HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-16-2014 PH3 PPP & LUCE UpdateLa
n
d
U
s
e
a
n
d
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
(L
U
C
E
)
U
p
d
a
t
e
Ci
t
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
1
6
,
2
0
1
4
1
Fi
n
a
l
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
I
m
p
a
c
t
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
F
E
I
R
)
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
H
o
s
p
i
t
a
l
Bi
s
h
o
p
K
n
o
l
l
Gr
a
n
t
C
l
o
s
e
-
o
u
t
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
1.
Ad
o
p
t
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
C
e
r
t
i
f
y
i
n
g
t
h
e
F
i
n
a
l
E
I
R
pr
e
p
a
r
e
d
f
o
r
t
h
e
L
U
C
E
U
p
d
a
t
e
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
MM
R
P
a
n
d
S
O
C
;
2.
A
d
o
p
t
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
s
a
p
p
r
o
v
i
n
g
u
p
d
a
t
e
s
t
o
La
n
d
U
s
e
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
r
e
l
a
t
i
v
e
t
o
t
h
e
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
Ho
s
p
i
t
a
l
a
n
d
B
i
s
h
o
p
K
n
o
l
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Ar
e
a
s
;
3.
A
d
o
p
t
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
c
e
r
t
i
f
y
i
n
g
a
n
d
d
i
r
e
c
t
i
n
g
s
t
a
f
f
to
t
r
a
n
s
m
i
t
f
i
n
a
l
g
r
a
n
t
c
l
o
s
e
-
o
u
t
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
2
3
Fi
n
a
l
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
I
m
p
a
c
t
R
e
p
o
r
t
Co
m
m
e
n
t
p
e
r
i
o
d
o
n
D
E
I
R
J
u
n
e
1
3
–
J
u
l
y
2
8
,
2
0
1
4
25
l
e
t
t
e
r
s
r
e
c
e
i
v
e
d
(
8
s
t
a
t
e
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
,
1
7
i
n
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
s
)
DE
I
R
r
e
v
i
e
w
e
d
b
y
C
i
t
y
a
d
v
i
s
o
r
y
b
o
d
i
e
s
:
Ju
l
y
1
,
2
0
1
4
J
o
i
n
t
s
t
u
d
y
s
e
s
s
i
o
n
b
y
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
a
n
d
C
i
t
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
Ju
l
y
9
,
2
0
1
4
M
a
s
s
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
Ju
l
y
1
7
,
2
0
1
4
B
i
c
y
c
l
e
A
d
v
i
s
o
r
y
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
Ju
l
y
2
1
,
2
0
1
4
A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
R
e
v
i
e
w
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Ju
l
y
2
2
,
1
0
1
4
P
a
r
k
s
a
n
d
R
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Ju
l
y
2
8
,
2
0
1
4
C
u
l
t
u
r
a
l
H
e
r
i
t
a
g
e
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
Re
c
e
n
t
C
o
r
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
e
n
c
e
Ca
l
t
r
a
n
s
–
R
E
T
i
m
i
n
g
o
f
E
I
R
C
e
r
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
-
EI
R
c
e
r
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
m
u
s
t
p
r
e
c
e
d
e
A
L
U
C
Ov
e
r
r
u
l
e
-
Ce
r
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
p
r
e
c
l
u
d
e
p
o
l
i
c
y
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
i
n
La
n
d
u
s
e
o
r
C
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
u
p
d
a
t
e
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
Si
e
r
r
a
C
l
u
b
–
R
E
P
o
l
i
c
y
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
-
P
o
l
i
c
y
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
w
i
l
l
b
e
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d
w
i
t
h
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
LU
E
&
C
E
C
h
a
p
t
e
r
Fl
i
c
k
i
n
g
e
r
e
t
a
l
-
-
R
E
L
O
V
R
B
y
p
a
s
s
-
E
I
R
c
e
r
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
w
o
u
l
d
n
o
t
c
o
n
s
t
r
a
i
n
t
h
e
Co
u
n
c
i
l
’
s
a
c
t
i
o
n
o
n
p
o
l
i
c
y
m
a
t
t
e
r
s
a
t
su
b
s
e
q
u
e
n
t
h
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
.
Ad
d
e
n
d
u
m
,
S
u
b
s
e
q
u
e
n
t
E
I
R
?
4
Cl
a
s
s
1
I
m
p
a
c
t
s
–
A
i
r
Q
u
a
l
i
t
y
,
N
o
i
s
e
,
a
n
d
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
an
d
C
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
Ai
r
Q
u
a
l
i
t
y
–
L
U
C
E
n
o
t
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
A
P
C
D
’
s
Cl
e
a
n
A
i
r
P
l
a
n
No
i
s
e
–
S
h
o
r
t
-
t
e
r
m
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
n
o
i
s
e
as
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
a
n
d
C
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
–
I
m
p
a
c
t
s
t
o
c
e
r
t
a
i
n
ro
a
d
w
a
y
s
e
g
m
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
i
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
,
a
n
d
im
p
a
c
t
s
t
o
U
.
S
.
1
0
1
Fi
n
a
l
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
I
m
p
a
c
t
R
e
p
o
r
t
5
AL
U
P
C
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
s
DE
I
R
c
a
u
t
i
o
u
s
l
y
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
z
e
d
i
n
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
c
y
w
i
t
h
AL
U
P
a
s
p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
a
n
d
u
n
a
v
o
i
d
a
b
l
e
(C
l
a
s
s
1
)
,
p
e
n
d
i
n
g
r
e
v
i
e
w
b
y
A
L
U
C
a
n
d
C
a
l
t
r
a
n
s
Di
v
i
s
i
o
n
o
f
A
e
r
o
n
a
u
t
i
c
s
FE
I
R
r
e
-
c
l
a
s
s
i
f
i
e
s
t
h
i
s
i
m
p
a
c
t
a
s
l
e
s
s
t
h
a
n
si
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
,
a
b
s
e
n
t
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
e
v
i
d
e
n
c
e
t
h
a
t
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
i
m
p
a
c
t
s
w
o
u
l
d
o
c
c
u
r
.
No
f
a
i
r
a
r
g
u
m
e
n
t
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
e
v
i
d
e
n
c
e
h
a
s
be
e
n
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
e
d
t
h
a
t
L
U
C
E
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
w
o
u
l
d
h
a
v
e
ad
v
e
r
s
e
i
m
p
a
c
t
s
r
e
l
a
t
e
d
t
o
s
a
f
e
t
y
,
n
o
i
s
e
o
r
a
i
r
p
o
r
t
co
m
p
a
t
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
.
6
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
m
a
t
i
c
N
a
t
u
r
e
LU
C
E
E
I
R
i
s
a
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
m
a
t
i
c
-
l
e
v
e
l
E
I
R
Ad
d
r
e
s
s
e
s
b
r
o
a
d
e
r
p
o
l
i
c
y
-
l
e
v
e
l
i
s
s
u
e
s
,
s
u
c
h
a
s
in
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
a
n
d
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
Do
e
s
n
o
t
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Si
t
e
-
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
i
m
p
a
c
t
s
n
o
t
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
e
d
Fu
t
u
r
e
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
w
i
l
l
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
u
b
s
e
q
u
e
n
t
en
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
7
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
1.
Ad
o
p
t
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
C
e
r
t
i
f
y
i
n
g
t
h
e
F
i
n
a
l
E
I
R
pr
e
p
a
r
e
d
f
o
r
t
h
e
L
U
C
E
U
p
d
a
t
e
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
MM
R
P
a
n
d
S
O
C
(A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
,
P
a
g
e
P
H
3
-
4
9
)
8
La
n
d
U
s
e
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
C
h
a
p
t
e
r
8
Sp
e
c
i
a
l
F
o
c
u
s
A
r
e
a
s
Sp
e
c
i
f
i
c
P
l
a
n
A
r
e
a
s
-
A
r
e
a
s
t
h
a
t
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
a
S
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
P
l
a
n
Sp
e
c
i
a
l
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
A
r
e
a
s
-
A
r
e
a
s
t
h
a
t
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
i
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
v
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
,
un
u
s
u
a
l
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
o
r
d
e
d
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
9
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
H
o
s
p
i
t
a
l
A
r
e
a
Re
t
a
i
n
f
o
r
m
e
r
h
o
s
p
i
t
a
l
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
i
t
e
f
o
r
o
f
f
i
c
e
a
n
d
tr
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
u
s
e
s
;
De
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
o
p
e
n
l
a
n
d
w
i
t
h
i
n
U
R
L
f
o
r
a
r
a
n
g
e
o
f
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
u
s
e
s
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
c
a
r
e
;
Re
t
a
i
n
o
p
e
n
s
p
a
c
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
l
a
n
d
s
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
th
e
U
R
L
Re
q
u
i
r
e
p
e
r
m
a
n
e
n
t
p
r
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
l
a
n
d
s
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
UR
L
u
p
o
n
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
o
f
l
a
n
d
s
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
U
R
L
10
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
1.
Ad
o
p
t
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
p
p
r
o
v
i
n
g
a
n
u
p
d
a
t
e
t
o
La
n
d
U
s
e
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
r
e
l
a
t
i
v
e
t
o
t
h
e
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
Ho
s
p
i
t
a
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
A
r
e
a
s
(A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
4
,
P
a
g
e
P
H
3
-
6
5
)
11
Bi
s
h
o
p
K
n
o
l
l
A
r
e
a
Cl
u
s
t
e
r
e
d
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
u
s
e
s
(
7
u
n
i
t
s
/
a
c
m
a
x
)
a
l
o
n
g
Fo
o
t
h
i
l
l
B
l
v
d
.
De
d
i
c
a
t
e
s
t
e
e
p
h
i
l
l
s
i
d
e
a
s
p
e
r
m
a
n
e
n
t
o
p
e
n
sp
a
c
e
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
l
o
t
a
n
d
t
r
a
i
l
a
c
c
e
s
s
t
o
B
i
s
h
o
p
s
Pe
a
k
Ac
c
e
s
s
a
n
d
t
r
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
t
o
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
n
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
12
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
1.
Ad
o
p
t
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
p
p
r
o
v
i
n
g
a
n
u
p
d
a
t
e
t
o
La
n
d
U
s
e
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
r
e
l
a
t
i
v
e
t
o
t
h
e
B
i
s
h
o
p
Kn
o
l
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
A
r
e
a
s
(A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
5
,
P
a
g
e
P
H
3
-
6
8
)
13
Gr
a
n
t
C
l
o
s
e
-
o
u
t
Fi
n
a
l
G
r
a
n
t
R
e
p
o
r
t
e
v
i
d
e
n
c
e
s
s
u
c
c
e
s
s
f
u
l
co
m
p
l
e
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
’
s
g
r
a
n
t
o
b
l
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
s
Al
l
m
i
l
e
s
t
o
n
e
s
a
n
d
d
e
l
i
v
e
r
a
b
l
e
s
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
e
d
o
n
t
i
m
e
a
n
d
o
n
b
u
d
g
e
t
Fi
n
a
l
r
e
p
o
r
t
,
a
n
d
f
i
n
a
l
r
e
i
m
b
u
r
s
e
m
e
n
t
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
,
m
u
s
t
be
f
i
l
e
d
w
i
t
h
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
G
r
o
w
t
h
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
De
a
d
l
i
n
e
i
s
S
e
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
1
4
14
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
1.
Ad
o
p
t
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
c
e
r
t
i
f
y
i
n
g
a
n
d
d
i
r
e
c
t
i
n
g
st
a
f
f
t
o
t
r
a
n
s
m
i
t
f
i
n
a
l
g
r
a
n
t
c
l
o
s
e
-
o
u
t
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
(A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
7
,
P
a
g
e
P
H
3
-
1
0
8
)
15
Ne
x
t
s
t
e
p
s
09
/
3
0
-
L
U
E
C
h
a
p
t
e
r
7
(
A
i
r
p
o
r
t
)
-R
e
v
i
e
w
A
i
r
p
o
r
t
O
v
e
r
l
a
y
Z
o
n
e
(
N
o
i
n
i
t
i
a
l
a
c
t
i
o
n
u
n
t
i
l
o
v
e
r
r
u
l
e
)
-T
e
n
t
a
t
i
v
e
D
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
o
n
r
e
m
a
i
n
i
n
g
C
h
a
p
t
e
r
8
F
o
c
u
s
A
r
e
a
s
-T
e
n
t
a
t
i
v
e
D
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
C
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
C
h
a
p
t
e
r
1
1
-
A
i
r
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
10
/
0
7
-
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
I
m
p
a
c
t
s
o
f
L
U
C
E
-T
e
n
t
a
t
i
v
e
L
U
E
C
h
.
1
-
6
&
9
-
1
2
-T
e
n
t
a
t
i
v
e
C
E
C
h
.
1
-
1
0
&
C
E
1
2
-
1
6
10
/
2
1
-
A
n
y
C
a
r
r
y
o
v
e
r
i
t
e
m
s
f
r
o
m
1
0
/
0
7
-M
i
n
o
r
S
a
f
e
t
y
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
Ch
a
n
g
e
s
a
n
d
C
O
S
E
a
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
s
-A
i
r
p
o
r
t
O
v
e
r
r
u
l
e
-1
s
t
r
e
a
d
i
n
g
o
f
A
i
r
p
o
r
t
O
v
e
r
l
a
y
Z
o
n
e
-A
d
o
p
t
i
o
n
o
f
Z
o
n
i
n
g
M
a
p
-F
i
n
a
l
A
d
o
p
t
i
o
n
L
U
E
C
h
.
1
-
6
&
9
-
1
2
,
C
E
C
h
.
1
-
1
0
&
C
E
1
2
-
1
6
,
-C
h
a
p
t
e
r
1
1
-
A
i
r
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
-C
h
a
p
t
e
r
8
F
o
c
u
s
A
r
e
a
s
-A
p
p
r
o
v
e
a
n
y
e
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
a
d
d
e
n
d
u
m
i
f
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
t
o
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
f
i
n
a
l
ac
t
i
o
n
s
.
11
/
1
0
2
n
d
R
e
a
d
i
n
g
o
f
A
i
r
p
o
r
t
O
v
e
r
l
a
y
Z
o
n
e
16
City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number
FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director
PREPARED BY: Gary Kaiser, Contract Planner
Brian Leveille, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: ACTIONS RELATING TO THE LAND USE AND CIRCULATION ELEMENT
UPDATE PROJECT (LUCE) INCLUDING: CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL EIR AND
ADOPTION OF A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS (SOC) RELATIVE
TO AIR QUALITY, NOISE, & TRAFFIC/CIRCULATION IMPACTS; CONSIDERATION OF
THE GENERAL HOSPITAL AND BISHOP KNOLL FOCUS AREAS OF CHAPTER 8 OF
THE LAND USE ELEMENT; AND, ACTION TO CLOSE OUT THE SUSTAINABLE
COMMUNITIES PLANNING GRANT FOR THE LUCE UPDATE PROJECT.
RECOMMENDATIONS
A. As recommended by the Planning Commission, adopt resolutions to:
1. Certify the FEIR (Attachment 3) with findings of overriding considerations relative to Air
Quality, Noise, and Transportation/Circulation; and
2. Adopt policy language for the General Hospital focus are of the Land Use Element
(Attachment 4); and.
3. Adopt policy language for the Bishop Knoll focus area of the Land Use Element
(Attachment 5) [the order of items 2 and 3 are subject to a random selection process]
B. Adopt a resolution (Attachment 7) to close out the Sustainable Communities Planning Grant
for the LUCE Update Project.
REPORT- IN- BRIEF
The public review period for the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) closed on July 28,
2014. The Draft EIR evaluated the potential impacts of the community’s growth as envisioned
in both the policy and program changes as well as through the areas of physical changes
identified in the opportunity sites. The Draft EIR was made publically available for comment and
was circulated to the appropriate public agencies for review and comment. Responses to
comments on the Draft EIR have been completed and refinements have been made based on
agency comments which are incorporated into the Final Environmental Impact Report which is
now ready for certification. An executive summary of the FEIR has been attached (Attachment
1) to the staff report and the full document is available on the LUCE project web site
at www.slo2035.com, or for review at the Community Development Department, 919 Palm
Street, or the City-County Library at 995 Palm Street.
The FEIR determined that there are significant and unavoidable impacts in the areas of Air
Quality (long term), Noise (short term), and Traffic and Circulation (long term roadway
performance, intersections, and freeways). Staff is recommending the Council adopt overriding
considerations for these impacts in accordance with findings that the benefits of the project
(objectives of LUCE update project) outweigh the potential for environmental impacts. Other
Sept. 16, 2014
PH3
PH3 - 1
Land Use and Circulation Element Update Page 2
potential impacts were identified but will be less than significant through implementation of
existing policies and programs and new policies and updates included in the LUCE update
project. Those areas include Agricultural Resources, Air Quality (short term), Cultural
Resources, and Public Services. These impacts are similar to those that would occur with the No
Project alternative.
Council is also being referred two of the focus areas in Chapter 8 of the draft Land Use Element,
Bishop Knoll and General Hospital, for which Council members have potential conflicts so
decisions can be resolved and remaining focus areas can be acted on by the full Council in
subsequent hearings. Remaining Chapter 8 focus areas are scheduled for the September 30th City
Council meeting along with Airport related General Plan policies and implementing Airport
Overlay Zone Regulations.
The LUCE update project was funded in part through a grant awarded by the Strategic Growth
Council. The grant contract requires City Council approval of the final close out report in order
to discharge the grant obligations and to request reimbursement of any remaining grant-funded
work.
DISCUSSION
Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR)
The Draft EIR was released on June 13, 2014 and comments were due on July 28, 2014. The
City received 25 responses to the EIR, eight from agencies and 17 from individuals. In
addition, the Draft EIR was reviewed by the City’s advisory bodies:
July 1, 2014 Joint study session by Planning Commission and City Council
July 9, 2014 Mass Transportation Committee
July 17, 2014 Bicycle Advisory Committee
July 21, 2014 Architectural Review Commission
July 22, 1014 Parks and Recreation Commission
July 28, 2014 Cultural Heritage Committee
Most comment letters provided input regarding policy discussions and/or observations
regarding current circulation operational issues versus input regarding environmental impacts
(FEIR Appendix A-1 and additional detail in Attachment 2 to this staff report). Some letters
requested project level evaluation for individual development sites, however, the more general
nature of the LUCE update project and the associated programmatic level of environmental
evaluation do not address this detailed and specific review. Responses have been provided to
comments within the Final EIR which was released on September 3, 2014.
The Final EIR was reviewed by the Planning Commission on September 10, 2014. The
recommendation and input from the Commission will be transmitted in an agenda
correspondence prior to the Council meeting.
The FEIR includes mitigations for identified Class 1 impacts (those that remain significant with
mitigation) and Class 2 impacts (those that can be mitigated to less than significant level). No
mitigations are required for Class 3 impacts, which are considered to be less than significant.
The Executive Summary of the FEIR is included as Attachment 1.
PH3 - 2
Land Use and Circulation Element Update Page 3
The FEIR identified significant and unavoidable impacts to Air Quality, Noise, and Traffic and
Circulation with the LUCE update.
1. Class 1 Impacts
Class 1 Impacts are considered significant and unavoidable. These impacts are those that
cannot be reduced to below significance thresholds even with the implementation of mitigation
measures. The FEIR identifies Class 1 impacts in three categories: Air Quality, Noise, and
Traffic and Circulation. In addition, one impact identified as Class 1 in the Draft EIR, Land
Use, has been determined to not remain a Class 1 impact after consideration of technical
information and lack of persuasive comments provided by the Caltrans Division of Aeronautics
and the Airport Land Use Commission during the public review of the DEIR. Each category is
briefly discussed below.
