 10% native tree
cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest
resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits.
Timberland is defined as land, other than land owned by the federal government and land designated by the State Board of
Forestry and Fire Protection as experimental forest land, which is available for, and capable of, growing a crop of trees of a
commercial species used to produce lumber and other forest products, including Christmas trees.
According to FMMP designations, the project site is located on Urban and Built-Up Land (DOC 2020). Since the project
site is not located on land designated as Farmland by the FMMP, the project would not result in the conversion of
Farmland to non-agricultural use; therefore, no impacts would occur.
The closest Prime Farmland is located approximately 530 feet east of the project just beyond Santa Rosa Street;
however, this area is not zoned for agricultural uses under the City’s COSE. The proposed project would not disturb the
FMMP designated Prime Farmland or interfere with agricultural zoning designations. The project site and adjacent land
are not under a Williamson Act contract. The closest land under a Williamson Act contract is located approximately
0.87 mile west on the opposite side of Bishop Peak. Proposed improvements would not affect nearby land under a
Williamson Act contract or conflict with nearby land that is zoned for agricultural uses; therefore, the project would not
conflict with existing agricultural zoning or a Williamson Act contract, and no impacts would occur.
The project site is currently zoned as R-1 (Low Density Residential) and is surrounded by R-1 (Low Density Residential)
zoning designations to the north, west, and south and open space to the east. Therefore, the project site does not include
land use designations or zoning for forest land or timberland. The project would not conflict with zoning for forest land,
timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production, and no impacts would occur.
The project site contains more than 10% of native tree cover resulting from coast live oaks (Quercus agrifolia) located
primarily along the northern and eastern property lines. While these trees provide an aesthetic benefit to the project site,
they are not present in such a quantity to provide for significant management of forest resources. Subdivision
improvements would require the removal of native trees, and pursuant to the City’s Tree Regulations (City Municipal
Code Chapter 12.24), the project would be required to compensate for removed trees at a minimum 1:1 ratio. Therefore,
the project’s impact related to loss or conversion of forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production
would be less than significant.
The project site is surrounded low-density residential uses to the north, west, and south and open space to the east. The
nearest agricultural uses are approximately 530 feet east of the project site. The proposed project would be consistent
with surrounding uses and consistent with existing zoning for this site and would not adversely affect agricultural water
supplies or other agricultural support facilities. Therefore, the project would not result in substantial changes in the
environment that could result in conversion of nearby agricultural land or forest land to non-agricultural or non-forest
use, and no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Conclusion
The project site is located in an urbanized area and is not within or adjacent to Farmland, land zoned for agricultural or forest
land use, or land under a Williamson Act Contract. No potentially significant impacts to agriculture or forest land would occur,
and no mitigation is necessary.
Page 257 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 16 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
3. AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by the
applicable air quality management district or air pollution control
district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project: Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
11, 12,
13 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under
an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
11, 12,
13 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
1, 3,
12, 13 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors)
adversely affecting a substantial number of people? 1, 14 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Evaluation
The city of San Luis Obispo is located within the South Central Coast Air Basin (SCCAB), which also includes Santa Barbara
and Ventura Counties. Air quality within the SCCAB is regulated by several jurisdictions including the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), California Air Resources Board (CARB), and San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
(SLOAPCD). The SLOAPCD monitors air pollutant levels to assure that air quality standards are met, and if they are not met,
develops strategies to meet the standards. Depending on whether the standards are met or exceeded, the SCCAB is classified as
being in “attainment” or as “nonattainment.”
San Luis Obispo County is currently designated as “nonattainment” for the State standards for ozone, partial nonattainment (in
eastern San Luis Obispo County, outside of the project area) for federal ambient standards for ground-level ozone (O3), and
nonattainment for the State standards for particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10). The COSE identifies goals
and policies to achieve and maintain air quality that supports health and enjoyment for those who live, work, and visit the c ity.
These goals and policies include meeting federal and State air quality standards, reducing dependency on gasoline- or diesel-
powered motor vehicles, and encouraging walking, biking, and public transit use.
The major sources of PM10 in the SCCAB are agricultural operations, vehicle dust, grading, and dust produced by high winds.
Additional sources of particulate pollution include diesel exhaust, mineral extraction and production, combustion products from
industry and motor vehicles, smoke from open burning, paved and unpaved roads, condensation of gaseous pollutants into liquid
or solid particles, and wind-blown dust from soils disturbed by demolition and construction, agricultural operations, off-road
vehicle recreation, and other activities. Ozone is a secondary pollutant that is formed by a reaction between nitrogen oxides
(NOx) and reactive organic gases (ROGs) in the presence of sunlight. Therefore, ozone levels are dependent on the amount of
these precursors. In the SCCAB, the major sources of ROGs are motor vehicles, organic solvents, petroleum production, and
pesticides. The major sources of NOx are motor vehicles, public utility power generation, and fuel combustion by various
industrial sources.
The SLOAPCD has developed a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Air Quality Handbook (most recently updated
with a November 2017 Clarification Memorandum) to evaluate project-specific impacts and determine if potentially significant
impacts could result from a project. To evaluate long-term emissions, cumulative effects, and establish countywide programs to
reach acceptable air quality levels, the 2001 San Luis Obispo County Clean Air Plan (CAP) was adopted by the SLOAPCD.
Some land uses are considered more sensitive to changes in air quality than others, depending on the population groups and the
activities involved. The CARB has identified the following groups that are most likely to be affected by air pollution (i.e.,
sensitive receptors): children under 14, the elderly over 65 years of age, athletes, and people with cardiovascular and chronic
respiratory diseases. The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are the single-family residences located adjacent to the
south (10 feet), west (20 feet), and east (10 feet) of the project site.
Page 258 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 17 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) has been identified as a toxic air contaminant by the CARB. Any ground disturbance or
demolition of existing structures in an area identified as having the potential to contain NOA must comply with the CARB
Airborne Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations. The
SLOAPCD NOA Map indicates that the project site is located within an area identified as having a potential for NOA to occur.
In order to be considered consistent with the 2001 San Luis Obispo County CAP, a project must be consistent with the
land use planning and transportation control measures (TCMs) and strategies outlined in the CAP. The proposed project
is consistent with the general level of development anticipated and projected in the CAP. The proposed development’s
location, uses, and intensity are generally consistent with planning envisioned in the 2014 City of San Luis Obispo
General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE) update and with the CAP’s land use planning strategies. The
project is located within the City’s urban reserve line and would not designate more land for urban use, would be in
close proximity to public transportation, and supports compact communities’ strategies. Increases in housing units
would help to offset projected imbalances between jobs and housing units, as noted in the 2019 Regional Housing Needs
Allocation Plan (RHNA) prepared by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG). Improvements in a
jobs-to-housing imbalance would help support and promote local and regional improvements related to increased
transportation mobility and potential reductions in vehicle miles traveled (VMT). The proposed project does not include
commercial or industrial land uses that would result in increases in employment.
The proposed project would be consistent with the general level of development anticipated and projected in the CAP.
Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
Construction of the subdivision improvements would disturb approximately 4.27 acres of land and result in emissions
of ROGs, NOx, and fugitive dust emissions (PM10). The parcel subdivision would facilitate future single-family
residential uses, with ADUs and JADUs as potential accessory uses, that would result in emissions of pollutants during
construction activity. During operation, the project would result in emissions of ozone precursor pollutants associated
with mobile source emissions and other uses.
Construction Emissions
Proposed subdivision improvements would disturb approximately 4.27 acres of land and require approximately
12,600 cy of total earthwork; however, specific future development plans are currently unknown and have the potential
to result in additional ground disturbance causing the production of more pollutants. Construction of subdivision
improvements and future residential structures have the potential to cause a short-term increase in dust and vehicle
emissions, including diesel particulate matter (DPM), ROGs, NOx, and particulate matter. As shown in Table 2,
construction emissions from proposed subdivision improvements would exceed the SLOAPCD’s applicable screening
thresholds for ROG, NOx, DPM, or PM10. Therefore, potential construction-related emissions of these pollutants would
require SLOAPCD Tier 1 mitigation as described in Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2.
Table 2. Project Construction Emissions
Criteria Pollutant Total Project
Emissions
SLOAPCD
Screening
Threshold
Exceeds
Threshold?
Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) + Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) 0.72 tons 2.5 tons/quarter No
Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) 0.03 tons 0.13 tons/quarter Yes
Fugitive Particulate Matter (PM10) 3.20 tons 2.5 tons/quarter Yes
It is anticipated that the subdivision improvements and construction of single-family residential uses, with an ADUs
and JADUs as potential accessory uses, would occur sequentially. Exact grading volumes for the residential
development are unknown at this time but would likely involve less than 4 acres of site disturbance and 1,200 cy of
earthwork per day, which would not result in exceedances of the SLOAPCD thresholds. To minimize potential impacts,
AQ-1 and AQ-2 would be applicable to the residential development. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than
significant with mitigation.
Page 259 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 18 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Operational Emissions
The SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook provides operational screening criteria to identify projects with the
potential to exceed SLOAPCD operational significance thresholds (see Table 1-1 of the CEQA Air Quality Handbook).
Based on Table 1-1 of the CEQA Air Quality Handbook, the project does not propose development that would have the
potential to result in operational emissions that would exceed SLOAPCD thresholds (76 single-family residences).
Based on the relatively low volume of trips associated with the project and the type of activities proposed, operational
impacts associated with the project would be minimal. The project would not generate substantial new long-term traffic
trips or vehicle emissions and does not propose construction of substantial new direct (source) emissions. Therefore,
potential operational emissions would be less than significant.
The project site is located within 1,000 feet of multiple sensitive receptors, including single-family residential units to
the south, east, and west of the project site. The development of single-family residential uses, with ADUs and JADUs
as potential accessory uses, would result in temporary construction vehicle emissions and fugitive dust that may affect
surrounding sensitive receptors. The SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook recognizes special conditions, such as
proximity to sensitive receptors, that require implementation of standard construction mitigation measures to reduce
diesel idling (DPM) and fugitive dust. Due to the project’s proximity to surrounding residential areas (less than 1,000
feet), standard measures for reducing DPM and fugitive dust are required. Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2 would
reduce exposure of sensitive receptors to adverse fugitive dust and construction vehicle emissions; therefore, impacts
would be less than significant with mitigation.
Project development activities, such as building construction, utility trenching, and installation, would generate odors
associated with equipment exhaust and fumes. The proposed activities would not differ significantly from those
resulting from any other type of construction project. Any effects would be short term in nature limited to the
construction phase of the proposed project and would be less than significant.
The SLOAPCD NOA Map indicates that the project site is located within an area identified as having a potential for
NOA to occur. The project includes excavation for road construction and trenching and installation of new water,
wastewater, and stormwater service pipelines to the proposed new parcels. The project may also include demolition of
an existing barn and shed, which have the potential to disturb asbestos-containing materials (ACM). Demolition can
have potential negative air quality impacts, including issues surrounding proper handling, demolition, and disposal of
ACM. Future development of the parcels would also likely include excavation for foundations and trenching for utilities.
Pursuant to SLOAPCD requirements and the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining
Operations (17 California Code of Regulations [CCR] Section 93105), the applicant is required to conduct a geologic
evaluation prior to any ground-disturbing activities and comply with existing regulations regarding NOA, if present.
Mitigation Measures AQ-3 and AQ-4 have been identified to require the applicant to complete a geologic evaluation
and follow all applicable protocols and procedures if NOA is determined to be present onsite. Mitigation Measure AQ-
5 requires inspection for ACM prior to demolition and reported to the SLOAPCD. Based on compliance with identified
mitigation and existing regulations, this potential impact would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
AQ-1 Idling Control Techniques. During all construction activities and use of diesel vehicles, the applicant shall
implement the following idling control techniques:
1. Idling Restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors for Both On- and Off-Road Equipment.
a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors if feasible;
b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be permitted;
c. Use of alternative-fueled equipment shall be used whenever possible; and
d. Signs that specify the no idling requirements shall be posted and enforced at the construction site.
2. California Diesel Idling Regulations. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with 13 CCR 2485. This
regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings
of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California- and non-
California-based vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles:
Page 260 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 19 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
a. Shall not idle the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location, except
as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation; and
b. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a heater, air conditioner,
or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater
than 5 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area, except as noted in
Subsection (d) of the regulation.
Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers of the 5-minute idling limit.
The specific requirements and exceptions in the regulation can be reviewed at the following website:
www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/truck-idling/2485.pdf.
AQ-2 Particulate Matter Control Measures. During all construction and ground-disturbing activities, the applicant
shall implement the following particulate matter control measures and detail each measure on the project grading
and building plans:
1. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible.
2. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the
site and from exceeding the SLOAPCD’s limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute
period. Increased watering frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour
(mph). Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible.
3. All dirt stockpile areas (if any) shall be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as
needed.
4. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall
be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil-disturbing activities.
5. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than 1 month after initial grading shall
be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established.
6. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders,
jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the SLOAPCD.
7. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. In addition,
building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
8. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the
construction site.
9. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or shall maintain at least 2 feet
of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 23114.
10. “Track out” is defined as sand or soil that adheres to and/or agglomerates on the exterior surfaces of motor
vehicles and/or equipment (including tires) that may then fall onto any highway or street as described in
CVC Section 23113 and California Water Code (CWC) Section 13304. To prevent track out, designate
access points and require all employees, subcontractors, and others to use them. Install and operate a
“track-out prevention device” where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved streets. The track-
out prevention device can be any device or combination of devices that are effective at preventing track
out, located at the point of intersection of an unpaved area and a paved road. Rumble strips or steel plate
devices need periodic cleaning to be effective. If paved roadways accumulate tracked-out soils, the track-
out prevention device may need to be modified.
11. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water
sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping
when feasible.
12. All PM10 mitigation measures required should be shown on grading and building plans.
13. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons whose responsibility is to ensure any fugitive
dust emissions do not result in a nuisance and to enhance the implementation of the mitigation measures
Page 261 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 20 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
as necessary to minimize dust complaints and reduce visible emissions below the SLOAPCD’s limit of
20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and
weekend periods when work may not be in progress (for example, wind-blown dust could be generated
on an open dirt lot). The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the SLOAPCD
Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork, or demolition (Contact Tim Fuhs at
805-781-5912).
AQ-3 Geologic Evaluation. Prior to initiation of ground-disturbing activities, the applicant shall retain a registered
geologist to conduct a geologic evaluation of the property, including sampling and testing for NOA in full
compliance with SLOAPCD requirements and the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and
Surface Mining Operations (17 CCR 93105). This geologic evaluation shall be submitted to the City Community
Development Department upon completion. If the geologic evaluation determines that the project would not have
the potential to disturb NOA, the applicant must file an Asbestos ATCM exemption request with the SLOAPCD.
AQ-4 Naturally Occurring Asbestos Control Measures. If NOA are determined to be present onsite, proposed
earthwork, demolition, and construction activities shall be conducted in full compliance with the various regulatory
jurisdictions regarding NOA, including the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface
Mining Operations (17 CCR 93105) and requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for Hazardous
Air Pollutants (NESHAP; 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Section 61, Subpart M – Asbestos). These
requirements include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities commencing, to the SLOAPCD;
2. Preparation of an asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Consultant; and
3. Implementation of applicable removal and disposal protocol and requirements for identified NOA.
AQ-5 Asbestos-Containing Material. Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the applicant shall provide an asbestos
report that was prepared by a certified asbestos consultant. If ACM are determined to be present, at least 10 working
days prior to any demolition work the applicant shall provide notification to SLOAPCD of such work. The
notification shall include an asbestos report that was prepared by a certified asbestos consultant. ACM removal and
disposal shall follow the requirements of the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Regulation
(NESHAP) Subpart M and of the SLOAPCD.
Conclusion
With implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-5, residual impacts associated with air quality would be less
than significant.
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through
habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
1, 4, 5,
62, 63,
64
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
1, 4, 5,
64 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Page 262 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 21 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected
wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
2, 4, 5,
17, 62,
64
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident
or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
4, 5,
64 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
7, 16 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved
local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
18 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
The city is generally surrounded by open space, rangeland used for grazing, and other agricultural uses that support a variety of
natural habitats and plant communities. The city’s many creeks provide sheltered corridors that allow local wildlife to move
between habitats and open space areas. The COSE identifies various goals and policies to maintain, enhance, and protect natural
communities within the City’s planning area. These policies include, but are not limited to, protection of listed species and
species of special concern, preservation of existing wildlife corridors, protection of significant trees, and maintaining
development setbacks from creeks.
The project site is zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential) and is surrounded by developed one- and two-story single-family
residential units to the south, east, and west, undeveloped land to the north, and CAL FIRE Station #12 to the east. The Patricia
Drive entrance to the Bishop Peak Trailhead is located 0.5 mile northwest. A creek and associated freshwater forested/shrub
wetland and riparian areas occur on the western portion of the project site and connects to a freshwater emergent wetland on the
northern undeveloped parcel.
According to the Biological Resources Assessment (BRA) conducted by Keven Merk Associates, LLC (KMA; KMA 2020),
there are five plant communities/land use types within the project site. The communities include ornamental vegetation,
developed/ruderal area, riparian habitat, annual grassland, and rock outcrop. KMA identifies the onsite creek as Twin Ridge
Creek, which runs in a north to south direction on the western portion of the project parcel and is a tributary to San Luis Obispo
Creek. The riparian habitat is comprised of native coast live oak and willows (Salix spp.) along with a variety of non-native
ornamental vegetation. The riparian habitat is considered a sensitive natural community by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife (CDFW) and the City’s COSE. The annual grassland that occurs on the project site is periodically used for horse
grazing and is predominantly comprised of non-native species as a result of a history of disturbance. There is one small rock
outcrop in the western portion of the project area that was determined to be a landscape feature rather than a habitat type.
During tree surveys, a total of 177 trees were identified on the project site, which include ornamental species and naturally
occurring native species. Native trees include coast live oak (quercys agrifolia), valley oak (quercus lobata), Southern California
black walnut (juglans California), California bay laurel (Umbellularia california), arroyo willow (salix lasiolepis), and
California holly toyon (heteromeles arbutifolia). A background review for the site identified five special-plant species that have
potential to occur within the project site, with three species—Cambria morning glory, California black walnut (Juglans
californica), and Monterey pine (Pinus radiata)—occurring onsite. Three invertebrate, one reptile, 19 bird, and four mammal
species were considered to have potential to occur on the project site. Fish species are not expected to occur onsite due to the
intermittent nature of the drainage. The project site is considered within Unit SLO-3 of designated critical habitat for the
California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii). Unit SLO-3 is approximately 116,517 acres in size and identifies a geographic
area that contains features essential for the conservation of the species. Activities on private lands that do not require a federal
Page 263 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 22 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
permit are not affected by the critical habitat designation (FWS 2010). The following analysis of biological resources is
primarily based off the BRA conducted by KMA for the project (KMA 2020, KMA 2021).
An Aquatic Resources Delineation Report prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA) in January 2021 determined
that a portion of the wetland area supported onsite is considered Waters of the United States (WOTUS) under the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Waters of the State (WOTS) under the state Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)
and CDFW.
Special-Status Plant Species
The BRA for the project site determined that there is potential for four special-status plant species to occur onsite, of
which three species (Cambria morning glory, California black walnut, and Monterey pine) were observed onsite.
Potential special-status plant species include California (southern) black walnut (California Rare Plant Rank [CRPR]
4.2, Cambria morning glory (CRPR 4.2), Miles’ milk-vetch (Astragalus didymocarpus var. milesianus; CRPR 1B.2),
and San Luis Obispo owl’s-clover (Castilleja densiflora var. obispoensis; CRPR 1B.2). In addition, Monterey pine was
observed within ornamental vegetation onsite and in surrounding neighborhood areas and is considered to be a
CRPR 1B.1 only within its native range of Año Nuevo, Cambria, and the Monterey Peninsula. These species are
considered to have potential to occur onsite based on the presence of suitable soils and habitat conditions.
Focused rare plant surveys were conducted for the project site within all potentially suitable habitat areas in March,
April, and May 2020, which is within the blooming period of these four species with potential to occur onsite. Based
on the findings of the surveys, Miles’ milk-vetch and San Luis Obispo owl’s-clover was not observed during field
surveys and would not be affected by project activities. Cambria morning glory and California black walnut were
observed onsite and are discussed below. In addition, the BRA identifies Monterey pine species present within
ornamental vegetation and is also discussed below.
Cambria Morning Glory
Cambria morning glory was observed within the annual grassland, which comprises the project site to the east of the
onsite wetland and riparian habitat. The occurrences supported low densities with average cover estimated at three
plants per square meter. The four observed occurrences were determined to cover approximately 1,076 sf (100 square
meters) of the project site and approximately 300 plants were present onsite. Construction of the project, including
grading and installation of road and utility improvements, as well as future residential development, would result in the
removal or disturbance of Cambria morning glory. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO-2 are
required to reduce potential impacts to Cambria morning glory. These measures would require implementation of a
Rare Plan Mitigation Program that would establish replanting of Cambria morning glory so that after a 5-year period
there would be no net loss of the plant. Implementation of recommended mitigation measures would reduce impacts to
a level that is considered less than significant with mitigation.
Monterey Pine
Monterey pine was observed within the ornamental trees onsite and in surrounding neighborhoods. Monterey pine is
considered to be a CRPR 1B.1 species within its native range. The three native stands in California are in Año Nuevo,
Cambria, and the Monterey Peninsula. Similar to the California black walnut, since San Luis Obispo is not within this
species’ native range, the Monterey pine would not be considered a special-status species onsite and no mitigation is
recommended.
Special-Status Wildlife Species
Based on a background review for the project site, 19 bird, three invertebrate, one reptile, and four mammal species
have potential to occur on the project site. No fish species were determined to have potential to occur onsite based on
the intermittent nature of the drainage. The species that have potential to occur onsite are discussed below.
Page 264 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 23 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Birds and Bats
The 19 bird species identified as having the potential to occur onsite include bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus),
burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actia), Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter
cooperii), ferruginous hawk (Buteo regalis), golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), grasshopper sparrow (Ammodramus
savannarum), great blue heron (Ardea herodias), great egret (Ardea alba), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus),
merlin (Falco columbarius), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus), sharp-shinned hawk
(Accipiter striatus), snowy egret (Egretta thula), tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor), white-tailed kite (Elanus
leucurus), yellow-billed magpie (Pica nuttallii), yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia), pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus),
San Diego desert woodrat (Neotoma lepida intermedia), Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii), and
western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus). The project site is comprised of numerous ornamental and native
trees and other habitat that have the potential for birds or bats to nest or roost in.
Burrowing owls have the potential to occur onsite, as a transient species, during the winter months due to large
grassland habitat to the north of the site. According to CDFW, burrowing owls are rare in the coastal San Luis
Obispo area and are believed to no longer nest in the region (KMA 2021, CDFW 2003). Additionally, the project site
is regularly disturbed (i.e. mowed, grazed) which reduces the potential for burrowing owl to stop at the site as this
species is highly sensitive to human activity, and the project site is located within an existing residential
neighborhood. Additionally, wintering habitat for burrowing owl has the potential to be disturbed during proposed
groundwork activity.
The project would remove 13 non-native trees within the riparian habitat, primarily acacia (silver wattle) trees and
one eucalyptus tree. Removal of trees for parcel upgrades and future development have the potential for accidental take
or other indirect affects to bird species in the area. Additionally, as noted in the Initial Study circulated for public
review, wintering habitat for burrowing owl has the potential to be disturbed during proposed groundwork activity.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-3 through BIO-7 would reduce impacts to nesting or roosting birds and
bats that could be present at the project site. Implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce project impacts
on birds to a level that is considered less than significant with mitigation.
Reptiles
The northern California legless lizard (Anniella pulchra) is a CDFW Species of Special Concern (SSC) and occurs in a
variety of habitats with soil moisture and cover. Suitable habitat for this species is present in the riparian habitat and
marginally in the ornamental vegetation onsite. While no construction activity is proposed within the riparian habitat,
non-native acacia trees within the riparian corridor and adjacent native and ornamental vegetation outside of the riparian
corridor would be removed, and therefore could impact California legless lizard. Implementation of Mitigation
Measures BIO-4 through BIO-7 would reduce impacts to northern California legless lizard to a level that is considered
less than significant with mitigation.
Invertebrates
The monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) is considered a sensitive species by the CDFW and is a candidate species
under the Endangered Species Act. Milkweed is required as a host plant for caterpillar species, which was not observed
onsite; however, individual species were observed flying overhead during surveys. The density of trees in the riparian
habitat could potentially be suitable habitat as an overwintering or autumnal site. Tree removal is proposed for parcel
upgrades and could affect monarch butterfly species present onsite. While eucalyptus is a typical tree species that
supports monarch butterfly overwintering, removal of the one eucalyptus tree and 13 non-native trees from the
riparian corridor would not have a substantial adverse effect on monarch butterfly overwintering populations, and
restoration of the creek corridor and adjacent areas would include the replanting and establishment of native species,
including Cambria morning glory onsite, that would provide protected foraging habitat onsite and potential
overwintering or autumnal habitat for this species in the long-term within the riparian corridor. Implementation of
Mitigation Measure BIO-8 would require vegetation removal to occur outside of the overwintering season; therefore,
impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
The obscure bumble bee (Bombus caliginosus) does not have a specific listing status but is considered sensitive in the
California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and is a species of local concern. The BRA identified that host plants
for these species are located in riparian habitat onsite. The riparian habitat would have a 20-foot setback and minimal
Page 265 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 24 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
work within the setback would be required. However, acacia tree removal is proposed within the riparian habitat that
has the potential to disturb obscure bumble bee species present within the riparian habitat. Implementation of Mitigation
Measures BIO-4 through BIO-8 would reduce impacts to obscure bumble bee species to a level that is considered less
than significant with mitigation.
The San Luis Obispo pyrg (Pyrgulopsis taylori) is an aquatic snail that is considered sensitive by CNDDB but does not
have a specific listing status. The species inhabits freshwater habitat, which is present at the onsite creek. Project
activities do not propose alteration or disturbance of the creek that could adversely affect San Luis Obispo pyrg species
potentially present. Standard Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce erosion and sedimentation within the creek
habitat would be sufficient to avoid impacts to potential species present onsite. Standard BMPs are identified in
Mitigation Measure BIO-9 and would reduce impacts to the San Luis Obispo pyrg to a level that is considered less than
significant with mitigation.
Designated Critical Habitat
The project site is considered designated critical habitat for the California red-legged frog by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS). The area is Unit SLO-3 Willow and Toro Creeks to San Luis Obispo and comprises approximately
116,517 acres. The unit occurs along the San Luis Obispo Coast, north of Morro Bay, and extends southeast into the
city of San Luis Obispo. Critical habitat areas identify a geographic area that contains features essential for the
conservation of the species. Activities on private lands that do not require a federal permit are not affected by the
critical habitat designation. However, listed species, such as red-legged frog, and their habitats, are protected by the
Endangered Species Act regardless of whether they occur in a designated critical habitat or not. (FWS 2010).
