HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/15/2005, PH 1 - CONSIDERATION OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO DESIGNATE 17 ACRES OF LAND FROM SERVICES AND MANUFACTU I
� j I
--
council memo Du
11-15-05
j acEnaa izEpout ; i
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
FROM: John.Mandeville, Director of Community Development
Prepared.By: Michael Codron, Associate Planner
SUBJECT- CONSIDERATION OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT_ TO
DESIGNATE 17 ACRES OF LAND FROM SERVICES AND
MANUFACTURING TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND
COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL AND CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL
EIR FOR THE 4-CREEKS PROJECT, WHICH INCLUDES BOTH THE
TUMBLING WATERS AND CREEKSTON DEVELOPMENT PLANS (ER
114-02); 791, 861 AND 953 ORCUTT ROAD, AND 3330 AND 3360 BROAD
STREET.
CAO RECOMMENDATION
1) As recommended by the Planning Commission, adopt a resolution to:
a. Conceptually approve a General Plan Amendment to designate 17 acres of land from
Services and Manufacturing to High Density Residential and Community Commercial.
Direct staff to place the item on the Council's agenda for December 6, 2005, to
coordinate final action with other General Plan Amendments scheduled for consideration_
before the end of the calendar year; and
b. Certify the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Four Creeks Project, including
approval of findings for significant environmental effects, a Statement of Overriding
Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring Program.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
This item is the first of three agenda items that cover the Four Creeks project. This report
evaluates the proposed General Plan Amendment and the Final EIR for the total project: Agenda
Items #2 and #3 cover the development plans and subdivisions proposed for the Tumbling
Waters and Creekston portions of the site, respectively. In 2002, the City Council initiated a
General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation on the project site from Services
and Manufacturing to High Density Residential (Attachment 1, Vicinity Map — Attachment 2,
Council Minutes 7-2-02). Within 18 months of the Council's action; two development plans had
been submitted covering different portions of the project site and the environmental review
process began. On October 12, 2005, the Planning Commission voted 5-1 to recommend
approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment and certification of the Final EIR. The Final
EIR for the Four.Creeks Project evaluates the impacts of the two development plans, which are
referred to as Tumbling Waters and Creekston. The proposed General Plan Amendment covers
both properties and is consistent with the General Plan because it would further specific Housing
Element (HE) goals for mixed-income housing (HE Goal 4.1), housing variety and tenure (HE
Goal 5.1), and housing production (HE Goal 6.1), and is consistent with Land Use Element
Four Creeks GPA and Final EIR_(GPA/ER_114-02) . Page 2.
(LUE) policies for the development of residential neighborhoods (LUE Chapter 2.0) and Open
Space Element (OSE) policies for creek protection (OSE Chapter 3). The Final EIR evaluates all
of the potentially significant environmental impacts of the project. One impact, cumulative air
quality, is identified as Class I, significant, adverse and unavoidable: The Planning Commission
is also recommending that the Council find two aesthetics mitigation measures infeasible because
they limit building height on the Creekston site to 45 feet, reducing project density. As a result,
Aesthetics Impact 4 is considered significant, adverse and unavoidable. All other environmental
impacts that are identified in the Final EIR can be mitigated to a less than significant level.
DISCUSSION
Situation/Previous Review
On February 17, 2004, the City Council approved the RFP for the Final EIR by consent. The
project has been to the Planning Commission on three occasions since the RFP was issued. On
July 28, 2004, the Commission held a hearing to receive public comments on the scope of work
for the EIR. On May 25, 2005, the Commission reviewed the Draft EIR. Finally, on October 12,
2005, the Commission reviewed the proposed entitlements and made their recommendation to
the Council. During each of these meetings the Commission discussed the projects in depth and
provided. direction to staff and the applicants regarding the project. The majority of the
Commission agreed that both projects provide what was asked for during the preliminary reviews
and that the proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of the
General Plan.
Review Procedure
Staff has prepared three separate agenda reports covering all of the recommendations that the
Council is being asked to consider. A summary of these reports follows:
• Agenda Item #1, GPA/ER 114-02: An overview of the proposed general plan
amendment and rezoning, initiated by the City Council in 2002, and the Final.EIR. The
report covers the policy basis for the General Plan Amendment and discusses the major
environmental impacts of the proposed development projects, and the required
environmental findings.
• Agenda Item#2, PD/TR 151-03: An overview of the Tumbling Waters project, including
required findings for the proposed Planned Development rezoning and vesting tentative
subdivision map.
• Agenda Item #3; PD/TR 164-02: An overview of the Creekston project; including
required findings for the proposed Planned Development rezoning and vesting tentative
subdivision map.
The actions associated with this agenda item include amending the General Plan Land Use
Element Map to change the designation on the project site from Services and Manufacturing to
High Density Residential and Community Commercial, and certification of the Final EIR for the
I
Four Creeks GPA and Final EIR_(GMER 114-02) _ __ Page 3
project: The Final EIR evaluates the development plans which are recommended for approval as
part of the subsequent agenda items. During the public hearing, staff will provide one
presentation to cover all three agenda items associated with the Four Creeks Project. After the
staff presentation, the Council may choose to take public testimony for all three agenda items at
one time, before discussing the recommended actions. This strategy worked well for the
Planning Commission because it allowed them to consider the staff presentation and all of the
public testimony before their discussion of the project.
Project Description
The Four Creeks Project is a City initiated general plan amendment and rezoning project, which
would designate 17 acres of industrial land for High Density Residential uses, including 1.6 acres
of land designated Community Commercial for mixed-use development. Two development
plans have been submitted covering different portions of the property. The Tumbling Waters
Development Plan covers 11.7 acres on 861 and 953 Orcutt Road. The Creekston Development
Plan covers 5.3 acres on 791 Orcutt, 3330 Broad and 3360 Broad. The Tumbling Waters and
Creekston development plans are used as the basis for evaluating the overall environmental
impacts of the project.
Tumbling Waters: This portion of the development would include 178 for-sale residential units
on a net site area of 7.8 acres, split by the Sacramento Drive right-of-way. Total density of the
project is equivalent to 23.59 units per acre. Several different ,residential building types are
proposed and most units are clustered in buildings of 2, 3,4; 6 and 9 units.
Creekston- This portion of the project area would include a total of 86 residential units and
approximately 10,000 square feet of commercial floor area. The project site has a net site area of
16 acres and density is equivalent to 24.17 units per acre. Four unit types are proposed,
including mixed-use apartments and "hoffices" (home/office or live-work spaces), courtyard
homes, zero lot-line homes, and flats.
Broad Street Parcels: The EIR looks at the potential for including four parcels of land on Broad
Street, south of the Creekston site, into the rezoning project. However, no changes in zoning are
recommended for the Broad Street Parcels at this time because existing zoning allows residential
development as part of a mixed-use project. Furthermore, rezoning the land to a residential zone
would make existing commercial uses on these properties non-conforming.
Evaluation
General Plan Amendment
The idea to consider high-density residential development on the project site became General
Plan policy when the Housing Element was adopted in 2004. As part of the process to adopt the
2004 Housing Element, and have it certified by the State, the City planned to accommodate 2,909
additional dwelling units between January 2001 and July 2009 (Housing Element Policy 6.2.1).
One of the primary strategies used by the City to meet this policy objective is to enable infill
development.. Program 6.3.7 and Figure 1 of the Housing Element identify the project site as one
1-�
Four Creeks GPA and Final EIR(GPA/ER 114-02) Page 4
of several to be considered for high density, infill development. Now that the Final EIR for the
project is completed, the City Council has a significant amount of information to better
understand the environmental impacts of the proposed change to the General Plan.
The following graphic shows the proposed land use designations and zoning for the project site:
CS-PD M M
O-S
Mage Makerylace CS C-S M
(Proposed GC:Carrealy Cis!)
OACUTT _
CS-PD C-C-PD
CS R-3
Cieek4on R-4PD
R-2
Tumbing Wates
R-2-PD
GC-PD M
R-2 b
Broad Street Parc ah(C-SS)
iNo Chonge) CIS-PD O
The City's General Plan was a major source of information for the Final EIR. The City of San
Luis Obispo has not adopted a list of environmental thresholds. Therefore, General Plan policies
effectively establish the thresholds that are used to determine whether or not an environmental
impact is considered potentially significant, requiring mitigation. This is particularly true of the
City's Circulation Element (Level of Service standards and scenic corridor policies), and Noise
Element (maximum noise exposure standards). In addition, the Open Space Element (OSE)
provides development practices for creek and wetland preservation and a local classification of
sensitive habitats and unique resources, which are considered in the environmental document and
recommended mitigation measures. Therefore, many mitigation measures that are recommended
in the Final EIR help to insure that the project is developed in a manner that is consistent with
specific General Plan policies.
The Planning Commission is recommending approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment
because it is consistent with the General Plan and furthers the City's objectives for housing
production, based on the findings provided in Section 1 of the proposed Council Resolution
(Attachment 4).
Final Environmental Impact Report
The Draft EIR was published in May and since that time staff has worked with the applicants to
make revisions to the project to respond to those mitigation measures that can be implemented
through plan revisions. These recent project changes are reflected in the plans provided for the
Council and include modifications to the site plans, landscape plans, building designs, and the
right-of-way configuration of Sacramento Drive. They differ from the project plans shown in the
�-y
Four Creeks GPA and Final EIR(GPAtut 114-o2) Page 5
Final EIR because they are more recent. These project modifications are discussed under the
headings Project Response,below.
The following is a summary of the major biological, traffic, noise, and aesthetics impacts
identified in the Final EIR.
Biological Resources
Summary of Impacts: The Final EIR identifies 8 potentially significant impacts to biological
resources, and provides 18 mitigation measures to reduce these impacts to less than significant
levels. These impacts are related to aquatic, riparian, wetland, ruderal vegetation and disturbed
annual grassland habitats. Specific plant species that may be impacted by the project include
Obispo Indian paintbrush, Jones' layia and adobe sanicle (BIO/mm-15). Roosting monarch
butterflies could also be threatened by the project, depending on the time of year of construction
(BIO/mm-17).
Project Response: The recommended mitigation measures include requirements for mitigation
plans for those plant and animal species found to be present prior to construction. Biological
monitoring is also required during construction for certain project components, such as bridges.
The applicants for the Creekston project have revised project plans to retain the eucalyptus grove
along the eastern edge of the project site.
On the Tumbling Waters site, impacts to wetlands are identified in the area where Sacramento
Drive is proposed. In this case, the applicants have responded by proposing to re-align the creek
channel to the west side of the roadway instead of covering the creek in a culvert., This solution
was recommended by the Natural Resources Manager and allows for wetland impacts associated
with Sacramento Drive construction to be mitigated on-site; in-kind. The change also adds a
significant natural feature to the project site that will benefit water quality, site drainage and
aesthetics.
As required by BIO/mm-8, both projects will provide. Re-vegetation and Restoration Plans to
mitigate potential impacts to the riparian areas on the project site.
Transportation and Circulation
Summary of Impacts: The Final EIR identifies 31 potentially significant impacts to
transportation and circulation, and provides 22 mitigation measures to reduce these impacts to
less than significant levels. Locations where off-site improvements are required include the
Broad/South Street intersection; the CapitolioBroad Street intersection and the Orcutt Road
segment from the railroad tracks to the Laurel Lane intersection. The Final EIR also identifies
pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and access impacts, which can be fully mitigated through on-site and
off-site improvements and changes to the project plans, as specified by each mitigation measure.
During their review of the_project, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council
delete TR/mm-3, which required the applicants to install a signal at the intersection of Orcutt
Road and Laurel Lane prior to occupancy. Interim improvements, including a stop sign for
westbound Orcutt Road traffic, have been installed at this intersection by the City to address
Four Creeks GPA and Flnal EIR(GPAIER 114-02) Page 6
safety concerns. After the Final EIR.was published, the City was successful in obtaining a grant
for the signal installation, and a CIP has been included in the FY 2005=2007 Financial Plan. The
Commission determined that TR Impact 3 is fully mitigated by the future signalization project
and the interim improvements that were installed in August 2005. Since the stop sign was
installed,there have been no collisions at this.intersection.
Project Response: . The proposed mitigation measures for off-site improvements will require
coordination with other agencies, including Caltrans and Union Pacific Railroad. In each of
these cases (TR Mitigation Measures 1, 2, 4, and 5) the recommended mitigation measures give
the applicant the ability to pay a mitigation fee and request that the City be the lead agency for
pursuing the necessary encroachment permits and constructing the improvements. This has been
requested by the applicants because of the uncertainty of the timing involved with pursuing
permits through both agencies. Therefore, it should be expected that the City will take the lead
on Orcutt Road construction between the Tumbling Waters site and the Laurel Lane/Orcutt Road
intersection, where the roadway crosses the railroad tracks. The applicants are not responsible
for the total cost of these improvements, and a reimbursement agreement would be created to
insure that future development in the vicinity, particularly in the Orcutt Area, pays its fair share
of the required improvements. The City may also take the lead on the minor intersection
improvements required for Broad/South intersection, which include converting one through lane
to a left turn lane so that there will be two left turn lanes from Broad Street onto westbound
South Street. A third off-site improvement required at the Capitolio and Broad Street
intersection is expected to be completed shortly by adjacent development.
Through-Traffic at Creekston
One of the impacts and mitigation measures related to transportation,TR Impact 16 and TR/mm-
14, addresses a problem with on-site circulation on the Creekston project. The traffic study for
the project indicates that through access on the project site is necessary to avoid conflicts at the
Orcutt/McMillan driveway.. The essential finding of the traffic study is that all users of the
project must be able to use the Broad Street driveway to facilitate access to northbound Broad
Street. Making a right tum out of the Broad Street driveway is a safer maneuver than a left turn
out of the Orcutt Road driveway and then a subsequent right tum onto Broad Street. During the
PM peak; the traffic study found that there was a significant delay for those vehicles turning left
out of the driveway, which creates impacts to on-site circulation. Normally impacts to on-site
circulation are not a significant concern. However, in this case, if cars entering the site from
Orcutt Road are prevented from turning into parking aisles along the Orcutt Road frontage,
traffic could back up into the roadway.
In order to address this impact in a way that is consistent with the applicant's desires to create a
`car-free' zone in the center of the project site, and consistent with the project's circulation
requirements, the Planning Commission recommended a compromise solution. The
Commission supported a narrow roadway with a reduced lane width at the center of the project
site. This reduced width roadway would allow vehicle traffic to have access to both driveways
on the project site during the peak times when turning queues develop at the Orcutt Road
driveway, but would also allow for a design that was comfortable for pedestrians and adjacent
residences. A minimum 20' width would still be maintained for emergency access, but through
/I"
Four Creeks GPA and Final EIR (GPA/ER 114-02) Page 7
a combination of turf block and decorative paving, the design of the roadway in this location
could be minimized in favor of pedestrian features. Final design of the roadway at this location
would be subject to review by the Architectural Review Commission. Other possible solutions
to this issue will be discussed with the Council during the public hearing.
Noise
'Summary of Impacts: Noise levels on the project site are significant because of the setting
adjacent to the railroad tracks, along two major roadways, and within an aircraft over-flight zone.
These noise sources are also located at different elevations relative to the site, making barriers an
aesthetically challenging option. While the buildings can be designed in a seamless way to meet
the interior noise level standard of 45dB LDN (day/night average), meeting the exterior noise
requirement of 60 dB LDN require more significant design modifications.
Proiect Response: The Final EIR analysis shows that outdoor noise levels can be reduced to
nteet City standards through a variety of measures, including strategic building orientation, noise
barriers or the elimination of outdoor activity areas where noise levels exceed 60dB LDN. While
all three of these methods will be used, the Noise Element says that walls are the least preferred
method for attenuating sound, and the EIR identifies aesthetic impacts from potential noise
barriers as a secondary impact. As a result, the applicants have received direction from staff to
avoid the extensive use of walls, per General Plan Policy.
The Tumbling Waters site plan has been revised since the Draft EIR was published to
reconfigure the row of buildings along Orcutt Road for better sound attenuation at the center of
the site. However, since it will not be possible for every unit within the project to have private
outdoor space associated with their unit, the Planning Commission has recommended modified
standards for private outdoor space as part of the PD ordinances for both projects.
This is consistent with the purpose of the Planned Development (PD) process. One of the
required findings for approving modifications to City standards as part of a PD states:
The approved modifications to the development standards of these Zoning
Regulations are necessary and appropriate to accommodate the superior design of
the proposed project, its compatibility with adjacent land uses, and its successful
mitigation of environmental impacts. (SLOMC 17.62.045.B.3.).
The Planning Commission is recommending a standard for private outdoor space that will allow
the project to successfully mitigate noise impacts, thereby insuring that future residents are not
exposed to excessive noise levels. As an alternative to the Property Improvement Standards for
New Condominium Projects (SLOMC 17.82.140), the Planning Commission is recommending
the following language as part of the PD ordinances for both development sites:
The numerical standards of the Property Improvement Standards for New
Condominium Projects (SLOMC 17.82.140.A, B, C and D) shall be waived in
favor of a qualitative review of the requirements to insure compliance with the
intent of the standards, while accommodating the superior design of the proposed
' 1
Four Creeks GPA and Final EIR(GPAIER 114-02) Page 8
project and its successful mitigation of noise impacts. The Architectural Review
Commission shall be responsible for evaluating the project for compliance with
the following project:imperative:
• The project meets the open space requirements of the High-Density
Residential zone by providing "common outdoor areas and very compact
private outdoor spaces," except where outdoor use areas would expose
residents to excessive noise levels and where the design of noise attenuation
measures (such as stand-alone sound walls) would be inconsistent with the
City's Community Design Guidelines. Decks that are 3 feet in depth or less
shall be considered architectural features instead of usable open space areas
and shall not be subject to noise attenuation requirements.
This requirement will insure that sufficient private and common open space areas are provided
on-site, where they are architecturally compatible with the site and surroundings and where noise
exposure concerns can be adequately addressed.
Aesthetic Resources
Summary of Impacts: Portions of Orcutt Road and Broad Street adjacent to the project site are
identified as scenic corridors in Figure 6 of the Circulation Element (Scenic. Roadways Map).
Impacts are identified to scenic resources because some proposed buildings adjacent to the
roadways block views of hillsides, such as the South Street Hills and Islay Hill (Aesthetics
Impact 1). Impacts are also identified because of the height of the loft buildings proposed on the
Creekston site. At 57 feet tall, the EIR says that these buildings would be out of scale with the
setting and surrounding development (Aesthetics Impact 4).
Project_Response: Mitigation Measure AES/mm-1 requires a 30-foot height maximum for
buildings within 100 feet of Orcutt Road, and a 35-foot height maximum for buildings within
150 feet of Orcutt Road (AES/mm-1). This mitigation measure applies only to buildings west of
Sacramento Drive. AES/mm-3 and AES/mm-4 require the height of the proposed loft buildings
on the Creekston site to be reduced from 57 feet tall to 45 feet tall. The Planning Commission
recommendation differs from the Final EIR for these mitigation measures, as follows:
AES/Trim-1
Project plans have been significantly revised for both projects to address the aesthetics concerns
identified by AES/mm-1 in the Final EIR. The proposed plan revisions are not consistent with
the mitigation measures provided in the Final EIR, but the changes will reduce impacts to
surrounding scenic roadways to less than significant levels. The following lists summarize the
changes each project has made.
Tumbling Waters:
1) The number of units at the northwest comer of the project site (the impact area) has
been reduced from 17 units to 9 units, significantly reducing the scale and mass of the
/^
Four Creeks GPA and Final EIR(GPA/ER 11402) Page 9
buildings.
2) The duplex units that are now proposed in the impact area are significantly lower in
height (2 stories above parking instead of 3 stories above parking) than the four-plex
units evaluated in the Final EIR. Each of these buildings is also approximately 7 feet
narrower;reducing the duration of the potential view blockage along Orcutt Road.
3) The applicants are pursuing revisions to the grading plan to lower the finished grade
in the impact area by approximately two feet, further reducing the relative height of
the proposed buildings. As proposed, the buildings in the impact area would stand
approximately 35 feet above existing grade, meeting the requirement of AES/mm-1
for buildings within 150 feet from the edge of the roadway, but still inconsistent with
the 30-foot height limit for buildings within 100 feet of the roadway.
Creekston Project:
I) The row of eucalyptus trees along the eastern edge of the development area will be
maintained. The trees will be safety pruned and impacts associated with their
removal (aesthetics and biological) will be reduced to insignificant levels.
2) The two 57' tall loft buildings will be relocated to the east side of the site, adjacent to
the row of eucalyptus trees. The proposed loft buildings do not pierce the ridgeline of
the South Street Hills and in this location are partially screened in the foreground by
the tall trees.
3) The three mixed-use buildings at the front of the site have been clustered at the
eastern end of the site to improve the line of site from Orcutt Road to the South Street
Hills. The relocation of the buildings in this manner reduces the obstruction by over
60 feet, or by about 1/3 of the frontage.
The Planning Commission determined that the plan revisions proposed by the applicants have
reduced the potential impacts to less than significant levels. Alternative mitigation measures for
AES Impact 1 are recommended in Exhibit A to the proposed Council Resolution (Attachment 3,
Exhibit A).
Aesthetics Impact 4 -AES/mm-3 and AES/mm4
These mitigation measures recommend a maximum building height of 45 feet for the lofts, and
aggressive landscaping. At 57' tall, the EIR consultant has determined that the loft buildings
would be `but-of-scale with the rest of the project, the setting, and inconsistent with the
pedestrian viewing experience." In this case, the plan revisions improve the project design, but
are not considered sufficient to mitigate the impact to a less than significant level.