Air Quality
These impacts are related to long-term emissions of criteria air pollutants and ozone precursors
associated with development under the LUCE update. This is primarily due to assumptions
contained in the Air Pollution Control District’s (APCD) Clean Air Plan that assigns growth
rates and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) to the area for the 1995-2015 time period. The EIR
refers to both the population growth rate and the VMT assumed in the Plan to determine
whether the LUCE is consistent with the Clean Air Plan. Differences between the Plan and the
LUCE update were identified as a significant impact because the VMT modeled with the
LUCE exceeds the growth anticipated in the APCD plan. Therefore, long term air quality
impacts are considered significant and unavoidable. This situation will most likely be remedied
with the update of the Clean Air Plan, but until that time, the FEIR finds Class 1 impacts
remain.
Noise
The FEIR identified that construction noise associated with development supported by the
LUCE update will exceed applicable standards in the City’s Noise Control Ordinance from
temporary use of construction equipment. Despite existing policies and regulations, these short
term noise impacts are not able to be mitigated to less than significant levels.
Traffic and Circulation
The FEIR identifies three areas where circulation impacts are considered significant and
unavoidable. Impacts to certain roadway segments and intersections were identified where
levels of service drop below acceptable minimum performance levels identified in the
Circulation Element. Finally, impacts to the US 101 freeway are identified in several segments
that pass through the City. While impacts are difficult to isolate to the LUCE update, growth in
the City will contribute to travel/trips on this facility. Caltrans is studying the possibility of
widening US 101 from 4 to 6 lanes in various locations, but no final decisions have been made
whether that will occur and when. Mitigations are included to continue City support of Caltrans
and SLOCOG efforts to address demand on Highway 101. Despite this effort, the impact
remains significant and unavoidable.
The current Circulation Element includes a full interchange at Prado Road and Highway 101
and includes a vehicular bridge to extend Bishop Street over the railroad tracks to connect to
Santa Barbara/South Street. The FEIR studied the effects of changing the planned full
PH3 - 3
Land Use and Circulation Element Update Page 4
interchange at Prado Rd. to an overpass only, and studied the elimination of the planned
overpass at Bishop Street. Several significant impacts associated with both of these changes
were identified and therefore these two pieces of infrastructure were retained in the proposed
project as necessary to address circulation needs and avoid significant impacts.
Land Use no longer a Class 1 impact
One impact that had been identified in the Draft EIR as significant and unavoidable was the
inconsistency of the LUCE update with the County Airport Land Use Plan. After thorough
evaluation, and lack of persuasive evidence submitted by the Caltrans Division of Aeronautics
or Airport Land Use Commission (the latter received after the public comment period had
closed) in response to the Draft EIR, the potential impact was re-characterized as a Class 3
impact. The evaluation centered on whether changes associated with the LUCE update would
result in adverse physical environmental effects associated with the inconsistency with the
Airport Land Use Plan. Although policy inconsistencies continue to exist, neither Caltrans
Aeronautics nor the Airport Land Use Commission provided information that would lead to a
conclusion that the policy inconsistency results in a physical impact. The emphasis in both
letters was focused on the process of overrule and state code requirements for purview and
action. As such, this impact which had previously been identified as Class 1 has been modified
and reduced to a Class 3 (less than significant) impact.
2. Class 2 Impacts
Class 2 impacts are those that can be mitigated to less than significant levels. There were three
of these impacts identified: Agricultural Resources, Air Quality, and Cultural Resources. The
policy mitigation to address potential impacts to Agricultural Resources includes minor word
changes to Land Use Element policy 1.7.1 to change the word “should” to “shall” in two
places. Implementation of APCD recommended construction measures is identified as a
mitigation for short term Air Quality impacts. Finally, modification of language (“should” to
“shall”) in three Conservation and Open Space policies has been identified as mitigation for
potential impacts to cultural resources.
3. EIR Circulation Analysis
In January, 2014, the City Council identified several options for study as part of the circulation
analysis to understand how various infrastructure changes would affect local and city-wide
circulation. These included running the circulation model with variations on circulation
infrastructure such as:
Bishop Street overpass versus no Bishop Street overpass;
Prado overpass versus interchange;
Laurel Lane overpass versus no overpass
Calle Joaquin extension to Froom Ranch/Dalidio Drive versus no connection
Buckley by-pass from S. Higuera to Los Osos Valley Road versus no by-pass
Additional connection between Tank Farm and Buckley Road versus no connection
Vachell Lane connection to Los Osos Valley Road versus no through connection
This analysis was conducted by modeling the maximum potential arrangement of circulation
options and then testing the sensitivity of variations independently. This sensitivity assessment
has been included as part of the technical studies in Appendix N of the EIR. Based on the
PH3 - 4
Land Use and Circulation Element Update Page 5
sensitivity analysis results, several circulation options were rejected due to significant impacts
or failing to deliver an adequate benefit. The remaining options have been compiled into the
proposed project and are summarized below:
• Add Grade Separated Pedestrian and Bicycle Crossing at Boysen & Santa Rosa
• Add Broad St. Ramp Closure and Upgrade of Hwy 1 & 101
• Convert Marsh & Higuera to Two Way (Santa Rosa to California Blvd.)
• Locate Transit Center in Vicinity of Santa Rosa & Higuera
• Extend Mission Plaza
• Extend Victoria Ave. to Emily
• Add Broad St. Corridor Circulation Improvements
• Add New Collector between Tank Farm & Buckley
• Develop Policy to review realignment of Chorro, Boysen, & Broad with development
• Develop Policy to review realignment of Bianchi Ln. & Pismo St. with development
• Develop Policy to review realignment of Madonna Rd. to Bridge St. with development
In some cases, only localized improvements in circulation were realized and discussion of cost
and impacts associated with that particular infrastructure lead to a recommendation to not
include that improvement as part of the proposed project. In other instances, significant
circulation impacts would result without inclusion of the facility and hence it was included into
the proposed project. For several of the potential options, direction is included in the land use
policies to consider and define the optimal circulation improvements that may be appropriate
and desirable at the time the surrounding land use development is reviewed.
4. EIR Alternatives:
Feasible alternatives were offered for consideration included a maximum infrastructure
circulation alternative, a reduced development alternative, and the CEQA-required no project
alternative.
No Project alternative
This alternative would result in no changes to the Land Use and Circulation Elements of the
General Plan. Minor reductions in impacts to aesthetics, air quality (due to fewer residences),
biological resources, cultural resources, and geologic resources would result. However,
beneficial aspects of the LUCE update project would not occur in the No Project alternative.
The No Project alternative would not include sustainable community policies, healthy city
policies, and multi-modal circulation policies that have the potential to reduce VMT and
provide a walkable community – all of which assist in reducing greenhouse gas emissions,
reduce obesity, and assist in more sustainable practices. Other minor reductions could be found
in impacts related to hazards, hydrology, public services, and utilities. The no project
alternative does result in minor increase in impact due to traffic congestion.
Reduced Development alternative
This alternative included assumptions that the proposed specific plan areas would provide the
minimum number of residential units which results in reductions of approximately 20% of
development capacity. In addition, the non-residential portions of these opportunity areas were
reduced to the minimum development range which would result in nearly 50% reduction in
some areas. The alternative would not reduce development associated with existing specific
PH3 - 5
Land Use and Circulation Element Update Page 6
plans, planned and approved projects or other vacant land in the city. This alternative resulted
in minor impact reductions in the categories of aesthetics, air quality, biological, cultural,
geologic, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards, hydrology, land use, noise, transportation, and
utilities resources. It had similar impacts to the project description for agricultural, population,
and recreation impacts.
Maximum Circulation Improvements alternative
This alternative included the proposed project and some of the circulation options that were
rejected due to impacts or failure to deliver substantial benefits. This alternative resulted in
impacts to aesthetics, geology, hazards, hydrology, land use, population, public services,
recreation and utilities. Minor increases to impacts resulted in categories of agricultural,
biological, cultural, and noise categories. Very slight decreases were seen in categories of
greenhouse gas emissions, air quality and transportation. Based solely on the slight difference
in Vehicle Miles Traveled calculations this was considered the environmentally superior
alternative due to the minor reductions in impacts to air quality, greenhouse gas emission.
Staff does not recommend this alternative as the “proposed project” because the < 0.1%
reduction in greenhouse gas emissions is not persuasive when compared to the potential
impacts to aesthetics, agriculture, and biological resources.
5. Other Input
Input in the form of comments offered during the EIR comment period that are not related to
potential environmental effects but rather relate to policy content or direction were presented to
the Planning Commission in a matrix (Attachment 2) sorted by element and chapter and will be
considered by the Planning Commission as they review the chapters of the elements and
formulate a recommendation to Council.
6. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
When changes or alterations have been incorporated into a project in order to avoid or lessen
significant environmental effects, CEQA requires adoption of a program for reporting and
monitoring those changes (§15091d). This requirement is reflected in a Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program (MMRP). The MMRP identifies each Class 1 and Class 2 impact, and
lists the associated mitigation measure(s), the body responsible to implement each measure, and
the timing of when it will be monitored. The LUCE update FEIR identifies both physical
infrastructure and minor policy edits as mitigations for potential impacts. Since the
Environmental Impact Report is programmatic in nature, future development may have
additional mitigations that are identified when specific projects are proposed and further
evaluated. Minor policy edits that were identified as mitigations will be updated as part of the
adoption of the final LUCE update. Infrastructure changes identified as mitigations will be
addressed as part of future development review and project construction or may be included in
future fee programs. The MMRP is included as part of the resolution to certify the FEIR
(Attachment 3).
7. Statement of Overriding Considerations
An EIR does not represent a decision but rather is an informational tool to assist decision-
makers’ understanding of the potential environmental effects of proposed changes. As such,
PH3 - 6
Land Use and Circulation Element Update Page 7
CEQA contains provisions for the decision-making agency to consider and “balance, as
applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide
or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project against its unavoidable
environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project.”1 This may include
approving a project despite knowing that it has the potential to generate significant adverse
environmental effects. In order to approve the project, findings that document the
consideration and balancing of influences are included in a statement of overriding
considerations. The LUCE update will need to be accompanied by a statement of overriding
considerations. A draft of this statement is included for Council review as part of the
Resolution in Attachment 3 and lists the outweighing benefits associated with the LUCE update
including provision of new residential development, increase of per capita parkland, policies to
support well-planned neighborhoods and complete streets that have the potential to reduce
vehicle trips, provision of new employment opportunities, and continued preservation of open
space due to the focus on infill development. An update of Planning Commission review of
the statement of overriding considerations will be provided at the Council meeting, or if
changes are proposed, through an agenda correspondence.
LUCE Focus Areas
Chapter 8 of the Land Use Element includes policy statements to guide the development or
redevelopment of identified “Special Focus Areas”. The focus areas include larger sites which
will require the completion and approval of Specific Plans and General Plan amendments (Avila
Ranch, San Luis Ranch, etc.), and other focus areas designed as “Special Planning Areas”.
Special Planning Area policies include guidance on intended uses, design, and key
considerations for each site given its particular circumstances. In order to enable the greatest
participation by Council members, two particular areas addressed in Chapter 8 of the Land Use
Element have been pulled out for separate action: General Hospital and Bishop Knoll. The draft
language from the Land Use Element for these special planning areas is shown in legislative
draft format below (underlining for new text and strike-out for deleted text). The proposed
policy direction for these two areas is new and hence all of the text is underlined. Updates from
the Planning Commission consideration of these areas will be provided at the hearing or via
agenda correspondence. The Council should review and take action on each planning area
separately via resolution (Attachments 4 and 5) so that Council members may rejoin the full
Council once the area that poses a potential conflict is resolved.
1. General Hospital
The General Hospital area is addressed in Chapter 8 of the Land Use Element and has a new
policy to guide future development for this special focus area.
8.3.3.5 General Hospital Site: The General Hospital site includes County-owned
property including the old hospital building (which is planned to remain as an
office / treatment facility) and lands behind the facility. Lands behind the hospital
building that are inside the City’s Urban Reserve line will be designated as Public
(for existing public facility) and a range of residential uses (Low Density and
Medium Density Residential) and will include the ability to support residential
care, transitional care use, and other residential uses consistent with the adjacent
1 CA Code of Regulations Title 14 Section 15093
PH3 - 7
Land Use and Circulation Element Update Page 8
areas. The remaining site outside the City’s Urban Reserve line will remain as
Open Space. The City shall seek to secure permanent protection of the open space
outside of the urban reserve line as part of any development proposal. The
undeveloped portion of this site on the southwest side of Johnson Avenue will
remain designated for Public uses.
2. Bishop Knoll
The north side of Foothill on the western limits of the City is known as the “Bishop Knoll”
property. Guidance regarding future development in this area is shown in two places in the Land
Use Element: existing Policy 1.12.7 B in Chapter 1 Annexations, and a new paragraph in
Chapter 8 Special Focus Area policies. No changes to policy 1.12.7B are proposed - the existing
language is recommended to be carried forward to work in concert with the new language in
Chapter 8. Both sections are shown below.
1.12.7B Foothill Annexation: The northern portion of the Foothill property, and
the creek area shall be annexed as open space. Development on this site should be
clustered or located near Foothill Boulevard, with the northern portion of the site
and creek area preserved as open space.
8.3.3.14 North Side of Foothill (Bishop Knoll): Future development of this area
shall address open space requirements under 1.12.7 and open space buffers in
accordance with Conservation and Open Space Element policy 8.3.2. This area
shall be subject to Architectural Review to ensure consideration of hillside and
resource protection; circulation and access, and transition to existing
neighborhoods. The steep hillside should be dedicated as Open Space and
residential lots grouped at the bottom of the hill closer to Foothill. Development
shall provide a parking lot and trail access to Bishops Peak. Circulation
connectivity shall be provided to Los Cerros Drive as feasible. Density shall be
limited to 7 units/acre as modified for slope under the Zoning Ordinance.
Strategic Growth Council Grant Closeout
The City was fortunate to receive a Strategic Growth Council (SGC) grant in the amount of
$880,000 to partially fund the LUCE update effort. This funding has augmented City resources
with consultant assistance to support the LUCE update and associated outreach efforts to engage
the community in the update process. The grant contract (Attachment 6) requires the City
Council to adopt the final report for submittal to the state in order to receive final reimbursement
for eligible LUCE expenses, including the outstanding 15% of grant funds that have been held
back from all previous reimbursement requests. This submittal must be postmarked by
September 26, 2014 and will include the reimbursement request, copies of the grant funded
products (the Draft LUCE and associated documents including the FEIR) and a final report that
documents the process as well as progress toward grant-defined outcomes. Attachment 7
contains the resolution that authorizes staff to submit the final report and close out the grant. The
final report itself will be provided as an agenda correspondence.
PH3 - 8
Land Use and Circulation Element Update Page 9
Closing out the grant does not affect the Planning Commission and City Council review of the
draft LUCE. The required deliverables specified draft versions of the Land Use and Circulation
Elements due to timing concerns that the update process may not have been fully completed
within the grant-mandated timeframe. Since draft elements have been developed and an EIR to
support their consideration has been developed, the City has met its grant performance
requirement. Taking action to closing out the grant does not prevent the Commission or Council
from making edits to the draft elements.
CONCLUSION
The LUCE update has been in process for nearly three years and has involved thousands of hours
of volunteer and advisory body consideration. Taking action to certify the FEIR and to resolve
two areas of potential conflict will allow the full Council to participate in review and discussion
of the revised elements.
CONCURRENCES
The LUCE and DEIR were reviewed by all City departments and were distributed to various
California agencies for comment and made available for public review and comment. Agency
comments, public and advisory body comments were addressed in the FEIR as discussed in this
report.
FISCAL IMPACT
The LUCE Update was made possible by a Sustainable Communities grant in the amount of
$880,000 provided by the State of California Strategic Growth Council. Funding for the grant is
from the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal
Protection Act of 2006 (Proposition 84). General Funds in the amount of $467,500 were added
to the grant to fund the environmental review and additional support to address Public Works
and Fire Department staffing impacts.
In order to satisfy the grant requirements, copies of the draft Land Use and Circulation Elements
and the associated FEIR will be submitted to the State Department of Conservation along with a
final status report and invoice for funds. Staff recommends the Council adopt and certify as
accurate the final report for submission to the State.
ALTERNATIVES
General Alternatives
1. Continue the discussion of Bishop Knoll and/or General Hospital policies with direction
to staff on changes or additional information in order to take an action at a future hearing.
If additional action or direction is needed for these areas, the Council may adopt a
resolution to certify the FEIR while providing direction to staff on items to bring back to
Council.
2. Consider a reduced development scenario as suggested by the FEIR. This would reduce
allowed development including much-needed areas for housing. In addition, a reduction
in development could reduce the amount of funding available to support required
PH3 - 9
Land Use and Circulation Element Update Page 10
infrastructure, making it challenging to address circulation needs in the upcoming 20
years. This alternative is not recommended.
ATTACHMENTS
1. FEIR Executive Summary
2. Matrix of policy comments received during the EIR public comment period
3. Resolution to certify the Final EIR with a statement of overriding considerations and a
mitigation monitoring program
4. Resolution approving Land Use Element policy language update for General Hospital
5. Resolution approving Land Use Element policy language update for Bishop Knoll
6. Strategic Growth Council grant contract
7. Resolution adopting and certifying final report for Strategic Growth Council grant
closeout.
AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE
Final Environmental Impact Report
\\chstore6\Team\Council Agenda Reports\2014\2014-09-16\LUCE Update (Johnson-Kaiser)\CAR (LUCE Update)FEIR, Graant Close-out.docx
PH3 - 10
ES
Executive Summary
Final EIR Page ES‐1
The purpose of this Final EIR (FEIR) is twofold. First, this document provides copies of the comment letters made on the
LUCE Update and EIR and provides written responses to all environmental issues raised in these comments on the Draft
EIR (see Public Resources Code, Section 21091(d)(2)(B); CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088(c)). Second, this document is
designed to function as the Final EIR for the Proposed Project, and as such has been designed to meet the content
requirements of a Final Program EIR as specified in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). (See Public
Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq. and the CEQA Guidelines [California Code of Regulations, title 14, Section 15000 et
seq.].
This Final EIR comprises four chapters that meet the requirements of the State CEQA Guidelines, as outlined above. The
four chapters that make up this Final EIR are as follows:
“Executive Summary” provides a brief project description and presents a summary table of the Proposed
Project’s environmental effects.
Chapter 1, “Introduction” provides a brief overview of the Proposed Project, environmental compliance activities
conducted to date, and outlines the contents and organization of the Final EIR
Chapter 2, “Response to Comments” provides a list of commenters and a copy of written comments (coded for
reference) received on the Draft EIR during the public review period, and provides the City’s response to each
comment received.
Chapter 3, “Minor Edits to Draft Program EIR” includes any corrections and/or additions to the Draft EIR text as a
result of comments made on the Draft EIR. These changes to the draft EIR are indicated by revision marks
(underline for new text and strikeout for deleted text).
Chapter 4, “Report Preparation” provides a list of the individuals involved in the preparation of the final EIR.
In reference to Section 15132(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Draft EIR for the Proposed Project has been
incorporated by reference into this Final EIR. A copy of the Draft EIR is on file at the City of San Luis Obispo Community
Development Department located at 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA. A copy can also be viewed by visiting the LUCE
Update web site at (www.slo2035.com).
The following section summarizes the characteristics of the proposed LUCE Update, alternatives considered in this EIR,
environmental impacts associated with the proposed project, recommended mitigation measures, and the level of
significance of project impacts after mitigation.
