HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/18/1994, 5 - ADOPTION OF THE GENERAL PLAN OPEN SPACE ELEMENT UPDATE.�►uH�����lllllll�l�ui����ll city of San LUIS OBISpo
NjnZa COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
FROM: Arnold B. Jonas, Community Development DirectorGi
BY: John Mandeville, AICP jj
Long Range Planning Manager
SUBJECT:
Adoption of the General Plan Open Space Element update.
CAO RECOMMENDATION:
MEETING DATE:
ITEM NUMBER
Adopt a resolution to approve a negative declaration of environmental impact and to adopt the
January 1994 General Plan Open Space Element.
DISCUSSION
Council Hearing Summary
The Council reviewed the draft Element on September 7, October 20, and November 16; 1993.
Public testimony was received and the Council directed staff to make revisions to the Planning
Commission Legislative Draft of the Element. The public hearing was closed on October 20,
1993. The Council gave staff final direction on revisions to the Draft Element and directed staff
to return a revised Element for adoption.
A summary of the Council revisions are attached to this report as Attachment 1.
Environmental Determination
The Community Development Director has approved, and the Planning Commission has
concurred with, a mitigated negative declaration of environmental impact, meaning that with
mitigation measures included in the .General Plan, there will be no significant impacts. The
mitigation measures are identified in the Negative Declaration ER 3 -93 (previously distributed).
I K I,
Planning Commission
On May 5, 1993, the Planning Commission voted 4 to 0 (3 absent) to recommend that the
Council adopt the Planning Commission Legislative Draft Open Space Element (July 1993).
Parks and Recreation Commission
The Parks and Recreation Committee (PRC) considered the DOSE on February 3, 1993, but
continued making a recommendation until May 5, 1993. The PRC summarized its comments
in the form of a memo to the City Council and Planning Commission. The PRC's comments
were considered by the Planning Commission at their May 12, 1993 meeting. The Planning
-5-
Commission directed staff to continue with the direction given at their May 5 meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT
The City is required by State law to have copies of the general plan available upon public
request. Adoption of the DOSE will entail publication costs. These costs have been included
in the Community Development Department budget for the current fiscal cycle. Copies of the
Element are distributed to the public for a fee that is intended to recover the cost of printing the
document.
The DOSE contains many implementation programs, each of which will have a fiscal impact.
As a part of the Open Space Element update program, a consultant -was hired to prepare
recommendations on funding mechanisms for the protection and acquisition of open space
resources. Chapter IV of the DOSE incorporates these recommendations as guidelines for
implementing the City's open space program.
The fiscal impact of the individual implementation programs will be analyzed as specific
projects and proposals brought to the Council, and as the of the Parks and Recreation and
Community Development Departments develop their annual work programs and budgets.
ALTERNATIVES
The Council may continue action. Council may direct that additional changes be made to the
Element before it is adopted.
ATTACBAIENTS
3. Summary of Council changes to Planning Commission Draft Open Space Element
2. Draft Open Space Element Negative Declaration ER 3 -93
$. Resolution to concur with negative declaration and adopt Open Space Element update.
4. January 1994 version of Open Space Element update.
osefinalaptrJm
2
sz
7
CITY COUNCIL REVISIONS TO PLANNING COMMISSION
DRAFT OPEN SPACE ELEMENT
Add new paragraph under first paragraph on p. 4.
Add new policy to p. 9.
Revise the first program on p. 9.
A. Work with and support the County, State, and special districts to form a joint
powers '...e
.agreement. This agreement should be utilized to preserve
.. .........................
open space, rural, and agricultural uses within the City's greenbelf and the Outer
Planning Area.
Add new programs to p. 10.
Change the language in the long-range vision for growth and open space on p. viii to a tense
more suited to articulating a vision, rather than using policy language which may confuse the
reader into thinking this section is making policy statements.
changes.ose/jml I
117-13
.. . ::':v':'.': ,.
area x............ td aread}� dvta SuurUan areas has lepzcte cart thereenbelt'M?)=
.v.:>.. xx...::.:n
Revise policy 2.0 on p. 14.
C.
public or private development to:
Revise Policy 4.A. on p. 15.
C}
preserve
, or areas
A. Through easements or dedications. Subdivision parcel lines or easements shall
be located to optimize resource protection. Easements as a condition of
t[ s &HO' b, ? 6d development approvals shall be required in hill and mountain
areas only for structural additions or new structures, not for accessory structures
or tree removal permits. If portions of a hill or mountain are covered by an
easement or an open space parcel, allowed uses and maintenance responsibilities
within the parcel or easement. should be clearly defined and conditioned prior to
............................................................................................................ ...............................
ma or t a r val. Male ' en: .. v ..:::::: : :..:..: <iri
v urotec nu o (1 =asem is or,ded cataons snail be t� ired in a anner
Revise the Purpose statement of the Creeks section on p. 19.
Purpose
changesxse/jm2
2
/.::.::...x
3' ;:gFfillll::
`:: •.i:!!!.i:i•:.:: ii: >:i': �i:.:::f:i•i'1..:.:i :::•,:::' :i. iiiY •)i!j y......: :ii:i'i:.::..:'.i'.i: ii "...... ...i :.:....;.ii:.:: ... is
•. t<reeksroxrde ad�ar fox flood waters (see l zgure J.
Revise the Policies 1, 2, and 3 on pg. 22, 23 & 25.
1. `Vttttztt the cuy iirnts the City shall, and outside the ctiy ltmrts the City shall encourage 9. x]r Coirity and the State to
2. ......... .
When no practicable alternative to a significant creek resource impact exists the City
a�tc shall encou the tour to re ut . "the developer to im lement a
xY 4 P P
City approved mitigation and monitoring plan that will avoid or ameliorate significant
impacts.
3.
Revise Policy 3.A. on p. 25.
3.A. Preserve creek corridors and creek setback areas through easements or dedications.
Subdivision parcel lines or easements shall be located to optimize resource protection.
Easements as a condition of dscrefonz development approvals shall be required in
cnanges.oe4m3
3
slJ
creek corridors and creek setback areas only for structural additions or new structures,
not for accessory structures or tree removal permits, anti to a manner consistent with
..........
aqulsihon policies conttned m Chapter Iv of this. element'. If a creek is located
within an open space parcel or easement, allowed uses and maintenance responsibilities
within that parcel or easement should be clearly defined and conditioned prior to map
or project approval. (See Figure 7).
Move Creek section Policy 3.13. on p. 23 to the Programs section p.27 and reword to
implementation measure format.
Revise Programs 1.C., 1.13 and 2. on p. 27 -28.
1C. Amend the Land Use Element and zoning map to designate all creek corridors as open
. ...............................
space (excluding creeks that are paved or culverted). Designate undeveloped flood
prone areas adjacent to creeks as open space, interim open space, or parkland where
it would be costly for the City to provide flood control or where major creek
alterations would be necessary to develop the site.
IE. l� pt�i`
VOW 1 t i't 2iat 'restoration of riparian
............... p
vegetation or creek corridors through adoption of a creek ordinance.
2. The City will work with and support the County Flood Control District done 9, thi
California Department of Fish and Game, Army Corp of Engineers, Cal Poly, other Stag
agencies, and resource conservation organizations (such as the Nature Conservancy, o.
the Land Conservancy) to jointly develop a regional mitigation banking program. Thi:
program should: (a) provide mitigation banking for creeks, wetlands, and wildlifE
resources (plants and animals); (b) develop guidelines for replacement of such resources
...............................
(c) develop a mitigation fee for replacement of such resources; (d) establish a j;airtegrate
sSxe3Ehabitat preserve areas on the basis that preservation of plants and animal;
requires the establishment of habitat areas larger than can be provided on individua
properties, and because many habitat areas are at risk of being lost to urbal
encroachment; (e) specify buffer and setback distances which should apply to all public
and private development activities that may affect creeks, wetlands, sensitive habitat
unique resources, or other resources determined important; and (f) identify funding fo:
long -term stewardship of mitigation banking sites.
Program 3.A. on p. 28.
The City shall work with and encourage Cal Poly and the County to:
4
J (o
oed?A. Identi fy ata>t e for r
...:.........:.:::.,..
replanting creek corridor sections that have been degraded and are in need of creek
Delete the word "significant" from references to wetlands.
p. 33. C. Protect existing signiflean t wetlands and restore degraded wetlands on lands the
City owns or develops.
p. 34. C. Enhance-signi€ean wetlands and their habitat value by: (1) providing an adequate
wetland buffer around signiftean wetland resources, (2) maintaining signiffeant
wetlands in a natural state, (3) employing restoration techniques where restoration
is needed to achieve a natural state, (4) utilizing wetland vegetation within
wetlands and wetland buffers, (5) prohibiting the planting of invasive, non - native
plants (such as Vinca major and Eucalyptus species) within wetlands or wetland
buffers, and (6) avoiding tree removals within wetlands and wetland buffers except
when determined necessary by the City Arborist.
Revise Policy 2.B.1. on p. 33.
2.B.1. An exception to this is the wetland in Meadow Park which should be maintained as
parkland. Expansion of this facility should not result in significant biological
impacts and should allow for the maintenance of existing habitat value as well as
human enjoyment. b
New recreation facilities (benches,
trails, viewing stations) shall be located to preserve sensitive resources while
providing some public access. If impacts occur in these areas, habitat values shall
be replaced on -site or off -site (in -kind only) at a 2:1 ratio.
Revise the beginning of Policy 4 p. 34.
4. Where wetland protection is required or proposed - the City should require, kid
rage #te Letuttty, aticl other .agen es to retjdim public and private development to:
A. Preserve wetlands and wetland buffers through easements or dedications.
Subdivision parcel lines or easements shall be located to optimize resource
.... ...............................
protection. Easements as a condition ofidiscfetiooa= development approvals shall
be required in wetlands and wetland buffers only for structural additions or new
structures, not for accessory structures or tree removal permits...:.. and ut man no
consistent vtr th ac4u sthott j oltCie ;:contained in Chanter :IV of .:this element. If a
changes.osom5
P
.fi 7
wetland is proposed within an open space parcel or easement, allowed uses and
maintenance responsibilities within that parcel or easement should be clearly defined
and conditioned prior to map or project approval. Preserve creek corridors and creek
setback areas through easements or dedications. If a creek is located within an
open space parcel or easement, allowed uses and maintenance responsibilities within
that parcel or easement should be clearly defined and conditioned prior to map or
project approval. (See Figure 7).
Revise Policy 2. on p. 39.
2. In areas that contain existing grasslands, the City should, and* should encourage the
......... ...............................
oi' tct
B. Protect grassland communities by requiring public and /or private development to:
1. Preserve grassland communities through easements or dedications. Subdivision
parcel lines or easements shall be located to optimize grassland protection.
Easements as a condition of 'dscetona; development approvals shall be required
in grassland areas only for structural additions or new structures, not for accessory
structures or tree removal permits, and tp a manner consistent;:with acquisitro i
polc4es .ontaanedn Chagter N of thts element. If the grassland community is
within a proposed open space parcel or easement, allowed uses and maintenance
responsibilities within that parcel or easement should be clearly defined and
conditioned prior to map or project approval.
Revise Policy 1 on p. 44.
1. i�ftzthin the limits the City should, and outside the;city Iim is encourage, the County
Revise Policy 2 on p. 45.
2.
Revise Policy 3 on p. 48.
0
d mmges.ow)Jm6
6
S-9
Revise Policy 4 on p. 48
4. Where unique resources are required or proposed to be protected .��..M h' h :, I`
qt ... q city: imits
u
u ci,
... ... ......
iN City should requireI.n;4..:.;tSIA t..... �m ts encourage t
...... .... .
X :6: te:"
44 7: :e co r
NX n:.:y q:require
........ . ........
public and private development (as is reasonable considering unique resources may be
sporadically located) to provide protection consistent with the sensitive habitat policies
1 through 5 under Policy 2 (b) [see page 37]).
p. 56 Revise Policies 1, 2, and 3 in Section G as follows:
1. ltit?t h. .. ..
the City should. : d ts
the Mt b ou, s. should encourage ffi
e
tt .404
require public or private development to:
B. Preserve local adobes (such as the Rodriguez, Bowden, Dallidet, and the Dana Street
Adobe) or other important historic structures located in open areas (sueh as Stifin
Aer,es) as open space or parkland (for the location of these structures see the Site
Map, sites 6 through 10).
2. -Iffli !J.....
Gtty Eli m, its the City should.. .d.
u, t sle e d C ... ... ..... ...3..: .encourage ..... ... . .. . ...... .. County
...... . .
........... . . .
.. ........ ..........
i-R; require public or private development to do the following where archaeological or
historical resources are protected as open space or parkland:
3. In areas where it is suspected that archaeological resources may exist, the City should
qj�.;Nq* f surveys, literature searches, and
require ic unt t 40�j.� surface
sub-sudke testing prior to site development or grading.
Revise the program section on p. 57.
Programs Within the Q*-
W, Urban Reserve Line, the Greenbelt, and the Outer
Planning Area
I. leetIiixjxt the City should adopt guidelines and standards for
WIN"N'
survey work and methods for preserving archaeological resources.
p. 60. Revise Policy 1 under "Policies within the City Limits and Urban Reserve Line".
1. ...............
a NA, the ty i "fi0 ft
the City should, outside
e city
lrmits A
h 6:11 t
V
should
eneouge; the Ouwlh
p. 60. Revise Policies in Section H, Mineral Resources, to change references to "significant",
chaMes.ose/jm7
7
S -y
which implies an environmental determination, to "important" which would allow the City some
discretion in determining how the policy will be applied.
Policies Within the City Limit Line and Urban Reserve Line
1. Within the City Limits the City should, and should encourage the County outside the City
Limits to:
........................
B. Prohibit annexation of lands that contain � ; M:: po:r::= :t mineral resources on
.::........ ..
the basis that such lands (a) should be designated by the County as Energy (EX) or
Resource Extraction Area (EX,), (b) should remain in a rural or semi -rural area so
conflicts between adjacent uses do not occur, and (c) should be preserved for future
mineral resource extraction.
Policies Within the Greenbelt and Outer Planning Area
1. Encourage the County to:
........................
A. Preserve sig�eam pprtant mineral resources areas for mineral extraction.
B. Designate sea+¢fporCat mineral resource areas with a County combining
designation of Energy (EX) or Resource Extraction Area (EX,) (as applicable).
2. The City, County, and State should discourage urban uses adjacent to mining if such uses
would be incompatible with mining operations, or would restrict future extraction of
sigfiffieaw 1:, pottat mineral resources.
Revise the program section on p. 61.
Programs Within the Urban Reserve Line. the City Limit Line, the Greenbelt. and the
Outer Planning Area
The City should:
A. Revise the Municipal Code to prohibit commercial mining within the city limits -aim
i� In conjunction with the County and State, identify and map old mining or dumping
sites that are unlikely to be reclaimed (because no responsible party has filed a
reclamation plan), or have not been reclaimed properly. Identification of these sites
changes.ose /jm8
8
,5'l0
would (1) make it more likely that such sites may be reclaimed properly in the
future, (2) warn perspective buyers of potential liability, and (3) better enable
jurisdictions to solve problems associated with such properties.
