HomeMy WebLinkAbout9375-9391RESOLUTION NO. 9391 (2002 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
ADOPTING COMMUNITY DESIGN GUIDELINES
WHEREAS, the Land Use Element of the General Plan of the City of San Luis Obispo,.
adopted on August 23, 1994, sets forth goals, policies and programs to: develop and maintain a
pleasant and harmonious environment; promote and enhance real property values; conserve the
City's natural beauty; preserve and enhance its distinctive visual character; and insure the orderly
and harmonious development of the City with attention to site planning and exterior appearance of
public and private structures; and
WHEREAS, the Community Design Guidelines are consistent with Land Use Element
(LUE) Goals 28 & 33 which call for maintenance of the City's existing small -town appeal and
rural setting, and for new development to contribute to the City's sense of place and architectural
heritage; and
WHEREAS, the Community Design Guidelines are intended to provide specific
guidelines and requirements to assist developers in designing projects in order that they will be
more acceptable to the decision - makers reviewing them, and ultimately better received by the
entire community; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission has the ability to add graphics and
photographs to the document to further illustrate concepts without a formal amendment process;
and
WHEREAS, the Community Design Guidelines are considered an ongoing work in
progress where additional chapters and information could be added as particular issues come up,
the first of which is Section 7.2, Hillside Development of Chapter 7, Special Design
Considerations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on November 19, 2002, and
has considered the testimony of interested parties, the records of the Architectural Review
Commission hearings and action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the draft Negative Declaration of
environmental impact as prepared by staff and reviewed by the Deputy Community Development
Director;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
Section 1. Environmental Determination: The City Council finds and determines that
the project's Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential environmental impacts of
the proposed guidelines, and reflects the independent judgment of the City Council. The Council
determines that the guidelines will have no significant effects on the environment. The Council
hereby adopts said Negative Declaration.
IM ' _
Resolution No. 9391 (2002 Series)
Page 2
Section 2. Approval. The Community Design Guidelines are hereby approved with
the minor modifications noted at the Council hearing to be made to the document, which
included highlighting the ARC'S role in environmental review, referencing the zoning
regulations sections related to large -scale retail development, and adding provisions that enable
superior design and innovation.
Upon motion of Council Member Ewan, seconded by Council Member Mulholland,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Members Ewan, Mulholland, and Schwartz, Vice Mayor Marx,
and Mayor Settle
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 19th day of November 2002.
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
��CC,I � �
�' W
CDD
• o
RESOLUTION NO. 9390 (2002 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBIPSO
ADOPTING A PRELIMINARY ALIGNMENT PLAN FOR THE BOB JONES CITY -TO-
SEA BIKE TRAIL WITH ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS AND MITIGATION
MEASURES
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo desires to create a comprehensive network of
multi -use paths, consistent with its adopted Bicycle Transportation Plan (May 2002) and General
Plan Circulation Element (November 1994); and
WHEREAS, the Bicycle Transportation Plan identifies Class I bike paths being
developed adjoining segments of San Luis Obispo Creek south of the downtown, and along
segments of Prefumo Creek west of Route 101; and
WHEREAS, in October 1999 the City Council authorized staff to distribute Request for
Proposals (RFPs) to solicit the services of qualified consultants to prepare a preliminary
alignment plan for segments of the Bob Jones City -to -Sea Trail; and
WHEREAS, in response to the City's RFPs and after a competitive selection process, the
City hired the RRM Design Group to prepare the desired route plan; and
WHEREAS, in 2000 RRM Design Group published the draft preliminary alignment plan
for this bike trail and the plan was reviewed and recommended for approval by the City's Parks
and Recreation Commission, Bicycle Advisory Committee, and Architectural Review
Commission (ARC); and
WHEREAS, at its November 5, 2001 meeting, the ARC found that Initial Environmental
Studies and Mitigated Negative Declarations published by the Director Of Community
Development for this project has been completed in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act and CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the preliminary alignment plan and its
Mitigated Negative Declaration on December 11, 2001, and directed staff to forward the plan to
the Planning Commission for its review and recommendations, with special emphasis on the
project's compatibility with natural resources; and
WHEREAS, on September 25, 2002 the Planning Commission reviewed a revised
preliminary alignment plan that significantly reduced creek setback encroachments and
recommended that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Preliminary
Route Plan, with revisions.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
R 9390
0 0
Resolution No. 9390 (2002 Series)
Page 2
SECTION 1: the Preliminary Alignment Plan and project description for the Bob Jones
City-to -Sea Bike Trail, as presented in Exhibit A, attached and incorporated herein by reference,
is hereby adopted, as amended to:
1. Show the bike path's alignment located fully outside the creek setback
along Prefumo Creek; and
2. Include language in the plan that states: "The City may consider
alternative path alignments as changes in land use and environmental
conditions occur over time."
SECTION 2: The project's Mitigated Negative .Declaration (ER 98 -01) adequately
addresses potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed project, includes
mitigation measures that will avoid or reduce to insignificant levels impacts associated with the
project, and is hereby adopted.
Upon Motion of Council Member Ewan, seconded by Vice Mayor Marx, and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Members Ewan and Schwartz, Vice Mayor Marx, and
Mayor Settle
NOES: Council Member Mulholland ��11
ABSENT: None 0 �pov
The foregoing resolution was adopted this day of Dena =l .
City Clerk'
TO FORM:
Jeffrey G
Allen
����� � �l ��� � �
C.i�
.�Ln�'U 1�L�'� -rte
L
L�:
• o
RESOLUTION NO. 9389 (2002 Series)
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF WATER REVENUE REFUNDING
BONDS IN THE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF NOT TO EXCEED $10,000,000
AND APPROVING RELATED DOCUMENTS AND ACTIONS
WHEREAS, the City has previously issued its 1993 Water Revenue Bonds in the
aggregate principal amount of $10,890,000 (the "1993 Bonds ") for the purpose of financing
improvements to the water treatment plant which is used in connection with the water treatment
and distribution system of the City (the "Water System "); and
WHEREAS, in order to provide interest rate savings the City wishes at this time to
refinance the 1993 Bonds, and for that purpose the City Council wishes to authorize the issuance
and sale of 2002 Water Revenue Refunding Bonds in the aggregate principal amount of not to
exceed $10,000,000 (the "Refunding Bonds ") under the provisions of Articles 10 and 11 of
Chapter 3 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the California Government Code, commencing
with Section 53570 of said Code (the "Bond Law "); and
WHEREAS, the Refunding Bonds will be secured by a pledge of and lien on the net
revenues derived by the City from the operation of the Water System, on a parity with the pledge
and lien which secures a portion of the obligations of the City under the Second Amended and
Restated Lease Agreement dated as of November 1, 2001 (the "2001 Lease Obligations "); and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes at this time to authorize the issuance and sale of
the Refunding Bonds for the purpose of refunding the 1993 Bonds, and to approve all related
documents and actions;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Issuance of Bonds. The City Council hereby authorizes the issuance of the
Refunding Bonds under the Bond Law in the aggregate principal amount of not to exceed
$10,000,000 for the purpose of providing funds to refund all of the outstanding 1993 Bonds. The
Refunding Bonds shall be secured by a pledge of and lien on the net revenues derived by the City
from the operation of the Water System, on a panty with the pledge and lien which secures the
2001 Lease Obligations.
SECTION 2. Approval of Financing Documents. The Council hereby approves each of
the following documents in substantially the respective forms on file with the City Clerk together
with any changes therein or additions thereto deemed advisable by the Director of Finance,
whose execution thereof shall be conclusive evidence of the approval of any such changes or
additions:
a. Indenture of Trust between the City and U.S. Bank, N.A., as trustee, setting forth
the terms and provisions of the Refunding Bonds, including the maturities, interest rates and
redemption provisions applicable the Refunding Bonds; and
b. Escrow Deposit and Trust Agreement between the City and U.S. Bank, N.A., as
escrow bank, providing for the investment and administration of funds to refund the 1993 Bonds.
The Director of Finance is hereby authorized and directed to execute, and the City Clerk
is hereby authorized and directed to attest and affix the seal of the City to, the final form of each
of the foregoing agreements on behalf of the City.
R 9389
0 O
Resolution No. 9389 (2002 Series)
Page 2
SECTION 3. Authorization of Competitive Sale of Refunding Bonds. The Council
hereby authorizes and directs the competitive sale of the Refunding Bonds in accordance with the
Notice of Sale in substantially the form on file with the City Clerk together with any changes
therein or additions thereto deemed advisable by the Director of Finance. The Director of
Finance is hereby authorized and directed to accept the best bid for the sale of the Refunding
Bonds, as determined in accordance with the Notice of Sale.
SECTION 4. Publication of Notice. Pursuant to Section 53692 of the Government Code,
Jones Hall, as bond counsel to the City, is hereby authorized and directed to cause the Notice of
Intention to Sell Bonds, in substantially the form on file with the City Clerk together with any
changes therein or additions thereto deemed advisable by the Director of Finance, to be
published once in The Bond Buyer, not later than 15 days prior to the date set for receipt of bids
on the Refunding Bonds.
Pursuant to Section 53583(c) of the Government Code, the City Clerk is hereby
authorized and directed to cause the Notice of Intention to Sell Bonds to be published once in a
newspaper of general circulation circulated within the boundaries of the City, not later than 10
days prior to the date set for receipt of bids on the Refunding Bonds.
SECTION 5. Official Statement. The Council hereby approves and deems nearly final
within the meaning of Rule 15c2 -12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the preliminary
Official Statement describing the Refunding Bonds in the form on file with the City Clerk. The
City Administrative Officer or the Director of Finance (each, an "Authorized Officer ") is
individually authorized, at the request of the purchaser of the Refunding Bonds, to execute an
appropriate certificate affirming the Council's determination that the preliminary Official
Statement has been deemed nearly final within the meaning of such Rule. Distribution of the
preliminary Official Statement by the purchaser of the Refunding Bonds is hereby approved. An
Authorized Officer is hereby authorized and directed to approve any changes in or additions to a
final form of said Official Statement, and the execution thereof by an Authorized Officer shall be
conclusive evidence of approval of any such changes and additions. The Council hereby
authorizes the distribution of the final Official Statement by the purchaser of the Refunding
Bonds. The final Official Statement shall be executed in the name and on behalf of the City by
an Authorized Officer.