Please note that where changes to the Draft EIR Executive Summary text resulted from the responses discussed in
Section 2.0 (Response to Comments) or edits shown in Section 3.0 (Minor Edits to the Draft Program EIR), those changes
are presented in the text of the Final EIR Executive Summary below as shown by underlining new text (e.g., new text) and
striking out text to be deleted (e.g., deleted text).
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 11
Page ES‐2 Final EIR
ES-1 Project Description
The LUCE Update Project (the “Project” or “proposed Update Project”) provides proposed changes to the City’s existing
Land Use Element and Circulation Elements of the General Plan (last updated in 1994). It is the intent of the proposed
Project to establish and implement a refined set of goals, policies, and programs for regulating development in the city,
guiding the land use decision‐making process, balance population growth with infrastructure availability, and provide a
true multimodal transportation system that will guide the community over the next 20 years.
The LUCE Update reflects extensive efforts and input from community surveys, workshops and open houses, advisory
bodies, the Task Force for the Land Use and Circulation Element Update (TF‐LUCE), City staff, consultants, the Planning
Commission, and City Council. Based on direction from the City Council that the Update Project primarily address infill
opportunities, changes in legislation, and the need to update existing policy direction to reflect current values and
requirements, the LUCE Update focuses on updated policy language and several areas of the City where “physical” land
use changes are proposed. The proposed physical land use changes would apply only to specified areas that over the next
20 years may have the potential to accommodate changes in the land use type or intensity or are in need of circulation
and infrastructure improvements. From a policy aspect, the LUCE Update proposes changes to existing policy and
program language, and new policies and programs where needed to enhance the two Elements or cover items not
previously addressed. The policies and programs included in the LUCE Update are intended to:
Address notable policy gaps that have been identified over time in the existing LUCE;
Provide new policy direction to address issues raised during the proposed Project’s public participation process;
Respond to changes in state law;
Address topics or items that the City committed to addressing as part of the Sustainable Communities grant that
provided funding for the Update Project; and
Address inconsistencies between the proposed project and the Airport Land Use Plan for San Luis Obispo County
Regional Airport.
The Land Use Element Update proposes to “preserve and enhance” existing conditions in most areas of the city. The
physical changes proposed by the Land Use Element Update are for the most part limited to changes in land use type or
intensity in specific areas. These changes include proposed mixed use redevelopment of some sites, the infill of
underutilized locations, and four sites that will require modified or new specific plans to addresses development
parameters such as the location and types of land uses, infrastructure needs, and designs to address environmental
constraints. These four sites include: Potential modification of the Margarita Area Specific Plan to allow increased
residential densities; and new specific plans for the San Luis Ranch (formerly known as the Dalidio site), the Madonna
property at Los Osos Valley Road (LOVR), and the Avila Ranch. Policy direction was also refined relative to a set of
“Special Planning Areas” (Section 8.3.3 in the proposed Land Use Element Update) throughout the City. This policy
guidance provides statements regarding the City’s expectations for these sites of new development, redevelopment, and
infill opportunities.
The following table lists each of the original 19 proposed “physical alternative” locations, identifies the sites dropped from
further consideration, the sites where no physical changes are proposed, and describes the type of development that
could occur at the proposed development sites. Throughout the Land Use Element Update process the 19 proposed
“physical alternative” sites were identified by the letters A through S (see Figure ES‐1).
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 12
Final EIR Page ES‐3
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!!
!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!!!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!!!!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
o
£¤101£¤1
South St
E
d
n
a
R
d
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
£¤101
£¤1
O
r
c
u
t
t
R
d
L
o
s
O
s
o
s
V
alley
R
d
J
o
h
n
s
o
n
Ave
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
Califo
rnia
Blvd
Higue
r
a
S
t
!A
!B
!D
!C
!M
!N
!O
!L !K
!J
!I
!E
!F
!G
!H
!P
!Q
!R
!S
Margarita
H
W
Y
1
E
D
N
A
R
D
HW
Y
1
0
1
KERN AVE
BUCKLEY RD
ON
T
A
R
I
O
R
D
A
L
T
E
G
R
E
S
S
O
C
O
N
N
O
R
W
A
Y
HIGUE
R
A
S
T
FOOT
H
I
L
L
B
L
V
D
JE
S
P
E
R
S
E
N
R
D
S
E
E
C
A
N
Y
O
N
R
D
C
A
S
T
I
L
L
O
R
D
DA
V
E
N
P
O
R
T
C
R
E
E
K
R
D
S
A
N
T
A
R
O
S
A
S
T
U
N
N
A
M
E
D
S
T
LOS
O
S
O
S
V
A
L
L
E
Y
R
D
GRE
Y
S
T
O
N
E
P
L
O
L
D
1
0
1
DRIVEWAY
V
I
A
C
A
R
T
A
VA
C
H
E
L
L
L
N
O
R
C
U
T
T
R
D
HO
O
V
E
R
R
D
MO
N
T
E
R
D
L
E
W
I
S
L
N
EVANS RD
TANK FARM RD
L
O
S
R
A
N
C
H
O
S
R
D
SEQU
O
I
A
D
R
B
R
O
A
D
S
T
MIOSSI
R
D
H
U
M
B
O
L
T
A
V
E
G
R
A
N
D
A
V
E
HA
C
I
E
N
D
A
A
V
E
CA
B
A
L
L
E
R
O
S
A
V
E
PERIMETER
S
T
TUO
L
U
M
N
E
A
V
E
PUM
A
C
T
ME
L
L
O
L
N
ALT EGRESS
UN
N
A
M
E
D
S
T
HW
Y
1
0
1
HW
Y
1
0
1
U
N
N
A
M
E
D
S
T
UNN
A
M
E
D
S
T
101
S
B
R
O
A
D
S
T
101 N
BUCKLEY
ORCUTT RD
L
O
S
O
S
O
S
V
A
L
L
E
Y
R
D
TANK FARM RD
J
O
H
N
S
O
N
A
V
E
C
H
O
R
R
O
S
T
MADON
N
A
R
D
MILL
S
T
PISM
O
S
T
MARS
H
S
T
HIGHLAND
D
R
HIG
U
E
R
A
S
S
T
FOOTHILL BLVD
HIGH ST
ISLA
Y
S
T
FO
O
T
H
I
L
L
W
B
L
V
D
S
A
N
T
A
R
O
S
A
S
T
T
O
R
O
S
T
PEA
C
H
S
T
ELK
S
L
N
A
U
G
U
S
T
A
S
T
ELLA
S
T
B
U
L
L
O
C
K
L
N
POL
Y
C
A
N
Y
O
N
O
C
E
A
N
A
I
R
E
C
T
MEISSNER
HIL
L
S
T
FULLE
R
R
D
AIRPORT
R
O
C
K
V
I
E
W
P
L
D
A
L
I
D
I
O
LIZZIE
S
T
C
A
S
A
S
T
VI
A
L
A
G
U
N
A
V
I
S
T
A
B
A
L
B
O
A
S
T
KENDAL
L
10
1
N
O
F
F
NA
S
E
L
L
A
L
N
K
L
A
M
A
T
H
101
S
O
N
OJAI
IRONBARK ST
LA
W
T
O
N
A
V
E
H
E
L
E
N
A
S
T
BOND ST
ISABELLA
W
A
Y
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
CE
N
T
E
R
S
T
HARMONY
RAMONA DR
CRAIG WAY
VIA LA PA
Z
10
1
N
O
F
F
101
N
BR
O
A
D
S
T
Figure ES-1-
Legend
LUCE SOI Area
Area of Potential
Land Use Change
Specific Plan Area
Preserve and Enhance
!
!!
!
City Limits
Water Body
Highway
Major Road
Streets
Railroad
o Airport
Source: City of Sanu Luis Obispo, 2012
0 10.5
Miles
Land Use Options Considered
!A
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 13
Page ES‐4 Final EIR
Site
Letter Site Description
Capacity
Units Population
Non-
Residential
Sq. Ft.
Employment
A Nativity Church Site
Removed from consideration. ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐
B Foothill @ Santa Rosa Area
Consider mixed use for the area on both sides
of Foothill between Chorro and Santa Rosa.
Consider both horizontal and vertical mixed
use. Emphasis on retail and housing. Policies
to support consideration of parking and height
changes to facilitate mixed use.
80 183 ‐1,184 ‐3
C Pacheco Elementary Site
Removed from consideration. ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐
D Diocese Site near Bressi Pl. & Broad St.
Removed from consideration. ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐
E Upper Monterey Area
No physical land use changes proposed.
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
F Downtown Area
No physical land use changes proposed.
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
G Mid‐Higuera Area
No physical land use changes proposed.
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
H Caltrans Site
Mixed use to include tourist commercial,
office and some residential. Site may be
appropriate to review height limit changes to
accommodate desired development.
Consider more public open space uses to
serve as gateway and uses compatible with
conference facilities.
53 121 101,943 185
I General Hospital Site
Residential development on the site behind
existing structure within the existing Urban
Reserve Line. Outside the Urban Reserve Line,
retain the current designation of Open Space.
Policies should support flexibility so that a
range of residential uses can be considered
(i.e. residential care, adjunct to transitional
care use, other residential uses consistent
with area) within the residential land use
designations.
41 94 48,788 89
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 14
Final EIR Page ES‐5
Site
Letter Site Description
Capacity
Units Population
Non-
Residential
Sq. Ft.
Employment
J Broad Street Area
Incorporate physical alternative described in
South Broad Street Area Plan endorsed on
September 17, 2013 by City Council (Council
Resolution 10460).
589 1,349 229,068 416
K Sunset Drive‐In/Prado Road Site
Consideration of mixed use. Develop policies
to address appropriate mix of uses. Policy
discussion should address historic nature of
Sunset Drive in and ensure the site is able to
accommodate Homeless Services center.
Provide bike connections as called for in
bicycle transportation plan.
0 0 483,668 879
L San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area
Consideration of a mix of uses with a
substantial open space/agriculture
component. Residential uses to be consistent
with applicable airport policies.
500 1,145 470,000 855
M Pacific Beach Site
Policy development to support consideration
of Commercial Retail/mixed use fronting LOVR
and Froom Ranch and park to serve
neighborhood.
38 87 ‐37,352 ‐68
N Calle Joaquin Auto Sales Area
Consideration of mixed use in the context
with the Dalidio property and the City's
agricultural parcel and focus on connectivity
to the neighborhoods to the north. Develop
policies to address appropriate mix of uses.
0 0 200,066 364
O Madonna Specific Plan Area
Future development to consider viewsheds,
hillside and open space protection, height
limits, wetland protection, access to other
connections, historic farm buildings, mixed
use to accommodate workforce housing, and
neighborhood commercial type uses.
115 263 336,170 611
P LOVR Creekside Area
Consideration of medium high density
residential infill housing with open space.
159 364 0 0
Q Margarita Specific Plan
Policy to support consideration of changes to
the previously approved Specific Plan to allow
increased density on eastern portion of
specific plan site.
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
No land use
changes
proposed
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 15
Page ES‐6 Final EIR
Site
Letter Site Description
Capacity
Units Population
Non-
Residential
Sq. Ft.
Employment
R Broad St. @ Tank Farm Rd. Site
Consideration of a mix of commercial uses
with limited residential on upper floors.
Commercial uses should serve the
surrounding businesses and bicycle and
pedestrian connectivity must be addressed.
41 94 135,906 247
S Avila Ranch Specific Plan Area
Consider a mix of residential densities,
connections to shops to the north, connection
to S. Higuera and a mix of uses. Respect
creek/wildlife corridor.
700 1,603 25,000 45
Source: Matrix Design Group, 2014; Mintier Harnish, 2014
The policy and program updates proposed in the Airport Chapter of the Land Use Element reflect airport safety, noise,
height and overflight considerations consistent with the purposes of the State Aeronautics Act. Policies, programs, and
Zoning Code implementation have been drafted to create an Airport Overlay Zone to codify airport compatibility criteria
for areas subject to airport influence consistent with the requirements of Cal. Pub. Utilities Code Section 21670, et. seq,
the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, and other related federal and state requirements relating to airport
land use compatibility planning. These include allowable uses and development standards such as density and intensity
limitations, identification of prohibited uses, infill development, height limitations, and other hazards to flight, noise
insulation, buyer awareness measures, airspace protection, nonconforming uses and reconstruction, and the process for
airport compatibility criteria reviews by the City.
The Circulation Element Update describes how the City plans to provide for the transportation of people and materials
within San Luis Obispo with connections to other areas in San Luis Obispo County and beyond. The Circulation Element
Update recognizes the implications of land use policy on all modes of movement, and establishes policies, standards, and
implementation measures that work with the Land Use Element to address both existing and potential circulation
opportunities and deficiencies. But beyond addressing changes in land use, the Circulation Element Update also looks at
the circulation system of the community as a whole. Introducing the concept of “complete streets”, the update looks to
integrate and enhance all types of circulation in order to create a more comprehensive and functional circulation system.
The proposed Circulation Element provides policy language to address a variety of circulation‐related issues, including:
traffic reduction; transit; encouraging the use of bicycles and walking; traffic management; future street network changes;
truck, air and rail transportation; parking management in commercial areas and residential neighborhoods; and scenic
roadways. A new section added to the Circulation Element addresses multi‐modal transportation, or the development
and maintenance of a circulation system that balances the needs of all modes of travel.
As part of the LUCE Update, a comprehensive list of circulation improvements to be considered (called the “project
description”) was reviewed and approved for further analysis by the City Council. This list also included variations of
those improvements. Appendix N provides the sensitivity analysis performed on those individual variations. The results
of this sensitivity analysis were then used by the City to determine which variations would be included as part of the
Proposed Project presented in the EIR. From this analysis, the City identified 17 circulation improvements to include in
the Proposed Project. These are listed on the following table.The table below lists the 17 proposed “physical alternative”
street network modifications identified by the Circulation Element Update public participation and Element preparation
process.
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 16
Final EIR Page ES‐7
Site Number Site Description
1 Boysen Ave. and Santa Rosa St.
Consideration of separated crossing for bikes/pedestrians of Santa Rosa at Boysen. Consider all vehicular
alternatives for Boysen intersection at SR 1 including full closure, access restrictions, and retaining its current
configuration.
2 Realign Chorro St., Boysen Ave., and Board St.
Consideration of realignment of Chorro and Broad and Boysen.
3 Potential Ramp Closures at Highway 101 and State Route 1
Consideration of ramp closures and consolidated SR1/Highway 101 interchange including the need for a
signage/way‐finding program.
4 Broad St. and Highway 101 Ramp Closures
Consideration of ramp closures at Broad with the addition of bike and pedestrian overpass.
5 Convert Marsh St. and Higuera St. to Two‐way
(Santa Rosa St. to California Blvd.)
Consideration of two way vehicular circulation of Marsh and Higuera between Santa Rosa and California.
6 Transit Center Location on Santa Rosa St. and Higuera St.
Consideration of site/block of Higuera/Santa Rosa/Monterey for the transit center location and consider use
of both public and private property. Consider ideas from student projects and the Downtown Concept Plan.
7 Mission Plaza “Dog Leg”
Consideration of several design alternatives with varying degrees of streets affected. Analyze full closure of
roadways. Develop policy direction regarding desired outcomes and nature and phasing of treatment for the
area.
8 Realign Bianchi Ln. and Pismo St.
Consideration of realignment of street intersection (Pismo to Bianchi).
9 Realign Madonna Rd. to Bridge St Instead of Higuera St.
Consider appropriate connection from Madonna to S. Higuera associated with redevelopment of Caltrans site.
Potential to realign Madonna to connect with Bridge Street may better address some pedestrian and bike
connections.
10 Bishop St. Extension
Evaluate elimination of Bishop Street bridge over railroad tracks and consider reducing the width of Johnson
Ave.
11 Victoria Ave. Connection to Emily St.
Consideration of Victoria connection to Emily.
12 Broad St. – Consolidate Access
Consideration of Broad Street consolidation of access points.
13 Orcutt Rd. Overpass
Keep facility as part of Circulation Element. Do not consider removing facility due to concerns about
increasing rail traffic.
14 Froom Rd. Connection to Oceanaire Neighborhood
Provide pedestrian and bicycle connectivity only.
15 Prado Rd. Interchange vs. Overpass
Evaluate both interchange and overpass
16 North‐South Connection between Tank Farm Rd. and Buckley Rd.
Consideration creating a north‐south connection between Tank Farm and Buckley for future connectivity.
17 LOVR Bypass
Consider (Buckley to Higuera connection and Higuera to LOVR behind Los Verdes ‐ 101 bypass.
Source: Matrix Design Group, 2014; Mintier Harnish, 2014
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 17
Page ES‐8 Final EIR
ES-2 Project Objectives
Land Use Element Update
For the purposes of CEQA analysis, the objectives of the Land Use Element Update are to:
1. Respond to changed conditions in San Luis Obispo.
2. Incorporate sustainable practices and policies into the Land Use Element.
3. Respond to new State planning requirements.
4. Engage the community in a reaffirmation of the community’s vision and goals for the City’s future.
5. Provide residential infill opportunities.
6. Maintain a healthy and attractive natural environment within a compact urban form.
Circulation Element Update
For the purposes of CEQA analysis, the objectives of the Circulation Element Update are to:
1. Encourage better transportation habits.
2. Promote alternative forms of transportation.
3. Manage traffic by limiting population growth and economic development to the rates and levels stipulated by the
Land Use Element.
4. Support environmentally sound technological advancement.
5. Support a shift in modes of transportation.
6. Establish and maintain livable street corridors.
7. Support the development and maintenance of a circulation system that supports and balances the needs of all
circulation modes.
ES.3 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Table EXES‐1, at the end of this section, contains a detailed listing of the environmental impacts of the proposed project,
proposed mitigation measures, and residual impacts. Impacts are categorized by classes: Class I impacts are defined as
significant, unavoidable adverse impacts, which require a statement of overriding considerations pursuant to Section
15093 of the CEQA Guidelines if the project is approved. Class II impacts are significant adverse impacts that can be
feasibly mitigated to less than significant levels and which require findings to be made under Section 15091 of the CEQA
Guidelines. Class III impacts are adverse, but less than the identified significance thresholds.
ES.4 Alternatives
Section 15126.6(a) of the CEQA Guidelines states that:
“an EIR shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project or to the location of the project, which would
feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant
effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives.”
As stated above, the development on an EIR is to include consideration of a “reasonable range” of alternatives to foster
informed decision‐making and public participation.
CEQA requires the EIR to identify feasible alternatives to the proposed project that will avoid, or at least lessen, significant
impacts associated with the project. CEQA defines “feasible” as follows:
“‘Feasible’ means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into
account economic, environmental, legal, social and technological factors.”
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 18
Final EIR Page ES‐9
Three alternatives to the LUCE Update project have been evaluated in this EIR. Each alternative is described below.
No Project Alternative: This alternative evaluates environmental conditions that would result if the proposed LUCE
Update Project were not implemented and future development in the City was implemented consistent with the land use
and policy requirements of the existing 1994 Land Use Element and Circulation Elements.
Reduced Development Alternative: This alternative evaluates environmental conditions that would result if the
development capacity proposed by the Land Use Element Update were reduced by approximately 20 percent.