Revise the program section on p. 61.
Programs Within the Greenbelt and the Outer Planning Area
1. The - should City shall ericpurage the bounty to:
Revise the first community goal on p. 64.
Encourage permanent conservation of agricultural lands to protect the agricultural economy
of die the state.
Revise Policy I. A. on p. 65.
The City should:
A.
are annexed to the City (see site #12, Site Map):
Revise Policy l.c. on p. 65.
Ze.
pount at urBan uses
adjacent to agricultural lands4e provide an agricultural buffer. Only eliminate or modify
the agricultural buffer requirement if there are significant topographical differences, a
barrier of vegetation capable of eliminating potentially adverse impacts associated with
agriculture on adjacent development, or existing physical barriers between the urban
development and the agricultural land. If a developer cannot provide an adequate
agricultural buffer between urban uses and agricultural land, the developer shall pay a
mitigation fee to purchase agricultural protection elsewhere within the greenbelt.
4At. Where the parcel proposed for development is within the URL, and the
agricultural land is outside the URL, an agricultural buffer shall be provided on
the developing parcel within the URL and maintained indefinitely until the URL
is expanded to encompass the agricultural parcel or the City determines that: (1)
there is no likelihood agriculture will occur on the agricultural land in the future
, and (2) removal of the buffer will not adversely impact other agricultural lands
in the general area. (see Figure 8)
chnWes.ose /jm9
9
2H. Where the parcel proposed for development is within the URL or City Limits and
the agricultural parcel is within the URL or City Limits, an agricultural buffer
located on the developing parcel shall be provided; however, once the agricultural
land is developed with urban uses this agricultural buffer may be removed at the
discretion of the City. (see Figure 8) If a mitigation fee has been paid instead of
providing the agricultural buffer, this fee should not be refunded since it provides
compensation for short-term impacts to agriculture.
Revise Policy I.D. on p.66.
D. Work with the Farm Bureau at*. r other farm organizations as;appropate to: (1) provide
so
public events which provide interest in the nature, value, and problems of local
agriculture, such as Family Farm Days and educational programs; (2) help sponsor or
raise money for agricultural facilities that are necessary for agriculture as a whole within
the County (such as a mobile lab unit); (3) retain adequate groundwater for agricultural
uses; and (4) provide (as feasible) reclaimed water for agricultural uses.
Revise Policy 2 on p. 69.
2. The City shall encourage the State and County to require agricultural clustering projects
to: (a) combine structures in one area of a parcel, or primarily one area of combined
parcels; (b) retain viable acreage in agricultural uses; (c) be compatible with adjacent
agricultural operations; (d) maintain agriculture on prime farmland; (e) minimize visual
impacts on scenic resources; and (f) be consistent with the City's Land Use Element
Update.
Revise Policy 3.A. on p. 69.
3. Where agricultural protection is proposed or required, the City shall'. encourage the;
County, and State shettldto require public or private development to:
A. Preserve agricultural areas through easements or dedications. Subdivision parcel lines
or easements shall be located to optimize resource protection. Easements as a
condition ofcretgna; development approvals shall be required only for structural
additions or new structures, not for accessory structures or tree removal permits.
Allowed uses and require maintenance within an agricultural parcel or easement shall
be clearly defined and conditioned prior to map or project approval.
Add Program 2. to program section on p. 69.
2. The City shall work with the County to prepare an agricultural land impact mitigation
fee process which establishes how the mitigation fee is to be determined as well as how
the fees will be used.
ehanges.ose /imto
10
S -/2
Revise Program I.C. on p. 71.
C. Review the possibility of a low- interest loan program that could be offered to
eligible agricultural operations to`support fieu cori:nued;operatio and' tabihty.
Revise Policies 1.A., 1.E., and 1.F.5.b. on pp. 78 -79.
1.A. Coordinate i................................... recreation planning and development, including joint
Feefeatiee projects.
1.E.
public and private development to combine recreation with hazard control measures.
For example, provide trails as part of a bypass channel or airport buffer area, or
recreation as part of a detention basins.
1.F.5.b. By designating preserved areas, or portions of preserved areas as: (1) open space
if the area is used for passive recreation, (2) parkland if the area will be used for
an active trail corridor, (3) active recreation,
(4) parWand if the aFea will be used fe a golf course, botanical garden, or similar
recreational facility or as an urban park.
Add Policy 2. on p. 79.
Revise Program 1.E.1. on p. 83.
E. Update the Park and Recreation Element. This update should consider the following
sites as parkland with potential open space areas:
1. Mission Plaza and its expansion areas (see site #14, Site Map). Mission Plaza
should not be considered a typical creek area. Although this area should include
protected natural areas (including some riparian vegetation clusters) and adequate
creek setback areas for commercial /residential structures, Mission Plaza should allow
public access along the setback area and into portions of the creek. Benches, picnic
areas, and other similar park facilities should be allowed within the setback area.
Interpretive displays should be located within Mission Plaza documenting (1) the
history of Mission Plaza, and (2) the importance of creek resources. Buildings
should not overhang the setback or cause the setback area to be dark or uninviting.
Expansion of this facility should not result in significant biological impacts and
should allow for the maintenance of existing habitat value as well as
humanenjoyment.
changes.osetjmll
11
S -/3
fniftifnem 20 feet setbaek A-7em ef emek bank, and a 20 feet buffer ft-efn
If impacts occur in these areas,
habitat values shall be replaced on -site or off -site (in -kind only) at a 2:1 ratio.
Revise Program I. EA on p. 83
Garden Street Linear Park (see site #19, Site Map). The section of Garden Street, between
Higuera and Marsh Street should be civsed to redesigned' for vne way traffic ff to
N issieR Plaa}. This afea shouid be epen to Related pedestrian improvements, restattfmt
seating, park -type landscaping, and benches should be installed.
Add the following text to the definition of flood prone in the Definitions section.
Add definition of "vernal pool" to the Definitions section.
Revise all policies and programs that apply to both the area within the city limits and the Urban
Reserve Line to clarify who the responsible agency is - the City or the County.
Revise the numbering format of the text to a standard hierarchy:
1.
A.
1.
a.
Revise the Creeks Map to accurately designate creek status. Remove designations for culvert
locations as this information is not necessary for applying the Open Space Element policies and
is available in another City source.
changes.oWjmU
12
�� ui
ity
�k o sAn tuis oaspo
990 Palm Street /Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.8100
Negative Declaration for the
Open Space Element Update (ER 3 -93)
Attached is the negative declaration (ND) for the draft Open Space Element
(DOSE). The draft ND ( #ER 3 -93) discusses potential environmental impacts associated
with adoption of the DOSE, and incorporates mitigation for potentially significant impacts.
The City Council must approve ER 3 -93 before adopting the Open Space Element
Update. Before the ND is approved, the City must respond to comments raising substantial
environmental concerns. If you wish to have the Council consider your review, comments
should be provided in writing to the Community Development Department during the ND's
30-day public review period, which ends March 1, 1993, 5:00 Please mail comments to:
City of SLO, P.O. Box 8100, San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 -8100, attention Jeanette Di Leo,
Senior Planner.
If you have questions or would like more information please contact Jeanette Di Leo
at (805) 781 -7162.
s /Arnold Jonas, Director
Community Development Department
,,j- %S
city of San tins OBISPO
INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
SITE LOCATION
The City & its Planning Area APPLICATION NO3 -93
PROJECroescRlPTIONThe Draft Open Space Element would (a) protect natural
resources, (b) provide for open space within and outside the City,
and (c) establish a greenbelt around the City.
APPLICANT City of San Luis Obispo
STAFF yRECOMMENDATION:
'NEGATIVE DECLARATION
EXPANDED INITIAL STUDY REQUIRED
PREPARED BY Jeanette Di Leo,
Senior P
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S ACTION:
X MITIGATION INCLUDED
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REQUIRED
DATE 1 -22 -93
DATE I %2S/g3
SUMMARY OF INITIAL STUDY FINDINGS
I. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
11. POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW
POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECTS
NONE*
A.
COMMUNITY PLANS AND GOALS ...................................................
NONE*
B.
POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND GROWTH ........... ...............................
.
MAYBE*
C.
LAND USE ........................................ ...............................
MAYBE*
D.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION ..............................................
NONE*
E
PUBLIC SERVICES ................................. ...............................
MAYBE*
F.
UTILITIES .......................................... ...............................
MAYBE*
G.
NOISE LEVELS .................................... ...............................
NONE*
H.
GEOLOGIC & SEISMIC HAZARDS & TOPOGRAPHIC MODIFICATIONS ....................
NONE*
1.
AIR QUALITY AND WIND CONDITIONS ...............................................
NONE*
J.
SURFACE WATER FLOW AND QUALITY ..............................................
MAYBE*
KPLANT
LIFE ....................................... ...............................
MAYBE*
LANIMAL
LIFE ...................................... ...............................
MAYBE*
M.
ARCHAEOLOGICALIHISTORICAL .................. ............................... .
MAYBE*
N.
AESTHETIC ....................................... ...............................
MAYBE*
O.
ENERGVRESOURCE USE ..........................................................
MAYBE*
P.
OTHER ........................................... ...............................
III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
NEGATIVE DECLARATION WITH MITIGATION
*SEE ATTACHED REPORT
S- /6
FNVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY
ER 3 -93
DRAFT OPEN SPACE ELEMENT
.. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Project Description:
This negative declaration (ND) provides environmental review of the City's Draft Open Space
Element (DOSE). The DOSE is an official planning document that coordinates planning for open
space and resource protection. As proposed, the DOSE would (a) direct the protection of natural
resources, (b) provide for open space within and outside the City, and (c) establish a greenbelt
around the City. The draft element is organized into five chapters. Chapter I serves as an
introduction to open space planning, identifying why open space should be preserved, a brief
definition of open space, and background information. Chapter II identifies eleven resources that
should be protected and twenty specific sites that should be preserved. The City's management of
open space is discussed in Chapter M. Chapter IV outlines implementation mechanisms (when
open space should be obtained and through what methods), and Chapter V provides definitions.
In each chapter (except Chapter I), the DOSE identifies open space goals, policies, and programs
for the City and its Planning Area. See Figures 1 and 2 for a depiction of the City Limits, the
greenbelt, the Urban Reserve Line, and Outer Planning Area.
As defined by the DOSE, community resources (such as creeks, wetlands, hillsides) would be
protected within the City. In areas such as the greenbelt and Outer Planning Area where the City
does not have jurisdiction, the City would work with the County and State to maintain rural uses
as well as preserve natural resources. It is planned that the greenbelt and Outer Planning Area
would be maintained in agricultural, rural, open space, and park uses as well as some residential
clustering projects.
Environmental Setting:
The City of San Luis Obispo (SLO) is located between the Santa Lucia Mountains and coastal hills
of central California, nestled in a narrow valley surrounded by hills and volcanic peaks (see Figure
3). Land uses outside the City are agriculture and rural lands, including vineyards and field crops.
Numerous creeks run through portions -of the City. San Luis Obispo Creek, the primary drainage
system, bisects the City and forms a defining downtown feature. Various plant and animal life is
located within and outside the City.
SLO is characterized by a mild Mediterranean climate, having low rainfall, warm summers and mild
winters. The average annual precipitation is 22 inches, with approximately 93 percent of the
precipitation falling between November and April. The heaviest rainfall typically occurs in January
(average 5.46 inches). The warmest month is September (the average maximum is 78.7 degrees)
and the coolest month is January (average minimum of 41.7 degrees F).
The City's economic base is supported by a combination of sources, including agriculture,
government, and business. Agriculture is one of the County's main economic bases. California
Polytechnic State University (.Cal Poly), the Men's Colony, Camp San Luis, and numerous
government offices (County and.City) also provide a large contribution to the City's economic base.
-1-
sv7
ER 3 -93, Open Space
Figure 1 (Above). This figure depicts the City Limits and the Urban Reserve Line (URL). The City's corporate limits
cover an area of approximately 95 square miles. Within the City Limit Line the City has jurisdiction. In 1977 the City
Council established an Urban Reserve Line (URL), this line delineates the area of ultimate City expansion.
Figure 2 (Below). This figure generally depicts the greenbelt and Outer Planning Area. The Planning Area surrounds
the City's corporate limits, defining that area that is under County jurisdiction but where the City is particularly concerned
with land use. In general, the Planning Area extends to the ridge of the Santa Lucia Range (Cuesta Ridge) on the north
and east, the southerly end of the Edna Valley on the southeast, the ridges of the Davenport and Irish Hills on the
southwest, and Turri Road and Cuesta College on the west. Outside the greenbelt, the DOSE identifies an Outer
Planning Area. This Outer Planning Area extends from the greenbelt perimeter to the Planning Area's outer edge. The
greenbelt approximates the San Luis Obispo watershed.
-2-
S18
ER 3 -93, Open Space
Figure 3 - The Location of SLO and the Planning Area
J,
46
9y
PASO ROBLES
9
Cambria lep
C
9
o Templeton
46
41
-ry 01
ATASCADERO
Cayucos
58
41
San t Margarita
a 9 aril a
1
1i[RRQ€
Park -
Los Osos
N 1
LU S
s
lf .............:...
.., � >.,y,��: .;.... _,.:w.. SAN LUIS OB1SP0
PLANNING AREA
Avila _
Beach
i; PISMO;BEaCH! ;:;::
GROVERCtTIf: ARROYO
ii €i:Oceaio O GRANDE
••
01
o C,ounry
SANTA
-
MARIA
,.C,,,C
5�1i0'c�County
'Barba
•C..,.
• - ants
a
-
e
_
NORTH
_
- - ••• •• o
z.s s
MILES
S• /9
ER 3 -93, Open Space
In addition, a rapidly growing tourist industry augments the traditional institutional and agricultural
sectors of the economy.
The City of SLO has a 1992 population of 42,480 (State Department of Finance). Since 1980, the
City has grown at an average annual rate of 1.8 percent. The City of SLO has an existing inventory
of 18,167 dwelling units, of which 948 are vacant (Department of Finance, 1992). This represents
a vacancy rate of 52 percent. In addition, there are 983 dwelling units outside the City limits but
within the City's URL. Single- family houses comprise 47 percent of all dwelling units within the
URL, with the remaining 53 percent consisting of various types of multi - family dwellings,
congregate facilities, and mobile homes. SLO's Planning Area includes extensive rural acreage
surrounding the City. Unincorporated portions of the Planning Area (outside the URL) are
sparsely populated. Such areas are dominated by agriculture and rural lands.
The City is accessible by highway, rail and air. Most visitors use U.S. Highway 101, a regional
route which links SLO to both San Francisco and Los Angeles. State Route 1, provides access to
northern coastal cities such as Morro Bay, San Simeon and Big Sur. The Southern Pacific rail line
is used by Amtrak to provide passenger service to the area; a passenger depot is located at the
southeast end of Osos Street in the City. The City's regional airport provides service to
destinations throughout California.