The BRA concluded that the project site does not provide suitable aquatic breeding habitat for California red-legged
frog. The onsite drainage portion of Twin Ridges Creek is intermittent and does not contain water of sufficient depth
long enough for California red-legged frog larvae to complete metamorphosis. At the time of the March 2020 site visit,
only one small pool was identified with less than six inches of standing water. No emergent wetland vegetation was
present, and wetland vegetation along the channel consisted of vernal marsh species, which indicated a lack of
permanent inundation (KMA 2021). In addition, the stream lacks any significant pools and does not contain sufficient
depth to support adult frogs. Typical breeding habitat is associated with still or slow-moving water that is more than
two feet in depth and is surrounded by dense, shrubby riparian or emergent vegetation. Additionally, breeding pools
maintain water at least into July (KMA 2021). Based on the site visit and aerial photography of the site vicinity, there
are no other potential breeding ponds nearby that could support California red-legged frog.
Annual grassland and ornamental habitats are considered suitable upland and dispersal habitat for California red-legged
frog if there are aquatic breeding sites within one mile that are not separated by barriers to dispersal.; however, the
The nearest record of California red-legged frog is 0.4 mile at Brizziolari Creek, which is separated from the project
site by SR 1, which is a barrier to movement and dispersal to and from the project site. The project site does not
provide connections to other suitable aquatic sites and is surrounded by urban development to the south, west, and east.
A comment received on the draft MND suggested that a perennial portion of Twin Ridges Creek exists downstream
of the project site and could potentially provide suitable habitat for California red-legged frog. The identified segment
is not mapped in the National Wetlands Inventory but is identified on a 1965 San Luis Obispo U.S. Geologic Survey
topographic quadrangle as an intermittent stream that originates on the east side of Bishop Peak (KMA 2021). This
drainage was visited by the project biologist, Kevin Merk, on June 10, 2021. The drainage originates from a storm
drainpipe and has a small pool at the outfall (6 feet wide, 14 feet long, and 4 inches deep). Based on channel
morphology and evidence of past flow events, this pool would likely reach a maximum depth of 18 inches (1.5 feet),
which is less than the 2 feet of depth observed at typical breeding sites for California red-legged frog. Two additional
pools occur downstream from this outfall pool, with water two to three inches deep and no flow between the pools.
The maximum size of these pools is estimated at 3 feet by 5 feet, and 6 inches deep, and 2 feet by 3 feet and 4 inches
deep; therefore, both pools would have a maximum depth less than the 2 feet of depth observed at typical breeding
sites for California red-legged frog.
Page 266 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 25 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
As noted in the supplemental memorandum prepared by KMA (2021), residential structures are present along the
top of bank and the streambank below the homes is armored with stacked concrete sacks. Extensive cover of
nonnative English ivy occurs throughout the area. Sparse wetland plants were observed in the channel and consisted
of a small patch of sedges with taller riparian canopy cover comprised mostly of willows. This native amphibian
needs deep enough water to dive into to escape predators such as raccoons and wading birds (USFWS, 2002;
Jennings and Hayes, 1994 [as cited in the KMA, 20210 memorandum). The non-native bullfrog is also a known
predator of California red-legged frog. When California red-legged frog tadpoles are found in streams they are in
large pools with emergent wetland plants, overhanging riparian vegetation in contact with the water or undercut
banks that provide the necessary hiding places to avoid predation so they can develop into young adults (USFWS,
2002; KMA personal observation). Although water persisted in the small culvert outfall pool until June in a drought
year, it is too shallow and limited in extent even at the estimated bank full stage to support California red-legged frog
breeding requirements. The segment of the drainage on the project site and extending further upstream to another
culverted section that daylights from under urban development along Skyline Drive naturally dries in the summer
and does not have any in-channel pools with suitable depth to support red-legged frogs. The commenter identified
this as the “spring origin”, and it appears to be another outfall of the culverted creek that has become overgrown
with weedy vegetation including several Canary Island palm trees. Additionally, there is no downstream habitat for
California red-legged frog as Twin Ridges Creek goes into an open concrete channel downstream from Highland
Drive (City 2014). Moreover, no records of California red-legged frogs are present from Stenner Creek or San Luis
Obispo Creek within the downtown area where individuals could breed and disperse through the creek corridor onto
the site (CDFW 2021).
In conclusion, these pools are too shallow (less than 2 feet in maximum depth) and do not provide enough
overhanging riparian vegetation in contact with the water or banks to provide necessary shelter from the elements
and predation for red-legged frog tadpoles to develop into young adults.
Therefore, the site is considered to have low potential for breeding habitat or upland and dispersal habitat for California
red-legged frog within the designated critical habitat and impacts would be less than significant.
The project site supports identified special-status plants and wildlife species that could be affected by the proposed
project. However, implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-9 would reduce or avoid potential
impacts to biological resources present onsite; therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
The project site contains a riparian forest along the onsite creek located in the western portion the property. The BRA
identifies the riparian habitat as a Central Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest Community, which has a State Rarity Rank
of 3.2. The identified riparian forest consists of native riparian trees and shrubs, which includes coast live oak, red
willow (Salix laevigata), arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis), toyon, California bay laurel (Umbellularia californica),
interior live oak (Quercus wislizenii), and California black walnut (Juglans californica). Non-native species also occur
in the riparian habitat, including blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus), silver wattle (Acacia dealbata), firethorn (Pyracantha
sp.), coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), and English ivy (Hedera helix). Native understory plants present within
the riparian area include poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), and coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis). A separate
wetland community was observed in the riparian area, which includes spikebrush (Eleocharis macrostachya), brown-
headed rush (Juncus phaeocephalus), tall flatsedge (Cyperus eragrostis), and curly dock (Rumex crispus). The project
would require permits described in Mitigation Measure BIO-10 for work proposed within the riparian area. In addition,
the Fire Protection Plan requires removal of non-native trees within the riparian habitat, resulting in the removal of 13
trees, primarily acacia (silver wattle) trees and one eucalyptus tree, within the riparian habitats corridor. The project
would be required to comply with the City’s Municipal Code (12.24.090) and replace trees at a minimum 1:1 ratio. The
City’s COSE (7.7.9) calls for a creek setback with appropriate separation from the physical top of bank unless there is
no reasonable alternative, in which structures may be permitted to encroach. The proposed TTM shows the extent of
the riparian area and a 20-foot creek setback, which would be further protected by implementation of mitigation measure
BIO-11, which requires recordation of a biological easement on the Final Map and application of creek setback
standards. As noted, improvements including stormwater improvements, removal of non-native trees and plants, and
restoration activities would be allowed within the easement area. No paving or structures would be permitted in the
Page 267 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 26 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
biological easement area, however, grading activity is proposed in several areas within the creek setback for
stabilization, and placement of rip rap pads are proposed within or adjacent to the setback. The easement and application
of creek setback standards would affect proposed Lots 1–8.;.. With implementation of the identified mitigation measure,
the project would reduce impacts to the riparian area onsite and impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
Proposed project construction requires 4.27 acres of ground disturbance, including 7,900 cy of cut and 4,760 cy of fill,
which has the potential to release erosive runoff into the creek and associated wetland areas that may cause adverse
effects to water quality. Mitigation Measure BIO-9 identifies construction BMPs to reduce potential runoff from the
project site that could adversely affects nearby water resources. In addition, an Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
was prepared by SWCA (SWCA 2021) as required by the BRA and determined that Twin Ridge Creek is likely non-
wetland WOTUS and waters of the state. Twin Ridge Creek likely falls under the USACE, CDFW, and RWQCB
jurisdictions due to the presence of clearly definable ordinary high-water marks, bank and bed features, riparian
vegetation, and hydrologic connectivity to San Luis Obispo Creek. Twin Ridge Creek does not meet the definition of a
wetland because it does not support hydric soils or consistent indicators of wetland hydrology. The Aquatic Resources
Delineation determined that 0.14 acre of Twin Ridge Creek is potentially under the jurisdiction of the USACE and 0.70
acre of the riparian area is potentially under the jurisdiction of the RWQCB and CDFW. The project identifies a 20-
foot setback from the riparian edge in accordance with the City’s COSE, and this area would be further protected from
future development by implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-11, which would create a biological easement;
however, some grading activity and placement of rip rap pads would occur within or adjacent to the creek setback, and
several non-native trees would be removed from within the riparian corridor for fire safety. The project would require
permits described in Mitigation Measure BIO-10 for work proposed within the jurisdictional areas (streambed and
riparian corridor). With implementation of the identified mitigation measures, potential impacts to the riparian area
onsite would be reduced and impacts would be considered less than significant with mitigation.
The project site is located near an area designated as a wildlife corridor within the COSE. The proposed property
subdivision, utility connections, and subsequent future development of new residences would not introduce a substantial
new barrier to wildlife passing through the area because they would be located outside of the designated wildlife
corridor.
Regarding common wildlife, the project site is zoned for residential development, and is surrounded on three sides
by the existing residential neighborhood, and the Cal Fire facility is located to the northeast. One existing residence
is currently located on Stanford Drive. The vacant land to the north of the site is located along State Route 1 and
connects to larger areas of largely vacant land, rural developments, and open space to the north and west. While
common wildlife adapted to urban development may approach the project site and surrounding neighborhood,
development of the project site would not block or inhibit wildlife movement throughout the larger undeveloped and
open space lands that extend from the City to the coastline (approximately 8.5 miles to the west). Furthermore, the
project incorporates a 20-foot setback from the riparian corridor that will be enhanced by the removal of non-native
trees and the planting of native vegetation, and wildlife that currently uses this corridor to access the larger areas to
the north would not be blocked or inhibited by the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed residential development
of the 4.98-acre site would not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites.
Public comment was received regarding concern that the removal of trees within the riparian corridor would
decrease roosting habitat for raptors. The proposed project would include the removal of only non-native species for
fire protection, and potential short-term impacts to nesting birds is discussed above (see [a]) and mitigation is
identified to reduce these potential short-term impacts to less than significant (Mitigation Measures BIO-3 through
BIO-7). In the long-term, the riparian corridor would be replanted with native trees, shrubs, and grasses and
protected in perpetuity. Therefore, the habitat condition of the riparian corridor will improve overall area that is
occupied by native riparian habitat will increase. The onsite grassland area is currently disturbed and does not
represent high quality foraging habitat given its limited area and proximity to existing urban development. Raptors
would still be able to utilize trees along the riparian corridor and in the surrounding area for perches even with the
Page 268 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 27 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
development of the proposed project. The BRA determined that the onsite creek, Twin Ridge Creek, does not support
fish species due to the intermittent nature of the drainage; therefore, project activities do not have the potential to
interfere with the movement of migratory fish species within the creek. However, according to the BRA, Twin Ridge
Creek is a tributary to San Luis Obispo Creek and potential erosive runoff from the project has the potential to degrade
water quality and fish species within San Luis Obispo Creek. Mitigation Measure BIO-9 identifies BMPs for
construction activity to reduce potential erosion and sedimentation from entering the onsite creek, which would reduce
the potential for erosion and sedimentation to enter San Luis Obispo Creek. In addition, implementation of Mitigation
Measure BIO-11 would create a permanent biological easement and application of a 20-foot setback standard from the
riparian edge, which would be consistent with the City’s Municipal Code (17.70.030). Future development would be
consistent with the City’s Municipal Code (17.70.030) and implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-9 would reduce
impacts to the movement of migratory or native species; therefore, impacts would be less than significant with
mitigation.
The project site supports Central Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest and other native and non-native trees. The project site
contains 177 ornamental and native trees, primarily within the riparian corridor. The project would remove all 73 trees
located outside the riparian corridor including 15 native coast live oak trees and 1 southern California black walnut tree
(tree numbers 1-62, 85-91, 173-177 as shown in Appendix D of Attachment 3 and Sheet C2 of Attachment 2).
Additionally, the Fire Protection Plan for the proposed project requires removal of non-native trees within the riparian
habitat. A total of 13 non-native trees, primarily acacia (silver wattle) trees, within the riparian corridor would be
removed (tree numbers 114, 148-157, 162, 169, as shown in Appendix D of Attachment 3 and Sheet C2 of Attachment
2).
The project would result in the removal of 86 trees total onsite. Of the 86 trees proposed for removal, 51 trees are subject
to the City’s Tree Ordinance, due to species, trunk size, or location within a creek setback. Based on the compensatory
tree planting requirements of the City’s Tree Ordinance, the applicant will be required to replant a minimum of one new
tree onsite, or two offsite, for each of the 51 being removed, as set forth in the City Municipal Code (12.24.090). This
application is subject to review and approval by the City Tree Committee. The project would not result in a conflict
with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
The project is not located within an area governed by an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved state, regional, or local habitat conservation plan. Therefore, the project would
not conflict with the provisions of an adopted plan and no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
BIO-1 Implement a Rare Plant Mitigation Program that ensures no net loss of Cambria morning glory on the
project site. Prior to any tract improvements, a Rare Plant Mitigation Program shall be implemented for Cambria
morning glory and shall be overseen by a qualified botanist approved by the City. As a component of the program,
seed shall be collected from Cambria morning glory plants during the appropriate season prior to tract grading
activities. Using standard procedures, the qualified botanist shall clean and store the seeds until the receiving sites
shown on the project plans are ready. Suitable habitat of 2,180 square-feet in size outside of the development area
(as designated on the site plans in the creek setback zone) shall be designated as the mitigation site that will be
maintained in a natural state and not be subject to mowing earlier than June 1 each year. The areas will be
maintained as grassland habitat and no planting of ornamental species or other adverse modifications (such as
grazing activities) will be allowed. The mitigation site shown on the project plans is twice the size as the areas
currently occupied by the rare plant occurrences (2,180 square-feet of habitat created for 1,076 square-feet of habitat
impacted). This equates to a 2:1 mitigation ratio (habitat created to habitat impacted) to ensure a minimum 1:1
replacement ratio is achieved. Topsoil from each of the four occurrences will be collected in 6-inch lifts and stored
for top-dressing the mitigation site once grading of the pads is complete. As needed, the mitigation site should be
prepared for planting by removal of non-native species or other measures as necessary, then applying the salvaged
topsoil. Once topsoil has been layered evenly through the area, collected seed should be hand-broadcasted into
suitable locations by the qualified botanist and covered with compost. Seed may also be incorporated into the native
Page 269 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 28 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
erosion control seed mix described in the Native Erosion Control Seed Mix table under Mitigation Measure BIO-9
and applied to other grassy areas of the site as part of the erosion control effort. Depending on the season when
construction starts, the qualified botanist may also potentially salvage plants (i.e., dig them up when soils are moist)
and transplant them to containers to be maintained until the mitigation sites are ready for planting.
BIO-2 Conduct annual monitoring and implement adaptive management measures for 5 years to ensure no net loss
of Cambria morning glory onsite. The Rare Plant Mitigation Program shall include annual monitoring and
maintenance of the mitigation site to ensure success of the program. Monitoring by a qualified botanist shall occur
during the spring growing season (between April 15 and May 15 each year) to ensure successful establishment of
planted propagules. The established rare plants shall be mapped to evaluate the goal of no net loss of the species
onsite. The measurable objective shall be to have at least 1,076 sf of occurrence comprised of approximately 300
Cambria morning glory plants. Appropriate vegetation sampling techniques shall be used to assess the areal cover
of vegetation to evaluate the status of the established occurrences. If the success criteria of having approximately
300 plants covering 1,076 sf within the creek setback zone is not reached by the third year of monitoring, remedial
actions such as collecting more seed and distributing it in suitable areas should be employed, with a corresponding
additional year of monitoring. Other activities to increase the success of the rare plant mitigation effort could
include non-native plant species removal within the mitigation site to reduce competition, additional seed
application, or supplemental irrigation during periods of prolonged drought. The qualified botanist shall prepare
annual reports for the applicant detailing the methods and results of the mitigation effort and monitoring effort. The
applicant shall be responsible for submitting the report to the City on an annual basis (by December 31 of each
year) for the 5-year monitoring period or until the final success criteria described above are met.
BIO-3 To the extent feasible, avoid initial site grading in the winter months. The burrowing owl has been recorded in
the vicinity of the project from October to the end of April. If initial vegetation removal and site grading for the
tract improvements is conducted outside of this period, potential effects on this species would be avoided and no
further mitigation would be required. Restricting the time period for earth-moving activities is also required to
avoid or minimize the potential for erosion and sedimentation (see Mitigation Measure BIO-9). If initial grading
work must commence during the time period that burrowing owls may be present onsite, preconstruction surveys
for this species shall be included in the survey effort described in Mitigation Measure BIO-4 prior to vegetation
removal or tract improvements.
BIO-4 Conduct a preconstruction survey and avoid construction in areas occupied by special-status wildlife species
until relocated or they have left the site. Within 7 days prior to the start of vegetation/tree removal, ground-
disturbing activities, or demolition of existing structures, a biologist approved by the City shall survey the project
impact area to identify whether nesting birds, roosting bats, monarch butterfly overwintering populations, obscure
bumble bee, and/or California legless lizard are present on site. A separate survey shall be conducted for any phase
of the project not conducted concurrently or within 10 days of cessation of the previous phase (i.e., structure
demolition conducted prior to general site grading). The biologist shall use appropriate survey techniques for the
special-status species identified in the 2020 BRA as having potential to occur onsite. For example, burrows shall
be examined with binoculars or wildlife cameras, and inspected for whitewash or prey remains. Leaf litter and
cover objects shall be searched for northern California legless lizards. Potential bat roost sites shall be inspected
for sign of roosting bats such as guano or prey remains. If any of these species are found onsite, the biologist shall
coordinate with the City, and CDFW as appropriate, on methods to ensure the successful relocation of individuals
to suitable habitat nearby. In some cases, CDFW may recommend creating structures for displaced woodrats and
bats. Burrowing owls can be discouraged from using burrows onsite, or occupied burrows can be avoided until the
owls have left the area. Bats can be restricted from roost sites by placing netting over their entrances after they have
left the roost for night-time foraging. The wildlife protection measures to be employed will be based on the results
of the survey and the particular characteristics of their use of the site, in coordination with CDFW and the
construction engineer. If no special-status animal species are found onsite during the preconstruction survey, work
may proceed with the implementation of the following Mitigation Measures BIO-5 through BIO-7.
Page 270 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 29 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
BIO-5 Prepare and present a Worker Environmental Awareness Program. Prior to any vegetation removal or tract
improvements, a qualified biologist shall prepare a Worker Environmental Awareness Program that will be
presented to all project personnel. This program shall detail measures to avoid and minimize impacts on biological
resources. It shall include a description of special-status species potentially occurring on the project site and their
natural history, the status of the species and their protection under environmental laws and regulations, and the
penalties for take. Recommendations shall be given as to actions to avoid take should a special-status species be
found on the project site. Other aspects of the training shall include a description of general measures to protect
wildlife, including:
1. Delineation of the allowable work area, staging areas, access points, and limits to vehicle access;
2. Storage of all pipes, metal tubing, or similar materials stored or stacked on the project site for one or more
overnight periods shall be either securely capped before storage or thoroughly inspected for wildlife before
the materials are moved, buried, capped, or otherwise used.
3. Inspection of materials stored onsite, such as lumber, plywood, and rolls of silt fence, for wildlife that may
have sheltered under or within the materials;
4. Use of netting to exclude birds from nesting in construction materials;
5. Construction of escape ramps in all excavations and trenches more than 6 inches deep;
6. Contact information for the City-approved biologist and instructions should any wildlife species be
detected in the work site;
7. Dust suppression methods during construction activities when necessary to meet air quality standards and
protect biological resources; and
8. Methods for containment of food-related trash items (e.g., wrappers, cans, bottles, food scraps), small
construction debris (e.g., nails, bits of metal and plastic), and other human generated debris (e.g., cigarette
butts) in animal-proof containers and removal from the site on a weekly basis.
All project personnel who have attended the training shall sign an attendance sheet. The program shall be repeated
for any new crews that arrive subsequently on the site.
BIO-6 Install high-visibility construction and silt fence along the creek corridor to delineate the allowable work
area, exclude wildlife from the site, and protect the stream habitat. Prior to vegetation removal or tract
improvements, and during subsequent residential development for Lots 1-7, a high-visibility construction
fence at least 4 feet tall together with a silt fence, or an approved wildlife exclusion fence, shall be erected along
the creek corridor to delineate the limits of grading and vehicle access. If possible, the fence shall be erected along
the creek setback line, and encroachment into the setback shall be kept at a minimum. In no case shall ground
disturbance occur within the riparian habitat or below the top of bank without obtaining proper permits from
regulatory agencies. The type of fence used may be a combination of wildlife exclusion and silt fence (i.e., ERTEC
Triple-function E-fence) or similar materials that would serve the purposes of safety/construction area delineation,
wildlife exclusion, and siltation prevention. The fence shall be checked weekly by construction personnel for
needed maintenance.
BIO-7 Conduct biological monitoring for special-status wildlife species while the property is cleared and graded,
and structures are removed. A qualified biologist shall monitor the removal of structures, materials, and
vegetation that may provide cover for obscure bumble bee, northern California legless lizards, and bat roosting
sites. The biologist shall be onsite daily until all materials are removed and all vegetation has been cleared. If any
special-status species are found, work shall be delayed until the individuals have left the work area or CDFW shall
be notified to obtain authorization for capture and relocation.
Page 271 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 30 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
BIO-8 Avoid vegetation removal within the riparian habitat during the overwintering season. Vegetation removal
within the riparian area shall be conducted outside of the overwintering season for monarch butterfly (late October
through February) and obscure bumble bee (late October through January) to avoid disturbance to species
potentially inhabiting riparian vegetation.
BIO-9 Install erosion and sediment BMPs and revegetate graded areas. The following erosion and sedimentation
control BMPs are required to be implemented during vegetation removal, tract improvements, during individual lot
construction, and after the construction phases of the project:
1. If possible, the potential for erosion and sedimentation shall be minimized by scheduling construction to
occur outside of the rainy season, which is typically defined as October 15 through April 15. Adherence
to this measure would also serve as avoidance for the burrowing owl, as described in Mitigation Measure
BIO-3.
2. To minimize site disturbance, all construction related equipment shall be restricted to established roads,
construction areas, and other designated staging areas. The creek setback zone shall be clearly marked as
described in Mitigation Measure BIO-6.
3. Prior to any site disturbance during tract improvements or individual lot construction, a Sediment and
Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared by a qualified engineer. The use of silt fence, straw wattles, erosion
control blankets, straw bales, sandbags, fiber rolls, and other appropriate techniques should be employed
to protect the drainage features on and off the property. Biotechnical approaches using native vegetation
shall be used as feasible. All areas with soil disturbance shall have appropriate erosion controls and other
stormwater protection BMPs installed to prevent erosion potential. All sediment and erosion control
measures shall be installed per the engineer’s requirements prior to the initiation of site grading if planned
to occur within the rainy season.
4. Spill kits shall be maintained on the site, and a Spill Response Plan shall be in place.
5. No vehicles or equipment shall be refueled within 100 feet of wetland areas, riparian habitat and/or
drainage features, and refueling areas shall have a spill containment system installed. No vehicles or
construction equipment shall be stored overnight within 100 feet of these areas unless drip pans or ground
covers are used. All equipment and vehicles shall be checked and maintained on a daily basis to ensure
proper operation and to avoid potential leaks or spills. Construction staging areas shall be located in a
location where spills would not drain into aquatic habitats.
6. No concrete washout shall be conducted on the site outside of an appropriate containment system.
Washing of equipment, tools, etc. should not be allowed in any location where the tainted water could
enter onsite drainages.
7. The use of chemicals, fuels, lubricants, or biocides shall be in compliance with all local, state, and federal
regulations. All uses of such compounds shall observe label and other restrictions mandated by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, California Department of Food and Agriculture, and other state and
federal legislation.
8. All project-related spills of hazardous materials within or adjacent to the project site should be cleaned up
immediately.
9. All areas with soil disturbance shall have appropriate erosion controls and other stormwater protection
BMPs installed to prevent erosion potential. Silt fencing, erosion control blankets, straw bales, sandbags,
fiber rolls, and/or other types of materials prescribed on the plan shall be implemented to prevent erosion
and sedimentation. Biotechnical approaches using native vegetation shall be used as feasible.
10. Areas with disturbed soils shall be restored under the direction of the project engineer in consultation with
a qualified restoration ecologist as detailed above. Methods may include recontouring graded areas to
blend in with existing natural contours, covering the areas with salvaged topsoil containing native
Page 272 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 31 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
seedbank from the site, and/or applying the native seed mix as described in the table below. Native seed
mix shall be applied to the graded areas in the creek setback area through either direct hand seeding or
hydroseeding methods. Seeding with the native erosion control seed mix should be provided on all
disturbed soil areas prior to the onset of the rainy season (by October 15).
Native Erosion Control Seed Mix
Species Application Rate
(lbs/acre)
California Brome (Bromus carinatus) 10
purple needlegrass (Stipa pulchra) 5
tomcat clover (Trifolium wildenovii) 5
six weeks fescue (Vulpia microstachys) 5
Total 25
BIO-10 Obtain necessary permits for impacts in jurisdictional areas, implement a compensatory mitigation
program, and monitor the success of the program to ensure no net loss of Riparian/Wetland habitat or other
waters on the subject property. Prior to any vegetation removal or site disturbance within the areas delineated as
jurisdictional features (Figure 5, Aquatic Resources Delineation 2021), the applicant shall provide documentation
to the City that a Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit from USACE, a Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality
Certification from RWQCB, and a California Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration
Agreement from CDFW have been obtained or have been determined by the regulatory agencies to not be required.
If regulatory permits are required, Prior to the initiation of vegetation removal or tract improvements, the applicant
shall retain a qualified biological monitor to ensure compliance with all Clean Water Act, City of San Luis Obispo
stormwater and water quality requirements, and CDFW permit requirements during work adjacent to the creek.
The monitor shall be present during the installation of the construction fencing delineating the limits of work in
relation to the edge of riparian, creek top of bank, and 20-foot creek setback buffer, as described in Mitigation
Measure BIO-6. Since the Cambria morning glory compensatory mitigation site is to be located within this buffer,
the monitor shall direct appropriate wildlife exclusion and erosion control BMPs to protect riparian habitat during
site preparation for planting. The monitor shall be present during construction of the rip rap pad and any other work
within the creek setback area on stormwater structures. The monitor shall also oversee removal of non-native tree
species and site preparation for tree planting within the setback. If a Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan
(HMMP) is required by the regulatory agencies, the applicant shall provide a copy of the plan to the City and the
biological monitor shall be responsible for successful implementation of the plan.
BIO-11 Record a Biological Easement and Biological Easement Agreement protecting riparian area: A Biological
Easement and Biological Easement Agreement shall be recorded in conjunction with the final map recordation.
The easement agreement shall be developed by the applicant in a format provided by the City. The following
activities are permitted within the biological easement, subject to the review and approval by the City Sustainability
and Natural Resources Official:
1. Stormwater improvements.
2. Removal of non-native trees.
3. Restoration and creek bank stabilization activities.
No future paving or structures shall be permitted within the biological easement. Creek setback standards shall be
applied to the easement area, consistent with municipal code requirements.
Page 273 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 32 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Conclusion
The project site supports native and ruderal plant species as well as Cambria morning glory, which is a special-status plant
species, and several riparian and ornamental tree species. The site also supports special-status wildlife habitat that could be
affected by the proposed project. Mitigation measures have been identified to reduce or avoid impacts to special-status plants
and wildlife species. A wetland area is supported on the western portion of the project area and a 20-foot setback would be
implemented from the riparian edge of the area. In addition, mitigation has been identified to reduce impacts to construction
activity within the riparian area. Tree removal associated with the project would be mitigated through compliance with the City’s
Tree Ordinance but could result in impact to nesting birds and roosting bats. Compliance with existing regulations would ensure
impacts to riparian habitats and sensitive natural communities would be less than significant. With implementation of Mitigation
Measures BIO-1 through BIO-11, project impacts to biological resources would be less than significant.