Maximum Circulation Improvements Alternative: This alternative evaluates the environmental conditions that would
result if three additional modifications were added to the proposed LUCE Update. These modifications include the re‐
introduction of two circulation improvements that were removed from the EIR traffic modeling (the “Vachel Lane
Realignment” and “Calle Joaquin Connector to Dalidio Drive” improvements) and a revised version of the “Buckley Road
to Los Osos Valley Road Connection” improvement. The three additional street network changes added to the Maximum
Circulation Improvements Alternative were options identified during the preliminary public review of potential street
system changes but were not included in the proposed Circulation Element traffic modeling.
Environmentally Preferred Alternative: Buildout of the No Project Alternative would generally reduce the environmental
impacts that would have the potential to occur if buildout of the City of San Luis Obispo was conducted in accordance
with the requirements of the existing 1994 Land Use and Circulation Elements of the general plan. Implementation of the
No Project Alternative, however, would not implement the beneficial policy revisions proposed by the LUCE Update.
Based on the potential for the No Project Alternative to reduce environmental impacts when compared to the impacts of
the proposed Project, it would be the environmentally superior alternative. The No Project alternative, however, would
not implement any of the proposed projects’ objectives. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2) indicates that “if the
environmentally superior alternative is the ‘no project’ alternative, the EIR shall also identify the environmentally superior
alternative among the other alternatives.”
The Reduced Development Alternative would generally have reduced or similar environmental impacts when compared
to the impacts of the proposed project. The Reduced Development Alternative, however, would not implement the
environmental objectives of the proposed LUCE Update. A reduction in development in the proposed specific plan areas
would be inconsistent with the objective to protect the environment within a compact urban form because developing
the specific plan areas at densities that are substantially less than their capacity could promote additional development in
other areas, such as unincorporated areas adjacent to the city. A reduction in development in the proposed special
planning areas would have the potential to reduce environmental impacts, however decreased development those areas
would not fully achieve the Land Use Element Update objective of promoting infill development. Reduced residential and
non‐residential density could be inconsistent with the implementation of State‐mandated planning requirements, such as
the requirements of Senate Bill (SB) 375. This bill provides a mechanism for more sustainable and efficiently‐planned
transportation infrastructure, reduced greenhouse gas emissions and improved compatibility with land uses. A
substantial reduction in future development density may impede the attainment of requirements to provide
transportation‐oriented development, would not respond to this State planning requirement, and would be inconsistent
with the Land Use Element objective of incorporating sustainable practices into the Land Use Element.
The Maximum Circulation Improvements Alternative would provide three street system modifications not included in the
proposed Circulation Element Update impact analysis. This alternative would generally result in environmental impacts
that are similar to the proposed Project, but would have fewer air quality, greenhouse gas emission, and traffic impacts
due to more free –flowing traffic circulation conditions. This alternative would also have the potential to result in
increased cultural resource and noise impacts along portions of one of the alternative roadway system projects; however,
it is likely that those impacts could be reduced to a less than significant level with the implementation of appropriate
design and other mitigation measures. The Maximum Circulation Improvements Alternative would result in substantial
and area‐wide environmental benefits and would not impede the implementation of proposed Land Use and Circulation
Element Update objectives. As stipulated under CEQA Guidelines §§15126.6(e), an EIR must evaluate the environmental
effects of project (or plan) alternatives, compare these effects to those of the proposed project, and identify the
environmentally superior alternative. Based on the reasons discussed above,Therefore, the Maximum Circulation
Improvements Alternative would be the environmentally superior alternative to the proposed project that fulfills the
basic objectives of the proposed LUCE Update.
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 19
Page ES‐10 Final EIR
ES.5 Incorporation of Studies, Reports and Other Documents
This EIR contains references to studies, reports and other documents that were used as a basis for, or a source of,
information summarized in the body of the EIR. These documents are incorporated by reference in this EIR in accordance
with Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines. Where a study, report or document is briefly cited or referred to for
convenience in the body of this EIR, the reader should consult the “References and Preparers” section of this document
for the full citation. It is important to note that the bulk of the references used for this EIR are pulled forward from
Appendix D, Background Report (Volume III of this EIR).
ES.6 Areas of Public Controversy
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines § 15123(b)(2), this EIR acknowledges the areas of controversy and issues to be
resolved which are known to the City of San Luis Obispo or were raised during the scoping process. No areas of
substantial controversy were raised in response to the Notice of Preparation that was circulated Thursday, December 5,
2013 with a required comment period originally set to end on Friday, January 10, 2014, but extended by the City until
Friday, January 24, 2014. However, the City received comments letters identifying a number of issues of concern in
response to the NOP and the public scoping meeting held in association with the regularly scheduled Planning
Commission on Wednesday, January 8, 2014.
As a result of the publishing of the NOP and the City’s outreach to the public and regulatory agencies, the City received
valuable input on the contents of the proposed EIR (please refer to Appendix E, Volume IV, of this EIR for a copy of all NOP
comments received and associated responses). This includes:
Regulatory Agency Comments
APCD: General comments concerning the responsibility for future development under the LUCE Update to ensure the
proper construction and operational permits are received prior to development, and the necessary environmental
information is provided that will be needed for the APCD to make determinations on impacts resulting from potential
future development.
CalTrans: General comments concerning the responsibility to work with the Airport Land Use Commission on the
development of the LUCE Update, and the requirements to provide adequate environmental analysis for future projects
within the Airport Land Use Plan area.
ALUC: Comments concerning project consistency with the ALUP, recommendations for environmental issue areas that
should be addressed through the EIR process, a needs assessment for residential growth, and analysis of a limited growth
EIR alternative.
Other Agencies/Offices
San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce: Comments concerning a need to focus on the City’s jobs/housing balance and
recommendations for land use amendments to specific areas in the city related to increased residential development
opportunities. This includes general comments regarding the need for increased housing. No comments on the nature of
the environmental impact analysis.
Public Comments
General comments include area‐specific concerns regarding various environmental issues effecting current city residents
and a general concern over the existing state of the city’s environmental resources. General concern about circulation
changes to the South Broad Street Area and concern regarding including impacts related to diverting collector traffic onto
residential streets. Comments also include a request for a complete impact assessment of a future extension of Prado
Road and an assessment of impacts relating to the Chevron Tank Farm Remediation and Redevelopment project as well as
the potential Johnson Avenue development project on SLCUSD property. Comments also include general
recommendations on development within the identified Specific Plan Areas.
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 20
Final EIR Page ES‐11
Table ES‐1. Summary of Significant and Unavoidable Impacts, Mitigation Measures and Significance After
Mitigation
Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation
Class I: Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
Air Quality
Impact AQ‐2 (Long‐Term)
Implementation of the LUCE
Update would involve operation
of development projects that
generate long‐term emissions of
criteria air pollutants and ozone
precursors. Implementation of
the LUCE Update would not
result in the exposure of
sensitive receptors to substantial
sources of local carbon
monoxide concentrations, odors,
or TACs. However, with regards
to criteria air pollutants and
precursors implementation of
the LUCE Update would not be
consistent with the assumptions
contained in the most recent
version of the APCD’s Clean Air
Plan even with the incorporation
of the proposed LUCE Update
policies and existing City policies.
Thus, long‐term air quality
impacts are considered Class I,
significant and unavoidable.
With regards to criteria air pollutants and
precursors implementation of the LUCE Update
would not be consistent with the assumptions
contained in the most recent version of the APCD’s
Clean Air Plan even with the incorporation of the
proposed LUCE Update policies and existing City
policies. Thus, long‐term air quality impacts are
considered Class I, significant and unavoidable.
APCD states that a Class 1 can be determined from
a qualitative analysis.
Significant and unavoidable.
Land Use
Impact LU‐1
The proposed LUCE Update
would have the potential to
conflict with an applicable land
use plan of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project
adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect. With the
implementation of proposed
LUCE Update policies, potential
land use conflict impacts are
considered to be a Class I,
significant and unavoidable
impact.
No mitigation measures have been identified to
reduce potential inconsistencies with the existing
ALUP to a less than significant level.
The proposed Project has the
potential to be found inconsistent
with the existing ALUP by the
Airport Land Use Commission.
While physical environmental
impacts of safety and noise have
not been identified for the LUCE
update from existing or future
airport operations as described in
the adopted Airport Master Plan,
development envisioned in the
proposed Project presents a
conflict with the ALUP.
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 21
Page ES‐12 Final EIR
Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation
Noise
Impact N‐1
Short‐Term Construction Noise
Levels. Implementation of
development projects under the
proposed LUCE Update would
involve construction that could
generate noise levels that exceed
applicable standards for mobile
construction equipment in the
City’s Noise Control Ordinance
and result in temporary
substantial increases in noise
levels primarily from the use of
heavy‐duty construction
equipment (see thresholds a and
c). Even with the incorporation
of the proposed LUCE Update
policies and existing City policies,
short‐term construction noise
levels are considered Class I,
significant and unavoidable.
Enforcement of the Noise Element and noise
control ordinance with respect to the existing
practice that accommodates infill construction
activity during the currently allowed hours of 7 AM
to 7 PM would reduce impacts to the extent
feasible.
With the implementation of
feasible construction noise
reduction measures and
exemptions, construction activities
could still exceed applicable
standards especially if activities are
near existing receptors and/or
occur during the nighttime. Thus,
short‐term construction noise
levels are considered Class I,
significant and unavoidable.
Traffic And Circulation
Impact CIR‐1
Development and street network
changes under the LUCE Update
will cause roadways currently
operating at LOS D or better to
deteriorate to LOS E or F, in
downtown San Luis Obispo,
roadways operating at LOS E or
better will deteriorate to LOS F,
or will add additional traffic to
roadways operating at LOS E
(outside of downtown) or F (in
downtown). This is considered a
Class I, significant and
unavoidable impact.
As future development under the LUCE Update is
proposed, the City will be required to ensure
consistency with the General Plan and the
policies/programs listed above. However, with the
incorporation of the Proposed Project, adherence
to proposed and existing City policies and programs
discussed above, and continued support of
Caltrans’, and SLOCOG’s and SLORTA’s efforts to
address demand on US 101 in the vicinity of San
Luis Obispo, these mitigation measures would not
mitigate the impacts and widening to 6‐lanes is not
feasible.
Implementation of proposed and
existing policies would not fully
mitigate the impact, so the impact
would remain potentially
significant and unavoidable.
Impact CIR‐2
Development and street network
changes under the LUCE Update
will cause intersections currently
operating at LOS D or better to
deteriorate to LOS E or F, in
downtown San Luis Obispo,
intersections operating at LOS E
or better will deteriorate to LOS
The following mitigation measures would be
options to mitigate impacts for these intersections
to meet the LOS standard. It should be noted that
installing a signal to mitigate an LOS impact would
be contingent on the intersection meeting signal
warrants per the MUTCD under future year
conditions. However, the decision to install a traffic
signal should not be based solely upon a single
warrant. Delay, congestion, driver confusion, future
Implementation of proposed and
existing policies and reliance on
establishment of project‐specific
mitigation measures where
appropriate would reduce
potential impacts to a less than
significant level. However, many of
the proposed mitigations are
infeasible due to right‐of‐way or
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 22
Final EIR Page ES‐13
Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation
F, or will add additional traffic to
intersections operating at LOS E
(outside of downtown) or F (in
downtown). Impact is considered
to be Class I, significant and
unavoidable.
land use or other evidence for right of way
assignment beyond that provided by stop controls
must be demonstrated. The City will adhere to
Caltrans’ process for intersection control
evaluation.
CIR‐1. Grand & Slack (#8)
Install increased traffic control (traffic signal or
roundabout).
CIR‐2. California & Taft (#12)
Install increased traffic control (traffic signal or
roundabout).
CIR‐3. Grand & US 101 SB on‐ramp (#13)
Install dedicated WB right‐turn lane.
CIR‐4. San Luis & California (#55)
Install increased traffic control (traffic signal or
roundabout).
CIR‐5. Higuera & Tank Farm (#85)
Add NB right‐turn lane, WB dual right‐turn lanes,
two‐way left‐turn lane on Tank Farm between
Higuera and Long.
CIR‐6. Broad & High (#89)
Install increased traffic control (traffic signal or
roundabout).
Augment bicycle facilities and improve transit
headways on Broad Street.
CIR‐7 Broad & Rockview (#94)
Install downstream signal at Broad & Capitolio.
Augment bicycle facilities and improve transit
headways on Broad Street.
CIR‐8. Broad & Capitolio (#95)
Install increased traffic control (traffic signal or
roundabout).
Augment bicycle facilities and improve transit
headways on Broad Street.
CIR‐9. Johnson & Orcutt (#96)
Install roundabout.
CIR‐10. Broad & Tank Farm (#98)
Establish time‐of‐day timing plans.
Add SB dual left‐turn lane, NB dedicated right‐turn
lane and WB dedicated right‐turn lane.
Augment Bicycle facilities and improve transit
headways on Broad Street.
CIR‐11. Broad & Airport (#102)
Install TWLTL north of intersection.
Augment Bicycle facilities and improve transit
headways on Broad Street.
funding constraints. Therefore, the
impact remains significant and
unavoidable.
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 23
Page ES‐14 Final EIR
Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation
Impact CIR‐3
Development under the LUCE
Update will increase traffic on
freeway facilities. Impact is
considered to be Class I,
significant and unavoidable.
As future development under the LUCE Update is
proposed, the City will be required to ensure
consistency with the General Plan and the
policies/programs listed above. However, with the
incorporation of the Proposed Project, adherence
to proposed and existing City policies and programs
discussed above, and continued support of
Caltrans’ and, SLOCOG’s and SLORTA’s efforts to
address demand on US 101 in the vicinity of San
Luis Obispo, these mitigation measures would not
mitigate the impacts and widening to 6‐lanes is not
feasible.
Given that there are no feasible
mitigation measures under the
City’s purview apart from
implementation of the Proposed
Project policies and programs, or
no enforceable plan or program
that is sufficiently tied to the actual
mitigation of the traffic impacts at
issue, this impact is significant and
unavoidable.
Table ES‐2. Summary of Significant but Mitigable Impacts, Mitigation Measures and Significance After Mitigation
Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation
Class II: Significant but Mitigable Impacts
Agricultural Resources
Impact AG‐2
Future development in
accordance with the LUCE Update
could occur on prime farmland,
unique farmland, and/or
farmland of statewide
importance. Buildout within the
City Limits would result in Class II,
significant but mitigable impacts
to agricultural conversion.
In order to ensure that prime farmland is
protected upon implementation of the
proposed LUCE Update, the following LUCE
Update policy edits shall be required:
AG‐1 1.7.1 Open Space Protection
Within the City's planning area and outside the
urban reserve line, undeveloped land should be
kept open. Prime agricultural land, productive
agricultural land, and potentially productive
agricultural land should/shall be protected for
farming. Scenic lands, sensitive wildlife habitat,
and undeveloped prime agricultural land
should/shall be permanently protected as open
space.
Implementation of proposed and
existing policies and reliance on
establishment of project‐specific
mitigation measures where
appropriate would reduce potential
impacts to a less than significant level.
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 24
Final EIR Page ES‐15
Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation
Air Quality
Impact AQ‐1 (Short‐Term)
Implementation of the LUCE
Update would involve
construction of development
projects that generate short‐term
emissions of criteria air pollutants
and ozone precursors. Emissions
from individual construction
projects could exceed APCD’s
project‐level significance
thresholds. Thus,
implementation of the LUCE
Update could result in
construction‐generated emissions
that violate or contribute
substantially to an existing or
projected air quality violation,
contribute a cumulatively
considerable net increase of
criteria air pollutants for which
the region is designated as non‐
attainment, and/or expose
sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations.
Adherence to relevant policies
and implementation of APCD‐
recommended project‐specific
mitigation measures would
reduce potential short‐term
impacts to a less‐than‐significant
level. Thus, construction‐
generated air quality impacts are
considered Class II, significant but
mitigable.
APCD specifies construction mitigation
measures designed to reduce emissions of ROG,
NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 (both fugitive and
exhaust). These include standard mitigation
measures, best available control technology
(BACT), and construction activity management
plan (CAMP) and off‐site mitigation for
construction equipment emissions; along with
short and expanded lists for fugitive dust
emissions.
The City shall ensure the implementation of the
most current APCD‐recommended construction
mitigation measures to reduce construction‐
generated emissions to less‐significant levels as
defined by APCD.
Individual development would be
required to undergo separate
environmental review, which may
result in specific impacts that require
project specific mitigation consistent
with the most current APCD‐
recommended construction
mitigation measures. As stated in
APCD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook, if
estimated construction emissions are
expected to exceed either of the
APCD Quarterly Tier 2 thresholds of
significance after the standard and
BACT measures are accounted for,
then an APCD approved CAMP and
off‐site mitigation would need to be
implemented to reduce air quality
impacts to a less‐than‐significant
level. In addition, all fugitive dust
sources shall be managed to ensure
adequate control below 20% opacity
as identified by Rule 401, for which
compliance is required by law.
Adherence to relevant policies and
implementation of APCD‐
recommended project‐specific
mitigation measures would reduce
potential impacts to a less‐than‐
significant level. Thus, construction‐
generated air quality impacts are
considered Class II, significant but
mitigable.
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 25
Page ES‐16 Final EIR
Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation
Cultural Resources
Impact CR‐1
Development allowed by the
LUCE update could cause a
substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical
resource which is either listed or
eligible for listing on the National
Register of Historic Places, the
California Register of Historic
Resources, or a local register of
historic resources. This impact is
considered to be Class II,
significant but mitigable.
Development facilitated by the LUCE Update
could adversely affect historical resources. In
order to better facilitate the protection of the
city’s historical resources and reduce potential
impacts to less than significant levels, the
following changes to the City’s General Plan
Conservation and Open Space Element
policies/programs shall be required:
CR‐1 3.3.2 Demolitions
Historically or architecturally significant
buildings should shall not be demolished or
substantially changed in outward appearance,
unless doing so is necessary to remove a threat
to health and safety and other means to
eliminate or reduce the threat to acceptable
levels are infeasible.
CR‐2 3.3.5
Historic districts and neighborhoods. In
evaluating new public or private development,
the City should shall identify and protect
neighborhoods or districts having historical
character due to the collective effect of
Contributing or Master List historic properties.
CR‐3 3.5.10 Southern Pacific Water Tower
The historic Southern Pacific Water Tower and
adjoining City‐owned land should shall be
maintained as open space or parkland.
Implementation of proposed and
existing policies, reliance on
establishment of project‐specific
mitigation measures where
appropriate, and incorporation of the
required policy/program language
changes will reduce potential impacts
to a less than significant level.
Public Services
Impact PS‐1
Buildout of the proposed Land
Use Element would increase the
demand for fire protection
services by increasing population
and the number of structures in
the city. This is a Class II,
potentially significant but
mitigable impact.
The following policy shall be added to the
proposed Land Use Element prior to adoption:
PS‐1 New Policy
Development should shall be approved only
when adequate fire suppression services and
facilities are available or will be made available
concurrent with development, considering the
setting, type, intensity, and form of the
proposed development.
Implementation of the proposed
mitigation measure and Land Use
Element policy would require the
development of a new fire station in
the southern portion of the city prior
to or in conjunction with the
development of the Avila Ranch
Specific Plan. The construction and
operation of a new fire station would
be required to comply with applicable
regulatory requirements, City
development review policies and
requirements, and may be subject to
the implementation of additional
mitigation measures identified by a
project‐specific environmental
review. With the implementation of
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 26
Final EIR Page ES‐17
Impact Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation
the proposed mitigation measure and
existing development review
requirements, the proposed Land Use
Element Update would result in less
than significant adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision
of new or altered facilities needed to
achieve consistency with the City’s
fire response standard.