Other Environmental Review
Environmental review is currently occurring for the City's Draft Land Use Element (DLUE) and
Draft Circulation Element (DCE). The EIR for the DLUE and DCE will discuss impacts
associated with City growth, proposed urban land use designations, and proposed circulation. In
addition, the County's Agriculture and Open Space Element and the San Luis Obispo Area Plan
are presently being updated. Rural and urban land use changes proposed by these documents will
be reviewed in a county EIR.
II. POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW
A. Community Plans and Goals
1. Consistency with the Land Use Element (LUE) Update
The LUE addresses residential, commercial, industrial, and open space uses, resource
protection, archaeological and historical resources, regional planning, City growth and
expansion, and public safety issues (flooding, airports, etc.). The LUE is consistent in
attempting to preserve natural resources such as creeks, hillsides, and agriculture.
Presently the LUE is being updated. This update has minor discrepancies with the DOSE;
however, these discrepancies will be resolved before the updates are adopted.
Conclusion:
The DOSE is consistent with the LUE.
-4-
..,5_4267
ER 3.93, Open Space
2. Consistency With the Circulation Element (CE).
Tice CE describes how the City will provide for the transportation of people and materials
within San Luis Obispo with connections to county areas and beyond. The CE contains
policies and programs regarding traffic reduction, traffic management, parking management
and the maintenance of scenic roadways. Each section contains several policies and
implementation programs designed to fulfill the CE's general goals and objectives.
Overlap between the CE and DOSE occurs regarding the protection of scenic resources
and scenic corridors. Although the two documents define scenic resources differently, the
documents augment one another in their protection of these resources.
Conclusion:
The DOSE is consistent with the City's existing Circulation Element as well as the
Circulation Element Update.
3. Consistency With the Park and Recreation Element (PRE).
The 1982 PRE is a 40 -year plan for parks and recreation. The PRE addresses park needs,
recreation, urban trails, and open space. The emphasis of the PRE is the provision of
active recreation (recreation typical of urban parks); whereas, the emphasis of the DOSE
is the protection of resources with a secondary goal of providing recreation.
Conclusion:
The DOSE is consistent with the Park and Recreation Element.
4. Consistency With Other City Elements (Housing, Conservation, Noise, Seismic Safety,
Safety, Scenic Highway, Energy Conservation, and Water and Wastewater Management
Element). Many of these elements are referenced in the DOSE, with the DOSE
amplifying policies within these elements.
Conclusion:
The DOSE is consistent with these elements.
5. Consistency With Other Policy Documents (City Administrative Creek Policy, Downtown
Plan). The DOSE contains creek policies that are consistent with these documents. In
addition, the DOSE has programs to augment these documents, such as creation of a creek
ordinance to replace the Administrative Creek Policy, updating hillside policies to further
protect hills and mountains, and designating open space downtown.
In terms of the proposed Downtown Plan, there are slight variations between the
Downtown Plan designations and the DOSE. The DOSE notes two programs that are not
identified in the Downtown Plan (see DOSE, page 52 - 53, programs a (6 and 7). These
programs, according to the DOSE, would occur with an update to the Park and Recreation
-s-
S'02l
ER 3 -93, Open Space
Element. DOSE program a (6) indicates that the parking lot on the corner of Nipomo
Street / Higuera Street should become a passive park, the downtown plan shows this area
occupied by a combination of commercial development and pedestrian plaza. In addition,
the DOSE indicates Garden Street (between Marsh and Higuera) should be closed to
traffic and utilized as an• area for pedestrians, outdoor restaurant seating, and park -type
landscaping and benches. The Downtown Plan depicts through traffic on Garden Street,
but restricted volume and parking, while incorporating pedestrian amenities. Both Plans
are in a draft stage and subject to change in these areas. These minor discrepancies will
be resolved prior to the adoption of the DOSE and the Downtown Plan.
Conclusion:
The DOSE and Downtown Plan are consistent.
6. SLO County Clean Air Plan.
The 1991 Clean Air Plan for San Luis Obispo County addresses the attainment and
maintenance of state and federal ambient air quality standards. These standards are
adopted to protect public health, vegetation, materials, and visibility. The Draft Open
Space Element (DOSE) contains several features that reinforce Clean Air Plan goals,
including: maintaining urban uses within the URL, preserving rural lands, and protecting
resources (such as air quality).
Conclusion:
The DOSE is consistent with the 1991 Clean Air Plan.
7. Airport Land Use Plan
Land development in areas near the SLO County Airport is regulated by the County's
Airport Land Use Plan (1973). The Land Use Plan is based on State and Federal
guidelines relating to land use compatibility with respect to airport operations. The plan
delineates six zones near the airport, and imposes land use restrictions for development
within each zone. Figure 4 illustrates these zones, which range from stringent safety and
noise restrictions, to areas not directly affected. Land use compatibility is considered to
be a function of potential safety and noise impacts.
The DOSE does not propose any land use changes within this area. In addition, DOSE
policies would require that development adequately mitigate hazards, and goals would
direct urban growth away from areas subject to high hazards (DOSE, pages 32 - 33).
Conclusion:
The DOSE is consistent with the County's Airport Land Use Plan (1973).
-6-
o
ER 3-93, Open Space
Figure 4 - Airport Zones
...................
.. ........:......:....Y
.......... .......... . .
% V
�0
\& ......... .
V
x
:N
1b
..........
..............................
............. .... . ..... ..
. --ft-
....... .... ..... ...
. ...........
X-
ggspl . ............
............ .......
............
-, 0-01.
............... ...... ...
...... . .... ........ ....
....... . . ...... ... %
..... ....... . ........
............
r4......
• V ............
....................................................
&
PREDOMINANT FUTURE LAND USE
PROSPOSED BY DRAFT LLE
Single - Family Residential IM Office
Mutd-Family Residential EM industrial
Retail Commerical Public Facility
Tourist Commercial
e Specific Plan Area; mostly low-density residentiaJI,
but also includes other higher intensity uses.
NOTE. Areas.;= marked will retain 94sting land use.
-7-
Prohibited Land Use
Land Use Subject to Airport Land Use
Commission Review
3-6 Airport Zone Number
jo-oz 3
. ........
."
I . . .. .......
.!Tv
E
...........
...................
.. ........:......:....Y
.......... .......... . .
% V
�0
\& ......... .
V
x
:N
1b
..........
..............................
............. .... . ..... ..
. --ft-
....... .... ..... ...
. ...........
X-
ggspl . ............
............ .......
............
-, 0-01.
............... ...... ...
...... . .... ........ ....
....... . . ...... ... %
..... ....... . ........
............
r4......
• V ............
....................................................
&
PREDOMINANT FUTURE LAND USE
PROSPOSED BY DRAFT LLE
Single - Family Residential IM Office
Mutd-Family Residential EM industrial
Retail Commerical Public Facility
Tourist Commercial
e Specific Plan Area; mostly low-density residentiaJI,
but also includes other higher intensity uses.
NOTE. Areas.;= marked will retain 94sting land use.
-7-
Prohibited Land Use
Land Use Subject to Airport Land Use
Commission Review
3-6 Airport Zone Number
jo-oz 3
ER 3 -93, Open Space
8. County General Plan Elements
The County's Land Use Plan and Agriculture Open Space Element do not indicate a greenbelt
around the City of SLO; however, in general, land uses around the City are proposed to be
maintained by the County in rural and agricultural uses. The DOSE does propose that a joint
powers agreement be implemented between the City and County to achieve consistency
between City and County land use goals. City and County plans should be made, consistent to
facilitate additional city-county agreements aimed at maintaining agriculture where it is viable,
and to promote urban growth where it is logical.
Conclusion:
County General Plans may be inconsistent with the DOSE pending the adoption of the
County's (a) SLO Land Use Plan Update, and (b) Agriculture and Open Space Element.
B. Population Distribution and Growth
Impacts relating to population distribution and growth result when a project will significantly
alter existing population distributions or result in significant growth. The DOSE emphasizes
resource protection, the maintenance of urban densities within existing urban areas, and the
creation of a greenbelt. DOSE programs do discuss the creation of a transfer of development
credit (TDC) program and a clustering program. Such ordinances would be instituted to
protect sensitive areas and may result in (a) cluster developments within the URL, greenbelt,
and Outer Planning Area to protect resources, and (b) increased densities in certain parts of
the City or County. Density increases may occur if TDC or cluster ordinances offered bonus
densities to encourage program participation. With density bonuses, such ordinances could
impact City or County population densities (at least within certain areas) and could impact
growth in certain areas (potentially creating growth inducements).
The intent of these programs is to locate development in appropriate areas, and remove
development activities from sensitive areas. Since no TDC or clustering ordinance has been
written it is difficult to ascertain impacts at this time. However, at the time such ordinances
are written, environmental review must occur and impacts must be mitigated. The program
within the DOSE itself would not result in a potentially significant change in population
distribution or population growth since projects could not occur until an ordinance is in place.
C. Land Use
This section evaluates land use compatibility impacts. Under the proposed project, new urban
development would be contained within the City's Urban Reserve. Line (URL). Areas outside
the URL would be maintained in agricultural uses, rural lands, parkland, and open space.
Minimizing land use conflicts is a primary objective of urban planning. Typically, land use
conflicts occur when impact - sensitive development is located near land uses which produce
negative noise, air quality, or traffic impacts. Such conflicts are generally avoided by separating
incompatible land uses through zoning restrictions. Where conflicting zones share a common
5:10
S'aMe
r,R 3 -93, Open Space
boundary, creative design solutions can be used to minimize potential impacts.
Agricultural Setting:
Cultivated land near the City provides fresh produce for area residents and visitors and is part
of the City's aesthetic backdrop. There are about 1,200 acres of prime (Class I and II) soils
in and around the City, comprising about one percent of such soils within the County (Figure
5).
Agriculture Impacts:
Appendix G, subsection (y) of the CEQA Guidelines states that a significant adverse impact
would occur if prime agricultural land is converted to non - agricultural use, or if the agricultural
productivity of prime agricultural land is impaired.
The existing Land Use Element (LUE) and LUE Update (DLUE) designate lands within the
City for urban land uses. The DLUE has designated some lands in the southern part of the
City for urban development that contain agricultural operations. These impacts are assessed
as part of the DLUE's environmental impact report (EIR). The DOSE, conversely, designates
some lands within the URL as agriculture as well as providing policies and programs to protect
agricultural lands located within the greenbelt and Outer Planning Area. Impacts reviewed in
this section focus on the impacts of proposed DOSE policies.
Agriculture Within the URL and City Limits. DOSE policies stipulate that the Dalidio,
McBride, and Madonna properties should remain in agriculture (see Figure 6 for location).
Exceptions contained in this policy include: (a) areas designated by the DLUE as commercial
or residential, and (b) areas of the site which should be designated as open space (i.e., Prefumo
Creek and the heron rookery). The DOSE also states that the City should work with Cal Poly
to preserve the Orchard site (see Figure 6 for the location). Policies in this section also
provide for agricultural buffers.
Agriculture within the Greenbelt and Outer Planning Area. DOSE policies support the
preservation of agricultural and rural uses, mandating that urban uses should locate within the
City's Urban Reserve Line (URL). The subdivision of agricultural land or residential
clustering on agricultural lands is supported only if adjacent agriculture is not impacted and
if the agricultural viability of the subject property is maintained. Agricultural policies call for
buffers between urban uses and agricultural lands. DOSE programs identify the need for a
transfer of development credit (TDC) and clustering ordinances that protect agriculture in the
greenbelt and Outer Planning Area (DOSE, pages 6 and 43). DOSE policies encourage
passive recreation on agricultural lands to connect other open space, parkland, or trail
resources. Active or passive recreation is permitted only if it (a) does not divide an
agricultural operation, (b) is compatible with adjoining agricultural operations, (c) does not
result in a significant environmental impact, and (d) involves a willing seller.
DOSE policies would afford some protection to agricultural lands within the City's URL and
City Limits by requiring an. agricultural buffer. Outside the City, more protection would be
.9-
r -aG
ER 3-93, Open Space
Figure 5 - Class I and II Soils
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
PROSPOSED BY DRAFT LLE
ED
Single-Family Residential IM
Office
EM
Muld-Family Residential go
Industrial
Retail commerical 02m
Public Facility
Tourist Commercial ROTE:
Areas not marked will
retain o)ds&g land use.
.10- —
.. . ........ ...... ?I ........
• : .
.
........................
v
72
......... ....... .
dt.
1.
•
................
f ............... ......
............
.
.. ....... . .. ..
........ .
ME
(Z) CLASS I & I SOILS
ee
PW
10�%2?43
PREDOMANT FUTURE LAND USE
PROSPOSED BY DRAFT LLE
ED
Single-Family Residential IM
Office
EM
Muld-Family Residential go
Industrial
Retail commerical 02m
Public Facility
Tourist Commercial ROTE:
Areas not marked will
retain o)ds&g land use.
.10- —
(Z) CLASS I & I SOILS
ee
PW
10�%2?43
ER 3 -93, Open Space
Figure 6 - Dalidio & Orchard Properties
Irr
Q
N
Q
n
C;
r ...............
,,
_.J t/• t
i
iI
r I
i
i
I
i
r�
,
t
Agricultural areas proposed within 1❑ Dalidio, McBride & Madonna Properties IE Orchard Property
the City for protection
-11-
,5.c�2
�
I 1
I
r ...............
,,
_.J t/• t
i
iI
r I
i
i
I
i
r�
,
t
Agricultural areas proposed within 1❑ Dalidio, McBride & Madonna Properties IE Orchard Property
the City for protection
-11-
,5.c�2
ER 3 -93, Open Space
afforded by limiting subdivisions, maintaining agricultural lands in agricultural uses, and
providing incentives to maintain land in agriculture (see DOSE policies .1 (d -g)). With
implementation of these policies, and the City actively working with the County to develop
cluster and TDC ordinances, impacts to agricultural lands would not be significant.
Agriculture Mitigation Measures:
The following mitigation measures are recommended to clarify DOSE policies regarding
agricultural issues:
1. DOSE policy 1 (a 3 c), page 41, requires agricultural buffers within the City Limits and
URL if development occurs next to agricultural land'. Buffers are to be placed on the
developing land, not the adjacent agricultural land. This policy should be clarified to state:
a. In the case the parcel proposed for development is within the URL, and the
agricultural land is outside the URL, an agricultural buffer shall be provided and
maintained indefinitely until the URL is expanded or the City determines that: (1)
there is no likelihood agriculture will occur on the agricultural land in the future, and
(2) removal of the buffer will not adversely impact other agricultural lands in the
general area. See Figure 7 for clarification.
b. In the case the parcel proposed for development is within the URL or City Limits and
the agricultural parcel is within the URL or City Limits, an agricultural buffer between
the developed parcel and the agricultural land shall be provided; however, once the
agricultural land is developed with urban uses this agricultural buffer may be removed
(at the discretion of the City). See Figure 7 for clarification of this policy change.
However, if a mitigation fee has been paid instead of providing the agricultural buffer,
this fee should not be refunded since it provides compensation for short -term impacts
to agriculture.