The Planning Commission is recommending that the City Council approve the proposed building
height by overriding considerations because they have determined that the mitigation measures
recommended in the Final EIR are infeasible. The Commission's decision was based on the fact
that the loft buildings include 36 units that are "affordable by design" because they are 850
�r 9
I '
Four Creeks GPA and Final EIR_(GPA/ER_114-02) Page 10
square feet each. These are an important aspect of the project's density and affordability and
contribute to the variety of housing cost, type and tenure within the project. Secondly, the
Commission determined that increased building height was necessary to achieve high-density
development on this site, because 2.5 acres consist of protected riparian areas.
Staff is supportive of the proposed building designs for three principal reasons:
1) All of the height between 45' and 57' is stepped back from the main building face so that the
taller portions of the buildings will appear less massive when viewed from a distance and will
not be visible at all from the ground immediately adjacent to the.buildings.
2) The proposed loft buildings are located 200 feet from the closest public sidewalk, so the
proposed building height will not create a looming, claustrophobic experience from the
public streets or sidewalk.
3) The relocation of the loft buildings to the east side of the site, where they can be placed
adjacent to a tall stand of eucalyptus trees, provides context for the height of the buildings.
Exhibit A to the proposed Council Resolution includes the Planning Commission's findings for
aesthetics impacts (Attachment 3, Exhibit A, Section V.G) and the Statement of Overriding
Considerations (Attachment 3, Exhibit A, Section VHD for the Council's review.
CONCURRENCES
The Planning Commission is recommending approval of the Four Creeks project, including
approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment and certification of the Final EIR.. The
project was reviewed for consistency with the Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) by the Airport
Land Use Commission (ALUC) on October 19, 2005. The ALUC determined that the project
was consistent with the ALUP. The project has also been reviewed by the Air Pollution Control
District, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, the California Department of Fish and
Game, the Army Corps of Engineers and Caltrans. Each of these agencies will have permitting
responsibilities during the construction phase of the project.
FISCAL IMPACT
When the General Plan was prepared, it was accompanied by a fiscal impact analysis of on-going
costs and revenues, which found that overall the General Plan was fiscally balanced. If the
proposed General Plan Amendment is approved, new costs and revenue sources are anticipated;
however, given the scale of the project, the fiscal.impact of the change is likely to be small.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Continue the project to a date certain and provide staff and the applicants with direction on
changes that need to be made to the project or additional information that needs to be
provided before the Council can make a decision.
Four Creeks GPA and Final EIR(GPIA/ER 11402) Page 11
2. Deny the project if the required findings for subdivision approval or Planned Development
zoning cannot be affirmed. This alternative is not recommended because the Planning
Commission has recommended findings required for approval of the proposed entitlements.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: Vicinity Map
Attachment 2: Council Minutes -July 2!2002
Attachment 3` Resolution,Approving GPA in concept and Certifying the Final EIR
Exhibit A: CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Exhibit& General Plan Amendment Exhibit
PROVIDED FOR COUNCIL
Final EIR for the.Four Creeks Rezoning Project; October 2005
Tumbling Waters Development Plan, Revised August 10, 2005
Creekston Development Plan, Revised October 3, 2005
Full=Size Project Plans
Planning Commission Minutes will be provided.to the Council on Thursday, 11610-05,after
they are approved by the Commission.
The above information is also available for review by the public at the Community Development
Department, 990 Palm Street.
COUNCIL READING FILE
A. Planning Commission Agenda Packet for October 12, 2005, including draft minutes..
LAMTumbling WaterACAR 11-15-05(ER-GPAI14-02-graphics).doc
1p
�1II G J111 `' ♦,♦,♦♦ ♦♦ ,1'
I��, � � Ilrr_ X14 � ` ♦♦♦♦♦♦ , �,�
11►� Ild d,l� `�
WA
FAM
MARI
PAP ♦ .
• • `` ` • r
� -
�rf' '•_ '�� . r v f
� ♦
M711, 17 na tin, GPA/ER
114-02
200 0 200 Feet
Attachment 2
City Council Meeting Page 6
Tuesday,July 2,2002-7:00 p.m.
Marv_BethSchroeder.2085 Wilding Lane,spoke against this development and urged the
Council to reconsider the project
Vice Mayor Marx closed the public hearing.
ACTION: Moved by Mulholland/Ewan to introduce Ordinance No.-1420(2002
Series) as recommended by the Planning Commission,approving a Negative
Declaration of environmental impact,and amending the City's zoning map
designation from Central-Commercial with the Historical Preservation and Planned
Development overlay zones(C-C-H-PD)to Central-Commercial with the Historical
Preservation overlay zone(C-C-H)for the Court Street parking lot site(999
Monterey Street),based on findings; motion carried 4:0
BUSINESS ITEMS
4. CONSIDERATION OF THE-PLANNING.COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO
INITIATE AN AMENDMENT TO THE'GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT AND
REZONE.PROPERTIES BOUNDED BY ORCUTT ROAD, BROAD STREET(STATE
HIGHWAY 227).ACACIA CREEK AND THE RAILROAD TRACKS TO CHANGE THEIR_
DESIGNATION FROM SERVICES AND MANUFACTURING-TO HIGH-DENSITY-
RESIDENTIAL,AND AMENDMENT OETHE.CIRCULATIO_N_ELEMENT REGARDING
TH .SACRAMENTO DRIVE EXTENSION.
Associate Planner Hook presented the staff report and responded to questions from the
Council.
Public Comments:
Dan Lemburo,560 Higuera Street(owner of 3210,3220,3230,3240 Broad Street),summarized
comments in his letter to Council(on file in the Office of the City Clerk)requesting that any
consideration to rezone his property would be to a change it to Neighborhood Commercial
(CN)or Retail Commercial(CR). He responded to questions from the Council.
Dave Romero,2057 Skylark,spoke in support of the staff recommendation.
Brett Cross,1217 Mariner's Cove(speaking on behalf of the Board.of Residents for Quality
Neighborhoods[RON]),summarized points outlined in their correspondence to the Council
on this issue(letter on file in the Office of the City Clerk). He noted that RQN was supportive
of rezoning the property from Services and Manufacturing to High Density Residential if the
City adopted detailed design guidelines and a planned development overlay for the project
James Caruso,3954 Sunrose Lane(speaking as a_ member of the public and not as a member
of the Planning Commission),spoke in favor of the staff recommendation and noted that the
San Luis Obispo real estate market shows that the City is in need of more high density
zoning. He also argued in favor of making improvements to traffic circulation by constructing
additional overpasses to decrease impact on neighbors.
—end of public comments—
Council Member Schwartz expressed general support for the staff recommendation but
wanted the addition of a planned development overlay. He urged Council not to limit the
height to three stories,to seek opportunities for architectural design,to define creek set
backs,to appreciate the open space,to give variety to the units,to generate as much
housing as possible and to create a family-oriented neighborhood.
Attachment 2
City Council Meeting Page 7
Tuesday,July 2,2002-7:00 p.m.
Council Member Ewan agreed and observed potential opportunities for circulation and
alternative transportation.
Council Member Mulholland voiced conceptual agreement to rezoning the property but
argued that it would be preferable to adopt design criteria and examine issues relating to
parking,density, low to moderate income housing,structures in the creek and the
Sacramento Road alignment, prior to taking any action.
City Attorney Jorgensen clarified that Council was not considering a rezoning at this time,
but rather the initiation of General Plan Land Use and Circulation amendments and
rezoning.
Vice Mayor Marx noted support for initiating the General Plan amendments and for
maximizing the use of the property by building as many units possible without impacting
the creeks. She concurred with Council Member Schwartz regarding architectural variety
and wanted affordable units built on site ratherthan deferring them to the inclusionary
housing fund. She also favored investigating ways to encourage alternative transportation
and shared concern about traffic impacts and the Sacramento Street alignment. She
expressed a desire to include Mr.Lemburg's property in the study and added that whatever
happens to his properties should remain compatible with the housing.
ACTION: Moved by Schwartz/Ewan to direct staff to Initiate General Plan Land Use
and Circulation amendments and rezoning as recommended by the Planning
Commission; and to encourage staff to look at the multitude of concepts mentioned
by the Council as well as the points outlined in the letter of June 28,2002 from
RO.N; and,further,to examine area wide circulation as part of this study;.motion
carried 4.0.
5. APPROVE THE 2002-2003 PROMOTIONAL COORDINATING COMMITTEE(PCC)
GRANTS-IN-AID RECOMMENDATIONS.
Assistant to the City.Administrative.Officer DeJarnette presented the.staff report.
Promotional Coordinating Committee(PCC)Subcommittee Chairperson Hunt Roberts
recapped the.PCCrecommendations.
.Public Comment:
Mary Beth Schroeder,2085 Wilding Lane,reiterated hopes that Council would move the
Senior Center to 1341 Nipomo Street.
---end of public comment.-
ACTION: Moved by Mulholland%Schwartz to adopt a Resolution No.9341 (2002
Series),as recommended by the Promotional Coordinating Committee(PCC),
approving 2002-2003 grants4n-aid and authorizing the City Administrative Officer to
execute agreements with each grant recipient as described in Exhibit"A" attached
to the resolution,and inclusive of any modifications made by the Council; motion
carred 4.0.
COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS
Council Member Ewan distributed a copy of the Air Pollution Control District(APCD)letter
regarding Union Pacific Railroad train engine complaints(on file in the Office of the City
Clerk).
Attachment 3
Council Resolution No. (2005 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT
MAP IN CONCEPT AND CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR THE FOUR CREEKS RESIDENTIAL
REZONING PROJECT (GPA/ER 114-02)
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in
the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on November
15, 2005, for the purpose of considering Planning Application GPA/ER 114-02, a City initiated
General Plan map amendment to re-designate approximately 17 acres of land from Services and
Manufacturing to High Density Residential and Community Commercial; and
WHEREAS, said public hearing was for the purpose of formulating and forwarding
recommendations to the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo regarding the General Plan
amendment and Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR); and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted public
hearings in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on
December 3, 2003, July 28, 2004, May 25, 2005 and October 12, 2005 for the varied purposes of
directing the scope of the environmental review for the project, reviewing revised plans and
making recommendations to staff and the applicant, and considering a final recommendation to
the City Council on the project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the Final EIR and has
determined that the environmental document represents the independent analysis of the City and
adequately addresses the potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony
of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations of the Planning
Commission and staff; presented at said hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
Section 1. Based upon all the evidence, the Council makes the following findings in
support of the General Plan Amendment:
1. The High Density Residential land use designation proposed for the site is consistent with
the General Plan because it will further Housing Element goals for mixed-income
housing (HE Goal 4.1), housing variety and tenure (HE Goal 5.1), and housing
production (HE Goal 6.1) by establishing a land use designation that will allow for the
creation of a new residential neighborhood of approximately 264 dwellings on an "infill"
Attachment 3
City Council Resolution No. (2005 Series)
Four Creeks Residential GPA and Final EIR
Page 2
site that is suitable for housing because the environmental impacts of the project and
development related policies in the General Plan have been considered and are reflected
in the project's proposed design.
2. The High Density Residential land use designation proposed for the site is consistent with
the General Plan because it will further Land Use Element Goal 31, which promotes a
compact urban forth.
3. The High Density Residential land use designation proposed for the site is consistent with
the General Plan because the project has been designed in a manner that is consistent
with City Open Space Element policies for development adjacent to creeks, wetlands and
other habitat areas. Features of the project design include significant riparian
enhancement, Best Management Practices for water quality, and on-site, in-kind
replacement for potential creek and wetland impacts. The project furthers Open Space
Element goals
4. The High Density Residential land use designation proposed for the site is consistent with
the General Plan because the project will meet the noise exposure standards provided in
the Noise Element for interior spaces and outdoor-use areas. The required levels of noise
reduction will be achieved using construction techniques and the strategic placement of
buildings relative to open space areas, including the limited use of sound barriers.
5. The High Density Residential land use designation proposed for the site is consistent with
the General Plan because the project will mitigate all of the transportation related project
impacts as required by the Circulation Element. The project is also designed in a manner
that mitigates impacts to scenic corridors because the proposed buildings will not "wall
off' scenic roadways or block views.
6. The Community Commercial land use designation is consistent with the General Plan and
with the site location along an arterial road and a regional highway because the project is
designed to accommodate mixed-use development with neighborhood serving retail uses
and community serving office uses such as medical offices. Through the Planned
Development zoning process the City has control over allowed uses on the site to insure
consistency with the City's Mixed-Use Regulations and to insure on-going compatibility
between commercial and residential uses on the project site.
Section 2. Environmental Review. The City Council does hereby certify the Final EIR,
and adopts Findings of Mitigation, a Mitigation Measure Monitoring Program and a Statement of
Overriding Considerations for the project as outlined in Exhibit A.
Section 3. General Plan Amendment. The City Council does hereby direct staff to place
the adoption of the General Plan amendment to re-designate the project site from Services and
Manufacturing to High Density Residential and Community Commercial, as shown in Exhibit B,
on the Council's agenda of December 6, 2005, so that the amendment can be coordinated with
other possible amendments that may occur this calendar year.
Attachment 3
City Council Resolution No. (2005 Series)
Four Creeks Residential GPA and Final EIR
Page 3
On motion of , seconded by , and on
the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 2005.
Mayor David F. Romero
ATTEST:
Audrey Hooper, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Jona well, City Attorney
1-17
EXHIBIT A
CEQA FINDINGS
I. Introduction.............................................................................................................. 2
II. Project Description...................................
A. Project Location......................................................................:......................:...........
: 3
B. Project Objectives..:..:....:.....:.....................................:.......::.....:....:............I........ 3
C. Project Components........................................................................................... 3
111. The Record.............................................................................................................:4
IV. Final Environmental Impact Report.......................................................................... 5
A. References......................................................................................E.................. 5
B. EIR Preparers.........................:..............:........................
.................................... 10
C. Certification of the Final EIR....................................................................:............ 10
V. Findings For Significant Environmental Effects and Mitigation Measures for the
ProposedProject .................:................................................................................. 11
A. Biological Resources.....................................:.................................................. 12
B. Transportation and Circulation....:........................::...................................:....:... 22
C. Air Quality................. :...:........................... ........ 37
D. Noise ..........................:...................................................................................... 45
E. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ................................................................... 51.
F. Utilities.............................................................................................................. 54
G. Aesthetic Resources.......................................................:................................. 55
H. Issues Evaluated With Insignificant Impacts..................................................... 63
VI. Cumulative and Growth Inducing Impacts..............:.....................:.......................... 68
A. Cumulative Impacts.......................................................................................... 68
B. Growth Inducing Impacts.................................................................................. 69
VII. Findings for Altematives to the Proposed Project..............:..................................... 70
A. Introduction....................................................................................................... 70
B. Description of Alternatives................................................................................ 71
C.. Findings..............................................................................................:............. 71
VIII..Statement of Overriding Considerations .....:. ..........:......:.....................:................ 74
A. Introduction....................................................................................................... 74
B. Findings:............................................................................................................ 75
IX. Mitigation Monitoring Program ............................................................................... 77
Four Creeks Rezoning Projecl CEQA Findings'-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Certification of a Final Environmental Impact Report,
Findings of Mitigation, and Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring Program
For the Four Creeks Rezoning Project
I. INTRODUCTION
The City of San Luis Obispo (City) has decided to approve the Four Creeks Rezoning Project
(project). The City is the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
and has certified an environmental impact report (Elk) for the project.
Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines and Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code require
a lead agency to adopt findings for each significant environmental impact disclosed in an EIR.
Specifically, for each significant impact,the lead agency must find that:
• Changes or alterations have been required in, incorporated into, the project which
avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the
EIR;
• Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another
public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been
adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency; or,
• Specific economic, social, legal; Eechnological, or other considerations; including.
provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible
the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.
In addition to making a finding for each significant impact, ifthe lead agency approves a project
with unavoidable significant environmental effects, the lead and responsible agency are required
by CEQA to prepare a Statement of Overriding Considerations. The Statement of Overriding
Considerations is a written statement explaining why the agency is willing to accept each
significant effect (Public Resources Code Section 21081; CEQA Guidelines Section 15093).
This requires the decision-maker to balance the benefits of the project against the unavoidable
environmental risks. The statement of overriding considerations must explain the specific
overriding social, economic, legal, technical, or other beneficial project aspects, based on
substantial evidence in the record. Substantial evidence shall include facts, reasonable
assumptions predicated upon facts, and expert opinion supported by facts.
10/3112005 - -_ - - 2 q
Four Creeks Rezoning Project __ __ ._ CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. PROJECT LOCATION
The project site consists of 11 parcels, ranging in size from 0.32 to 7.32 acres totaling
approximately 17.7 acres, located southeast of the intersection of Orcutt Road and Broad Street
(State Highway 227) in the City of San Luis Obispo. Bishop Creek runs along the western border
of the site, and Alrita-Carla Creek runs along the southern border. Sydney Creek and "Escorp
Drainage" also traverse the site.
B. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The primary objective of the proposed project is to amend the designation on the City's General
Plan Land Use Map and rezone the parcels from the C-S-S (Service-Commercial Special
Considerations) and M-PD (Manufacturing Planned Development) to R-4-S (High Density
Residential Special Considerations) and R-47PD (High Density Residential Planned
Development). Existing land zoned C-S-S along Orcutt Road and Broad Street would be
rezoned to C-S-PD to allow for mixed-use development. These land use designation and zoning
changes would allow for the implementation of two development plans, Tumbling Waters and
Creekston; covering different portions of the proposed project site.
The proposed project was initiated in part by a request from the San Luis Obispo City Council to
rezone the parcels to allow for high-density housing. In addition to the primary objective
identified above, the proposed project incorporates several other community objectives that were
identified in meeting and discussions with various community groups. These objectives include
the creation of community facilities, providing homes at affordable prices, maximization of the
number of units while minimizing building coverage, varied architectural styles, energy
efficiency, and several others.
C. PROJECT COMPONENTS
The proposed Four Creeks Rezoning Project involves the rezoning and/or development of three
primary project components: Tumbling Waters, Creekston, and four separately owned parcels
located on Broad Street, collectively referred to as the Broad Street Parcels (refer to Figure III-
4).
The Tumbling Waters component would include 175 residential units on 11.63 acres. The homes
Within the development would consist of two different residential product types: 152 fourplex
units (three-story units over basement garages, ranging from 773 to 1,456 square feet) and 23
duplex units (two-story units over basement garages, ranging from 1,349 to 1,465 square-feet),
for a total of 175 homes. In addition, there would be a 2750 square-foot multipurpose building
and fitness center, children's playground, and water gardens located within the core of the
development as well as a paved outdoor plaza that includes a school bus drop-off/pick-up.
The Creekston component of the proposed project would include a total of 86 residential units,
approximately 7,200 square feet of commercial floor area, and a 2500 square foot day care
facility on approximately 5.3 acres. The portions of the Creekston component fronting Orcutt
/0/31/2005 3
/-,,2 0
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Road and Broad Street are proposed mixed=use building types, which include commercial floor
area with residential lofts above.
The remaining land along Broad Street proposed for rezoning includes approximately 1.8 acres
on four separate properties. The properties are currently developed with residential uses. Under
the proposed zoning, a total of 24 two-bedroom units could be developed. As a conservative
measure, in order to account for possible density bonuses, etc., this EM assumes .a maximum
development potential of 36 two-bedroom units.
III. THE RECORD
For the purposes of CEQA and the Findings, the record of the Planning Commission relating to
the application includes:
• Documentary and oral evidence received and reviewed by the Planning Commission
during the public hearing on the project;
• The October 2005 Four Creeks Rezoning Project Final EIR;
• The City of San Luis Obispo Four Creeks Rezoning Project application and
supporting materials;
• The October 2005 Four Creeks Rezoning Project Final EIR Staff Report prepared for
the Planning Commission;
• Matters of common knowledge to the Commission which it considers, such as.:
- The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan, including the elements thereof, land
use maps;etc.;
- The City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code-,
- The City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations and Zoning Map;
- The City of San Luis Obispo Community Design Guidelines;
- The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA.Guidelines.
- The SLO APCD 2001 Clean Air Plan;
- Other formally adopted City; State and Federal regulations, statutes, policies, and
ordinances; and,
- City of San Luis Obispo Four Creeks Rezoning Project.
This document contains the findings and statement of overriding considerations for the approval
of the Four Creeks Rezoning Project and reflects the City's independent..judgment. The
documents and other items of the administrative record are available for review at:.
City of San Luis Obispo
Community Development Department
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Contact: Michael Codron
(805) 781-7175
10/31/2005 4
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings-Attachment 3 -Exhibit A
IV. FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
The Four Creeks Rezoning Project Final EIR was prepared in accordance with the State and City
administrative guidelines established to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) of 1970, as amended. The purpose of the Final EIR was to identify the proposed
project's significant effects on the environment, to indicate the manner in which such significant
effects shall be mitigated or avoided, and to identify alternatives to the proposed project that
avoid or reduce these impacts. This Final EIR was intended to serve as an informational
document for use by the City of San Luis Obispo, other responsible agencies, the general public,
and decision makers in their consideration and evaluation of the environmental consequences
associated with the implementation of the proposed project. This document was provided to the
public and decision makers for their review and comment as required by CEQA.
The initial study and Notice of Preparation of the Draft EIR were circulated to appropriate public
agencies, organizations, and interested groups and individuals for a 30-day comment period that
ran from July 9, 2004 through August 9, 2004. The Draft EIR was distributed to responsible and
trustee agencies, other affected agencies, surrounding cities, and interested parties, as well as all
parties requesting a copy of the Draft EIR in accordance with Public Resources Code
21092(b)(3). The Notice of Completion of the Draft EIR was also distributed as required by
CEQA. The 45-day public review period began on May 23, 2005 and ended on July 15, 2005.
Written responses to all significant environmental issues raised were prepared and included as
part of the Final EIR and the environmental record for consideration by decision-makers for the
project.
A. REFERENCES
1, Biological Resources
Baicich, P. J., & Harrison, C. J. O. (1997). A guide to the nests, eggs, and nestlings of North
American birds (2nd ed.). San Diego: Academic Press.