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historic resource pursuant to §15064.5? 19, 20 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? 59 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries? 59 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Evaluation
Pre-Historic Setting
Archaeological evidence demonstrates that Native American groups (including the Chumash) have occupied the Central Coast
for at least 10,000 years. The city is located within the area historically occupied by the Obispeño Chumash, the northernmost
of the Chumash people of California. The Obispeño Chumash occupied much of San Luis Obispo County; the earliest evidence
of human occupation in the region comes from archaeological sites along the coast. The project site is not located within a Burial
Sensitivity Area as identified in COSE Figure 1: Cultural Resources.
Historic Setting
The COSE establishes various goals and policies to balance cultural and historical resource preservation with other community
goals. These policies include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Identification, preservation, and rehabilitation of significant historic and architectural resources;
2. Prevention of demolition of historically or architecturally significant buildings unless doing so is necessary to remove
a threat to health and safety;
3. Consistency in the design of new buildings in historical districts to reflect the form, spacing , and materials of nearby
historic structures; and
4. Identification and protection of neighborhoods or districts having historical character due to the collective effect of
Contributing or Master List historic properties.
Page 274 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 33 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
The project site is not located within the Historic Preservation (H) Overlay Zone, nor does it contain any built structures that
may be considered potentially eligible historic resources.
The following analysis of Cultural Resources is predominately based on the Cultural Resources Survey conducted by Central
Coast Archaeological Resource Consultants (CCARC) for the project site (CCARC 2020).
The project proposes to demolish the two existing residential structures located on the project site; however, the
residential units were not determined to have historical significance by the Cultural Resources Survey conducted for
the project. Therefore, the project site does not currently contain, nor is it located near, any historic resources identified
in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). The project
site is not identified on the City’s Historic Properties map; therefore, the project would not result in a substantial adverse
change in the significance of, or any other adverse impact to, a historical resource and impacts would be less than
significant.
The Cultural Resources Report conducted by CCARC in February 2020 concluded that despite the project site’s location
on land with moderate archaeological sensitivity, desktop review and an intensive archaeological field survey of the
project site did not identify any cultural resources. Based on this conclusion, no further archaeological survey is
necessary for the project site. However, based on the large scale of grading and earthwork required for the project,
Mitigation Measure CR-1 has been identified to identify the proper procedures and contact in the event an inadvertent
discovery of an archaeological or historical resource is made. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-1 would
reduce impacts in the event an archaeological resource is uncovered during excavation and other groundwork activities
during project construction; therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
The project site is not located within a Burial Sensitivity Area associated with San Luis Obispo Creek identified in
COSE Figure 1: Cultural Resources. No human remains are known to exist within the project site; however, the
discovery of unknown human remains is a possibility during ground-disturbing activities. Protocol for properly
responding to the inadvertent discovery of human remains is identified in California Health and Safety Code Section
7050.5 and is detailed in Mitigation Measure CR-2. With implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-2, potential
impacts to human remains would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
CR-1 Discovery of Previously Unidentified Cultural Resources. In the event that historical or archaeological remains
are discovered during ground-disturbing activities associated with the project, an immediate halt work order shall
be issued, and the City Community Development Director shall be notified. A qualified archaeologist shall conduct
an assessment of the resources and formulate proper mitigation measures, if necessary. After the find has been
appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. These requirements shall be noted on the project’s final map
and all improvement/construction plans.
CR-2 Discovery of Human Remains. In the event that human remains are exposed during ground-disturbing activities
associated with the project, an immediate halt work order shall be issued, and the City Community Development
Director shall be notified. California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance of
the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains shall occur until the County
Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. If the
remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. These requirements shall be noted on the project’s final map and all
improvement/construction plans.
Conclusion
Based on the records search conducted through the Central Coast Information Center, no known historical or archaeological
resources are present onsite. Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2 have been identified above to require appropriate protocol for
inadvertent resource discovery and discovery of human remains. With implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2
identified above, potential impacts to cultural resources would be reduced to less than significant.
Page 275 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 34 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
6. ENERGY
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy
resources, during project construction or operation?
21, 22,
23 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable
energy or energy efficiency?
21, 22,
23 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
PG&E has historically been the primary electricity provider for the City. In October 2018, the City Council committed to joining
the Monterey Bay Community Power (MBCP) and, beginning in January 2020, MBCP became the City’s primary electricity
provider. In September 2020, MBCP became Central Coast Community Energy (3CE); 3CE will strive to provide 100% carbon-
free electricity to utility customers within the city by 2030, and provides a rate savings relative to PG&E.
The City recently adopted the Clean Energy Choice Program for New Buildings, which encourages clean, efficient, and cost-
effective all-electric new buildings through incentives and local amendments to the California Energy Code. When paired with
cost-comparable modern electric appliances and carbon-free electricity from 3CE, all-electric new buildings are operationally
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions free, cost effective, and help achieve the community’s climate action goals. Unlike other cities
that are banning natural gas entirely, the proposed Clean Energy Choice Program encourages clean, efficient, and cost-effective
all-electric new buildings through incentives, local amendments to the California Energy Code, and implementation of the
Carbon Offset Program. New projects wishing to use natural gas will be required to build more efficient and higher performing
buildings and offset natural gas use by performing retrofits on existing buildings or by paying an in-lieu fee that will be used for
the same purpose.
The California Building Code (CBC) contains standards that regulate the method of use, properties, performance, or types of
materials used in the construction, alteration, improvement, repair, or rehabilitation of a building or other improvement to real
property. The CBC includes mandatory green building standards for residential and nonresidential structures, the most recent
version of which are referred to as the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. These standards focus on four key areas:
smart residential photovoltaic systems, updated thermal envelope standards (preventing heat transfer from the interior to the
exterior and vice versa), residential and nonresidential ventilation requirements, and nonresidential lighting requirements.
The COSE establishes goals and policies to achieve energy conservation and increase use of cleaner, renewable, and locally
controlled energy sources. These goals include increasing the use of sustainable energy sources and reducing reliance on non-
sustainable energy sources to the extent possible and encouraging the provision for and protection of solar access. Policies
identified to achieve these goals include, but are not limited to, use of best available practices in energy conservation,
procurement, use, and production; energy-efficiency improvements; pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly facility design; fostering
alternative transportation modes; compact, high-density housing; and solar access standards.
The City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery also identifies strategies and policies to increase use
of cleaner and renewable energy resources in order to achieve the City’s GHG emissions reduction target. These strategies
include promoting a wide range of renewable energy financing options, incentivizing renewable energy generation in new and
existing developments, and increasing community awareness of renewable energy programs. The Climate Action Plan was
updated in August 2020.
During construction, fossil fuels, electricity, and natural gas would be used by construction vehicles and equipment.
The energy consumed during construction would be temporary in nature and would be typical of other similar
construction activities in the city. Current federal and state regulations require fuel-efficient equipment and vehicles and
prohibit wasteful activities, such as diesel idling; therefore, potential impacts associated with construction energy use
would be less than significant.
Page 276 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 35 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Specific development plans are currently unknown; however, it can be assumed that each parcel will be developed as a
single-family residential use, with ADUs and JADUs as potential accessory uses. Based on this assumption, the project
would result in an overall increase in consumption of energy resources associated with vehicle trips and electricity and
natural gas usage by future project occupants. The project would be designed in full compliance with the CBC and the
City’s adopted amendments (Title 15 of the Municipal Code), including applicable green building standards, ensuring
a high standard for energy efficiency in building design, materials, light fixtures, and appliances. The project would rely
on the local electricity service provider, 3CE, to supply project electricity needs. Compliance with existing regulations
would ensure the project would not result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient,
or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Through use of 100% GHG-free electricity resources, project energy
use would not result in a significant environmental impact; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
The project would be designed in full compliance with the CBC and the City’s adopted amendments (Title 15 of the
Municipal Code), including applicable green building standards. The project would be consistent with energy goals and
policies in the COSE associated with use of best available practices in energy conservation. The project would be
consistent with other goals and policies set forth in the Climate Action Plan associated with renewable energy or energy
efficiency, including the provision of compact, high-density housing. Therefore, the project would not result in a conflict
with, or obstruction of, a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, and impacts would be less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Conclusion
Future development would be designed in full compliance with applicable energy efficiency standards and would not conflict
with state or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency. No potentially significant impacts related to energy would
occur, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on
the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area
or based on other substantial evidence of a known
fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
1, 2, 3,
23, 24,
25
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? 1, 2,
23, 24,
25
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 1, 2, 3,
23, 25 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iv. Landslides? 1, 2, 3,
23, 25 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Page 277 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 36 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 1, 2, 3,
23, 27 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that
would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially
result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
1, 2, 3,
23, 26,
27, 28
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1802.3.2 of the
California Building Code (2013), creating substantial direct or
indirect risks to life or property?
1, 2, 3,
23, 27,
28
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers
are not available for the disposal of waste water?
1, 2, 3,
8, 23 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
or site or unique geologic feature?
1, 2,
59 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Safety Element identifies active, potentially active, and inactive mapped and inferred
faults with the potential to affect the city in the event of rupture. The Los Osos Fault, adjacent to the city of San Luis Obispo, is
identified under the State of California Alquist-Priolo Fault Hazards Act and is classified as active. The West Huasna, Oceanic,
and Edna Faults are considered potentially active and present a moderate fault rupture hazard to developments near them. The
San Andreas Fault and the offshore Hosgri Fault, which present the most likely source of ground shaking for San Luis Obispo,
have a high probability of producing a major earthquake within an average lifespan. The highest risk from g round shaking is
found on deep soils that were deposited by water, are geologically recent, and have many pore spaces among the soil grains.
These soils are typically found in valleys.
Faults capable of producing strong ground-shaking motion in San Luis Obispo include the Los Osos, Point San Luis, Black
Mountain, Rinconada, Wilmar, Pecho, Hosgri, La Panza, and San Andreas Faults. Engineering standards and building codes set
minimum design and construction methods for structures to resist seismic shaking. Based on the DOC Fault Activity Map and
the Safety Element Earthquake Faults – Local Area map, the project site is not located within or within the immediate vicinity
of an active fault zone.
As discussed in the City’s 2014 LUCE Update Environmental Impact Report (EIR), San Luis Obispo lies within the southern
Coast Range Geomorphic Province. This province lies between the Central Valley of California and the Pacific Ocean and
extends from Oregon to northern Santa Barbara County. The Coast Range province is structurally complex and comprised of
sub-parallel northwest–southeast trending faults, folds, and mountain ranges.
Rock types in the San Luis Obispo area are mainly comprised of volcanic rock, metavolcanic rock, and a mixture of serpentinite
and greywacke sandstone. These rocks are highly fractured and are part of the Mesozoic-aged Franciscan Formation. Intrusive
and extrusive volcanic deposits of Tertiary-age and marine sedimentary deposits of the Miocene-aged Monterey Formation are
also found in the area. The most distinctive geomorphological feature of the San Luis Obispo area is the series of Tertiary-aged
volcanic plugs (remnants of volcanoes), known as the Nine Sisters or the Morros, that extend from the city of San Luis Obispo
northwesterly to the city of Morro Bay. Hollister Peak, Bishop Peak, Cerro San Luis Obispo, Islay Hill, and Morro Rock are all
comprised of these volcanic plugs.
Seismic-Related Ground Failure
Settlement is defined as the condition in which a portion of the ground supporting part of a structure or facility lowers more than
the rest or becomes softer, usually because ground shaking reduces the voids between soil particles, often with groundwater
rising in the process. Liquefaction is the sudden loss of the soil’s supporting strength due to groundwater filling and lubri cating
the spaces between soil particles as a result of ground shaking. Soils with high risk for liquefaction are typically sandy and in
creek floodplains or close to lakes. In extreme cases of liquefaction, structures can tilt, break apart, or sink into the gro und. The
Page 278 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 37 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
likelihood of liquefaction increases with the strength and duration of an earthquake. Based on the Ground Shaking and Landslide
Hazards Map in the Safety Element, the project site is not located within an area of high liquefaction potential.
Slope Instability and Landsides
Slope instability can occur as a gradual spreading of soil, a relatively sudden slippage, a rockfall, or in other forms. Causes
include steep slopes, inherently weak soils, saturated soils, and earthquakes. Improper grading and manmade drainage can be
contributing factors. Much of the development in San Luis Obispo is in valleys, where there is low potential for slope instability.
Based on the Ground Shaking and Landslide Hazards Map in the Safety Element, the project site is located within an area with
moderate landslide potential.
Subsidence
Land subsidence is a gradual settling or sudden sinking of the earth’s surface due to subsurface movement of earth materials.
Primary causes are groundwater withdrawal, in which water is removed from pore space as the water table drops, causing the
ground surface to settle; tectonic subsidence, where the ground surface is warped or dropped lower due to geologic factors such
as faulting or folding; and earthquake-induced shaking that causes sediment liquefaction, which in turn can lead to ground-
surface subsidence. Based on the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Areas of Land Subsidence in California Map, the project site
is not located in an area of known subsidence.
Soil-Limiting Factors
The project site is underlain by Los Osos-Diablo complex (9 to 15 percent slopes) and Cropley clay (2 to 9 percent slopes) soil
units. The Los Osos-Diablo complex is characterized as well drained with a very high runoff class and Cropley clay is
characterized as moderately drained with a moderate runoff class. The project site is underlain by soils that are predominantly
clayey and would have a moderate to high shrink/swell potential as a result. The slope of the project site is generally flat to
slightly sloping, with an average of 8 percent slopes. Foundations and footings should be designed to offset shrink-swell potential,
and the low strength of the clay subsoil. These soil characteristics can require that the subgrade be removed and replaced with a
more suitable material or that a high degree of compaction and moisture control be maintained.
a.i) The project site is located approximately 2.8 miles east from the Los Osos Fault Zone and 1.9 miles west from the
Cambria fault zone. There are no fault lines that run under or adjacent to the project site; therefore, direct impacts related
to fault rupture are not anticipated. Because San Luis Obispo is located in a seismically active region, it has adopted
building standards to protect structures and individuals. Development plans are not currently specified; however, future
development of the proposed parcels would be designed to comply with the CBC (including Title 15 amendments) and
other applicable guidelines. Therefore, the project would not have the potential to result in substantial adverse effects
involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, and impacts would be less than significant.
a.ii, iii) As discussed in (a.i) above, San Luis Obispo is located in a seismically active region where there is always the potential
for ground shaking. According to Section 1613 of the 2019 CBC, all structures and portions of structures are required
to be designed to resist the effects of seismic loadings caused by earthquake ground motions. Future residential units
developed at the project site would comply with the CBC and other applicable regulations for earthquake hazards.
According to the City’s Safety Element, soils found at the project site have a low potential for liquefaction risk.
Assuming that any and all future development of the project site is compliant with CBC and other federal and state
regulations, the potential to result in substantial adverse effects involving seismic ground shaking and ground-related
failure would be less than significant.
a.iv) According to the City’s Ground Shaking & Landslide Hazards Map, the project site is located in an area that has a low
risk for landslides. The project area is comprised of predominantly flat to slightly sloping land and does not consist of
moderate to steep slopes that would increase risk for landslides at the proposed site. Future developments would comply
with the CBC, which requires, at a minimum, a soils report for new residential development, and other applicable
regulations to reduce the potential for the project to result in substantial adverse effects involving landslides to less than
significant.
b) Proposed project construction requires 4.27 acres of ground disturbance including 7,900 cy of cut and 4,760 cy of fill,
which has the potential to release erosive runoff into the creek and associated wetland areas that may cause adverse
effects to water quality. Additionally, the project would remove 86 trees, including 13 non-native trees within the
Page 279 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 38 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
riparian corridor. The project proposes to disturb more than one-acre of soil and would require the preparation and
implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) with BMPs to avoid or reduce erosive or polluted
runoff from entering the onsite creek and associated wetland area. Section 4, Biological Resources, identifies Mitigation
Measure BIO-9, which outlines BMPs that would reduce construction impacts related to erosive runoff. Project
development would be required to comply with the Central Coast RWQCB requirements set forth in the Post-
Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region.
Future development as a result of the subdivision will be single-family residential uses, with ADUs and JADUs as
potential accessory uses, potential removal of additional existing trees, and connections to the proposed utility lines.
Grading activity for future development is proposed for current parcel improvements; therefore, it is unlikely that future
development would require more than one-acre of groundwork and would not need to develop and implement a SWPPP.
However, future development would be required to comply with the Central Coast RWQCB Post-Construction
Requirements (PCRs), and physical improvement of the project site would be required to comply with the drainage
requirements of the City’s Waterways Management Plan. This plan was adopted for the purpose of ensuring water
quality and proper drainage within the City’s watershed. Therefore, through implementation of Mitigation Measure
BIO-9 and compliance with existing regulations, impacts related to violation of water quality standards would be less
than significant with mitigation.
c) According to the City’s Ground Shaking and Landslide Hazards Map, the project site is not located within an area with
high landslide or liquefaction potential (City of San Luis Obispo 2014). The soils present at the project site currently
support two existing residential units and associated structures and features. Future development would be required to
comply with the CBC and other applicable regulations for building standards. Based on compliance with existing
regulations and Code requirements, impacts would be less than significant.
d) Soils with high shrink/swell potential are predominantly comprised of clay and clay materials. The project site is
underlain by soils that contain clay and clay materials; therefore, the soils have a low to moderate shrink/swell potential.
The volume changes that soils undergo in this cyclical pattern can stress and damage slabs and foundations. Typical
precautionary measures would likely include premoistening the underlying soil in conjunction with placement of non-
expansive material beneath slabs, and a deepened and more heavily reinforced foundation. In addition, future
development facilitated by implementation of this project would be required to be designed in compliance with standard
seismic design criteria established in the CBC to reduce risk associated with ground failure, including from expansive
soils. Therefore, based on compliance with existing regulations, impacts related to expansive soils would be less than
significant.
e) The project would utilize an existing sewage connection and would also include a new connection to the City sewer
system. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater treatment systems are proposed onsite. Therefore, no impacts would
occur.
f) The project site is underlain late Mesozonic sandstones and shales, early to mid-Cenozonic siltstones, igneous and
intrusive rock, and quaternary alluvium (CCARC 2020). There are no known paleontological resources on the project
site and there are no unique geologic features on the property. For subdivision improvements, 4.27 acres of grading and
excavation activity are proposed (i.e., road improvements and utility trenching), and future residential foundations will
likely remove expansive soils to comply with the CBC. Based on the low sensitivity of the underlying geologic unit, the
lack of proposed activities that would result in significant cuts into bedrock, and the surrounding developed areas, the
project would not have the potential to result in impacts to a unique paleontological resource or unique geologic feature,
and potential impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measure BIO-9.
Conclusion
Based on the location of the project site and underlying geologic and soil properties, and compliance with existing regulations,
potential impacts would be less than significant. Parcel improvements have the potential to result in erosion and sedimentation
Page 280 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 39 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
that could runoff into nearby water resources. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-9 and compliance with existing
regulations would reduce construction impacts related to erosion and impacts to Geology and Soils would be less than significant.
8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly,
that may have a significant impact on the environment?
11, 12,
22, 55 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted
for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
11, 12,
22, 55 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
GHGs are any gases that absorb infrared radiation in the atmosphere, and are different from the criteria pollutants discussed in
Section 3, Air Quality, above. The primary GHGs that are emitted into the atmosphere as a result of human activities are carbon
dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and fluorinated gases. In 2012, the City established a Climate Action Plan
that identified measures and implementation strategies in order to achieve the City’s GHG reduction target of 1990 emission
levels by 2020. The City’s Climate Action Plan was recently updated and outlines a plan for achieving carbon neutrality by 2035.
The City’s 2016 Community Wide GHG emissions inventory showed that 63% of the city’s GHG emissions came from
transportation, 13% came from commercial and industrial uses, 11% came from residential uses, and 13% from waste.
Statewide legislation, rules, and regulations have been adopted to reduce GHG emissions from significant sources. Senate Bill
(SB) 32 and Executive Order (EO) S-3-05 extended the state’s GHG reduction goals and required the CARB to regulate sources
of GHGs to meet a state goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, 40% below 1990 levels by 2030, and 80%
below 1990 levels by 2050. Other statewide policies adopted to reduce GHG emissions include AB 32, SB 375, and SB 97, as
well as the Clean Car Standards, Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Renewable Portfolio Standard, CBC, and California Solar Initiative.
The City recently updated its Climate Action Plan. The plan establishes a community-wide goal of carbon neutrality by 2035,
adopts sector specific goals, and provides foundational actions to establish a trajectory towards achieving those goals. Appendix
C of the Climate Action Plan Update includes thresholds and guidance for the preparation of GHG emissions analysis under
CEQA for projects within the City. To support progress toward the City’s long‐term aspirational carbon neutrality goal, plans
and projects within the City that undergo CEQA review will need to demonstrate consistency with targets in the Climate Action
Plan, a qualified GHG reduction strategy, consistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5. According to the adopted
SLOAPCD guidance, if a project is consistent with a qualified GHG reduction strategy, such as the City’s Climate Action Plan,
the project would not result in a significant impact.
In October 2018, the City Council committed to joining 3CE, an existing community choice energy program that serves the
counties of Santa Cruz, San Benito, and Monterey and provides 100% carbon-free electricity with a rate savings relative to
PG&E. Additionally, the City recently adopted the Clean Energy Choice Program for New Buildings, which encourages clean,
efficient, and cost effective all-electric new buildings through incentives and local amendments to the California Energy Code.
When paired with cost comparable modern electric appliances and carbon-free electricity from 3CE, all-electric new buildings
are operationally GHG emissions free, are cost effective, and help achieve the community’s climate action goals.
a, b) Construction-related activities that would generate GHG emissions include worker trips and hauling trips to and from
the project site, as well as off-road construction equipment (e.g., dozers, loaders, excavators). Construction activity also
requires 4.27 acres of ground disturbance that has the potential to generate ROG and NOx, which are ozone precursors.
Impacts related to GHG emissions occur on a global scale and are, therefore, cumulative in nature. Short-term
construction-related emissions rarely result in a considerable contribution to GHG emissions. Operational-related
activities that would typically generate GHG emissions include residential trips, solid waste disposal, and energy
consumption.
Page 281 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 40 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
The demographic forecasts and land use assumptions of the Climate Action Plan are based on the City’s LUCE. If a
plan or project is consistent with the existing 2014 General Plan land use and zoning designations of the project site,
then the project would be considered consistent with the demographic forecasts and the land uses assumptions of the
Climate Action Plan. The project would be consistent with the land use and zoning designation for the existing parcel;
therefore, the project is expected to be consistent with the demographic and land use assumptions used for the
development of the City’s latest Climate Action Plan.
As discussed previously, the City recently adopted the 2020 Climate Action Plan, which identifies six pillars, each of
which include long-term goals, measures, and foundational actions for reducing GHG emissions throughout the city.
The pillars include:
1. Leading by Example: Create a Municipal Action Plan by 2020 and achieve carbon-neutral government
operations by 2030.
2. Clean Energy Systems: Achieve 100% carbon-free electricity by 2020.
3. Green Buildings: Generate no net new building emissions from on‐site energy use by 2020 and achieve a 50%
reduction in existing building on‐site emissions (after accounting for 3CE) by 2030.
4. Connected Community: Achieve the General Plan mode split objective by 2030 and have 40% VMT by electric
vehicles by 2030.
5. Circular Economy: Achieve 75% diversion of landfilled organic waste by 2025 and 90% by 2035.
6. Natural Solutions: Increase carbon sequestration on the San Luis Obispo Greenbelt and Urban Forest through
compost application-based carbon farming activities and tree planting to be ongoing through 2035.
Projects that are consistent with the demographic forecasts and land use assumptions used in the Climate Action Plan
can utilize the City’s CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist to demonstrate consistency with the
Climate Action Plan’s GHG emissions reduction strategy. The proposed project does not propose any new buildings
that would be applicable to green building and other energy efficiency standards. Parcel improvements would result in
23 new lots, a new interior connection road, and new utility infrastructure and easements. One of the utility easements
would be 17 feet wide and would also be used as bicycle and pedestrian access to and from the site. The proposed
project has the potential to developed single-family residential uses, with ADUs and JADUs as potential accessory uses,
that would be subject to energy efficiency standards and could increase population and VMT to the project area. The
project site is located 0.2 mile north from two bus stops, and additional bus stops are located on Foothill Boulevard
approximately 0.5 mile south that would facilitate future residential transit use. In addition, the project is within close
walking or biking distance to nearby retail and services, including grocery stores, restaurants, and medical services
located approximately 0.56 mile away, which is consistent with the updated Climate Action Plan. Based on the City’s
Residential VMT Screening Map, the project is located in an area of the City that would result in average VMT less
than or equal to 85% of the regional average, meaning a project in this area would result in reduced VMT. Specific
development plans are currently unknown; however, future residential development would likely utilize GHG-free
energy through participation in 3CE and with compliance with the City’s Clean Energy Choice Program for New
Buildings. New development would also be required to comply with applicable green building standards identified in
the updated Climate Action Plan. The project would maintain, where feasible, onsite trees and vegetation and would
plant native vegetation at the project site. Based on design elements of the proposed project, the project would be
consistent with the goals in the updated Climate Action Plan; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Conclusion
The project would be located and designed to minimize GHG emissions and would not result in a conflict with an applicable
plan or policy adopted for reducing GHG emissions. The project would be consistent with the City’s Climate Action Plan, a
qualified GHG reduction strategy. No potentially significant impacts associated with GHG emissions have been identified, and
no mitigation measures are necessary.
Page 282 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 41 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
1, 2
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
1, 2
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
1, 2, 3 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment?
30, 31,
32 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety
hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the
project area?
2, 3,
42, 43 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
25 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a
significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?
1, 2,
23, 25 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The Hazardous Waste and Substances Site (Cortese) List is a planning tool used by the State, local agencies, and developers to
comply with CEQA requirements related to the disclosure of information about the location of hazardous materials release sites.
California Government Code Section 65962.5 requires the California EPA (CalEPA) to develop at least annually an updated
Cortese List. Various State and local government agencies are required to track and document hazardous material release
information for the Cortese List. The California Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) EnviroStor database tracks
DTSC cleanup, permitting, enforcement, and investigation efforts at hazardous waste facilities and sites with known
contamination, such as federal superfund sites, State response sites, voluntary cleanup sites, school cleanup sites, school
investigation sites, and military evaluation sites. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) GeoTracker database
contains records for sites that impact, or have the potential to impact, water in California, such as Leaking Underground Storage
Tank (LUST) sites, Department of Defense sites, and Cleanup Program Sites. The remaining data regarding facilities or sites
that meet the Cortese List requirements are included on the CalEPA website: https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/.
The project does not propose the long-term transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Short-term
construction materials may be transported during development of the proposed improvements to the property and during
future development of one- and two-story single-family residences. Hazardous materials would be properly handled to
according to federal and State regulations, including response and clean-up requirements for any minor spills. Therefore,
potential impacts would be less than significant.