Table ES‐3. Less Than Significant Impacts, Mitigation Measures and Significance After Mitigation
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After
Mitigation
Class III: Less Than Significant Impacts
Aesthetics
Impact AES‐1
Development under the LUCE Update would introduce new
development along viewing corridors and scenic roadways,
including state scenic highways, in the San Luis Obispo area. This
could have a substantial adverse effect on scenic resources or an
identified visual resource or scenic vista from a public viewing
area. With the incorporation of the proposed LUCE Update
policies and existing City policies, potential impacts to such views
are considered Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact AES‐2
The LUCE Update emphasizes both reuse of existing urbanized
lands, infill development on vacant parcels, and new
development on vacant parcels near urban areas. The
development of such areas could degrade the existing visual
character and its surroundings. With the incorporation of the
proposed LUCE Update and existing City policies and programs,
potential impacts related to existing visual character changes are
considered Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact AES‐3
Proposed development in accordance with the LUCE Update
would introduce new sources of light and glare. However,
adherence to policies included in the Zoning Ordinance and
Community Design Guidelines would reduce potential impacts to
a Class III, less than significant, level.
None required. Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 27
Page ES‐18 Final EIR
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After
Mitigation
Agricultural Resources
Impact AG‐1
The LUCE Update could alter the existing land use and zoning on
sites throughout the city and may result in incompatibilities with
adjacent urban and agricultural uses. However, the General Plan
reduces land use conflicts through policies and plan review.
Therefore, impacts that would occur from development would be
Class III, less than significant.
None required Less than significant.
Biological Resources
Impact BIO‐1
Development under the LUCE Update has potential to impact
common habitat types including non‐native annual grasslands
and disturbed/ruderal areas that provide habitat for common
wildlife and plant species. With the incorporation of the
proposed LUCE Update policies and existing governing policies,
potential impacts to these common habitats are considered Class
III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact BIO‐2
Development consistent with the LUCE Update has potential to
impact four Natural Communities of Special Concern present
within the LUCE SOI Planning Subarea including Serpentine
Bunchgrass, Northern Interior Cypress Stand, Central Maritime
Chaparral, and Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh. With the
incorporation of the proposed and existing City policies, and the
requirements of regulatory and oversight agencies, potential
impacts to sensitive habitats are considered Class III, less than
significant.
None required. Less than significant
Impact BIO‐3
Development consistent with the LUCE Update has the potential
to impact special‐status plant species within the LUCE SOI
Planning Subarea. With the incorporation of the proposed and
existing City policies, and the requirements of regulatory and
oversight agencies, potential impacts to special‐status plant
species are considered Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact BIO‐4
Development consistent with the LUCE Update has potential to
impact special‐status wildlife species within the LUCE SOI
Planning Subarea. With the incorporation of the proposed and
existing City policies, and the requirements of regulatory and
oversight agencies, potential impacts to special‐status wildlife
species are considered Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 28
Final EIR Page ES‐19
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After
Mitigation
Impact BIO‐5
Development consistent with the LUCE Update has potential to
impact common wildlife species and species of local concern
within the LUCE SOI Planning Subarea. With the incorporation of
the proposed and existing City policies, and the requirements of
regulatory and oversight agencies, potential impacts to common
and species of local concern are considered Class III, less than
significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Cultural Resources
Impact CR‐2
Development facilitated by Land Use and Circulation Element
Update could adversely affect identified and previously
unidentified archaeological and paleontological resources. This
includes potential disturbance of human remains. General Plan
policies would ensure that such impacts are addressed on a case‐
by‐case basis. Impacts would be considered Class III, less than
significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Geology and Soils
Impact GEO‐1
New development under the LUCE Update could be susceptible to
impacts from future seismic events, creating the potential for
structural damage or health and safety risks. However,
compliance with required building codes and implementation of
General Plan polices would result in a Class III, less than
significant impact.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact GEO‐2
Future seismic events could result in liquefaction of soils near San
Luis Obispo Creek, Prefumo Creek and other low‐lying areas.
Development in these areas could be subject to liquefaction
hazards. The compliance of future development projects with the
California Building Code (CBC) and General Plan policies would
result in Class III, less than significant impacts.
None required.
Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 29
Page ES‐20 Final EIR
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After
Mitigation
Impact GEO‐3
Development facilitated by the LUCE Update could occur on soils
that have the potential to present natural hazards (expansive
soils, erosive soils, and differential settlement) to structures and
roadways. Development could also result in the loss of a unique
geologic feature. However, compliance of future development
projects with the California Building Code and adopted General
Plan policies would ensure that resulting impacts are Class III, less
than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact GEO‐4
Steep slopes outside of the existing city limits present potential
on‐ or off‐site landslide hazards. In addition to human safety
impacts, a landslide has the potential to damage or destroy
structures, roadways and other improvements as well as to
deflect and block drainage channels, causing further damage and
erosion, including loss of topsoil. The compliance of future
development projects with the California Building Code (CBC) and
General Plan policies would result in Class III, less than significant
impacts.
None required. Less than significant.
Global Climate Change
Impact GCC‐1
Implementation of the proposed LUCE Update could result in an
increase in GHG emissions due to short‐term construction and
long‐term operational activities associated with new housing and
commercial development, resulting in a cumulatively
considerable contribution to the impact of global climate change.
However, because the proposed LUCE Update would be
consistent with the City’s CAP and incorporates applicable CAP
policies and programs that would reduce GHG emissions, this
impact would be considered Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact HAZ‐1
Development facilitated by the LUCE Update could occur near
known hazardous material users or result in construction in areas
with existing hazardous materials. Implementation of the LUCE
Update could expose individuals to health risks due to
soil/groundwater contamination or emission of hazardous
materials into the air and could impact an adopted emergency
response/evacuation plan. With the incorporation of the
proposed LUCE Update policies and existing City policies,
potential impacts are considered Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact HAZ‐2
Development consistent with the proposed LUCE Update could
introduce incompatible residential and commercial land uses into
safety zones established through the Airport Land Use Plan and
may result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in
these areas. Impacts would be Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 30
Final EIR Page ES‐21
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After
Mitigation
Impact HAZ‐3
Development consistent with the proposed LUCE Update would
introduce residential land uses into areas designated as having a
Moderate or High Wildland Fire Hazard, introducing the potential
to expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss and/or
injury. However, compliance with existing policies and state and
local regulations would reduce impacts to a Class III, less than
significant level.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact HAZ‐4
Development facilitated by the LUCE Update could introduce
sensitive receptors to additional hazards related to exposure to
radiation, electromagnetic fields and hazardous trees. With the
incorporation of the proposed LUCE Update policies and existing
City policies, potential impacts are considered Class III, less than
significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact HAZ‐5
Development under the proposed LUCE Update could potentially
introduce sensitive receptors to areas in direct proximity to
hazardous materials transportation corridors including the Union
Pacific Railroad and Highway 101 and could potentially create a
public safety hazard. This is a Class III, less than significant impact.
None required. Less than significant.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Impact HWQ‐1
New development under the LUCE Update within the 100‐year
flood plain could be subject to flooding and have the potential to
impede or redirect flood flows. However, with implementation of
General Plan policies and adherence to the City’s Floodplain
Management Regulation impacts related to flooding would be
Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact HWQ‐2
Development facilitated by the LUCE Update has the potential to
increase the amount of impervious surfaces within the city. This
could result in a decrease in percolation to the Groundwater
Basin, the alteration of drainage patterns and increases in the
volume of surface runoff. Compliance with the City’s Stormwater
Management Plan (SWMP) would reduce impacts to a Class III,
less than significant level.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact HWQ‐3
Point and non‐point sources of contamination could affect water
quality in San Luis Obispo Creek, Prefumo Creek as well as other
surface waters and groundwater in the city. However,
compliance with existing regulations and implementation of
General Plan policies and the City’s Stormwater Management
Plan (SWMP) would result in Class III, less than significant
impacts.
None required. Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 31
Page ES‐22 Final EIR
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After
Mitigation
Impact HWQ‐4
Development facilitated by the LUCE Update has the potential to
create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems,
resulting in increased stormwater runoff and has the potential to
result in the need for additional stormwater infrastructure.
Compliance with the City’s Stormwater Management Plan
(SWMP), and State regulatory requirements, would reduce
impacts to a Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Land Use
Impact LU‐1
Aspects of the proposed LUCE Update would conflict with the
airport land use plan. However, with the implementation of
proposed LUCE Update policies, potential land use conflict
impacts would be Class III, less than significant.
No mitigation measures are
required because impacts
would be less than significant.
The proposed Project
includes policies and
programs that would
ensure the orderly
expansion of the airport
and provide adequate
protection for safety and
noise. Impacts would be
less than significant
without mitigation..
Impact LU‐2
The proposed LUCE Update would have the potential to result in
land use conflicts between existing and proposed land uses. With
the implementation of proposed LUCE Update policies, potential
land use conflict impacts are considered Class III, less than
significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact LU‐3
The proposed Land Use Element Update would result in conflicts
with applicable habitat conservation plans or natural community
conservation plans. With the implementation of proposed LUCE
Update policies, potential plan and policy conflict impacts are
considered Class III, less than significant.
None required.
Less than significant.
Impact LU‐3
The proposed Circulation Element Update identifies future
roadway improvements that would have the potential to result in
a significant impact if the improvements would physically divide
an established community. This impact is considered Class III, less
than significant.
None required.
Less than significant.
Noise
Impact N‐2
Long‐Term Roadway and Railroad Traffic Noise Levels
Implementation of the proposed LUCE Update would increase
traffic volumes and associated noise levels along major
transportation routes. In some instances, traffic‐related noise
increases could be more than 3 dB, the level typically audible to
the human ear and; therefore, considered a substantial increase
in noise.
New development associated with the proposed LUCE Update
None required. Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 32
Final EIR Page ES‐23
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After
Mitigation
could also result in the siting of new sensitive receptors in close
proximity to transportation noise sources such as the railroad,
with potential to exceed the land use compatibility and
transportation noise exposure standards in the existing Noise
Element. However, because the City’s Noise Element contains
policies and programs that would address and mitigate potential
site‐specific impacts for individual projects in the future, this
impact would be considered Class III, less than significant.
Impact N‐3
Exposure of Noise Sensitive Receptors to Stationary Sources.
Implementation of the proposed LUCE Update could increase
stationary source noise levels from new development. New
development associated with the proposed LUCE Update could
also result in the siting of new sensitive receptors in close
proximity to these source types, with potential to exceed the land
use compatibility and stationary noise exposure standards in the
existing Noise Element. However, because the City’s Noise
Element contains policies and programs that would address and
mitigate potential site‐specific impacts for individual projects in
the future, this impact would be considered Class III, less than
significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact N‐4
Airport Noise Exposure. Implementation of the proposed LUCE
Update would result in the designation of noise‐sensitive land
uses located within or near the 55 dBA and 60 dBA noise contours
of the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport Land Use Plan.
This could result in exposure of people to excessive noise levels.
However, with the incorporation of the proposed LUCE Update
policies that address airport noise compatibility and consistency
with the adopted ALUP, this impact would be considered Class III,
less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact N‐5
Exposure to Excessive Vibration Levels. Implementation of the
proposed LUCE Update could increase exposure to vibration
levels. However, because the City’s ordinance contains and that
these sources (existing and proposed) would be anticipated to be
minor, this impact would be considered Class III, less than
significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Population and Housing
Impact PH‐1
The LUCE Update would not result in residential unit
development or associated population growth that exceeds an
adopted average annual growth rate threshold. Potential
population and housing impacts are considered Class III, less than
significant.
None required.
Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 33
Page ES‐24 Final EIR
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After
Mitigation
Impact PH‐2
The LUCE Update would not result in a substantial displacement
of residents or existing housing units. This impact is considered
Class III, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Public Services
Impact PS‐2
Buildout of the proposed Land Use Element Update would
increase the demand for police protection services by increasing
population and development in the city. This is a Class III, less
than significant impact.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact PS‐3
Buildout of the proposed Land Use Element Update would
increase enrollment in public schools by increasing the population
of the city. This is a Class III, less than significant impact.
None required. Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 34
Final EIR Page ES‐25
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After
Mitigation
Recreation
Impact REC‐1
Buildout of the proposed LUCE Update would increase the
population of the city and would facilitate the development of
additional parkland. Buildout of the proposed LUCE Update
would result in a small increase in total per capita parkland in the
city when compared to existing conditions. Although the LUCE
Update would not comply with the City’s per capita parkland
standard, this would not result in a physical effect. Therefore the
LUCE Update would result in a Class III, less than significant
environmental impact related to the increased use of existing
park and recreation facilities.
The proposed LUCE Update
would result in less than
significant recreation‐related
environmental impacts and
no mitigation measures are
required. Although the LUCE
Update would result in less
than significant
environmental impacts
related to the provision of
parkland in the city, the
existing condition where the
City’s per capita parkland
standard is not achieved
would continue to exist. The
City’s per capita parkland
ratio goal is intended to meet
the community’s desire for
increased recreational
opportunities, and is not
considered to be a policy
adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect.
Therefore the identified
inconsistency is not
considered to be a significant
environmental impact and no
mitigation is required.
Recommendations to address
the City’s goals for meeting
the per capita parkland ratio
include, but are not limited
to, the following additions to
the Parks and Recreation
Element:
Development may be
required to fund or dedicate
parkland greater than what is
required through the Quimby
Act in order to meet the
community’s needs and goals
for parkland.
The City shall pursue a gift of
Cuesta Park from the County
to the City as part of the City’s
parkland system.
Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 35
Page ES‐26 Final EIR
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After
Mitigation
Impact REC‐2
Buildout of the proposed Land Use Element would potentially
provide up to 52.4 acres of new park facilities in the city. The
construction and use of the proposed parks would have the
potential to result in significant environmental impacts. This is
considered a Class III impact, less than significant.
None required. Less than significant.
Traffic and Circulation
Impact CIR‐4
Development under the LUCE Update may increase traffic
volumes or traffic speed in designated neighborhood traffic
management areas. Impact is considered to be Class III, less than
significant.
As future development under
the LUCE Update is proposed,
the City will be required to
ensure consistency with the
General Plan and the
policies/programs listed
above. Therefore, mitigation
measures are not required.
Less than significant.
Impact CIR‐5
Development under the LUCE Update may encourage increased
heavy vehicle traffic on non‐designated truck routes. Impact is
considered to be Class III, less than significant.
As development under the
LUCE Update is proposed, the
City will be required to ensure
consistency with the General
Plan and the
policies/programs listed
above. Therefore, mitigation
measures are not required.
Less than significant.
Impact CIR‐6
Development under the LUCE Update will cause increased activity
at San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport that may lead to
changes in traffic volumes or traffic patterns that result in
deteriorated safety conditions. Impact is considered to be Class
III, less than significant.
As development under the
LUCE Update is proposed, the
City will be required to ensure
consistency with the General
Plan and the
policies/programs listed
above. Therefore, mitigation
measures are not required.
Less than significant.
Impact CIR‐7
Development and street network changes and adoption of the
policies and programs under the LUCE Update would not conflict
with adopted policies that are supportive of increased active
transportation. Impact is considered to be Class III, less than
significant.
The LUCE Update significantly
strengthens the City’s policies
on active transportation
which will lead to reduced
traffic congestion and a
healthier population.
Therefore, no mitigation
measures are required.
Less than significant.
Impact CIR‐8
Development and adoption of the policies and programs under
the LUCE Update would not conflict with adopted policies that
are supportive of increased transit ridership and provision of
services. Impact is considered to be Class III, less than significant.
As future development under
the LUCE Update is proposed,
the City will be required to
ensure consistency with the
General Plan and the
policies/programs listed
above. Therefore, mitigation
measures are not required.
Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 36
Final EIR Page ES‐27
Impact Mitigation Measure Significance After
Mitigation
Utilities and Service Systems
Impact USS‐1
New development that could occur as a result of the proposed
LUCE Update would increase existing water demand. This is a
Class III, less than significant impact.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact USS‐2
New development that could occur as a result of the LUCE Update
would generate wastewater flows that exceed the existing
capacity of the City’s Water Resource Recovery Facility. This is a
Class III, less than significant impact.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact USS‐3
New development that could be facilitated by the LUCE Update
would require the construction of new water and wastewater
infrastructure or the replacement of existing infrastructure. The
construction or replacement of infrastructure has the potential to
result in significant environmental effects. This is a Class III, less
than significant impact.
None required. Less than significant.
Impact USS‐4
New development that could be facilitated by the LUCE Update
would increase the demand for solid waste disposal at county
landfills. Potential new development would also comply with
applicable regulations related to the management of solid waste.
As such, solid waste disposal impacts of the LUCE Update are
Class III, less than significant impact.
None required. Less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 37
Page ES‐28 Final EIR
Please see the next page.
ATTACHMENT 1
PH3 - 38
1
Land Use Element Policy Input
Policy Input
Land Use Element Chapter 1
Com-
ment
#
Commenter Chapter Policy
# Input Policy Response
A2-1 Cal Poly Chapter
1 (LUE) 1.12.3
Rationale for
annexation of Cal Poly
should be stated.
New policy 1.12.3 directs the City to
analyze the costs/benefits to annexing
Cal Poly. No changes proposed by
staff.
Policy Input
Land Use Element Chapter 2
Com-
ment
#
Commenter Chapter Policy
# Input Policy Response
P12-4 Kovesdi Chapter
2 (LUE) 2.2.7
Comment
recommended adding
"protect in kind" or
"create in kind habitat
off site"
Not recommended for addition to this
policy which directs residential
developments to preserve and
incorporate natural features.
P12-5 Kovesdi Chapter
2 (LUE)
2.2.9
G(b)
Comment
recommended adding
"healthy and native" to
policy that directs new
development to
maintain mature trees
on site.
Not recommended for addition to this
policy. The policy already has
provisions for "feasibility" that would
address concerns about restoration
projects and non-native trees.
P13-
15 Lopes Chapter
2 (LUE) 2.2.9
Concern that criteria
defining “compatible
development” may
encourage increased
density and zone
changes in
neighborhoods.
Recommend policy updates as follows:
2.2.9 Compatible Development…..All
multifamily development and large
group-living facilities shall be
compatible with any nearby, lower
density development. Compatibility
for all development shall be evaluated
using the following criteria:...H.
Housing Diversity. A mix of housing
types, and a range of density within a
neighborhood an area is generally
desirable (see also Policy 2.1.6)
ATTACHMENT 2
PH3 - 39
2
Policy Input
Land Use Element Chapter 3
Com-
ment
#
Commenter Chapter Policy
# Input Policy Response
P2-5 Sierra Club Chapter
3 (LUE) 3.5.7.8
Wants additional
language to reflect OS
areas are acquired and
maintained for use of
residents and tourism
programs are not to
include national
marketing of City OS
areas.
The areas impacted by overuse are
popular areas for both tourists and
residents and should be addressed by
specific actions to address each
situation. Survey currently underway
to develop profile of open space users
to better understand demographics.
No change to program proposed.
P2-6 Sierra Club Chapter
3 (LUE)
3.5.7.1
2
Requests removing
specific reference to
Economic
Development Strategic
Plan (EDSP)
EDSP went through public process (4
workshops and hearings) and
incorporates city policies for
development’s responsibility to bear
cost of facilities and services required
to serve it. Removing specific
reference to EDSP in this program will
not remove Council direction to
implement it.
Policy Input
Land Use Element Chapter 6
Com-
ment
#
Commenter Chapter Policy
# Input Policy Response
P2-7 Sierra Club Chapter
6 (LUE) 6.4.5
Request to replace
“encourage” with
“require” for rainwater
percolation from roof-
hardscape areas.