Bent, A. C. (1942). Life histories of North American flycatchers, larks, swallows, and their
allies. U.S. Nad. Mus. Bull., 179, 1-555.
CalFlora. (2004). CalFlora occurrence database.. Retrieved October 12, 2004, from
http://www.calflora.org
Tibor, D. P. (Ed.). (2001). Inventory of rare and endangered plants of California(6`h ed.).
Sacramento: California Native Plant Society.
California Native Plant Society (CNPS). (2004). Blue gum eucalyptus. Retrieved October 12,
2004, from http://www.calflora.org/cgi-bin/s pecies_query.cgi?where-calrecnum=3534
California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). (2004). San Luis Obispo and Morro Bay
South, USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle overlays. Sacramento: California Department of
Fish and Game.
City of San Luis Obispo. (2004). Species of Local Concern: Insects. Retrieved October 21,
2004;from httg://www.ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us/naturalresolirces/insects.am
10/31/2005 5
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Finding-AnacAment3-Exhibit A
Cowardin, L. M.; V. Carter, F. C. Golet, & E. T. LaRoe. (1979). Classification of wetlands and
deepwater habitats of the United States (FWSIOBS-,79131). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service.
Edell, T. (2004, June 17). Western yellow-billed cuckoo record.. Message posted to
http://www.su&f 1623
Environmental Laboratory. (1987). U.S Army Corps ofEngineers wetlands delineation manual
(Technical Report Y-87-1). Vicksburg: U.S Army Engineer Waterways Experiment
Station.
Grinnell, J., & A. H. Miller. (1986). the distribution of the birds of California (Pacific Coast
Avifauna No. 27). Lee Vining: Artemisia Press.
Harrison, C. (1978). Afield guide to the nests, eggs and nestlings of North American-birds.,
Cleveland: W. Collins Sons and Co.
Holland, R. F. (1986). Preliminary descriptions of the terrestrial natural communities of
California. State of California. Sacramento: State of California,The Resources Agency,
California Department of Fish and Game.
Holland, V. L., & D. J. Keil. (1995). California vegetation. Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt Publishing
Company.
P —
Jennings, M. R., & M. P. Hayes. (1994).Amphibian and reptile species of special concern in
California. Rancho Cordova: California Department of Fish and Game.
NOAA Fisheries. (1998, October 26). Concurrence letter.
Raleigh, R. F., T. Hickman,.R. C. Soloman, & P. C. Nelson. (1984). Habitat suitability
information: rainbow trout(Report USFWSIOBS-82110.60). Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of the Interior.
Zeiner, D. C.,W. F. L.audenslayer,Jr., K. E. Mayer,I& M. White (Eds.). (1990). California's
Wildlife (Vols. 1-3). Sacramento-. California Statewide Wildlife Habitat Relationships
System,The Resources Agency, California Department of Fish and Game.
2. Transportation and Circulation
California Department of Transportation. (1996). Highway Traffic Manual.
City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department. (2000). Traffic Impact Study Preparation
Guidelines.
City of San Luis Obispo. (1994). Circulation Element.
City of San Luis Obispo. (2004). Municipal Code.
Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trip Generation (Seventh Edition).
State of Florida Department of Transportation. (2002). 2002 Qualit)/ vel of Service Handbook.
Transportation Research Board. (2000). 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. Special Report 209.
1013112005 6
i
Four Creeks Rezoning Project` CEQA Findings Attachment 3 -Exhibit A
3. Air Quality
Air Pollution Control District, County of San Luis Obispo. (2001). Clean Air Plan, San Luis
Obispo County.
Air Pollution Control District, County of San Luis Obispo. (2003). CEQA Air Quality
Handbook, A Guide for Assessing_ the Air Quality Impacts for Projects Subject to CEQA.
Review.
4. Noise
City of San Luis Obispo. (1996). General Plan Noise Element. San Luis Obispo, California:
Community Development Department.
Lord, David (2001): Noise Study Report Prepared for 791 Orcutt Road. David Lord Acoustics
and Noise Consulting.
5. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of San Luis Obispo: (2000). General Plan Safety Element. San Luis Obispo, California:
Community Development Department..
Earth Systems Pacific (2004): Results of the Phase II Assessment Proposed Four Creeks
Development Orcutt Road at SPRR Tracks, San Luis Obispo; California.
6. Utilities
City of San Luis Obispo. (2004). General Plan Water and Wastewater Element. San_ Luis
Obispo, California: Community Development Department.
City of San Luis Obispo. (2004). Water Resources Status Report. San Luis Obispo, California:
Public Works Utilities Department.
City of San Luis Obispo. (2003). Tank Farm Gravity Sewer and Lift Station. San Luis Obispo,.
California: Public Works Utilities Department.
City of Santa Barbara (1989). Water Demand Factor and Conservation Study. Santa Barbara
California: Community Development Department:
Environmental Science Associates (1998) Final Woodlands Specific Plan Environmental Impact
Report. Community of Nipomo, San Luis Obispo County California.
7. Aesthetic Resources
City of San Luis Obispo. (1994). General Plan Circulation Element. San Luis, Obispo,.
California: Community Development.Department.
City of San Luis Obispo: (2002). General Plan Digest of the Open Space Element. San Luis
Obispo, California Community Development Department.
City of San Luis Obispo: (2004). General Plan Land Use Element. San Luis Obispo, California:
Community Development Department.
10/31/2005 - - - — - 7
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings Attachment 3-Exhibit A
8. Issues Evaluated with Insignificant Impacts
a. Geology and Hydrology
Earth Systems Pacific (2004). Soils Engineering Report for Tumbling Waters, San Luis Obispo,
California.
GSI Soils Inc. (2004). Updated Geotechnical Investigation for the Creekston Development San
Luis Obispo, California.
Crowe, Keith V. (2004) Analysis of the Tumbling Waters Storm Water Detention System. EDA
Inc. San Luis Obispo, California.
Triad/Holmes Associates (2004) Drainage Report for the Creekston Mixed Use Development.
San Luis Obispo, California.
b. Cultural Resources
Angel; M. (1883). History of San Luis Obispo County. Oakland, California: Thompson & West.
Reprinted 1979 Fresno, California: Valley Publishers.
Applegate, R.B. (1975). An Index of Chumash Place Names, Papers on the Chumash: San Luis
Obispo County Archaeological Society Occasional Paper No. 9. San Luis Obispo
County, California: San Luis Obispo County Archaeological Society.
Bertrando, B. (1994, July 16). Historic Records Search for Stickler Parcels, Broad Street and
Orcutt Road, San Luis Obispo, CA. Prepared for R.O. Gibson, Project Archaeologist.
San Luis Obispo; Califamiac Bertrando and Bertrando Research Consultants.
Best, G.M. (1981). Ships and Narrow Gauge Rails: The Story of the Pacific Coast Company. San
Diego, California: Howell-North.
Breschini, G.S., Haversat, T., & Erlandson, J. (1986). California Radiocarbon Dates (4th ed.).
Salinas, California: Coyote Press.
Brock, J. & Wall, R.J. (1986, November). A Cultural Resources Assessment of Selected Study
Areas Within the City of San Luis Obispo. Prepared for the U.S. Corps of Engineers.
Newport Beach, California: The Archaeological Advisory Group. On file with the
Information Center at the University of California at Santa Barbara.
Gammage, G., Jones, P.N., & Jones, S. (1975). Historic Preservation in California: A Legal
Handbook. Stanford, California: Stanford Environmental Law Society.
Gibson, R.O. (1979, November). Preliminary Inventory and Assessment of Indian Cultural
Resources at Lodge Hill, Cambria, CA. Manuscript on file with San Luis Obispo County
Engineering Department, California. On file with the Information Center at the
University of California at Santa Barbara.
Gibson, R.O. (1990). The Chumash in Indian of North America. New York_, New York: Chelsea
House Publishers.
10/31/2005 8
r/
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings Attachment_3 -_Exhibit A
Gibson, R.O. (1994, June). Results of Phase One Archaeological Surface Survey for the Stickler
Project, Broad Street and Orcutt Road, San Luis Obispo, California. Prepared for Strong
Planning Services, San Luis Obispo, California. On file with Information Center at the
University of California at Santa Barbara.
Gibson, R.O. (1998, April 29). Results of Phase One Archaeological Surface Survey for the
Beko Project, Orcutt Road, San Luis Obispo, CA. Prepared for Norman Beko, Santa
Maria, CA. On file with Information Center at the University of California at Santa
Barbara
Greenwood, R.S. (1972). 9,000 Years of Prehistory at Diablo Canyon, San Luis Obispo
County, California: San Luis Obispo County Archaeological Society Occasional Paper
No. 7. San Luis Obispo County, California: San Luis Obispo County Archaeological
Society.
Greewood, R.S. (1978). Handbook of North American Indians (Vol: 8). Washington, D.C.:
Smithsonian Institution.
Johnson, C.H. (1981). The Pacific Coast Railway Comes to Arroyo Grande: A Centennial
History. Arroyo Grande, California: Bennett-Loomis Archives and South County
Historical Society.
Johnson, C.H. (1982). The Pacific Coast Railway: Southbound to Los Alamos: A. Centennial
History. Arroyo Grande, California:.Arroyo Grande Press.
Heizer, R.F..(Ed.). (1978). Handbook of North American Indians (Vol, 8). Washington D.C.:
Smithsonian Institution.
Klar, K. (1977). An Addendum to Applegate's "Chumash Place Names" Occasional Paper No. 9:.
San Luis Obispo County Archaeological Society Occasional Paper No. 11. San Luis
Obispo County, California: San Luis Obispo County Archaeological Society.
Kroeber; A. L. (1953). Handbook of the Indians of California. Berkeley, California: California
Book Co., Ltd.
Nicholson, L. (1980). Rails Across the Ranchos. Fresno, California: Valley Publishers.
Ochs, P.M. (1970). History of Chinese Labor In San Luis Obispo County (La Vista Vol. 2, No.
1). San Luis Obispo, California: San Luis Obispo County Historical Society.
Parsons, J.A. & Gibson, R.O. (1992, May 21). Results of Phase 2 Archaeological Investigations
for the Unocal-Sisquoc Pipeline, Northern Santa Barbara County, CA. Prepared for
Unocal Pipeline Company, Los Angeles, California.. On file with the Iinformation Center
at the University of California at Santa Barbara.
Thompson, G.-D. (1982). Memories of the PC. Pacific Coast Railway, A Guide to Locations.
Santa Maria, California: Santa Maria Valley Historical Society.
C. Recreation
City of San Luis Obispo. (2001). General Plan Parks and Recreation Element and Master Plan...
San Luis Obispo, California: Community Development Department.
10/3112005 - / 9
I 1
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings Attachment 3-Exhibit A_
U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). American Factfinder (various datasets). Retrieved October 2004,
from http://www.census.gov/rhain/www/Cen2000.html
B. EIR PREPARERS
This EIR has been prepared by the Morro Group, Inc:, in association with the City of San Luis
Obispo other independent consultants. Project Director for the EIR was Bill Henry, AICP, Vice
President, Morro Group, Inc. The following is a list of individuals responsible-for preparation of
the EIR:
R-e-spoesibilities EIR_Preparer
Introduction;Summary; Pro-Je-c-t Description; - - Sarah Spann, Project Manager
Environmental Setting; Recreation; Other Issues; Morro Group, Inc.
Alternatives Analysis; Environmental Analysis;
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Biological Resources Geoff Hoetker,Associate Biologist
Morro Group, Inc.
Air Quality;Noise; Hazards and Hazardous Materials;' Karl Mikel, EIT
Utilities; Geology and Hydrology Morro Group, Inc.
Transportation and Circulation Sohrab Rashid, P.E., Senior Associate
Norman Wong, Senior Transportation Engineer
Fehr&Peers Transportation Consultants
Aesthetic Resources Bob Carr
Visual Resources Consultant
Cultural Resources Robert 0.Gibson, Principal Archaeologist
Gibson's Archaeological Consulting
Hazards and Hazardous Materials.(Phase II Timothy Conroy;Senior Geologist
Environmental Site Assessment) Earth Systems Pacific
C. CERTIFICATION OF'THE FINAL EIR
The City of San Luis Obispo Planning Commission.makes the following findings with respect to
the October 2005 Four Creeks Rezoning Project Final EIR (SCH #2004071043)-
1. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered_the information contained in the
October 2005 Four Creeks Rezoning Project Final EIR, the public comments and responses
previously submitted, the public comments and information presented at the public bearings,
and the documents and other information in the record listed in Section III above, before
taking an action on the project. The October 2005 Four Creeks.Rezoning Project Final EIR
has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act.
10/3P2005 - /0
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
2. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that implementation of the Four
Creeks Rezoning Project may have a significant adverse effect on the environment.
3. The Planning Commission finds that changes or alterations have been incorporated into the
project to mitigate or avoid significant impacts to the greatest degree practicable. These
changes or alterations include mitigation measures and project modifications outlined herein
and set forth in more detail in the October 2005 Four Creeks Rezoning Project Final EIR.
4. The Planning Commission finds that the project as approved includes an appropriate
Mitigation Monitoring Program. This mitigation monitoring program ensures that measures
that avoid or lessen the significant project impacts,.as required by the CEQA Guidelines, will
be implemented as described.
5. The Planning Commission finds that, should the final design of the Four Creeks Rezoning
Project have the potential to result in adverse environmental impacts that are not anticipated
or addressed by the October 2005 Four Creeks Rezoning Project Final EIR, subsequent
environmental review shall be required in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section
15162(a).
V. FINDINGS FOR SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS AND
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT
This section presents the project's significant environmental impacts and feasible mitigation
measures. Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines and Section 21081 of the Public Resources
Code require a.lead agency to make findings for each significant environmental impact disclosed
in an EIR. Specifically, for each significant impact, the lead agency must find that:
• Changes or alterations have been required in, incorporated into, the project which
avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the
EIR;
• Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another
public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been
adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency; or,
• Specific economic, social, legal, technological; or other considerations, including
provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible
the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.
Each of these findings must be supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record.
This section identifies the following environmental impacts associated with implementation of
the proposed project, as identified in the program EIR:
• Impacts that can be fully avoided or reduced to a less-than-significant level through
the incorporation of feasible mitigation measures into the project; and
70/31/2005
Four Creeks Rezoning_Project CEQ4 Findings._Attachment 3 -Exhibit A
• Impacts that can be reduced, but not to a less-than-significant level, through the
incorporation of feasible mitigation measures into the project, and Which therefore,
remain significant and unavoidable.
The impacts identified in this section are considered in the same sequence in which they appear
in the Final EIR. Where adoption of feasible mitigation measures is not effective in avoiding an
impact or reducing it to a less-than-significant level, the feasibility of adopting alternatives to the
proposed project is considered in Section VI of this document.
A. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact
BIO Impact I Construction and operation of the project has potential to indirectly impact
aquatic habitats located within the site and downstream from the site.
Wtigation Measures
BIO/mm-1 Prior to construction, the applicant shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which shall include detailed sediment and erosion
control plans submitted to the City of San Luis Obispo for approval. The
SWPPP shall specifically address protection of drainages, and riparian and
wetland resources on and adjacent to the project site. Compliance shall be
verified by the project environmental monitor through submission of
compliance reports.
BIO/mm-2 To avoid erosion and downstream sedimentation, and to avoid. impacts to
aquatic species, no work in drainages shall occur during the rainy season
(November I through April 30).
1310/mrn-3 Equipment access and construction shall be conducted from the banks rather
than from within drainages. No equipment shall, be staged and no temporary
placement of fill shall occur in drainages.
BIO/mm-4 Soil stockpiles shall not be placed' in areas that have potential to experience
significant runoff during the rainy season. All project-related spills of
hazardous materials within or adjacent to project sites shall be cleaned up
immediately. Spill prevention and cleanup materials shall be on-site at all
times during construction. Cleaning and refueling of equipment and vehicles
shall occur only within designated staging areas. The staging areas shall
conform to standard BMPs applicable to attaining zero discharge of
stormwater runoff. No maintenance, cleaning or fueling of equipment shall
occur within wetland or riparian areas, or within 50 feet of such areas. At a
minimum, all equipment and vehicles shall be checked and maintained on a
daily basis to ensure proper operation and to avoid potential leaks or spills.
1013112005 12
9
Four Creeks Rezoning Project __ CEQA Findings-Attachment 3 Exhibit A
_
BIO/mm-5 During construction and operation, permanent installation of filtration devices
designed to remove oil, grease, and other potential pollutants from stormwater
runoff shall be required for all project storm water runoff directed to drainages
traversing the project site.
BIO/mm-6 If surfactants or herbicides are used at any time on the project site, application
of surfactants or herbicide shall not occur within 20 feet of drainages/riparian
area, in compliance with the City's riparian setback requirements.
Findings.:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, BIO Impact 1 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
BIO Impact 2 Riparian habitat would be permanently removed or impacted by project
implementation; resulting in significant adverse impacts to riparian resources.
Mitigation Measures
BIO/mm-7 At the time of application of grading permits, all riparian areas and 20-foot
setback boundaries shall be shown on all construction plans. The riparian
areas and 20-foot setback boundaries shown on grading plans shall be based
on the field data collected as pan of the EIR analysis, as presented in Figure
BIO-2. All riparian vegetation planned for removal shall be specified on
construction plans. Except for activities requiring removal of riparian trees
and associated understory vegetation that are specified on construction plans,
all ground disturbances and vegetation removal shall be prohibited within the
20-foot setback from the outer edge of the riparian canopy of any drainage
onsite.
BIO/mm-8 In order to protect existing native trees (i.e. California black walnut, western
sycamore, Fremont cottonwood, coast live oak, arroyo willow, red willow,
blue elderberry, California bay), native riparian understory vegetation (i.e.
California blackberry, mugwort, stinging nettle), and minimize adverse effects
of grading and construction onsite, the applicant shall implement a Riparian
Habitat Revegetation and Restoration Plan in consultation with the CDFG and
the City Natural Resources Manager. A qualified restoration biologist and/or
horticulturalist, approved by the City of San Luis Obispo, shall be retained by
the applicant to prepare the Riparian Habitat Revegetation and Restoration
Plan, complete with success criteria goals and a five-year monitoring
schedule. The qualified biologist shall supervise. site preparation, timing;
10/31/2005 13
/-S6
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings-Attachment.3 -Exhibit A
species utilized, planting installation, maintenance, monitoring, and reporting
of the.revegetation/restoration efforts.
If impacts to riparian trees or riparian understory vegetation cannot be
avoided, the impacts shall be minimized to the extent practicable. No ground
disturbance including grading for buildings, access roads, easements,
subsurface grading, sewage disposal, and well placement shall occur within
the critical root zone of any native tree unless specifically authorized by the
Revegetation and Restoration Plan. The Revegetation and Restoration plan
shall include the following:
a. An exhibit (i.e. map) showing the location, identification, diameter, and
critical root zone of all native trees located onsite.
b. Fencing of all trees to be protected at or outside of the critical root zone or
at the 20-foot setback boundary, whichever is greater. Fencing shall be at
least three feet in height of material acceptable to the City of San Luis
Obispo and shall be staked every six feet. The applicant shall place signs
stating "tree protection area" at 15-foot intervals on the fence. The
fencing and signs shall be shown on the tree protection exhibit, shall be
installed prior to grading permit approval, and shall remain in place
throughout all grading and construction activities.
c. Identification of any areas where landscaping, grading, trenching, or
construction activities would encroach within the critical root zone of any
native or specimen tree. All encroachment is subject to review and
approval by the City of San Luis Obispo.
d.. Location of construction equipment staging and storage areas shown on
the tree protection exhibit. All construction equipment staging and storage
areas shall be located outside of the 20-foot riparian setback and other
sensitive habitat areas, and shall be depicted on project plans submitted for
land use clearance. No construction equipment shall be parked; stored or
operated within the protected area. No fill soil, rocks, or construction
materials shall be stored or placed within the protected area.
e. Identification of all proposed utility corridors and irrigation lines shown
on the tree protection exhibit. New utilities shall be located within
roadways, driveways, or a designated utility corridor such that impacts to
trees are minimized.
f. Any proposed tree wells or retaining walls shown on the tree protection
plan exhibit, as well as grading and construction plans, and located outside
of the critical root zone of all protected trees unless specifically
authorized.
10/3112005 14 /
Four Creeks Rezoning fYojiect___ CEQA Findings Attachment 3-Exhibit A
g. Any encroachment within the critical root zone,of native trees adhering to
the following,standards:
i. Any paving shall be of pervious material (e:g. gravel, brick without
mortar).
ii. Any trenching required Within the critical root zone of a protected tree
shall be done by hand.
iii. Any roots one inch in diameter or greater encountered during grading
or trenching shall be cleanly cut and sealed.
h. All trees located within 20 feet of buildings protected from stucco and/or
paint during construction.
i. No permanent irrigation within the critical root zone of any native tree.
Drainage plans shall be designed so that tree trunk areas are properly
drained to avoid ponding.
j. Remove only trees designated for removal on the approved tree protection
plan.
k. Replace in-kind any native trees that are removed, relocated, and/or
damaged on a 3:1 ratio with either one-gallon sized saplings grown.from
seed obtained.from drainages traversing the project site or commercially
available one-gd1lon plantings. When hen necessary to remove a tree and
feasible to replant, trees shall be boxed and replanted. In addition, replace
in-kind any native riparian understory vegetation (e.g: California
blackberry) that is removed, relocated, and/or damaged basis with either
one-gallon sized plantings grown from seed obtained from drainages
traversing the project site or commercially available one-gallon plantings.
Acreage of riparian understory vegetation removed will be quantified and
replaced on a ratio of 3:1. The*plantings shall be protected from predation
by Wild and domestic animals, and from human interference by the use of
staked, chain link fencing and gopher fencing during the maintenance
period.