SECTION 6. Authorization to Obtain Municipal Bond Insurance. The Council hereby
authorizes the Director of Finance to determine whether the Refunding Bonds are eligible for
municipal bond insurance and, if so, whether it is in the best interests of the City to obtain such
insurance. If the Director of Finance determines that it is in the best interests of the City to
obtain municipal bond insurance, the Director of Finance is authorized to determine which
municipal bond insurer offers the most favorable terms and conditions, to execute a commitment
for such insurance and to take all actions required to implement the delivery of such policy.
SECTION 7. Official Actions. The City Administrative Officer, the Director of Finance,
the City Clerk, the City Attorney and all other officers of the City are each authorized and
directed in the name and on behalf of the City to make any and all assignments, certificates,
requisitions, agreements, notices, consents, instruments of conveyance, warrants and other
documents, which they or any of them might deem necessary or appropriate in order to
consummate any of the transactions contemplated by the documents approved pursuant to this
Resolution. Whenever in this resolution any officer of the City is authorized to execute or
countersign any document or take any action, such execution, countersigning or action may be
taken on behalf of such officer by any person designated by such officer to act on his or her
behalf in the case such officer shall be absent or unavailable.
0 G
Resolution No. 9389 (2002 Series)
Page 3
SECTION 8. Effective Date. This resolution shall take effect from and after the date of
approval and adoption thereof.
Upon motion of Council Member Ewan, seconded by Vice Mayor Marx,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Member Ewan, Mulholland, and Schwartz, Vice Mayor Marx,
and Mayor Settle
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
the foregoing resolution was adopted on Novembe
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
�w -����
i
O
RESOLUTION NO. 9388 (2002 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING REVISED STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND
ENGINEERING STANDARDS FOR CONSTRUCTION
WHEREAS, the Public Works Department is responsible for maintaining Standard
Specifications and Engineering Standards establishing quality requirements and contract conditions
for construction; and
WHEREAS, the Standard Specifications and Engineering Standards must be periodically
updated to allow for changes in construction practices and contract law; and
WHEREAS, legally adopted Standard Specifications are necessary to provide "design and
plan immunity" thereby protecting the City from possible liability,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
Approve the revised City Standard Specifications and Engineering Standards.
2. Rescind Resolution No.s 9109 (2000 Series) and 8917 (1999 Series) approving the
previous editions of the Standard Specifications and Engineering Standards
respectively.
Upon motion of Council Member Ewan, seconded by Council Member Mulholland, and on
the following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Members Ewan, Mulholland, and Schwartz, Vice Mayor Marx, and
Mayor Settle
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 19th day of November 2002.
Mayor Allen K. Settle
ATTEST: /,) I
Lee Price, C._M.C.
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
i
_ ;� Attomey
Vlvl •
GD D
i � "c
N
G
�13
RESOLUTION NO. 9387 (2002 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
ESTABLISHING AN AD HOC HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE
WHEREAS, the City is updating its General Plan Housing Element with the goals of
expanding housing opportunities for very-low, low, and moderate income households, preserving
and enhancing residential neighborhoods, and complying with state laws, including the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and City Council have approved a Housing
Element Update work program that promotes community participation in the update process; and
WHEREAS, to promote community participation that reflects a wide range of interests,
perspectives and needs, the City Council seeks to create a volunteer, ad hoc Housing Element
Task Force to advise the Planning Commission and City Council during the Housing Element
update process.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that:
SECTION 1. Housing Element Task Force. The City Council hereby establishes the Housing
Element Task Force to assist the City during the Housing Element update process. The Task
Force shall be an ad hoc, volunteer advisory body serving at the pleasure of the City Council.
SECTION 2. Duties of the Task Force. The duties of the Task Force shall be as follows:
1. Review and comment on existing housing policies and programs in an effort to expand
housing opportunities for very-low, low, and moderate income households.
2. Recommend new housing goals, policies or programs to address community housing
needs.
3. Review the Draft Housing Element Update.
4. Other duties as assigned by the City Council.
SECTION 3. Term and Meetings. The Task Force shall serve during the term of the Housing
Element update, starting January 1, 2003 and ending June 30, 2003, unless extended by the City
Council. Meetings shall be once a month, or more frequently during this term if determined
necessary by the Community Development Director and the majority of Task Force members,
and shall generally be organized as follows:
R 9387
Resolution No. 9387 (200�2 eries)
Page 2
Meeting 1: Organizational and background briefing
Meeting 2: Review past Housing Element programs
Meeting 3: Review new housing policies and programs
Meeting 4: Recommend new housing policies and programs
Meeting 5: Review draft Housing Element Update
Meeting 6: Summarize and forward comments to the Planning Commission and City
Council
SECTION 4. Appointment of Task Force Members. Task Force members shall be
appointed by a majority vote of the City Council, and shall represent a wide spectrum of
community interests, perspectives, and housing needs, with at least two- thirds of the Task Force
comprised of city residents.
Upon motion of Mayor Settle, seconded by Council Member Ewan, and on the following roll
call vote:
AYES: Council Member s Ewan, Mulholland, and Schwartz, Vice Mayor Marx,
and Mayor Settle
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
the foregoing resolution was adopted this 12`h day of November 2002
Mayor Allen K. git le
ATTEST: %
Lee Price, C.M.0
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Jtity Attorney
4)\., • i
6Q JN.e�Lr�i
(r,p e ��wplka\o
�I � U
RESOLUTION NO. 9386 (2002 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
ESTABLISHING A RAMFOR THE SALE OF RECYCLED WATER
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo (City) has identified a need to develop additional
water supplies to meet the goals of the adopted-General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City will be completing a Water Reuse project to use recycled water for
irrigation and other purposes in and around the City as a new water supply project, and
WHEREAS, the City has adopted prior policies guiding the establishment of rates, and
WHEREAS, it is now necessary for the City to establish a rate for the sale of recycled water
consistent with the aforementioned policies.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
that the sale of recycled water shall be set and remain at a rate equivalent to 90% of the potable
water rate. Such recycled water rate shall be changed as potable water rates are changed to retain the
90% relationship:
Upon motion of Council Member Ewan, seconded by Vice Mayor Marx, and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Members Ewan, Mulholland, and Schwartz, Vice Mayor Marx and
Mayor Settle
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 12`h day of November 2002.
Lee Price, C.M.C.
City Clerk
•...O FORM:
/ /�LG: �� /L, '
• %� 1; •
Mayor Allen K.
F A :•
• . •
U�IS
�G�G� -SGT
0
•
RESOLUTION NO. 9385 (2002 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING A
CONDOMINIUM TRACT MAP AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION
APPLICATION NO. TR/ER 43 -02
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on November, 12, 2002 and
has considered testimony of interested parties and the evaluation and recommendation of staff;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the draft Negative Declaration of
environmental impact as prepared by staff; and
WHEREAS, Tract Maps require City Council review and approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
Section 1. Environmental Review. The City Council finds and determines that the
project's Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential significant environmental
impacts of the proposed project, and reflects the independent judgment of the City Council. The
Council hereby adopts said Negative Declaration.
Section 2. Findings. That City Council, after consideration of a request to subdivide one
lot into four airspace condominium lots and a fifth common lot with an exception to the
Condominium Standards, makes the following findings:
Subdivision Findings
1. The proposed condominium map is consistent with the General Plan because changing
the apartments to condominiums will not impact available affordable housing, displace
residents, or exceed 50% of the number of apartments built the previous year.
2. The site was physically suitable for the proposed type and density of development.
3. The design of the subdivision, or the type of improvements, is not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife
or their habitat since the subdivision will not allow additional construction or
entitlements.
4. Based on staff's analysis and the projects environmental review, the design of the
subdivision, or type of improvements, is not likely to cause detriment to public health or
safety.
R 9385
• •
Resolution No. 9385
Page 2
5. That the design of the subdivision, or the type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within
the proposed subdivision.
Condominium Exception Findings
1. There are circumstances of the site, such as size, shape or topography, distinct
from land in the same zoning, or compliance would not be practical because of the
location or site design, since the site is particularly long and narrow with a large
portion of the lot on upper slopes;
2. The exception will not constitute a grant of special privilege; an entitlement
inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the
same zoning since adjacent properties with the same slope and characteristics are
developed to a similar or greater density; and
3. No feasible alternative to authorizing the exception would satisfy the intent of the
City policies and regulations.
4. The project shall be considered as a new condominium project and not a
conversion since the units have been occupied less than 4 months and the tenants
were notified about the proposed condominium project prior to tenancy.
5. Approval of the condominium subdivision will be consistent with the
recommendations of the Planning Commission, and the condominiums have been
built to substantially comply with Condominium Development standards.
Section 3. Approval. The City Council does hereby approve Application No. TR/ER 43-
02, a request to approve a Condominium Subdivision for 3045 Rockview, subject to the
following conditions:
1. All applicable conditions as required by approval of ARC 13 -00 and Administrative Use
Permit A- 13 -00 shall apply to the project.
2. The applicant shall pay Park In -Lieu Fees consistent with SLO Municipal Code Section
16.40.080.
3. Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (C.C. & R.'s) are required, to the approval of the
Community Development Director and the Public Works Director. The C.C. & R.'s shall
include a description and regulations pertaining to the open space easement.
•
Resolution No. 9385
Page 3
r1
L
4. Each lot shall have a separate water service connection to the public main. A common
private sewer is allowed, subject to a proper agreement addressing the joint ownership
and maintenance of the private sewer.
5. The common open space shall be maintained in accordance with the City's weed
abatement program.
6. The Open Space easement agreement shall be noted on the Final Map.
7. Solar water heating shall be provided for each unit, and appropriate easements shall be
provided for collector locations. The Community Development Director may waive the
requirement for solar water heating in cases where the Chief Building Official has
determined that equivalent energy saving will be obtained by other means.
8. If pertinent, the tentative map shall reflect the location of all any overhead and
underground utilities. The tentative map does not reflect the location of the existing
power, phone, and cable services.
9. Use, access to, and maintenance responsibility of the proposed common open space area
shall be recorded as part of the C.C. & R.'s.
10. The map shall be recorded prior to occupancy of any of the units. Otherwise, the map
shall be processed as a condominium conversion per Municipal Code Chapter 17.82.
11. The subdivider shall submit a final map to the City for review, approval, and recordation.
The map shall be prepared by, or under the supervision of a registered civil engineer or
licensed land surveyor. The final map shall be prepared in accordance with the
Subdivision Map Act and the Subdivision Regulations.