The long-term use of the project would be residential units that would not use hazardous materials other than commonly
used household substances within the project site (e.g., cleaners, solvents, oils, paints, etc.). Construction of the
Page 283 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 42 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
proposed project is anticipated to require use of limited quantities of hazardous substances, including gasoline, diesel
fuel, hydraulic fluid, solvents, oils, paints, etc. Construction contractors would be required to comply with applicable
federal and State environmental and workplace safety laws for the handling of hazardous materials, including response
and clean-up requirements for any minor spills. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
The project site is located approximately 0.47 mile east of Bishop Peak Elementary School. California Polytechnic State
University, San Luis Obispo (Cal Poly), is located approximately 500 feet east, across Highway 1. While the project
would be located within 0.25 mile of Cal Poly, the eastern portion of the school property that is closest to the project
site is developed with experimental agricultural crops. The project site is approximately 0.63 mile from the nearest
educational instruction buildings, and approximately 1.0 mile from the onsite residential dormitory areas. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
According to the CalEPA Cortese List resources, including the DTSC EnviroStor and SWRCB GeoTracker databases,
there are no hazardous materials sites on or within 1,000 feet of the project site. Based on the local nature and the
existing and historic traffic levels on Stanford Drive, Cuesta Drive, and Westmont Drive, the potential for these
roadways to contain hazardous levels of aerially deposited lead (ADL) is negligible. No known mining activities have
occurred within or near the project site and no known use of organochlorinated pesticides have occurred. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
The nearest airport is the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport, located approximately 4.5 miles south of the project
site. The project is not located within the boundaries of the airport land use plan and project development would not
adversely impact airport operations. Similarly, airport operations would not result in a substantial safety hazard.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
The City has identified goals regarding emergency response plans in its Safety Element. The proposed site
improvements for future development include the creation of fire safety measures, including an emergency access
easement and improved access roads. Project development has the potential to create temporary traffic controls to
residential streets but would not result in street closures that would block emergency access. Future development would
be designed to comply with building and fire code regulations, as well as City requirements for fire safety; therefore,
potential impacts would be less than significant.
According to the City’s Wildland Fire Hazards Map, the project is located within a low wildland fire severity zone and
surrounding land is located within a moderate wildland fire severity zone. The nearest fire station is San Luis Obispo
City Fire Station #2, located approximately 0.56 mile south of the project site on Chorro Street. Emergency response
times for the project site are less than 5 minutes. The project would consist of infill development within an existing
neighborhood and would not substantially increase wildfire risks. The project proposes the development of
improvements for fire hazard safety that include an emergency access easement, upgraded roads, necessary water
connections, removal of non-native vegetation and ornamental and native trees, and other measures identified in
Mitigation Measures WF-1 and WF-2, included in Section 20, Wildfire. The future development of residential
structures would follow CBC and other design regulations for fire hazards. Therefore, people and/or structures would
not be exposed to significant risk and the impact would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measures WF-1 and WF-2.
Conclusion
The project would not result in the routine transportation or storage of hazardous materials. The project is not located on a known
hazardous waste site and is not within close proximity to a school or airport. Potential impacts related to hazards, including
emergency access and wildfire, would be less than significant.
Page 284 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 43 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or
ground water quality?
34, 35,
41, 65 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project
may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
37, 38,
39 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream
or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a
manner which would:
i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site; 1, 41 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-
or offsite;
1, 36,
41, 65 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed
the capacity of existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff; or
1, 35,
65 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows? 36 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of
pollutants due to project inundation?
1, 25,
36, 40 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
37, 38,
39, 41 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
As discussed in the City’s 2014 LUCE Update EIR, the project site is located within the San Luis Obispo Creek Hydrologic
Subarea of the Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit, an area that corresponds to the coastal draining watersheds west of the Coastal
Range. The Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit stretches roughly 80 miles between the Santa Maria River and the Monterey County
line and includes numerous individual stream systems. Within the Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit, the San Luis Obispo Creek
watershed drains approximately 84 square miles.
The city of San Luis Obispo is generally located within a low-lying valley centered on San Luis Obispo Creek. San Luis Obispo
Creek is one of four major drainage features that create flood hazards in the city, with the others b eing Stenner, Prefumo, and
Old Garden Creeks. In addition, many minor waterways drain into these creeks, which can also present flood hazards. Because
of the high surrounding hills and mountains in the area, the drainage sheds of these creeks are relatively small, but the steep
slopes and high gradient can lead to intense, fast-moving flood events in the city. There is an unnamed creek (identified as Twin
Ridge Creek) with associated freshwater forested/shrub wetland and riparian areas located in the western portion of the project
area.
The City is enrolled in the State General Permit National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program
governing stormwater. As part of this enrollment, the City is required to implement the Central Coast RWQCB’s adopted Post-
Construction Stormwater Management requirements through the development review process. The primary objective of these
PCRs is to ensure that the permittee is reducing pollutant discharges to the maximum extent practicable and preventing
Page 285 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 44 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
stormwater discharges from causing or contributing to a violation of receiving water quality standards in all applicable
development projects that require approvals and/or permits.
The 100-year flood zone identifies areas that would be subject to inundation in a 100-year storm event, or a storm with a 1%
chance of occurring in any given year. Based on the City’s interactive Parcel Viewer and Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) map (06079C1066G, effective 11/16/2012), the project site is located within
an area of minimal flooding and the onsite creek is not a 100-year flood zone hazard.
There is an unnamed creek (identified as Twin Ridge Creek) with associated freshwater forested/shrub wetland and
riparian areas located in the western portion of the project area.
Project improvements propose a 20-foot setback from the riparian edge of the existing vegetation that would reduce
impacts during future development and operation. Proposed project construction requires 4.27 acres of ground
disturbance including 7,900 cy of cut and 4,760 cy of fill, which has the potential to release erosive runoff into the creek
and associated wetland areas that may cause adverse effects to water quality. Parcel improvements require the use of
construction vehicles and equipment that could lead to inadvertent polluted runoff through vehicle leakage or spill. The
project proposes to disturb more than 1 acre of soil and would require the development and implementation of a SWPPP
with BMPs to avoid or reduce erosive or polluted runoff from entering the onsite creek and associated wetland area.
Section 4, Biological Resources, identifies Mitigation Measure BIO-9, which outlines BMPs that would reduce
construction impacts related to polluted or erosive runoff. Project development would be required to comply with the
Central Coast RWQCB requirements set forth in the Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for
Development Projects in the Central Coast Region.
Future development as a result of the subdivision would include single-family residential uses, with ADUs and JADUs
as potential accessory uses, potential removal of existing trees, and connections to the proposed utility lines. Grading
activity for future development is proposed for current parcel improvements; therefore, it is unlikely that future
development would require more than 1 acre of groundwork and would not likely need to develop and implement a
SWPPP. However, future development would be required to comply with the Central Coast RWQCB PCRs, and
physical improvement of the project site would be required to comply with the drainage requirements of the City’s
Waterways Management Plan. This plan was adopted for the purpose of ensuring water quality and proper drainage
within the City’s watershed. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-9 during parcel improvements
and compliance with existing regulations, impacts related to violation of water quality standards would be less than
significant with mitigation.
San Luis Obispo is located within the San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin. The Sustainable Groundwater
Management Act (SGMA) requires that high- and medium-priority basins comply with the provisions of the SGMA.
The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) designated the San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin as
a high-priority basin, and the City has developed a Groundwater Sustainability Plan to comply with SGMA regulations.
The COSE states the urban water planning and usage will use the “most efficient available practices” for water
conservation. The “most efficient available practices” refer to behavior and devices that use the least water for a desired
outcome, considering available equipment, lifecycle costs, social and environmental side effects, and the regulations of
other agencies.
Construction of the proposed project and future residential development would result in new development on
previously undeveloped land and would result in an increase of impervious surfaces. Physical improvement of the
project site would be required to comply with the drainage requirements of the City’s Waterways Management Plan.
This plan was adopted for the purpose of ensuring water quality and proper drainage within the City’s watershed.
The Waterways Management Plan and Low Impact Development (LID) stormwater treatment requires that site
development be designed so that post-development site drainage does not significantly exceed pre-development run-
off. In order to comply with these standards, the project proposes four drainage measures throughout the project
site, which include an 85th percentile retention area, a 95th percentile retention area, and Filterra and Biofiltration
treatment. The proposed drainage measures would be implemented to catch additional surface runoff generated
from the project during operation. The project is also required to comply with Post-Construction Stormwater
Management Requirements, including requirements for site design, water quality treatment, runoff retention, and
peak discharge management. These requirements include, and are not limited to, minimizing impervious surfaces,
collecting stormwater runoff to reduce pollutant discharge, and maintaining the pre-developed hydrology by
Page 286 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 45 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
reducing overland flow and promoting groundwater recharge. Therefore, based on compliance with existing
regulations, implementation of the project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of
the basin.
Based on the 2020 Water Resources Status Report, the City utilizes multiple water sources to meet its water supply
needs. The four primary water sources for the City includes Whale Rock Reservoir, Salinas Reservoir, Nacimiento
Reservoir, and recycled water; groundwater acts as the City’s fifth supplemental source. The total water available for
the City in 2019 was 10,107 acre-feet per year (AFY). As this availability was adjusted following years of drought and
updates to the City’s safe annual yield model, the availability is considered a reasonable long-term safe yield value for
the purposes of this analysis. The 2020 Water Year (October 1, 2019 to September 30, 2020) had a total water demand
of 4,762 AF with 0% of water being supplied by groundwater resources. Compared against the City’s 2019 annual
availability, the City has approximately 5,374 AF of water surplus available to allocate to new beneficial uses within
the city.
The project would be required to pay development impact fees to offset the project’s marginal impact on the City’s
water resources. Future residential development will be conditioned to comply with City standards, and potential
impacts would be less than significant.
c.i) Project construction requires 4.27 acres of grading activity, which includes 7,900 cy of cut and 4,760 cy of fill. The
project does not propose alteration of the onsite creek; however, the BRA identified that several areas of grading are
proposed within the creek setback and a rip rap pad at the stormwater retention area is planned adjacent to or within the
creek setback area. Additionally, 13 non-native trees would be removed from the riparian corridor. The project proposes
a 20-foot setback from the creek during proposed improvements. However, due to the amount of ground disturbance
proposed for parcel improvements, there is potential for construction activity and permanent impervious surfaces
associated with future development to temporarily alter onsite drainage patterns and disturb the creek channel, which
could increase runoff on- or offsite. The project would be required to prepare and implement a SWPPP with BMPs
designed to reduce erosive runoff to surface and other water resources in the area. Mitigation Measure BIO-9 identifies
BMPs that would reduce erosive runoff during project construction. These BMPs include, and are not limited to,
avoiding construction during the rainy season if feasible, preparation of a Sediment and Erosion Control Plan that
would be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer, identification of construction staging areas (in locations that
would not drain into the creek), and application of measures that are typically applied and approved by the City and
resource agencies including the RWQCB and CDFW to protect water quality including silt fencing, erosion control
blankets, straw bales, sandbags, fiber rolls, and/or other types of materials. Mitigation Measure BIO-10 requires that
the applicant comply with existing RWQCB and CDFW regulations, permits, and authorization requirements, and
has been clarified to require a biological monitor during construction activities and work within and adjacent to the
riparian corridor regardless of whether regulatory permits are required, and the on-site monitor would ensure
compliance with all local and state water quality regulations. Verification of the BMPs and Erosion and
Sedimentation Control Plan and compliance with water quality regulations would occur during review of these
standard plans by City and regulatory agency professionals and experts, and during installation of creek protection
measures and any work within and adjacent to the creek by a biological monitor. The project would also be required
to comply with Central Coast RWQCB requirements set forth in the Post-Construction Stormwater Management
Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region.
The 20-foot setback established during parcel improvements would ensure that future development would not require
work within the onsite stream or associated wetland area. Grading activity for future development is proposed for current
parcel improvements; therefore, it is unlikely that future projects would require more than 1 acre of groundwork;
therefore, future development is not likely to substantially alter any existing drainage patterns that would lead to on- or
offsite erosion. Because future development is not anticipated to disturb more than 1 acre of soils, the preparation and
implementation of a SWPPP is not necessary. However, future development would be required to comply with the
Central Coast RWQCB PCRs, and physical improvement of the project site would be required to comply with the
drainage requirements of the City’s Waterways Management Plan. This plan was adopted for the purpose of ensuring
water quality and proper drainage within the City’s watershed. With implementation of BIO-9 and compliance with
existing regulations, impacts related to erosion and siltation on- or offsite would be less than significant with mitigation.
Page 287 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 46 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
c.ii–iv) As described in the evaluation above, the project site is not located within a flood zone. However, the proposed parcel
improvements and future development would result in new impervious surface areas that could increase surface water
runoff. Proposed parcel improvements would create a new interior road that loops from Stanford Drive to Cuesta Drive
ranging from 54 to 60 feet in width, a 17-foot-wide AC bicycle/pedestrian pathway that would also be used as a utility
and drainage easement across Lot 15, and other proposed access and easements. Future development plans are currently
unknown; however, it is anticipated that single-family residential uses, with ADUs and JADUs as potential accessory
uses, could be developed as a result of the subdivision, which would create more impervious surface areas.
Construction of the proposed project and future residential development would result in new development on previously
undeveloped land and would result in an increase of impervious surfaces that would cause the timing and amount of
surface water runoff to increase. Physical improvement of the project site would be required to comply with the drainage
requirements of the City’s Waterways Management Plan, which includes the Drainage Design Manual. This plan was
adopted for the purpose of ensuring water quality and proper drainage within the City’s watershed. The Waterways
Management Plan and Low Impact Development (LID) stormwater treatment requires that site development be designed
so that post-development site drainage does not significantly exceed pre-development run-off. The Drainage Design
Manual states that “runoff shall be managed to prevent any significant increase in downstream peak flows, including
2-year, 10-year, 50-year, and 100-year events. Significant generally means an increase of over 5 percent at and
immediately downstream of the project site, but must be determined on a site-specific basis” (DDM 3.3). In order to
comply with these standards, the project proposes four drainage measures throughout the project site, which include an
85th percentile retention area, a 95th percentile retention area, and Filterra and Biofiltration treatment. The proposed
drainage measures would be implemented to catch additional surface runoff generated from the project during operation.
The proposed approach to peak flow management for this project at Twin Ridge Creek involves collecting a portion
of the runoff from the proposed development, detaining that flow in a detention facility, and then introducing it to
Twin Ridge Creek resulting in an overall reduction in peak flow for the system. At Cuesta, the runoff is collected
and detained in an underground detention facility and then released onto the proposed site at Cuesta Drive. The
proposed drainage at Stanford was designed so that the runoff would match existing drainage conditions (Cannon
2020). In addition, the project would be required to comply with the City’s engineering standards, water pollution
control plan requirements, Post-Construction Stormwater Requirements, and adopted building and grading codes for
water quantity/quality analysis. Compliance with these requirements would ensure operational impacts are less than
significant and implementation of BIO-9 would reduce construction-related impacts to potential erosive runoff from
alteration of drainage patterns; therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
d) The proposed project site is not located within a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zone; therefore, the release of pollutants
due to project inundation is not anticipated, and no impacts would occur.
e) The City’s COSE identifies goals and policies for the City’s water needs, including planning and water quality
management. The proposed project and any future development would be conditioned to comply with the COSE water
quality and groundwater management standards (Section 10). As discussed above, parcel improvements and future
development would be compliant with the Central Coast RWQCB PCRs, the City’s Waterways Management Plan and
LID design requirements, and other applicable water quality policies and regulations. The project would be required to
pay development impact fees to offset the project’s marginal impact on the City’s water resources. Future residential
development will be conditioned to comply with City standards, and potential impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measure BIO-9.
Conclusion
The proposed project would be subject to City requirements regarding water quality and stormwater runoff. Future residential
structures would be required to comply with the water quality and conservation standards stated in the COSE. The project is not
located within a 100-year flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zone. Therefore, project impacts on hydrology and water quality would
be less than significant.
Page 288 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 47 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
11. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established community? 42 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
a) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with
any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose
of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
5, 42 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Evaluation
The project is zoned as R-1 (Low Density Residential) and located in the northern portion of the city. The surrounding land uses
include one- and two-story single-family residential units to the south, east and west, undeveloped residential land to the north,
and CAL FIRE Station #12 to the east.
The proposed project is an infill project and would not have the potential to divide an established community on adjacent
parcels or in the vicinity of the project site. The project is designed to be consistent with existing and developing/planned
surrounding commercial infill development and would not physically divide an established community. Impacts would
be less than significant.
The project site is located within the city of San Luis Obispo and is subject to the City of San Luis Obispo General Plan.
The project is zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential), and future residential development would be consistent with the
zoning and required to follow design regulations for the zoning requirement (City Ordinances 17.16 and 17.70). Future
development would be consistent with the COSE and other applicable regulations. Mitigation measures identified
throughout this Initial Study would reduce environmental impacts that could conflict with existing regulations and
ensure that future development would be consistent with applicable land use standards and regulations. Therefore,
project impacts would be less that significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
Implement mitigation measures identified in other sections of this Initial Study.
Conclusion
The proposed project would not divide an established community and identified mitigation measures would ensure future
development is consistent with applicable land use plans. Therefore, no mitigation is necessary, and impacts to land use and
planning would be less than significant.
12. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource
that would be of value to the region and the residents of the
state?
5 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan,
specific plan or other land use plan?
5 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Page 289 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 48 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Evaluation
Mineral extraction is prohibited within city limits according to the COSE.
a, b) No known mineral resources are present within the project site and future extraction of mineral resources is very unlikely
due to the urbanized nature of the area and current restrictions on resource extraction within city limits; therefore, no
impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Conclusion
According to the COSE, mineral extraction is prohibited within city limits. The project site is located within the city, and there
would be no impact on mineral resources.
13. NOISE
Would the project result in:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
8, 43,
44, 45 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels? 45 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip
or an airport land use plan, or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
3 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
As analyzed in the City’s 2014 LUCE Update EIR, a number of noise-sensitive land uses are present within the city, including
various types of residential development, schools, hospitals and care facilities, parks and recreation areas, hotels and tran sient
lodging, and places of worship and libraries. Based on ambient noise level measurements throughout the city, major sources of
noise include traffic noise on major roadways, passing trains, and aircraft overflights.
Per City Municipal Code Chapter 9.12, Noise Control, operating tools or equipment used in construction on weekdays between
7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. or any time on Sundays or holidays is prohibited, except for emergency works of public service utilities
or by exception issued by the City Community Development Department. The City Municipal Code also states that construction
activities shall be conducted in such a manner, where technically and economically feasible, that the maximum noise levels at
affected properties will not exceed 75 A-weighted decibels (dBA) at single-family residences, 80 dBA at multi-family residences,
and 85 dBA at mixed residential/commercial uses. Based on the City Municipal Code (9.12.050.B.7), operating any device that
creates vibration that is above the vibration perception threshold of an individual at or beyond 150 feet from the source if on a
public space or right-of-way is prohibited.
Typical noise levels produced by equipment commonly used for demolition and construction projects are shown in Table 3.
Page 290 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 49 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Table 3. Construction Equipment Noise Emission Levels
Equipment Type Typical Noise Level (dBA)
50 feet From Source
Backhoe 80
Compactor 80
Concrete Mixer 85
Concrete Pump 82
Dozer 85
Excavator 85
Heavy Truck 84
Paver 85
Scraper 85
The nearest noise sensitive receptors to the project site include existing single-family residential units located adjacent to the site
on the south, west, and east.
Project construction has the potential to increase short-term noise in the surrounding area. Project construction includes
demolition of two existing residential structures onsite, excavation and grading activity, development of a new
connection road, and installation of utility infrastructure and easements. Parcel improvements would be required to
adhere to City Municipal Code Section 22.10.120.A.4, which limits the hours and days of construction equipment use
and seeks to limit construction noise to 85 dBA. Project construction would be conducted in close proximity to
surrounding residential units. The nearest residential unit is located approximately 10 feet from the eastern property
line. In addition, there are residential units to the west and south located within 10 to 15 feet from the property. Due to
the close proximity of nearby residential uses, the proposed demolition and construction project activities have the
potential to periodically exceed the City’s Municipal Code standard for conducting construction activities in such a
manner that prevents noise levels above 75 dBa from reaching residential uses, when technically and economically
feasible. Mitigation Measures N-1 and N-2 have been identified to reduce the potential for exceedances to occur and
minimize potential temporary construction noise impacts to surrounding residential uses.
Upon completion of construction activities, the project would not include any significant stationary noise sources and
would not result in a substantial increase in vehicle noise that would result in an increase to the ambient noise
environment. However, construction activity for future developments would create short-term noise and would be
required to adhere to City Municipal Code Section 22.10.120.A.4 and other applicable regulations. In addition, future
development would be required to implement Mitigation Measures N-1 and N-2 to mitigate noise from development
activities near existing residential units. Operation of the project would be generally consistent with surrounding existing
uses in the project vicinity and would not result in substantial changes to the existing noise environment. Therefore,
upon implementation of Mitigation Measures N-1 and N-2, potential impacts associated with generation of a substantial
temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established
would be less than significant with mitigation.
The project does not propose pile driving or other high impact activities that would generate substantial groundborne
noise or groundborne vibration during construction. Use of heavy equipment for excavation and other ground
disturbance activity would generate groundborne noise and vibration, but these activities would be limited in duration
and consistent with other standard construction activities and would likely not be substantial enough to be detected by
occupants of surrounding land uses. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
The project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan; therefore, no impact
would occur.
Mitigation Measures
Page 291 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 50 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
N-1 For the entire duration of the construction phase of the project, the following BMPs shall be adhered to:
1. Stationary construction equipment that generates noise that exceeds 60 dBA at the project boundaries shall
be shielded with the most modern noise control devises (i.e., mufflers, lagging, and/or motor enclosures).
2. Impact tools (e.g., jack hammers, pavement breakers, rock drills, etc.) used for project construction shall
be hydraulically or electrically powered wherever possible to avoid noise associated with compressed-air
exhaust from pneumatically powered tools.
3. Where use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the compressed air exhaust shall be
used.
4. All construction equipment shall have the manufacturers’ recommended noise abatement methods
installed, such as mufflers, engine enclosures, and engine vibration insulators, intact and operational.
5. All construction equipment shall undergo inspection at periodic intervals to ensure proper maintenance
and presence of noise control devices (e.g., mufflers, shrouding, etc.).
N-2 Construction plans shall note construction hours, truck routes, and all construction noise BMPs, and shall be
reviewed and approved by the City Community Development Department prior to issuance of grading/building
permits. The City shall provide and post signs stating these restrictions at construction entry sites prior to
commencement of construction and maintained throughout the construction phase of the project. All construction
workers shall be briefed at a preconstruction meeting on construction hour limitations and how, why, and where
BMP measures are to be implemented.
Conclusion
The project has the potential to periodically exceed City Municipal Code construction and operational noise standards for single-
family residential uses. With implementation of Mitigation Measures N-1 and N-2, potential impacts associated with temporary
exceedances of local established standards would be less than significant. No other potentially significant impacts associated
with noise were identified, and no additional mitigation measures are necessary.
14. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
46 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The city of San Luis Obispo is the largest city in terms of population in San Luis Obispo County and has grown from 45,119 in
2010 to approximately 48,826 in 2020, according to the City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Annual Report 2020 The City’s
housing tenure is approximately 39% owner-occupied and 61% renter-occupied, which is strongly influenced by California
Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo (Cal Poly) and Cuesta College enrollment. Many segments of the city’s population
have difficulty finding affordable housing within the city due to their economic, physical, or sociological circumstances. San
Luis Obispo contains the largest concentration of jobs in the county and, during workdays, the city’s population increases to an
estimated 70,000 persons.
Page 292 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 51 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Housing Element identifies various goals, policies, and programs based on an
assessment of the housing needs, opportunities, and constraints. The City’s overarching goals for housing include ensuring safety
and affordability, conserving existing housing, accommodating for mixed-income neighborhoods, providing housing variety and
tenure, planning for new housing, maintaining neighborhood quality, providing special needs housing, encouraging sustainable
housing and neighborhood design, maximizing affordable housing opportunities for those who live or work in the city, and
developing housing on suitable sites. The project site is zoned as R-1 (Low Density Residential).
The project proposes a subdivision of one existing parcel into 23 different parcels, which would have the potential to
support single-family residential uses, with ADUs and JADUs as potential accessory uses. Current proposed parcel
improvements would not create structures that would cause population growth. The proposed construction is consistent
with the General Plan, would improve the City’s jobs-housing balance, and would not create substantial unplanned
population growth. Therefore, impacts to significant population growth would be considered less than significant.
The project proposes demolition of the two existing residential units onsite. However, implementation of the project
would create 23 new parcels that will be developed with single-family residential uses, with ADUs and JADUs as
potential accessory uses. Therefore impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Conclusion
The proposed parcel improvements and future development would not substantially increase population growth in the area, nor
would it displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing. Future residential development would be consistent with
the R-1 zone and the City’s General Plan, and potential impacts to population and housing would be less than significant.
15. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection? 1, 2,
47, 48 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Police protection? 1, 2,
47, 48 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Schools? 1, 2,
47, 48 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Parks? 1, 2,
47, 48,
49
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Other public facilities? 1, 2,
47, 48 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
Page 293 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 52 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
The project is located in the western portion of the city, 1.5 miles from the city’s downtown. The City of San Luis Obispo Fire
Department (SLOFD) provides emergency response services for the city, including fire and medical, and is comprised of 57 full-
time employees. The SLOFD operates out of four fire stations in the city, with the nearest station to the project located at City
Fire Station #2, 126 North Chorro Street, near the intersection with Foothill Boulevard. The City of San Luis Obispo Police
Department (SLOPD) provides public safety services for the city and is comprised of 85.5 employees, 59 of which are sworn
police officers. The SLOPD operates out of one main police station, which is located at 1042 Walnut Street at the intersection of
Santa Rosa Street (Highway 1) and US 101. The project site is located within the San Luis Coastal Unified School District
(SLCUSD) and public parks and recreation trails within the city are managed and maintained by the City Department of Parks
and Recreation.
All new residential and nonresidential development within the city is subject to payment of development impact fees, which are
administered by and paid through the City Community Development Department. Development impact fees provide funding for
maintaining city emergency services, infrastructure, and facilities. For example, fire protection impact fees provide funding for
projects such as the renovation of the City’s fire stations and the replacement of fire service vehicles and equipment.
Fire protection: The project is located within a low fire severity zone and is under local fire jurisdiction. Fire response
times to the project site are less than 5 minutes and the nearest fire station is City Fire Station #2, located 0.56 mile
away. The project would result in single-family residential uses, with ADUs and JADUs as potential accessory uses and
would not lead to a substantial increase in population in the city. Implementation of the project would not result in the
need for construction of new or expanded fire protection facilities. In addition, the project would be subject to
development fees for fire protection, which would offset the emergency access, upgraded roads, and necessary utility
connections; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
Police protection: The SLOPD is located 1.4 miles southeast of the project site on Walnut Street. The project proposes
uses generally consistent with the surrounding area, and the proposed level of development would be similar to
surrounding residential development. The project proposes residential infill development and would not result in a
substantial increase in demand on police protection services. The project would result in a slight increase in residents
within the city and would be consistent with the projected population growth for the city. The project would not result
in a substantial increase in the number of units or population in the city and would not result in the need for construction
of new or expanded police protection facilities. The project would be required to pay development impact fees
established to address direct demand for new facilities associated with new development. Therefore, the project impacts
on police protection would be less than significant.