BIO/mm-9 Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall obtain all necessary
permits, approvals, and authorizations from jurisdictional agencies. These
may include, but may not be limited to (1) ALOE Section 404 Nationwide
Permit or Individual Permit for impacts to ACOE jurisdictional wetlands or
other waters; (2) RWQCB Section 401 Water Quality Certification for
discharges "Waters of the U.S." and/or "Waters of the State"; and (3) CDFG
Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement for activities within the tops of
banks or outer edges of riparian canopies (whichever extends furthest from the
streambeds) of drainages.
1013IY2005 15
Four Creeks.Rezoning-Project CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
BIO/mm-10 Prior to construction, the applicant shall provide funding for a qualified, City-
approved environmental monitor for the construction phase of the project to
ensure compliance with EIR mitigation measures, the Revegetat.ion and
Restoration Plan, any applicable permit conditions, and any conditions
required by the City of San Luis Obispo. The environmental monitor shall be
under contract to the City. The monitor shall be responsible for (1) ensuring
that procedures for verifying.compliance with environmental mitigations are
followed; (2) lines of communication and reporting methods; (3) daily and
weekly reporting of compliance; (4) construction crew training regarding
environmentally sensitive areas; (5) authority to stop work; and (6) action to
be taken in the event of non-compliance. Monitoring shall be at a.frequency
and duration determined by the affected natural resource agencies (e,g.,
ACOE, RWQCB, CDFG, and the City of San Luis Obispo).
BIO/mm-11 If onsite mitigation to permanent loss of riparian habitat is not feasible, an
offsite riparian mitigation component shall be incorporated into the
Revegetation and Restoration Plan, subject to review arid approval by
jurisdictional agencies. Plans for off-site mitigation shall include a
monitoring schedule and.success criteria to ensure that onsite and any offsite
restoration/enhancement efforts are successful.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, BIO Impact 2 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
BIO Impact 3 Wetlands would be permanently removed or impacted by project
implementation j resulting in significant adverse impacts to wetland resources.
Mitigation Measures
BIO/mm-12 If impacts to wetlands cannot be avoided, the impacts shall be minimized to
the extent practicable. All wetland vegetation planned for removal shall be
specified on construction plans. Ekcept for activities requiring removal of
wetland vegetation that are specified on construction plans, all ground
disturbances and vegetation removal shall be prohibited within a 20-foot
setback from the outer edge of the riparian canopy of any drainage onsite. All
riparian areas and.20-foot.setback boundaries shall be shown on all grading
plans.
1013112005 16
Four Creeks_Rezoning Projec _ _ CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
13I0/mm-13 The applicant shall incorporate' a wetland mitigation component into the
Revegetation and Restoration Plan outlined in BIO/mm-2, which shall include
the following:,
a. An exhibit (i.e. map) showing_ the location, of all wetland vegetation
located onsite.
b. If impacts to wetlands are proposed, the method of wetland vegetation
removal shall be determined by the ACOE Nationwide Permit, or by the
landscape contractor if no guidance is provided by ACOE.. If feasible,
wetland vegetation removed shall be salvaged as plugs or plantings for
revegetation/restoration.
c. If permanent impacts to wetlands are proposed, the. Plan .shall include a
requirement to replace in-kind any wetland vegetation removed, relocated,
and/or damaged on a 3:1 basis with plugs or plantings obtained from
drainages traversing the project site, or commercially available plug_s or
plantings.Temporary impacts shall be mitigated onsite on a 1:1 basis.
BIO/mm-14 If on-site mitigation for permanent loss of wetlands is not.feasible, an off-site
wetland mitigation component shall be incorporated into the Revegetation and
Restoration Plan, subject to review and approval by jurisdictional agencies.
Plans for off-site mitigation shall include a monitoring schedule and success
criteria to ensure that onsite and any offsite restoration/enhancement efforts
are successful.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, BIO Impact 3 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
BIO Impact 4 Ruderal vegetation/disturbed annual grassland habitat would be permanently
removed or impacted by project implementation, resulting in significant,
adverse impacts to sensitive plant species.
Mitigation Measures
BIO/mm-15 Prior to ground disturbance, botanical surveys shall be conducted to determine
presence or absence of Obispo Indian paintbrush, Jones's layia, or adobe
sanicle in annual grasslands within the project site. A minimum of three
botanical surveys shall be scheduled to occur throughout the February to May
10/31/2005 _ - - — 17
i
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA.Findings -Attachment 3 -Exhibit A
blooming (identification) period, according to the following table, prior to
scheduled site disturbance.
Sensitive Plant Species Bloominglldentification
Period
Obispo Indian Paint Brush Aril
Jones la is March-May
Adobe sanicle February May
If sensitive plant species are identified within the project site the applicant
shall implement a Sensitive Plant.Species Revegetation and Restoration Plan
in consultation with CDFG and the City Natural Resources Manager. A
qualified biologist and/or botanist, approved by the City of San Luis Obispo
shall be retained by the applicant to prepare the Sensitive Plant Species
Revegetation and Restoration Plan, complete with success criteria goals and a
five-year monitoring schedule. The qualified biologist shall supervise site
preparation, timing, species utilized, planting installation, maintenance,
monitoring, and reporting of the revegetation/restoration efforts. The
following measures shall be incorporated into the Sensitive Plant Species
Revegetation and Restoration Plan.
a. In areas not permanently displaced by new development, ruderal
vegetation/disturbed annual grassland shall be revegetated and restored
using topsoil salvage, restoring disturbed areas to original contours, and
hydroseeding impacted areas with a seed mix characteristic of the
grasslands onsite. Appropriate species for erosion control and eventual
native shrub and herb cover shall be utilized. Because native grassland
species are likely to be out-competed by non=native species, a ground
cover mix is recommended for impacted ruderal vegetation/annual
grassland areas. Topsoil salvage methods and seed mixes shall be
specified in the Sensitive Plant Species Revegetation and Restoration Plan.
Hydroseeded areas shall be monitored by a qualified restoration biologist
and/or horticulturalist for viability and overall success, with additional
recommendations as necessary.
b. If Obispo Indian paintbrush, Jones's layia, or adobe sanicle are identified
on the proposed project site, the locations of these populations shall be
clearly included on an exhibit (i.e.. map). These populations shall be
flagged by a qualified biologist and protected with temporary fencing prior
to construction. These areas to be protected shall be shown on all
applicable construction plans. The protection devices shall be installed by
the applicant and verified by the Environmental Monitor prior to any
grubbing or vegetation removal Sensitive plant species protective
measures shall remain in place throughout the grading and construction
phases.
1013112005 18
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings_-Attachment 3 Exhibit A
c. If avoidance of Obispo Indian paintbrush, Jones's layia, or adobe sanicle
in ruderal vegetation/disturbed annual grassland habitat is not feasible, the
applicant shall specify an onsite mitigation strategy in the Sensitive Plant
Species Revegetation and Restoration Plan shall specify an onsite
mitigation strategy that identifies the following:
i. Suitable onsite mitigation locations based on soil type, hydrologic
conditions, and proximity to existing sensitive species populations;
ii. Seed collection requirements and protocol;
iii. Soil seed bank conservation strategies;
iv. Mitigation site preparation techniques;
v. Seeding regimen;
vi. Mitigation site maintenance schedule, including weed abatement
strategies,erosion control monitoring, etc.; and
,
vii.Monitoring requirements.
BIO/mm-16 If onsite mitigation to permanent loss of sensitive plant populations in annual
grassland habitat is not feasible, an offsite sensitive plant mitigation
component shall be incorporated into the Sensitive Plant Species Revegetation
and Restoration Plan, subject to review and approval by CDFG and the City
Natural Resources Manager: The.Sensitive Plant Species Revegetation and
Restoration Plan shall identify an offsite area that can be restored with the
identified sensitive plant species. Such a site must have the following
components.
a. The offsite area is owned or controlled by a non-profit or governmental
agency;
b.. It is shown that the intent for the area will be to protect it in perpetuity
with the primary goal to reestablish and maintain native habitat;
c. There is comparable area available for sensitive plant species restoration;
d. It is within close proxiinity of the subject property;
e. The offsite mitigation area is clearly shown to have all the necessary
requirements for successful reestablishment of the plant/habitat (that will
be better than or equal to the sensitive plant. habitat being eliminated)
without the need for any long-term artificial maintenance;
In addition, the Sensitive Plant Species Revegetation and Restoration Plan
shall specify an offsite mitigation strategy that identifies the following:
f. If feasible,, the sensitive plant species located onsite and/or their seed shall
be used for the offsite mitigation area, as determined appropriate by the
biologist/botanist;.
g. Seed collection requirements and protocol;
h. Soil seed bank conservation strategies;
i. Mitigation site preparation techniques;
j. Seeding regimen;
10/31/2005 19
Four Creeks.Rezoning Project CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
k. Mitigation site maintenance schedule, including weed abatement
strategies; erosion control monitoring;etc.;
1. Submittal of a cost estimate by a qualified individual for: property
acquisition, site evaluation reporting; all restoration work, and
monitoring/maintenance/remedial work for at least 5 years;
in. Establishment of a bond for the cost estimate to be held by the City until
the 5 year-time period is up or until sensitive plant species restoration is
determined to be successful by City Natural Resources Manager;
whichever is greater;
n. If offsite mitigation area fails, bond shall be applied to establishing a
second area.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation_measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, BIO Impact 4 is -reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
BIO Impact 5 Construction of the project has potential to impact sensitive plant species
including Obispo Indian paintbrush, Jones's layia, and adobe sanicle.
Mitigation Measures
Implement BIO/mm-15 and BIO/mm-16, as described above.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, BIO Impact 5 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
BIO Impact 6 Construction of the project has potential to impact monarch butterfly winter
roosting habitat.
Mitigation Measures
BIO/mm-17 Prior to construction, if construction activities are scheduled to occur between
November 1 and March 1, a qualified biologist shall conduct surveys for
overwintering monarch butterflies. Overwintering.monarch butterfly surveys
shall consist of a preconstruction survey prior to eucalyptus tree removal, with
/0/3112005 - - - - - — - - — 20
/ -3 7
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
weekly surveys continuing thereafter until March 31. If no roosts are
observed within the project site, then no further mitigation is required. If
active roosts are observed, then tree removal activities shall be delayed and an
appropriate setback for other construction-related activities shall be
maintained until monarch butterflies have migrated from the site. Tree
removal shall be monitored and documented by the biological monitor
regardless of time of year..
Finding:
Nfitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, BIO Impact 6 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
BIO Impact 7 Construction of the project has potential to impact nesting birds..
Mitigation Measures
13I0/mm-18 Prior to construction, if construction activities are scheduled to occur during
the typical bird nesting season (from March 1 to August 31) a qualified
biologist shall be retained to conduct a preconstruction survey (approximately
I week prior to construction) to determine presence/absence for tree-nesting
birds within riparian corridors and ground-nesting birds within annual
grasslands onsite. If no nesting activities are detected within the proposed
work area, noise-producing construction activities may proceed and no further
mitigation is required. If nesting activity is confirmed during preconstruction
nesting surveys or at any time during the monitoring of construction activities;
work activities shall be delayed within 100 feet of active nests until the young
birds have fledged and left the nest. In addition, the results of the surveys will
be passed immediately to the CDFG and the City Natural Resources Manager,
possibly with recommendations for buffer zone changes, as needed; around
individual nests. Tree removal in riparian zones shall be monitored and
documented by the biological monitor regardless of time of year.
Finding:
Nfitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, BIO Impact 7 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
/0/31/2005 21
Four Creeks Rezoning Project' _ _ _ _ ._ (7EQA Findings_Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Impact
BIO Impact 8 The cumulative losses of riparian habitat, wetlands, and annual grassland
habitat resulting from the proposed project in conjunction with the cumulative
development scenario would result in impacts to biological resources.
Mitigation Measures
Implement BIO/min-I through BIO/mm-18, as described above.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, BIO Impact 8 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
B. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
Impact
TR Impact I The proposed project would cause the intersection of Broad Street and South
Street to degrade from LOS D under Baseline Conditions to LOS E under
Baseline Plus Project Conditions.
Mitigation Measures
TR/mm-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicants shall design, subject to
approval of the Public Works Director, the following improvement.
Convert one northbound through lane into.a second left-tum lane at the
intersection of Broad Street and South Street. The left-turn phasing for
the northbound and southbound approaches shall be modified to
accommodate lead-lag left-tum phasing.
Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the applicants.shall either; 1) complete
the improvements identified within this mitigation measure subject to review,
inspection and permit issuance by the City and Caltrans; or 2) deposit a
mitigation fee in an amount equal to the estimated construction costs of the
improvements identified within this mitigation measure and request that the
City become the lead entity in processing a Caltrans Encroachment Permit for
the required work.
Prior to occupancy, the applicants will each enter into a reimbursement
agreement for costs associated with the design; permitting, inspections, and
construction of the required improvements that are beyond the scope of each
development project.. Final cost estimates will be subject to prior approval of
10/31/2005 22 g
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings -Attachment 3-Exhibit A
the Director of Public Works. The amount of reimbursement between the
applicants will be determined by taking into consideration the project's
percentile contribution to overall traffic volumes at this intersection, based on
13M peak hour trip estimates.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 1 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 2 The proposed project would exacerbate unacceptable operations at the
unsignalized intersection of Broad Street and Capitolio Way. The westbound
approach is projected to operate at LOS F under both Baseline and Baseline
Plus Project Conditions and the volumes exceed the minimum thresholds for
the peak-hour signal warrant.
Mitigation Measures
TR/mm-2 If, prior to issuance of occupancy permits, improvements at the intersection of
Capitolio/Broad Street have not been completed by adjacent development, the
project applicants shall design and install improvements to the Capitolio
Road/Broad Street intersection. These improvements shall include the
widening of westbound Capitolio, including curb and gutter installation and
street paving and the striping of a dedicated left tum lane and separate right-
turn lane for access onto Broad Street. The applicants will each enter into a
reimbursement agreement for a portion of the improvement costs at the time
that the improvements are actually installed. The reimbursement amounts for
each applicant will be based on the project's percentile contribution to overall
traffic volumes at this intersection,based on PM peak hour trip estimates.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 2 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 3 The proposed project would exacerbate unacceptable operations at. the
unsignalized intersection of Laurel. Lane and Orcutt Road. The southbound
left-tum movement/approach is projected to operate at LOS F under both
10/312005 — -- - -- - - - ---- - - - - - - -- 23
Four Creeks Rezoning Project' CEQA Findings_-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Baseline and Baseline Plus Project Conditions. The peak-hour volume warrant
is satisfied under Baseline Plus Project Conditions. The proposed project
would increase traffic at this intersection, which has a high collision rate and
is ranked as the most dangerous intersection for collisions out of those
intersections consisting of two arterial streets.
Mitigation Measure
Mitigation Measure TR/mm-3 has been deleted based on the following finding.
Finding:
As discussed in the Final EIR; a stop sign for westbound Orcutt Road was recently installed to
address safety concerns at the intersection. According to the City's Public Works Department,
the interim improvements are sufficient to mitigate safety impacts until the ultimate
improvements are installed. These ultimate improvements are currently identified in the City's
CIP program, and the City has recently received grant funds to augment existing project funding,
which will allow for construction of the project.
The City will take the lead on installing the following improvements to the Orcutt/Laurel
intersection and will complete the improvements at the earliest opportunity:
• Install a traffic signal with a 70-"second cycle length and including a southbound right-
turn overlap phase (southbound vehicles turn right when eastbound vehicles turn left) to
provide acceptable (LOS A) operations.
Because .interim improvements have been installed at the intersection and the existing CIP
project for the signal is funded, TR Impact 3 is considered less than significant.
Impact
TR Impact 5 The proposed project would exacerbate unacceptable operations for the
roadway segment of Orcutt Road, between Broad Street and Laurel Lane.
Mitigation Measures
TR/mm-4 Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the project. applicants shall install,
subject to approval of the Public Works Director, the following
improvements:
• Provide an additional through lane in each direction along Orcutt Road,
between Broad Street and the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way: The
alignment of Orcutt Road, with the widening, would shift southwards near
Duncan Road/Sacramento Drive and transition northwards before the
railroad tracks.. This alignment was set by City Council in 1994 (see
1013112005 24
i=yr
Four Creeks Rezoning Project ___ _. CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Ordinance No. 1269). The widening of Orcutt Road shall incorporate state
and city design standards.
• Provide bicycle lanes and sidewalks in both directions and left-turn
pockets in both directions at McMillian Avenue and Duncan
Road/Sacramento Drive with the widening of Orcutt Road.
In addition, prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the applicants shall either;
1) complete the following improvements subject to review, inspection and
permit issuance by the City, the California Public Utilities Commission
(CPUC), and Union Pacific Railroad, or 2) subject to approval of the Director
of Public Works, deposit a mitigation fee in an amount equal to the estimated
construction costs of said project and request that the City become_ the lead
entity in processing a CPUC Encroachment Permit for said work.
• Provide an additional through lane in each direction along Orcutt Road,
between Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way and Laurel Lane.
• Provide bicycle lanes and sidewalks in both directions and left-turn
pockets in both directions at. Laurel Lane with the widening of Orcutt
Road.
Prior to occupancy, the applicants will each enter into a reimbursement
agreement for costs associated with the design, permitting inspections, and
construction of the required improvements that are beyond the scope of each
development project. Final cost estimates will be subject to prior approval of.
the Director of Public Works. The amount of reimbursement between the
applicants will be determined by taking into consideration the project's
percentile contribution to overall traffic volumes along this roadway, based on
PM peak hour trip estimates.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 5 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 6 The proposed project would generate new pedestrian trips where sidewalks or
pathways are not currently provided or proposed.
Mitigation Measures
TR/mm-5 Implement TR/mm-4
10/31/2005 - -- - — -- - 25
i
Four Creeks-Rezonin 'A
roject - CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that theproposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. The proposed pathway will be provided
as part of the build-out.of Orcutt Road to its ultimate design. between Broad and Laurel. The
Creekston plans have been revised to provide the pathway connection from across the
commercial parking lot along Orcutt Road. With the proposed mitigation measures incorporated
into the project as conditions of approval,TR Impact 6 is reduced to a less than significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 7 Development of the proposed project, including the proposed Class I bike path
within the Sacramento Drive extension easement, would increase bicycle lane
usage on Orcutt Road.
Mitigation Measure
TR/mm-6 Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicants shall revise site plans
shall to include striped, Class II bicycle lanes along eastbound and westbound
Orcutt Road. These Class II bicycle lanes shall provide a connection to the
Railroad Recreational Trail.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted: With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 7 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 8 The proposed Class I (bike path) facility on the Sacramento Drive is
inconsistent with the City Bicycle Transportation Plan, and would result in
bicycle safety impacts.
Mitigation Measures
TR/mrn-7 Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicants shall revise site plans to
include increasing the proposed width (24 feet) of the Sacramento Drive
extension to provide five-foot Class II bike lanes on both sides.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project: The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
10/31)W05- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - -26.
f
Four Creeks Rezoning Projert _ CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 8 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 9 The proposed project would not accommodate for increased transit trips at bus
stops in the immediate vicinity of the project site.
Mitigation Measure
TR/mm-8 Prior to issuance of building permits, the project applicants shall revise site
plans to show the provision a bus stop along the project's frontage on Orcutt
Road at McMillian Avenue. Prior to issuance of building permits, the
applicant shall coordinate with San Luis Obispo Transit and provide all
funding for the installation of transit signs, schedule, and a bench at the new
bus stop location. All transit improvements shall be installed prior to
occupancy clearance.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 9 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 10 The proposed southbound left-turn access on Broad Street to the Creekston
driveway would create a new conflict point on Broad Street in the close
proximity to two existing southbound left-turn movements, resulting in
potentially significant impacts.
Mitigation Measure
TR/mm-9 Prior to issuance of building.permits, the Creekston applicant shall modify site
plans to show removal of the proposed median modification that would allow
southbound left-tum access on Broad Street to the Creekston driveway.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed.mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR impact 10 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
1013112005 27
i-77
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Impact
TR Impact 11 Site access at the Broad Street parcels may result in delays on Broad Street._
The Broad Street parcels are located opposite and north of Rockview Place.
Any future driveways that are not aligned with Rockview Place would result
in offset intersections and may cause additional congestion.
Mitigation Measure
TR/mm-10 Prior to issuance of building permits for any proposed future development on
the Broad Street Parcels, project plans shall show.a driveway at the southern
boundary of the project site aligning directly with Rockview Place. The site
access for the Broad Street parcels shall be reviewed and approved by the City
Public Works Department.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated, into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 11 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 12 The proposed project would cause delays on Orcutt Road at the project
driveways without the addition of left-tum pockets. Westbound vehicles on
Orcutt Road may queue back from the Sacramento Drive extension towards
the railroad crossing.
Mitigation Measure
Implement TR/mm-4, as described above.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 12 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 13 Northbound Sacramento Drive. vehicles may queue back and potentially block
access to the Tumbling Waters development, resulting in potentially
significant traffic safety impacts.
1013112005 28
Ys-
Four Creeks Rezoning Project _ -, _CEQA Findings-_Attachment 3 -Exhibit A
Mitigation Measure
TR/mm-11 Prior to occupancy clearance, the .Tumbling Waters applicant shall stripe a
"Keep Clear" legend within Sacramento Drive at the northernmost Tumbling
Waters driveway.
Finding:.
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 13 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 14 The southernmost Tumbling Waters driveway on Sacramento Drive is located
in between two curves. Vehicles traveling around the curved alignment on
Sacramento Drive may not anticipate inbound or outbound Tumbling Waters
vehicles..