12. The map shall be tied to at least two points of the City's horizontal control network,
California State Plane Coordinate System, Zone 5 (1991.35 epoch adjustment of the
North American Datum of 1983 also referred to as "NAD 83" - meters) for direct import
into the Geographic Information System (GIS) database. Submit this data either via
email, CD or a 3 -1/2" floppy disc containing the appropriate data for use with AutoCAD,
version 2000 or earlier (model space in real world coordinates, NAD 83 - m). If you have
any questions regarding format, please call prior to submitting electronic data.
13. The final map shall use the International System of Units (metric system). The English
System of Units may be used on the final map where necessary (e.g. all record data shall
be entered on the map in the record units, metric translations should be in parenthesis), to
the approval of the City Engineer.
0
Resolution No. 9385
Page 4
E
14. Prior to acceptance by the City of public improvements, the developer's engineer shall
submit a digital version of all public improvement plans & record drawings, compatible
with AutoCAD (Digital Interchange Format, DXF) for Geographic Information System
(GIS) purposes, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
15. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9(b)(1), the subdivider shall defend,
indemnify and hold harmless the City or its agents, officers and employees from any
claim, action, or proceeding against the City or it agents, officers or employees to attack,
set aside, void or annul an approval of the City, advisory agency, appeal board or
legislative body concerning this subdivision. The City shall promptly notify the
subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
On motion of Council Member Schwartz, seconded by Mayor Settle, and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES` Council Members Ewan, Mulholland, and Schwartz, Vice Mayor Marx,
and Mayor Settle.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
the foregoing resolution was adopted this 12`s day of Noy °^�k°� Inn)
City Clerk Lee Price
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
it tto a of orgensen
Exhibit A: Tentative Tract Map #2478, 3045 Rockview Place
0
Resolution No. 9385
Page 5
EXHIBIT A
9
YI
z
CDD • O
A] s,
i"i,yi a/!/L. U�
��ns fnwe
5o�� R.
a woad .S+
SOU,Cs� �,4 l
• •
RESOLUTION NO. 9384 (2002 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
DENYING THE TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP FOR A MINOR SUBDIVISION
LOCATED AT 1655 ALRITA STREET
MS/ER 139 -02 (COUNTY MAP NO. SLO 02 -210)
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on November 12, 2002
and has considered testimony of interested parties, and considered the applicant's request for
a tentative parcel map to create two lots from an existing lot with an exception to the
Subdivision Ordinance Section, Section 16:36.230 flag lot requirements, for property
located at 1655 Alrita Street, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of San
Luis Obispo as follows:
Section 1. That Council, after consideration of Tentative Parcel Map No. MS 139-
02 (County Map No. SLO 02- 0210), staff recommendations, and reports thereof makes the
following findings:
The site is not suited for the type and design of the subdivision.
2. The property to be divided is not of such size or shape, or is not affected by such
topographic conditions, that it is impossible, impractical or undesirable, in the
particular case, to conform to the strict application of the regulations codified in this
title (Title 16, Subdivisions, of the SLO Municipal Code).
3. The exception will allow approval of a minor subdivision that will result in
improvements that may be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, or
be injurious to other properties in the vicinity.
4. Granting the exception is not in accord with the intent and purposes of the
Subdivision ordinance, the Zoning Regulations, and is not consistent with the
general plan or other City adopted plans and standards.
Section 2. Denial. The request for approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. MS 139-
02 (County Map No. SLO 02 -0210) and requested exceptions are hereby denied.
R9384
Resolution No. 9384 O
Page 2
On motion of Council Member Mulholland, seconded by Vice Mayor Marx, and
on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Members Mulholland, Schwartz, and Vice Mayor Marx
NOES: Council Member Ewan and Mayor Settle
ABSENT: None
the foregoing resolution was adopted this 12th day of November 2002.
ATTEST:
K.
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
G',
rgef q(ty Attorney
ve,J S +Y-m 9
;pro 5 sw q,s{
Lt 1," , CA 9 340
EN
RESOLUTION NO. 9383 (2002 Series)
RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT
TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF
THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
WHEREAS, the Public Employees' Retirement Law permits the participation of
public agencies and their employees in the Public Employees' Retirement System by the
execution of a contract, and sets forth the procedure by which said public agencies may
elect to subject themselves and their employees to amendments to said Law; and
WHEREAS, one of the steps in the procedures to amend this contract is the
adoption by the governing body of the public agency of a resolution giving notice of its
intention to approve an amendment to said contract, which resolution shall contain a
summary of the change proposed in said contract; and
WHEREAS, the following is a statement of the proposed change:To provide
Section 21363.2 (3% @ 50 Full formula) for local Police members.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the governing body of the
above agency does hereby give notice of intention to approve an amendment to the
contract between said public agency and the Board of Administration of the Public
Employees' Retirement System, a copy of said amendment being attached hereto as an
"Exhibit" and by this reference made a part hereof
Upon motion of Vice Mayor Marx, seconded by Council Member Mulholland,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Member Ewan, Mulholland, and Schwartz, Vice Mayor
Marx, and Mayor Settle
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 12`" day of November 2002.
Mayor All K. Settle
ATTE pp
� W
6
Lee Price. C.M.C.
City Clerk
R 9383
Resolution No. 9383 •
Page 2
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
tenden, Oy Attorney
5 C ��
������
0 0
RESOLUTION NO. 9382 (2002 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
DIRECTING THE CAO TO SUBMIT A FUNDING APPLICATION TO THE
CALIFORNIA BICYCLE TRANSPORATION ACCOUNT (BTA) PROGRAM FOR THE
NORTHERN SEGMENT OF THE RAILROAD SAFETY TRAIL
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a Bicycle Transportation Plan that complies with
the content requirements of Section 891.2 of the California Streets and Highways Code; and
WHEREAS, San Luis Obispo's Bicycle Transportation Plan specifically recommends the
creation of the Railroad Safety Trail and identifies the segment between Foothill Boulevard and
Hathway Street as a- segment of this trail system; and
WHEREAS, the San Luis Obispo Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) has reviewed the
BTA Grant Program Guidelines, considered alternative eligible projects, and has recommended that
the City Council pursue BTA grant funding for the project described herein; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has reviewed the Railroad Safety Trail
project and its Initial Environmental Study and has granted the project a Mitigated Negative
Declaration consistent with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
its guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that implementation of this project described below
will improve bicycle transportation in San Luis Obispo, consistent with the community's General
Plan Circulation Element and Bicycle Transportation Plan.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
Section 1. The City Council directs the City Administrative Officer (CAO) to submit BTA
grant applications to Caltrans and to enter into any subsequent cooperative agreements with that
agency for the following project:
1. The northern segment of the Railroad Safety Trail paralleling the east side of the
Union Pacific Railroad right -of -way between Foothill Boulevard and Hathway
Street ($350;000 total cost).
Section 2. The City Council hereby certifies that it will provide a minimum ten percent
(10 %) local funding match for the project described in Section 1.
R 9382
Resolution No. 9382 (2002erie"s)
Page 2
On motion of Council Member Mulhollnad, seconded by Vice Mayor Marx and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Member Ewan, Mulholland,and Schwartz, Vice Mayor MArx, and
Mayor Settle
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
the following resolution was adopted this 12th day of November, 2002.
Mayor Al en K. e
ATTEST:
1
Lee Price, C.M.C.
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
.I u
%\V/ -- %) . • O
�v
ca
N
RESOLUTION NO. 9381 (2002 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TO APPLY
FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE GRANT TO STUDY THE
BROAD STREET CORRIDOR
WHEREAS, the California Department
Planning has grant monies available to pron
Planning for Communities; and
of Transportation, Division of Transportation
ate Environmental Justice: Context - Sensitive
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo has an area Broad Street/Highway 227 between
Orcutt Road and High Street that could benefit from a study of potential changes in land uses that
specifically includes a targeted effort to involve minority business owners as well as traditionally
under - represented home owners and property owners; and
WHEREAS, there exists a clearly demonstrated interest in the community to look at
improving the appearance and functionally of this major entrance to the City's historic district and
downtown;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
that the Community Development Director is authorized to apply to the State of California for an
Environmental Justice Grant for the 2003 — 2004 cycle;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ALSO RESOLVED, that if recommended for funding by the
State of California, the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo authorizes the City of San Luis
Obispo to accept a grant of up to $200,000.
Upon motion of Council Member Mulholland, seconded by Vice Mayor Marx, and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Member Ewan, Mulholland, and Schwartz, Vice Mayor Marx, and
Mayor Settle
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 12' day of November 200x.
Mayor Allen K. Settle
ATTES ee
Lee Price, C.M.C.
City Clerk
R 9381
• o
Resolution No. 9381(2002 Series)
Page 2
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
�� • •
Goo
��
� ��,�� �.
��
�` �y�
C��.,
0 0
RESOLUTION NO. 9380 (2002 Series)
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CORRECTION TO THE AMENDMENT
TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF
THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo and the Board of
Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System entered into a contract
effective July 1, 1952 providing for the participation of Public Agency in the Public
Employees' Retirement System; and
WHEREAS, this contract has been amended many times since July 1, 1952, most
recently on September 3, 2002; and
WHEREAS, due to an inadvertence, paragraph "5" of the contract reads:
"The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited
prior and current service as a local miscellaneous member shall be determined in
accordance with Section 21354.5 of said Retirement Law (2.7% @ age 55 Full).
[Note that a future legislative proposal is being considered which could amend
Government Code Section 21354.5 to make the 2.7% at 55 benefit formula
applicable to both active members and inactive members who have not yet retired.
If enacted, this amendment could have an effect on the City of San Luis Obispo's
actuarial valuation and employer contribution rates in future years.];" and
WHEREAS, the legislative proposal is no longer being considered and so the
contract language is no longer applicable; and;
WHEREAS, Section 20472 of the Government Code provides that corrections
may be made through amendments approved by the adoption of suitable resolutions by
the contracting parties;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
San Luis Obispo does hereby authorize a correction to the amendment to the contract
effective January 30, 2003 as follows:
A. Paragraph 5 of said contract shall be changed as follows: "The percentage
of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and
current service as a local miscellaneous member in employment before
and not on or after January 30, 2003 shall be determined in accordance
with Section 21354 of said Retirement Law (2% @ age 55 Full);" and
Resolution No. 9380 O 0
Page 2
B. Paragraph 6 of said contract shall be added as follows: "The percentage of
final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and
current service as a local miscellaneous member in employment on or
after January 30, 2003 shall be determined in accordance with Section
21354.5 of said Retirement Law (2.7% @ age 55 Full);" and
C. Paragraph numbers "6 through 13 ;" shall be renumbered paragraph
numbers "7 though 14."