P2-8 Sierra Club Chapter
6 (LUE) 6.4.6
Request to replace
“encourage” with
“require” for project
designs that minimize
drainage
concentrations.
P2-9 Sierra Club Chapter
6 (LUE) 6.5.1
Request to restore
deleted language
specifying approaches
to flood protection.
Not recommended to specify
particular approaches that may no
longer meet FEMA or Stormwater
regulations. Broader policy language
to support flood plain standards is
appropriate.
ATTACHMENT 2
PH3 - 40
3
Policy input
Land Use Element Chapter 8
Com-
ment
#
Commenter Chapter Policy
# Input Policy Response
A2-2 Cal Poly Chapter
8 (LUE)
8.3.3.1
3
CalFire /Cal Poly site
shows up in Cal Poly
Master Plan as
designated for Faculty
and Staff housing.
Update Plan to show
this designation.
Update policy to state, "The Cal Poly
Master Plan currently designates this
area for Faculty and Staff housing.
The City shall collaborate….."
A6-7 SLOCOG Chapter
8 (LUE) 8.3.3.8
Executive summary
mentions need to
reflect Homeless
Center use of
Prado/Sunset Drive-in
Site but doesn’t
mention RTA new
facility at this location.
Policy 8.3.3.8 includes reference to
both Homeless Services center and
transportation agency use. Staff
recommends retaining Office
designation for this portion of the site
to ensure LUCE update does not
create non-conforming use.
P2-10 Sierra Club Chapter
8 (LUE) 8.3.2.6
Delete provision for
meeting a portion of
open space
requirement off-site
Task Force generated this concept and
it was carried through PC and CC.
P16-
13
Mila
Vujovich-
LaBarre
Chapter
8 (LUE) 8.3.2.4
San Luis Ranch should
be retained for
agriculture.
Policy in LUCE provides for
development consistent with current
policy direction to retain 50% open
space/ag.
P16-
16
Mila
Vujovich-
LaBarre
Chapter
8 (LUE) 8.3.3.1
Need access for
pedestrians and bikes
across Santa Rosa
This circulation alternative is part of
the LUCE but wasn’t explicit in the
land use policy direction for this site.
Recommend clarifying policy
direction:
“Redevelopment plans shall include
consideration of improving the
existing complex intersections of
Foothill/Chorro/Broad, the desirability
of modifying Boysen at and through
the property on the northeast corner
of the area, and enhancement of
pedestrian, bicycle and transit
connections across Foothill and Santa
Rosa/Highway 1 and to the campus.”
ATTACHMENT 2
PH3 - 41
4
Policy Input
Land Use Element Chapter 9
Com-
ment
#
Commenter Chapter Policy # Input Policy Response
P2-11 Sierra Club Chapter
9 (LUE) 9.3.7D
Request to expand
policy supporting grey
water systems to
include a builder
incentive program to
build new homes with
an onsite water
recycling system
included.
In 2009 the state amended the grey
water regulations to make it easier to
install a “simple” system which uses
washing machine water only and
doesn’t require a permit to install. A
full home recycling grey water system
is supposed to be designed to match
the output of the house which
includes the number of occupants and
size of the landscape and it is illegal to
store grey water. Therefore, while a
house may be plumbed to be grey
water-ready, it could not actually have
an installed system until all the
variables are known. Recommend
policy be updated to state, “Utilize
plumbing fixtures that conserve or
reuse water such as low flow faucets
or grey water systems, and encourage
new homes to be constructed to be
grey water ready.”
P5-3 DiGangi Chapter
9 (LUE)
No
specific
policies
Add electric vehicle
charging stations to
residential
developments.
Add incentives to
development that
incorporate features
that off-set
operational energy
use.
Incorporate
requirements for
buildings to be solar-
ready.
Add these as examples to draft
programs:
“Incentive Program: The City shall
consider the feasibility of providing
incentives for new and renovated
projects that incorporate sustainable
design features such as constructing
new buildings that are solar ready, or
off-setting significant operational
energy use through use of solar water
heating, photovoltaic systems,
geothermal or wind energy systems.”
“Building Code Update: The City shall
regularly review and update its
building code and ordinances to
identify revisions to promote energy
efficient building design and
construction practices, for example by
including requirements for electric
ATTACHMENT 2
PH3 - 42
5
vehicle charging stations for new
residential developments.”
P5-3 DiGangi Chapter
9 (LUE) 9.3.7 G
Add “trees” in
addition to building
elements to address
Solar Shade Act.
Public Resources Code contains
provisions that restrict height of
vegetation on properties adjoining
properties with solar collectors. Prior
notice is required and local ordinance
may modify or opt not to apply PRC
code. If Commission is interested in
including this concept, staff
recommends adding a new program in
Chapter 9 that directs the City to
explore local conditions to support the
Solar Shade Act as reflected in PRC
25980-25986.
ATTACHMENT 2
PH3 - 43
6
Circulation Element Policy Input
Policy Input
Circulation Element Chapter 1
Com-
ment
#
Commenter Chapter Policy
# Input Policy Response
P2-12 Sierra Club Chapter
1 (CE) 1.9 1A Request to expand
language in objective.
Support updated language for
objective 1.9: A.
“The City will continue to support the
use and development of compressed
natural gas and biodiesel fueling
stations, EV recharging stations, and
other alternative fuel stations in the
San Luis Obispo area.”
Policy Input
Circulation Element Chapter 2
Com-
ment
#
Commenter Chapter Policy
# Input Policy Response
A2-3 Cal Poly Chapter
2 (CE) 2.1.4 Request to expand
language.
Support updated language, “The City
shall continue to work with Cal Poly,
Cuesta College and other…..”
P2-13 Sierra Club Chapter
2 (CE) 2.1.3
Request to restore text
requiring mandatory
trip reduction.
Per SB 437 (Lewis), the language was
removed because it is inconsistent
with current State law (code 40717.9
in Health and Safety regulations).
Replacement text emphasizes
commuter benefit options instead.
Policy Input
Circulation Element Chapter 3
Com-
ment
#
Commenter Chapter Policy
# Input Policy Response
A6-
26 SLOCOG Chapter
3 (CE) 3.0.3
Request to edit
language regarding
seniors and persons
with disabilities.
Staff supports. See PH6-6 below for
language.
ATTACHMENT 2
PH3 - 44
7
P2-14 Sierra Club Chapter
3 (CE) 3.0.6
Request to restore
bullet point directing
frequency of transit
service to compare
favorably to use of
private vehicle.
If Commission wishes to retain
direction regarding transit service
frequency, staff recommends:
“The frequency of City transit service
will not pose a barrier to this mode
choice.”
PH6-
6
Mass Transit
Committee
Chapter
3 (CE)
3.0.3,
3.0.4,
3.1.4
Requests for updated
language.
Supported by staff:
3.03 The City shall continue to support
paratransit service for the elderly and
disabled persons provided seniors and
persons with disabilities by public and
private transportation providers.
3.0.4 Campus Service. The City shall
continue to work with Cal Poly to
maintain and expand the free fare
subsidy program"....
3.1.4 The City shall coordinate with
the San Luis Obispo Regional Transit
Authority (SLORTA) to evaluate the
cost effectiveness of benefits and
drawbacks of coordinated and
consolidated service.
Policy Input
Circulation Element Chapter 4
Com-
ment
#
Commenter Chapter Policy
# Input Policy Response
P15-1
and
P15-5
Santa Maria
Valley
Railroad
Chapter
4 (CE) 4.1.6
Concern that bikeways
and pedestrian paths in
railroad rights of way
are not compatible due
to security problems
and potential to block
adjacent properties’
access to be served by
rail.
No change to policy or program is
proposed.
Policy Input
Circulation Element Chapter 6
Com-
ment
#
Commenter Chapter Policy
# Input Policy Response
P2-15 Sierra Club Chapter
6 (CE) 6.0.5 Remove text that
references “fair share”
No change to policy is proposed by
staff. “Fair share” has roots in
proportional nexus in case law and
ATTACHMENT 2
PH3 - 45
8
Commission and Council should
discuss and provide direction.
Policy Input
Circulation Element Chapter 9
Com-
ment
#
Commenter Chapter Policy
# Input Policy Response
P2-16 Sierra Club Chapter
9 (CE) 9.0.1
Request to remove
reference to "fair
share" and include
language "as mitigation
for the impacts of
development".
No change to policy is proposed by
staff. “Fair share” has roots in
proportional nexus in case law and
Commission and Council should
discuss and provide direction.
P2-17 Sierra Club Chapter
9 (CE) 9.1.6
Request to add
reference to “complete
streets” model.
No change to policy is proposed by
staff. This policy addresses
appearance of streets and roads.
Addition of complete streets model,
which is addressing mode share of
right-of-way, is covered in policy 6.0.1.
Policy Input
Circulation Element Chapter 12
Com-
ment
#
Commenter Chapter Policy
# Input Policy Response
P15-7
Santa Maria
Valley
Railroad
Chapter
12 (CE) 12.1.3
Request to remove
policy regarding idling
trains.
No changes to policy are
recommended. Commenter response
to GHG emissions but rails to note the
noise concerns to surrounding
neighborhoods which is main focus of
policy.
Policy Input
Circulation Element Chapter 14
Com-
ment
#
Commenter Chapter Policy
# Input Policy Response
P2-18 Sierra Club Chapter
14 (CE) New
Request to add new
policy:
14.0.4 Unbundled
parking: The City shall
Schools are superior agencies and City
cannot set policy for them. General
intent of unbundled parking is
accomplished through downtown
ATTACHMENT 2
PH3 - 46
9
introduce unbundled
parking, congestion
pricing, shared parking,
fair price policies,
positive transportation
demand management
(TDM) and the other
components of an
Intelligent Parking
program for schools
and government
buildings with the goal
of creating a Request
for Proposal process
for full
implementation.
parking in-lieu districts and in zoning
provisions that allow for parking
modifications for projects that include
car-sharing, employer-paid transit
passes, off-peak work hours and/or
trip reduction plans.
Policy Input
Circulation Element Chapter 15
Com-
ment
#
Commenter Chapter Policy
# Input Policy Response
A6-
28 SLOCOG Chapter
15 (CE) 15.0.5
Request to remove
reference to US 101
Aesthetic study
Revise D to read, "Actively
participating in the development and
periodic updates of the Caltrans US
101 Aesthetic Study of San Luis Obispo
County.
Policy Input
Circulation Element Chapter 16
Com-
ment
#
Commenter Chapter Policy
# Input Policy Response
P15-2
Santa Maria
Valley
Railroad
Chapter
16 (CE) 16.0.2
Request to specifically
address freight mobility
as a benefit to regional
congestion.
No change to policy is proposed by
staff. Policy 16.0.2 encourages
programs that reduce dependence on
single occupant vehicles and
encourages use of alternative modes
without listing them. Rail is an
alternative mode.
ATTACHMENT 2
PH3 - 47
10
P2-20 Sierra Club Chapter
16 (CE) 16.1.2
Request to remove
reference to “fair
share”.
No change to policy is proposed by
staff. “Fair share” has roots in
proportional nexus in case law and
Commission and Council should
discuss and provide direction.
ATTACHMENT 2
PH3 - 48
Resolution No. XXXX-14 Attachment 3
Page 1
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX-14
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CERTIFYING THE FINAL PROGRAMMATIC
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) PREPARED FOR THE LAND
USE AND CIRCULATION ELEMENT (LUCE) UPDATE PROGRAM
(APPLICATION #GPI/ER 15-12)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public
hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on September
10, 2014, for the purpose of considering the Final EIR prepared for the LUCE Update Program; and
WHEREAS, said public hearing was for the purpose of formulating and forwarding a
recommendation to the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo regarding the Final EIR for the
LUCE Update Program; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by
law; and
WHEREAS, The Draft EIR was released on June 13, 2014 with a 45-day comment period that
closed on July 29, 2014 and the Final EIR was issued on September 3, 2014; and
WHEREAS, the Final EIR responded to 25 comment letters offered during the comment period
and found no new impacts or mitigation measures were identified; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the Final EIR and mitigation
monitoring program prepared for the project at a public hearing held on September 10, 2014; and
WHEREAS, at the September 10, 2014 hearing, the Planning Commission duly considered all
evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and
recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990
Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California on September 16, 2014 to review and consider the Final EIR
and mitigation monitoring program prepared for the project and to consider all evidence, including the
testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff and by the
Planning Commission, presented at said hearing; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by
law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Council makes the following findings
in addition to the CEQA findings detailed in Exhibit A:
Findings
1. The Final EIR was prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) and was considered by the City prior to any approvals of the project.
PH3 - 49
Resolution No. XXXX-14 Attachment 3
Page 2
2. The Final EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City.
3. For each potentially significant effect identified in the EIR under the categories of Agricultural
Resources, Cultural Resources and Public Services, the approved mitigation measures contained
in the EIR will avoid or substantially lessen the identified adverse environmental impacts of the
project to a level of insignificance and have been incorporated into the project.
4. The significant effects identified in the Air Quality, Traffic and Circulation, and Noise sections of
the EIR will not be fully mitigated to a degree of insignificance with the incorporation of all the
identified mitigation measures included in the EIR. However, the City Council finds that the
adverse environmental effects are acceptable and makes a statement of overriding considerations
for those significant and unavoidable environmental impacts because:
a. Mitigation strategies identified in the Final EIR and policies and programs contained in
the LUCE update that require compact transit-oriented infill development and improved
multi-modal circulation will help to reduce emissions to the extent feasible.
b. The project will result in increased housing capacity to link housing to employment
opportunities, resulting in reduced commuter trips and therefore reduced vehicle miles
traveled. This will help to reduce emissions in the long term.
c. The LUCE Update includes policies and programs that will improve internal circulation
within the City, such as north-south streets connecting Buckley and Tank Farm Roads,
the connection of Buckley Road to South Higuera Street and the Prado Road east to west
connection over US 101. This will also reduce vehicle miles traveled and will have air
quality benefits in the long term.
d. Policies and programs contained in the LUCE promote transit-oriented development,
bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, complete streets other incentives that will reduce
the City’s reliance on the automobile. The will also have long-term air quality benefits.
SECTION 2. Action. The City Council does hereby certify the Final EIR for the project with
findings and mitigation measures as described in attached Exhibit A.
Upon motion by Councilmember , seconded by Councilmember , and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
REFRAIN:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this ____________ day of ____________ , 2014.
___________________________
ANTHONY MEJIA, MMC
City Clerk
PH3 - 50
City of San Luis Obispo CEQA FINDINGS Exhibit A
2014 LUCE Update
Page 1
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
FINDINGS OF MITIGATION AND
ADOPTION OF MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE
LUCE UPDATE PROJECT
I. Environmental Determination
The City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo considers and relies on the Final Programmatic
Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse Number 2013121019) for the Land Use and
Circulation Element (LUCE) Update in determining to carry out the proposed amendments to the General
Plan. The Final EIR consists of the Draft EIR; responses to comments on the Draft EIR; a list of persons
and agencies commenting on the Draft EIR; a Mitigation Monitoring Program; and technical appendices.
The City Council has received, reviewed, considered, and relied on the information contained in the Final
EIR, as well as information provided at hearings and submissions of testimony from official participating
agencies, the public and other agencies and organizations.
Having received, reviewed and considered the foregoing information, as well as any and all information
in the record, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo hereby makes these Findings pursuant to,
and in accordance with, Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code, as follows:
II. Summary Project Description
The LUCE Update Project (the “Project” or “proposed Update Project”) provides proposed changes to the
City’s existing Land Use Element and Circulation Elements of the General Plan (last updated in 1994). It
is the intent of the proposed Project to establish and implement a refined set of goals, policies, and
programs for regulating development in the city, guiding the land use decision‐making process, balance
population growth with infrastructure availability, and provide a true multimodal transportation system
that will guide the community over the next 20 years.
The LUCE Update reflects extensive efforts and input from community surveys, workshops and open
houses, advisory bodies, the Task Force for the Land Use and Circulation Element Update (TF‐LUCE),
City staff, consultants, the Planning Commission, and City Council. Based on direction from the City
Council that the Update Project primarily address infill opportunities, changes in legislation, and the need
to update existing policy direction to reflect current values and requirements, the LUCE Update focuses
on updated policy language and several areas of the City where “physical” land use changes are proposed.
The proposed physical land use changes would apply only to specified areas that over the next 20 years
may have the potential to accommodate changes in the land use type or intensity or are in need of
circulation and infrastructure improvements. From a policy aspect, the LUCE Update proposes changes to
existing policy and program language, and new policies and programs where needed to enhance the two
Elements or cover items not previously addressed. The policies and programs included in the LUCE
Update are intended to:
• Address notable policy gaps that have been identified over time in the existing LUCE;
• Provide new policy direction to address issues raised during the proposed Project’s public
participation process;
• Respond to changes in state law;
PH3 - 51
City of San Luis Obispo CEQA FINDINGS Exhibit A
2014 LUCE Update
Page 2
• Address topics or items that the City committed to addressing as part of the Sustainable
Communities grant that provided funding for the Update Project; and
• Address inconsistencies between the proposed project and the Airport Land Use Plan for San Luis
Obispo County Regional Airport.
The Land Use Element Update proposes to “preserve and enhance” existing conditions in most areas of
the city. The physical changes proposed by the Land Use Element Update are for the most part limited to
changes in land use type or intensity in specific areas. These changes include proposed mixed use
redevelopment of some sites, the infill of underutilized locations, and four sites that will require modified
or new specific plans to addresses development parameters such as the location and types of land uses,
infrastructure needs, and designs to address environmental constraints. These four sites include: Potential
modification of the Margarita Area Specific Plan to allow increased residential densities; and new specific
plans for the San Luis Ranch (formerly known as the Dalidio site), the Madonna property at Los Osos
Valley Road (LOVR), and the Avila Ranch. Policy direction was also refined relative to a set of “Special
Planning Areas” (Section 8.3.3 in the proposed Land Use Element Update) throughout the City. This
policy guidance provides statements regarding the City’s expectations for these sites of new development,
redevelopment, and infill opportunities.
The policy and program updates proposed in the Airport Chapter of the Land Use Element reflect airport
safety, noise, height and overflight considerations consistent with the purposes of the State Aeronautics
Act. Policies, programs, and Zoning Code implementation have been drafted to create an Airport Overlay
Zone to codify airport compatibility criteria for areas subject to airport influence consistent with the
requirements of Cal. Pub. Utilities Code Section 21670, et. seq, the California Airport Land Use Planning
Handbook, and other related federal and state requirements relating to airport land use compatibility
planning. These include allowable uses and development standards such as density and intensity
limitations, identification of prohibited uses, infill development, height limitations, and other hazards to
flight, noise insulation, buyer awareness measures, airspace protection, nonconforming uses and
reconstruction, and the process for airport compatibility criteria reviews by the City.
The Circulation Element Update describes how the City plans to provide for the transportation of people
and materials within San Luis Obispo with connections to other areas in San Luis Obispo County and
beyond. The Circulation Element Update recognizes the implications of land use policy on all modes of
movement, and establishes policies, standards, and implementation measures that work with the Land Use
Element to address both existing and potential circulation opportunities and deficiencies. But beyond
addressing changes in land use, the Circulation Element Update also looks at the circulation system of the
community as a whole. Introducing the concept of “complete streets”, the update looks to integrate and
enhance all types of circulation in order to create a more comprehensive and functional circulation
system.
The proposed Circulation Element provides policy language to address a variety of circulation‐related
issues, including: traffic reduction; transit; encouraging the use of bicycles and walking; traffic
management; future street network changes; truck, air and rail transportation; parking management in
commercial areas and residential neighborhoods; and scenic roadways. A new section added to the
Circulation Element addresses multi‐modal transportation, or the development and maintenance of a
circulation system that balances the needs of all modes of travel.