Mitigation Measure
TR/mm-12 Prior to issuance of building permits, the Tumbling Waters applicant shall
revise all site plans to show either of the following requirements:
a. The southernmost driveway shall be restricted to emergency vehicle and
pedestrian/bicycle access to minimize vehicular conflicts on the curved
alignment of Sacramento Drive. Should this driveway be restricted to
emergency vehicles only, the east-west aisle located immediately north
can be extended to Sacramento. Drive and a new driveway could be
installed. This driveway would be located at the northern end of
Sacramento Drive where the roadway includes a straighter alignment,
which would provide improved sight distance for drivers of exiting
vehicles; or,
b. The southernmost driveway shall be restricted to right-turns in and out to
minimize vehicular conflicts on the curved alignment of Sacramento
Drive.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
10/31/2005 29
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA_Findings -Attachment 3-Exhibit A
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 14 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 15 Vehicle circulation for the eastern portion of the Tumbling Waters
development would be temporarily restricted, due to the proposed uses of the
main north-south circulation aisle (school bus pick-up/drop-off and closure for
community events).
Mitigation Measure
TR/mm-13 Prior to issuance of building permits, the Tumbling Waters applicant shall
modify site plans to show the west side of the main north-south aisle adjacent
to the Village Plaza & Hall designated as a passenger loading zone. The
designated passenger loading zone would be available for school bus drop-
off/pick-up and for closure for community events. The east-west aisle shall
remain open at all times.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR-Impact 15 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 16 The Creekst6n component of the proposed project would include two dead-
end aisles separated only by turf block, which could result in internal
circulation impacts.
Mitigation Measure
TR/mm-14 Prior to issuance of building permits, the main circulation aisle in the
Creekst6n development shall be reconfigured to allow through access between
the residential and commercial uses. Implementation of this mitigation would
m
reove the proposed dead-end aisles on the main circulation aisle and
improve overall vehicular access to and through the site.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
1013112005 30
�-yam
1
Four Creeks Rezoning_Ptojec_t CEQA Findings-Anachment 3-Exhibit A
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 16 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 17 Emergency and passenger vehicle access .would be restricted with the
proposed dead-end aisles in the Tumbling Waters and Creekston development.
Mitigation Measure
TR/mm-15 Prior to issuance of building permits, the Tumbling Waters and Creekston
applicants shall coordinate with the San Luis Obispo City Fire Department to
determine the acceptable parameters for all dead-end aisles to ensure that
emergency vehicle access is available.. Design features, such as a
"hammerhead," would be required to reduce the number of three-point turns
vehicles have to make to enter/exit the affected_ areas. Plans shall be revised
to reflect necessary changes to dead-end aisles.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 17 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 18 Location of grouped mailboxes adjacent to public streets may cause additional
delay for vehicles on public roadways, resulting in potentially significant
impacts.
Mitigation Measure
TR/mm-16 Prior to issuance of building permits, the Tumbling Waters and Creekston
applicants shall revise all site plans to show locations of all grouped mail
boxes located adjacent to private streets rather than public streets: The
location of the grouped mailboxes shall be approved by City staff..
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 18 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
10/31/2005 31
r
Four Creeks Rezoning Project -- _ -_ CEQA Findings-Attachment 3--Exhibit A
Impact
TR Impact 19 The five perpendicular parking spaces located at the Broad Street driveway
for the Creekston development would cause delays to vehicles entering the
site. These delays could result in potential safety problems for vehicles on
Broad Street.
Mitigation Measure
TR/mm47 Prior to issuance of building permits, the Creekston applicant shall submit
revised site plans that show no parking spaces located along the entry roadway
within 50 feet of the project entrance located on Broad Street.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into. the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 19 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 22 The westbound approach at the intersection of Broad Street and Capitolio
Way is projected to operate at LOS F under Ten-Year Conditions. Traffic
volumes at this intersection exceed the minimum thresholds for the 1VMUTCD
peak-hour signal warrant.
Mitigation Measure
Implement TR/mm-2, as described above.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 22 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 23 The proposed project would exacerbate unacceptable operations at the
unsignalized intersection of Duncan Road/Sacramento Drive Extension, and
Orcutt Road. The traffic volumes at this intersection slightly exceed the
minimum volume thresholds for the MUTCD peak-hour signal warrant.
10/31/2005 32
�-Y9
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Mitigation Measure
TR/mm-20 Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, project applicants shall make "fair
share" contributions to the City's Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) program
for the installation of a signal at the Duncan Road/Orcutt Road/Sacramento
Drive intersection. If at the time of issuance of permits; the TIF program has
not been modified to reflect the costs of the necessary signalizat on; the
applicant shall be responsible for paying current TIF fees plus a mitigation fee
associated with the estimated cost differential.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation treasures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project As conditions of approval, TR Impact 2.3 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 24 The proposed project would exacerbate unacceptable operations at the
unsignalized intersection of Laurel Lane and Orcutt Road. The northbound
and southbound movements/approaches are projected to operate at LOS F.
Traffic volumes at this intersection meet the MUTCD peak-hour signal
warrant.
Mitigation Measure
Irnplement TR/min-3, as described above.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 24 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR.Impact 25 The proposed project would cause the roadway segment of Broad Street, south
of Orcutt Road; to exceed LOS D volume thresholds under Ten-Year
Cumulative Condition's.
Mitigation Measure
Implement TR/mm-2, as described above.
10/31/2005 33
1
Four Creeks Rezoning Pro CEQA Findings-_Attachment 3 Exhibit A
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 25 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 26 The proposed project would exacerbate LOS F operations at the intersection
of Broad Street and South Street under General Plan Buildout Plus Project
Conditions.
Mitigation Measure
TR/mm-21 In order to mitigate buildout level traffic conditions the intersection will need
to be widened so as to provide for dual left turn lanes, two through lanes and
an exclusive right turn lane in the northbound direction on Broad Street. This
project is currently not included in the City's TIF program. However,. the
program is being updated and may be amended to include it in the future.
Prior to issuance of building permits; project applicants shall make "fair.
share" contributions to the City's Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) programfor
the widening of the south leg of the Broad Street/South Street (Broad Street)
intersection for said improvements. If at the time of issuance of building
permits, the TIF program has not been modified to reflect the costs of the
necessary intersection, or roadway improvement, the applicant shall be
responsible for paying current TIE fees plus a "fair share" mitigation fee as
determined by the Director of Public Works, associated with the estimated
intersection improvements.,
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 26 is reduced_ to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 27 The proposed project would exacerbate-LOS F operations at the unsignalized
intersection of Broad Street and Capitolio Way under General Plan Buildout
Conditions.
10/31/2005 34
/-15-1
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Mitigation Measure
TR/mm2l a, Prior to issuance of building permits, project applicants shall make "fair
share" contributions to the City's Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) program
for the installation of a signal at the Broad Street/Capitoho Way intersection.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 27 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 28 The proposed project would exacerbate LOS F operations at the future
signalized intersection of Broad Street and Prado Road under General Plan
Buildout Conditions.
Mitigation Measure
TR/mm-22 Prior to issuance of occupancy permits; project applicants shall make "fair
share" contributions to the City's Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) program
for the addition of a second northbound left-tum lane and southbound right-
turn overlap phase at the intersection of Broad Street and Prado Road.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the .Project. The City _finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 28 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 29 The proposed project would exacerbate unacceptable operations at the
unsignalized intersection of Laurel Lane and Orcutt Road under General Plan
Buildout Conditions. The MUTCD peak-hour signal warrant thresholds would
be exceeded at this location.
Mitigation Measure
Implement TR/mm-3, as described above.
10/312005 35
i
Four Creeks Rezoning Project- - CEQA Findings -Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR impact 29 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 30 The "proposed project would exacerbate unacceptable operations at the
unsigialized intersection of Duncan Road, Sacramento Drive Extension, and
Orcutt Road. The traffic volumes at this intersection slightly exceed the
minimum volume thresholds for the MUTCD peak-hour signal warrant.
Mitigation Measure
Implement TR/mm-20; as described above.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated. into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed in measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 30 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
TR Impact 31 The proposed project would exceed LOS D thresholds for the roadway
segment of Broad Street, south of Orcutt Road, under General Plan Buildout
Conditions-
Mitigation Measure
Implement TR/mm-21 a and TR/mm-22.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, TR Impact 31 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
10131/2005 -- -- - - - -- -- 36
1—,:5-,3
1
Four Creeks Retoning Project - CEQA Findings-Attachment -Exhibit A
C. AIR QUALITY
Impact
AQ Impact 1 The proposed project would cause direct short-term construction related air
pollutant emissions from earthwork equipment and material disposal
operations, resulting in significant combustion related air quality impacts.
Mitigation Measure
AQ/mm-1 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall submit a Construction
Activities Management Plan for the review and approval of the SLOAPCD.
This plan shall include but not be limited to the following Best Available_
Control Technology for diesel-fueled construction equipment:
a. Minimize the number of large pieces of construction equipment operating
during any given period.
b. Schedule construction related truck/equipment trips during-non-peak hours
to reduce peak-hour emissions.
c. Properly maintain and tune all construction equipment according to
manufacturer's specifications:
d. Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment including but not
limited to: bulldozers, graders, cranes, loaders, scrapers, backhoes,
generators, compressors, auxiliary power units, with CARB motor vehicle
diesel fuel.
e. Use 1996 or newer heavy duty off road vehicle_s to the extent feasible.
f. Electrify equipment where possible.
g. Use Compressed Natural Gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), bio-
diesel, or propane for on-site mobile equipment instead of diesel-powered
equipment.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of appioval, AQ Impact 1 is reduced to 'a less than
significant level.
Impact
AQ Impact 2 Construction of the proposed project would result in direct short-term air
quality impacts associated with ROG and NOx emissions:
Mitigation Measures
AQ/mm-2 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicants shall-.
10/31/2005 -- -- -- - 37
\i
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
a. Submit a Suitability Report identifying and explaining the particular
constraints to using the preferred catalytic soot filter for APCD review and
approval. Suitability shall be determined by an authorized representative
of the filter manufacturer, or an independent California Licensed
Mechanical Engineer.
b. Identify equipment to be operated during construction as early as possible
in order to place the order for the appropriate filter and avoid any project
delays.
c. Include the following specifications on all project plans: Catalyzed diesel
particulate filters (CDPF) shall be used on the pieces of equipment
estimated to generate the greatest emissions. Emissions from the entire
project, including potential hauling activities, shall be evaluated by the
APCD was the final grading quantities are known, and the number of
filters required based on this estimate. The number of filters required for
onsite construction equipment shall be determined after total impacts from
the project are known.
d. Contact the APCD Planning Department (805-781-5912) to initiate
implementation of this mitigation measure at least two months prior to
start of construction. The APCD encourages that catalysts be retained and
maintained by contractors for future emission reductions and potential
benefits for future project bidding.
AQ/mm-3 Prior to issuance of grading permits, if it is determined,th-at portable engines
and portable equipment will be utilized, the contractor shall contact the
SLOAPCD and obtain a permit to operate portable engines or portable
equipment, and shall be registered in the statewide portable equipment
registration program. Contact.APCD Engineering Department at 781-5912.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, AQ Impact 2 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
AQ_ Impact 3 PMIO emissions resulting from construction activities would result in direct
short and long-term impacts on air quality, further exacerbating the County
non-attainment status for PMio.
10/31/2005 - - - - - 338 rr
` - JS
Four Creeks Rezoning Project'- " CEQA Findings -Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Mitigation Measures
AQ/mm-4 Prior to issuance of grading permits, a Dust Control Plan shall be prepared and
submitted to the APCD for approval prior to commencement of construction
activities. The Dust Control Plan shall:
a. Use APCD approved BMPs and dust mitigation measures;
b.. Provide provisions for monitoring dust and construction debris during
construction;
c. Designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to
order increased watering or other measures as necessary to prevent
transport of dust off-site. Duties should include holiday and weekend
periods when work may not be in progress;
d. Provide the name and telephone number of such persons to the APCD
prior to construction commencement.
e. Identify compliant handling procedures.
f. Fill out a daily dust observation log.
AQ/mm=5 Prior to issuance of grading permits,the applicant shall:
a. Obtain a compliance review with the APCD prior to the initiation of any
construction activities;
b. Provide a list of all heavy-duty construction equipment operating at the
site to the APCD. The list shall include the make, model; engine size; and
year of each piece of equipment. This compliance review will identify all
equipment and operations requiring permits and will assist in the
identification of suitable equipment for the catalyzed diesel particulate
filter;
c. Apply for an Authority to Construct from the APCD.
AQ%mm-6 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the following mitigation measures shall
be shown on all project plans and implemented during the appropriate grading
and construction phases to reduce PMio emissions during earth moving_
activities:
a. Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible.
b. Water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used in sufficient quantities to
prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency
shall be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-
potable) water shall be used whenever possible.
c. All dirt stockpile areas shall be sprayed daily as needed.
d. Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than
one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast-germinating
native grass seed and watered until vegetation is established.
10/31/2003 - 39
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
e. All disturbed soil areas not subject to fe-vegetation shall be stabilized
using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods
approved in advance by the APCD.
f. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed
as soon as possible after initial site grading. In addition; building pads
shall be laid as soon .as possible after grading unless seeding or soil
binders are used.
g. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall be posted to not exceed
15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site.
h. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, or other loose materials are to be covered or
shall maintain at least two feet of free board (minimum vertical distance
between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section
23114.
i. Wheel washers shall be installed where vehicles enter and exit unpaved
roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site,
j. Streets shall be swept at the end of each day if visible soil material is
carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water
shall be used when feasible.
k. Permanent dust control measures shall be implemented as soon as possible
following completion of any soil disturbing activities.
AQ/min-7 During construction, the applicant shall maintain monthly compliance checks
throughout the construction phase, verifying that all equipment and operations
continue to comply with the APCD requirements.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, AQ Impact 3 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
AQ Impact 4 Earth moving activities for development of the proposed project components
would result in grading activities that may expose naturally occurring
asbestos, resulting in an indirect short-term impact.
Mitigation Measures
AQ/mm-8 Prior to issuance of building permits,the applicants shall:
a. Conduct a geologic analysis to ensure the presence/absence of serpentine
rock onsite. The geologic analysis shall identify if' naturally occurring
asbestos is contained within the serpentine rock onsite; and,
10/3U2005 40 y
I i
_Four Creeks Rezoning Project _ CEQA FindirTgs_-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
b.. If naturally occurring asbestos is found at the project site, the applicant
must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos Airborne
Toxic Control Measures (ATCM). In addition, the applicants shall work
with the APCD to prepare an APCD-approved Asbestos Health and Safety
Program and an Asbestos Dust Control Plan prior to issuance of building
permits. The Asbestos Health and Safety Program and Asbestos Dust
Control Plan may include, but is not limited to,the following:
i. Equipment operator safety requirements: protective clothing,
breathing apparatuses to prevent inhalation.of airborne asbestos
fibers,
ii. Dust mitigation measures: continually water site to prevent
airborne dust migration, cover all vehicle that haul materials
from the site
iii. Identification. of APCD-approved disposal areas for all
excavated materials.
c. If naturally occurring asbestos is not present, an exemption request must
be filed with the APCD.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, AQ Impact 4 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
AQ Impact 5 Demolition activities for the . Broad Street Parcels development may
potentially lead to adverse air quality impacts during removal or remodeling
of existing structures due to the potential presence of hazardous air pollutants,
resulting in an.indirect short-term impact.
Mitigation Measures
AQ/mm-9 Prior to Plan approval, the following measures shall be included as conditions
of approval for Any future proposed development within the Broad Street
Parcels component. Prior to commencement of demolition activities, the
applicant shall:
a. Notify the APCD at least 10 working days prior to commencement of any
demolition activities;
b. Conduct an Asbestos survey by a Certified Asbestos Inspector;
c. Use applicable disposal and removal requirements for any identified'
asbestos containing material.
10131120.05 - 41
1-.s8'
Four Creeks Rezoning ProjectCEQA_Findirlgs Attachment 3_ Exhibit A
d. Contact the SLOAPCD Enforcement Division prior to final approval of
any demolition activity.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, AQ Impact 5 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
AQ Impact 6 ROG, NOx, CO, and PM10 long-term operation emissions would exceed the
APCD's Tier Il Threshold, and ROG emissions would exceed the APCD's
Tier III Threshold: Development of the project would result in a direct long_-
term impact on air quality.
Mitigation Measures
AQ/mm-10 Prior to issuance of building permits, the following mitigation measures shall
be implemented to reduce area source emissions, to the greatest extent
feasible.
a. Increase walls and attic insulation by 10% above what is required by
APCD Title 24.
b. Plant shade trees along the southern exposures of buildings to reduce
summer cooling needs.
c. Plant shade trees in parking lots to reduce evaporative emissions from
parked vehicles..
d. Use built-in energy efficient appliances.
e. Orient buildings toward streets with convenient pedestrian and transit
access.
f. Use double-paned windows.
g. Use low-energy parking lot and streetlights. (e.g. sodium), consistent with
visual policies.
h. Use energy efficient interior lighting.
i. Incorporate energy efficient skylights into roof plan (i.e. should meet the
EPA/DOE Energy Star® rating).
j. Install high efficiency or gas space heating.
k. Install door sweeps and weather stripping if more efficient doors and
windows are not available.
AQ/mm-11 Prior to issuance of building permits, the following mitigation measures shall
be implemented, where applicable, to reduce area source emissions resulting
from the use of wood-bur6ing stoves. The SLOAPCD approved devices for
new homes under APO Rule 504 include:
10/31/2005 42 _q
y
Four Creeks Rezoning Project _. CEQA Findinjs-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
a. .All EPA-Certified Phase II wood burning devices;
b. Catalytic wood burning devices which emit less than or equal to 4.1 grams
per hour of particulate matter which are not EPA-Certified but have been
verified by a nationally-recognized testing lab;
c. Non-catalytic wood burning devices which emit less than or equal to 7.5
grams per hour of particulate matter which are not EPA-Certified but have
been verified by a nationally-recognized testing lab;
d. Pellet-fueled wood heaters and,
e. Dedicated gas-Cued fireplaces.
AQ/nim-12 Based on the Mitigation Threshold Guide (Table 5-1 in the SLOPAPCD
CEQA Air Quality Handbook), all of the standard mitigation measures and all
of the feasible discretionary mitigation measures identified within the APCD
Handbook would apply to the proposed project. The City of San Luis Obispo
has met with the APCD to define which measures would be most effective at
mitigating impacts from the proposed project. According to APCD
recommendations, the applicant shall:
a. Provide transit bus stop enhancements, information kiosk, smart signs,
shelter, and lighting within the project area;
b. Provide bicycle paths for project and connecting to Railroad Bicycle Path
(as required by TR/mm-6)
c. Provide onsite long and short-tem bicycle parking for residential and
commercial elements of the project;
d. Implement onsite circulation design element in parking lots to reduce
vehicle queuing and improve the pedestrian and bicycle environment;
e. Provide continuous walkways separated from the roadway by landscaping
and on street parking;
f. Include internal wiring/cable in dwelling unit that allows telecomm
uniting and teleconferencing to occur simultaneously in at least three
locations in each home;
g. Provide pedestrian signalization and.signage to improve pedestrian safety;
h. Establish a buffer zone between the railroad and the residential portion of
the project.
AQ/mm-13 Prior to issuance of building- permits, the applicants shall prepare an
aggressive tree planting and landscape plan using species endemic to the area
to be prepared as a part of the proposed development and shall be developed
in coordination with the APCD and the Community Development Director.
The tree planting and landscape plan shall include deciduous trees, planted so
that they can shade buildings in the summer, decrease indoor temperatures,
and reduce energy demands for air conditioning and fossil fuel emissions.
AQ/mm-14 Based on the Mitigation Threshold Guide (Table 5-1 in the SLOPAPCD
CEQA Air Quality Handbook), all of the standard mitigation measures and all
1013Y2005 43 T
V
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings-Attachment 3 -Exhibit A
of the feasible discretionary mitigation measures identified within the APCD
Handbook would apply to the proposed project. The City of San Luis Obispo
has met with the APCD to define which measures would be most effective at
mitigating impacts from the proposed project. According to APCD
recommendations, the applicant shall:
a. Provide assistance in the implementation of projects that are identified in
the City's Bicycle Transportation Plan or establish an easement and extend
the Railroad Bicycle Path along the frontage between the Tumbling
Waters development and the railroad.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, AQ Impact 6 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
AQ Impact 7 Incompatible mixed-use development has the potential to place residential
development in the same building or adjacent to land uses that may potentially
create odor or inhalation hazards. These actions could result in a direct long-
term impact.
Mitigation Measures
AQ/mm-15 Prior to approval of the development plan, the City shall coordinate with the
APCD to determine appropriate mixed-use designations and to determine
potential uses that would,require APCD permit approval.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the. Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, AQ Impact 7 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
AQ Impact 8 The project, combined with all other future projects in the area would iesult'in
significant cumulative, direct long-term operational impacts to air quality.
Mitigation Measures
Implement.mitigation measures AQ/mm-1 through AQ/mm-15, as described above.
10/31/2005 44
}
Four Creeks Rezoning Project = CEQA_Findiri'gs-A tta chment 3-Exhibit A
rrf
Fmdings
Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially lessen
AQ Impact 8 identified in the Final EIR; however, this impact remains significant and
unavoidable. The City has determined that AQ Impact 8 is acceptable by reason of the overriding
considerations discussed in Section VIII.
D. NOISE
Impact
NS Impact 1 Development of the proposed project would expose existing and newly
constructed sensitive residential receptors surrounding and on the project site
to temporary construction-related noise impacts, resulting in a direct short-
term impact.