Schools: The project site is located within the SLCUSD and would be subject to payment of SLCUSD development
fees to offset the potential increase in student attendance in the district’s schools as a result of the project. These fees
would be directed towards maintaining sufficient service levels, which include incremental increases in school
capacities. The nearest schools are Bishop Peak Elementary School and Pacheco Elementary School, located less than
1 mile southeast and south of the project site, respectively. San Luis Obispo High School is located 2 miles away. Local
schools have the capacity to support additional students that may cumulate from future residential development plans.
Therefore, the project impacts on schools would be less than significant.
Parks: The Patricia Drive entrance to the Bishop Peak Trailhead is located 0.5 mile northwest and Throop Park is
0.4 mile south of the project site. Future development plans for the project site have the potential to facilitate population
growth and slightly increase demand on local parks. The General Plan outlines the importance of public recreation. The
project does not currently propose the development of public parks; however, future population growth induced by
future residential development would be supported by current facilities. The project would be subject to required
developer impact fees (Quimby fees) established to address direct demand for new facilities associated with new
development. Therefore, project impacts on parks would be less than significant.
Other public facilities: The project would not induce substantial population growth and would result in a negligible
effect on use of other public facilities, such as roadways and public libraries. The project would be subject to the City’s
standard development fees, which would offset the project’s marginal contribution to increased use of City facilities.
Therefore, potential project impacts on public facilities would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Page 294 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 53 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
No mitigation is required.
Conclusion
The project site has the potential to induce future population growth of a maximum of 23 residential lots, which would be
developed with residential units, consistent with the General Plan. There would not be substantial population growth and City
development fees would offset the increased demand on any necessary public services. Therefore, project impacts on public
services would be less than significant.
16. RECREATION
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or
be accelerated?
48, 49 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might
have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
48, 49 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
Existing City recreational facilities consist of 28 parks and recreational facilities, 10 designated natural resources and open space
areas, and two bike trails. The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Parks and Recreation Element identifies goals, policies,
and programs to help plan, develop, and maintain community parks and recreation facilities. The City’s statement of overall
department goals is for the City Parks and Recreation facilities and programs to enable all citizens to participate in fun, healthful,
or enriching activities that enhance the quality of life in the community.
As demand for recreation facilities and activities grow and change, the City intends to focus its efforts in the following ar eas:
continuing development of athletic fields and support facilities, providing parks in underserved neighborhoods, providing a
multi-use community center and therapy pool, expanding paths and trails for recreational use, linking recreation facilities, and
meeting the special needs of disabled persons, at-risk youth, and senior citizens. Parks and Recreation Element Policy 3.13.1
establishes the City’s goal to develop and maintain a park system at the rate of 10 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, 5 acres
of which shall be dedicated as neighborhood parks.
The Patricia Drive entrance to the Bishop Peak Trailhead is located approximately 0.5 mile northwest and Throop Park
is 0.4 mile south of the project site. Future plans for the project site have the potential to facilitate population growth
and increase demand on local parks. As discussed above, the project would be subject to required development impact
fees established to address direct demand for new facilities associated with new development. Therefore, project impacts
on parks would be less than significant.
The project does not propose the development of recreational facilities, and possible future development includes
residential development on the 23 residential lots, which would not require the construction or expansion of existing
recreational facilities. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Conclusion
Page 295 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 54 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
The project site has the potential to induce future population growth of a maximum 23 residential lots, which would be developed
with residential units, consistent with the General Plan. There would not be substantial population growth and City development
fees would offset the increased demand on any necessary recreational facilities. Therefore, project impacts on recreation would
be less than significant.
17. TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing
the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
1, 15,
21, 50 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section
15064.3, subdivision (b)?
1,
50, 55 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
1, 50 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? 1, 50,
54 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Circulation Element identifies current traffic levels and delays on public roadways,
as well as transportation goals and policies to guide development and express the community’s preferences for current and future
conditions. Goals included in the plan include, but are not limited to, maintaining accessibility and protecting the environment
throughout San Luis Obispo while reducing dependence on single-occupant use of motor vehicles; reducing use of cars by
supporting and promoting alternatives such as walking, riding buses and bicycles, and carpooling; promoting the safe operation
of all modes of transportation; and widening and extending streets only when there is a demonstrated need and when the projects
would cause no significant, long-term environmental problems.
Level of Service (LOS) is a term used to describe the operating conditions of an intersection or roadway based on factors such
as speed, travel time, queuing time, and safety. LOS designations range between A and F, with A representing the best operating
conditions and F the worst. The Circulation Element establishes the minimum acceptable LOS standard for vehicles in the city
as LOS D (except in downtown areas).
The City of San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan outlines the City’s official policies for the design and development of
infrastructure to support sustainable transportation within the city and in adjoining territory under County of San Luis Obispo
jurisdiction but within the City’s Urban Reserve and includes specific objectives for reducing vehicle use and promoting other
modes.
In 2013 SB 743 was signed into law with the intent to “more appropriately balance the needs of congestion management with
statewide goals related to infill development, promotion of public health through active transportation, and reduction of
greenhouse gas emissions.” SB 743 required the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to identify new metrics for
identifying and mitigating transportation impacts under CEQA. As a result, in December 2018, the California Natural Resources
Agency certified and adopted updates to the State CEQA Guidelines. The revisions included new requirements related to the
implementation of SB 743 and identified VMT per capita, VMT per employee, and net VMT as new metrics for transportation
analysis under CEQA (as detailed in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b)). Beginning July 1, 2020, the newly adopted
VMT criteria for determining significance of transportation impacts must be implemented statewide.
SLO Transit operates transit service within the city of San Luis Obispo and San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority
(SLORTA) operates transit service throughout San Luis Obispo County and adjacent areas. The project site is located off
Page 296 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 55 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Westmont Avenue from the east and Stanford Drive to the southwest. The project site is approximately 0.08 mile west of Santa
Rosa Street between Foothill Boulevard and the northern City limits. The nearest bus stop is located 0.2 mile away at Highland
Drive and Cuesta Drive. Additional bus stops are located 0.5 mile south along Foothill Boulevard.
In June 2020, the City formally adopted the transition from LOS to VMT for the purposes of CEQA evaluation and also
established local VMT thresholds of significance. Potential CEQA impacts are based on the VMT analysis.
The project site is accessed by Westmont Avenue and Stanford Drive, which are residential streets, and vehicular trips
on these streets are generated by residents.
The proposed project would be consistent with the City’s Circulation Element, which establishes goals and policies for
the City’s circulation system, described in the evaluation above. Future development would have access to several
transit stops less than 0.5 mile away. The project proposes a new 17-foot-wide AC bicycle/pedestrian easement to
promote alternative modes of transportation to and from the site. The proposed project is located approximately
0.56 mile north of dining, grocery, and other commercial buildings that could be reached using alternate modes of
transportation. New development would be consistent with goals and policies described in the City’s Circulation
Element and impacts would be less than significant.
The 2018 OPR SB 743 Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA states that absent substantial
evidence indicating that a project would generate a potentially significant level of VMT, or inconsistency with a
Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) or general plan, projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day
generally may be assumed to cause a less-than-significant transportation impact. According to the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, a single-family residential unit generates
9.44 average daily trips (ADT). The project would create 23 new parcels that could result in the development of single-
family residential uses, with an ADUs and JADUs as potential accessory uses. Operation of the project may create more
than 110 trips per day; however, based on the City’s Residential VMT Screening Map, the project is located in an area
of the city that would result in average VMT less than or equal to 85% of the regional average, meaning a project in
this area would result in VMT generation below the City’s adopted thresholds. Therefore, future potential development
of the project is not anticipated to generate VMT at a rate that is inconsistent with adopted plans and impacts would be
less than significant.
The project proposes the improvements that include a new 54- to 60-foot-wide interior road, emergency access, and
various easements, including a bicycle/pedestrian easement. These potential roadway improvements would be designed
and constructed in compliance with City Public Works Department standards to provide adequate vehicle and
emergency vehicle access to all proposed parcels. The project would not substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature or incompatible uses or result in inadequate emergency access. Therefore, project impacts
would be less than significant.
As mentioned above, the project proposes the implementation of emergency vehicle access that would be with City
Public Works Department standards. The emergency access easement is a proposed improvement as part of the parcel
subdivision and would be completed prior to any potential residential development. Therefore, there would be adequate
access for emergency services and project impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Conclusion
Potential future infill development of residential uses at the project site would not result in a reduction in LOS on surrounding
intersections and would be consistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) regarding VMT. Any future development
at the project site would be required to meet City Public Works Department safety design standards and would maintain adequate
emergency access. Therefore, no potentially significant impacts related to transportation would occur, and no mitigation
measures are necessary.
Page 297 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 56 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources
Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, or cultural
landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and
scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to
a California Native American tribe, and that is: Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of
Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources
as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)?
17, 18,
19, 59 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code
Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision
(c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency
shall consider the significance of the resource to a California
Native American tribe.
17, 18,
19, 59 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Evaluation
Approved in 2014, AB 52 added tribal cultural resources to the categories of resources that must be evaluated under CEQA.
Tribal cultural resources are defined as either of the following:
1. Sites, features, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe
that are either of the following:
a. Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the CRHR; or
b. Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of California PRC Section
5020.1.
2. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of California PRC Section 5024.1. In applying these criteria for the
purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native
American Tribe.
Recognizing that tribes have expertise with regard to their tribal history and practices, AB 52 requires lead agencies to provide
notice to tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of a proposed project if they have requested
notice of projects proposed within that area. If the tribe requests consultation within 30 days upon receipt of the notice, the lead
agency must consult with the tribe regarding the potential for adverse impacts on tribal cultural resources as a result of a project.
Consultation may include discussing the type of environmental review necessary, the presence and/or significance of tribal
cultural resources, the level of significance of a project’s impacts on the tribal cultural resources, and available project alternatives
and mitigation measures recommended by the tribe to avoid or lessen potential impacts on tribal cultural resources. The City has
provided notice of the opportunity to consult with appropriate tribes per the requirements of AB 52 and received correspondence
from Patti Dunton, Tribal Administrator of the Salinan Tribe of San Luis Obispo, Monterey, and San Benito Counties. The
correspondence included a request to have all ground disturbing activities for the project monitored by a cultural resource
specialist from their tribe. No other responses from California Native American tribes have been received as of the date of this
document.
a.i, ii.) As discussed in the evaluation above, the City received one response from the Salinan Tribe of San Luis Obispo,
Monterey, and San Benito Counties in accordance with AB 52. The tribe requested that a cultural resource specialist
from their tribe monitor all ground disturbing activities approved with the project. The request for onsite monitoring has
been included as a mitigation measure with the project as TC-1. No additional consultation was requested from the
Salinan Tribe of San Luis Obispo, Monterey, and San Benito Counties beyond this request. There have been no other
responses from Native American tribes in accordance with AB 52 as of the date of this draft. Therefore, impacts
associated with tribal resources would be less than significant with mitigation.
Page 298 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 57 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2 have been identified to address the potential for inadvertent discovery of cultural
resources and require cultural resource awareness training and cessation of work area if a discovery is made until a
qualified archaeologist can assess the significance of the find. Therefore, impacts related to a substantial adverse change
in the significance of tribal cultural resource would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
TC-1 Culturally Affiliated Native American Monitor. A representative from the Salinan Tribe shall be notified prior to
any ground disturbing activities to provide for on-site monitoring. If cultural resources are encountered during subsurface
earthwork activities, all ground disturbing activities within a 25-foot radius of the find shall cease and the City shall be notified
immediately consistent with the requirements of Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2.
Implement Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2.
Conclusion
With implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1,CR-2, and TC-1, impacts to tribal cultural resources would be less than
significant.
19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or
expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage,
electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
1 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
a) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry,
and multiple dry years?
39, 51 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider
which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to
the provider’s existing commitments?
47, 60 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in
excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise
impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
52, 53 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction
statutes and regulations related to solid waste? 52, 53 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The City Utilities Department is the sole water provider within the city, provides potable and recycled water to the community,
and is responsible for water supply, treatment, distribution, and resource planning. The City’s Water Resource Recovery Facility
(WRRF) treats all wastewater from the city, Cal Poly, and the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport, which includes
4.5 million gallons of wastewater per day. The WRRF manages and treats wastewater in accordance with standards established
by the SWRCB to remove solids, reduce the amount of nutrients, and eliminate bacteria in treated wastewater. A portion of the
treated water is recycled for irrigation use within the city and the remaining flow is discharged to San Luis Obispo Creek.
Page 299 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 58 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
The City utilizes San Luis Garbage as a licensed waste hauler for residential and commercial solid waste removal. Solid waste
collected from the city is taken to Cold Canyon Landfill, which is a modern municipal solid waste disposal facility that is
permitted by California Department of Resources, Recycling, and Recovery (CalRecycle) and meets state and local rules and
regulations. The landfill disposes of non-hazardous solid waste.
For water needs, parcel improvements propose connecting to the existing water line on Stanford Drive and looping it
around to Cuesta Drive and a connection from Westmont Avenue will connect to Cuesta Drive through a proposed
17 foot-wide- easement of Lot 15. For sewer needs, parcel improvements propose connecting to the existing sewerline
on Stanford Drive and also proposes an additional line connecting to Cuesta Drive. Lots 17 and 18 would use the
existing sewer main on Westmont Avenue. The project proposes easements throughout the project site for additional
utility connections and relocation of existing ones. Parcel improvements propose PG&E easements for electricity needs.
Proposed drainage easements would occur across Lots 4, 15, and 19–23. Proposed drainage measures for the project
include an 85th percentile retention area, a 95th percentile retention area, and Filterra and Biofiltration treatment system
to capture surface runoff produced during project operation. Future development would require individual connections
to the proposed utility lines.
These new utility components and associated easements would have the potential to result in noise and dust emissions
in proximity to sensitive receptor locations, such as single-family residences. There would also be the potential for
discovery of subsurface cultural resources during proposed utility work. Excavation and other ground-disturbing
activity has the potential to release erosive or pollutant runoff to the onsite creek and associated wetland area. Mitigation
Measures AQ-1 through AQ-5, BIO-1 through BIO-9, CR-1 and CR-2, N-1 and N-2, and TC_1 would reduce
potentially significant environmental impacts resulting from installation and establishment of new utility connections
associated with air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and noise, respectively, to less than significant.
Therefore, potential environmental impacts associated with construction or extension of existing utilities would be less
than significant with mitigation.
The project would be serviced by the City’s water system, which has four primary water sources, including the Whale
Rock Reservoir, Salinas Reservoir, Nacimiento Reservoir, and recycled water (for irrigation), with groundwater serving
as a fifth supplemental source. As of 2015, the City no longer draws groundwater for potable purposes. The project is
not within the City’s Recycled Water Master Plan Area and therefore recycled water is not available for irrigation use.
As of November 2019, both the Salinas and Whale Rock Reservoirs are above 85% storage capacity and Nacimiento
Reservoir is at 45% storage capacity.
San Luis Obispo is located within the San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin. The SGMA requires that high- and
medium-priority basins comply with the new law; the DWR designated the San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin
as a high-priority basin. The City has developed a Groundwater Sustainability Plan to comply with SGMA regulations.
The COSE states the urban water planning and usage will use the “most efficient available practices” for water
conservation. The “most efficient available practices” refer to behavior and devices that use the least water for a desired
outcome, considering available equipment, lifecycle costs, social and environmental side effects, and the regulations of
other agencies.
Based on the 2020 Water Resources Status Report, the City utilizes multiple water sources to meet its water supply
needs. The four primary water sources for the City includes Whale Rock Reservoir, Salinas Reservoir, Nacimiento
Reservoir, and recycled water; groundwater acts as the City’s fifth supplemental source. The total water available for
the City in 2020 was 10,107 AFY. As this availability was adjusted following years of drought and updates to the City’s
safe annual yield model, the availability is considered a reasonable long-term safe yield value for the purposes of this
analysis. The 2020 Water Year (October 1, 2019 to September 30, 2020) had a total water demand of 4,730 AF with
0% of water being supplied by groundwater resources. Compared against the City’s 2020 annual availability, the City
has approximately 5,377 AF of water surplus available to allocate to new beneficial uses within the city.
The project would be required to pay development impact fees to offset the project’s marginal impact on the City’s
water resources. Future residential development will be conditioned to comply with City standards, and potential
impacts would be less than significant.
The proposed project would create new parcels that range from 6,000 to 24,000 sf each. According to the City’s
Wastewater Generation Rates per Use Table, residential units have to potential to generate 45 to 150 gallons of
Page 300 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 59 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
wastewater per day based on size of the dwelling unit. Specific development plans have not been identified; however,
there is potential for up to 23 new single-family residential units, with ADUs and JADUs as potential accessory uses,
to result from the proposed project. According to the City’s wastewater generation rates, a typical single-family
residence would generate approximately 150 gallons of wastewater per day and an ADU would generate approximately
105 gallons of wastewater per day. (JADUs are connected to single-family residences and are included with that rate.)
The project has the potential to generate approximately 5,865 gallons of wastewater per day. The City treats about 4.5
million gallons of wastewater per day according to standards set forth by the SWRCB. The WRRF operates in an
efficient manner to comply with federal, State, and local discharge requirements. This additional wastewater generation
would not result in a significant load on the City’s sewer infrastructure or the WRRF. Additionally, impact fees are
collected at the time building permits are issued to accommodate the project’s contribution to the City’s WRRF capacity.
Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
Grading and other ground-disturbing activity has the potential to temporarily increase solid waste generation. Soil and
other waste that results from ground-disturbing activity would be disposed of according to applicable standards and
would not lead to the generation of excessive waste.
The proposed project has the potential to create up to 23 new single-family residential units, with ADUs and JADUs as
potential accessory uses, that would produce solid waste. According to the CalRecycle Estimated Solid Waste
Generation Rates Table, residential units generate approximately 12.23 pounds of solid waste per day. CalRecycle does
not include specific rates for ADUs; however, it can be assumed that based on the size of ADUs as compared to single-
family residential units, that ADUs produce solid waste at rates more similar to multi-family dwellings, which produce
approximately 4 pounds per day. (JADUs are connected to single-family residences and are included with that rate.)
Therefore, the project would produce approximately 373.29 pounds of solid waste per day. Future residential
development would include provision of solid waste and recycling receptacles that would be serviced by San Luis
Garbage and brought to Cold Canyon Landfill, which has approximately 13,100,000 cubic yards of remaining capacity
as of February 2020 and is expected to reach capacity in 2040. Cold Canyon Landfill is compliant with State and local
rules and regulations regarding solid waste and potential future residential development would be required to adhere to
the standards set forth in the City’s Development Standards for Solid Waste Services for trash, green waste, and
recycling. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
Solid waste is disposed of at Cold Canyon Landfill, which follows State and local rules and regulations regarding solid
waste. The potential future residential development would be required to adhere to the standards set forth in the City’s
Development Standards for Solid Waste Services for trash, green waste, and recycling. Therefore, the impacts would
be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-5, BIO-1 through BIO-9, CR-1 and CR-2, N-1 and N-2, and TC-1.
Conclusion
With implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-5, BIO-1 through BIO-9, CR-1 and CR-2, N-1 and N-2, and
TC-1, potential impacts to utilities and service systems would be less than significant.
20. WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as
very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan? 25, 54 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Page 301 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 60 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate
wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to,
pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled
spread of a wildfire?
1, 25,
54, 56,
57
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water
sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire
risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
1, 25,
54, 56,
57
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including
downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of
runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
1, 25,
54, 56,
57
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
Urban fire hazards result from the materials, size, and spacing of buildings, and from the materials, equipment, and activities
they contain. Additional factors are access, available water volume and pressure, and response time for firefighters. Based on the
City Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, the risk of wildland fires is greatest near the City limits where development meets rural areas
of combustible vegetation. Most of the community is within 1 mile of a designated high or very high fire hazard severity zone,
which indicates significant risk to wildland fire.
The Safety Element identifies four policies to address the potential hazards associated with wildfire, including approving
development only when adequate fire suppression services and facilities are available, classification of wildland fire hazard
severity zones as prescribed by CAL FIRE, prohibition of new subdivisions located within “very high” wildland fire hazard
severity zones, and continuation of enhancement of fire safety and construction codes for buildings.
According to the City’s Safety Element Maps, the project is located within a low fire hazard severity zone. The project site is
surrounded by developed residential areas to the east, north, west, and south that are also designated as a low fire hazard severity
zone. The area of land located to the east north of the project is designated as a moderate fire hazard severity zone and Bishop
Peak located 0.5-mile northwest is designated as a high fire hazard severity zone. In addition, the project site is not located within
a State Responsibility Area (SRA).
The project proposes infill development within an existing residential neighborhood. Implementation of the proposed
project would not result in a significant temporary or permanent impact on any adopted emergency response plans or
emergency evacuation plans. No breaks in utility service or road closures would occur as a result of project
implementation; therefore, the project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation
plan and impacts would be less than significant.
The Safety Element describes the project area and immediate land as low and moderate wildland fire risk. The nearest
high wildland fire risk is located 0.5 mile northwest at Bishop Peak. Fire response times are less than 5 minutes for this
project location and City Fire Station #2 is located approximately 0.56 mile south of the project site. The General Plan
states that development shall only be approved when adequate fire suppression services and facilities are available or
will be made concurrent with development. Parcel upgrades include emergency access, upgraded roads, and necessary
utility connections.
San Luis Obispo has an average wind speed of approximately 7 miles per hour. The project site is located on land that
is characterized as gently sloping and would not increase fire risk due to hazardous slopes onsite. Parcel improvements
propose to remove multiple ornamental trees and vegetation from the project site that would reduce wildfire hazard.
Future residential structures built on the upgraded parcels would be conditioned to comply with building and fire code
regulations as well as City requirements for fire safety.
In order to manage wildfire risk associated with placing residents in close proximity to moderate and high fire hazard
severity areas, a Vegetation/Fuel Management Plan for the project site has been identified in Mitigation Measure WF-1.
Additionally, a Wildland Fire Protection Report by James A. Neumann identifies mitigation measures to further reduce
wildland fire hazards to future development and is described in Mitigation Measure WF-2. Therefore, with
Page 302 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 61 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
implementation of Mitigation Measures WF-1 and WF-2, impacts would be considered less than significant with
mitigation.
The proposed improvements to the project site include a new emergency access road, road upgrades, and necessary
utility connections. Additionally, future residential developments would also be required to comply with CBC
regulations for fire safety and to reduce fire risk. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
The project area is not located within an area with substantial risk for flooding or landslides. Improvements made to the
project site for the proposed subdivision and future development of residential structures will be required to comply
with CBC regulations for fire safety and stability. The project does not include any design elements that would expose
people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
WF-1 Vegetation/Fuel Management Plan. Prior to issuance of any construction permit, the applicant shall provide a
vegetation/fuel management plan prepared by a registered professional forester or certified arborist for each lot.
The plan shall identify fuel load reduction techniques, including vegetation removal and trimming, to increase
defensible space around residential structures and driveways/access roads. The plan shall also identify appropriate
standards for installation of new landscaping, such as requirements for drought-tolerant and fire-resistant species.
WF-2 Additional Fire Hazard Reductions. Future development would incorporate the following fire reduction methods
identified by the 2020 Wildland Fire Protection Report (Neumann) to reduce wildland fire risk:
1. Rain gutters, when not adequately maintained, will collect leaf material which becomes a receptive fuel
bed for embers and sparks and can then transmit fire underneath the non-combustible roof materials. Rain
gutters should be protected by noncombustible leaf shields or not allowed.
2. Record on all lots a deed restriction that allows for only non-combustible fences and decks in the
subdivision.
3. Record on all lots a deed restriction that allows for fire resistant landscaping in the back yards of the
subdivision.
4. Require enclosed eves on all structures within the subdivision.
5. Install fireproof vents on all structures (fire-rated, flame and ember resistant).
6. Working with the biologist, remove the non-native vegetation in the creek, riparian area, to reduce the fuel
load.
7. Install a non-combustible wall (block or steel stud /stucco) wall 36 inches in height all around the northern
perimeter of the subdivision. The wall shall begin at the westernmost property line and continue to the 20-
foot setback at the west side of the creek, and shall continue beginning at the 20-foot setback at the east
side of the creek, terminating at the property line of CAL FIRE Station #12. The purpose of this wall is to
interrupt fire progression from the north onto the proposed lots without obstructing the very desirable view
of the open space.
Conclusion
The project is located 0.5 mile away from a high wildland fire hazard zone and could expose people or structures to new or
exacerbated wildfire risks. The development of new and/or expanded infrastructure and maintenance to reduce wildfire risks is
proposed along with parcel improvements to the project site. Mitigation Measures WF-1 and WF-2 would reduce wildland fire
risk. Therefore, potential impacts associated with wildfire would be less than significant with mitigation.
Page 303 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 62 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a
fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant
or animal community, substantially reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
N/A ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
The project would allow for the future development of up to 23 new residential units with ADUs and JADUs as accessory uses
within the project site and would result in the removal of several trees. Mitigation measures BIO-1 through BIO-7 identified in
Section 4, Biological Resources, are included to minimize potential impacts to native plants and wildlife species during project
construction. Specifically, Mitigation Measure BIO-8 through BIO-11 would reduce impacts to aquatic resources onsite.
Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2 have been included to require awareness training be conducted for all construction crew
members so that cultural resources can be recognized if unearthed during site disturbance activities and to require work be halted
in the event of an unanticipated discovery until a qualified archaeologist can assess the significance of the find and identify the
appropriate protocol for properly responding to the inadvertent discovery. TC-1 requires a native American monitor to be present
during ground disturbance to identify unknown tribal cultural resources. With implementation of the recommended mitigation
measures, potential impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable
future projects)?
N/A ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
When project impacts are considered along with, or in combination with, other reasonably foreseeable impacts, the project’s
potential cumulative impacts may be significant. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to reduce project-
related impacts to a less-than-significant level. Based on implementation of identified project-specific mitigation measures and
the relatively limited number and extent of potential impacts, the cumulative effects of the proposed project would not be
cumulatively considerable and would be less than significant with mitigation.
Page 304 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 63 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
N/A ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
The project has the potential to result in significant impacts associated with air quality and noise that could result in sub stantial
adverse effects on human beings. Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-5 and N-1 and N-2 have been identified to reduce
these potential impacts to less than significant, including, but not limited to, standard idling restrictions, dust control measures,
preparation of a geologic investigation for asbestos, and implementation of noise control measures. With implementation of the
mitigation measures identified in this Initial Study, potential environmental effects of the project would not directly or indirectly
result in any substantial adverse effects on human beings, and this impact would be less than significant with mitigation.
Page 305 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 64 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
22. EARLIER ANALYSES
Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have
been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case a discussion should
identify the following items:
a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
N/A
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately
analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
N/A
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation
measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific
conditions of the project.