2. Table IV (page 50) should clarify when recreation is prohibited on agricultural lands. This
section should clearly state active recreation is not encouraged on agricultural lands
outside the URL, and that recreation should not interfere with existing or adjacent
agricultural operations. In addition, that passive recreation is prohibited when it "divides"
agricultural lands versus the present wording which says it is prohibited if it 'bisects an
agricultural parcel."
3. A program should be added to the Outdoor Recreation section. This program should
state: "As part of the Park and Recreation Element Update, the City and County should
identify potential golf course sites within and outside the URL."
t Agricultural lands are lands that are viable for agriculture or designated by the County Land UFe Ordinance with a zoning or
general plan designation of agriculture.
-12-
ER 3-93, Open Space
Figure 7 - Agricultural Buffers Within and Outside the URL and City Limits
Parcel
Parcel
A
A
within URL
outside URL
Parcel
Parcel
B
B
Now
Urban Reserve Line (URL) — — — Urban Reserve Line (URL)
A Parcel Proposed for urban A Developed Parcel
development
B Existing agricultural land B Agricultural Operation Ceases
jBuffer required EM Buffer remains
Depicted above is parcel A proposed for an urban use. Parcel A is within the URL, while Parcel B (which is agricultural
land) is outside the URL. Parcel A must provide an agricultural buffer. Since Parcel A is located adjacent to the URL the
agricultural buffer must remain indefmitely between Parcel A and B until the URL is expanded or the City determines that:
(1) there is no likelihood agriculture will occur on Parcel B in the future, and (2) removal of the buffer on Parcel A will not
adversely impact other agricultural lands near or adjacent to Parcel B.
Parcel j Parcel
C j D
_within URL_
outside URL
Parcel Parcel
C D
NOW Ldiel
— — — Urban Reserve Line (URL) — — — Urban Reserve Line (URL)
C Parcel Proposed for urban C Developed Parcel
development
D Existing agricultural land D Urban development proposed
��j I Buffer required Buffer may be removed
Depicted above is Parcel C proposed for an urban use and Parcel D presently remaining as agricultural land. In this case
both parcels are within the URL. Parcel C must provide an agricultural buffer to protect the agricultural land on Parcel
D; however, since parcel D is slated for urban development (because it is within the URL and zoned by the City for
development), at the time Parcel D develops the agricultural buffer on Parcel C may be removed (at the discretion of the
Zity).
-13-
'5 -,;z9
ER 3 -93, Open Space
D. Transportation & Circulation
Setting
The Draft Land Use Element (DLUE) and Draft Circulation Element (DCE) EIR reviewed
the City's vehicular traffic characteristics. Existing automobile traffic volumes are based on the
City's 1991 MINUTP traffic model. As noted by the 1992 EIR for the DLUE and DCE, traffic
conditions throughout the City are generally good (Level of Service A and B).
Transportation & Circulation Impacts:
Tvoe of Development Impacts
Scattered rural housing Traffic increases on private and county roads could occur
throughout the planning area. Depending on the allowed
development levels, cumulative traffic increases could require
improvements to county roads and may result in longer trip
distances and greater energy use. Such development has very
little potential use of alternative transportation.
Clustered rural. housing More focused traffic. increases on private and county roads.
Depending on allowed development levels, cumulative traffic
increase could require improvements to county roads. Longer
trip. distances and greater energy use may occur. Such
development has limited potential for use of alternative
transportation (primarily reduction in work trips).
TDC housing within URL ' Depending on level of TDC allowed, incrementally higher
traffic levels in neighborhoods that include receiver sites; no
significant difference in traffic levels on arterial streets when
compared to other options. Reduced trip distances and energy
use may occur. Significant potential for use of alternative
transportation as a trip reduction mechanism.
The draft Circulation Element (DCE) promotes the use of alternative transportation. The
DOSE's support for TDC and cluster programs is generally consistent with the emphasis of the
DCE.
Transportation & Circulation Mitigation Measures:
1. A program statement should be added to DOSE program 1 (g), page 6: "Incorporate into
this cluster ordinance a trip reduction program."
E. Public Services
This section analyzes impacts to fire and police protection, administration, and public schools.
.14-
S-90
ER 3 -93, Open Space
Fire Protection. The City of SLO Fire Department ( SLOFD) provides fire and emergency
medical protection service in the City of SLO. The department operates four stations
throughout the City and employs a total of 55 persons. Of the 42 fire fighters at the SLOFD,
15 are paramedics. The SLOFD strives to maintain a City-wide average emergency response
time of under five minutes. Current staffing and facilities are considered adequate to provide
service to all areas within the City limits. Although additional staffing would be required as
the City's population grows, no additional capital improvements are anticipated to be necessary
to serve new development within the current City limits. The Fire Department states that
major development would require new facilities in order to maintain adequate emergency
response times.
Fire Protection Impacts:
DOSE policies require that hazards be mitigated, and that mitigation should not result in a
public cost (DOSE, pages 32 -33). Such policies would require new development to provide
adequate fire service for new facilities (to mitigate potential fire impacts). With incorporation
of these DOSE policies, impacts to fire protection are not considered significant.
Fire Protection Mitigation:
None.
Police Protection. Based on the City's current population of 42,480, the current level of police
protection service is one sworn officer per 787 City residents. In order to maintain the current
level of police protection, this officers /residents ratio must be maintained. Increased
development without corresponding increases in SLOPD staffing and expansion of department
facilities would constitute a significant impact.
Police Protection Impacts :
New recreation in rural and urban areas, clustering projects, and TDC receiver sites may
require new or additional police protection services. Protection would be provided by the
appropriate jurisdiction or agency. For example, clustering projects located in rural areas (not
annexed to the City) would likely have police service provided by the County sheriff. Rural
trails (implemented by the City) may have some security provided by open space funds,
neighbors, volunteers, or the County sheriff. At the time specific projects are. proposed, the
adequacy of police protection services would be assessed and mitigated. With this mitigation,
impacts to law enforcement would not be considered significant.
Police Protection Mitigation:
None.
Administration. Impacts to City administrative services are analyzed on the basis of the City's
current ratio of full -time staff to the current total number of residents and employees in the
City. Given the current City staff of 196 employees (excluding police and fire services) and the
.is.
ER 3 -93, Open Space
current combined resident /employee population of 75,822, the current ratio of City staff to
residents /employees is 1:387.
Administration Impacts:
To have an effective open space program, staffing will be required to negotiate open space
purchases, prepare management plans, perform maintenance, provide security, plan for open
space priorities, and comment on individual projects that may affect the City's open space
program. In the beginning the program can be maintained by existing staff; however, as more
lands are acquired program staffing needs may grow. As proposed in the DOSE, funding
sources should be provided for the open space program (see DOSE, Chapter IV). Initially, this
money would primarily be utilized for property acquisition and related tasks; however, as more
land is obtained open space monies would be utilized more for maintenance, security, and
similar tasks. DOSE policies requires that new open space monies be allocated for acquisition
as well as maintenance. Thus it is expected that open space would have a set revenue source
and that staff would not significantly exceed that revenue source, a basic constraint of any City
program.
Administration Mitigation :
None.
Public Schools. Impacts to public schools are based upon the capacity of existing school
facilities and planned future facilities to accommodate projected increases in school enrollment.
Impacts are considered significant if the increased enrollment associated with buildout of the
proposed project or any alternative exceeds the capacity of local school facilities.
Public Schools Impacts:
Cluster and TDC projects may result in a need for new or augmented school facilities. The
location of TDC or cluster projects will not be clear until ordinances are created. Such
ordinances and individual projects proposed will require environmental review and mitigation
for school impacts. With this mitigation, school impacts are not considered potentially
significant.
F & O. Utilities EnerQV/Resources
This section analyzes the provision of services and resources.
Water Supply:
The City of San Luis Obispo currently receives its water from three sources: Whale Rock
Reservoir, Salinas Reservoir (Santa Margarita Lake), and local groundwater supplies. The
current estimated water supply from these three sources is 7,357 acre -feet per year (AFY) (see
Appendix 1 for a summary of City water supplies).
-16-
5 - -302-
ER 3 -93, Open Space
Whale Rock Reservoir and Salinas Reservoir constitute 93 percent of the City's current water
supply. In addition, the City has operated six wells [not all active now] from which 1,955 and
1,954 AFY of groundwater were extracted in 1990 and 1991, respectively. According to the
City's Groundwater Basin Evaluation, between 2,000 and 3,000 AF of groundwater can be
extracted on an annual basis if proper water management steps are taken. However, Policy
33 of the City's Water and Wastewater Management Element states that the City will not
compete with local agricultural use of groundwater or damage wildlife habitat through reduced
steam flows in obtaining long -term sources of supply. Based on this policy, the City Council
decided in April, 1992, to limit the long -term use of groundwater to 500 AFY.
Water Consumption:
The City will provide water service to all areas within the City and some agencies outside the
City. Consumption within the City's service area during the past six years is shown in Appendix
1. Water consumption peaked in 1988 and fell off sharply thereafter. The City's total 1991
consumption of 4,640 AF represents a 45 percent reduction from the peak annual consumption
of 8,411 AFY (1988). This decline in consumption is primarily a result of the mandatory water
conservation program that was imposed by the City in 1989 in response to drought conditions.
The City ended its mandatory water conservation program in March, 1992. Despite lifting of
mandatory conservation, water demand is still below the demand experienced in 1987 (the
baseline year for the conservation program). Due to mandatory conservation the past several
years do not represent normal City water consumption conditions. Using typical water demand
rates for the various land uses that exist in the City, City-wide demand is anticipated to be
approximately 8,095 AFY (under normal conditions). This level of demand would exceed the
City's current available water supply of 7,357 AFY by 738 AFY.
Water Supply Impacts:
Impacts to water supplies are considered significant if projected demand for water exceeds
projected available supply at the time of buildout. In general terms, the DOSE could increase
water demands from current levels as a result of water needed for: (1) active or passive
recreation projects, (2) new plantings or restoration provided along degraded creeks, hillsides,
or similar resource areas, and (3) cluster or TDC projects.
DOSE policies stipulate that recreation is prohibited if (a) a significant environmental impact
occurs, or the project would significantly mar the scenic quality of a site (DOSE, Table III,
page 49). Recreation projects (such as parks or golf courses) may require a significant amount
of water (depending on the landscaping provided and the project's design). At the time such
projects are proposed, environmental review would determine water impacts. Under DOSE
policies, water impacts would need to be mitigated.
DOSE policies encourage restoration and enhancement of creek environments. Water use for
such projects would be minimal in that: (1) water would be necessary for starting the
vegetation (usually two years maximum), (2) the required native vegetation has a lower water
demand than ornamental .plants, and (3) most restoration projects would be small scale.
.17-
S -33
ER 3 -93, Open Space
Because of the scale and sporadic nature of such projects it is not anticipated that
enhancement projects will result in potentially significant water impacts. In addition, such
projects will be subject to environmental review and mitigation for potentially significant
impacts.
The DOSE programs include the preparation of clustering and TDC ordinances. Such projects
may be dependent on City water, although rural projects would generally provide their own
services (since current LUE policy prohibits City sewer and water service outside the City Limit
Line or URL). TDC projects would likely transfer development from rural areas to areas
within the URL, thus utilizing City services. Clustering projects may occur within the URL,
but such projects would not necessarily significantly increase density as much as protect natural
resource areas. At the time a specific TDC or cluster ordinance is proposed mitigation will
be required for water supply impacts. Programs identifying the need to create such ordinances
(as specified within the DOSE) would not result in a potentially significant impact to City water
supply.
Water Supply Mitigation:
Policies and programs within the DOSE could encourage water conservation or better
utilization of water, resources. Doing so may effect the ability of the City and County to
provide for desired development (such as cluster or TDC development) versus allowing
sporadic rural development. The following programs are recommended to be added to the
DOSE Outdoor Recreation Section, to be included in the Park and Recreation Element
Update:
1. The City, County, and State should encourage regional and community parks and facilities
such as golf courses to utilize reclaimed water for landscaped areas.
2. Regional and community parks, golf courses, and similar projects should:
a. Utilize primarily native plants while minimizing turf area, and
b. Prior to project approval, provide a water conservation plan. This plan shall be
updated every five years, and shall detail water supply and demand for the facility
during drought and non - drought years.
Wastewater Treatment and Sewage Collection:
Water supplies from the two reservoirs that serve the City are treated at the Stenner Canyon
water treatment facility located north of the City. Stenner Canyon's current peak water
treatment capacity is 11.5 million gallons per day (mgd). This rate of treatment was regularly
approached during the summer and fall days before the drought and mandatory conservation.
The plant's upgrade (now underway) would increase peak capacity to about 16 mgd.
The City's current wastewater collection system includes approximately 150 miles of sewer
pipes, and eight pumping stations. Collected flows are treated at the City's wastewater
_18-
S-311
ER 3 -93, Open Space
treatment plant on Prado Road. The sewage collection system in the City is currently in need
of improvements. The system suffers from high infiltration /inflow (I /I) rates, primarily during
wet weather conditions, due to cracks in the joints of older pipes, root intrusion, and pipe
breakage. The City continually replaces sewer pipes as part of its maintenance schedule and
uses television cameras, smoke tests, and manhole inspections to identify problem areas.
The City's wastewater treatment plant currently has the capacity to treat 5.2 million gallons per
day (mgd) of sewage. By 2015, the City plans to increase the capacity of the treatment plant
to 5.8 mgd during dry weather flows and 6.2 mgd during wet weather flows. An upgrade of the
City's treatment plant is currently being conducted. This will allow the plant to treat
wastewater to an advanced tertiary level, which will bring the plant into compliance with
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) requirements.
In 1989, the average dry weather flow into the City's treatment plant was 4.4 mgd. However,
because of water conservation measures that were implemented during the recent drought,
wastewater flows in the City have been reduced to between 3.1 and 3.5 mgd, on average.
These flows are 60 to 67 percent of current treatment capacity, respectively. Overall flows will,
however, rise as a return to normal water consumption patterns occurs following the lifting of
the City's conservation program. Under conditions of normal water consumption, estimated
wastewater flow for current levels of development in the City would be approximately 4.76
mgd.
Wastewater Impacts:
Impacts to wastewater collection and treatment systems are considered significant if projected
flows exceed projected treatment plant capacity or the capacity of local sewage collection
systems. Clustering and TDC projects may be dependent on City wastewater facilities,
although rural projects would generally provide their own facilities (since current LUE policy
prohibits City sewer and water service outside the City Limit Line or URL). TDC projects
would likely transfer development from rural areas to areas within the URI., thus utilizing City
wastewater facilities. Clustering projects may occur within the URL, but such projects would
not necessarily significantly increase density as much as protect natural resource areas. At the
time a specific TDC or cluster ordinance is proposed mitigation will be required for impacts
to wastewater facilities. Programs identifying the need to create such ordinances (as specified
within the DOSE) would not result in a potentially significant impact to City wastewater
facilities.
Wastewater Mitigation:
None.
Electricity Setting:
Electrical power is supplied to the City of SLO by Pacific Gas and Electric (PG &E). Using
typical electrical power demand rates for the various land uses that presently exist in the City,
current demand for electrical power is estimated at 314 million kilowatt hours per year
-19-
.s-o
ER 3 -93, Open Space
(kWh /y). The PG &E system has an electrical delivery capacity of approximately 65 megawatts
(MW). Peak demand for electricity in the City is estimated at 57.3 MW. Therefore, a surplus
peak demand capacity of approximately 7.7 MW currently exists.