Mitigation Measures
NS/mm-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicants shall submit a Noise
Reduction Plan prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant for review and
approval by the City Planning Department. The Noise Reduction Plan shall
include but is not limited to:
a. Limit all phases of construction to the hours of 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM
Monday through Friday as required by City ordinance;
b. Regular notification of all existing and future residences within 1,000 feet
of the site boundary concerning the construction schedule;
c. Shield especially loud pieces of stationary construction equipment;
d. Locate portable generators, air compressors, etc. away from sensitive
noise receptors;.
e. Limit grouping major pieces of equipment operating in one area to the
greatest extent feasible;
f. Place heavily trafficked areas such as the maintenance yard, equipment,
tool, and other construction oriented operations in locations that would be
the least disruptive to surrounding sensitive noise receptors;
g. Use newer equipment that is quieter and ensure that all equipment items
have the manufacturers' recommended noise abatement measures, such as
mufflers, engine covers, and engine vibration isolators intact and
operational. Internal combustion engines used for any purpose on or
related to the job shall be equipped with a muffler or baffle of a type
recommended by the manufacturer;
h. Conduct worker-training meetings to educate and encourage noise
awareness and sensitivity. This training should focus on worker conduct
while in the vicinity of sensitive receptors (i.e. minimizing and locating
the use of circular saws in areas adjacent to sensitive receptors and being
mindful of shouting and the loud use of attention drawing language); and,
10/31/2005 45
/—ee dZ
Four Creeks Rezoning Project Findings-Attachment 3 Exhibit A
i. Notify offy surrounding residences de.nces in advance of the construction schedule
When unavoidable construction Boise and upcoming construction tion activiti es
likely to produce an,adverse noise environment are expected. Noticing
shall provide phone number of project monitor, City inspector,
construction foreman etc. This notice shall be given one week in advance;
and at a minimum of one day in advance of anticipated activities have
changed. Project representative shall verbally notify all surrounding
residential owners.
Finding:
Mitigation, Has Been Incorporated into-to the Project. The City finds that the proposed
an
mitigation measures are feasible d have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, NS Impact I is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
NS.Impact 2 Increased vehicular noise resulting from the proposed project would expose
sensitive residential receptors to outdoor noise levels that would exceed the
thresholds defined in the City Noise Element, resultin- 9 in a direct long-term
impact.
Mitigation Measures
NS/mm-2 Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicants shall submit revised plans
for the review and approval of the City Community Development Director
and the Architectural Review Commission that include the implementation of
mitigation strategies, which would attenuate outdoor noise levels below the 60
dB; threshold. The applicant shall comply With one of the following:
a. The applicant shall implement the following noise mitigation strategy,
which has been modeled and determined to attenuate outdoor activity area
noise levels to below the 60 dB; threshold.
do Design the buildings that are adjacent to and bordering Oicutt Road
and Broad Street (refer to Figures NS-4 and NS-5) such that the
outdoor activity areas are located, the farthest distance-from the right-
of-Way line as possible, (other structures- depicted
e-d in Figures NS-4 and
NS-5 would be located far enough away from the roadway and
shielded by other structures to be in compliance with the Noise
Element). To accomplish this, orient the structure such that the
building is between the source of noise and the outdoor activity area.
In this way, the structure provides a shielding effect for the outdoor
activity area from the noise source (refer to Figures NS-4 and NS-5 for
building orientation direction).
10131a005 46
Four Creeks Rezoning ProjectCEQA Findings-Attachment 3_Exhibit A
Implement sound barriers as depicted in Figures NS-4 and NS-5 along
building exteriors adjacent to the noise source to attenuate noise levels
for the various floors of the project components. The barriers would
need to sufficiently wrap around the end structures and break the line
of sight to attenuate noise levels. Physical sound barriers shall be built
to the heights recommended in Figures NS4 and NS-5. The sound
barriers would be most effective when placed as close to the structures
as possible and in the arrangements shown. There are a number of
aesthetic treatments that could be included in the design to help
visually soften the sound barrier.
Or,
b. The applicant shall submit proposed alternative mitigation strategies and
shall demonstrate that the alternative mitigation strategies would attenuate
outdoor noise levels below 60 dB. An individual deemed qualified in noise
analysis by the City of San Luis Obispo shall model the effectiveness of
the alternative mitigation strategies to verify that outdoor activity area
noise levels would be attenuated below 60 dB. Modeling and or/reporting
shall be conducted using verifiable methodologies. Acceptable
combinations of mitigation strategies include the installation of physical
.sound barriers in conjunction with architectural design features, setbacks
from the noise source,and/or the elimination of outdoor activity areas.
NS/mm-3 Prior to final inspection or occupancy, whichever occurs first, the applicants
shall provide the Community Development Director with a report from an
engineer qualified in noise analysis, indicating that outdoor noise mitigation
measures have been installed as discussed in NS/mm-2.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, NS Impact 2 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
NS Impact 3 Increased vehicular noise under Baseline Plus Project conditions would
expose sensitive residential receptors to interior noise levels that would
exceed the thresholds defined in the City Noise Element, resulting in a direct
long-term impact.
10/3112005 47
l^e�e /4/
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Mitigation Measures
NS/mm-4 Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicants shall submit revised plans
for the review and approval of the City Community Development Director
that include the implementation of mitigation strategies, which would
attenuate interior noise levels to below the 45 dB Ldn threshold and the 60 dB
SEL (single event level) maximum threshold. The applicant shall comply
with one of the following:
a. The applicant shall implement the following noise mitigation strategy,
which has determined to attenuate interior noise levels to below the 45 dB
Ldn threshold and the 60 dB SEL (single event level) maximum threshold.
• Vents and roof penetrations: Soffit vents, cave vents, dormer vents and
other wall and roof penetrations shall be located on the walls and roofs
facing away from the noise source wherever possible. In addition, any
roof and attic facing the noise source shall be baffled.
• Walls: The walls of habitable spaces of dwelling units nearest the
noise source shall have wall construction with an S.T.C. (Sound
Transmission Class) rating of 30 or .greater. For instance, stucco
exterior or equivalent on 2" x 6" stud walls with. minimum. R-13
insulation and two layers of 1/2" gypsum board on the interior will
provide an S.T.0 rating of 30 or greater along these walls. The same
S.T.0 rating_ of 30 or greater can be achieved with a 1/2" soundboard
applied to the outside of the 2" x 6" studs with minimum R-13
insulation and one layer of 1/2" gypsum board on the interior.
• Acoustical Leaks: Common acoustic leaks, such as electrical outlets,
Pipes, vents, ducts, flues and other breaks in the integrity of the wall,
ceiling, or roof construction on the side of the dwellings nearest
transportation noise source shall receive special attention during
construction. All construction openings and joints on the walls on the
noise facing side of the project shall be insulated, sealed, and caulked
with a resilient, non-hardening, acoustical caulking material. All.such
openings and joints shall be airtight to maintain sound isolation.
• Windows: To meet the interiorLd,, 45 dBA requirements, windows for
habitable spaces of affected units facing the noise source shall be of
minimum double=glazed construction and installed with an interior
glass sash in accordance with the recommendations of the
manufacturer. The windows shall be fully gasketed, with an S.T.C.
rating of 30 or better, as determined in testing by an accredited
acoustical laboratory. Windows and sliding glass doors shall be
mounted in low air infiltration rate frames (0.5 cfm or less, per ANSI
specifications).
• Doors: Exterior doors shall be of solid core,.with perimeter weather
stripping and threshold seals on all exterior doors of impacted units
facing the noise source shown in Figure NS-6.
10/31/2005 48
. 15—
Four iCreeksRezqjTiizg P? ject
)A Findings-Anachment 3 -Exhibit A
_ l q
Or,
b. The applicant, shall submit proposed alternative mitigation strategies and
shall demonstrate that the alternative mitigation strategies would attenuate
interior noise levels below the 45 dB Ldn threshold and the 60 dB SEL
(single event level) maximum threshold. An individual deen i ied qualified
in noise analysis by the City of San Luis Obispo shall model the
effectiveness of the alternative mitigation strategies to verify that interior
noise levels would be attenuated below the 45 dB Ldn threshold and the
60 dB SEL (single event level) maximum threshold. Modeling and
or/reporting shall be conducted using verifiable methodologies.
NS/mm-5 Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicants shall submit revised plans
for the review and approval of the City Community Development Director
that provide the structures highlighted in Figure NS=6 With air conditioning
units and mechanical ventilation systems so the windows, can remain closed
during summer months and still achieve.interior noise standards.
NS/mm-6 Prior to final inspection or occupancy, whichever occurs; first, the applicants
shall provide the Community Development Director With a report from an
engineer qualified in noise analysis, noting that interior noise mitigation
measures have been installed as discussed in this EIR.
Finding.
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, NS Impact 3 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
NS Impact 4 Development of the project would expose outdoor activity areas along the
eastern project boundary to noise levels- from railroad sources that would
exceed the thresholds contained in the City Noise Element, resulting in a
direct, long-term impact.
Mitigation Measures
Implement NS/mm-2 and NS/mm-3, as described above.
NS/mm-1 Prior to recordation of theFinalMap, the applicants shall develop Covenants,
and d Restrictions (CC&Rs) that disclose to potential property owners,
tenants, etc:, that there would be times where residents are subject to outdoor
noise levels that exceed the allowable Ldn noise thresholds defined in the City
Noise
Element due to railroad traffic from Amtrak and the UPRR.
1013112005 499
r �
Four Creeks Rezoning Project__ _ CEQA Findings -Anachment 3 -,Exhibit A
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and.have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, NS Impact 4 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
NS Impact 5 Development of the project would expose interior living areas along the
eastern project boundary to noise levels from railroad sources that would
exceed_ the thresholds contained in the City Noise Element, resulting in a
direct, long-term impact.
Mitigation Measures
Implement NS/mm-4 through NS/mm-6, as described above.
NS/mm-8 Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall revise site plans to
show the provision of double glazed laminated windows that have a minimum
10 min thickness with a '12 mm space and 6.4 mm laminated surface for all
windows facing the railroad tracks (refer to Figure NS-6).
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, NS Impact 5 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
NS Impact 6 Increased vehicular noise from General Plan Buildout would expose sensitive
residential receptors to outdoor noise levels that would exceed the thresholds
defined in the City Noise Element, resulting in a direct long-term impact.
Mitigation Measures
Implement NS/mm-2 and NS/mm73, as described above.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project: The City finds that the proposed
mitigation. measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval; NS Impact 6 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
10/31/2005 50
Four Creeks Rezoning project_ _ CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Impact
NS Impact 7 Increased vehicular noise from General Plan Buildout would expose sensitive
residential receptors to interior noise levels that would exceed the thresholds
defined in the City Noise Element, resulting in a direct long-term impact.
Mitigation Measures
Implement NS/mm-4 through NS/mm-6; as described above.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds. that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of.approval, NS Impact 7 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
E. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Impact
HAZ Impact 1 Development of the proposed project would increase residential density
Within San Lui's Obispo Regional Airport S2 Safety Area, inconsistent with
safety-related policies of the ALUP, resulting in a direct long=term safety
impact.
Mitigation Measures
HAZ/mm-1 Prior to development plan, rezoning, or general plan amendment approval by
the City Council, the proposed project must be referred to the ALUC for a
consistency determination with the ALUP. The ALUC must determine that
the proposed residential density is consistent with the ALUP; or, the applicant
shall submit revised plans that show a reduction in proposed residential
density, consistent with ALUP requirements. The proposed project may not be
approved by the City Council unless it is determined to be consistent with the
ALUP by the ALUC.
HAZ/mm-2 Prior to recordation of final map, the applicant shall develop Covenants;
Codes, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) that disclose to potential buyers or leasers
that aircraft over-flights occur, and that such flights may result in safety
hazard impacts should an aircraft accident occur. In addition, prior to
recordation of final map, avigation easements shall be recorded over the entire
project site for the benefit of the SLO County Regional Airport.
10/31/2005 SI
—CLQ
Four Creeks Rezoning_Project = CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Finding:,
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, HAZ Impact 1 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
HAZ Impact 3 Development of the Creekst6n component of the proposed project would
introduce a day-care facility within San Luis Obispo Regional Airport S-2
Safety Area. This is inconsistent with the policies of the ALUP and would
result in a significant long-term impact.
Mitigation Measures
HAZ1mm-5 Prior to development plan, rezoning, or general plan amendment approval, by
the City Council; the project must be referred to the ALUC for a consistency
determination with the ALUP. The ALUC must determine that the proposed
Special Function Land Use is consistent with the ALUP; or, the applicant
shall submit revised plans showing that the proposed Day Care Facility has
been eliminated from the proposal. The proposed project may not be approved
by the City Council unless it is determined to.be consistent with the ALUP by
the ALUC.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, HAZ Impact 3 is reduced to a.less than
significant level.
Impact
HAZ Impact 4 Development of the proposed project would exceed the maximum building
coverage allowed within S72 Safety Area of the San Luis Obispo Regional
Airport. This is inconsistent with the policies of the ALUP and would result in
a significant long-term impact.
Mitigation Measures
HAZ1mm-6 Prior to. development plan, rezoning, or general plan amendment approval; by
the City Council, the project must be referred to the ALUC for a consistency
determination with the ALUP. The ALUC must determine that the proposed
Building Coverage is consistent with the ALUP; or, the applicant shall submit
revised plans showing that the 20 percent building coverage limitation has
10/31/2005 - -- - -- - 52 / q
Four Creeks Rezoning Project _ _ CEQA Findings-Attachment 3 Fxhibif A
been met. The proposed project may not be approved by the City Council
unless it is determined to be consistent with the ALUP by the ALUC.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, HAZ Impact 4 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
HAZ Impact 5 Transportation of hazardous materials through and adjacent to the project site
could potentially expose residences to safety impacts associated with
hazardous materials, or structures could be physically impacted by train crash_,
resulting in a direct long-term impact.
Mitigation Measures
HAZ/mm-7 . Prior to recordation of final map, the applicant shall develop Covenants,
Codes, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) that disclose to potential buyers or leasers
that hazardous materials are or could be transported on Sacramento Drive and
the UPRR tracks, and that inherent safety/hazardous materials impacts exist
should an accident or upset condition occur.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, HAZ Impact 5 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
HAZ Impact 5a Diesel exhaust from trains idling along the project frontage, adjacent to the
Tumbling Waters development, could result in health impacts to residents due
to the diesel particulate matter in the exhaust.
Mitigation Measures
HA2/mm-7a Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the applicant shall submit to the
Community Development Department evidence that they are working with
UPRR to establish a"No Idling Zone" along the project frontage.
HAZ/mm-7b Prior to recordation of final map, the applicant shall develop Covenants,
Codes, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) that disclose to potential buyers or leasers
10131/2005 53
/—��
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA-Findings --Attachment 3 -Exhibit A
the potential health hazards and nuisances associated with diesel particulate
matter.
Finding:.
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, HAZ Impact 5a is reduced to a less than
significant level.
F. UTILITIES
Impact
UTIL Impact 1 The proposed project would consume approximately 40 percent of the City's
remaining available water supply, resulting in a direct long=term impact.
Mitigation Measures
UTIUmm-1 At the time of application for building permits, the applicants shall submit
revised plans that include all on-site irrigation systems designed for the use of
City.recycled wastewater. All water utility services shall be designed for
compatibility with on-site use of recycled water for irrigation.
UTIUmm-2 Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicants shall develop a detailed
Water Conservation Plan to be reviewed and approved by the Community
Development Director. The Water Conservation Plan shall identify use of the
following: low flow shower restrictors, low flow toilet fixtures, drought
tolerant landscaping, and other water saving .devices. In addition, the plan
shall incorporate the use of recycled.water for landscape irrigation to mitigate
overall water consumption.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, UTIL Impact 1 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
UTEL Impact 2. The proposed project would create additional wastewater flows through
wastewater conveyance systems that are currently operating near capacity,
resulting in a direct long-term impact.
10/31/2005 54
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Finding's-Attachment 3 -,Exhibit A
Mitigation Measures
UTIUnim=3 Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicants shall make fair share
payments to the City's Wastewater Impact Fee, which would help finance the
construction of an'y needed capacity expansion at the Wastewater- treatment
plant and the necessary Tank Farm Regional lift station that would serve the
project. Payments into the City's Wastewater Impact Fees include
consideration of needed system improvements.
UTIUmm-4 Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicants shall provide evidence
that there are adequate,wastewater conveyance systems to serve the proposed
project through either ofthefollowing:
a. A letter from the City Public Works Department indicat ng that
i
construction of the Tank Farm Regional lift station is completed: or;
b. A letter from the City Public Works Department indicating that a
phased approach to the project has been reviewed and approved based
on estimates of existing wastewater capacity from the City Utilities
Engineer.
gineer.
Finding:
Mitigation Has !Been Incorporated into the Project. The Cit y finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, LTTI1L Impact 2 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
G. AESTHETIC RESOURCES
Impact
AES Impact I Construction of specific buildings adjacent to Orcutt Road would effectively
"wall-off views of the South Street Hills from a City-designated Scenic
Roadway resulting in a direct, long-term impact.
Mitigation Measures
AES/mffi=I Prior to issuance of grading permits for the Tumbling Waters and Creekst6n
developments, all project grading and building plans shall be revised to show
that all structures west of the proposed Sacramento Drive Extension conform
to the following: .
a. Structures within 100 feet of the edge of the future alignment of Orcutt
Road shall be a maximum of 30 feet in height.
b. Structures within 150 feet of the edge of the future alignment of Orcutt
Road shall be a maximum of 35 feet in height.
10131)2005 55
I
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings-Attachment 3 -Exhibit A
Alternative Mitigation Measures Incorporated Into the Project Design:
Alternate AES/mm-1
Tumbling Waters:
On August 17; 2005, after review of the Draft EIR for the project, revised plans for the Tumbling
Waters project were submitted with the following changes to address AES Impact 1.
1) The number of units at the northwest corner of the project site (the impact
area) has been reduced from 17 units to 9 units, significantly reducing the
scale and mass of the buildings.
2) The duplex units that are now proposed in the impact area are significantly
lower in height (2 stories above parking instead of 3 stories above parking)
than the four-p lex units evaluated in the Final EIR. Each of these buildings is
also approximately 7 feet narrower, reducing the duration of the potential
view blockage along Orcutt Road.
3) The applicants are pursuing revisions to the grading plan to lower the finished
grade in the impact area by approximately two feet, further reducing the
relative height of the proposed buildings.. As proposed, the buildings in the
impact area would stand approximately"35 feet above existing grade; meeting
the requirement of AES/mm-1 for buildings within 150 feet from the edge of
the foadway, but still inconsistent with the 30-foot height limit for buildings
within 100 feet of the roadway.
Creekston:
On August 15, 2005; after review of the Draft. EIR for the project; revised plans for the
Creekston project were submitted with the following changes to address AES Impact 1.
1) The row of eucalyptus trees along the eastern edge of the development area
will be maintained. The trees will be safety pruned and impacts associated
with their removal (aesthetics and biological) will be reduced to insignificant
levels:
2) The two 57' tall loft buildings will be relocated to the east side of the site,
adjacent to the row of eucalyptus trees. The proposed loft buildings do not
pierce the ridgeline of the South Street Hills and in this location are partially
screened in the foreground by the tall trees.
3) The three mixed-use buildings at the front of the site have been clustered at
the eastern end of the site to improve the line of site from Orcutt Road to the
South Street Hills. The relocation of the buildings in this manner reduces the
obstruction by over 60 feet, or by about 1/3 of the frontage.
10/31/2005 56
/_ �7j
Four Creeks Rezoning Project'- CEQA Finding's -Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
alternative mitigation "measure is feasible and has been adopted. With the proposed alternative
mitigation measure incorporated into the project plans, AES Impact I is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
AES Impact 3 Without strict adherence to the San Luis Obispo Community Design
Guidelines, the proposed project would substantially degrade the existing_
visual character of the site and its surroundings.
Mitigation Measures
AES/mm-2 Prior to issuance of grading permits for the Tumbling Waters and Creekston
developments, the Architectural Review Commission, in consultation with
City staff and other reviewing authorities, shall require that the project adhere
to the Community Design Guidelines. The Architectural Review
Commission, City staff, and other reviewing authorities shall not approve the
project unless the following specific findings can be made:
a. The project maintains a high quality of craftsmanship in development
through use of authentic building styles, design elements, and materials..
b. The project buildings are clustered to achieve a "village" scale. The
various buildings are designed to create a visual and functional
relationship with orie another:
C. The project buildings provide a "sense of human scale. The project
buildings incorporate significant wall and roof articulation to reduce
apparent. scale. Roofs are multi-planed to avoid large; monotonous
expanses. Horizontal and vertical wall articulation are expressed through
the use of elements such as wall offsets, recessed windows and entries,
awnings, and second floor setbacks.
d. The project buildings incorporate setbacks at the ground floor level and/or
upper levels (stepped-down) along street frontages such that they do not
visually dominate the adjacent neighborhood.
e. The project buildings' elements are in proportion. Building designs
demonstrate continuity, harmony, simplicity, rhythm, and balance and are
in proportion to one another..
f. The project's internal streets are designed as if they were pleasing public
streets, with comprehensive streetscapes including sidewalks; and planting
strips between curb and sidewalk with canopy trees.
g. The project landscaping is planned as an integral part of the overall design
and not simply located in "left over" areas. Landscaping is used to help
define outdoor spaces, soften the project structures' appearance, and to
screen parking, loading, storage, and equipment areas
10/3112005 57 e,/
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA FindingsgAttachment 3 -Exhibit A
h. Where visual screening at ground level is required (for those portions of
the development visible from Broad Street and Orcutt Road), the project
utilizes a combination of elements as appropriate, such as walls, berms,
and landscaping.
is The project maintains views of the South Street Hills and the Santa Lucia
Foothills to the greatest extent possible.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, AES Impact.3 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
AES Impact 4 The height of the "Loft" residential structures proposed as part of the
Creekston project component would be out-of-scale with the rest of the
project, the setting, and inconsistent with the pedestrian viewing experience,
resulting in a direct, long-term impact.
Mitigation Measures
AES/mm73 Prior to issuance of building permits for the Creekston development, all
project grading and building plans shall be revised to show the height of the
Loft buildings not exceeding 45 feet above average natural grade.