N/A
23. SOURCE REFERENCES
1. Project Plans, Parcel Map, September 2020
2. Project Plans, Project Description, April 2020
3. City of San Luis Obispo Interactive Parcel Viewer, January 2015
4. Kevin Merk Associates, LLC (KMA), 468 Westmont Avenue, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California
(Assessor’s Parcel Number 052-496-001) Biological Resources Assessment, August 2020
5. City of San Luis Obispo Conservation & Open Space Element (COSE), 2006.
6. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), California Scenic Highways, February 2017
7. City of San Luis Obispo Community Design Guidelines, June 2010
8. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, May 2019
9. California Department of Conservation (DOC) Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, 2018
10. California Department of Conservation (DOC) Land Conservation Act of 1965: San Luis Obispo County, 2006
11. San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD), County Attainment Status, 2019
12. San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) CEQA Air Quality Handbook, April 2012
(revised November 2017)
13. San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) Clean Air Plan, December 2001
Page 306 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 65 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
14. San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) Naturally Occurring Asbestos Mapping Tool,
2020
15. City of San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan, 2021
16. San Luis Obispo Heritage Trees Map, 2019
17. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory Map, 2019
18. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), California Natural Community Conservation Plans Map 2019
19. Historic Properties in San Luis Obispo, California (A SLO Story Map), accessed January 2021
20. San Luis Obispo Historic Preservation Program Guidelines 2010
21. San Luis Obispo Transit 2019-20120 User Guide, June 17, 2019
22. City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan, August 2020
23. California Building Code, 2019
24. California Department of Conservation (CDOC) Fault Activity Map of California, 2010
25. City of San Luis Obispo Safety Element, 2014
26. U.S., Geological Survey (USGS) Areas of Land Subsidence in California, Accessed January 2021
27. U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey, 2019
28. California Department of Conservation (DOC), Soil Web Survey 2020
29. Geologic Map of the San Luis Obispo Quadrangle, San Luis Obispo County, California, 2004
30. California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), Envirostor Accessed January 2021
31. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Geotracker Accessed January 2021
32. California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), Cortese List Data Resources Accessed January 2021
33. San Luis Obispo 2016 Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Update 2019
34. SLO Watershed Project, San Luis Obispo Creek Description, 2014
35. SLO Stormwater Website 2020
36. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) Viewer, accessed January
2021
37. California Department of Water Resources (DWR) Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) Groundwater
Management, Webpage, 2019
38. County of San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin, Webpage, 2019
Page 307 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 66 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
39. City of San Luis Obispo 2019 Water Resources Status Report. August 2019.
40. California Department of Conservation (DOC) Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning Port San Luis
Quadrangle, 2009
41. Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coast Basin, 2019
42. City of San Luis Obispo Land Use Element 2014
43. City of San Luis Obispo Noise Element, 1996
44. Construction Noise Handbook: Construction Equipment Noise Levels and Ranges, Federal Highway Administration,
September 2017
45. Transportation and Construction-Induced Vibration Guidance Manual. California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans). September 2013. Available at: <http://website.dot.ca.gov/env/noise/docs/tcvgm-sep2013.pdf>.
46. City of San Luis Obispo 2014–2019 General Plan Housing Element, January 2015
47. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Annual Report, 2020
48. City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department Development Impact Fees, 2018
49. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Parks and Recreation Element, 2001
50. City of San Luis Obispo Circulation Element, October 2017
51. City of San Luis Obispo 2020 Water Resources Status Report, 2020
52. Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates, California Department of Resources, Recycling, and Recovery
(CalRecycle), accessed November 2019
53. SWIS Facility Detail Cold Canyon Landfill, Inc., California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery
(CalRecycle), Accessed August, 2020
54. San Luis Obispo Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2006
55. San Luis Obispo Residential VMT Screening Map. 2020
56. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Fire Hazard Severity Zones Maps, San Luis
Obispo County, March 2009
57. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. 15.04. Construction and Fire Prevention Regulations. 2019
58. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), SB 743 Technical Advisory, April 2018
59. Joslin, Terry; Central Coast Archaeological Research Consultants (CCARC), Cultural Resources Survey of the
Westmont Avenue Project, City of San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California, February 2020
60. City of San Luis Obispo Wastewater Generation Rates Per Use Table. Available at:
https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/utilities-department/wastewater/wastewater-offset-
program.
Page 308 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 67 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
61. City of San Luis Obispo Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines. June 2020.
62. SWCA 2021 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report. January 2021.
63. USFWS Designation of Critical Habitat for the California red-legged frog Background, Questions and Answers.
March 16, 2010.
64. Kevin Merk Associates, LLC Memorandum Re: Westmont Avenue TTM 3157 – Response to Comments Regarding
Biological Resources. July 1, 2021.
65. Cannon, Drainage Report, Tract 3157, 468 Westmont Avenue, March 11, 2020
Attachments
1. Project Location Map
2. Proposed Project Plans
3. Biological Report
4. Response to Comments Regarding Biological Resources. July 1, 2021.
5. Drainage Report, Tract 3157, 468 Westmont Avenue, March 11, 2020
Page 309 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 68 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS
Air Quality
AQ-1 Idling Control Techniques. During all construction activities and use of diesel vehicles, the applicant shall
implement the following idling control techniques:
1. Idling Restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors for Both On- and Off-Road Equipment.
a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors if
feasible;
b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be permitted;
c. Use of alternative-fueled equipment shall be used whenever possible; and
d. Signs that specify the no idling requirements shall be posted and enforced at the construction
site.
2. California Diesel Idling Regulations. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with 13 CCR 2485. This
regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight
ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California- and
non-California-based vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles:
a. Shall not idle the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location,
except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation; and
b. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a heater, air
conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper
berth for greater than 5 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area,
except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation.
Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers of the 5-minute idling limit.
The specific requirements and exceptions in the regulation can be reviewed at the following website:
www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/truck-idling/2485.pdf.
AQ-2 Particulate Matter Control Measures. During all construction and ground-disturbing activities, the applicant
shall implement the following particulate matter control measures and detail each measure on the project grading
and building plans:
1. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible.
2. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving
the site and from exceeding the SLOAPCD’s limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60-
minute period. Increased watering frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles
per hour (mph). Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible.
3. All dirt stockpile areas (if any) shall be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as
needed.
4. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans
shall be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil-disturbing activities.
5. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than 1 month after initial grading shall
be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established.
6. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil
binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the SLOAPCD.
7. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. In addition,
building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
Page 310 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 69 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
8. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the
construction site.
9. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or shall maintain at least
2 feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 23114.
10. “Track out” is defined as sand or soil that adheres to and/or agglomerates on the exterior surfaces of
motor vehicles and/or equipment (including tires) that may then fall onto any highway or street as
described in CVC Section 23113 and California Water Code (CWC) Section 13304. To prevent track
out, designate access points and require all employees, subcontractors, and others to use them. Install
and operate a “track-out prevention device” where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved
streets. The track-out prevention device can be any device or combination of devices that are effective
at preventing track out, located at the point of intersection of an unpaved area and a paved road. Rumble
strips or steel plate devices need periodic cleaning to be effective. If paved roadways accumulate tracked-
out soils, the track-out prevention device may need to be modified.
11. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water
sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping
when feasible.
12. All PM10 mitigation measures required should be shown on grading and building plans.
13. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons whose responsibility is to ensure any
fugitive dust emissions do not result in a nuisance and to enhance the implementation of the mitigation
measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints and reduce visible emissions below the SLOAPCD’s
limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Their duties shall include
holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress (for example, wind-blown dust could
be generated on an open dirt lot). The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to
the SLOAPCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork, or demolition (Contact
Tim Fuhs at 805-781-5912).
AQ-3 Geologic Evaluation. Prior to initiation of ground-disturbing activities, the applicant shall retain a registered
geologist to conduct a geologic evaluation of the property, including sampling and testing for NOA in full
compliance with SLOAPCD requirements and the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and
Surface Mining Operations (17 CCR 93105). This geologic evaluation shall be submitted to the City Community
Development Department upon completion. If the geologic evaluation determines that the project would not have
the potential to disturb NOA, the applicant must file an Asbestos ATCM exemption request with the SLOAPCD.
AQ-4 Naturally Occurring Asbestos Control Measures. If NOA are determined to be present onsite, proposed
earthwork, demolition, and construction activities shall be conducted in full compliance with the various
regulatory jurisdictions regarding NOA, including the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and
Surface Mining Operations (17 CCR 93105) and requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP; 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Section 61, Subpart M – Asbestos).
These requirements include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities commencing, to the SLOAPCD;
2. Preparation of an asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Consultant; and
3. Implementation of applicable removal and disposal protocol and requirements for identified NOA.
AQ-5 Asbestos-Containing Material. Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the applicant shall provide an asbestos
report that was prepared by a certified asbestos consultant. If ACM are determined to be present, at least 10
working days prior to any demolition work the applicant shall provide notification to SLOAPCD of such work.
The notification shall include an asbestos report that was prepared by a certified asbestos consultant. ACM
removal and disposal shall follow the requirements of the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants Regulation (NESHAP) Subpart M and of the SLOAPCD.
Page 311 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 70 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated onto Final Map and project grading / building plans for review
and approval by the City Community Development Department. Compliance shall be verified by the City during regular
inspections, in coordination with the SLOAPCD, as necessary.
Biological Resources
BIO-1 Implement a Rare Plant Mitigation Program that ensures no net loss of Cambria morning glory on the
project site. Prior to any tract improvements, a Rare Plant Mitigation Program shall be implemented for Cambria
morning glory and shall be overseen by a qualified botanist approved by the City. As a component of the program,
seed shall be collected from Cambria morning glory plants during the appropriate season prior to tract grading
activities. Using standard procedures, the qualified botanist shall clean and store the seeds until the receiving sites
shown on the project plans are ready. Suitable habitat of 2,180 square-feet in size outside of the development area
(as designated on the site plans in the creek setback zone) shall be designated as the mitigation site that will be
maintained in a natural state and not be subject to mowing earlier than June 1 each year. The areas will be
maintained as grassland habitat and no planting of ornamental species or other adverse modifications (such as
grazing activities) will be allowed. The mitigation site shown on the project plans is twice the size as the areas
currently occupied by the rare plant occurrences (2,180 square-feet of habitat created for 1,076 square-feet of
habitat impacted). This equates to a 2:1 mitigation ratio (habitat created to habitat impacted) to ensure a minimum
1:1 replacement ratio is achieved. Topsoil from each of the four occurrences will be collected in 6-inch lifts and
stored for top-dressing the mitigation site once grading of the pads is complete. As needed, the mitigation site
should be prepared for planting by removal of non-native species or other measures as necessary, then applying
the salvaged topsoil. Once topsoil has been layered evenly through the area, collected seed should be hand-
broadcasted into suitable locations by the qualified botanist and covered with compost. Seed may also be
incorporated into the native erosion control seed mix described in the Native Erosion Control Seed Mix table
under Mitigation Measure BIO-9 and applied to other grassy areas of the site as part of the erosion control effort.
Depending on the season when construction starts, the qualified botanist may also potentially salvage plants (i.e.,
dig them up when soils are moist) and transplant them to containers to be maintained until the mitigation sites are
ready for planting.
BIO-2 Conduct annual monitoring and implement adaptive management measures for 5 years to ensure no net
loss of Cambria morning glory onsite. The Rare Plant Mitigation Program shall include annual monitoring and
maintenance of the mitigation site to ensure success of the program. Monitoring by a qualified botanist shall occur
during the spring growing season (between April 15 and May 15 each year) to ensure successful establishment of
planted propagules. The established rare plants shall be mapped to evaluate the goal of no net loss of the species
onsite. The measurable objective shall be to have at least 1,076 sf of occurrence comprised of approximately 300
Cambria morning glory plants. Appropriate vegetation sampling techniques shall be used to assess the areal cover
of vegetation to evaluate the status of the established occurrences. If the success criteria of having approximately
300 plants covering 1,076 sf within the creek setback zone is not reached by the third year of monitoring, remedial
actions such as collecting more seed and distributing it in suitable areas should be employed, with a corresponding
additional year of monitoring. Other activities to increase the success of the rare plant mitigation effort could
include non-native plant species removal within the mitigation site to reduce competition, additional seed
application, or supplemental irrigation during periods of prolonged drought. The qualified botanist shall prepare
annual reports for the applicant detailing the methods and results of the mitigation effort and monitoring effort.
The applicant shall be responsible for submitting the report to the City on an annual basis (by December 31 of
each year) for the 5-year monitoring period or until the final success criteria described above are met.
BIO-3 To the extent feasible, avoid initial site grading in the winter months. The burrowing owl has been recorded
in the vicinity of the project from October to the end of April. If initial vegetation removal and site grading for
the tract improvements is conducted outside of this period, potential effects on this species would be avoided and
no further mitigation would be required. Restricting the time period for earth-moving activities is also required to
avoid or minimize the potential for erosion and sedimentation (see Mitigation Measure BIO-9). If initial grading
work must commence during the time period that burrowing owls may be present onsite, preconstruction surveys
for this species shall be included in the survey effort described in Mitigation Measure BIO-4 prior to vegetation
removal or tract improvements.
Page 312 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 71 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
BIO-4 Conduct a preconstruction survey and avoid construction in areas occupied by special-status wildlife
species until relocated or they have left the site. Within 7 days prior to the start of vegetation/tree removal,
ground-disturbing activities, or demolition of existing structures, a biologist approved by the City shall survey
the project impact area to identify whether nesting birds, roosting bats, monarch butterfly overwintering
populations, obscure bumble bee, and/or California legless lizard are present on site. A separate survey shall be
conducted for any phase of the project not conducted concurrently or within 10 days of cessation of the previous
phase (i.e., structure demolition conducted prior to general site grading). The biologist shall use appropriate
survey techniques for the special-status species identified in the 2020 BRA as having potential to occur onsite.
For example, burrows shall be examined with binoculars or wildlife cameras, and inspected for whitewash or
prey remains. Leaf litter and cover objects shall be searched for northern California legless lizards. Potential bat
roost sites shall be inspected for sign of roosting bats such as guano or prey remains. If any of these species are
found onsite, the biologist shall coordinate with the City, and CDFW as appropriate, on methods to ensure the
successful relocation of individuals to suitable habitat nearby. In some cases, CDFW may recommend creating
structures for displaced woodrats and bats. Burrowing owls can be discouraged from using burrows onsite, or
occupied burrows can be avoided until the owls have left the area. Bats can be restricted from roost sites by
placing netting over their entrances after they have left the roost for night-time foraging. The wildlife protection
measures to be employed will be based on the results of the survey and the particular characteristics of their use
of the site, in coordination with CDFW and the construction engineer. If no special-status animal species are
found onsite during the preconstruction survey, work may proceed with the implementation of the following
Mitigation Measures BIO-5 through BIO-7.
BIO-5 Prepare and present a Worker Environmental Awareness Program. Prior to any vegetation removal or tract
improvements, a qualified biologist shall prepare a Worker Environmental Awareness Program that will be
presented to all project personnel. This program shall detail measures to avoid and minimize impacts on biological
resources. It shall include a description of special-status species potentially occurring on the project site and their
natural history, the status of the species and their protection under environmental laws and regulations, and the
penalties for take. Recommendations shall be given as to actions to avoid take should a special-status species be
found on the project site. Other aspects of the training shall include a description of general measures to protect
wildlife, including:
4. Delineation of the allowable work area, staging areas, access points, and limits to vehicle access;
5. Storage of all pipes, metal tubing, or similar materials stored or stacked on the project site for one or
more overnight periods shall be either securely capped before storage or thoroughly inspected for
wildlife before the materials are moved, buried, capped, or otherwise used.
6. Inspection of materials stored onsite, such as lumber, plywood, and rolls of silt fence, for wildlife that
may have sheltered under or within the materials;
7. Use of netting to exclude birds from nesting in construction materials;
8. Construction of escape ramps in all excavations and trenches more than 6 inches deep;
9. Contact information for the City-approved biologist and instructions should any wildlife species be
detected in the work site;
10. Dust suppression methods during construction activities when necessary to meet air quality standards
and protect biological resources; and
11. Methods for containment of food-related trash items (e.g., wrappers, cans, bottles, food scraps), small
construction debris (e.g., nails, bits of metal and plastic), and other human generated debris (e.g.,
cigarette butts) in animal-proof containers and removal from the site on a weekly basis.
All project personnel who have attended the training shall sign an attendance sheet. The program shall be repeated
for any new crews that arrive subsequently on the site.
BIO-6 Install high-visibility construction and silt fence along the creek corridor to delineate the allowable work
area, exclude wildlife from the site, and protect the stream habitat. Prior to vegetation removal or tract
improvements, and during subsequent residential development for Lots 1-7, a high-visibility construction fence
at least 4 feet tall together with a silt fence, or an approved wildlife exclusion fence, shall be erected along the
Page 313 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 72 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
creek corridor to delineate the limits of grading and vehicle access. If possible, the fence shall be erected along
the creek setback line, and encroachment into the setback shall be kept at a minimum. In no case shall ground
disturbance occur within the riparian habitat or below the top of bank without obtaining proper permits from
regulatory agencies. The type of fence used may be a combination of wildlife exclusion and silt fence (i.e., ERTEC
Triple-function E-fence) or similar materials that would serve the purposes of safety/construction area delineation,
wildlife exclusion, and siltation prevention. The fence shall be checked weekly by construction personnel for
needed maintenance.
BIO-7 Conduct biological monitoring for special-status wildlife species while the property is cleared and graded,
and structures are removed. A qualified biologist shall monitor the removal of structures, materials, and
vegetation that may provide cover for obscure bumble bee, northern California legless lizards, and bat roosting
sites. The biologist shall be onsite daily until all materials are removed and all vegetation has been cleared. If any
special-status species are found, work shall be delayed until the individuals have left the work area or CDFW
shall be notified to obtain authorization for capture and relocation.
BIO-8 Avoid vegetation removal within the riparian habitat during the overwintering season. Vegetation removal
within the riparian area shall be conducted outside of the overwintering season for monarch butterfly (late October
through February) and obscure bumble bee (late October through January) to avoid disturbance to species
potentially inhabiting riparian vegetation.
BIO-9 Install erosion and sediment BMPs and revegetate graded areas. The following erosion and sedimentation
control BMPs are required to be implemented during vegetation removal, tract improvements, during individual
lot construction, and after the construction phases of the project:
12. If possible, the potential for erosion and sedimentation shall be minimized by scheduling construction to
occur outside of the rainy season, which is typically defined as October 15 through April 15. Adherence
to this measure would also serve as avoidance for the burrowing owl, as described in Mitigation Measure
BIO-3.
13. To minimize site disturbance, all construction related equipment shall be restricted to established roads,
construction areas, and other designated staging areas. The creek setback zone shall be clearly marked
as described in Mitigation Measure BIO-6.
14. Prior to any site disturbance during tract improvements or individual lot construction, a Sediment and
Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared by a qualified engineer. The use of silt fence, straw wattles,
erosion control blankets, straw bales, sandbags, fiber rolls, and other appropriate techniques should be
employed to protect the drainage features on and off the property. Biotechnical approaches using native
vegetation shall be used as feasible. All areas with soil disturbance shall have appropriate erosion
controls and other stormwater protection BMPs installed to prevent erosion potential. All sediment and
erosion control measures shall be installed per the engineer’s requirements prior to the initiation of site
grading if planned to occur within the rainy season.
15. Spill kits shall be maintained on the site, and a Spill Response Plan shall be in place.
16. No vehicles or equipment shall be refueled within 100 feet of wetland areas, riparian habitat and/or
drainage features, and refueling areas shall have a spill containment system installed. No vehicles or
construction equipment shall be stored overnight within 100 feet of these areas unless drip pans or ground
covers are used. All equipment and vehicles shall be checked and maintained on a daily basis to ensure
proper operation and to avoid potential leaks or spills. Construction staging areas shall be located in a
location where spills would not drain into aquatic habitats.
17. No concrete washout shall be conducted on the site outside of an appropriate containment system.
Washing of equipment, tools, etc. should not be allowed in any location where the tainted water could
enter onsite drainages.
18. The use of chemicals, fuels, lubricants, or biocides shall be in compliance with all local, state, and federal
regulations. All uses of such compounds shall observe label and other restrictions mandated by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, California Department of Food and Agriculture, and other state and
federal legislation.
Page 314 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 73 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
19. All project-related spills of hazardous materials within or adjacent to the project site should be cleaned
up immediately.
20. All areas with soil disturbance shall have appropriate erosion controls and other stormwater protection
BMPs installed to prevent erosion potential. Silt fencing, erosion control blankets, straw bales, sandbags,
fiber rolls, and/or other types of materials prescribed on the plan shall be implemented to prevent erosion
and sedimentation. Biotechnical approaches using native vegetation shall be used as feasible.
21. Areas with disturbed soils shall be restored under the direction of the project engineer in consultation
with a qualified restoration ecologist as detailed above. Methods may include recontouring graded areas
to blend in with existing natural contours, covering the areas with salvaged topsoil containing native
seedbank from the site, and/or applying the native seed mix as described in the table below. Native seed
mix shall be applied to the graded areas in the creek setback area through either direct hand seeding or
hydroseeding methods. Seeding with the native erosion control seed mix should be provided on all
disturbed soil areas prior to the onset of the rainy season (by October 15).
Native Erosion Control Seed Mix
Species Application Rate
(lbs/acre)
California Brome (Bromus carinatus) 10
purple needlegrass (Stipa pulchra) 5
tomcat clover (Trifolium wildenovii) 5
six weeks fescue (Vulpia microstachys) 5
Total 25
BIO-10 Obtain necessary permits for impacts in jurisdictional areas, implement a compensatory mitigation
program, and monitor the success of the program to ensure no net loss of Riparian/Wetland habitat or
other waters on the subject property. Prior to any vegetation removal or site disturbance within the areas
delineated as jurisdictional features (Figure 5, Aquatic Resources Delineation 2021), the applicant shall provide
documentation to the City that a Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit from USACE, a Clean Water Act Section
401 Water Quality Certification from RWQCB, and a California Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Lake and
Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFW have been obtained or have been determined by the regulatory
agencies to not be required.
If regulatory permits are required, Prior to the initiation of vegetation removal or tract improvements, the applicant
shall retain a qualified biological monitor to ensure compliance with all Clean Water Act, , City of San Luis
Obispo stormwater and water quality requirements, and CDFW permit requirements during work adjacent to
the creek. The monitor shall be present during the installation of the construction fencing delineating the limits
of work in relation to the edge of riparian, creek top of bank, and 20-foot creek setback buffer, as described in
Mitigation Measure BIO-6. Since the Cambria morning glory compensatory mitigation site is to be located within
this buffer, the monitor shall direct appropriate wildlife exclusion and erosion control BMPs to protect riparian
habitat during site preparation for planting. The monitor shall be present during construction of the rip rap pad
and any other work within the creek setback area on stormwater structures. The monitor shall also oversee removal
of non-native tree species and site preparation for tree planting within the setback. If a Habitat Mitigation and
Monitoring Plan (HMMP) is required by the regulatory agencies, the applicant shall provide a copy of the plan to
the City and the biological monitor shall be responsible for successful implementation of the plan.
BIO-11 Record a Biological Easement and Biological Easement Agreement protecting riparian area: A Biological
Easement and Biological Easement Agreement shall be recorded in conjunction with the final map recordation.
The easement agreement shall be developed by the applicant in a format provided by the City. The following
activities are permitted within the biological easement, subject to the review and approval by the City
Sustainability and Natural Resources Official:
22. Stormwater improvements.
Page 315 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 74 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
23. Removal of non-native trees.
24. Restoration and creek bank stabilization activities.
No future paving or structures shall be permitted within the biological easement. Creek setback standards shall
be applied to the easement area, consistent with municipal code requirements.
Monitoring Program: These conditions and measures shall be noted on Final Map and all grading and construction plans.
The City Community Development Department and Natural Resources Manager shall verify compliance.
Cultural Resources
CR-1 Discovery of Previously Unidentified Cultural Resources. In the event that historical or archaeological remains
are discovered during ground-disturbing activities associated with the project, an immediate halt work order shall
be issued, and the City Community Development Director shall be notified. A qualified archaeologist shall
conduct an assessment of the resources and formulate proper mitigation measures, if necessary. After the find has
been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. These requirements shall be noted on the project’s
final map and all improvement/construction plans.
CR-2 Discovery of Human Remains. In the event that human remains are exposed during ground-disturbing activities
associated with the project, an immediate halt work order shall be issued, and the City Community Development
Director shall be notified. California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance
of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains shall occur until the County
Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. If the
remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. These requirements shall be noted on the project’s final map and all
improvement/construction plans.
Monitoring Program: These conditions shall be noted on Final Map and all grading and construction plans. The City
Community Development Department shall verify compliance, including preparation and implementation of the Monitoring
Plan, and review and approval of cultural resources monitoring reports documenting compliance with required Mitigation
Measures.
Noise
N-1 For the entire duration of the construction phase of the project, the following BMPs shall be adhered to:
1. Stationary construction equipment that generates noise that exceeds 60 dBA at the project boundaries
shall be shielded with the most modern noise control devises (i.e., mufflers, lagging, and/or motor
enclosures).
2. Impact tools (e.g., jack hammers, pavement breakers, rock drills, etc.) used for project construction shall
be hydraulically or electrically powered wherever possible to avoid noise associated with compressed-
air exhaust from pneumatically powered tools.
3. Where use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the compressed air exhaust shall be
used.
4. All construction equipment shall have the manufacturers’ recommended noise abatement methods
installed, such as mufflers, engine enclosures, and engine vibration insulators, intact and operational.
5. All construction equipment shall undergo inspection at periodic intervals to ensure proper maintenance
and presence of noise control devices (e.g., mufflers, shrouding, etc.).
N-2 Construction plans shall note construction hours, truck routes, and all construction noise BMP, and shall be
reviewed and approved by the City Community Development Department prior to issuance of grading/building
permits. The City shall provide and post signs stating these restrictions at construction entry sites prior to
commencement of construction and maintained throughout the construction phase of the project. All construction
Page 316 of 361
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 75 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
workers shall be briefed at a preconstruction meeting on construction hour limitations and how, why, and where
BMP measures are to be implemented.
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated into Final Map and project grading and building plans for
review and approval by the City Community Development Department. Compliance shall be verified by the City during regular
inspections. Tribal Cultural Resources
TC-1 Culturally Affiliated Native American Monitor. A representative from the Salinan Tribe shall be notified
prior to any ground disturbing activities to provide for on-site monitoring. If cultural resources are encountered
during subsurface earthwork activities, all ground disturbing activities within a 25-foot radius of the find shall
cease and the City shall be notified immediately consistent with the requirements of Mitigation Measures CR-1
and CR-2.
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated into Final Map and project grading and building plans for
review and approval by the City Community Development Department. Compliance shall be verified by the City during
regular inspections.
Wildfire
WF-1 Vegetation/Fuel Management Plan. Prior to issuance of any construction permit, the applicant shall provide a
vegetation/fuel management plan prepared by a registered professional forester or certified arborist for each lot.
The plan shall identify fuel load reduction techniques, including vegetation removal and trimming, to increase
defensible space around residential structures and driveways/access roads. The plan shall also identify appropriate
standards for installation of new landscaping, such as requirements for drought-tolerant and fire-resistant species.
WF-2 Additional Fire Hazard Reductions. Future development would incorporate the following fire reduction
methods identified by the 2020 Wildland Fire Protection Report (Neumann)to reduce wildland fire risk:
1. Rain gutters, when not adequately maintained, will collect leaf material which becomes a receptive fuel
bed for embers and sparks and can then transmit fire underneath the non-combustible roof materials.
Rain gutters should be protected by noncombustible leaf shields or not allowed.
2. Record on all lots a deed restriction that allows for only non-combustible fences and decks in the
subdivision.
3. Record on all lots a deed restriction that allows for fire resistant landscaping in the back yards of the
subdivision.
4. Require enclosed eves on all structures within the subdivision.
5. Install fireproof vents on all structures (fire-rated, flame and ember resistant).
6. Working with the biologist, remove the non-native vegetation in the creek, riparian area,
7. reduce the fuel load.