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the
City of San Luis Obispo is hereby authorized, empowered, and directed to execute said
amendment for and on behalf of the City of San Luis Obispo.
Upon motion of Council Member Mulholland, seconded by Vice Mayor Marx,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Member Ewan, Mulholland, and Schwartz, Vice Mayor
Marx and Mayor Settle
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 12`h day of November 2002.
Mayor
Lee Price, C.M.C.
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
i/��. Al Z
j%� • r� City Attorney
K.
� � et/
�I6k,
N
RESOLUTION NO. 9379
0
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FROM THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION'S
FARMLAND CONSERVANCY PROGRAM FOR THE
PROJECT KNOWN AS BRUGHELLI EASEMENT ACQUISITION
WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of California has established the Farmland Conservancy
Program within the Department of Conservation, and through said program is providing assistance to
conserve important agricultural land resources that are subject to conversion pressures; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo intends to acquire agricultural conservation easements on
one or more areas surrounding the City in cooperation with landowners for the purpose of conserving
important agricultural resources; and
WHEREAS, the City Council certifies that any easements obtained will meet the eligibility
requirements set forth in Public Resources Code Section 10251 and incorporated herein by reference;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
hereby:
1. Authorizes the filing of an application for grant assistance from the State Farmland
Conservancy Program for the above project; and
2. Appoints the City Administrative Officer as agent of the City to conduct all negotiations,
execute and submit all documents, including, but not limited to, applications, agreements, amendments,
payment requests and so on, which may be necessary for the completion of the aforementioned project.
On motion of Council Member Mulholland, seconded by Vice Mayor Marx and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Members Ewan, Mulholland, and Schwartz, Vice Mayor Marx, and
Mayor Settle
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was passed adopted this 12th day of November 2002.
Mayor Allen K. Settle
ATTEST:
Lee Price, C.M.C.
City Clerk
R 9379
•
Resolution No. 9379
Page 2
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
I
�J
iottomey
L) •
�W
•
•
RESOLUTION NO. 9378
G
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FROM
THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT AND MITIGATION PROGRAM
UNDER SECTION 164.56 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE
FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS AHEARN PROPERTY ACQUISITION
WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of California has enacted AB 147 (Chapter 106 of
the Statutes of 1989), which is intended to provide $10 million annually for grant funds to local,
State, and Federal agencies and nonprofit entities for projects to enhance and mitigate the
environmental impacts of modified or new public transportation facilities; and
WHEREAS, the Resources Agency has established the procedures and criteria for
reviewing grant proposals and is required to submit to the California Transportation Commission a
list of recommended projects from which the grant recipients will be selected; and
WHEREAS, said procedures and criteria established by the Resources Agency require a
resolution certifying the approval of application by the applicant's governing body before
submission of said application to the State; and
WHEREAS, the application contains assurances that the applicant must comply with; and
WHEREAS, the applicant, if selected, will enter into an agreement with the State of
California for acquisition or development of the project;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo hereby:
1. Authorizes the filing of an application for the Environmental Enhancement and
Mitigation Program for grant assistance for the above project; and
2. Certifies that said applicant will make adequate provision for operation and
maintenance of the project; and
3. Appoints the City Administrative Officer as agent of the City to conduct all
negotiations, execute and submit all documents, including, but not limited to, applications,
agreements, amendments, payment requests and so on, which may be hecessary for the completion
of the aforementioned project.
ml %frk i
Resolution No. 9378
Page 2
•
On motion of Council Member Mulholland, seconded by Vice Mayor Marx and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Members Ewan, Mulholland, and Schwartz, Vice Mayor Marx, and
Mayor Settle
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was passed adopted this 12th day of November 2002.
Mayor Allen K.19-Me-
ATTEST:
Lee Price, C.M.C.
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
MM), 011
:1� i� •
�vq
GD 0
c
RESOLUTION NO. 9377 (2002 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
MODIFYING FINANCIAL POLICIES FOR PURCHASE OF CHEMICALS
REQUIRED FOR TREATMENT OF WATER AND WASTEWATER
WHEREAS, City financial policies require Council approval of purchases of materials which
cost more than $50,000; and
WHEREAS, purchase of chemicals which are required for the proper treatment of water and
wastewater at City facilities is not a discretionary action for the City; and
WHEREAS, Council approves the financial plan that includes funding necessary for the
purchase of the chemicals needed for the treatment of water and wastewater.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
SECTION 1. Modify the financial plan procedures for procurement of chemicals necessary for
the treatment of water and wastewater, authorizing the City Administrative Officer to approve invitation
for bids and award of contracts if the bids are within available budget.
Upon motion of Council Member Mulholland, seconded by Vice Mayor Marx, and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Members Ewan, Mulholland, and Schwartz, Vice Mayor Marx, and
Mayor Settle
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 12' day of November 2002.
Mayor Allen K. Settle
ATT ST: `
Cam'
Lee Price, C. C.
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Ii/. I�:.�
Ell ' _ f Attorney
R 9377
��`� c�-
��`"
���
0 0
RESOLUTION NO. 9376 (2002 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING THE TENTATIVE MAP FOR MINOR SUBDIVISION
LOCATED AT 2915 JOHNSON AVENUE
MS 13 -02 (SLO 02 -033)
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on October 15', 2002 and has
considered testimony of interested parties and the evaluation and recommendation of staff, and
WHEREAS, minor subdivisions with requests for exceptions require City Council
review and approval; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration of
environmental impact as prepared by staff.
BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Environmental Review. The City Council finds and determines that the
although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because mitigation measures have been added and agreed to by
the project proponent. This determination reflects the independent judgment of the City Council,
and the Council hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration (ER 13 -02) with the following
mitigation measures:
Aesthetics
1. All trees shall be protected and preserved on the site unless otherwise approved for
removal by the City Arborist. Removal of any on- site'tree shall require a City tree
removal permit and mitigation to consist of on -site replanting.
Monitoring Program: Compliance will be insured through final review of the project
improvement plans, building and grading plan check, and occupancy release.
2. The lots shall be designated as "sensitive sites," and development on either parcel
shall be subject to architectural review to ensure compatibility with the City's scenic
roadway policies.
Monitoring Program: The parcels' sensitive status shall be recorded against the deed
of both parcels, indicating the requirement for City architectural review, and so noted
in the City's Land Use Inventory database.
R a3q-b
• o
Resolution No. 9376 (2002 Series)
Page 2
Geology and Soils
3. Any future construction shall require preparation of a landscape plan to be approved
by the Community Development Director prior to building permit issuance, and
landscaping shall be installed prior to final to insure minimal surface run -off.
Monitoring Program: Compliance will be insured through final review of the project
improvement plans, building and grading plan check, and occupancy release.
SECTION 2. Findings. That this Council, after consideration of a request to subdivide
one lot into two with an exception to the subdivision ordinance regarding setback of the existing
house to the edge of payment of the common accessway (6 feet where 10 feet required), and after
consideration of staff recommendations, public testimony, and reports thereof, makes the
following findings:
Minor Subdivision
1. The tentative map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans in that the
general plan and its policies call for compact urban form and infill which this map
provides consistent with the existing neighborhood.
2. The design of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and
specific plans in that the proposed land division would result in lot sizes typical of a
Low Density Residential neighborhood, lot configurations commonly found within
the City and this neighborhood specifically, and promote more compact development
consistent with both the general plan and the existing neighborhood.
3. The site is physically suited for the type and density of development allowed in the R-
1 zone and LD designation in that the proposed lots meet minimum size requirements
as required within the R -1 district, the map creates lot sizes more typical of an R -1
neighborhood and is consistent with the lotting pattern in this neighborhood, and
project conditions will require architectural review for new development to ensure
architectural compatibility of any new residence(s).
4. The design of the tentative map and the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems, substantial environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat in that the site is
already developed with a single - family residence and surrounded by urban
development, and the project does not contain sensitive habitat or interfere with
creeks or wetlands.
5. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements for access through (or
0 0
Resolution No. 9376 (2002 Series)
Page 3
use of property within) the proposed subdivision since all adjacent properties are
accessed independently and the proposed lots will have access easements as required
by the Subdivision Ordinance.
Exceptions
6. The property to be divided is of such shape that it is undesirable, in this particular
case, to conform to the strict application of the subdivision and zoning regulations
because to do so would require the demolition or relocation of an existing residence.
7. The cost to the subdivider of strict or literal compliance with the subdivision and
zoning regulations is not the sole reason for granting exceptions to the lot width and
yard standards, rather it is City policy to conserve existing housing and prevent
displacement of occupants.
8. The exception will not be detrimental to public health, safety and welfare or be
injurious to other properties in the vicinity, in that the 4 -foot reduction in the required
10 -foot setback from edge of pavement of the common accessway affects only a
corner of the residence on the subject property which setback is not contrary to
Uniform Building Code requirements.
9. Granting exceptions to yard setback standards is in accord with the intent and
purposes of these regulations and is consistent with the general plan and with all
applicable specific plans or other plans of the city, in that it does not grant special
privileges or modify allowable land uses within the existing R -1 zone district.
SECTION 3. Approval. The request for approval of the minor subdivision to allow
parcelization of one lot to two with an exception to the Subdivision Ordinance §16.36.230.D for
property at 2915 Johnson Avenue, is hereby approved subject to the following conditions:
Conditions
1. This Tentative Tract Map shall expire within 24 months of the date of approval unless
an extension of time is granted pursuant to a written request to the City Council
received prior to the expiration date.
2. A final map, drawn in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and
in compliance with all conditions set forth herein, shall be submitted for review and
approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision
Ordinance.
3. The final map and improvements plans shall show the 20 -foot wide accessway
• O
Resolution No. 9376 (2002 Series)
Page 4
(common driveway) to be no longer than 150 feet from Johnson Avenue as specified
in §16.36.230.0 of the subdivision ordinance.