AES/mm-4 Prior to issuance of grading permits for the Creekston development, the
applicant shall revise all site and landscape plans to include a minimum 20
foot planting area along the west side of the Loft residential buildings: Tall
growing evergreen trees shall be densely planted in this area. Prior to issuance
of grading permits, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City to
install required landscaping and water-conserving irrigation systems and
maintain landscaping for the life of the project. The applicant shall also
submit a final landscaping and water-conserving irrigation plan to the
Community Development Director for review and approval. Prior to
occupancy clearance, landscaping and irrigation shall be installed.
Findings:
The City has determined that the proposed mitigation measures AES/mm-3 and AES/mm-4 are
infeasible, due to the following:
1) The proposed building height of 57-feet for the loft buildings is necessary to achieve high
density development within the available development areas of the site. The objectives
of the project include the designation of the site for high density residential development
10/31%2005 58
Four Creeks Rezoning Project _ _ CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
to allow for the implementation of the Creekston development plan.. The two loft
buildings contain 36 1-bedroom units that are 850 square feet each. These units are
affordable by design and contribute to the variety of housing cost, type and tenure within
the project site, which are General Plan goals.
2) Over 2.5 acres of the Creekston project site are occupied by creek corridors, including
setback areas. In order to achieve high density development in the manner proposed by
the project, which has been, determined to be consistent with the General Plan, building
height greater than allowed under AES/mm-3 is necessary.
3) . AES/mm4 is not feasible because the loft buildings have been relocated to address AES
Impact I and a 20-foot planting area west of the building conflicts with required garage
access and driveway aisles on the project-site, and conflicts with the location of other
units proposed on the site.
The following alternate mitigation measure has been incorporated in the proposed project;
however, even with implementation of this mitigation measure this impact remains significant
and unavoidable: The City has determined that AES Impact 4 is acceptable by reason of the
overriding considerations discussed in Section VII.
Alternate AES/mm-3: As shown on the Creekston project plans, submitted August 15, 2005,
the row of eucalyptus trees along the easter edge of the development
area will be maintained and the two 57' tall loft buildings will be
relocated adjacent to the row of eucalyptus trees. The relocation of the
buildings adjacent to the tall stand of eucalyptus trees will help to
provide context for the proposed building height, and achieve some of
the goals of AES/mm4.
Impact
AES Impact 5 The proposed landscape area along the north side of the Tumbling Waters
component is located within City-owned right-of-way and is insufficient in
reducing the urban appearance of the project and blending it with the
community, resulting in a direct, long-term impact.
Mitigation Measures
AES/mm-5 Prior to issuance of grading permits for the Tumbling Waters development,
the Architectural Review Commission, in consultation with City staff and
other reviewing authorities, shall require that theproject adhere to the
Community Design Guidelines. The Architectural Review Commission, City
staff, and other reviewing authorities shall not approve the project unless.the
following specific findings can be made:
10/31/2005 30
Four Creeks Rezoning Project - CEQA,Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
a. Sufficient landscaped buffer area(minimum of 20-feet) shall be located on
the northern boundary of the project site, outside of City-owned right-of=
way; and
b. Within the minimum landscape buffer area, planting density and species
height shall be increased so that after five years a minimum of 80 percent
of the development is not visible from Orcutt Road.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, AES Impact 5 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
AES Impact 6 Visibility of existing overhead utilities along Orcutt Road would add to the
visual clutter of the project and would increase the urban visual character of
the site as seen from a City-designated scenic roadway resulting in a direct,
long-term impact.
Mitigation Measures
AES/mm-6 Prior to issuance of building permits for the Tumbling Waters and CreekstSn
developments, the applicants shall submit utility relocation plans showing the
undergroundng of all existing overhead utilities along the south side of Orcutt
Road,
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, AES Impact 6 is reduced to a less than
significant level..
Impact
AES Impact 7 Removal of the eucalyptus trees along Sydney Creek would adversely affect
the vegetative character of the site and the surrounding neighborhood, would
increase noticeability of existing and proposed project, and would decrease
spatial qualities desirable for creating a- village-like, pedestrian-scale
development resulting in a direct, long=term impact.
10/31/2005 60
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEO Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Mitigation Measures
AES/mm-7 Prior to issuance of building permits for the Creekston development, the
applicant shall revise all site and landscape plans to include the preservation
and protection of the existing eucalyptus trees along Sydney Creek to the
greatest extent feasible. If tree removal is unavoidable, the Revegetation and.
Restoration Plan (identified within the Biological Resource Section of the
EIR) shall identify all native and non-native trees to be retained and all native
and non-native trees to be removed by location, size, and species. The Plan
shall not allow removal of any tree taller than 40 feet, and shall not allow
removal of more than 15 percent of the total number of trees along the creeks
within the development. The Plan shall be f eld verif ed by a Certified
Arborist and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Natural Resources
Manager.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted, With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, AES Impact 7 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
AES Impact 8 Visibility of proposed light sources would substantially increase nighttime
glare and light spillover as seen from City-designated scenic roadways and.
residential areas resulting in a,direct, long-term impact.
Mitigation Measures
AES/mm-8 Prior to issuance of building permits for the Tumbling Waters and Creekston
developments, the applicants shall submit exterior lighting plans in
conformance with the San Luis Obispo Community Design Guidelines,
Chapter 6.1 C, Lighting. In addition;plans shall include the following:
a. The point source of all' private road street lighting, business and parking
lot lighting, public area lighting, and residential exterior lighting shielded
from off-site views.
b. Light trespass from, streetlights minimized by directing light downward
and utilizing cut-off fixtures or shields.
c. Illumination from streetlights, parking area lights, and public area lights at
the lowest level allowed by public safety standards.
1013112005 61
Four.Creeks Rezoning_Project__ _ CEQA.Findings-Attachment 3 -Exhibit A
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted: With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, AES Impact 8 is reduced to a less than.
significant level.
Impact.
AES Impact 9 The. visibility of the ,proposed project combined with the continuing
development of along the Broad Street corridor and the southern portion of the
City would cause an increasing reduction in hillside resource views and
urbanization along City-designated scenic roadways.resulting in a directs long-
term impact.
Mitigation Measures
Implement mitigation measures AES/mm-1 through AES/mm-8, as described above.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and havebeen adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, AES Impact 9 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impacts
AES Impact 10 The installation of physical "sound barriers, as recommended by NS/mm-2,
Would substantially degrade the existing visual character and increase the
urban visual character of the project resulting in a direct, long-term impact.
Mitigation Measures
AES/mm-9 Prior to issuance of building permits for the Tumbling Waters and Creekst6n
components, project grading and building plans shall be revised to show the
following:
All proposed physical sound barriers shall be in tones compatible with
..surrounding terrain or buildings. Sound barriers shall be screened with native
Vegetation (including trees, shrubs, and vines) to ensure a minimum of 80
percent.screening after five years.
ny
10/31/2005 62
/J q
r
i
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings-Attachment 3- Exhibit A
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, AES Impact 10 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
H. ISSUES EVALUATED WITH INSIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
1. Geology and Hydrology
Impacts
INSIG Impact 3 The project site is located on expansive; soft; and liquefiable soils; building
foundations have the potential to be subject to differential settlement.
Mitigation Measures
INSIG/mm-1 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall incorporate into the
grading plans all recommendations of the Geotechnical and Soil Investigation
Report prepared for the project by, Earth Systems Pacific, 2004, for the
Tumbling Waters component,
an
d SI Soils Inc. for the Creekston project
component.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval; INSIG Impact 3 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
2. Cultural Resources
Impacts
INSIG Impact 4 Earthmoving activities associated with the construction and future
development of the project site have the potential to unearth prehistoric and
historic resources, resulting in potentially significant impacts to cultural
resources.
Mitigation Measures
INSIG/mm72 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall prepare and submit a
cultural resources monitoring plan to the City of San Luis Obispo Community
Development Director for review and approval. The monitoring plan shall
identify the procedure for notification of accidental discovery. The plan shall
10/31/2005 63/ hh
Four CreeksftrzoningTroinil !CEQ4 c _ in Attachment 3 -Exhibit.A
_ _ V
also identify* the Proposed communication network so that
t if any suspected
historic cultural materials are unearthed, they m be quickly examined and
evaluated by a qualified historic archaeologist and appropriate
recommendations made consistent with CEQA and the San Luis Obispo's
historic resources guidelines.
INSIG/mm-3 Prior to commencement of initial grading and grubbing, archaeological
training shall be conducted for all construction personnel to educate them
about what types of historic cultural materials may be encountered during
construction excavation. This training shall be conducted by a qualified
archaeologist approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Community
Development Director.,
INSIG/mm-4 During construction, in the event that buried of isolated prehistoric or historic
material is discovered on the property, all activities shall cease in the affected
area until the area is surveyed by a,qualified archaeologist/historian approved
by the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Director. Under the
direction of the archaeologist/historian, a mitigation plan shall be developed
and approved by the City. Salvage or mitigation excavations shall be outlined
in the mitigation plan, as necessary.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, INSIG Impact 4 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
3. Recreation
Inipact
INSIG Impact 5 Development of the proposed project would increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
.substantial physical deterioration of the facility could occur or be accelerated.
Mitigation Measures
INSIG/mm-5 Prior to land use permit issuance, the applicants shall comply with Sections
16.40.040 through 16,40.100 of the City Municipal Code and dedicate land
equivalent to five acres for each 1,000 residents expected to reside within the
subdivision or pay in-lieu fees, as applicable.
1013112005 64
Four Creeks Rezoning Project : — _ CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, INSIG Impact 5 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
INSIG Impact 6 Development of the proposed project includes recreational facilities or
requires the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might
have an adverse physical effect on the environment.:
Mitigation Measures
The recreation facilities proposed are incorporated into the design of the Creekston and
Tumbling Waters developments and would be constructed concurrently with the rest of the
project. The long- and short-term impacts associated with the construction of these facilities are
addressed under each of the applicable resource headings (i.e., Biological Resources) within
Section V of this document, and mitigation measures have been recommended as applicable. No
additional mitigation measures are necessary:
Finding:
Mitigation. Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, INSIG Impact 6 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact
INSIG Impact 7 Development of the proposed project, including the proposed Class I bikeway
within the Sacramento Drive extension easement, would increase Bicycle lane
usage on Orcutt Road.
Mitigation Measures
Implement TR/mm-6, as described above.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project,. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted_. With.the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, INSIG Impact 7 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
1013. 112005 65
r
Four Creeks_Rezoning Aroject _ _ CEQA_Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Impact
INSIG Impact 8 Construction activities along the Orcutt Road and Broad Street frontages
would result in short-term impacts to recreational and commuter bicyclists.
Mitigation Measures
INSIG/mm-6 Prior to initiating construction, the applicant shall coordinate with the City
Public Works Department and provide the following:
a. Signage along the length of:all :affected roads advising bicyclists of the
temporary construction and the estimated period of construction along
these routes.
b. Signage for an alternative bike route when existing routes are affected by
construction.
c. Signage alerting bicyclists and vehicular traffic of the need to exercise
caution.
INSIG/mm-7 During construction activities adjacent to the edge of pavement, construction
crews shall keep all equipment off of the paved roadway to the maximum
extent feasible to allow bicyclists to continue to use the road. (Note:
Exceptions to this measure shall include situations where sensitive habitat is
located adjacent to roadways and where safety issues exist.)
INSIG/mm-8 During construction when equipment is located in the roadway, the applicant
shall provide one flag person to separately guide bicyclists and motor vehicles
past the construction zone.
INSIG/mm-9 Upon completion of construction adjacent to Broad Street and Orcutt Road
the applicant shall replace all bicycle lanes that have been damaged by the
construction process to City standards. In addition, if any paint is scuffed, the.
applicant shall repaint the affected bicycle lane markings.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project: The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, INSIG Impact 8 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
4. Other Issues
Impact
INSIG Impact 9 The solid waste stream generated by the project would result in less than
significant energy impacts.
10/3112005 -66
/-=��3
1
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CE QA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A.
Mitigation Measures
INSIG/mm-10 Construction Solid Waste Minimization. During the construction phase of the
project, the following measures shall be implemented to reduce solid waste
generation to the maximum extent feasible:
a. The applicant shall develop and implement a Solid Waste Management
Program. The program shall identify the amount of waste generation
projected during processing of the project.
b. Prior to construction, the applicant shall arrange for construction recycling
service with a waste collection provider. Roll-off bins for the-collection of
recoverable construction materials shall be located onsite. Wood,
concrete, drywall, metal, cardboard, asphalt, soil, and land clearing debris
shall all be recycled.
c. The applicant shall designate a person to monitor recycling efforts and
collect receipts for roll-off bins and/or construction waste recycling: All
subcontractors shall be informed of the recycling plan, including which
materials are to be source-separated and placed in proper bins.
d. The applicant shall use recycled materials in construction wherever
feasible.
e. The above construction waste recycling measures shall be incorporated
into the construction specifications for the contractor.
INSIG/mm-11 Occupancy Solid Waste Minimization. During the long-term occupancy
phase of the project, the following measures shall be implemented to reduce
solid waste generation to the maximum extent feasible.
a. General Solid Waste. Space shall be allotted for storage of smaller
recyclable materials such as glass and plastic bottles and aluminum cans.
Such space shall be specified on building plans.
b. Gardening Waste. The following measures shall be the responsibility of
the applicant.
i. Landscape design trees shall be selected for the7 appropriate size and
scale to reduce pruning waste over the long-term.
ii. Slow-growing, drought-tolerant plants shall be included in the
landscape plan. Drought-tolerant plants require less pruning and
generate less long-term pruning waste, require less water, and require
less fertilizer than non drought-tolerant plants.
iii. Woody waste generated in the open space and park areas shall be
chipped and used as mulch, to the maximum extent feasible. The
chipped garden waste shall be directly applied soon after chipping.
Excess woody,waste from the open space/park areas that is not utilized
As mulch shall be hauled offsite by the maintenance crew. Whenever
possible, grass clippings shall be re-applied directly to the turf areas
through the use of mulch mowers.
10/31/2005 67
Four Creeks Rezoning Project CEQA Findings Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, INSIG Impact 9 is reduced.to a less than
significant level.
Impact
INS IG Impact 10 The proposed turning radii in the Tumbling Waters portion of the project do
not allow for adequate access of emergency response vehicles.
Mitigation Measures
implement TR/mm-15, as described above.
Finding:
Mitigation Has Been Incorporated into the Project. The City finds that the proposed
mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. With the proposed mitigation measures
incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, INSIG Impact 10 is reduced to a less than
significant level.
VI. CUMULATIVE AND GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS
A. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15355 defines cumulative impacts as
"two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which
compound or increase other environmental impacts": Further, "the cumulative impact from
several projects is the change in the environment which results from the incremental impact of
the project when added to other- closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable
probable future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively
significant projects taking place over a period of time."
The Guidelines require the discussion of cumulative impacts to reflect the severity of the impacts
and their likelihood of occurrence. However, the discussion need not be as detailed as the
analysis of impacts associated with the project, and should be guided by the rule of reason.
Cumulative impacts associated with Four Creeks Rezoning Project are discussed in the topical
analysis sections provided in Section.V of the Final EIR.
Findings
1. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project that reduce cumulative impacts
to less than significant levels. Except for the impact listed below, the City finds that the
10/31/2005 - 68/
Four Creeks Rezoning,Project__ J___ CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
mitigation measures identified in Section V above are feasible and have been adopted to
reduce the cumulative impacts of the proposed project.
2. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially
lessen AQ Impact 8 identified in the Final EIR; however, this impact remains significant and
unavoidable. The City has determined that AQ .Impact 8 is acceptable by reason of the
overriding considerations discussed in Section VIII.
B. GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS
Pursuant to Section 15126.2(d) of the State CEQA Guidelines, an EIR must address whether a
project would directly or indirectly foster growth. Section 15126.2(d) reads as follows:
"An EIR shall discuss the ways in which the proposed project could foster economic or
population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the
surrounding environment. Included in this are projects, which would remove obstacles to
population growth (a major expansion of wastewater treatment plant, might,for example, allow
for more construction in service areas). Increases in the population may further tax existing
community service facilities so consideration must be given to this impact. Also discuss the
characteristic of some projects, which may encourage and facilitate other activities that could
significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively. It must not be assumed
that growth in any area is necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the
environment."
As discussed in this section, this analysis evaluates whether the proposed project would directly,
or indirectly, induce economic, population, or housing growth in the surrounding environment.
Findings
1. Population Growth: The 264 housing units of the proposed project would increase the
population of the City of San Luis Obispo by approximately 599 residents (264 housing units
x 2.27 persons per household based (U.S. Census 2000)). Based on the City's estimated 2004
population of 44,176 residents, an.additional 599 residents would account for an approximate
1.34 percent increase in population. The addition of 264 units of housing to the City's total of
19,306 housing units (US Census 2000) would also represent an increase of approximately
1.34 percent in the number of housing units within the City. This increase in population is not
considered a substantial increase in the overall population of the City in terms of percentage,
and therefore is not considered significant on a communitywide basis.
2. Economic Growth: Normally, economic issues are not discussed in an EIR unless there is a
nexus with a physical impact on the environment (CEQA Guidelines Section 15131). CEQA
states that economic or social information may be included in an EIR or may be presented in
whatever form the agency desires. It also goes on to state in subsection (a) that "...economic
or social effects of a project shall not be treated as significant effects on the environment, An
EIR may trace a chain of cause and effect from a proposed decision on a project through
anticipated economic or social changes resulting from the project to physical changes caused
in turn by the economic or social changes. The intermediate economic or social changes
10/31/2005 69
�—0oo
Four Creeks Rezoning Project' CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Ezhibit A
need not be analyzed in any detail greater than necessary to trace the chain of cause and
effect. The focus of the analysis shall be on the physical changes."
A market feasibility study was not conducted for the proposed project. Therefore, the
feasibility of the project and a cost-benefit analysis is not known. However, it is certain that
a mixed ase commercial project of this size would bring an increase in revenue resulting in
growth inducing impacts to the area. The effects will indirectly provide change in the social
and economic environment of the area and these changes may be considered beneficial or
adverse depending upon one's social perspective and desires for the growth of the area.
3. Employment Opportunities: Based on estimates from similar projects, the commercial
components of the proposed project are expected to employ approximately 60 people.
Additionally, there would be short-term employment opportunities during the construction of
both components of the proposed project. Given the ample supply of construction workers in
the local work force (both employed and unemployed); it is likely that a majority of these
workers would come from the local area. Long-term employment opportunities may include
part-time work, retail sales associates in low and moderate income ranges, with managers in
the higher income ranges. Most jobs, with the exception of managerial positions,. are
secondary-income jobs and would likely go to spouses, students, and young adults. Although
there is a local employment.base with the training to work at these commercial facilities, the
development could encourage a small.number of persons relocating to the area, resulting in a
minor demand for housing, additional commuting, and secondary impacts to energy
consumption, air pollution, and an increase in traffic levels of service.
4. Employment Growth to Supporting Industries: The proposed project is considered growth
inducing because it would foster economic growth and employment not only for the project
itself but also for complimentary industries. Commercial developments require products and
supplies from existing industries to facilitate growth and success. These industries may
include: trucking, janitorial, advertising service, and service industries that serve the
secondary increase in employment base (food; sundries, etc.). The increase in supporting
industries could contribute to the cumulative need for more of these services in the area,
however it would not be considered significant for either primary service industries to the
commercial complex or the secondary service industries to the employees, and would not.
likely attract new business to the area.
VII. FINDINGS FOR ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. INTRODUCTION
Six project alternatives were selected for review in the EIR because of their potential to avoid or
substantially lessen project impacts, or because they were required under CEQA Guidelines (e.g:,
the no project altemative). These alternatives include the following:
1. No Project Alternative
2. Alternative Land Use Under the R-4-PD, C-S-PD, and R-4-S Designations
3. Reduced Density Alternative
4. Redesigned Project Alternative
10/3112005 - - 70/ G
O
.I
Four Creeks Rezoning Project' CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
5. Mitigated Project Alternative
6. Environmentally Superior Alternative
The Alternatives section of the FEIR provides a qualitative analysis of the six alternatives and
the level of impact that would result if they were to be implemented. Those alternatives that were
determined to significantly reduce the environmental impacts associated with the proposed
project and that were determined to be feasible were compared to the proposed project (refer to
EIR Section VI).
B. DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES
Of these alternatives, all but the Alternative Land Uses Alternative have been brought forward .
for further review. The Alternative Land Uses Alternative has been determined to be feasible for
implementation; however, it does not meet most of the basic objectives of the proposed project
and was therefore not considered further in the alternatives analysis.
1. No Project Alternative: Analysis of this alternative includes the assumption that future
development would occur onsite under the existing M-PD and C-S-S land use designations
and would likely include development of commercial retail stores and/or commercial office
building or warehouse manufacturing and retail facilities.
2. Alternative Land Uses Under the R-4-PD, C-S-PD, and R-4-S Designations: This alternative
considers the various land uses that would be allowed under the proposed rezone, other than
the mixed-use development proposed. Alternative land uses include: mobile home parks;
residential care facilities, family day care homes, convents and monasteries, and
parks/playgrounds.
3. Reduced Density Alternative: This alternative would retain the mixed-use land uses of the
proposed project, but would involve a 75 percent reduction in the proposed residential and
commercial square footage in order to minimize environmental impacts.
4. Redesigned Project Alternative: This alternative was developed with the objective of
minimizing Class I noise and aesthetics impacts while maintaining the mixed-use character
of the proposed project. Under this alternative, buildings would be re-oriented and
redesigned.
5. Mitigated Project Alternative: This alternative would implement all of the EIR.recommended
mitigation measures intended to reduce significant environmental impacts. With
implementation of mitigation measures, all. Class I impacts would be reduced to
insignificance, with the exception of cumulative air quality.
6. Environmentally Superior Alternative: This is the alternative with the least amount of
environmental impacts.
C. FINDINGS
1. No Project Alternative: As compared to the proposed project, No Project Alternative would
minimize the following environmental impacts:
10/31/2005 71
�� 00
Four Creeks Rezoning Projeei_ CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
• Noise: There would be no residential development under the No Project Alternative.