8. Install a non-combustible wall (block or steel stud /stucco) wall 36 inches in height all around the
northern perimeter of the subdivision. The wall shall begin at the westernmost property line and continue
to the 20-foot setback at the west side of the creek, and shall continue beginning at the 20-foot setback
at the east side of the creek, terminating at the property line of CAL FIRE Station #12. The purpose of
this wall is to interrupt fire progression from the north onto the proposed lots without obstructing the
very desirable view of the open space.
Monitoring Program: This measure shall be incorporated into Final Map and noted on all grading and construction plans.
The City Community Development Department shall verify compliance through initial and regular inspections.
Page 317 of 361
Page 318 of 361
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: REVIEW, CONTINUED FROM MAY 26, 2021, OF A TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP (TRACT 3157) TO CREATE 23 RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON A 4.98-ACRE SITE
WITHIN THE LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) ZONE. PROJECT INCLUDES THE
EXTENSION OF STANFORD DRIVE, WHICH WILL CONNECT TO AN EXTENSION OF
CUESTA DRIVE. AN INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS
PROPOSED FOR ADOPTION (CEQA).
PROJECT ADDRESS: 468/500 Westmont Ave. BY: Kyle Van Leeuwen,
Associate Planner
Phone Number: (805) 781-7091
E-mail: kvanleeuwen@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: SBDV-0169-2020, FROM: Tyler Corey, Deputy Director
EID-0170-2020
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution (Attachment A) recommending the City Council approve Tentative
Tract Map (TTM) No. 3157 and adopt the associated Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration.
SITE DATA
SUMMARY
The applicant has submitted a Tentative Tract Map (TTM) application to subdivide the
subject parcel into 23 residential lots. No residential development is proposed at this time;
however, recordation of the map would require the installation of public improvements,
including new roads, water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure (Attachment B,
Vesting Tentative Tract Map & Phasing Plan). This project was reviewed by Planning
Commission on May 26, 2021. The commission moved to continue the item to allow for
Applicant Andrew G. Meinhold,
Alice Jo Meinhold Survivors
Trust
Representative Katie Rollins, Cannon
Zoning Low-Density Residential (R-
1)
General Plan Low Density Residential
Site Area 4.98 acres
Environmental
Status
Initial Study-Mitigated
Negative Declaration
(IS/MND)
Meeting Date: 7/28/2021
Item Number: 4a
Time Estimate: 90 Minutes
Page 319 of 361
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 2
completion of the 30-day public comment period on the environmental document
prepared for the project and to allow for staff to incorporate additional information and
clarifications that address public comments regarding California red-legged frog,
burrowing owl, and other concerns about biological impacts. The commission also
directed staff to work with the applicant to review alternative grading concepts to further
preserve large trees, and to address concerns raised related to transportation and traffic
impacts (Attachment C, Planning Commission Staff Report and Meeting Minutes).
At the hearing on May 26th, many neighbors stated that they did not receive a mailed
notice about the Planning Commission hearing. Since that hearing, staff discovered that
the notices intended to be sent for the May 26th hearing did not go out with the appropriate
batch and were received late. Due to the circumstances, review of this item is considered
a de novo hearing and will be presented as such with additional attention to those areas
highlighted at the previous hearing. This will also allow for those commissioners not
present at the May 26th hearing to participate.
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
Review the project for consistency with the General Plan, Subdivision Regulations and
applicable City development standards and guidelines. Planning Commission (PC)
review is required for projects that include the subdivision of five or more lots (Subdivision
Regulations, Table 1). The PC’s role is to make a recommendation to the City Council on
the proposed subdivision and associated environmental document (Attachment D, Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration). This project is subject to the Department of
Housing and Urban Development’s Housing Accountability Act. 1
2.0 PROJECT STATISTICS AND SETTING
The project proposes 23 residential lots on a 4.98-acre site zoned for residential use (R-
1). The proposed lots are consistent with the Subdivision Regulations standards for lot
size and dimensions and the proposed streets and other improvements are consistent
with current engineering standards. No exceptions to the subdivision regulations have
been proposed. The project site has a creek that crosses the western portion of the site.
Lots have been proposed in an arrangement that allows for creek setbacks to be applied
to those lots adjacent to the creek and allow for an adequate buildable area outside those
applied setbacks.
1
A tentative tract map application to subdivide lots for residential use is a “housing development project” under the
HAA, and is therefore, afforded the protections set forth in California Government Code Section 65589.5(j)(1). (See
Honchariw v. County of Stanislaus (2011) 200 Cal. App. 4th 1066, 1074.)
Page 320 of 361
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 3
Figure 1: Subdivision Design
TABLE 1: SUBDIVISION: GROSS AND NET LOT SIZE
Lot Gross Lot Size
(sf)
Net Lot Size*
(sf)
Lot Gross Lot Size
(sf)
Net Lot Size*
(sf)
1 24,451 20,109 13 6,000 Same
2 11,283 9,265 14 6,000 Same
3 9,750 8,976 15 6,000 Same
4 7,884 6,598 16 6,000 Same
5 9,115 7,468 17 6,533 Same
6 10,097 7,931 18 6,001 Same
7 8,868 6,823 19 6,691 Same
8 6,374 Same 20 6,298 Same
9 6,000 Same 21 6,117 Same
10 6,000 Same 22 9,283 Same
11 6,000 Same
12 6,000 Same Minimum Req
Net
6,000
*Net lot size excludes areas between creek top of bank
2.1 SETTING
The project site is located adjacent to the northern city limit line just west of Highway 1.
The 4.98-acre site is located at the terminus of the east and west portions of Westmont
Avenue and the northern terminus of Cuesta Drive and Stanford Drive. Existing
development on the project site includes two residential structures and associated
accessory structures, a pool, and other site improvements. Vegetation on the property
Page 321 of 361
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 4
includes a freshwater forested/shrub wetland with associated riparian habitat that extends
through the western portion of the site. The site is generally comprised of
developed/ruderal land, riparian habitat, and annual grassland. There are 177 ornamental
and native trees throughout the project site.
Surrounding land and Zoning are as follows:
West: Single-family residences zoned Low-Density Residential (R-1).
North: Cal Fire San Luis Obispo Unit Headquarters (Fire Station #12), outside city limits.
East: Single- and multi-family residences zoned Low-Density (R-1) and Medium-Density
(R-2).
South: Single-family residences zoned Low-Density Residential (R-1).
3.0 PREVIOUS REVIEW
The project was previously reviewed by the Planning Commission (PC) on May 26, 2021;
however, as noted above, review of this item is considered a de novo hearing. At the May
26th hearing, the PC received presentations and testimony from staff, the applicant’s
team, and the public, and provided direction and comments to staff and the applicant. The
result of this hearing was a motion to continue the item to allow for the completion of the
30-day public comment period on the environmental document, and to allow for staff to
incorporate additional information and clarifications that address public comments
regarding wildlife and biological resources, to explore alternative grading concepts that
would allow for greater protection of large trees, and to address concerns raised related
to transportation impacts (discussed below).
The project was reviewed by the City’s Tree Committee on May 17, 2021, for consistency
with the Tree Regulations. The Tree Committee (TC) recommended that, with the
inclusion of the recommended condition of approval for compensatory planting, the PC
find the proposed tree removals consistent with the City’s Tree Regulations (Attachment
E, Tree Committee Staff Report and Draft Minutes). The TC recommended that the
project approval include a condition to provide compensatory tree plantings at a one-to-
one ratio on site, consistent with Municipal Code requirements, and that compensatory
plantings consist of an even mix of 15-gallon and 24-inch tree box sizes. The
recommendation also stipulated that 50% of the required compensatory plantings be of a
native species. This condition has been included in the proposed resolution as Condition
#5. The TC also included in their motion a request that the Planning Commission consider
the retention of several specific trees onsite. This included one eucalyptus within the
creek corridor (#114), and two eucalyptus and one live oak near the southern edge of the
property line on proposed lots 23 (#s 33, 34, & 91).
4.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
The project must conform to the standards and limitations of the Subdivision Regulations
and be consistent with the General Plan. Staff has evaluated the project and the PC shall
consider if the project is in substantial compliance with the applicable policies and
standards, as discussed in this analysis. The project aligns with the Major City Goal to
address Housing and Homelessness, as the project would facilitate the production of
housing; 23 lots for single-family residential development created from one existing
residential lot.
Page 322 of 361
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 5
4.1 Consistency with the General Plan
The General Plan Land Use Element (LUE), Circulation Element (CE), and Housing
Element (HE) provide policies for the conservation and development of residential
neighborhoods. The Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE) also provides
policies to preserve and protect natural resources on the project site. The project is
consistent with these policies in several aspects.
LUE Policy 2.2.3 Neighborhood Traffic: Neighborhoods should be protected
from intrusive traffic. All neighborhood street and circulation improvements should
favor pedestrians, bicyclists, and local traffic. Vehicle traffic on residential streets
should be slow. To foster suitable traffic speed, street design should include
measures such as narrow lanes, landscaped parkways, traffic circles, textured
crosswalks, and, if necessary, stop signs, speed humps, bollards, and on-street
parking and sidewalks.
LUE Policy 2.2.4 Neighborhood Connections: The City shall provide all areas
with a pattern of streets, pedestrian network, and bicycle facilities that promote
neighborhood and community cohesiveness. There should be continuous
sidewalks or paths of adequate width, connecting neighborhoods with each other
and with public and commercial services and public open space to provide
continuous pedestrian paths throughout the city. Connectivity to nearby community
facilities (such as parks and schools), open space, and supporting commercial
areas shall also be enhanced, but shall not be done in a method that would
increase cut-through traffic.
CE Policy 4.1.4 New Development: The City shall require that new development
provide bikeways, secure bicycle storage, parking facilities and showers consistent
with City plans and development standards. When evaluating transportation
impacts, the City shall use a Multimodal Level of Service analysis.
CE Policy 5.1.3 New Development: New development shall provide sidewalks
and pedestrian paths consistent with City policies, plans, programs, and standards.
When evaluating transportation impact, the City shall use a Multimodal Level of
Service analysis.
HE Policy 7.3: New residential developments should incorporate pedestrian and
bicycle linkages that provide direct, convenient and safe access to adjacent
neighborhoods, schools, parks, and shopping areas.
The design of the subdivision protects the existing neighborhood from intrusive traffic by
only connecting the two existing streets to the south, avoiding any increase in cut-through
traffic between other existing neighborhoods and Highway 1. The subdivision design also
incorporates a potential bicycle and pedestrian connection to the east, as well as
parkways, on-street parking, and sidewalks.
Page 323 of 361
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 6
Figure 1: Subdivision Design Circulation Connections
LUE Policy 2.3.5. Neighborhood Pattern: The City shall require that all new
residential development be integrated with existing neighborhoods. Where
physical features make this impossible, the new development should create new
neighborhoods.
The design of the subdivision integrates with the existing neighborhood by continuing the
street layout of Stanford and Cuesta Drive, including street width, sidewalks, and
parkways (see Figure 2 as example).
Figure 2: Cuesta Drive Street Design Connection to Existing
LUE Policy 2.3.7. Natural Features: The City shall require residential
developments to preserve and incorporate as amenities natural site features, such
as landforms, views, creeks, wetlands, wildlife habitats, wildlife corridors, and
plants.
Page 324 of 361
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 7
LUE Policy 2.3.10 Site Constraints: The City shall require new residential
developments to respect site constraints such as property size and shape, ground
slope, access, creeks and wetlands, wildlife habitats, wildlife corridors, native
vegetation, and significant trees.
COSE Policy 7.7.9 Creek Setback B.: Development approvals should respect the
separation from creek banks and protection of floodways and natural features
identified in part A above (buildings, streets, driveways, etc.), whether or not the
setback line has been established.
The TTM identifies the dimensions of the creek and existing riparian area. The lots
proposed adjacent to the creek are a larger size so that creek protection measures, such
as compliance with the applied creek setback requirements, can be met and still allow
development of the created parcel. The TTM also proposes no development or grading
activities in the southwest corner of the site, where the creek and associated vegetation
is most prominent and established. In all, over 60 coast live oaks, will be retained within
the protected creek corridor area, as well as other native species.
Figure 3: Creek Corridor, trees number in black within setbacks are retained
4.2 Consistency with Subdivision Regulations
Lots Size and Dimensions
The Subdivision Regulations regulates minimum lot sizes in the R-1 zone and sets
specific development standards. The minimum lot size allowed in the R-1 zone is 6,000
square feet with a minimum width of 50 feet and a minimum depth of 90 feet. Lots are
also required to have a minimum street frontage of 20 feet. All the lots within the proposed
Page 325 of 361
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 8
subdivision meet these base requirements for size and dimension. Additionally, the
Subdivision Regulations states that any area between creek banks shall be excluded from
the calculation of minimum lot area. The TTM has also demonstrated compliance with
this requirement (See Table 1 above). The Subdivision Regulations also call for natural
contours of the site to be preserved to the greatest extent possible in new subdivisions
and for lot lines to be generally perpendicular to the street (§16.18). The design of the
subdivision is consistent with these standards.
Corner Lots
Lot 19 of the TTM is the only “corner lot” included in the proposed subdivision. Per Table
3 of the Subdivision Regulations, corner lots in residential subdivisions shall have a
minimum area of 15% greater than otherwise required and shall be ten feet wider that
otherwise required. Lot 19 does provide a width of no less than 60 feet, consistent with
this standard, but is less than 15% larger than the minimum lot area. Staff has included
in the proposed resolution condition #3 which requires the area of lot 19 to be increased
to no less than 6,900 square feet for final map recordation, consistent with regulations
standards for corner lots. This can be achieved by moving the lot line between Lot 19 and
lot 20 approximately 2 feet, without compromising Lot 20’s compliance with minimum lot
size or dimension standards. Only minor changes in site grading will be needed with this
adjustment of lot lines.
5.0 ANALYSIS OF PC DIRECTIONAL ITEMS
The following analysis section concentrates on the specific areas identified by the PC at
the May 26th hearing.
5.1 Environmental Review
Prior to the May 26th hearing public comment was received regarding the biological
analysis incorporated into the Initial Study. Areas of concern were specific to the adequate
protection of the riparian and wildlife corridor, the California red-legged frog, and the
burrowing owl. In response to these comments, the applicant’s biologist and City’s
Sustainability and Natural Resource Officer re-visited the site on June 10th to further
evaluate the conditions of the site and adjacent creek areas, and the applicant’s biologist,
Kevin Merk, has provided a memorandum in response to those comments (Attachment
F). The conclusions of that analysis and additional staff analysis are provided below.
The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration has been updated in certain areas as
needed in connection to the information below in response to public comments and
Planning Commission direction. These modifications do not require recirculation of the
IS/MND because the edits constitute minor modifications and clarifications to an adequate
MND and do not include significant new information that would result in a new significant
environmental impact or a substantial increase in the severity of a significant
environmental impact. Within the Initial Study document all new text is indicated by
underlined, bold, and italicized text. Deleted text is indicated by strike-through
(Attachment D). Additional information and discussion about certain areas of the
Environmental Review are provided in Attachment C.
Page 326 of 361
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 9
Riparian Corridor and Creek Protection
The project proposes to remove nonnative species from the riparian corridor and this
removal is recommended by the project's Fire Protection Plan (Attachment K) to reduce
fuel loads; this does not include the redwood trees in the corridor. The effects of these
actions and other measures within the creek corridor are described in the Biological
Resource Analysis and further discussed in the Memorandum, provided by Kevin Merk.
The conclusion of that analysis is that with the application of creek setbacks,
establishment of an open space easement, and the habitat enhancements proposed
(such as the removal on non-native species and replanting of native species), the habitat
value of this creek area will increase, and the wildlife corridor connecting areas to the
north and south will be maintained and enhanced.
Additional Information on Creek Protection
The section of Twin Ridge Creek located on the project site is not a creek subject to creek
setback requirements outlined in the General Plan and Zoning Regulations. While the
project plans identify a 20-foot setback from the riparian area, these 20-foot setbacks do
not reflect a current requirement for the site. The creek setback standards in the Zoning
Regulations (Section 17.70.030 (B)), state: creek setback requirements shall apply to all
creeks as defined in the General Plan Open Space Element and shown on that element’s
creek map, and only to those creeks. This section of Twin Ridge Creek is not identified
on the Conservation and Open Space Element2 (COSE) Creek Map and therefore, is not
currently subject to creek setback requirements.
The creek setbacks were shown on plans at the recommendation of staff and are intended
to show that a usable building envelope is provided on each lot adjacent to the creek, in
anticipation that the application of creek setbacks would likely be included as a mitigation
measure or tract condition. This also demonstrates that the lots were specifically designed
by the applicant to include appropriate creek protection, even if the Zoning Regulations
do not specifically require a 20-foot setback for the onsite creek. Creek protection is also
consistent with guidelines found in the Subdivision Regulations.3 The IS/MND includes
mitigation measure BIO-11, which requires the application of creek setback standards to
the sites adjacent to the creek. This means that creek setback requirements will be
applied to the newly created lots adjacent to the creek when structures are proposed,
even though this section of Twin Ridge Creek is not identified on the COSE creeks map.
Extent of Riparian Edge
During the recent review of the riparian corridor and associated analysis documents, a
discrepancy was identified in the method used to determine the extent of the creek’s
riparian area, and the extent of jurisdictional areas. The applicant’s initial delineation of
the creek’s riparian area did not include areas covered by non-native trees such as the
eucalyptus and acacia trees, and the delineation has been adjusted to include this
additional area in Attachment G (Review of Preservation of Trees & Alternative Grading
Concept). This revised delineation is consistent with the City’s Creek Setback standards,
2 City of San Luis Obispo, Conservation and Open Space Element: Figure 9: Creeks and Wetlands:
https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/4110/635497639403930000
3 Subdivision Regulations, §16.18.155 (1): Creeks and their corridors are to be preserved as open space, and creek corridors are
to be maintained in essentially a natural state to protect the community’s water quality, wildlife diversity, and aesthetic value.
Page 327 of 361
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 10
which state that creek setbacks shall be measured from the existing top of bank or from
the edge of the predominant pattern of riparian vegetation, whichever is further from the
creek flow line (Section 17.70.030.C). While the City’s creek setback requirements do not
apply to this specific creek, as noted above, the language in the Zoning Regulations
explaining how the setback would be measured is a useful tool to use when determining
the extent of riparian area that should be protected.
In response to this discrepancy, and the direction from PC to explore the possibility of
retaining more trees on site (discussed further below), the applicant has provided an
additional exhibit showing the revised delineation in addition to an alternative grading
approach and new locations for storm water treatment/retention. These new grading and
retention locations would be outside this expanded riparian area and would allow for the
retention of the non-native species; however, as discussed further below, retaining these
non-native trees would conflict with the Fire Protection Measures that are recommended
to mitigate a potential wildfire impact. This change in delineation of the riparian corridor
to include non-native species does not result in a new significant impact or increase the
severity of an identified impact because the physical effects of the project on the
environment, including and not limited to proposed tree removals, was adequately
addressed in the Initial Study, and the clarifications that have been incorporated into the
Initial Study include evidence in support of the impact determinations. Mitigation requiring
compensatory plantings would be required.
California Red Legged Frog
In the Biological Resource Assessment provided by Kevin Merk, it was stated that
California red-legged frog (CRLF) was “unlikely” to occur on the project site based on lack
of suitable habitat and separation from known breeding sites to the north. Public
comments received by the City suggested that a “permanently wetted” branch of Twin
Ridge Creek downstream of the site may provide suitable habitat for CRLF. Upon further
review by Merk (Attachment F), the areas identified by the commenter are not suitable for
CRLF breeding due to the small size of pools and insufficient water depth and lack of
vegetation cover. Furthermore, while this creek is within a 116,517-acre area designated
as critical habitat for the CRLF, Twin Ridge Creek has not been identified as red-legged
frog habitat in the California Natural Diversity Database (Attachment H, Biological
Resource Assessment). Any currently identified breeding sites are separated from the
project site by a major barrier (Highway 1), leading to the conclusion that there is a very
low potential for CRLF to utilize the project site or adjacent wetted areas for breeding or
dispersal. In addition, required mitigation includes pre-construction surveys and biological
monitoring to ensure avoidance and protection of special-status species. Based on the
analysis in the IS/MND and supplemental evaluation (Attachment F), no additional studies
or mitigation measures are warranted.
Burrowing Owl
Burrowing owls are rare in the coastal San Luis Obispo area, and according to the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife are believed to no longer nest in this region.
The project site is highly manipulated from years of human occupation, and the onsite
grassland areas are used regularly for horses and are mowed and managed. This species
is very sensitive to human activity and the proximity of the site to dense urban
Page 328 of 361
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 11
development in the city further reduces the habitat value for this species, especially
considering the extensive grasslands to the north along Highway 1 that are further away
from human activities. No Burrowing Owls were observed during field investigations. The
mitigation measures included with the IS/MND require a pre-construction survey and
provide protections in the case that a Burrowing Owl is discovered on site or in close
proximity. Based on this analysis no additional studies or mitigations are warranted.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Public comments received by the City stated that the project would result in substantial
erosion and increased discharge into the creek, and that the project would substantially
decrease groundwater recharge. While the project would increase the amount of
impervious surface, the project will be required to comply with the drainage requirements
of the City’s Waterways Management Plan. This plan was adopted for the purpose of
ensuring water quality and proper drainage within the City’s watershed. The Waterways
Management Plan and Low Impact Development (LID) stormwater treatment requires that
site development be designed so that post-development site drainage does not
significantly exceed pre-development run-off.
The proposed drainage measures would be implemented to catch additional surface
runoff generated from the project during operation. As further described in the Drainage
Report (Attachment I), the proposed approach to peak flow management for this project
would result in an overall reduction in peak flow into Twin Ridge Creek. The proposed
approach to peak flow management includes collecting a portion of the runoff from the
proposed development, detaining that flow in a detention facility, and then introducing it
to Twin Ridge Creek. Other locations on site collect and detain runoff within an
underground detention facility and then released onto streets consistent with the current
drainage condition for the site.
The project is also required to comply with Post-Construction Stormwater Management
Requirements, including requirements for site design, water quality treatment, runoff
retention, and peak discharge management. These requirements include, and are not
limited to, minimizing impervious surfaces, collecting stormwater runoff to reduce
pollutant discharge, and maintaining the pre-developed hydrology by reducing overland
flow and promoting groundwater recharge. Therefore, based on compliance with existing
regulations and recommended mitigation measures, no significant hydrology and water
quality impacts would occur.
5.2 Tree Preservation
The Planning Commission directed staff and the project applicant to explore alternative
grading approaches to further preserve large trees currently on site that are identified for
removal (Attachment J, Tree Removal Exhibit). Staff discussed and evaluated with the
applicant possible modifications to site grading, and this analysis also took into
consideration how changes in proposed site grading would affect the project’s compliance
with Subdivision Regulations, Engineering Standards and other City codes and
standards. The overall conclusion of these evaluations was that greater tree protection in
most instances would require such changes in grading or site engineering that the project
would be brought out of compliance with applicable regulations and standards related to
Page 329 of 361
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 12
grading and site engineering. A summary of this evaluation and conflicts has been
provided by the applicant (Attachment G, Review of Preservation of Trees & Alternative
Grading Concept). In addition, retention of the non-native trees would conflict with the
Fire Protection Report, which calls for non-native trees within the corridor to be removed.
The Subdivision Regulations call for the natural contours of a site to be largely preserved,
and storm water and drainage standards call for runoff to be retained and managed within
the site. Compliance with these requirements paired with the fact that large trees are often
located at low points of the site where water naturally collects, presents an unavoidable
conflict with the preservation of trees. For other larger trees not located in low lying areas,
engineering standards for street and driveway grades, and limits on retaining wall heights,
constrain how much the subdivision design can be modified to facilitate tree preservation
while maintaining compliance with those standards. While tree protection policies are
applicable to the project, a proposed subdivision must first and foremost be compliant
with the Subdivision Regulations and Engineering Standards. This project does not
include any exceptions to subdivision standards or engineering standards for streets and
driveways.
Trees within the Creek Corridor
The applicant has provided an additional exhibit showing how the project can be executed
while retaining the non-native trees within and directly adjacent to the riparian area, with
grading and stormwater treatment/retention areas moved outside of these areas. While
retention of the non-native trees in this area is possible as shown on the applicant’s
additional exhibit, staff notes that this would conflict with the Fire Protection Report, which
calls for non-native trees within the corridor to be removed. The City’s Fire Marshall
required a Fire Protection Report be provided for the project, and this report provides
effective ways to mitigate fire risk. The Fire Protection Report’s recommendations are
incorporated as mitigation measures for the project and would mitigate potential wildfire
impacts to a less than significant level.
In conjunction with the removal of non-native trees in the riparian area, mitigation
measure BIO-10 requires a compensatory mitigation program to ensure no net-loss of
riparian habitat. These replanting efforts will “fill in” some areas where non-native species
were removed and will become the new riparian edge. When development of specific lots
occurs, the setback will be measured from this edge. Staff recommends that the language
of condition #4 be modified from the previous resolution as follows:
Plans submitted for final map recordation shall include the Biological Easement
required by mitigation measure BIO- 11. This easement shall include all the area
between the creek top of bank, or current riparian area, or replanted areas which
are planned directly adjacent to the creek, whichever is furthest from the
centerline of the creek. The easement shall also cover all areas identified for
Cambria morning glory replanting required by mitigation measure BIO-1.
This will ensure that compensatory planting areas intended to compensate for removal of
non-native species receive open space easement protections.
Page 330 of 361
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 13
5.3 Transportation and Traffic Concerns
Planning Commission directed staff to address concerns raised by neighboring residents
related to traffic impacts of the project. The evaluation of the project includes analysis of
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), consistency with the Circulation Element, potential
hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses, and emergency access.
This analysis concludes that there are no significant impacts related to transportation and
traffic. In evaluating the impacts of new streets and level of service, staff found that the
existing streets would become safer than the current condition with the extension of
Cuesta Drive connecting to an extension of Stanford Drive. While the extension of the two
streets would increase the number of vehicles utilizing them, approximately seven
additional homes using Stanford and nine using Cuesta, these new street connections
would also improve emergency access. Currently, these two streets do not terminate in
a cul-de-sac turnaround, which is an undesirable scenario. With the two streets
connected, residents in the area will have a second means of evacuation, and emergency
vehicle response is improved. For these reasons, staff does not recommend modifications
to the project’s current street design.
6.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
The project has been reviewed by various City departments and divisions including
Planning, Engineering, Utilities, Fire, Building, Office of Sustainability, Natural Resources,
and the City Arborist. Comments have been incorporated into the draft resolution as
conditions of approval.
7.0 ACTION ALTERNATIVES
7.1 Continue the item. An action to continue the item should include a detailed list of
additional information or analysis required.
7.2 Deny the project. An action denying the application should include findings that
cite the basis for denial and should reference inconsistency with the General Plan,
Subdivision Regulations, Zoning Regulations or other policy documents or make
findings required by the Housing Accountability Act (California Government Code
Section 65589.5(j)(1) that the project either results in a “specific, adverse impact”
and “there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse
impact.”