Electricity Impacts:
Impacts related to the provision of electrical power would be considered significant if project
demand adversely affects the ability of PG &E to maintain adequate service. Since the DOSE
does not involve significant new areas for development that would require electrical service,
project impacts would not be considered significant.
Natural Gas Setting.
Southern California Gas Company, a privately owned company under the jurisdiction of the
Public Utilities Commission, provides natural gas service to the San Luis Obispo area. The
availability of natural gas service is dependent upon current natural gas supplies and regulatory
policies. Using typical natural gas demand rates for the various land uses that presently exist
in the City, current demand for natural gas is estimated at 1.51 billion cubic feet per year
(cf /yr). Under present conditions, Southern California Gas Company has the capacity to meet
all demand for natural gas in the City.
Natural Gas Impacts:
Impacts related to the provision of natural gas are considered significant if projected demand
adversely affects the ability of SCG to maintain adequate service. Since adoption of the DOSE
does not involve significant new areas for development that would require natural gas service,
project impacts would not be considered significant.
Recycling/Solid Waste Disposal Setting:
An estimated 97,726 tons of solid waste were generated in 1991 by residential, commercial,
industrial, and other customers in the City. Given the City's current population of 42,480,
current per capita generation is 12.6 pounds per day, or approximately 2.3 tons per year. Of
this total, 82,314 tons (84 %) were disposed in area landfills and the remaining 15,412 tons
(16 %) are diverted from landfills either through source reduction or recycling activities.
Cold Canyon Landfill receives all of San Luis Obispo's solid waste. The landfill is nearing
capacity; however, there are plans to expand this landfill. This expansion will increase capacity
by 3.49 million tons. At current disposal rates, this would provide adequate capacity for the
next 10 to 15 years. Further expansion of Cold Canyon Landfill or development of an
alternative site would be required at the time this capacity is reached.
Recycling/Solid Waste Disposal Impacts:
Impacts related to solid waste generation are considered significant if projected solid waste
disposal exceeds the projected capacity of available disposal facilities. Since adoption of the
-20-
lf't o
ER 3 -93, Open Space
and implementation of the DOSE does not involve significant new areas for development that
would require solid waste disposal, project impacts would not be considered significant.
G. Noise Levels
Noise Setting.
Excessive noise can not only be undesirable but may also cause physical and /or psychological
damage. The amount of annoyance or damage caused by noise is dependent primarily upon
three factors: the amount and nature of the noise, the amount of ambient noise present before
the intruding noise, and the activity of the person working or living in the noise source area.
Generally, noise levels diminish as distance from a noise source increases. The duration of
noise and the time period at which it occurs are important factors in determining noise impacts
to sensitive land uses (such as residences, schools, etc.). Noise is more disturbing at night than
during the day and noise indices have been developed to account for the varying duration of
noise events over time as well as community responses to them.
The primary sources of noise in the City of SLO corporate boundary and URL includes
vehicular traffic on roads and highways, train operations from the Southern Pacific Railroad,
and airport activities at the SLO Airport. Two major stationary sources of noise near the City
are the Southern Pacific Milling Company, which produces concrete, and Air -Vol Block which
manufactures concrete blocks.
Noise Impacts:
Noise standards contained within the City of SLO Noise Element (1991), identify noise as a
significant impact if sensitive land uses are exposed to an (a) interior noise level greater than
45 dBA, or (b) exterior noise levels of greater than 60 dBA Ldn. Noise sensitive land uses are
generally defined as residences, transient lodging, schools, hospitals, nursing homes, churches,
meeting halls, office buildings, and mortuaries.
Noise impacts are assessed in terms of long and short -term impacts. Long -term impacts result
from a noise source which is constant or re- occurring (such as traffic or train noise,
respectively). Short-term noise impacts occur for a limited duration of time. Construction and
maintenance equipment noise are examples of short -term impacts, once construction or
maintenance is completed the noise impact is removed. Long -term noise impacts result largely
from transportation facilities (such as airports, roads, trains) or stationary sources (such as
manufacturing plants).
With implementation of the DOSE, noise impacts could result from: (a) the construction of
recreation, cluster, or TDC projects (short-term noise impacts associated with construction),
and (b) open space maintenance activities (short-term impacts associated with mowers and
other heavy equipment required to maintain open space). Potentially significant noise impacts
would occur if (a) sensitive uses are located adjacent to noise sources, and (b) the noise
generated exceeds City or. County Noise Element standards Sdepending on the project's
.21-
S-27
ER 3 -93, Open Space
jurisdiction). Within the greenbelt and Outer Planning Area, the likelihood of noise impacts
is decreased because there are few noise sensitive uses. Within or near the URL, because of
the density of sensitive uses (i.e., residences), the potential for impacts is greater. At the time
individual projects are proposed CEQA review will occur. In addition, in order for cluster or
recreation projects to be approved they must be consistent with the City (or County) Noise
Element standards. Such consistency would guarantee that significant noise impacts do not
occur.
Noise Mitigation Measures:
To clarify that City construction and maintenance activities on open space do not result in.
potentially significant impacts to sensitive receptors the following policies should be
incorporated into DOSE, Chapter III (Management of Open Space and Greenbelt Areas by
the City):
1. If open space uses are proposed adjacent to noise sensitive uses they shall include the
following mitigation measures (unless there is an emergency which requires immediate
action by the City):
a. Construction and maintenance activities shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 am to
4:00 pm, Monday through Friday.
b. All construction and maintenance equipment, fixed or mobile, should be in proper
operating condition and fitted with standard silencing features.
c. In areas where construction or maintenance equipment (such as diesel generators and
air compressors) is operating for more than one day within 50 feet of a sensitive land
use, temporary portable noise barriers should be erected and located between the
piece of equipment and the sensitive use.
d. During construction or maintenance operations within areas located near a noise
sensitive land use, only one piece of equipment should be allowed to operate. [Using
150 feet as a reference distance, the reduction from two pieces of equipment to one
could reduce noise levels by approximately 3 dBA].
H. Geologic and Seismic Hazards and Topographic Modifications
Geologic and Seismic Hazards and Topographic Modifications Setting:
The SLO area is subject to several types of related but distinct geologic hazards, including
earthquakes, liquefaction, and landslides. Within SLO County, small to moderate earthquakes
(magnitude less than 5.0 on the Richter Scale) are common. The potential for liquefaction (a
phenomenon whereby unconsolidated or near saturated soils lose cohesion and are converted
to a fluid state as a result of severe vibratory motion) varies considerably over the study area,
dependent on local soil types and conditions. Much of the Laguna Lake area, for example,
rests on recent alluvium which is considered to carry a high liquefaction potential in the event
W;E
5-39
ER 3 -93, Open Space
of an earthquake.
Landslides are influenced by a number of factors, including slope angle, soil moisture content,
vegetative cover and the physical nature of the underlying strata. Landslides can be triggered
by one or more specific events including development-related construction, seismic activity, and
fires. The primary factor in determining landslide potential is an unstable slope condition.
Other potential geologic hazards are tsunamis and seiches. Tsunami and seiches are
seismically induced waves which occur in the large bodies of water. No known tsunami or
seiches have affected the City of SLO, and their future possibility of posing a hazard to the
City is extremely remote.
Geologic, Seismic, & Topographic Modifications Impacts:
Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines state that a project will have a significant impact
if it "exposes people or structures to major geologic hazards." Therefore, if new development
is located in areas of high seismic, liquefaction, landslide, or erosion potential, a significant
impact would occur.
DOSE programs encourage the creation of TDC and cluster ordinances. In addition, DOSE
policies recommend the preservation of historic structures (DOSE, page 34). Such structures
could be impacted by geologic hazards. According to State and City guidelines, new or
renovated facilities (such as adobes) would be required to comply with the requirements of the
Uniform Building Code, the City's Seismic Safety Element, and local ordinances. Such
compliance would mandate that project- related geologic risks be mitigated to a less than
significant level. These requirements include the preparation of soils engineering and
geological engineering investigations prior to development in areas of moderate, high, and very
high landslide risks and in areas of high and very high liquefaction and subsidence potential.
In addition, the DOSE, in the Hazard Section (pages 32 -33), does provide policies regarding
development in hazard areas. These policies mandate that lands proposed for development
should provide adequate mitigation for hazards. DOSE Outdoor Recreation policies encourage
combining recreation with hazard control measures (DOSE, page 48, policy 1 (e)). Such
recreation uses are allowed only if they do not increase the hazard. State and City guidelines,
and DOSE policies would adequately mitigate potentially significant geologic impacts
associated with DOSE adoption.
I. Air Ouality
Air Quality Setting.
Ozone and particulate matter less than 10 microns are the primary pollutants of concern in the
SLO area. Although the City has not exceeded Federal ozone and particulate standards,
occasionally State standards for both ozone and particulates have been exceeded. The City
of SLO, during the period of 1989 through 1991, did not exceed State or Federal standards for
carbon monoxide, nitrogen. dioxide or sulfur dioxide.
-23-
.539
ER 3-93, Open Space
Air Quality Impacts:
Air quality impacts occur as a result of (a) construction emissions (from equipment, materials,
and grading activities), and (b) exhaust emissions (from vehicles and stationary sources).
DOSE air quality impacts could occur from emissions generated by (a) construction of
recreation facilities, cluster projects, TDC projects, or roads associated with facilities, and (b)
vehicles traveling to or from such facilities or projects.
In terms of construction emissions, DOSE policies do require that sound soil conservation
techniques be utilized in all construction activities. These policies require planting graded
areas (to stabilize dust emissions), minimizing cut and fill, and limiting graded areas (see
DOSE page 45, Policy 4). Noise mitigation proposed in this negative declaration would also
diminish air quality impacts by requiring that construction and maintenance machinery be kept
in good working order.
In terms of vehicle emissions, DOSE policies encourage recreation, clustering, and TDC
programs. Such projects, once implemented, would likely generate vehicle trips and associated
emissions. DOSE recreation policies encourage park projects such as Mission Plaza and the
Murray Street linear park (DOSE, page 52 -53), some active recreation, and open space uses
such as trails and viewing stations. For the most part, recreation encouraged in the DOSE
would not generate significant traffic or air quality concerns. Recreation encouraged in the
DOSE would tend to generate little to no traffic, and, for the most part, should encourage
pedestrian traffic. Since DOSE policies require that proposed recreation not result in a
significant environmental impact (DOSE, Table III and IV, page 49 -50), DOSE recreation
policies would not be considered potentially significant in terms of air quality impacts.
Cluster and TDC projects (once an ordinance is created) may generate additional vehicle
traffic and thus create air quality impacts; however, the impacts of such projects would have
to be reviewed in terms of (a) the density of proposed cluster or TDC projects, (b) existing hot
spots2, (c) potential hot spots, and (d) vehicle trips generated by proposed projects. Cluster
and TDC development would group development (versus allowing sprawl), thus potentially
facilitating car pools, bus service, or other alternative modes of transportation. Since the City's
cluster and TDC ordinances must receive environmental review at the time these ordinances
are drafted, and because environmental review and mitigation will be required at the time
individual projects are proposed, impacts to air quality are not deemed potentially significant
at this time.
Air Quality Mitigation:
None.
2 High concentrations of carbon monoxide usually occurring at a traffic intersection.
-24-
,T- #0
ER 3 -93, Open Space
J. Surface Water Flow & Ouaft
Water Flow & Quality Setting:
The major drainage system within the City is the San Luis Obispo Creek system. This drainage
system originates in the Santa Lucia Range north of the city and drains southwest to the Pacific
Ocean. Major creeks within San Luis Obispo's Urban Reserve Line (URL) include: San Luis
Obispo, Stenner, Brizzolari, Prefumo, and Old Garden Creek. Water quality within the San
Luis Obispo Creek system is generally characterized as good. Water quality generally
decreases in the summer months due to reduced flows.
The major groundwater basin within the City, its greenbelt, and Outer Planning Area is the San
Luis Obispo groundwater basin. There are currently groundwater quality problems with
nitrate, iron and manganese levels within the basin. These levels are related to surface water
degradation in San Luis Obispo Creek from municipal waste and business discharges, and
agricultural runoff.
Natural flooding in the Planning Area is most severe along the course of San Luis Obispo
Creek, particularly downstream of its confluence with Stenner Creek. Additional areas of
flooding include the upper reaches of Stenner Creek and its major tributary, Brizzolari Creek.
Areas within the Planning Area that are vulnerable to flooding during a 100 -year event are
shown in Figure 8.
Water Flow & Quality Impacts:
The DOSE identifies numerous policies related to protecting creek corridors, wetlands, and
hazard areas (DOSE, pages 13, 22, and 33). Such policies require that development (a) locate
outside of a creek corridors or wetland, and (b) provide an adequate setback or buffer from
a creek or wetland. An adequate setback (as defined by the DOSE) provides for the creek's
storm design capacity and potential natural changes to the creek or wetland. Hazard policies
stipulate that hazards should be mitigated and mitigation should not result in a public cost to
the City or adjacent property owners. DOSE outdoor recreation policies encourage active and
passive recreation in hazard areas where the recreation use is consistent with the hazard, and
prohibit recreation in hazard areas if it would increase the hazard (see DOSE, page 50).
In terms of water quality, the DOSE specifies that development should "utilize design,
construction, and maintenance techniques that ensure that development near a creek will not
cause or make worse natural hazards (such as erosion, sedimentation, flooding, or water
pollution); ..:' In addition, creek enhancement as well as erosion and sediment control
practices are required (DOSE, page 19, policy e). Existing DOSE policies adequately mitigate
potential surface water flow and quality impacts, thus impacts to surface water flow and quality
are not considered potentially significant.
Water Flow & Quality Mitigation:
None.
-25-
ER 3 -93, Open Space
Figure 8 - Areas Vulnerable to Flooding
ER 3 -93, Open Space
K & L Plant and Animal Life
Plant & Animal Life Setting:
The City of SLO is situated between the Santa Lucia Mountains to the east and the Pacific
Ocean to the west. The region is considered to be a valuable ecological resource due to the
presence of contiguous blocks of relatively undisturbed natural areas and the unique
assemblages of plant and animal species supported by them. The variety of plant communities
within this region provides for diverse habitat types which enhance biological values. Seven
major vegetation types are common within the San Luis Valley region: non -native grassland,
ruderal (introduced or disturbed vegetation), riparian, chaparral, coastal scrub, oak woodland,
and oak savannah.
The potential variety and abundance of animal species in the URI , greenbelt, and Outer
Planning Area is determined by physical parameters such as soils, slope, exposure,
precipitation, evaportranspiration and vegetation. Vegetation also reflects physical parameters
to a great degree, and consequently provides a suitable framework for identification of animal
associations. The plant communities described above provide habitat for a variety of mammals,
birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish and invertebrates. To protect wildlife in the region, it is
essential to protect the variety of habitats required by each species.