4. The final map shall reflect building code compliance for setback of the existing
building with respect to the new lot line or the eaves shall be constructed as required
for fire- resistive construction to the satisfaction of the Building Official. Any
modification to the eaves for compliance with the Uniform Building Code shall be
completed prior to recordation of the final map.
5. A demolition permit for the removal of existing carport and a permit for the
replacement of covered parking for Parcel 1, including access to the new parking
structure, shall be issued and all work completed to the satisfaction of the Building
Official prior to recordation of the final map.
6. The subdivider shall dedicate a 2m wide public utility easement across the frontage of
each lot. Said easement shall be adjacent to and contiguous with all public right -of-
way lines bordering each lot.
7. The subdivider shall dedicate a 3m wide street tree easement across the frontage of
each lot. Said easement shall be adjacent to and contiguous with all public right -of-
way lines bordering each lot.
8. The new driveway approach shall comply with current city standards. The current
standard includes a 4' level sidewalk extension to provide disabled access around the
ramp. The final map may need to reflect a public pedestrian easement to
accommodate improvements required for Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
compliance, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
9. The existing driveway approach, north of the common driveway approach, shall be
abandoned per City standards.
10. All lots if graded shall preclude cross -lot drainage, or, appropriate easements and
drainage facilities shall be provided, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director
and Building Official. Final analysis of improved drainage, diverted, or concentrated
drainage caused by land contour changes and/or driveway improvements shall be
evaluated at the time of permit application for said improvements.
11. Two 15- gallon replacement street trees are required and shall be planted prior to
recordation of the final map to the satisfaction of the City Arborist. The street tree
species and planting locations shall be in accordance with city standards #8010, 8020,
and 8240 and as required by the City Arborist.
o
Resolution No. 9376 (2002 Series)
Page 5
12. All trees, other than those already approved for removal by the Tree Committee or
City Arborist, shall be retained and protected unless permitted for removal by the City
Arborist.
Code Requirements
1. Each parcel shall be served with separate utilities (water, sewer, gas, electricity,
telephone & cable TV), to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. Utilities
to new residences shall be underground.
2. Existing water and sewer services shall be properly relocated and resized, if
necessary, to ensure that each parcel is appropriately served in accordance with City
standards.
3. Should any portion of a structure constructed on parcel 2 exceed 300 feet from
Johnson Avenue, an on -site hydrant and fire department vehicle turnaround shall be
required.
4. Development of Parcel 2 shall be subject to development impact fees for parks and
recreation purposes (QUIMBY Act) and Traffic Impact Fees as required by City
Ordinance.
5. The final map shall be submitted to the City for review, approval, and recordation.
The map shall be prepared by, or under the supervision of a registered civil engineer
or licensed land surveyor. The final map shall be prepared in accordance with the
Subdivision Map Act and the Subdivision Regulations.
6. The final map, public improvement plans and specifications shall use the
International System of Units (metric system). The English System of Units may be
used on the final map where necessary (e.g. - all record data shall be entered on the
map in the record units, metric translations should be in parenthesis), to the approval
of the City Engineer.
7. The map shall be tied to at least two points of the City's horizontal control network,
California State Plane Coordinate System, Zone 5 (1991.35 epoch adjustment of the
North American Datum of 1983 also referred to as "NAD 83" - meters) for direct
import into the Geographic Information System (GIS) database. Submit this data either
via email, CD or a 3 -1/2" floppy disc containing the appropriate data for use with
AutoCAD, version 2000 or earlier (model space in real world coordinates, NAD 83 -
m). If you have any questions regarding format, please call prior to submitting
electronic data.
Resolution No. 9376 (2002 Series)
Page 6
On motion of Council Member Ewan, seconded by Council Member Mulholland, and on
the following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Members Ewan and Mulholland, Vice Mayor Marx, and Mayor Settle
NOES: None
ABSENT: Council Member Schwartz
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 15th day of i
►:1
Lee Pnce, C.M.C.
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
,17
r
Exhibit A: Environmental Review 13 -02
Exhibit B: Tentative Parcel Map SLO -02 -033
INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
For ER #13 -02
1. Project Title: Minor Subdivision 13 -02
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Lynn M. Azevedo, Associate Planner
805 -781 -7166
4. Project Location: 2915 Johnson Avenue, San Luis Obispo, CA
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
Brad, Kristen & Marcell Lachemann
550 Spanish Trail
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
6. General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential
7. Zoning: R -1 (Low Density Residential)
8. Description of the Project: Division of an 0.52 -acre parcel into two parcels with an exception
to standards relating to structure setback from access road pavement (6 feet proposed where 10
feet required).
9. Project Entitlements Requested: Parcel Map
10. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Single- family residential to the east and west and across
Johnson Avenue to the north. A large apartment complex, Terrace Homes, abuts the property to
the south.
11. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g. permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement): None.
A CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPo ( INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
V�The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities.
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781 -7410. Z/_
0
•
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
F%kAgi +-A
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following
pages..
X
Aesthetics
X
Geology /Soils
Public Services
Agricultural Resources
Hazards & Hazardous
Recreation
Materials
Air Quality
Hydrology /Water Quality
Transportation & Traffic
Biological Resources
Land Use and Planning
Utilities and Service
Systems
Cultural Resources
Noise
Mandatory Findings of
Significance
Energy and Mineral
Population and HousingF.
«
ri b4 tJ
Resources
FISH AND GAME FEES
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more
State agencies (e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Game, Department of Housing and
Community Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines
15073(a)).
CITY OF SAN Luis Osispo
2 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
There is no evidence before the Department that the project will have any potential adverse effects on fish
X
and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. As such, the project qualifies for a
de minimis waiver with regards to the filing of Fish and Game Fees.
The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish
and Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code. This initial study has
been circulated to the California Department of Fish and Game for review and comment.
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more
State agencies (e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Game, Department of Housing and
Community Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines
15073(a)).
CITY OF SAN Luis Osispo
2 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
0 • _
lt bi fT
DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and
a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the.environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been
made, or the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet(s) have been added and
X
agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant" impact(s) or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has
been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached
sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the
effects that remain to be addressed
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided
or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR of NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions
or miti ation measures that are imposed upon the ro osed proiect, nothing further is required.
Signature
Ron Whisenand_ Deputy Director of Community Development
Printed Name
September 12, 2002
Date
For: John Mandeville. Community Development Director
3
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
® o
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: €K�t.c br fi4
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the
information sources a lead agency cites in the analysis in each section. A "No Impact" answer is adequately
supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one
involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is
based on project - specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to
pollutants, based on a project - specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well
as project - level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. The explanation of each
issue should identify the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question.
3. "Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are
one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has
reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must
describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level
(mitigation measures from Section 17, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross- referenced). .
5. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has
been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D) of the California
Code of Regulations. Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential
impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should,
where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted
should be cited in the discussion. In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of
and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether
such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on earlier analysis.
C) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,"
describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the
extent to which they address site- specific conditions for the project.
Cm of SAN Luis Oeisao
4 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
t
�*l UA L,2,14_.a
Issues, Discussion and Suppo� Intormauon Sources
Sources
Pon
Sign. an
nti;dly
Sfigniicant
-• ....
6414$ X11
Tfpa
ER #13 -02
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
Issues
Unless
Impact
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, open space, and historic
I, I 1
Mitigation
X
buildings within a local or state scenic highway?
Ltcorporated
1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
1
X
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, open space, and historic
I, I 1
X
buildings within a local or state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of
'the site and its surroundings?
1, 11,
X
28
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely effect day or nighttime views in the area?
12, 30
X
Evaluation
a), b), c) The subject property is surrounded by urban uses and is located along Johnson Avenue which is identified as a
road of moderate scenic value. General Plan Policy CI 14.3.A states that "projects in the viewshed of a scenic roadway
should be considered as `sensitive' and require architectural review"
The project will result in the entitlement to build one additional single - family residence on the new parcel being created
(Parcel 2) and require demolition of an existing carport and construction of a new covered parking structure at the rear of
Parcel 1. Associated with the development is the removal of 4 pine trees as part of construction of the common driveway
and possibly additional trees with construction of the new residence. Tree removals could potentially impact views from the
Johnson Avenue corridor and surrounding properties. The Tree Committee considered the removal of the 4 trees in the
proposed common driveway and approved their removal at their August 26, 2002 meeting. As there are no immediate plans
for development on Parcel 2, no other tree removals are proposed at this time. The Tree Committee also required the
planting of street trees along the frontage of Parcel 1.
d) Any additional lighting would be that typical of single - family residential development which would not be a new source
of substantial light causing adverse effect on day or nighttime views in the area.
Conclusion
The designation of the lots as "sensitive sites," requiring architectural review is appropriate considering existing trees on
the site and existing adjacent residential rear yard privacy that could be affected by the introduction of new residential
development interior to the block. Impact is potentially significant unless mitigated.
Mitigation Measures
1. All trees shall be protected and preserved on the site unless otherwise approved for removal by the City Arborist.
Removal of any on -site tree shall require a City tree removal permit and mitigation to consist of on -site replanting.
2. The lots shall be designated as "sensitive sites," and development on either parcel shall be subject to architectural
review to ensure compatibility with the City's scenic roadway policies.
2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of
14
X
the California Resources Agency, to non - agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a
Williamson Act contract?
10
X
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland
12
X
to non - agricultural use?
`� CITY OF SAN LUIS Oe1SPo 5 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
�xti.t p,'f -4-
Issues, Discussion and Suppoo Information Sources sources Poti� Potentially LessThmi p"
Sign ,._.uu Significant Significant Impact
ER #13 -02 Issues unless Impact
Mitigation
Evaluation
a), c) The project site is comprised of Los Osos- Diablo complex, 9 to 15 percent slopes which is not considered "prime"
farmland or farmland of "Statewide Importance' by the U:S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Service.
b) There is no Williamson Act contract in effect on the project site.
Conclusion
No impact.
3. A_ IR QUALITY. Would the project:
a) . Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an
12,15,
existing- or.projecteid air quality violation?
16,30
X
b) Conflict with or.obstr ict implementation of the applicable air.