8.0 ATTACHMENTS
A. Draft Resolution
B. Vesting Tentative Tract Map & Phasing Plan
C. Planning Commission Staff Report and Meeting Minutes 5.26.21
D. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
E. Tree Committee Staff Report and Draft Meeting Minutes 5.17.21
F. Response to Comments Regarding Biological Resources, Kevin Merk Associates
G. Review of Preservation of Trees & Alternative Grading Concept, Cannon
H. Biological Resource Assessment
I. Drainage Report
J. Tree Removal Exhibit
K. Fire Protection Plan
Page 331 of 361
1
Planning Commission Minutes
July 28, 2021, 6:00 p.m.
City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo
Planning
Commissioners
Present:
Chair Bob Jorgensen, Vice Chair Nick Quincey, Commissioner
Hemalata Dandekar, Commissioner Michael Hopkins,
Commissioner Steve Kahn, Commissioner Michelle Shoresman
Planning
Commissioners
Absent:
Commissioner Mike Wulkan
City Staff Present: Community Development Director Michael Codron, Deputy
Community Development Director Tyler Corey, Assistant City
Attorney Markie Jorgensen, Kevin Christian, Deputy City Clerk
_____________________________________________________________________
1. CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission was called to
order on July 28, 2021 at 6:01 p.m.
2. PUBLIC COMMENT
Public Comment:
None
--End of Public Comment--
3. CONSENT
3.a CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES - JULY 14, 2021 PLANNING
COMMISSION MINUTES
Approve the Planning Commission Minutes of July 14, 2021.
Motion By Commissioner Dandekar
Second By Commissioner Kahn
Page 332 of 361
2
Ayes (6): Chair Jorgensen, Vice Chair Quincey, Commissioner Dandekar,
Commissioner Hopkins, Commissioner Kahn, and Commissioner
Shoresman
Absent (1): Commissioner Wulkan
CARRIED (6 to 0)
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS
4.a 468/500 WESTMONT AVE (SBDV-0169-2020, EID-0170-2020) REVIEW
OF TTM NO. 3157, 23 LOT SUBDIVISION AND ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW
Commissioner Kahn declared a conflict on this item. (Cannon, his
employer, provides the Project Representative and Engineer for this
project. At 6:05 p.m., Commissioner Kahn recused himself and left the
room. )
Associate Planner Kyle Van Leeuwen presented the staff report,
expounding on focus topics that arose in the original hearing, and
responded to commission inquiries with input from Community
Development Director, Michael Codron, Deputy Community Development
Director, Tyler Corey, Assistant City Attorney, Markie Jorgensen, and
Supervising Civil Engineer, Hal Hannula.
Applicant representative, Katie Rollins, provided a brief overview of the
project and areas of concern raised previously by the Commission and
public, and responded to questions raised.
Chair Jorgensen opened the public hearing.
Public Comments:
David Brodie
Robert Schroeder
Maryann Stansfield
Eileen Amaral
Genevieve Czech
Adolf Czech
Becky Keen
Laurie Fenwick
--End of Public Comment--
Page 333 of 361
3
Chair Jorgensen closed the public hearing.
The Commission directed staff to include a full account of alternative traffic
circulation options in their report to City Council.
Motion By Commissioner Hopkins
Second By Commissioner Shoresman
Adopt a Resolution entitled, "A Resolution of the Planning Commission of
the City of San Luis Obispo, California, recommending the City Council
adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Review and
Tentative Tract Map No. 3157 to create twenty-three (23) residential lots in
the Low-Density (R-1) Zone (SBDV-0169-2020, EID-0170-2020)." with the
following condition modification and added condition:
Modification to Condition #4 - Plans submitted for final map recordation
shall include the Biological Easement required by mitigation measure BIO-
11. This easement shall include all the area between the creek top of
bank, or current riparian area, or replanted areas which are planted
directly adjacent to the creek, whichever is furthest from the centerline
of the creek. The easement shall also cover all areas identified for
Cambria morning glory replanting required by mitigation measure BIO-1.
New Condition - to include the development of a Construction
Communication Plan.
Ayes (4): Chair Jorgensen, Vice Chair Quincey, Commissioner Hopkins,
and Commissioner Shoresman
Noes (1): Commissioner Dandekar
Absent (1): Commissioner Wulkan
CARRIED (4 to 1)
4.b 950/990 AERO DRIVE (ARCH-0165-2020) REVIEW OF A REQUEST
FOR A USE PERMIT AND DESIGN REVIEW FOR A PROPOSED
125,500-SQUARE FOOT, THREE-STORY, 204-ROOM, DUAL-
BRANDED HOTEL
Senior Planner Shawna Scott presented the staff report and responded to
Commission inquiries.
Applicant representative, Pamela Jardini, provided an overview of the
project and responded to questions raised by the Commission.
Page 334 of 361
4
Chair Jorgensen opened the public hearing.
Public Comments:
None
--End of Public Comment--
Chair Jorgensen closed the public hearing.
Motion By Commissioner Kahn
Second By Commissioner Hopkins
Adopt a Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the Planning Commission of
the City of San Luis Obispo, California, Approving The Airport Hotel
Project including approval of a Planning Commission Use Permit to allow
a hotel in the Business Park Zone, and associated exceptions to Lot
Frontage Side Parking Standard, Loading Space Standard, and Sign
Regulations for wall signs as represented in the staff report dated July 28,
2021, and adoption of the associated Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration (ARCH-0165-2020, USE-0294-2019, and EID-0650-2020; 950
and 990 Aero Drive)" with a Condition amendment:
Condition #47 - The time frame when no left turn is permitted should be
specified on the proposed signage, subject to approval by the Public
Works Director.
Ayes (6): Chair Jorgensen, Vice Chair Quincey, Commissioner Dandekar,
Commissioner Hopkins, Commissioner Kahn, and Commissioner
Shoresman
Absent (1): Commissioner Wulkan
CARRIED (6 to 0)
5. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
5.a STAFF UPDATES AND AGENDA FORECAST
Deputy Community Development Director Tyler Corey provided an update
of upcoming projects.
6. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:51 p.m. The next Regular Meeting of the
Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for August 11, 2021 at 6:00 p.m. in
the Council Chambers at City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
Page 335 of 361
5
_________________________
APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION: XX/XX/202X
Page 336 of 361
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT:Review of a Tentative Tract Map (Tract 3157) to create 23 residential lots on a 4.98-
acre site within the Low-Density Residential (R-1) zone. Project includes the extension of Stanford
Drive, which will connect to an extension of Cuesta Drive. An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration is proposed (CEQA).
PROJECT ADDRESS:468/500 Westmont Ave.BY:Kyle Van Leeuwen, Associate Planner
Phone Number: (805) 781-7091
E-mail: kvanleeuwen@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER:SBDV-0169-2020,FROM:Tyler Corey, Deputy Director
EID-0170-2020
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution recommending the City Council approve Tentative Tract Map (TTM) No. 3157
and adopt the associated Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.
SITE DATA
SUMMARY
The applicant has submitted a Tentative Tract Map (TTM) application to subdivide the subject parcel
into 23 residential lots. No residential development is proposed at this time; however, recordation of
the map would require the installation of public improvements, including new roads, water,
wastewater and storm water infrastructure (Attachment 2, Project Plans and Vesting Tentative Tract
Map). To accommodate the onsite improvements, 86 ornamental, native and non-native trees would
be removed, 51 of which are identified as subject to tree removal permitting and compensatory
requirements.
Applicant Andrew G. Meinhold,
Alice Jo Meinhold Survivors
Trust
Representative Katie Rollins, Cannon
Zoning Low-Density Residential (R-1)
General Plan Low Density Residential
Site Area 4.98 acres
Environmental
Status
Initial Study-Mitigated Negative
Declaration (IS/MND)
Meeting Date: May 26, 2021
Item Number:
Item 2
Packet Page 3Page 337 of 361
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 2
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
Review the project for consistency with the General Plan, Subdivision Regulations and applicable
City development standards and guidelines. Planning Commission (PC) review is required for
projects that include the subdivision of five or more lots (Subdivision Regulations, Table 1). The PC’s
role is to make a recommendation to the City Council on the proposed subdivision and associated
environmental review.
2.0 PROJECT STATISTICS AND SETTING
TABLE 1: SUBDIVISION: GROSS AND NET LOT SIZE
Lot Gross Lot Size (sf) Net Lot Size* (sf) Lot Gross Lot Size (sf) Net Lot Size*
sf)
1 24,451 20,109 13 6,000 Same
2 11,283 9,265 14 6,000 Same
3 9,750 8,976 15 6,000 Same
4 7,884 6,598 16 6,000 Same
5 9,115 7,468 17 6,533 Same
6 10,097 7,931 18 6,001 Same
7 8,868 6,823 19 6,691 Same
8 6,374 Same 20 6,298 Same
9 6,000 Same 21 6,117 Same
10 6,000 Same 22 9,283 Same
11 6,000 Same
12 6,000 Same Minimum Req Net 6,000
Net lot size excludes areas between creek top of bank
2.1 SETTING
The project site is located adjacent to the northern city limit line just west of Highway 1. The 4.98-
acre site is located at the terminus of the east and west portions of Westmont Avenue and the northern
terminus of Cuesta Drive and Stanford Drive. Existing development on the project site includes a
residential structure and associated accessory structures, a pool, and other site improvements.
Vegetation on the property includes a freshwater forested/shrub wetland with associated riparian
habitat that extends through the western portion of the site. The site is generally comprised of
developed/ruderal land, riparian habitat, and annual grassland. There are 177 ornamental and native
trees throughout the project site.
Surrounding land and Zoning are as follows:
West: Single-family residences zoned Low-Density Residential (R-1).
North: Cal Fire San Luis Obispo Unit Headquarters (Fire Station #12), outside city limits.
East: Single- and multi-family residences zoned Low-Density (R-1) and Medium-Density (R-2).
South: Single-family residences zoned Low-Density Residential (R-1).
Item 2
Packet Page 4Page 338 of 361
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 3
3.0 PREVIOUS REVIEW
The project was reviewed by the City’s Tree Committee on May 17, 2021 for consistency with the
Tree Regulations. The Tree Committee (TC) recommended that, with the inclusion of the
recommended condition of approval for compensatory planting, the PC find the proposed tree
removals consistent with the City’s Tree Regulations (Attachment 3, Tree Committee Staff Report
and Draft Minutes). The TC recommended that the project approval include a condition to provide
compensatory tree plantings at a one-to-one ratio on site, consistent with Municipal Code
requirements, and that compensatory plantings consist of an even mix of 15-gallon and 24-inch tree
box sizes. The recommendation also stipulated that 50% of the required compensatory plantings be
of a native species. This condition has been included in the proposed resolution as Condition #5.
The TC also included in their motion a request that the Planning Commission consider the retention
of several specific trees onsite. This included one eucalyptus within the creek corridor (#114), and
two eucalyptus and one live oak near the southern edge of the property line on proposed lots 23 (#s
33, 34, & 91). Staff does not recommend retention of these trees as retention of the eucalyptus in the
creek corridor is inconstant with wildfire mitigation measure W-1, and retention of trees near the
southern property line would require a redesign of the stormwater treatment/retention system and
changes in lot grading.
4.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
The project must conform to the standards and limitations of the Subdivision Regulations and be
consistent with the General Plan. Staff has evaluated the project and the PC shall consider if the
project is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards, as discussed in this analysis.
4.1 Consistency with the General Plan
The General Plan Land Use Element (LUE), Circulation Element (CE), and Housing Element (HE)
provide policies for the conservation and development of residential neighborhoods. The
Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE) also provides policies to preserve and protect natural
resources on the project site. The project is consistent with these policies in several aspects.
LUE Policy 2.2.3 Neighborhood Traffic: Neighborhoods should be protected from intrusive
traffic. All neighborhood street and circulation improvements should favor pedestrians,
bicyclists, and local traffic. Vehicle traffic on residential streets should be slow. To foster
suitable traffic speed, street design should include measures such as narrow lanes, landscaped
parkways, traffic circles, textured crosswalks, and, if necessary, stop signs, speed humps,
bollards, and on-street parking and sidewalks.
LUE Policy 2.2.4 Neighborhood Connections: The City shall provide all areas with a pattern
of streets, pedestrian network, and bicycle facilities that promote neighborhood and
community cohesiveness. There should be continuous sidewalks or paths of adequate width,
connecting neighborhoods with each other and with public and commercial services and
public open space to provide continuous pedestrian paths throughout the city. Connectivity to
nearby community facilities (such as parks and schools), open space, and supporting
commercial areas shall also be enhanced, but shall not be done in a method that would
increase cut-through traffic.
Item 2
Packet Page 5Page 339 of 361
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 4
CE Policy 4.1.4 New Development: The City shall require that new development provide
bikeways, secure bicycle storage, parking facilities and showers consistent with City plans
and development standards. When evaluating transportation impacts, the City shall use a
Multimodal Level of Service analysis.
CE Policy 5.1.3 New Development: New development shall provide sidewalks and pedestrian
paths consistent with City policies, plans, programs, and standards. When evaluating
transportation impact, the City shall use a Multimodal Level of Service analysis.
HE Policy 7.3: New residential developments should incorporate pedestrian and bicycle
linkages that provide direct, convenient and safe access to adjacent neighborhoods, schools,
parks, and shopping areas.
The design of the subdivision protects the existing neighborhood from intrusive traffic by only
connecting the two existing streets to the south, avoiding any increase in cut-through traffic between
other existing neighborhoods and Highway 1. The subdivision design also incorporates a potential
bicycle and pedestrian connection to the east, as well as parkways, on-street parking, and sidewalks.
Figure 1: Subdivision Design Circulation Connections
LUE Policy 2.3.5. Neighborhood Pattern: The City shall require that all new residential
development be integrated with existing neighborhoods. Where physical features make this
impossible, the new development should create new neighborhoods.
The design of the subdivision integrates with the existing neighborhood by continuing the street
layout of Stanford and Cuesta Drive, including street width, sidewalks, and parkways (see Figure 2
as example).
Item 2
Packet Page 6Page 340 of 361
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 5
Figure 2: Cuesta Drive Street Design Connection to Existing
LUE Policy 2.3.7. Natural Features: The City shall require residential developments to
preserve and incorporate as amenities natural site features, such as land forms, views, creeks,
wetlands, wildlife habitats, wildlife corridors, and plants.
LUE Policy 2.3.10 Site Constraints: The City shall require new residential developments to
respect site constraints such as property size and shape, ground slope, access, creeks and
wetlands, wildlife habitats, wildlife corridors, native vegetation, and significant trees.
COSE Policy 7.7.9 Creek Setback B.: Development approvals should respect the separation
from creek banks and protection of floodways and natural features identified in part A above
buildings, streets, driveways, etc.), whether or not the setback line has been established.
The TTM identifies the dimensions of the creek and existing riparian area. The lots proposed adjacent
to the creek are a larger size so that creek protection measures, such as compliance with creek setback
requirements, can be met and still allow development of the created parcel. The TTM also proposes
no development or grading activities in the southwest corner of the site, where the creek and
associated vegetation is most prominent and established. In all, over 60 coast live oaks, will be
retained within the protected creek corridor area, as well as other native species.
Item 2
Packet Page 7Page 341 of 361
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 6
Figure 3: Creek Corridor, trees number in black within setbacks are retained
4.2 Consistency with Subdivision Regulations
Lots Size and Dimensions
The Subdivision Regulations regulates minimum lot sizes in the R-1 zone and sets specific
development standards. The minimum lot size allowed in the R-1 zone is 6,000 square feet with a
minimum width of 50 feet and a minimum depth of 90 feet. Lots are also required to have a minimum
street frontage of 20 feet. All of the lots within the proposed subdivision meet these base requirements
for size and dimension. Additionally, the Subdivision Regulations states that any area between creek
banks shall be excluded from the calculation of minimum lot area. The TTM has also demonstrated
compliance with this requirement (See Table 1 above).
Corner Lots
Lot 19 of the TTM is the only “corner lot” included in the proposed subdivision. Per Table 3 of the
Subdivision Regulations, corner lots in residential subdivisions shall have a minimum area of 15%
greater than otherwise required and shall be ten feet wider that otherwise required. Lot 19 does
provide a width of no less than 60 feet, consistent with this standard, but is less than 15% larger than
the minimum lot area. Staff has included in the proposed resolution condition #3 which requires the
area of lot 19 to be increased to no less than 6,900 square feet for final map recordation, consistent
with regulations standards for corner lots. This can be achieved by moving the lot line between Lot
19 and lot 20 approximately 2 feet, without compromising Lot 20’s compliance with minimum lot
size or dimension standards. Only minor changes in site grading will be needed with this adjustment
of lot lines.
Item 2
Packet Page 8Page 342 of 361
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 7
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed project has been analyzed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA). An Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was prepared and is currently
being circulated. The IS/MND was noticed for circulation on April 29, 2021 and will be circulated
until May 29, 2021 for public review. The Planning Commission shall review the environmental
analysis (refer to Attachment 4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration) and provide a
recommendation to the City Council regarding adoption of the IS/MND. The following discussion
highlights some of the more significant topics of the environmental analysis.
Biology
The initial study and associated biological survey identified Cambria morning glory within the annual
grassland on site, which is a special-status plant species. Construction of the project would result in
the removal or disturbance of the Cambria morning glory. Implementation of Mitigation Measures
BIO-1 and BIO-2 reduce potential impacts to Cambria morning glory to less than significant. These
measures require implementation of a Rare Plan Mitigation Program that would establish replanting
of Cambria morning glory so that after a 5-year period there would be no net loss of the plant on site.
The project site contains a riparian forest along the onsite creek located in the western portion the
property. The identified riparian forest consists of native riparian trees and shrubs, and native
understory plants are also present within the riparian area. In addition, the Fire Protection Plan
requires removal of non-native trees within the riparian habitat, resulting in the removal of 13 trees,
primarily acacia (silver wattle) trees. The proposed TTM shows the extent of the riparian area and a
20-foot creek setback, which would be further protected by implementation of mitigation measure
BIO-11, which requires recordation of a biological easement on the Final Map and application of
creek setback standards. No paving or structures would be permitted in the biological easement area,
however, grading activity is proposed in several areas within the creek setback for stabilization, and
placement of rip rap pads are proposed within or adjacent to the setback1. The project requires permits
described in Mitigation Measure BIO-10 for work proposed within the riparian area. The easement
and application of creek setback standards would affect proposed Lots 1–8.
Wildfire
The project area and adjacent lands are identified as low and moderate wildland fire risk in the Safety
Element of the General Plan. The Element states that development shall only be approved when
adequate fire suppression services and facilities are available or will be made concurrent with
development. Parcel upgrades include emergency access, upgraded roads, and necessary utility
connections. To manage wildfire risk associated with placing residents in close proximity to moderate
and high fire hazard severity areas, a Vegetation/Fuel Management Plan for the project site has been
identified in Mitigation Measure WF-1. Additionally, a Wildland Fire Protection Report identifies
mitigation measures to further reduce wildland fire hazards to future development and is described in
Mitigation Measure WF-2. Part of this mitigation measure calls for the removal of non-native plant
species within the creek corridor to manage wildfire risk.
1 Zoning Regulations § 17.70.030 G. Exceptions to Creek Setback: 2. Accessory Structures and Uses. The following items may be
located within the required creek setback without obtaining a discretionary exception unless otherwise noted, provided, that they do
not extend beyond the top of bank into the creek channel; will not cause the removal of native riparian vegetation; will not reduce any
flooding capacity in compliance with the City’s flood damage prevention regulations; in total occupy not more than one -half of the
total required creek setback area; and are consistent with other property development standards of the Zoning Regulations.
h. Natural flood control and stormwater improvements, including vegetated buffers, bioswales, and rain gardens.
Item 2
Packet Page 9Page 343 of 361
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 8
5.1 Comments Received
Comments were received from the State Department of Toxic Substances Control recommending
certain broad-based evaluations be included in the MND Hazards and Hazardous Materials section.
In review of these recommendations, staff finds that the Initial Study sufficiently identifies the
potential impacts related to hazardous materials for this project and project site. Given the project’s
size, location, and surroundings, potential impacts would be mitigated by Mitigation Measures AQ-
3, AQ-4 and AQ-5. This was the only comment received at the time of publication of this report. The
applicant has agreed to all mitigation measures proposed specific to this project. The IS/MND shall
constitute the complete environmental determination for the project.
5.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
The project has been reviewed by various City departments and divisions including; Planning,
Engineering, Utilities, Fire, Building, Office of Sustainability, Natural Resources and the City
Arborist. Comments have been incorporated into the draft resolution as conditions of approval.
6.0 ACTION ALTERNATIVES
6.1 Continue the item. An action to continue the item should include a detailed list of additional
information or analysis required.
6.2 Deny the project. An action denying the application should include findings that cite the basis
for denial and should reference inconsistency with the General Plan, Subdivision Regulations,
Zoning Regulations or other policy documents.
7.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Resolution
2. Vesting Tentative Tract Map & Phasing Plan
3. Tree Committee Staff Report and Draft Meeting Minutes 5.17.21
4. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Item 2
Packet Page 10Page 344 of 361
CityofSanLuisObispo, Council Agenda, CityHall, 990PalmStreet, SanLuis
Obispo
Minutes - Draft
Planning Commission
Minutes
Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
Wednesday, May 26, 2021
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission was called to order on
Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 6:07 p.m., via teleconference, by Chair Robert Jorgensen.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Hemalata Dandekar, Mike Wulkan, Vice Chair Nicholas
Quincey, and Chair Robert Jorgensen
Absent: Commissioners Michael Hopkins, Steve Kahn, and Michelle Shoresman
Staff: Community Development Director Michael Codron, Deputy Community
Development Director Tyler Corey, Assistant City Attorney Markie Jorgensen,
and Deputy City Clerk Kevin Christian
1. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DANDEKAR, SECOND BY VICE CHAIR
QUINCEY, CARRIED 4-0-3 (Commissioner Hopkins, Kahn, and Shoresman absent) to
approve the Planning Commission Minutes of April 28, 2021.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Public Comments:
None
End of Public Comment—
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. Review of a Tentative Tract Map (Tract 3157) to create 23 residential lots on an existing 4.98-
acre site within the Low-Density Residential (R-1) zone. Project includes the extension of
Stanford Drive, which will connect to an extension of Cuesta Drive. An Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration is proposed (CEQA); Project Address: 468 & 500 Westmont. Case
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020; Alice Jo Meinhold Survivors Trust/Andrew G.
Meinhold, owner/applicant.
Page 345 of 361
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 26, 2021
Page 2 of 3
Associate Planner Kyle Van Leeuwen presented the staff report and responded to Commission
inquiries with input given by Supervising Civil Engineer Hal Hannula, Transportation
Manager Luke Schwartz, and Community Development Director Michael Codron.
Applicant representative, Katie Rollins, Canon Corporation, and Kevin Merk, project
biologist, provided a brief overview of the project and responded to questions raised.
Chair Jorgensen opened the public hearing.
Public Comment:
Maryann Stansfield
Becky Keehn
Robert Schroeter
Rayleen Wight
Genevieve Czech
Adolph Czech
Eileen Amaral
End of Public Comment—
Chair Jorgensen closed the public hearing.
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR QUINCEY, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
WULKAN, CARRIED 4-0-3 (Commissioner Hopkins, Kahn, and Shoresman absent) to
continue this item to the June 23, 2021 Planning Commission meeting to allow for completion
of the environmental review period, incorporating all comments given during the 5/26/2021
meeting, directing staff to work with the applicant to review alternative grading concepts to
preserve as many large trees as possible, and to address concerns raised related to
transportation and traffic impacts.
3. Review of the City’s Public Draft Parks + Recreation Blueprint for the Future: 2021-2041
Parks and Recreation Plan and General Plan Element Update) that will supersede the 2001
Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element. A Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is
recommended for the project; Project Address: Citywide; Case #: GENP-1942-2018 &
EID-0150-2021; Zone: Citywide; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant.
Parks and Recreation Director Greg Avakian introduced the plan and Senior Planner Shawna
Scott presented the staff report and Mr. Avakian and Ms. Scott responded to Commission
inquiries.
Page 346 of 361
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 26, 2021
Page 3 of 3
Chair Jorgensen opened the public hearing.
Public Comment:
None
End of Public Comment—
Chair Jorgensen closed the public hearing.
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DANDEKAR, SECOND BY
COMMISSIONER WULKAN, CARRIED 4-0-3 (Commissioner Hopkins, Kahn, and
Shoresman absent) to adopt a resolution entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE
PARKS AND RECREATION BLUEPRINT FOR THE FUTURE: 2021-2041 (PARKS AND
RECREATION PLAN AND GENERAL PLAN ELEMENT UPDATE) (GENP-1942-2018,
EID-0150-2021; CITYWIDE)”
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
4. Agenda Forecast
Deputy Community Development Director Tyler Corey provided an update of upcoming
projects.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:46 p.m. The next scheduled Regular Meeting of the Planning
Commission for Wednesday, June 9, 2021 has been cancelled. The following Regular Meeting
of the Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for June 23, 2021, 6:00 p.m., via
teleconference.
APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: 07/14/2021
Page 347 of 361
Page 348 of 361
Page 349 of 361
Page 350 of 361
Page 351 of 361
Page 352 of 361
Page 353 of 361
Page 354 of 361
Page 355 of 361
Page 356 of 361
Page 357 of 361
Page 358 of 361
Page 359 of 361
Minutes – Tree Committee Meeting of May 17, 2021 Page 1
Minutes
TREE COMMITTEE
Monday, May 17, 2021
Special Meeting of the Tree Committee
CALL TO ORDER
A Special Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Tree Committee was called to order on Monday, May
17, 2021 at 5:30 p.m. via teleconference by Chair Alan Bate.
ROLL CALL
Present: Committee Members Daniel Canella, Elizabeth Lucas, Allen Root, Emily Rosten,
Vice Chair Jake Minnick and Chair Alan Bate
Absent: Committee Member Rodney Thurman
Staff: Anthony Whipple, Urban Forester and Megan Wilbanks, Deputy City Clerk
PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS ONLY
None
End of Public Comment--
TREE REMOVAL APPLICATIONS
1.468 & 500 Westmont Ave. Review of the proposed removal of 51 onsite trees and replanting
of at least 20 street trees on site, with the remainder of compensatory tree plantings required
as a condition of approval. Compensatory planting will be required at a rate of 1:1 onsite or
2:1 offsite, consistent with Tree Regulations standards. Tree removals are proposed to facilitate
a proposed tract map development (TR 3157), a 23-lot subdivision in the Low-Density
Residential (R-1) zone (SBDV-0169-2020).
Associate Planner, Kyle Van Leeuwen, provided a presentation and responded to Committee
inquiries.
Public Comment:
Becky
Genevieve Czech
End of Public Comment—
Page 360 of 361
Minutes – Tree Committee Meeting of May 17, 2021 Page 2
The applicant’s representative, Katie Rollins with Cannon, responded to comments and
questions from Tree Committee Members.
ACTION: UPON MOTION OF VICE CHAIR MINNICK, SECONDED BY COMMITTEE
MEMBER ROSTEN, CARRIED 5-1-1 (Member Root dissenting and Member Thurman
absent), to recommend that the Planning Commission approve the project with the following
recommendations:
All regulated trees shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio, on the site, with 15-gallon or 24-inch
box trees
Require 50% of the replacement trees to be native species
Require the developer or the property owner to irrigate and maintain replanted trees until
they are established
Retain tree #33, #34, #91, and #114
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6:51 p.m. The next Special Meeting of the Tree Committee is
scheduled for Monday, June 28, 2021 at 5:30 p.m. via teleconference.
APPROVED BY THE TREE COMMITTEE: 06/28/2021
Page 361 of 361