The California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) lists several sensitive plant communities
and plant and animal species within the San Luis Valley region. For purposes of analysis,
sensitive taxa (named species, subspecies) are considered to be: (a) plant communities and
species of plants and animals which have been designated as rare, threatened, or endangered
by federal or state agencies; (b) candidates for such designations; and (c) taxa otherwise
considered sensitive by the state (Department of Fish and Game), recognized monitoring
organizations, or local observers with area flora and fauna expertise. A total of 3 sensitive
communities, 14 sensitive plant species and 24 sensitive animal species have been recorded in
the general vicinity of the URL, greenbelt, and Outer Planning Area. A summary of sensitive
plant communities and taxa is presented in Appendix 2. A summary of sensitive animal taxa
is presented in Appendix 3. The majority of species occur outside the City of SLO's URL
Plants and Animals Impacts:
When development occurs in natural areas, the site's biological resources and the surrounding
area are affected. Biological impacts may be direct, indirect, or both. Direct impacts include
habitat loss and fragmentation, introduction of barriers to movement, and native plant and
animal communities converted to buildings, roads, and decorative landscaping. Development
may also result in indirect impacts which affect the habitat quality within and outside the URL
Indirect impacts may include the invasion of non - native weedy or landscape plants into natural
areas (see Appendix 4 for a list of invasive plants), the introduction of feral predators or other
exotic animals, light intrusion into natural areas, noise disturbances, declines in air quality,
changes in the quality and quantity of water resources, erosion and sedimentation, and
intentional or accidental depredations by human beings.
-27-
S-JI3
ER 3 -93, Open Space
Project impacts are assessed in view of the quality and extent of biological resources in the
proposed development area and regional biological issues. Thresholds of significance were
developed to provide a standard against which the proposed development and cumulative
projects can be measured. Development impacts are discussed in terms of generalized changes
in the structure and function of the biological community, and specific impacts to plant and
animal associations, sensitive taxa and habitats, and wildlife networks.
Significance thresholds were identified based on the California. Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA, Appendix G), and local and regional plans and ordinances. See Appendix 5 of this
negative declaration for these guidelines.
Federal and state regulations require development projects to mitigate an unavoidable loss of
wetlands and riparian habitats. The California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), US
Army Corps of Engineers, and the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) determine the
location and type of mitigation that should be performed. Federal and State agencies typically
prefer protecting a resource as it exists. A second alternative (when unavoidable impacts
occur) is the creation of a resource (such as a wetland or creek corridor) on the same site
where the impact occurred. This resource should maintain a composition and functional value
similar to the habitat or resource impacted. This is known as "onsite /inkind" mitigation. A
third (less desirable) alternative is to provide a new resource on another site (in the same
general area), which maintains a similar composition and functional value. This is known as
"off- site /in kind" mitigation. Mitigation which creates a different type of resource or habitat
on a site (either on the site where the impact occurred or on another parcel) is generally not
considered acceptable mitigation. This is known as "onsite /out of kind" or "off- site /out of kind"
mitigation.
The DOSE recommends coordination of City staff with State and Federal agencies to
guarantee that proper mitigation is implemented. The DOSE Plant and Animal section
provides for coordination between local agencies by defining the category of resource that must
be protected and what agency is responsible for that listing (see DOSE, Tables I and II, page
28 and 29). The DOSE includes policies to protect and designate as open space wetlands,
sensitive plants and animals, hills and mountains, and creeks. Policies in the DOSE would
restrict development within or adjacent to such resources unless (a) no "practicable
alternative;3n is available, (b) alterations are necessary to protect public health and safety, or
(c) alterations are necessary for the location of infrastructure. In the case of new
infrastructure, it may be located in sensitive areas only if the Community Development
Director determines the project has minimized environmental impacts through project design
and infrastructure placement. DOSE policies also state, that if encroachment occurs (for
example if there is no practicable alternative), the City may require replacement vegetation or
payment of a mitigation fee.
3 Practicable alternative shall mean (1) the project's basic purpose could still be accomplished either through a redesign or a
reduction in massing, scale, or density, or (2) if changes are required to the project's design, scale, or density, reasonable use of
the subject property could still occur. Reasonable use of the property in the case of new development may include less development
then indicated by zoning. In the ease of additional development on an already developed site, reasonable development may mean
that no additional development is reasonable considering site constraints and the existing development's scale, design, or density.
.28.
S. #//
ER 3 -93, Open Space
DOSE policies stipulate an adequate creek setback and buffers for wetlands, plants, and
animals. Policy 8.6 within the Draft Land Use Element (DLUE) states that "the City should
establish creek setback lines. The lines should include: as a minimum, the first 20 feet from
the edge of the wetland or the top of the creek bank; significant riparian plants or wildlife
habitat; space for paths called for by any City- adopted plan" (see DLUE, page 53, policy 8.6
A). The DOSE stipulates that recreation is prohibited within a creek, wetland, sensitive
habitat area, and unique resource except portions of Mission Plaza, Laguna Lake, and Meadow
Park (DOSE policies 1 (a), page 15; Table III and IV, pages 49 -50; and program a (1), page
52).
As a result of this exclusion, and the fact that policies and programs are not clear regarding
these sites, potential expansion of these projects may significantly impact sensitive resources
(creeks, wetlands, sensitive habitat, or unique resources). In addition, DOSE policies state the
City may require replacement and /or a mitigation fee. This policy should clarify preference
(in terms of onsite/inldnd versus offsite /out -of -kind) and when replacement may be required.
To mitigate potentially significant impacts to creeks, wetlands, and plants and animals, DOSE
policy should be clarified in these areas.
Plants and Animals Mitigation:
DOSE creek, wetland, plant and animal, and Outdoor Recreation policies or programs (as
applicable) shall be clarified to indicate:
1. When significant impacts occur to creeks, wetlands, or plants and animals, the City should
approve and the developer should implement a mitigation and monitoring plan that is
designed to avoid or ameliorate impacts (in the case that no practicable alternative is
available or similar circumstances as discussed in the DOSE). If avoidance is infeasible,
the mitigation plan shall be used to replace habitat values. The monitoring portion shall
provide fora guarantee (such as a security) that the prescribed mitigation is successful.
The mitigation and monitoring plan should be (a) in accordance with official CDFG
guidelines, and (b) prepared and implemented by qualified professionals under funding by
the applicant.
2. Alterations or expansions to Mission Plaza, Laguna Lake Park, and Meadow Park facilities
should not result in significant biological impacts. Expansion of these park facilities should
allow for the maintenance of existing habitat value . as well as human enjoyment. Buildings
and ancillary uses (such as parking) shall maintain a minimum 20 foot setback from top
of creek bank, and a 20 foot buffer from a wetland or sensitive habitat or unique resource.
New recreation facilities (benches, trails, viewing stations) shall be located to preserve
sensitive resources while providing some public access. If impacts occur, habitat values
shall be replaced onsite or offsite (inkind only) at a 2:1 ratio.
3. The priority of habitat replacement. Mitigation should be provided to offset significant
biological impacts, and first priority mitigation should be utilized unless a lower priority
will result in substantially more resource protection or a first priority mitigation is not
feasible. If encroachment results in a significant biological impact, the first priority shall
-29.
S- j
ER 3 -93, Open Space
be the provision of onsite /inkind mitigation. A second priority is offsite /inkind mitigation
(within the same general area), and a third priority is a mitigation fee.
4. The standardized setback indicated in the Draft Land Use Element (DLUE), i.e., a 20 foot
setback
M. Archaeological/Historical
Archaeological Resources Setting.
The following archaeological resource summary is conditioned by certain constraints:
• Very little of the Planning Area (estimated less than 10 %) has been examined for
archaeological resources;
• Many of the designated historical landmarks which potentially include subsurface cultural
resources have not been recorded as archaeological sites; and
• There may be sites known to local or non - professional researchers which have not been
recorded in the archives.
In the SLO Planning Area there are 85 recorded archaeological sites. Some of the historical
landmarks, in particular, nineteenth or early twentieth century residences of SLO citizens and
early commercial buildings, have the potential for subsurface archaeological resources. The
prehistoric sites comprise the range of predictable resources; milling stone sites, villages,
cemeteries, camps, and lithic scatters from the Chumash and Salinan speaking Native American
tribes that lived in the San Luis Obispo area (their territory stretched from Malibu to northern
San Luis Obispo County and inland as far as the western edge of the San Joaquin Valley). Of
the archaeological sites that have been recorded, 22 are within the Urban Reserve Line (URL),
and seven sites (four prehistoric, three historic) are within or close to areas which would be
considered for development under the Draft Land Use Element.
Historic Resources Setting.
A number of significant historic resources have been identified in the Planning Area. These
include local, state, National Landmarks, and Historical Preservation Districts. Historic
Resources are listed in Appendix E of the Historical Preservation Program Guidelines.
In 1987, the City Council created three Historic Preservation Districts: Downtown, Old Town,
and Mill Street (Figure 9). These districts identify the older parts of SLO which exhibit an
important part of the community's history. In addition, three additional Historic Zoning
Districts be may be established by the City. If approved these new districts would include the
Mount Pleasanton /Anholm District, the Little Italy /Railroad District, and the Monterey
Heights District (Figure 9).
The three Historical Preservation Districts have been comprehensively surveyed and most of
-30-
'11-44
ER 3 -93, Open Space
the city has been subject to at least a cursory historic inventory survey. However, the majority
of these studies addressed only the merits of standing structures and did not address the
potential that some of the older buildings may also contain archaeological resources. Historic
and /or surface resources may exist in other parts of the Planning Area that have not been
recorded. Any future changes to these areas would require a comprehensive survey of historic
resources to determine their significance.
Archaeological and Historical Resources Impacts:
Potentially significant unknown archaeologic and historic resources could exist throughout the
Planning Area that could be significantly impacted by future development. Such resources can
only be identified through site - specific research, survey, and inventory. The significance of an
archaeologic or historic resource is most appropriately determined during the site - specific
project planning and review stages of the development process. More detailed and conclusive
testing and evaluation should be conducted at that time based on state and national guidelines.
The significance of site specific impacts can be identified by deciding if the resource would be
demolished or altered or if the surface would be significantly disturbed.
The DOSE policies and programs recommend preserving significant historic archaeological
resources as open space or parkland unless no practicable alternative is available. DOSE
policies also discuss preserving local adobes and other important historic structures as open
space or parkland, and providing sufficient acreage around such structures to maintain and
enhance the historical character (DOSE, page 34 and 35). Further, DOSE policies stipulate
that recreation is prohibited where it will harm the historical or archaeological resource.
In addition to DOSE policies, the City's Historical Preservation Guidelines and the Draft Land
Use Element provide policies and programs for the protection of historical resources. Since
the Draft Open Space Element proposes that historical, archaeological, and cultural resources
be protected as open space or parkland, and that recreation be prohibited where it will harm
the resource, impacts to such resources are not considered significant.
Archaeological and Historical Resources Mitigation:
Add the following policies to the DOSE Historical, Archaeological, or Cultural Resource
section (pages 34 - 35) to be consistent with the protection language contained in other sections
of the DOSE and to provide adequate mitigation:
1. In the case that an archaeological or historical resource is protected as open space or
parkland, the City should require public or private development to:
a. Preserve such resources through easements or dedications. Parcel lines (in the case
of a subdivision) or easements (in the case of a subdivision or other development)
shall be located to optimize resource protection. If a historic or archaeological
resource is located within an open space parcel or easement, allowed uses and
maintenance responsibilities within that parcel or easement should be clearly defined
and conditioned prior to map or project approval.
-31-
S'17 7
ER 3-93, Open Space
Fioure 9 - Existing and Proposed Historic Preservation District
A
AAW'
V-. 4
`=���: ����� iii �I
Existing Historic
Preservation Districts
Proposed Historic
Preservation Districts
j.. L10
170
ER 3.93, Open Space
b. Designate such easements or dedication areas (as enumerated in a above) as open
space or parkland as appropriate.
c. Maintain such resources by prohibiting activities that may significantly degrade the
resource.
2. In areas where it is suspected that archaeological resources may exist, surface surveys,
literature searches, and sub- surface testing should be conducted prior to site development
or grading.
Add the following policies to the DOSE Outdoor Recreation section:
3. Have Table IV (page 50) reference cultural & archaeological resources as well as historical
resources.
N. Aesthetics
Aesthetics Setting.
The City of SLO lies in a valley ringed by hills and morros. Inland and north of the City,
livestock graze the grass- covered rolling hills, interrupted by farmland, vineyards and orchards.
In the winter and spring the oak dotted hillsides surrounding the community become vivid
green accented by a multitude of wildflowers. In the summer and autumn the hillsides turn
tawny, creating a stark contrast between the dark green oaks and the golden -brown grassland.
Visual resources within SLO are defined and protected through primarily two planning
documents: the Land Use Element and the Scenic Highway Element. In addition, architectural
review is conducted by the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) for most development
proposed in the City.
Land Use Element. The existing Land Use Element contains goals and policies for the
preservation of scenic resources. The Element also contains standards and policies for hillside
protection. Hillside policies provide protection and preserve scenic hillside areas and natural
features. They do this by (a) setting boundaries for commercial and residential development
in sensitive hillside areas, (b) creating a permanent open space greenbelt at the community's
edge, and (c) directing development away from hazard areas.
Scenic Highway Element. The Scenic Highway Element (SHE) focuses on the scenic value of
local roads and .identifies policies and programs that will protect and enhance their scenic
qualities. A map of the designated scenic highways identified in the SHE is presented in Figure
10. Table 1 lists streets in the project area that are designated as scenic in the SHE.
Architectural Review Commission (ARC). ARC examines a proposed project's layout, building
design, its relationship to the surrounding neighborhood, landscaping, parking, signage and
other features affecting the project's appearance. The purpose of ARC review is to recognize
the interdependence of land values and aesthetics, preserve and enhance the City's beauty and
.33.
SJ/9
ER 3-93, Open Space
Figure 10 - Scenic Highways Identified in the Scenic Highway Element
Ila
IN
w
A fF
v VISTA
- ROADS OF HIGH SCENIC VALUE
ROADS OF MODERATE SCENIC VALUE
•••••••••• ROADS OF HIGH OR MODERATE SCENIC
VALUE OUTSIDE THE CITY 11MITS
-3q.
,5-50
ER 3 -93, Open Space
Table 1 - Scenic Roadways
ROADWAY
SCENIC VALUE DESIGNATION
Santa Rosa Street
Moderate to High
U.S. Highway 101
Moderate to High
Johnson Avenue
Moderate to High
Foothill Boulevard
Moderate
Los Osos Valley Road
Moderate to High
Madonna Road
Moderate
Higuera Street
Moderate to High
South Street
Moderate
Broad Street
Moderate to High
Prado Road
Moderate
Orcutt Road
Moderate to High
Tank Farm Road
Moderate to High
Buckley Road
Moderate to High
environmental amenities, and promote and protect the general welfare of the community.
Aesthetics Impacts:
The CEQA Guidelines Appendix G (a) states that a project will normally have a significant
effect on the environment if it will "conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the
community were it is located." Therefore, the project is considered to result in a significant
aesthetic impact if it conflicts with the visual resource goals, policies and guidelines outlined
in the City's adopted Land Use Element or Scenic Highway Element.