12,15;
quality plan?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
16,30
X
concentrations ?;
12,30
X
d) .Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number, of
people ?:
e) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of aty
12
}{
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment
under art applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions which exceed qualitative
12,15,
16,30
X
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
Evaluation
a), b), c), e) San Luis Obispo County is a non - attainment area for the State ozone and PMID (fine particulate matter 10
microns or less in diameter) air quality standards. State law requires that emissions of non - attainment pollutants and their
precursors be reduced by at least 5% per year until the standards are attained. The 1995 Clean Air Plan (CAP) for San Luis
Obispo County was developed and adopted by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) to meet that requirement. The CAP
is a comprehensive planning document designed to reduce emissions from traditional industrial and commercial sources, as
well as from motor vehicle use. Land Use Element Policy 1. 18.2 states that the City will help the APCD implement the
Clean Air Plan. One way the City helps the APCD implement the Clean Air Plan is through the development and
environmental review process.
The Air Quality Handbook finds that a project that produces 10 pounds a day of emissions will have a significant effect on
air quality. The construction of 35 homes results in the production of approximately 10 pounds of emissions per day. The
proposed project will ultimately allow the construction of one additional. home, therefore it can be assumed that less than
significant air quality impacts will result from construction of a new residence and an access drive. During project
construction, however, there will be increased levels of fugitive dust associated with construction and grading activities, as
well as, construction emissions associated with heavy -duty construction equipment. The City has addressed these
construction related impacts through standards in the Grading Ordinance and mitigation measures in the General Plan EIR.
Compliance with these standards is monitored during the building permit plan check process and by field inspections
conducted by Building Division inspectors.
d) No objectionable odors will emanate from the project.
Conclusion
Less than significant impact.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 6 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
,F4 1A 1. .. L. W%
Issues, Discussion and Suppor• Information Sources
Sources
Pure
Potentially
—•♦...
Less Than
N g , F7
No
through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a
Sign, It
.Significant
significant
Impact
ER X13 -02
candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Issues
Unless
Impact
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect, on any riparian habitat or
A1itigation
other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
12
Incorporated
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or indirectly or
through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
12
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect, on any riparian habitat or
other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
12
X
c) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance (e.g. Heritage Trees)?
12
X
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident
or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
wildlife nursery sites?
12
X
e) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved
local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
5, 12
X
f) Have a substantial adverse effect on Federally protected
wetlands as defined in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marshes, vernal pools, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
12
X
other means?
Evaluation
a), b) According the Natural Diversity Database of the California Department of Fish and Game, there are no species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on or near the project site, nor is riparian habitat
or other sensitive natural community identified.
c) There are several non - native tree species on the property including 7 Pinus radiata and 22 Pinus halepetisis. Four Pinus
radiata are proposed for removal as part of construction of the expanded driveway. Two of the trees are dead which will be
permitted to be removed and the other two trees were considered and approved for removal by the Tree Committee at their
August 26, 2002 meeting. These removals do not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation policy. The Tree Committee has required the planting of trees, however, to compensate
for the removal of the four pines.
d) As the property has been developed for over 50 years with a residential use and has been completely surrounded by urban
development for over 30 years, the division of the subject property and ultimate construction of an expanded driveway and
additional residence will not interfere with the movement of any wildlife species or migratory wildlife corridor.
e) The proposed project will not conflict with any local policy protecting biological resources nor any adopted habitat
conservation plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation
plan.
0 The site is not near any natural waterway and will therefore have no adverse effect on Federally protected wetlands.
Conclusion
Less than
des CITY OF SAN LUIS OEISPo 7 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
CM i bi'�-
Issues, Discussion and Suppo J Information Sources
sources
Pot J,
Potentially
Less'rhan
No
historic resource? (See CEQA Guidelines 15064.5)
Signrticant
Significant
Significant
Impact
ER #13 -02
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
Issues
Unless
Impact
archaeological resource? (See CEQA Guidelines 15064.5)
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
21,22
Mitigation
X
Incorporated
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historic resource? (See CEQA Guidelines 15064.5)
10,
21,22
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource? (See CEQA Guidelines 15064.5)
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
21,22
X
or site or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
11,21
X
formal cemeteries?
23
X
Evaluation
a), b) Based on review of the City's Historic Site Map and Land Use Information System, the project is not located on or near
a known sensitive archaeological site or historic resource.
c) There are no known paleontological resources or unique geologic features on the project site. The project site is mostly
developed, mostly paved and while bordering a tributary to Orcutt Creek, the proposed development will fully comply with
creek setbacks.
d) The project site is outside of the areas designated on the City's Burial Sensitivity Map as potential burial sites.
Conclusion
No impact.
6. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
b) Use non - renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient
6
X
manner?
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource
6, 12
X
that would be of value to the region and the residents of the
State?
6
X
Evaluation
a), b) The project is consistent with the City's Energy Conservation Element which encourages concentrations of residences
close to concentrations of employment. The additional dwelling that will likely result from the proposed lot split would be
considered an infill project as it would be surrounded by existing urban development, thereby reducing energy impacts that
could be created by placing additional housing further from existing development.
c) No known mineral resources exist within the project vicinity.
Conclusion
No impact.
7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse
effects, including risk of loss, injury or death involving:
1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated in the
most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area, or based on other
25
X
A CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 8 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
N
Issues, Discussion and Suppor( Information Sources
ER #13 -02
Sources
sigu�,�t I Significant Significant I Impact
Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
substantial evidence of a known fault?
IL Strong seismic "ground shaking? . 25 X
III. Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? 13 X
IV. Landslides ortnudflows? 10
X
b) Result in substantial soil :erosion or the loss of topsoil? 13,30 X
c) Be located on a geologic. unit or soil that is unstable, or that
would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially
result in on or-o&-site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, 13 X
liquefaction, or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994),.creating substantial risks to life 13 X
or DroDertv?
Evaluation
a), c) San Luis Obispo County, including the City of San Luis Obispo, is located within the Coast Range Geomorphic
Province, which extends along the coastline from central California into Oregon. This region is characterized by extensive
folding, faulting, and fracturing of variable intensity. In general, the folds and faults of this province comprise the
pronounced northwest trending ridge - valley system of the central and northern coast of California.
Under the Alquist- Priolo Special. Studies Zone Act, the State Geologist is required to delineate appropriately wide special
studies zones to encompass all potentially and recently- active fault traces deemed sufficiently active and well - defined as to
constitute a potential hazard to structures from surface faulting or fault creep. In San Luis Obispo County, the special
Studies Zone includes the San Andreas and Los Osos faults. The edge of this study area extends to the westerly city limit
line, near Los Osos Valley Road. According to a recently conducted geology study (source 16), the closest mapped active
fault is the Los Osos Fault, which runs in a northwest direction and is about one mile from the City's westerly boundary.
Because portions of this fault have displaced sediments within a geologically recent time (the last 10,000 years), portions of
the Los Osos fault are considered "active ". Other active faults in the region include: the San Andreas, located about 30 miles
to the northeast, the Nacimiento, located approximately 12 miles to the northeast, and the San Simeon - Hosgri fault zone,
located approximately 12 miles to the west.
Although there are no fault lines on the project site or within close proximity, the site is located in an area of "High Seismic
Hazards," specifically Seismic Zone 4, which means that future buildings constructed on the site will most likely be
subjected to excessive ground shaking in the event of an earthquake. Structures must be designed in compliance with
seismic design criteria established in the California Building Code for Seismic Zone 4. To minimize this potential impact,
the Uniform Building Code and City Codes require new structures to be built to resist such shaking or to remain standing in
an earthquake.
b) The project is a somewhat disturbed site as the existing single - family residence was constructed in approximately) 950.
The amount of original topsoil left is unknown. The USDA NRCS Soil Survey states that the Los Osos - Diablo complex, 9 to
15 percent slope soil is rated as medium surface run -off. As part of any future development on the site, the mitigation
measure below should be applied to ensure landscaping is installed to minimize run -off.
c), d) The Safety Element of the General Plan indicates that the project site has a high potential for liquefaction, which is
true for most of the City, and the site contains highly expansive soils as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building
Code (1994). A soils engineering report will be required to be submitted as part of the building permit process to insure the
integrity of the structures and infrastructure.
Conclusion
Potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated.
a CITY OF SAN LUIS OBIspo 9 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
Issues, Discussion and Suppo
ER #13 -02
Information Sources I Sources
3. Any future construction shall require preparation of a landscape plan to be approved by the Community Development
Director prior to building permit issuance, and landscaping shall be installed prior to final to insure minimal surface run -off.
8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
v
it
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
No
hnpact
through the routine use, transport or disposal of hazardous
materials ?:
Issues
Unless
Impact
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
Mitigation
3. Any future construction shall require preparation of a landscape plan to be approved by the Community Development
Director prior to building permit issuance, and landscaping shall be installed prior to final to insure minimal surface run -off.
8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine use, transport or disposal of hazardous
materials ?:
29
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
29
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
29
X
d) Expose people orstructures to existing sources of hazardous
emissions or hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste?
29
X
e) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, it would create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment?
12
X
0 For a project located within an airport land use plan, or within
two miles of a public airport, would the project result in a safety
hazard for the people residing or working in the project area?
g). Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, the
27
X
adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
4, 12
X
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of lose, injury,
or death, involving wildland fires, including where wildlands
are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residents are
4
X
intermixed with wildlands?
Evaluation
a) The project does not involve the routine use, transport, or disposal of hazardous materials.
b); c), d) The division of land and future construction of a single - family residence would not result in the release of
hazardous materials into the environment.
e) The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code § 65962.5.
f) The project site is more than 2 miles north of the San Luis Obispo County Airport, outside the Airport Land Use Plan
Area.
g) The project has been reviewed by the Fire Marshall and will not conflict with any emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan.
h) The Safety Element of the General Plan identifies the site as having a low potential for impacts from wildland fires.
CITY OF SAN Luis OBISPO
10 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
LI ' / A
a), c), d), h) The proposed redevelopment of the site will increase the amount of impervious surfaces on the site and
moderately affect% the absorption rate, drainage patterns, and the amount and rate of surface runoff. To ensure that potential
drainage impacts are minimized to a level of insignificance, redevelopment of the site will be required to be designed to meet
all applicable City codes, including City grading and drainage standards. Site drainage will be evaluated with the grading
plans as part of the required Architectural Review process. It is intended that the site would continue to drain into a private
drainage channel at the rtar (or bottom) of the property. Mitigation Measure #3 is imposed above (Geology and Soils) to
ensure landscaping is installed with construction to minimize loss of topsoil from run -off.
e) The project design does not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area in a manner which would
result in substantial flooding on -site or off -site as the site is already partially developed and compliance with City grading
and drainage standards would apply to any construction.