As part of the LUCE Update, a comprehensive list of circulation improvements to be considered (called
the “project description”) was reviewed and approved for further analysis by the City Council. This list
also included variations of those improvements. Appendix N of the EIR provides the sensitivity analysis
PH3 - 52
City of San Luis Obispo CEQA FINDINGS Exhibit A
2014 LUCE Update
Page 3
performed on those individual variations. The results of this sensitivity analysis were then used by the
City to determine which variations would be included as part of the Proposed Project presented in the
EIR. From this analysis, the City identified 17 circulation improvements to include in the Proposed
Project.
III. The Record
The California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15091 (b) requires that the City's findings be
supported by substantial evidence in the record. Accordingly, the Lead Agency's record consists of the
following, which are located at the City Community Development Department office, San Luis Obispo,
California:
• Documentary and oral evidence, testimony, and staff comments and responses received and
reviewed by the Lead Agency during informational workshops, public review, and the public
hearings on the project.
• The LUCE Update Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report, Volumes I, II, III, IV
and V.
IV. The September 2014 Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report for the
LUCE Update
The City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo makes the following findings with respect to the
September 2014 Final Environmental Impact Report for the LUCE Update program SCH #201312019:
A. The City has considered the information contained in the September 2014 Final Programmatic EIR
for the LUCE Update, the public comments and responses previously submitted, and the public
comments and information presented at the public hearings.
B. The City Council hereby finds and determines that implementation of the LUCE Update may have a
significant adverse effect on the environment.
C. The City Council hereby finds with respect to the adverse environmental impacts detailed in the Final
EIR:
1. That, based on information set forth in the Final EIR and the policies and programs contained
within the LUCE Update, the City Council finds and determines that changes or alterations
have been required in or incorporated into the project which avoid or substantially lessen the
adverse environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
2. That, based on information set forth in the Final EIR and in the Findings of Fact, the adverse
environmental effects related to long-term operational air quality and transportation and
circulation impacts, and temporary noise impacts associated with construction activity, are
significant effects which cannot be entirely mitigated or avoided if the project is approved
and implemented;
3. That no additional adverse impacts will have a significant effect or result in substantial or
potentially substantial adverse changes in the environment as a result of the LUCE Update
program.
PH3 - 53
City of San Luis Obispo CEQA FINDINGS Exhibit A
2014 LUCE Update
Page 4
D. The City Council hereby finds and determines that:
1. All significant effects (except operational related air quality and cumulative transportation
impacts and temporary noise impacts associated with construction activities) that can be
feasibly avoided have been eliminated or substantially lessened;
2. The LUCE policies and programs incorporate adequate measures to preclude significant
effects in the following categories: aesthetics; agricultural resources; biological resources;
cultural resources; geological resources; global climate change; hazards; hydrology and water
quality; land use; noise; population and housing; public services; recreation; and utilities and
services.
3. Based on the Final EIR, the Findings, and other documents in the record, specific
environmental, economic, social and other considerations make infeasible other project
alternatives identified in the Final EIR;
4. Based on the Final EIR, the Findings, and other documents in the record, the remaining
unavoidable significant environmental effects of the LUCE program are outweighed and
overridden by the benefits of the project as described in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
5. Should the LUCE program have the potential to result in adverse environmental impacts that
are not anticipated or addressed by the September 2014 Final EIR, subsequent environmental
review shall be required in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a).
V. Statement of Overriding Considerations
Prior to approving a project or program for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was certified
and for which findings were made that one or more significant impacts would result because mitigation
measures or alternatives identified in the EIR are infeasible, CEQA requires that the Lead Agency find
that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project or program
outweigh the significant effects on the environment. This must be a written finding stating the agency’s
specific reasons supporting its action based on the Final EIR and/or other information in the record. The
requirements for a Statement of Overriding Considerations are established in Section 15093 of the State
CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.) and in the CEQA statute in Section 21081 of the Public
Resources Code.
The Program EIR for the LUCE Update identifies the following significant and unavoidable impacts of
the program:
1. Implementation of the LUCE Update would involve operation of development projects that
generate long-term emissions of criteria air pollutants and ozone precursors. Implementation
of the LUCE Update would not result in the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial
sources of local carbon monoxide concentrations, odors, or TACs. However, with regards to
criteria air pollutants and precursors implementation of the LUCE Update would not be
consistent with the assumptions contained in the most recent version of the APCD’s Clean
Air Plan even with the incorporation of the proposed LUCE Update policies and existing City
policies.
PH3 - 54
City of San Luis Obispo CEQA FINDINGS Exhibit A
2014 LUCE Update
Page 5
2. Implementation of development projects under the proposed LUCE Update would involve
construction that could generate noise levels that exceed applicable standards for mobile
construction equipment in the City’s Noise Control Ordinance and result in temporary
substantial increases in noise levels primarily from the use of heavy-duty construction
equipment.
3. Development and street network changes under the LUCE Update will cause roadways
currently operating at LOS D or better to deteriorate to LOS E or F, in downtown San Luis
Obispo, roadways operating at LOS E or better will deteriorate to LOS F, or will add
additional traffic to roadways operating at LOS E (outside of downtown) or F (in downtown).
4. Development and street network changes under the LUCE Update will cause intersections
currently operating at LOS D or better to deteriorate to LOS E or F, in downtown San Luis
Obispo, intersections operating at LOS E or better will deteriorate to LOS F, or will add
additional traffic to intersections operating at LOS E (outside of downtown) or F (in
downtown).
5. Development under the LUCE Update will increase traffic on freeway facilities.
For projects or programs which would result in significant environmental impacts that cannot be avoided,
CEQA requires that the Lead Agency balance the benefits of these projects against the unavoidable
environmental risks in determining whether to approve the projects. If the benefits of these
projects/programs outweigh the unavoidable impacts, those impacts may be considered acceptable
(CEQA Guidelines Section 15093[a]). CEQA requires that, before adopting such projects or programs,
the Lead Agency adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations setting forth the reasons why the
agency finds that the benefits of the project outweigh the significant environmental effects caused by the
project. This statement is provided below.
Required Findings
The City has incorporated all feasible mitigation measures into the project. Although these measures will
significantly lessen the unavoidable impacts listed above, the measures will not fully avoid these impacts.
The City has also examined a reasonable range of alternatives to the project and has incorporated portions
of these alternatives into the project in order to reduce impacts. The City has determined that none of
these alternatives, taken as a whole, is both environmentally superior and more feasible than the project.
Alternative 1 (No Project): The No Project Alternative compares the environmental impacts of the
proposed LUCE Update to the impacts that would result if the project were not approved and future
development in the city occurred in accordance with the land use and policy requirements of the existing
1994 Land Use and Circulation Elements. Buildout of the existing Land Use Element would result in
fewer dwelling units when compared to the proposed LUCE Update, however, buildout of the existing
Land Use Element would result in an increase of non-residential uses when compared to the proposed
Land Use Element. Under the No Project Alternative, several new street network changes and circulation
system modifications identified by the Circulation Element Update would not be implemented. In
addition, policies and programs intended to reduce vehicle trips; and to enhance transit, bicycle, and
pedestrian circulation would also not be implemented. As such, impacts would be generally greater with
implementation of the No Project Alternative.
PH3 - 55
City of San Luis Obispo CEQA FINDINGS Exhibit A
2014 LUCE Update
Page 6
Alternative 2 (Reduced Development Alternative): This alternative evaluates environmental conditions
that would result if the residential and non-residential development capacity of the proposed Land Use
Element Update were to be reduced. This alternative would only reduce development identified by the
Land Use Update related to the proposed specific and area plans, and special planning areas. The
Reduced Development Alternative would not reduce planned development associated with existing
specific plans, planned and approved projects, or other vacant land in the city. The Reduced
Development Alternative would generally have reduced or similar environmental impacts when compared
to the impacts of the proposed Project. The Reduced Development Alternative, however, would not
implement the environmental objectives of the proposed Land Use Element Update and has the potential
to leave the city unable to meet capacity for future regional housing needs allocations. A reduction in
development in the proposed specific plan areas would be inconsistent with the objective to protect the
environment within a compact urban form because developing the specific plan areas at densities that are
substantially less than their capacity could promote additional development in other areas, such as
unincorporated areas adjacent to the city.
Alternative 3 (Maximum Circulation Improvements Alternative): This alternative would provide three
street system modifications not included in the proposed Land Use and Circulation Element Update
proposed project. This alternative would generally result in environmental impacts that are similar to the
proposed Project, but would have slightly reduced air quality, greenhouse gas emission, and traffic
impacts. Considering the slight reduction in vehicle miles traveled and the associated slight reduction in
air emissions (a Class 1 impact) this alternative was determined to be the environmentally superior
alternative. This alternative would also have the potential to result in increased cultural resource,
biological resource and noise impacts along portions of the alternative roadway system projects; however,
it is likely that those impacts could be reduced to a less than significant level with the implementation of
appropriate design and other mitigation measures. The Maximum Circulation Improvements Alternative
would result in area-wide environmental benefits associated with reductions in air emissions and
improved traffic conditions, and would not impede the implementation of proposed Land Use and
Circulation Element Update objectives. Therefore, the Maximum Circulation Improvements Alternative
would be the environmentally superior alternative to the proposed project that fulfills the basic objectives
of the proposed LUCE Update.
In preparing this Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has balanced the benefits of the
proposed LUCE Update against its unavoidable environmental risks. For the reasons specified below, the
City finds that the following considerations outweigh the proposed project's unavoidable environmental
risks:
1. Provision of new Residential and Commercial Uses. The implementation of the LUCE Update
will include new residential development to meet the City's housing needs and that designates
sufficient land for neighborhood serving commercial uses to reduce vehicle trips and provide for
the convenience of area residents.
2. Open Space and Natural Resource Protection: Implementation of the proposed LUCE
Update would result in the continued preservation of open space within the City's planning area
and outside the urban reserve line. Policies in the LUCE Update direct protection of undeveloped
land, prime agricultural land, productive agricultural land, and potentially productive agricultural
land. Scenic lands, sensitive wildlife habitat, and undeveloped prime agricultural land will be
permanently protected as open space.
PH3 - 56
City of San Luis Obispo CEQA FINDINGS Exhibit A
2014 LUCE Update
Page 7
3. Provision of Park and Recreational Facilities. Buildout of the proposed LUCE Update would
result in an incremental increase in total per capita parkland in the city when compared to existing
conditions.
4. Well-Planned Neighborhood Would Reduce Vehicle Trips: The LUCE Update would result
in new residential development opportunities intended to meet the City's housing needs and
designates sufficient land for neighborhood serving commercial uses to reduce vehicle trips and
provide for the convenience of city residents. The proposed Circulation Element provides policy
language to address a variety of circulation-related issues, including: traffic reduction; transit;
encouraging the use of bicycles and walking; traffic management; future street network changes;
truck, air and rail transportation; parking management in commercial areas and residential
neighborhoods; and scenic roadways. A new section added to the Circulation Element addresses
multi-modal transportation, supporting the development and maintenance of a circulation system
that balances the needs of all modes of travel.
5. Provision of New Jobs: The project would create new construction-related and permanent jobs
in the city. Increases in planned commercial development would provide new jobs that are
needed to support a household within the city.
6. Implementation of the General Plan: The LUCE Update contains policies and standards that
will facilitate appropriate development of land, protection of open space, improved citywide
circulation, and provision of adequate public facilities.
Accordingly, the City finds that the project's adverse, unavoidable environmental impacts are outweighed
by these considerable benefits.
IMPACT ANALYSIS: Four categories of impacts are identified:
Class I. Class I impacts are significant and unavoidable. To approve a project resulting in Class
I impacts, the CEQA Guidelines require decision makers to make findings of overriding
consideration that "... specific legal, technological, economic, social, or other considerations
make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR..."
Class II. Class II impacts are significant but can be mitigated to a level of insignificance by
measures identified in this EIR and the project description. When approving a project with Class
IT impacts, the decision-makers must make findings that changes or alternatives to the project
have been incorporated that reduce the impacts to a less than significant level.
Class III. Class III impacts are adverse but not significant.
Class IV. Beneficial impacts.
VI. Potential Environmental Effects Which Are Not Significant or Beneficial
The City Council has concluded that the following effects are not considered significant.
PH3 - 57
City of San Luis Obispo CEQA FINDINGS Exhibit A
2014 LUCE Update
Page 8
Impact AES‐1
Development under the LUCE Update would introduce new development along viewing corridors and
scenic roadways, including state scenic highways, in the San Luis Obispo area. This could have a
substantial adverse effect on scenic resources or an identified visual resource or scenic vista from a public
viewing area. With the incorporation of the proposed LUCE Update policies and existing City policies,
potential impacts to such views are considered Class III, less than significant.
Impact AES‐2
The LUCE Update emphasizes both reuse of existing urbanized lands, infill development on vacant
parcels, and new development on vacant parcels near urban areas. The development of such areas could
degrade the existing visual character and its surroundings. With the incorporation of the proposed LUCE
Update and existing City policies and programs, potential impacts related to existing visual character
changes are considered Class III, less than significant.
Impact AES‐3
Proposed development in accordance with the LUCE Update would introduce new sources of light and
glare. However, adherence to policies included in the Zoning Ordinance and Community Design
Guidelines would reduce potential impacts to a Class III, less than significant, level.
Impact AG‐1
The LUCE Update could alter the existing land use and zoning on sites throughout the city and may result
in incompatibilities with adjacent urban and agricultural uses. However, the General Plan reduces land
use conflicts through policies and plan review. Therefore, impacts that would occur from development
would be Class III, less than significant.
Impact BIO‐1
Development under the LUCE Update has potential to impact common habitat types including non‐native
annual grasslands and disturbed/ruderal areas that provide habitat for common wildlife and plant species.
With the incorporation of the proposed LUCE Update policies and existing governing policies, potential
impacts to these common habitats are considered Class III, less than significant.
Impact BIO‐2
Development consistent with the LUCE Update has potential to impact four Natural Communities of
Special Concern present within the LUCE SOI Planning Subarea including Serpentine Bunchgrass,
Northern Interior Cypress Stand, Central Maritime Chaparral, and Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh.
With the incorporation of the proposed and existing City policies, and the requirements of regulatory and
oversight agencies, potential impacts to sensitive habitats are considered Class III, less than significant.
Impact BIO‐3
Development consistent with the LUCE Update has the potential to impact special‐status plant species
within the LUCE SOI Planning Subarea. With the incorporation of the proposed and existing City
policies, and the requirements of regulatory and oversight agencies, potential impacts to special‐status
plant species are considered Class III, less than significant.
Impact BIO‐4
Development consistent with the LUCE Update has potential to impact special‐status wildlife species
within the LUCE SOI Planning Subarea. With the incorporation of the proposed and existing City
PH3 - 58
City of San Luis Obispo CEQA FINDINGS Exhibit A
2014 LUCE Update
Page 9
policies, and the requirements of regulatory and oversight agencies, potential impacts to special‐status
wildlife species are considered Class III, less than significant.
Impact BIO‐5
Development consistent with the LUCE Update has potential to impact common wildlife species and
species of local concern within the LUCE SOI Planning Subarea. With the incorporation of the proposed
and existing City policies, and the requirements of regulatory and oversight agencies, potential impacts to
common and species of local concern are considered Class III, less than significant.
Impact CR‐2
Development facilitated by Land Use and Circulation Element Update could adversely affect identified
and previously unidentified archaeological and paleontological resources. This includes potential
disturbance of human remains. General Plan policies would ensure that such impacts are addressed on a
caseby‐case basis. Impacts would be considered Class III, less than significant.
Impact GEO‐1
New development under the LUCE Update could be susceptible to impacts from future seismic events,
creating the potential for structural damage or health and safety risks. However, compliance with required
building codes and implementation of General Plan polices would result in a Class III, less than
significant impact.
Impact GEO‐2
Future seismic events could result in liquefaction of soils near San Luis Obispo Creek, Prefumo Creek
and other low‐lying areas. Development in these areas could be subject to liquefaction hazards. The
compliance of future development projects with the California Building Code (CBC) and General Plan
policies would result in Class III, less than significant impacts.
Impact GEO‐3
Development facilitated by the LUCE Update could occur on soils that have the potential to present
natural hazards (expansive soils, erosive soils, and differential settlement) to structures and roadways.
Development could also result in the loss of a unique geologic feature. However, compliance of future
development projects with the California Building Code and adopted General Plan policies would ensure
that resulting impacts are Class III, less than significant.
Impact GEO‐4
Steep slopes outside of the existing city limits present potential on‐ or off‐site landslide hazards. In
addition to human safety impacts, a landslide has the potential to damage or destroy structures, roadways
and other improvements as well as to deflect and block drainage channels, causing further damage and
erosion, including loss of topsoil. The compliance of future development projects with the California
Building Code (CBC) and
General Plan policies would result in Class III, less than significant impacts.
Impact GCC‐1
Implementation of the proposed LUCE Update could result in an increase in GHG emissions due to short‐
term construction and long‐term operational activities associated with new housing and commercial
development, resulting in a cumulatively considerable contribution to the impact of global climate
change. However, because the proposed LUCE Update would be consistent with the City’s CAP and
incorporates applicable CAP policies and programs that would reduce GHG emissions, this impact would
be considered Class III, less than significant.
PH3 - 59
City of San Luis Obispo CEQA FINDINGS Exhibit A
2014 LUCE Update
Page 10
Impact HAZ‐1
Development facilitated by the LUCE Update could occur near known hazardous material users or result
in construction in areas with existing hazardous materials. Implementation of the LUCE Update could
expose individuals to health risks due to soil/groundwater contamination or emission of hazardous
materials into the air and could impact an adopted emergency response/evacuation plan. With the
incorporation of the proposed LUCE Update policies and existing City policies, potential impacts are
considered Class III, less than significant.
Impact HAZ‐2
Development consistent with the proposed LUCE Update could introduce incompatible residential and
commercial land uses into safety zones established through the Airport Land Use Plan and may result in a
safety hazard for people residing or working in these areas. Impacts would be Class III, less than
significant.
Impact HAZ‐3
Development consistent with the proposed LUCE Update would introduce residential land uses into areas
designated as having a Moderate or High Wildland Fire Hazard, introducing the potential to expose
people or structures to a significant risk of loss and/or injury. However, compliance with existing policies
and state and
local regulations would reduce impacts to a Class III, less than significant level.
Impact HAZ‐4
Development facilitated by the LUCE Update could introduce sensitive receptors to additional hazards
related to exposure to radiation, electromagnetic fields and hazardous trees. With the incorporation of the
proposed LUCE Update policies and existing City policies, potential impacts are considered Class III,
less than significant.
Impact HAZ‐5
Development under the proposed LUCE Update could potentially introduce sensitive receptors to areas in
direct proximity to hazardous materials transportation corridors including the Union Pacific Railroad and
Highway 101 and could potentially create a public safety hazard. This is a Class III, less than significant
impact.
Impact HWQ‐1
New development under the LUCE Update within the 100‐year flood plain could be subject to flooding
and have the potential to impede or redirect flood flows. However, with implementation of General Plan
policies and adherence to the City’s Floodplain Management Regulation impacts related to flooding
would be Class III, less than significant.
Impact HWQ‐2
Development facilitated by the LUCE Update has the potential to increase the amount of impervious
surfaces within the city. This could result in a decrease in percolation to the Groundwater Basin, the
alteration of drainage patterns and increases in the volume of surface runoff. Compliance with the City’s
Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) would reduce impacts to a Class III, less than significant level.