The City's Scenic Highway Element states: "the City may consider the total or partial blocking
of a view along a Scenic Highway as a "significant environmental impact." For the purpose of
this analysis, the total or substantial blocking of views is considered to be a significant impact.
Additionally, the SHE states that development along scenic highways should not detract from
the quality of the views. Therefore if the project would result in development that would
reduce the visual quality of a scenic roadway viewshed, a significant aesthetic impact is
expected to result.
The DOSE for the most part regulates development in sensitive areas. DOSE policies
-35-
,-5-11
ER 3 -93, Open Space
augment the SHE and the LUE by containing policies to preserve scenic resources° and
protect view corridors, viewsheds, and gateways. The DOSE further prohibits structures along
ridgelines, steep slopes, or in other highly visible locations unless no practicable alternative is
available, or such a location is necessary to protect public health and safety. Other policies
within the DOSE regulate grading and design of development.
To guarantee that development along scenic highways is consistent with the intent of the SHE
and the DOSE, the following mitigation measures are recommended to be incorporated into
the SHE, DOSE, DLUE or ARC guidelines.
Aesthetics Mitigation:
The following programs should be incorporated into the SHE, DOSE, DLUE, or ARC
guidelines:
1. The City should develop: (a) precise scenic corridor boundaries located along designated
scenic roadways, and (b) specific setback distances, height limitations, lot coverage
standards, architectural standards and landscape standards for all property within scenic
roadway corridors to ensure that views from the roadway are maintained.
P. Other Impacts
This section examines the increased potential from danger due to wildland fires as well as
hazards associated with electrical transmission lines.
Wildland Fires:
Fires in undeveloped areas that result from the ignition of accumulated brush and woody
material are known as "wildland fires." Such fires are most likely to occur during the warm,
dry summer months in areas of SLO County that are dominated by species adapted to dry
conditions (such as chaparral and grasslands). The rugged topography of the SLO area affects
wildland fire behavior and the ability of fire fighters to suppress such fires. Development and
human encroachment in fire prone areas aggravates the wildland fire problem. Studies have
indicated that people furnish the ignition source for wildland fires an estimated 67 percent of
the time.
Four levels of wildland fire danger are identified within the City of SLO: extreme, high,
moderate, and low. Areas at extreme risk include particularly steep slopes covered with highly
flammable chaparral. Areas of high and moderate risk are generally flatter and with less dense
vegetation. Low risk areas are generally developed areas that do not include native vegetation
or areas along streams where vegetation maintains moisture. Most of the City is at low or
moderate wildland fire risk while many of the steeply sloped areas surrounding the City are
at primarily high or extreme risk.
Scenic resources are defined as resources having high aesthetic qualities, such as hills and mountains; creeks and other
wetland resources; sensitive habitat and unique resources; and agricultural lands t1at contain grazing or cropland.
.36.
S-542
ER 3 -93, Open Space
The California Department of Forestry (CDF) has primary responsibility for the prevention
and abatement of wildland fires in and around the City. The CDF maintains 13 stations
throughout the County, including one near SLO. The CDF has entered into a mutual aid
agreement for fire protection, in which a number of fire protection agencies share personnel
and equipment during emergency situations.
Wildland Fire Impacts:
The DOSE contains policies encouraging passive recreation and clustering projects in the
greenbelt and Outer Planning Area. Such policies may introduce human activity where it did
not occur before. DOSE policies do prohibit recreation in hazard areas if it will increase the
hazard (DOSE, page 50, 'Table IV). In addition, the DOSE requires that passive recreation
be located such that public access is restricted or limited in sensitive areas (as necessary to
protect sensitive habitats or to prevent erosion during the rainy season) (DOSE, page 48, policy
f (2)).
In terms of clustering development or other development in hazard areas, the DOSE contains
numerous policies that state development should avoid, adequately mitigate, and not increase
hazards. Thus clustering or recreation projects would be required to mitigate wildland fire
dangers prior to project approval. Mitigation may include water storage facilities for fire
safety, providing additional fire suppression facilities or stations, and restricting access to
certain areas. In addition, the City's Safety Element prohibits development in areas of extreme
or high wildland fire risk. DOSE and Safety Element policies would provide adequate
mitigation for potential wildland impacts, thus wildland impacts are not considered potentially
significant.
Wildland Fire Mitigation:
1. The DOSE should include additional hazard policies requiring areas that cannot be
developed due to high hazard risks be preserved as open space, interim open space, or
parkland (as appropriate), and that such areas be preserved through easements or
dedications.
2. Change DOSE Table IV (page 50) to clarify where recreation is encouraged in hazard
areas. This policy should be changed to read: Passive afA Qr active recreation where
hazard control and recreation can loth be beneficially provided.
High Voltage Transmission Lines
High voltage transmission lines, low- voltage distribution lines, substations, electrical service
vaults, and household appliances all generate electromagnet fields (EMFs). These fields are
generated laterally from the power lines, tending to diminish with distance from the source.
The rate of decay depends on the source. EMFs from appliances fall off quickly, while those
-37.
,ssl
ER 3 -93, Open Space
from power lines do so more slowly'.
More than forty studies have found a positive association between long -term exposure to EMFs
and disease (usually cancer). One study showed that adult subjects whose house had magnetic
fields of about 2 milligauss (mG) exhibited a 28 percent increased risk for cancer, compared
with subjects who lived in a field of OS mG. Another study showed that children who lived
in the 2 mG field exhibited a 133 percent increased risk for cancer when compared with
children exposed to a OS mG fields.
Despite the indications from the epidemiological studies, there is as yet no precise threshold
for EMF effects. It is still not clear what particular aspects(s) of the EMF is (are) responsible
for the observed higher rates of cancer and other health effects. Progress will be slow until
more is known about the mechanisms of EMF interaction.'
Various jurisdictions have established their own guidelines. The California Department of
Health Services has recommended the application of "prudent avoidance," described as follows:
"The best response is a prudent one, to avoid unnecessary new exposure to
electromagnetic fields if such avoidance can be achieved at a cost which is
reasonable in light of the risk identified."
The California Board of Education's School Facilities Planning Division has adopted setbacks
for locating schools near high voltage power lines. These setbacks range from 100 feet to 250
feet from the edge of the utility easement, depending upon the line voltage (magnetic fields
of 2 mG may extend 100 feet from a 115,000 volt power line). The City of Irvine has used
measurements of EMFs emitted from existing power lines to regulate new land uses. In the
consideration of a proposed subdivision and rezoning, Irvine used a Southern California Edison
report to define 4 mG as the acceptable level and prohibited residential or school development
in areas where the measured magnetic field was greater. The City of Wilmette, in approving
a new transit facility that included an electric substation, required that there be no increase in
EMF exposure at the project property line and set an absolute level of 2 mG for the project's
field strengths.
High Voltage Transmission Lines Impacts:
One high voltage transmission line runs through the City. Figure 11 depicts the location of this
transmission line. The DOSE discusses the establishment of natural resource open space
corridors (some with trails) along existing easements (see DOSE, page 48, policy 1 (b)). In
addition, cluster or TDC projects may be located near transmission lines. Although the Hazard
Section of the DOSE provides hazard mitigation, there is no clear reference to EMF fields in
the initial discussion (DOSE, page 32) or in the policies. From preliminary information it
would appear that there may be a potentially significant health impact if land uses (such as
residential, commercial, or industrial uses) provide long-term erm exposure to EMF fields. To
5 Slesin, Louis, et al., -Electromagnetic Fields and Land -Use Controls; American Planning Association, PAS Report S 435,
American Planning Association, 1992
.38-
ER 3-93, Open Space
Figure 11 - High Voltage Transmission Line Within SLO
...........................
PREDOMNANT FUTURE LAND USE
PROSPOSED BY DRAFT
Le
. ............. .... .. : ..........
... ........
. . .. ..
...
. .... ...
.............
.
...................
Tourist Commercial
Recreational
NOTE
..................
existing land use.
................ %.
.......... ........
......................
..........................
....................
.................
•
•
S
PREDOMNANT FUTURE LAND USE
PROSPOSED BY DRAFT
M.......... ;.� .................
. ............. .... .. : ..........
... ........
. . .. ..
. .........
...........
.............
Retail Commerical
Public Facility
Tourist Commercial
Recreational
NOTE
..................
existing land use.
......................
..........................
....................
.................
•
•
S
PREDOMNANT FUTURE LAND USE
PROSPOSED BY DRAFT
LUE
Single-Family Residential
Office
Multi-Family Residential
industrial
Retail Commerical
Public Facility
Tourist Commercial
Recreational
NOTE
Areas not marked will retain
existing land use.
......................
..........................
....................
.................
•
•
S
I
N
N ..
I ON
O
OMAN HEALTH HAZARD
High Voltage Transmission Une
-39-
0
1w
ER 3 -93, Open Space
mitigate potentially significant impacts. additional policies should be added to the Hazard
Section to clarify where development should occur and under what circumstances.
High Voltage Transmission Lines Mitigation:
The following shall be added to the Hazard Section of the DOSE:
1. The introduction to the Hazard Section should reference Electromagnetic Fields.
2. The DOSE should contain a policy similar to the State Department of Health Services
recommendation stating: "If a project will result in long -term exposure to EMF fields, the
City should avoid unnecessary new exposure to electromagnetic fields if such avoidance can
be achieved at a cost which is reasonable in light of the risk identified."
3. A program which states: "Develop standards for new development proposed adjacent to
EMF fields based on research and actions taken by other communities."
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends a negative declaration with mitigation.
Mitigation is summarized below:
1. DOSE policy 1 (a 3 c), page 41, requires agricultural buffers within the City Limits and URL if
development occurs next to agricultural land. Buffers are to be placed on the developing land, not
the adjacent agricultural land. This policy should be clarified to state:
a. In the case the parcel proposed for development is within the URL, and the agricultural land
is outside the URL, an agricultural buffer shall be provided and maintained indefinitely until
the URL is expanded or the City determines that: (1) there is no likelihood agriculture will
occur on the agricultural land in the future, and (2) removal of the buffer will not adversely
impact other agricultural lands in the general area. See Figure 7 for clarification.
b. In the case the parcel proposed for development is within the URL or City Limits and the
agricultural parcel is within the URL or City Limits, an agricultural buffer between the
developed parcel and the agricultural land shall be provided; however, once the agricultural
land is developed with urban uses this agricultural buffer may be removed (at the discretion
of the City). See Figure 7 for clarification of this policy change. However, if a mitigation fee
has been paid instead of providing the agricultural buffer, this fee should not be refunded since
it provides compensation for short-term impacts to agriculture.
2. Table IV (page 50) should clarify when recreation is prohibited on agricultural lands. This section
should clearly state active recreation is not encouraged on agricultural lands outside the URL, and
that recreation should not interfere with existing or adjacent agricultural operations. In addition,
that passive recreation is prohibited when it "divides" agricultural lands versus the present wording
which says it is prohibited if it ".bisects an agricultural parcel."
.40.
.S_S4�
ER 3-93, Open Space
3. A program should be added to the DOSE Outdoor Recreation section. This program should state:
"As part of the Park and Recreation Element Update, the City and County should identify potential
golf course sites within and outside the URL."
4. A program statement should be added to the DOSE program 1 (g), page 6: "Incorporate into this
cluster ordinance a trip reduction program."
5. The following programs are recommended to be added to the DOSE Outdoor Recreation Section,
to be included in the Park and Recreation Element Update:
a. The City, County, and State should encourage regional and community parks and facilities such
as golf courses to utilize reclaimed water for landscaped areas.
b. Regional and community parks, golf courses, and similar projects should:
1. Utilize primarily native plants while minimizing turf area, and
2. Prior to project approval, provide a water conservation plan. This plan shall be updated
every five years, and shall detail water supply and demand for the facility during drought
and non - drought years.
6. The following policies should be incorporated into DOSE, Chapter III (Management of Open
Space and Greenbelt Areas by the City):
a. If open space uses are proposed adjacent to noise sensitive uses they shall include the following
mitigation measures (unless there is an emergency which requires immediate action by the
City):
1. Construction and maintenance activities shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 am to 4:00
pm, Monday through Friday.
2. All construction and maintenance equipment, fixed or mobile, should be in proper
operating condition and fitted with standard silencing features.
3. In areas where construction or maintenance equipment (such as diesel generators and air
compressors) is operating for more than one day within 50 feet of a sensitive land use,
temporary portable noise barriers should be erected and located between the piece of
equipment and the sensitive use.
4. During construction or maintenance operations within areas located near a noise sensitive
land use, only one piece of equipment should be allowed to operate. [Using 150 feet as
a reference distance, the reduction from two pieces of equipment to one could reduce
noise levels by approximately 3 dBA].
7. DOSE creek, wetland, plant and animal, and Outdoor Recreation policies or programs (as
applicable) shall be clarified to indicate:
-41-
SSA
ER 3 -93, Open Space
a. When significant impacts occur to creeks, wetlands, or plants and animals, the City should
approve and the developer should implement a mitigation and monitoring plan that is designed
to avoid or ameliorate impacts (in the case that no practicable alternative is available or
similar circumstances as discussed in the DOSE). If avoidance is infeasible, the mitigation plan
shall be used to replace habitat values. The monitoring portion shall provide for a guarantee
(such as a security) that the prescribed mitigation is successful. The mitigation and monitoring
plan should be (a) in accordance with official CDFG guidelines, and (b) prepared and
implemented by qualified professionals under funding by the applicant.
b. Alterations or expansions to Mission Plaza, Laguna Lake Park, and Meadow Park facilities
should not result in significant biological impacts. Expansion of these park facilities should
allow for the maintenance of existing habitat value as well as human enjoyment. Buildings and
ancillary components shall maintain a minimum 20 foot setback from top of creek bank, and
a 20 foot buffer from a wetland or sensitive habitat or unique resource. New recreation
facilities (benches, trails, viewing stations) shall be located to preserve sensitive resources while
providing some public access. If impacts occur habitat values shall be replaced onsite or offsite
(inkind only) at a 2:1 ratio.
c. The priority of habitat replacement. Mitigation should be provided to offset significant
biological impacts, and first priority mitigation should be utilized unless a lower priority will
result in substantially more resource protection or a first priority mitigation is not feasible. If
encroachment results in a significant biological impact, the first priority shall be the provision
of onsite/inldnd mitigation. A second priority is offsite/inldnd mitigation (within the same
general area), and a third priority is a mitigation fee.
d. The standardized setback indicated in the Draft Land Use Element (DLUE), i.e., a 20 foot
setback.
8. In the case that an archaeological or historical resource is protected as open space or parkland, the
City should require public or private development to:
a. Preserve such resources through easements or dedications. Parcel lines (in the rase of a
subdivision) or easements (in the case of a subdivision or other development) shall be located
to optimize resource protection. If a historic or archaeological resource is located within an
open space parcel or easement, allowed uses and maintenance responsibilities within that
parcel or easement should be clearly defined and conditioned prior to map or project approval.
b. Designate such easements or dedication areas (as enumerated in a above) as open space or
parkland as appropriate.
c. Maintain such resources by prohibiting activities that may significantly degrade the resource.