0, g) The project site appears to be out of the 500 -year flood zone per the Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map. Therefore, no future structure (i.e. house) on the property would impede or redirect flood flows or
occur within a 100 -year flood hazard area.
a CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 11 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
Issues, Discussion and Suppor G Information Sources Sources Pov rolentiauy Less
Sigr, -t Significant SiER # 13 -02 Issues Unless I
Mitigation
Incorporated
Conclusion
Less than significant impact.
9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
12
X
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would
be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level (e.g. The production rate of pre - existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses for which permits have been granted)?
12, 19
X
c) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.
12, 19
X
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or
siltation onsite or offsite?
30
X
e) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area in a manner which would result in substantial flooding
onsite or offsite?
30
X
f) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on
a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map
or other flood hazard delineation map?
26
X
g) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
h) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
26
X
12
X
Evaluation
b), h) A water allocation will be required for any additional residence creating addtional demand on the City's water supply.
The City currently has water to allocate, and does so on a "first -come, first- served" basis. Water is allocated at the time
building permits are issued and the Water Impact Fee is paid. Water will be provided by the City's Utilities Department and
will not use or otherwise deplete groundwater resources or interfere with groundwater recharge.
a), c), d), h) The proposed redevelopment of the site will increase the amount of impervious surfaces on the site and
moderately affect% the absorption rate, drainage patterns, and the amount and rate of surface runoff. To ensure that potential
drainage impacts are minimized to a level of insignificance, redevelopment of the site will be required to be designed to meet
all applicable City codes, including City grading and drainage standards. Site drainage will be evaluated with the grading
plans as part of the required Architectural Review process. It is intended that the site would continue to drain into a private
drainage channel at the rtar (or bottom) of the property. Mitigation Measure #3 is imposed above (Geology and Soils) to
ensure landscaping is installed with construction to minimize loss of topsoil from run -off.
e) The project design does not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area in a manner which would
result in substantial flooding on -site or off -site as the site is already partially developed and compliance with City grading
and drainage standards would apply to any construction.
0, g) The project site appears to be out of the 500 -year flood zone per the Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map. Therefore, no future structure (i.e. house) on the property would impede or redirect flood flows or
occur within a 100 -year flood hazard area.
a CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 11 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
�A VAW 14- A--
Issues, Discussion and SUppor Information Sources
ER #13 -02
Sources
-
Pou r
Sig" n
ISSUCS
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Incorporated
d
Conclusion
The project does not have the potential to significantly impact hydrology or water quality.
10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: -
a) Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of
an agency with jurisdiction. over the project adopted for the
purpose Of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? '
1,8
}(
b) Physicall y divide an established community?
c). Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
1, 10
X
community conservation plans?
1, 12
X
Evaluation
a) The project complies with all provisions of the General Plan Land Use Element. The proposed, subdivision would create
2 lots from one existing parcel. The project meets criteria for a categorical exemption from environmental review except that
the required setback of a structure (the existing house) from the proposed access road pavement for the flag lot is less than
the minimum. standard required by the Subdivision Regulations.;The proposed exception request to the Regulations is to
allow a 4 -foot setback where a 10 -foot setback is required. The reduced setback does not affect the project's ability to avoid
or mitigate an environmental effect. The proposed lots will meet subdivision requirements for depth, width, and minimum
size.
b) The project would result in a lotting pattern common to the neighborhood and the eventual construction of an additional
dwelling in a residential neighborhood. Therefore, the project can be considered infill and would not divide the established
community.
c) There is not a habitat or natural community conservation plan adopted for this area, therefore, the project would not
conflict with such.
Conclusion
Less than significant impact. City Council approval is required for minor subdivisions that include exceptions to subdivision
standards. Exceptions associated with this subdivision proposal are an issue of neighborhood compatibility property
aesthetics, safety and fire access.
11. _NOISE. Would the project result im
a) Exposure of people to or generation of "unacceptable" noise
levels as defined by the San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise
Element, or general noise levels in excess of standards
3, 18
X
established in the Noise Ordinance?
b) A substantial temporary, periodic, or permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the pi-oject?
30
X
c) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome
vibration or groundbome noise levels?
d) For a project located within an airport land use plan, or within
3, 18
X
two miles of .a public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project area to
27
X
excessive noise levels?
03199 CITY OF SAN. Luis QBISPO 12 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
G., I- "t
Issues, Discussion and Suppol Information Sources
Sources
Pot
Potentially
Less Phan
No
12: POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial :populatiop growth in an area, either directly
SigiOnt
Significant
Significant
Impact
ER # 13-02
- (for example by proposing new homes or businesses) or
indirectly (for example through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
Issues
Unless
Impact
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people
Mitigation
necessitating the construction of replacement 'housing
elsewhere?
30
Incorporated
n ..
Evaluation -
a) The proposed project itself will not generate unacceptable noise levels, only increased noise levels during construction as
discussed below. The City's Noise Element and Noise Guidebook identifies Traffic Noise Exposure Calculations for
Johnson Avenue as it is a residential arterial street. At build -out, exterior noise levels reach 60 dB at approximately 103 feet
from the edge of Johnson Avenue. Maximum noise exposure for a residence is 45 dB for indoor spaces and 60 dB for
outdoor activity areas. Parcel, #2 of the Parcel Map is approximately 137 feet from the edge of the Johnson Avenue right-of-
Way, therefore, noise exposure to any structure built on the proposed new parcel would not affected by "excessive" noise
levels. In addition, the fact that Johnson Avenue is elevated in relation to the project site and that an existing residence exists
between Johnson and any future development on Parcel 2, noise levels would be even less_ than identified in the Noise
Element, as those circumstances further reduce sound attenuation.
b), c) The project will not raise ambient noise levels in the project vicinity substantially. The project will, however, generate
noise during grading and construction which activities are subject to the Noise Ordinance to minimize impact to nearby
properties.
d) The project is not within the Airport Land Use Plan area, therefore, the project will not result in exposure of people to
excessive noise levels from aircraft operations.
Conclusion
Less than significant impact.
12: POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial :populatiop growth in an area, either directly
- (for example by proposing new homes or businesses) or
indirectly (for example through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
12,30
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people
necessitating the construction of replacement 'housing
elsewhere?
30
X
Evaluation
a) The Parcel Map would result in the availability of a parcel for construction of a single- faintily dwelling unit. Such use is
consistent with .Land Use and Housing Element policies encouraging a variety of housing types, efficient infill development,
and compact urban form. The possibility of one additional housing unit does not constitute "substantial population growth."
b) As there are no structures on the proposed new parcel, no housing or people would be displaced as a result of the project.
Conclusion
No impact.
13. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision, or need, of new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other
performance objectives for any of the public. services:
a) Fire protection?
b) Police protection?
c) Schools?
d) Parks?
e) Roads and other transportation infrastructure?
12
X
12
X
12
X
12
X
12
X
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 13 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
r4
Issues, Discussion and SUppo O Information Sources Sources
ER #13 -02
Significant Significant Impact
Unless Impact
Mitigation
f) Other public facilities?
12
X
Evaluation
a), b), c), d), e), f) The characteristics of the project do not present situations or conditions that would create potentially
significant impacts to services for fire, police, schools, parks, roads or other public facilities. The project has been evaluated
by the City's Fire Marshall, Chief Building Official, Public Works Department, Utilities Department, the local school district,
and affected utility companies, and no resource deficiencies have been identified.
Conclusion
Less than significant impact.
14. RECREATION. Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or
other recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
30
X
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
30
X
Evaluation
a), b) One additional home on this property will not create significant impacts to recreation services or facilities in the City.
Final approval of the new lot will also be subject to payment of the Park -In -Lieu fee designed to support park acquisition
(Quimby fees) and development.
Conclusion
Less than significant impact.
15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the
existing traffic load and capacity of the street system?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service
2, 12
X
standard established by the county congestion management
agency for designated roads and highways?
2, 12
X
c) Substantially increase hazards due to design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g.
farm equipment)?
30
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
e) Result in inadequate parking capacity onsite or offsite?
0 Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative
12, 30
X
9
X
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?.
g) Conflict with the San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use
Plan resulting in substantial safety risks from hazards, noise, or
a change in air traffic patterns?
2, 12
X
27
X
Evaluation
a), b) Traffic generation associated with an additional single - family lot will not significantly increase traffic on Johnson
Avenue nor exceed the level of service standards established by the County congestion management agency for nearby
streets and highways. Johnson Avenue is designated ac re6fie.ntial arterial ctraat ..Ath ,..: .. i o..e, ,.gee_.:..,, (r nON ,.47
�� CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 14 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
txfc (oi�— fi-
Issues, Discussion and Suppo•; Information Sources
ER #13 -02
SeL1«cs
Pa IV
Sig�nt
Issues
X
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
12
D. The latest traffic count information dates to 1998 at which time 14,310 average daily trips were documented with a Level
of Service B. A typical single - family residential use generates 10 trips /day which equates to a 0.06% increase in traffic.
This is an insignificant increase not affecting LOS.
C) There are no hazards which the project would be subject to or create, as Johnson Avenue is a 4 -lane residential arterial
street.
d) The project complies with the Fire Department's requirements for emergency access.
e) The existing garage is being removed in order to accommodate a common driveway serving both parcels. To ensure
adequate parking will be provided for the existing residence per the Municipal Code, a condition of the tentative map will
require the off - street and covered parking requirement to be met prior to approval of the final map. City parking standards
will apply to any new construction proposed on the new parcel.
f) The project does not conflict with alternative transportation policies in that the project does not impede any existing or
proposed bike baths, transit stops, etc.
g) The project is not within the Airport Land Use Plan area, therefore, there is no conflict with the Plan that-would result in
substantial safety risks from hazards, noise or a change in air traffic patterns.
Conclusion
No impact
io. u r ri,r,t r>r;"$ Atvu 6r,Kvlc:r: sYs'FEMS. Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction or expansion of new water
12
X
treatment, wastewater treatment, or storm drainage facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
12
X
C) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project
from.existing entitlements and resources, or are new and .
expanded water resources needed?
12
}t
d) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider
which serves or may, serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to
the provider's existing commitment?
12
X
e) Be served by a landfill-with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
f) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations
related to solid waste?