Impact HWQ‐3
Point and non‐point sources of contamination could affect water quality in San Luis Obispo Creek,
Prefumo Creek as well as other surface waters and groundwater in the city. However, compliance with
PH3 - 60
City of San Luis Obispo CEQA FINDINGS Exhibit A
2014 LUCE Update
Page 11
existing regulations and implementation of General Plan policies and the City’s Stormwater Management
Plan (SWMP) would result in Class III, less than significant impacts.
Impact HWQ‐4
Development facilitated by the LUCE Update has the potential to create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems, resulting in increased
stormwater runoff and has the potential to result in the need for additional stormwater infrastructure.
Compliance with the City’s Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP), and State regulatory requirements,
would reduce impacts to a Class III, less than significant.
Impact LU-1
Aspects of the LUCE update would conflict with the airport land use plan. However, implementation of
LUCE policies and programs would ensure that land use conflicts are less than significant.
Impact LU‐2
The proposed LUCE Update would have the potential to result in land use conflicts between existing and
proposed land uses. With the implementation of proposed LUCE Update policies, potential land use
conflict impacts are considered Class III, less than significant.
Impact LU‐3
The proposed Land Use Element Update would result in conflicts with applicable habitat conservation
plans or natural community conservation plans. With the implementation of proposed LUCE Update
policies, potential plan and policy conflict impacts are considered Class III, less than significant.
Impact LU‐3
The proposed Circulation Element Update identifies future roadway improvements that would have the
potential to result in a significant impact if the improvements would physically divide an established
community. This impact is considered Class III, less than significant.
Impact N‐2
Long‐Term Roadway and Railroad Traffic Noise Levels Implementation of the proposed LUCE Update
would increase traffic volumes and associated noise levels along major transportation routes. In some
instances, traffic‐related noise increases could be more than 3 dB, the level typically audible to the human
ear and; therefore, considered a substantial increase in noise.
New development associated with the proposed LUCE Update could also result in the siting of new
sensitive receptors in close proximity to transportation noise sources such as the railroad, with potential to
exceed the land use compatibility and transportation noise exposure standards in the existing Noise
Element. However, because the City’s Noise Element contains policies and programs that would address
and mitigate potential site‐specific impacts for individual projects in the future, this impact would be
considered Class III, less than significant.
Impact N‐3
Exposure of Noise Sensitive Receptors to Stationary Sources. Implementation of the proposed LUCE
Update could increase stationary source noise levels from new development. New development
associated with the proposed LUCE Update could also result in the siting of new sensitive receptors in
close proximity to these source types, with potential to exceed the land use compatibility and stationary
noise exposure standards in the existing Noise Element. However, because the City’s Noise Element
PH3 - 61
City of San Luis Obispo CEQA FINDINGS Exhibit A
2014 LUCE Update
Page 12
contains policies and programs that would address and mitigate potential site‐specific impacts for
individual projects in the future, this impact would be considered Class III, less than significant.
Impact N‐4
Airport Noise Exposure. Implementation of the proposed LUCE Update would result in the designation of
noise‐sensitive land uses located within or near the 55 dBA and 60 dBA noise contours of the San Luis
Obispo County Regional Airport Land Use Plan. This could result in exposure of people to excessive
noise levels. However, with the incorporation of the proposed LUCE Update policies that address airport
noise compatibility and consistency with the adopted ALUP, this impact would be considered Class III,
less than significant.
Impact N‐5
Exposure to Excessive Vibration Levels. Implementation of the proposed LUCE Update could increase
exposure to vibration levels. However, because the City’s ordinance contains and that these sources
(existing and proposed) would be anticipated to be minor, this impact would be considered Class III, less
than significant.
Impact PH‐1
The LUCE Update would not result in residential unit development or associated population growth that
exceeds an adopted average annual growth rate threshold. Potential population and housing impacts are
considered Class III, less than significant.
Impact PH‐2
The LUCE Update would not result in a substantial displacement of residents or existing housing units.
This impact is considered Class III, less than significant.
Impact PS‐2
Buildout of the proposed Land Use Element Update would increase the demand for police protection
services by increasing population and development in the city. This is a Class III, less than significant
impact.
Impact PS‐3
Buildout of the proposed Land Use Element Update would increase enrollment in public schools by
increasing the population of the city. This is a Class III, less than significant impact.
VII. Potential Significant Effects Which Have Been Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
The City Council has concluded that the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring
Program (Section XI.) will result in substantial mitigation of the following effects and that these effects
are not considered significant or they have been mitigated to a level of insignificance.
Impact AG‐2
Future development in accordance with the LUCE Update could occur on prime farmland, unique
farmland, and/or farmland of statewide importance. Buildout within the City Limits would result in Class
II, significant but mitigable impacts to agricultural conversion.
Impact AQ‐1 (Short‐Term)
Implementation of the LUCE construction of development projects that generate short‐term emissions of
criteria air pollutants and ozone precursors. Emissions from individual construction projects could exceed
PH3 - 62
City of San Luis Obispo CEQA FINDINGS Exhibit A
2014 LUCE Update
Page 13
APCD’s project‐level significance thresholds. Thus, implementation of the LUCE Update could result in
construction‐generated emissions that violate or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation, contribute a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria air pollutants for which
the region is designated as nonattainment, and/or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations. Adherence to relevant policies and implementation of APCD recommended project‐
specific mitigation measures would reduce potential short‐term impacts to a less‐than‐significant level.
Thus, construction generated air quality impacts are considered Class II, significant but mitigable.
Impact CR‐1
Development allowed by the LUCE update could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
a historical resource which is either listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic
Places, the California Register of Historic Resources, or a local register of historic resources. This impact
is considered to be Class II, significant but mitigable.
Impact PS‐1
Buildout of the proposed Land Use Element would increase the demand for fire protection services by
increasing population and the number of structures in the city. This is a Class II, potentially significant
but mitigable impact.
VIII. Potential Significant Unavoidable Effects for Which Sufficient Mitigation is not Feasible
Impact AQ‐2 (Long‐Term)
Implementation of the LUCE Update would involve operation of development projects that generate
long‐term emissions of criteria air pollutants and ozone precursors. Implementation of the LUCE Update
would not result in the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial sources of local carbon monoxide
concentrations, odors, or TACs. However, with regards to criteria air pollutants and precursors
implementation of the LUCE Update would not be consistent with the assumptions contained in the most
recent version of the APCD’s Clean Air Plan even with the incorporation of the proposed LUCE Update
policies and existing City policies. Thus, long‐term air quality impacts are considered Class I, significant
and unavoidable.
Impact N‐1
Short‐Term Construction Noise Levels. Implementation of development projects under the proposed
LUCE Update would involve construction that could generate noise levels that exceed applicable
standards for mobile construction equipment in the City’s Noise Control Ordinance and result in
temporary substantial increases in noise levels primarily from the use of heavy‐duty construction
equipment (see thresholds a and c). Even with the incorporation of the proposed LUCE Update policies
and existing City policies, short‐term construction noise levels are considered Class I, significant and
unavoidable.
Impact CIR‐1
Development and street network changes under the LUCE Update will cause roadways currently
operating at LOS D or better to deteriorate to LOS E or F, in downtown San Luis Obispo, roadways
operating at LOS E or better will deteriorate to LOS F, or will add additional traffic to roadways
operating at LOS E (outside of downtown) or F (in downtown). This is considered a Class I, significant
and unavoidable impact.
Impact CIR‐2
PH3 - 63
City of San Luis Obispo CEQA FINDINGS Exhibit A
2014 LUCE Update
Page 14
Development and street network changes under the LUCE Update will cause intersections currently
operating at LOS D or better to deteriorate to LOS E or F, in downtown San Luis Obispo, intersections
operating at LOS E or better will deteriorate to LOS F, or will add additional traffic to intersections
operating at LOS E (outside of downtown) or F (in downtown). Impact is considered to be Class I,
significant and unavoidable.
Impact CIR‐3
Development under the LUCE Update will increase traffic on freeway facilities. Impact is considered to
be Class I, significant and unavoidable.
IX. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code requires that when a public agency is making findings
required by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(l), codified as Section 21081(a) of the Public
Resources Code, the public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the
proposed project which it has adopted or made a condition of approval, in order to mitigate or avoid
significant effects on the environment.
The City Council hereby finds and accepts that the Draft Mitigation Monitoring Program for the LUCE
Update attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference meets the requirements of Section 21081.6
of the Public Resources Code by providing for the implementation and monitoring of mitigation measures
intended to mitigate potential environmental effects.
PH3 - 64
ATTACHMENT 4
RESOLUTION NO. (2014 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING NEW POLICY LANGUAGE IN THE DRAFT LAND USE ELEMENT
RELATED TO THE GENERAL HOSPITAL AREA
(GPI 15-12)
WHEREAS, the City received a Strategic Growth Council grant in the amount of
$880,000 to update the City’s Land Use and Circulation Elements; and
WHEREAS, public participation has been a long tradition in land use issues in the City
of San Luis Obispo and public involvement is essential in updating the 1994 Land Use and
Circulation Elements; and
WHEREAS, to date input has been received through two different on-line tools, six
community workshops, one workshop at Cal Poly, 34 Task Force meetings, eight advisory body
meetings, ten Planning Commission hearings, two traveling open houses in six locations, and a
community survey returned by over 2,000 respondents; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed and recommended a new policy to
guide future development for the General Hospital area and has incorporated said direction in a
paragraph in Chapter 8, Special Focus Areas, of the Land Use Element based upon input from
the community and the Task Force; and
WHEREAS, the Final Environmental Impact Report has been certified; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony
of interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by the TF-LUCE, Planning
Commission, and staff presented at said hearing; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo that provisions in Chapters 1 and 8 of the Draft Land Use Element that apply to the
General Hospital area presented at the hearing on September 16, 2014 as amended by Council
shall be approved as part of the Land Use and Circulation Elements Update.
Section 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the following
findings:
1. Adjustments to the Land Use Element recognize existing public uses on the property and
accommodate a mix of residential densities and residential types in the area behind (east
of) General Hospital, while matching land use designations for land adjacent to adjoining
residential neighborhoods.
2. The proposed policies support obtaining open space dedication for property outside of the
Urban Reserve Line as part of any development project proposed on County-owned land.
PH3 - 65
Council Resolution No. XXXX (2014 Series) ATTACHMENT 4
Page 2
Section 2. Action. The City Council hereby amends the policies related to the General
Hospital area shown in Attachment A in the Draft Land Use Element as modified by City
Council, an official copy of which shall be maintained in the Office of the City Clerk referencing
this Resolution.
Upon motion of , seconded by , and on the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
RECUSED: Council member Ashbaugh
The foregoing Resolution was adopted this _______________________, 2014.
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
____________________________
Anthony J. Mejia, CMC
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_/s/ J.Christine Dietrick_____________________
Christine Dietrick, City Attorney
PH3 - 66
Council Resolution No. XXXX (2014 Series) ATTACHMENT 4
Page 3
ATTACHMENT A
8.3.3 Special Planning Areas
General Hospital Site
The General Hospital site includes County-owned property including the old hospital building
(which is planned to remain as an office/treatment facility) and lands behind the facility. Lands
behind the hospital building that are inside the City’s Urban Reserve line will be designated as
Public (for existing public facility) and a range of residential uses (Low Density and Medium
Density Residential) and will include the ability to support residential care, transitional care use,
and other residential uses consistent with the adjacent areas.
The remaining site outside the City’s Urban Reserve line will remain as Open Space. The City
shall seek to secure permanent protection of the open space outside of the urban reserve line as
part of any development proposal.
The undeveloped portion of this site on the southwest side of Johnson Avenue will remain
designated for Public uses.
PH3 - 67
ATTACHMENT 5
RESOLUTION NO. (2014 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING NEW POLICY LANGUAGE IN THE DRAFT LAND USE ELEMENT
RELATED TO THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL (BISHOP KNOLL) AREA
(GPI 15-12)
WHEREAS, the City received a Strategic Growth Council grant in the amount of
$880,000 to update the City’s Land Use and Circulation Elements; and
WHEREAS, public participation has been a long tradition in land use issues in the City
of San Luis Obispo and public involvement is essential in updating the 1994 Land Use and
Circulation Elements; and
WHEREAS, to date input has been received through two different on-line tools, six
community workshops, one workshop at Cal Poly, 34 Task Force meetings, eight advisory body
meetings, ten Planning Commission hearings, two traveling open houses in six locations, and a
community survey returned by over 2,000 respondents; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed and recommended a new policy to
guide future development for the Bishop Knoll area and has incorporated said direction in a
paragraph in Chapter 8, Special Focus Areas, of the Land Use Element based upon input from
the community and the Task Force; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed and recommended retention and
minor update of existing policy which will apply to future development for the Bishop Knoll
area that directs open space acquisition as part of annexation requests in Chapter 1 of the Land
Use Element, based upon input from the community and the Task Force; and
WHEREAS, the Final Environmental Impact Report has been certified; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony
of interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by the TF-LUCE, Planning
Commission, and staff presented at said hearing; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo that provisions in Chapters 1 and 8 of the Draft Land Use Element that apply to the
Bishop Knoll area presented at the hearing on September 16, 2014 as amended by Council shall
be approved as part of the Land Use and Circulation Elements Update.
Section 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the following
findings:
1. New policies in Chapter 8 of the Land Use plan provide direction to for future
development to address the open space requirements in Policy 8.3.2 of the Conservation
and Open Space Element, and to address hillside protection, circulation and transition to
PH3 - 68
Council Resolution No. XXXX (2014 Series) ATTACHMENT 5
Page 2
existing neighborhoods;
2. New policies in Chapter 8 of the Land Use Element for the Bishop Knoll area direct
dedication of a public parking lot and trail access as part of future development to meet
the needs of the community.
Section 2. Action. The City Council hereby amends the policies related to the North
Side of Foothill (Bishop Knoll) shown in Attachment A in the Draft Land Use Element as
modified by City Council, an official copy of which shall be maintained in the Office of the City
Clerk referencing this Resolution.
Upon motion of , seconded by , and on the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
RECUSED: Council member Ashbaugh
The foregoing Resolution was adopted this _______________________, 2014.
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
____________________________
Anthony J. Mejia, CMC
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_/s/ J.Christine Dietrick_____________________
Christine Dietrick, City Attorney
PH3 - 69
Council Resolution No. XXXX (2014 Series) ATTACHMENT 5
Page 3
ATTACHMENT A
1.12.7B Foothill Annexation: The northern portion of the Foothill
property, and the creek area shall be annexed as open space. Development on this site should be
clustered or located near Foothill Boulevard, with the northern portion of the site and creek area
preserved as open space.
8.3.3 Special Planning Areas
North Side of Foothill (Bishop Knoll)
Future development of this area shall address open space requirements under 1.12.7 and open
space buffers in accordance with Conservation and Open Space Element policy 8.3.2. This area
shall be subject to Architectural Review to ensure consideration of hillside and resource
protection; circulation and access, and transition to existing neighborhoods. The steep hillside
should be dedicated as Open Space and residential lots grouped at the bottom of the hill closer to
Foothill. Development shall provide a parking lot and trail access to Bishops Peak. Circulation
connectivity shall be provided to Los Cerros Drive as feasible. Density shall be limited to 7
units/acre as modified for slope under the Zoning Ordinance.
PH3 - 70
ATTACHMENT 6
PH3 - 71
ATTACHMENT 6
PH3 - 72
ATTACHMENT 6
PH3 - 73
ATTACHMENT 6
PH3 - 74
ATTACHMENT 6
PH3 - 75
ATTACHMENT 6
PH3 - 76
ATTACHMENT 6
PH3 - 77
ATTACHMENT 6
PH3 - 78
ATTACHMENT 6
PH3 - 79
ATTACHMENT 6
PH3 - 80
ATTACHMENT 6
PH3 - 81
ATTACHMENT 6
PH3 - 82
ATTACHMENT 6
PH3 - 83
ATTACHMENT 6
PH3 - 84
ATTACHMENT 6
PH3 - 85
ATTACHMENT 6
PH3 - 86
ATTACHMENT 6
PH3 - 87
ATTACHMENT 6 PH3 - 88
ATTACHMENT 6
PH
3
-
89
ATTACHMENT 6 PH3 - 90
ATTACHMENT 6
PH
3
-
91
ATTACHMENT 6 PH3 - 92
ATTACHMENT 6
PH
3
-
93
ATTACHMENT 6 PH3 - 94
ATTACHMENT 6
PH
3
-
95
ATTACHMENT 6 PH3 - 96
ATTACHMENT 6
PH
3
-
97
ATTACHMENT 6 PH3 - 98
ATTACHMENT 6 PH3 - 99
ATTACHMENT 6 PH3 - 100
ATTACHMENT 6 PH3 - 101
ATTACHMENT 6 PH3 - 102
ATTACHMENT 6 PH3 - 103
ATTACHMENT 6 PH3 - 104
ATTACHMENT 6 PH3 - 105
ATTACHMENT 6
PH3 - 106
ATTACHMENT 6
PH3 - 107
Resolution No. (2014 series) Attachment 7
Page 1
RESOLUTION NO. (2014 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ADOPTING AND CERTIFYING AS ACCURATE
THE FINAL PLAN REPORT AND DIRECTING STAFF TO SUBMIT THE
REPORT TO THE STRATEGIC GROWTH COUNCIL TO CLOSE OUT GRANT
3010-532 TO DISCHARGE GRANT OBLIGATIONS FOR THE LAND USE AND
CIRCULATION ELEMENTS (LUCE) UPDATE
(#GPI/ER 15-12)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the
Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on September 16, 2014, for
the purpose of considering discharge of grant obligations under the Strategic Growth Council Grant 2010-
532 that supported the LUCE update; and
WHEREAS, said public hearing was to consider the final grant report and direct staff to forward
the final grant report, final reimbursement request, and Draft copies of the Land Use and Circulation
Elements and Final EIR to the Strategic Growth Council to satisfy provisions of the grant; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by
law; and
WHEREAS, the Strategic Growth Council grant funds were instrumental in providing the
resources necessary to augment City staff to conduct the LUCE update and engage the community; and
WHEREAS, the tasks, milestones and deliverables have been accomplished within the grant-
mandated timeframe and budget; and
WHEREAS, the work upon which the draft LUCE is based was funded in part through a grant
awarded by the Strategic Growth Council, however the statements and conclusions in the draft LUCE
reflect the input of the community, the TF-LUCE, the advisory bodies, the Planning Commission, and the
City Council and are not necessarily those of the Strategic Growth Council or of the Department of
Conservation or its employees; nor does the Strategic Growth Council or the Department of Conservation
make any warranties, expressed or implied, and assume no liability for the information contained in the
LUCE update; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the
applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. The City Council certifies and finds that the final grant report included
as Exhibit A is accurate.
SECTION 2. Action. The City Council does hereby direct staff to transmit the final grant
report, final reimbursement request, draft Land Use and Circulation Elements of the General Plan, and
Final Environmental Impact Report to the Strategic Growth Council to discharge grant obligations and
close out Grant 3010-532.
PH3 - 108
Resolution No. (2014 series) Attachment 7
Page 2
Upon motion by , seconded by , and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
REFRAIN:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this ____________ day of ____________ , 2014.
____________________________________
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Anthony Mejia
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
PH3 - 109
City of San Luis Obispo Final Report Exhibit A
SGC Grant 3010-532
Page 1
TO BE PROVIDED AS AN AGENDA CORRESPONDENCE
PH3 - 110