9. In areas where it is suspected that archaeological resources may exist, surface surveys, literature
searches, and sub- surface testing should occur prior to site development or grading.
-42.
S-15-9
ER 3 -93, Open Space
10. Add the following policies to the DOSE Outdoor Recreation section:
a. Have Table IV (page 50) reference cultural & archaeological resources as well as historical
resources.
11. The following programs should be incorporated into the SHE, DOSE, DLUE, or ARC guidelines:
a. The City should develop: (a) precise scenic corridor boundaries located along designated
scenic roadways, and (b) specific setback distances, height limitations, lot coverage standards,
architectural standards and landscape standards for all property within scenic roadway
corridors to ensure that views from the roadway are maintained.
12. The DOSE should include additional hazard policies requiring areas that cannot be developed
due to high hazard risks be preserved as open space, interim open space, or parkland (as
appropriate), and that such areas be preserved through easements or dedications.
13. Change DOSE Table IV (page 50) to clarify where recreation is encouraged in hazard areas.
This policy should be changed to read: Passive ads active recreation where hazard control and
recreation can both be beneficially provided.
14. The following shall be added to the Hazard Section of the DOSE:
a. The introduction to the Hazard Section should reference Electromagnetic Fields.
b. The DOSE should contain a policy similar to the State Department of Health Services
recommendation stating: "If a project will result in long -term exposure to EMF fields, the City
should avoid unnecessary new exposure to electromagnetic fields if such avoidance can be
achieved at a cost which is reasonable in light of the risk identified."
c. A program which states: "Develop standards for new development proposed adjacent to EMF
fields based on research and actions taken by other communities.
Monitoring:
Recommended mitigation (from this Negative Declaration) incorporated into the Final Open Space
Element.
Current Building Code Regulations, City Elements, and ARC guidelines.
-,a-
0
s -0
APPENDIX 1
rTnDvFNT WATFR SIIPPLIES
SOURCE
AVAILABLE SUPPLY
(ACRE FEET PER YEAR)
PERCENTAGE OF
TOTAL
Whale Rock
2057
28.0
Salinas Reservoir
4,800
65.2
Groundwater
500
6.8
TOTAL
79357
100.0
Jource: t-ay of JLV
9-rry wsrmu nnwQTT&4W ON TN ACRE FEET PER YEAR (AFY)
YEAR
SURFACE SOURCES
(AFY)
GROUND WATER
(AFY)
TOTAL
CONSUMPTION
(AFY)
1986
8,367
0
8,367
1987
8,399
0
8,399
1988
8,411
0
8,411
1989
5,524
480
6,004
1990
2,831
1,955
4,786
1991
2,686
1.954
4,640
1992
3,761
1 1,543
5,304
Source: ty o an Luis Obispo.
_5-60
LEGEND:
F2 -
3C -
1B -
SR -
List 4 -
B-
CSC -
BL -
CFP -
LC -
CITY 0
APPENDIX 2 CONTINUED
..I
F SLO EDT AlvMIMIL AxN& �C,irDtitvn PLANT' COMMUNITIES
COMMUNITIES
Serpentine Rock Outcrop
Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh
Sargent Cypress Forest
Category 2. Species may warrant listing but sufficient biological information to support a proposal rule is
lacldng
Withdrawn from candidacy as too abundant, widespread and /or without sufficient threats, to warrant Federal
Listing
Plants rare, threatened or endangered in California and elsewhere.
Listed by the State of California as rare.
Plants of Limited Distribution. A work list.
Listed as Endangered by the Federal Government.
Withdrawn from candidacy for Federal Listing because this name does not represent a distinct taxa meeting the
Endangered Species Act definition of "species.' The status could be reevaluated in the future based on new
information.
California Department of Fish and Game Species of Special Concern.
Blue List; Avian Species of concern Identified in American Birds.
California Fully Protected Species.
Local Concern.
iii
5-602
APPENDIX 3
CITY OF SLO PLANNING AREA SENSITIVE ANIMAL TAXA
SPECIES
T,� AT—US*
COMMON /NAME
CALIFORNIA FEDERAL OTHER
Ambystoma tigrinum californiewe
CSC
F2
–
California Tiger Salamander
Rana aurora draytoni
CSC
–
–
California Red - legged Frog
Rana boylei
CSC
–
--
Foothill Yellow - legged Frog
Clemmys marmorata pallida
–
F2
--
Southwestern Pond Turtle
Phrynosoma coronatum frontale
CSC
–
--
Coast Horned Lizard
Elanus caendeus
CFP
–
–
Black Shouldered Kite
Accipiter cooperi
CSC
–
BL
Coopers Hawk
Accipiter striatus
CSC
–
BL
Sharp - shinned Hawk
Aquila chrysaetos
CSC
–
--
Golden Eagle
Buteo lineatus
–
–
BL
Red - Shouldered Hawk
Buteo regalis
--
F2
BL
Ferruginous Hawk
Circus cyaneus
CSC
–
BL
Northern Harrier
Falco peregrines
CE
FE
–
Peregrine Falcon
Falco meszcanus
CSC
–
--
Prairie Falcon
*Refer to page iii for legend.
Appendix 3 continues on the next page.
-iv-
"S-4 3
APPENDIX 2
rrrY OF SLO PLANNING AREA SENSITIVE PLANT TAXA
*Refer to page iii for legend.
Appendix 2 continues on next page.
-H-
Xr61
STATUS*
SPECIES
COMMON /NAME
CALIFORNIA FEDERAL CNPS
Arctostaphylos cruzauis
—
F2
1B
Arroyo de la Cruz M ta
Arctostaphylos morroensis
—
Fl
1B
Morro Manzanita
Calochonw obispoensis
—
3C
113
San Luis Mariposa Lily
Camissoma hardmaniae
—
F2
1B
Hardman's Evening Primrose
Carer obisponensis
—
3C
1B
San Luis Obispo sage
Chorizanthe breweri
--
3C
1B
Brewer's Spineflower
Chorizanthe rectispina
—
F2
1B
One -awned Spineflower
Cb-sium fondnale var. obispoense
—
F2
1B
Chorro Creek Bog Thistle
Dudleya bettinae
--
3C
1B
San Luis Serpentine Dudleya
Dudleya blochmaniae ssp. blochmaniae
--
—
1B
Blochman's Dudleya
Layia jonesii
—
F2
1B
Jones Layia
Quercus lobata
—
—
List 4
Valley Oak
Sanicula maritima
SR
F2
--
Adobe sanicle
Sidalcea hiclonanii ssp. anomaly
SR
F2
1B
Cuesta Pass Checkerbloom
*Refer to page iii for legend.
Appendix 2 continues on next page.
-H-
Xr61
APPENDIX 3 CONTINUED
rTTV nF cr.n PLANNING AREA SENSITIVE ANIMAL TAXA
SPECIES
STATUS*
COMMON /NAME
CALIFORNIA FEDERAL OTHER
Athene cunicularia
CSC
—
BL
Burrowing Owl
Coccyzus americanus occidentalis
CE
3B
—
Western Yellow Billed Cuckoo
Empidonax tnullu
CSC
—
—
Willow Flycatcher
Lanus ludovicianus
—
—
BL
Loggerhead Shrike
Dendroica petechia
CSC
—
—
Yellow Warbler
Icteria virens
CSC
—
—
Yellow - breasted Chat
Plecotus townsedii towsendii
CSC
F2
—
Townsend's Big -eared Bat
Eumops perotis californicus
CSC
F2
—
California Mastiff Bat
Tadddea taxus
CSC
--
—
American Badger
Danaus pl6dppus
--
--
LC
Monarch
*Refer to page iii for legend.
-v-
s-00,y
APPENDIX 4
vi AMTQ Tn RR AVOTURD IN LANDSCAPING IN NATURAL AREAS'
'Based on the California Native Plant Society list of undesirable species.
Vi
S -Z
COMMON NAME
SCIENTIFIC NAME
COMMON NAME
SCIENTIFIC NAME
Tree of heaven
Ailanthus altissima
Grasses:
Pampas grass
Cortaderia spp
Bermuda grass
Cynodon dactylon
Beach grass
Ammophila arenaria
Kikuyu grass
Pennisetum cladestinum
Fountain grass
Pennisetum setaceum
Mat grass
Phyla nodiflora
Giant reed
Arundodonax
Hottentot fig,.ice
Carpobrotus edulis
plant
brooms:
Garland
Chrysanthemum
Scotch broom
CytLms scoparius
chrysanthemum
coronarium
French broom
Cytims
Easter broom
monspessulanus
Spanish broom
Cytisus spachiarw
Sparticum junceum
Eucalyptus:
Bermuda buttercup
Oxalis pes- caprae
Blue gum
Eucalyptus globus
Red gum
Eucalyptus
camaldulensis
Acacia
Acacia decurrens
Gorse, Furze
Ulex europaneus
Tamarisk, Salt cedar
Tamarix ramosissima
Sydney wattle
Acacia longifolia
Artichoke thistle
Cynara cardunculus
Black Acacia
Acacia melanoxylon
Ivy:
Water hyacinth
Eichhomia crassipes
Algerian Ivy
Hedera canarieusis
English ivy
Hedera helix
German ivy
Senecio mikanioodes
Black locust
Robinia pseudoacacia
Everlasting pea
Lathyrus latifloncs
Big Leaf
Vmca major
Castor bean
Ricinus communis
Periwinkle
Himalaya berry
Rubus procerus (Martz)
'Based on the California Native Plant Society list of undesirable species.
Vi
S -Z
APPENDIX 5
CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT TO PLANTS AND ANIMALS
A proposed development would have a significant impact to the biological resources of the site or region if it would:
• Conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals in the community where it is located (CEQA Guidelines,
Appendix G [a]);
Substantially affect a rare or endangered species of animal or plant or habitat of the species (CEQA Guidelines,
Appendix G [c]);
Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species (CEQA
Guidelines, Appendix G [d]);
• Substantially diminish habitat for fish, wildlife or plants (CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G [t]);
• Involve the use, production or disposal of materials which pose a hazard to animal or plant populations in the
area affected (CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G [v]);
Involve the alteration or conversion of biological resources within the City, region or state (City of SLO General
Plan). These resources include: Locally important species and Locally important communities.
For purposes of this analysis, a plant or animal taxa are considered locally important if they meet any of the following
criteria:
o Taxa (species, subspecies or varieties) that are limited in distribution in the county or region, or are endemic
(limited to a specific area) to the region;
o Taxa that are at the extremes of their range, or are disjunct from the known range of that taxon;
o Taxa whose habitat requirements make them susceptible to local extinctions as a consequence of development,
the introduction of barriers to movement, and /or accompanying increases in human activity,
o Populations of particular species which exhibit unusual adaptations or are quality examples of the species; and
o Taxa which are considered sensitive by recognized monitoring groups (i.e., Audubon Society, California Native
Plant Society, California Department of Fish and Game, etc.).
Communities are considered locally important if they meet any of the following criteria:
V Plant communities or habitat types that are of singular or limited occurrence within the county or project area;
V Plant communities or habitat types that are critical or essential habitat for rare, threatened, endangered or
locally important species;
0 Plant communities, habitat types, or geographic areas which link substantial, intact open space areas;
V Plant communities or habitat types that exhibit characteristics approximating pristine conditions;
0 Communities considered sensitive by recognized monitoring groups such as the Audubon Society, California
Native Plant Society, California Department of Fish and Game; and
v Ephemeral or perennial wetlands defined as areas which sporadically, seasonally or perennially serve to emit,
conduct, or impound water, making it available to water- dependent and /or facultative associations of plants or
animals.
- vii
,' -66
s
RESOLUTION NO. (1994 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND ADOPTING AN UPDATE TO
THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN OPEN SPACE ELEMENT
WHEREAS, on January 7, 1992 the City Council appointed the Open Space Element
Advisory Committee to provide public input and assistance in the preparation of an update to
the City's Open Space Element; and
WHEREAS, eight public workshops were held from February 1992 to May 1992 to
promote public input on the Open Space Element update; and
WHEREAS, a draft Open Space Element was distributed for public review in November
1992; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Open Space Element update has been reviewed by the Parks
and Recreation Commission; and
WHEREAS, a negative declaration with mitigation for the draft Open Space Element was
prepared and distributed for public comment pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act in January 1993; and
S-67
a
WHEREAS, following notice as prescribed by law, the Planning Commission held public
hearings on November 18, December 9 and 29, 1992, and January 13 and 27, February 24,
March 3, 10, and 31, and May 5, 1993 to review the draft Open Space Element and the negative
declaration for the draft Open Space Element; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed all testimony provided during its
hearings, written and oral, regarding the draft Open Space Element; and
WHEREAS, following notice as prescribed by law, the City Council held public hearings
on September 7th, 21st and October 20, 1993, to receive comments and recommendations
regarding the proposed Open Space Element update; and
WHEREAS, the City Council and Planning Commission have reviewed the mitigated
negative declaration prepared for the proposed Open Space Element update; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds the proposed Open Space Element update to be
consistent with all other elements of the City General Plan;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council hereby:
1. Concurs with the environmental determination to approve a negative declaration
with mitigations for the proposed Open Space Element update, and hereby adopts
the negative declaration with mitigations; and
'7 -doo
2. Adopts the proposed Open Space Element update as revised by the Planning
Commission.
On motion of , seconded by
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
/:
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this _ day of , 1993, and
shall take effect thirty days from adoption.
Mayor
ITi-V—V:5-4I
City Clerk
S-69
MEPTING AGENDA
D: 'fig- ITEM #
From: BILL ROALMAN (BROALMAN)
To: SSTENDAHI AJONAS, JMANDEVI
Date: Thursday, January 13, 1994 12:13 pm
Subject: Open Space Element
As you know, San Luis Drive residents have strong concerns about
a trail running through their backyards. I have met with
neighborhood residents to discuss their concerns. Given the
physical constraints of having a trail along that-section of
creek, on January 18, 1994, I will be proposing the following to
council:
1) A paragraph or sentence be added in an appropriate section of
the Open Space Element that precludes . the possibility of a trail
along San Luis Obispo Creek north of California Blvd.
2) That council initiate an amendment to the Parks and Recreation
Element, eliminating any reference to a trail along this section
of San Luis Obispo Creek. Presently, there is a map in the Parks
and Recreation Element showing a trail in the San Luis Drive
neighborhood.
The neighborhood seems to be unanimously opposed to a trail.
Language in the Draft Open Space Element precludes the placement
of trails where there is neighborhood opposition. Therefore, I
would like the issue put to rest once and for all, so the
neighborhood can feel confident that a trail will not pass
through their backyards.
WCAO
❑ FIN DIR
2-XrAO
O FIRE CHIEF
641fORNEY
O P%V DIR
G
D �CE CHI
D MGMT TEAM
W<C DIR
D C RE
AD.JFILE
❑ UTIL DIR
i;i� I le'
D PERS DIR
RECEIVED
JAN 14 199A
CITY COUNCIL
SAN LUIS OBISPO. CA