24
X
24
X
Evaluation
a), d) The City wastewater treatment plant has adequate capacity to serve this development, and the - existing sewers in the
vicinity have sufficient capacity to serve the development. Impact fees are collected at the time building permits are issued
to pay for capacity at the City's Water Reclamation Facility. The fees are set at, a level intended to offset the potential
impacts of the project. Wastewater impact fees are associated with water usage, so determination of :applicable impact fees
will be made at the building permit stage.
b) This project has been reviewed by the Utilities Department staff. Comments note that the project is subject to water
impact fees which were adopted to ensure that new development pays its fair share of the cost of constructing the water
CITY OF SANLUIS OBISPO 15 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
Issues, Discussion and Suppot Information Sources
C�
Sources
Pon y
sigi..
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
No
_)tt
Impact
ER #13 -02
Issues
Unless
Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
supply, treatment and distribution facilities that will be necessary to serve it.
c) The City has adopted Water Allocation Regulations to ensure that increased water use by new development and land use
changes do not jeopardize. adequate water service to current and new customers. Compliance with the provisions of the
Water Allocation Regulations and the water impact fee program is adequate to mitigate the effects of increased water
demand. A water allocation is required for any new residence on the new parcel. The City currently has water to allocate,
and does so on a "first -come, lust- served" basis. Water is allocated.at the time building permits are issued and the Water
Impact Fee is paid.
e), f) Background research for the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB939) shows that Californians dispose of
roughly 2,500 pounds of waste per month. Over 90% of this waste goes to landfills, posing a threat to groundwater; air
quality, and public health. Cold Canyon landfill is projected to reach its capacity by 2018. The Act requires each city and
county in California to reduce the flow of materials to landfills by 50% (from 1989 levels) by 2000. To help reduce the
waste stream generated by this project, consistent with the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element, recycling
facilities must be accommodated on the project site and a solid waste reduction plan for recycling discarded construction .
materials must be submitted with the building permit application. The residences will be subject to subscribing to the City's
trash collection service which provides receptacles for recycling and green waste materials consistent with the Source
Reduction and Recycling Element.
Demolition of the existing garage may trigger compliance with the City's construction debris recycling ordinance. This will
be determined upon submittal of a demolition permit application. Compliance with this ordinance will require the applicant
to prepare a plan to show how significant amounts of construction debris will be diverted from the landfill. The ordinance
also requires reporting on compliance with the approved plan, which is verified by area recycling companies and through the.
provision of receipts for recycled materials.
Conclusion
Less than significant impact.
17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or .
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
X
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a
rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
As discussed in the biological section of this study, there are no species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service on or near the project site, nor is riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified. The four
Pinus radiata proposed for removal do not serve as habitat for any candidate, sensitive, or special status species, and their
removal does not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation
policy. With regard to historical resources, the project is not located on or near a known sensitive archaeological site or
historic resource. There are no known paleontological resources or unique geologic features on the project site, and the
project site is outside of the areas designated on the City's Burial Sensitivity Map as potential burial sites.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects,
X
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 16 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
t- l i °b1 t- f}-
Issues, Discussion and SupporO Info rmation Sources
Sources
POLL
The proposed project's cumulative impacts are insignificant for the same reasons discussed in this study for project - specific
impacts.
Potentially
Less Than
No
Sigri,,�t
Significant
Significant
Impact
ER #13 -02
N/A
Issues
Unless
Impact
N/A
19. SOURCE REFERENCES. -
1.
City. of SLO General Plan Land Use Element, August 1994_
Mitigation
City of SLO General Plan Circulation Element, November _1994
3.
City of SLO General Plan Noise Element, May 1996
4.
City of SLO General Plan Safety Element, July 2000
Incorporalcd
City of SLO General Plan Conservation Element, July 1973
6.
the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable
Mum projects)
The proposed project's cumulative impacts are insignificant for the same reasons discussed in this study for project - specific
impacts.
c). Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
X
There are no environmental effects identified that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. While
construction noise may affect persons in the vicinity of the property" once construction of infrastructure, a residence or garage.
begins, it would last only for a relatively short period of time, and the City's noise thresholds must be met which have been
determined to be acceptable noise levels.
18. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier; analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR; or otlier CEQA process, one or 'more, effects have
been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration: Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case: a discussion
should.identify the following items:
a) analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where.they are available for review.
N/A
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above .checklist were within' the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
N/A
C) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation
measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -
specific conditions of the project. - -- — "
N/A
19. SOURCE REFERENCES. -
1.
City. of SLO General Plan Land Use Element, August 1994_
2.
City of SLO General Plan Circulation Element, November _1994
3.
City of SLO General Plan Noise Element, May 1996
4.
City of SLO General Plan Safety Element, July 2000
5.
City of SLO General Plan Conservation Element, July 1973
6.
City of SLO General Plan Energy Conservation Element, April 1981
7.
City of SLO Water and Wastewater Element, July 1996
8.
City of SLO General Plan EIR 1994 for Update to the Land Use and Circulation Elements
9.
City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code
10.
City of San Luis Obispo, Land Use Inventory Database
11.
Site Visit
12.
Staff Knowledge
13.
14.
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Soil Survey of San Luis Obispo County -
Website of the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency:
http://www.q(?psrv.ca.gov/dirp/FMMP/
15.
Clean Air Plan for San Luis Obispo County, Air Pollution Control District, 1995
16.
CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Air Pollution Control. District, 1995
17.
Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 6`h Edition, on file in the Community
Development Department
�6 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISpo 17 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
Issues, UIscussion and Suppol/1, Information Sources
0
ER #13 -02
Sources
PotDy
Sig nt
Iss' es
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
LcssThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
18.
City of San Luis Obispo Noise Guidebook, May 1996
19.
2001 City of San Luis Obispo Water Resources Report
20.
City of San Luis Obispo, Historic Resource Preservation Guidelines, on file in the Community Development
Department
21.
City of San Luis Obispo, Archaeological Resource Preservation Guidelines, on file in the Community
Development Department
22.
City of San Luis Obispo, Historic Site Map
23.
City of San Luis Obispo Burial Sensitivity Map
24.
25.
City of SLO Source Reduction and Recycling Element, on file in the Utilities Department
San Luis Obispo Quadrangle Map, prepared by the State Geologist in compliance with the Alquist - Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Act, effective January 1, 1990
26.
27.
Flood Insurance Rate Map (Community Panel 0603100005_ C) dated July 7, 1981
San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan
28.
Architectural Review Guidelines
29.
1997 Uniform Building Code
30.
Project Plans
All documents listed above are available for review at the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department,
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California (805) 781 -7172.
Attachment: Mitigation and Monitoring Program
�d� CITY OF SAN Luis OBISPo 18 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
r4
• O
Environmental Review #13 -02
Minor Subdivision #13 -02 (Lachemann), 2915 Johnson
MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM . .
AESTHETICS
All trees shall be protected and preserved on the site unless otherwise approved for removal by the
City Arborist. Removal of any on -site tree shall require a City tree removal permit and mitigation
to consist of on -site replanting.
• Monitoring Program: Compliance will be insured through final review of the project improvement
plans, building and grading plan check, and occupancy release.
--> Responsibility: City Arborist, Community Development Department Planning Division
2. The lots shall be designated as "sensitive sites," and development on either parcel shall be subject to
architectural review to ensure compatibility with the City's scenic roadway policies.
• Monitoring Program: The parcels' sensitive status shall be recorded against the deed of both
parcels, indicating the requirement for City architectural review, and so noted in the City's Land
Use Inventory database.
—� Responsibility: Community Development Department Planning Division
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
3. Any future construction shall require preparation of a landscape plan to be approved by the
Community Development Director prior to building permit issuance, and landscaping shall be
installed prior to final to insure minimal surface run -off.
• Monitoring Program: Compliance will be insured through final review of the project improvement
plans, building and grading plan check, and occupancy release.
—> Responsibility: Community Development Department Planning Division
i
tea® CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
(TI]
INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2002
PAN
�N AV6N�
1 S7 71— !
n _ 1
s,
m
\ y.u.
�O!\ � •AIL E � x i��
\ E a y
�y'rj
s 631
?asa
—901 jh x tE
cusT"
EIS
8
ua9
ms
V('r Pl r/
O
E. C"J egg§ Z,u^s�
>'
. „ OIaJ3w
Q �
AS pyyp
/m/
00
}g as
U� s°
1
B
.W1 �
s
all o
\
U
O
E
V] a
O
N
gg
U Yik •
4p
d
p
r
g$y�Eh3A
�
K,
U
Pga$g
r
e
$
b
1
all o
\
g8 �ehg $
E
e
gg
4p
d
p
g$y�Eh3A
1
f V
E
e
4p
p
g$
a�i
Pga$g
64'7 a
e
$
b
En
8
Mh
ri ^_
f V
s
Q O
RESOLUTION NO. 9375 (2002 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING AN EXPENDITURE OF 2002/03 LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT GRANT
FUNDS AND APPROVING A 1/9`h MATCH FROM THE GENERAL FUND
WHEREAS, the Federal Omnibus Appropriations Act, Public Law 104 -208, provides
funds for implementation of the Local Law Enforcement Block Grants Program to be administered
by the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), U.S. Department of Justice; and
WHEREAS, based on population, the City of San Luis Obispo is eligible to apply for the
amount of $30,469 from the Local Law Enforcement Block Grants Program; and
WHEREAS, as part of the application process, an advisory board was established to review
the application for funding, and has made non - binding recommendations for the use of funds by the
City of San Luis Obispo; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on October 15, 2002, to receive public input on the
recommendations of the advisory board;
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approves the
expenditure of $30,469 of Local Law Enforcement Block Grant fimds for security enhancements in
and around the Police Department facility and approves the appropriation of 1 /9' matching funds of
$3,385 from the General Fund, and authorizes the City Administrative Officer to make all grant
applications and execute all grant related documents.
Upon motion of Vice Mayor Marx, seconded by Council Member Mulholland, and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES
NOES:
ABSENT:
Council Members Ewan and Mulholland,
Mayor Settle
None
Council Member Schwartz
Vice Mayor Marx, and
the foregoing resolution was adopted this 15' day of October 2002
ayor Allen K. Settle
ATTEST:
Lee Price, C.M.C.
City Clerk
R 9375
Q o
Resolutio No. 9375 (2002 Series)
Page 2
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
,��rsoK City Attorney
0
o