Noise impacts would be significantly reduced because sensitive receptors would not
be exposed to outdoor activity area noise levels in excess of 60 dBA.
• Hazards: Under the No Project Alternative, maximum non=residential densities,
proposed commercial land uses, and maximum building coverage would be required
to comply with ALUP standards for non-residential development located within
Aviation Safety Area S-2. This would reduce airport hazards impacts to less than
significant levels, as compared to the proposed project.
• Utilities: Commercial retail, commercial offices, and warehouse retail uses generally
consume less water and produce less wastewater than high-density residential
development. Water and wastewater impacts would be less than with the proposed
project.
• Aesthetic Resources: Under the No Project Alternative, building heights would be
required to comply with City ordinances that limit building heights to 35 feet. This
reduction in building height, as compared with the proposed project would reduce
aesthetic resources impacts to less than significant levels.
e Recreation: Implementation of the No Project Alternative would reduce impacts to
recreational resources, as compared to the proposed project, because there is no
residential component of the No Project. Alternative that would increase the use of
existing recreational facilities or create the need for new parks.
Potentially adverse impacts associated with implementation of the No Project Alternative
that would be more severe than those associated with the proposed project include:
• Transportation/Circulation: Depending on the type of commercial retail facility
developedunderthe No Project Alternative, there is the possibility for traffic volumes
to increase as compared to the proposed project
Biological resources, air quality, and geology/hydrology impacts would remain the same as
with the proposed project. The Class I impacts associated with cumulative air quality would
remain. The No Project. Alternative would reduce environmental impacts overall and has
been determined to be feasible fouimplementation. The No Project Alternative does not meet
most of the basic objectives of the proposed project, namely the City's desire for mixed-use
development in this area; however; it has been included in this alternatives analysis, per
CEQA requirements.
2. Reduced Density Alternative: As compared to the proposed project, Reduced Density
Alternative would minimize the following environmental impacts:
• Biological Resources: Reduced densities and building coverage onsite would allow
for 20-foot creek setbacks; as required by City ordinance. In addition, impacts to
sensitive resources would be reduced.
• Transportation/Circulatiom The Reduced Density Alternative would lower the
projected traffic volumes and reduce transportation impacts.
10/31/2005
Four Creeks Rezoning Project_ ___ _ _ __CEQA Findings-Attachment 3 -Exhibit A-
• Air Quality: With lower traffic volumes, air quality impacts associated with vehicular
trips would also decrease. Short-term air quality impacts from construction activities
would remain approximately the same.
• Noise: The reduced density of development would allow for greater setbacks from
transportation noise sources, which would significantly reduce noise impacts to
sensitive receptors. Transportation noise impacts from vehicular traffic would also be
reduced, because development under the Reduced Density Alternative would result in
lower traffic volumes. Although noise impacts would be much less with the Reduced
Density Alternative than with the proposed project, noise impacts would remain
significant.
• Hazards: Under the Reduced Density Alternative, maximum non-residential densities;
proposed commercial land uses, and maximum building coverage would be required
to comply with ALUP standards for non-residential development located within
Aviation Safety Area S-2. This would reduce airport hazards impacts to less than
significant levels, as compared to the proposed project.
• Utilities: Generally speaking, a 75 percent reduction in overall density would equate
to an approximate 75 percent reduction in water usage and wastewater generation. It
is possible that this significant reduction in wastewater generation would allow for
development to occur prior to completion of the Tank Farm Regional Lift Station
project.
• Aesthetic Resources: Because densities and building coverage under the Reduced
Density Alternative would be less, building heights would not be as tall as with the
proposed project, which would reduce impacts to aesthetic resources.
There are no potentially adverse impacts associated with 'implementation of the. Reduced
Density Alternative that would be more severe than those associated with the proposed
project. Geology/hydrology and recreation impacts would remain the same as with the
proposed project. The Class I impacts associated with cumulative air quality would remain.
The FEIR identified that the Reduced Density Alternative would reduce environmental
impacts overall, would meet most of the basic objectives of the proposed project, and has
been determined to be feasible for implementation; however,. this project has not been
identified as the Environmentally Superior Alternative and will not be incorporated into the
proposed project.
4. Redesigned Project Alternative: As compared to the proposed project, Redesigned Project
Alternative would minimize the following environmental impacts:
• Noise: Noise impacts would be significantly reduced through the addition of interior
and exterior noise attenuation strategies and the reorientation of residential structures.
Although noise impacts would be much less with the Redesigned Project Alternative
than with the proposed project, noise impacts would remain significant.
• Aesthetic Resources: Under the Redesigned Project Alternative, building heights
would be limited to 35 feet. This reduction in building height, as compared with the
proposed project, would reduce aesthetic resources impacts to less than significant
levels.
10/31/2005 73
i
Four Creeks Rezoning Project - CEQA Findings-Attachment 3 -Exhibit A
There are no potentially adverse impacts associated with implementation of the Redesigned
Project Alternative that would be more severe than those associated with the proposed
project. Biological .resources, transportation/circulation, air quality, hazards, utilities,
geology/hydrology, and recreation impacts would remain the same as with the proposed
project. The Redesigned Project Alternative would reduce environmental impacts overall,
would meet most of the basic objectives of the proposed project, and has been determined to
be feasible for implementation however, this project -has not been identified as the
Environmentally Superior Alternative and will not be incorporated into the proposed project..
5. Mitigated Project Alternative (Environmentally Superior Alternative): As compared to the
proposed project, Mitigated Project Alternative would minimize environmental impacts in all
issue areas. All identified Class I impacts would be fully mitigated (i.e., reduced to less than
significant levels), with the exception of cumulative air quality. The Mitigated Project
Alternative would reduce significant environmental impacts and meet most of the basic
objectives of the proposed project; and has been determined to be feasible for
implementation. Because the Mitigated Project Alternative is feasible for implementation and
reduces environmental impacts to a greater extent than the proposed project, the Mitigated
project Alternative has been identified as the Environmentally Superior Alternative. Portions
of the Environmentally Superior Alternative have been incorporated into the proposed
project, with the exception of mitigation measures AES/mm-1 and AES/mm-3. Alternate
mitigation measures have been developed; however, even with implementation of the
alternate mitigation measures aesthetic impacts remain significant and unavoidable. The City
has determined that these impacts are acceptable by reason of the overriding considerations
discussed in Section VII.
VIII. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
A. INTRODUCTION
The CEQA Findings for the Four Creeks Rezoning Project identifies the following significant
and unavoidable impacts of the project:
• AQ Impact 8: Cumulative air quality inipact
• AES Impact 4: Construction of project components that would be out-of-scale with the rest
of the project, the setting, and inconsistent with the pedestrian viewing experience.
For projects which would result in significant environmental impacts that cannot be avoided,
CEQA requires that the lead agency balance the benefits of these projects against the
unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the projects. If the benefits
of these projects outweigh the unavoidable impacts, those impacts may be considered acceptable
(CEQA Guidelines Section 15093[a]).. CEQA requires that, before adopting such projects, the
public agency adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations setting forth the reasons why the
agency finds that the benefits of the project outweigh the significant environmental effects
caused by the project. This statement is provided below.
10/3112005 74
1-491
1 I.
Four_Creeks Rezoning Project _ _ CEQA Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A
B. FINDINGS
The City has incorporated all feasible mitigation measures into the project. Although these
measures will significantly lessen the unavoidable impacts listed above, the measures will not
fully avoid these impacts. The City has also examined a reasonable range of alternatives to the
project and has incorporated portions of these alternatives into the project in order to reduce
impacts.
In preparing this Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has balanced the benefits of
the proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks. For the reasons specified
below, the City finds that the following considerations outweigh the proposed project's
unavoidable environmental risks:
1) Implementation of the General Plan: The project implements a major program of the
General Plan Housing Element by re-designating land for high density residential
development (HE 63.7). The project will allow the City to pursue existing Housing
Element policies for Mixed-Income Housing (HE 4.1), Housing Variety and Tenure (5.0),
Housing Production (6.1) and Neighborhood Quality (7.1). The project also implements
goals and policies of the Land Use Element, including Goal 31, which promotes infill
development and a compact urban form. The project is consistent with the Land Use
Element policies for development of residential neighborhoods, including Residential
Project Objectives (LUE 2.2.12). The project is also consistent with the Open Space
Element and respects and preserves significant habitat areas on the project site to maintain
the health of the riparian corridors, which will help to provide the developed project with a
unique sense of place. The project also implements important plans for improvements
identified in the Circulation Element, including the widening of Orcutt Road to arterial
standards and the connection of Sacramento Drive to Orcutt Road, facilitating area-wide
circulation.
2) Provision of Affordable Housing: The project will provide affordable housing to the
residents of San Luis Obispo in a manner that exceeds the requirements of the City's
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. This is made possible because of the proposed density of
development which creates the a significant and unavoidable impacts of the project. The
Tumbling Waters project will provide 12 affordable units. In conjunction with the City of
San Luis Obispo, the developer is proposing to establish a fund of approximately $500,000
to use for interest rate buy-downs, making the units affordable to moderate income
households. In addition tothis fund, the State BEGIN program has awarded the City a grant
of $300,000 to use for direct down payment assistance. The project qualified for the
BEGIN program because the proposed City actions (re-designating land for high density
development) facilitates housing development and helps the State meet its affordable
housing goals. The Creekston project also provides affordable housing—through its density
and design. Consistent with Table 2a of the Housing Element, the Creekston project is
considered "affordable by design" with 43 units out of 86, or 50% of the dwellings,
proposed to have 850 square-foot, 1-bedroom floor plans.
10/31/2005 75 q
Four Creeks Rezoning Project _ CEQA,Findings-Attachment 3-Exhibit A,
IX. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
A. STATUTORY REQUIREMENT
When a Lead Agency makes findings on significant environmental effects identified in an EIR,
the agency must also adopt a "reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project
which it has adopted or made a condition of approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant
effects on the environment" (Public Resources Code section 21081.6(4) and CEQA Guidelines
sections 15091(d) and 15097). The M.itgaton Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) is
implemented to ensure that the mitigation measures and project revisions identified in the EIR
are implemented. Therefore, the MMRP must include all changes in the proposed project either
adopted by the project proponent or made conditions of approval by the Lead or Responsible
Agency.
B. ADMINISTRATION OF THE MMRP
The City of San Luis Obispo is the Lead Agency responsible for the adoption of the MMRP for
the Four Creeks Rezoning Project, if the project is approved. According to CEQA Guidelines
section 15097(a), a public agency may delegate reporting or monitoring responsibilities to
another public agency or to a private entity that accepts the delegation. However, until mitigation
measures have been completed, the Lead Agency remains responsible for ensuring that the
implementation of the measure occurs in accordance with the program:
Mitigation measures listed in the Four Creeks Rezoning Project MMRP will be primarily
implemented by the project applicants, under the oversight of the City of San Luis Obispo and/or
an approved environmental monitor acting of the City's behalf..
C. MITIGATION MEASURES
The following mitigation measures have been recommended in the EIR. Included with each
mitigation measure are the Applicant Responsibilities, Party Responsible for Verification,
Method of Verification, and Verification Timing. For the purposes of this EIR, the timing
requirement "prior to issuance of building permits" includes issuance of all City permits for
grading and construction of the proposed project, including but not limited.to grading permits,
permits for public improvements, and construction permits.
See Table beginning on the following page.
1013112.005 76
Four Creeks Rezoning Project itigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan- Attachment 3—Exhibit A
Table VIII-1
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Mitigation Applicant Party Responsible Method of Verification
Measure Responsibilities for Verification Verification Timin
BR/rrim-1 Submit and State Water The City shall Prior to
implement the Resources Control verity receipt, issuance of
required plan. Board; City of San approval,and building permits
Luis Obispo proper and throughout
implementation of all phases of
the proposed plan grading and
in accordance construction
with the EIR activities
mitigation
measure. -- - -- _
BI0/mm-2 Comply with City of San Luis The retained Throughout all -
timing
ll -timing limitations. Obispo; Environmental phases of
Environmental Monitor or City grading and
Monitor Staff shall verify construction
compliance with activities.
required timing of
construction
activities-
BIO/mrri-3 Com
ply with City of San Luis The retained Throughout all
equipment access Obispo; Environmental phases of
and construction Environmental Monitor or City grading and
limitations within Monitor Staff shall verify construction
drainages. compliance with activities.
required
equipment access
and construction
limitations within
draina es.
BIO/mm-4 Comply with storm City of San Luis The City shall Throughout all
water BMPs, as Obispo verify proper phases of
listed in the EIR.. implementation of grading and
the approved construction
SWPPP. activities.
810/mm-5 Comply with'storm City of San Luis The City shall Throughout all
water BMPs, Obispo verify proper phases of
including implementation of grading and
permanent the approved construction
installation of SWPPP. activities..
filtration devices,
as listed in the
EIR.
BI0/mm-6 Comply with City of San Luis The retained Throughout all
surfactant and Obispo; Environmental phases of
herbicide Environmental Monitor or City grading and
application Monitor Staff shall-verffy _ construction
Final EIR 77
Four Creeks Rezoning Project ,itigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan Attachment 3—Exhibit A
Mitigation Applicant Party Responsible Method of Verification
Measure Responsibilities for Verification Verification riming
limitations. compliance with activities.
surfactant and
herbicide
application
limitations.
BIO/mm-7 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo; verify receipt, issuance of
required plans. Environmental approval,and building permits
Monitor proper and throughout
implementation of all phases of
the proposed plan grading and
in accordance construction
with the EIR activities
mitigation
measure.The
retained
Environmental
Monitor or City
Staff shall verify
compliance with
riparian setback
limitations in the
field.
13I0/mm-8 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement the Obispo; verify receipt, issuance of
required Environmental approval, and building permits
Revegetation and Monitor proper and throughout
Restoration Plan. implementation of all phases of
the proposed plan grading and
in accordance construction
with the EIR activities.
mitigation
measure.The
retained
Environmental
Monitor or City
Staff shall verify
compliance with
the Revegetation
and Restoration
Plan in the field.
B10/mm-9 Obtain all required U.S.Army Corps of The City shall Prior to
permits from Engineers; verify receipt of recordation of
affected resource California copies of all the final map
agencies. Department of Fish required resource and issuance of
and Game; agency permits/ grading permits.
Regional Water authorizations or
Final EIR 78
/—.O
Four Creeks Rezoning Project :itigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan Attachment 3—Exhibit A
Mitigation Applicant Party Responsible Method of Verification
Measure Responsibilities for Verification Verification Timfn
Quality Control documentation
Board;City of San from the resource
Luis Obispo agency that the
permit/
authorization is
not needed.
BI0/mm-10 Provide funding City of San Luis The City Natural Prior to
for a City- Obispo Resources issuance of
approved Manager shall building permits.
Environmental verify
Monitor and qualifications of
ensure submittal Environmental
of required Monitor. The
monitoring retained
reports. Environmental
Monitor shall
submit monitoring
reports to the.City
Community
Development
Department(if
necessary).
BI0/mm-11 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement the Obispo; verify receipt, issuance of
required Environmental approval,and building permits
Revegetation and Monitor proper and throughout
Restoration Plan. implementation of all phases of
the proposed plan grading and
in accordance construction
with the EIR activities.
mitigation
measure.The-
retained
Environmental
Monitor or City
Staff shall verify
compliance with
the Revegetation
and Restoration
Plan in the field.
610/mm-12 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo; verify receipt, issuance of
required plans. Environmental approval, and building permits
Monitor proper and throughout
implementation of all phases of
the proposed plan grading and
in accordance construction
with the EIR activities
Fina1.EIR 79
Four Creeks Rezoning Project litigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Mitigation _ Applicant Party Responsible Method of Ver'rfication
Measure Res nsibilities for Verification Verification Timin
mitigation
measure.The
retained
Environmental
Monitor or City
Staff shall verify
compliance with
riparian setback
limitations in the
field.
191I0/mm-13 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall. Prior to
implement the Obispo; verify receipt, issuance of
required Environmental approval,and tiuildiq permits
Revegetation and Monitor proper and throughout
RestorationPlan. implementation of all phases of
the,proposed plan grading and
in accordance construction
with the EIR activities.
mitigation
measure.The
retained
Environmental
Monitor or City
Staff shall verify
compliance with
the Revegetation
and Restoration
Plan in the field.
BIO/mm-14 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement the Obispo; verify receipt, issuance of
required Environmental approval,and building permits
Revegetation and Monitor proper and throughout
Restoration Plan. implementation of all phases of
the proposed plan grading and
in accordance construction
with the EIR activities.
mitigation
measure.The
retained
Environmental
Monitor or City
Staff shall verify
compliance with
the Revegetation
and Restoration
Plan in the field.
BI0/mm-15 Retain qualified California The City shall Prior to
individual to Department of Fish .verify receipt of issuance of
Final EIR - 80
l-9�'
Four Creeks Rezoning Project ,itigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan Attachment 3—Exhibit A
Mitigation Applicant Party Responsible Method of Verification
Measure Responsibilities for Verification_ - Verification_._ _Timin
conduct surveys, and Game;City. plant survey building permits
and, if necessary, San Luis Obispo results,and,if and throughout
submit and necessary, ail phases of
implement the receipt,approval, grading and
Sensitive Plant and proper construction
Species implementation of activities.
Revegetation and the proposed
Restoration Plan. Sensitive Plant
Species
Revegetation and
Restoration Pian
in accordance
With the EIR
mitigation
measure.The
retained
Environmental
Monitor or City
Staff shall verify
compliance with
the Sensitive
Plant Species
Revegetation and
Restoration.Plan
in the field.
BIO/mm-16 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement the Obispo; verify receipt, issuance of
.required Sensitive Environmental approval, and building permits
Plant Species Monitor proper and throughout.
Revegetation and implementation of all phases of
Restoration Plan. the proposed plan grading and
in accordance construction
with the EIR activities.
mitigation
measure.The
retained
Environmental
Monitor or City
Staff shall verify
compliance with
the Revegetation
and Restoration
Plan in the field.
BI0/mm07 Retain qualified City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
individual to Obispo; verify receipt of commencement
conduct surveys; Environmental pre construction of grading and
modify Monitor survey results and construction
Final EIR 81
Four Creeks Rezoning Project __,itigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan Attachment 3—Exhibit A
witigatiop Appllici'n' Party Respofisiole Method Of Verification
Measure Res pon 11-bilities for Verification, Verification riming,
construction recommendations. activities
location and The retained between
schedule as Environmental November 1
necessary to Monitor or City and March 1,
Avoid active StAft shall'verify and throughout
roosts. compliance with all phases of
the survey grading and
recommendations construction
in the field. activities,as
necessary.
BIO/inm--18 Retain qualified California The City and the One week prior
individual
dividual t-o Department of Fish California to
conduct surveys; and Game;City of Department of commencement
modify San Luis Obispo; Fish and Game of grading and
construction Environmental shall verify receipt construction
location and Monitor of pre- , . activities
schedule;aCs construction between March
necessary to survey results and 1 and August
avoid nesting recommendations. 31,and
sites. The retained throughout all
Environmental phases of
Monitor or City grading and
Staff shall Verify construction
compliance with activities,as
the survey necessary.
recommendations
in the field.
TR/mm-1 Design necessary City of San Luis The City shall Proposed
intersection Obispo; Director of verify receipt, design shall be
improvement; Public Works approval,and submitted,
and,complete prop'er reviewed,and
approved implementation of approved prior
intersection the proposed to issuance of
improvements or intersection building permits.
deposit required improvement Approved
mitigation fees. design in intersection
accordance with improvements
the EIR mitigation shall be
measure. completed or
mitigation fees
shall be paid
priorto
issuance of
occupancy
permits
TRIinim-9. Design and install City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
intersection Obispo; Director of verify receipt, issuance of
improvements. Public Works Approval, and occupancy
Final EIR 82
Four Creeks Rezoning Project ;riga-tion Monitoring and Reporting Plan Attachment 3—Exhibit A
Mitigation Applicant Party Responsible Method of Verification
Measure I Responsibilities for Verification _ _ Verification. _ TirninL.
— proper permits.
implementation of
the proposed
intersection
improvement
design in
accordance with
the EIR mitigation
measure.
—TR/664 Design necessary City of San Lui§ The City shall Prior to
roadway Obispo;Director of verify receipt, issuance of
improvements; Public Works approval, and occupancy
and, complete proper permits.
approved roadway implementation of
improvements or the proposed
deposit required roadway
mitigation fees. improvement
design in
accordance with
the OR mitigation
measure.
TRlmm-5 Design necessary City of San Luis The City shall Proposed
roadway Obispo; Director of verify receipt, design shall be
improvements; Public Works approval,and submitted,
and,complete proper reviewed,and
approved roadway implementation of approved prior
improvements or the proposed to issuance of
deposit required roadway building permits.
mitigation fees. improvement Approved
design in roadway
accordance with improvements
the EIR mitigation shall be
measure. completed or
mitigation fees
shall be paid
prior to
issuance of
occupancy
_ - --- — - . — — permits.
TR/mm-6 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo; Director of verity receipt; issuance of
required plans. Public Works_ approval,and building permits.
proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance.
with the EIR
mitigation
Final EIR 83 /'
Four Creeks Rezoning Project I _,.litigation Monitoring and Reporting,Plan Attachment —Exhibit
Mitigation Applicant Party Responsible Method of Verification
Measure- Responsibilities.. - for Verification Verification Trmfn
-- - measure.
TRImm-7 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo verify receipt, issuance of
required plans. approval,and building permits.
proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
TRli im-B Submit and City of San Luis The City shall - Prior-to ..
implement Obispo; Director of verify receipt, issuance of
required plans. Public Works;San approval,and building_ permits.
Luis Obispo Transit proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
TR/mm-9 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo; Director of verify receipt, issuance of
required plans. Public Works approval, and building permits.
proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance_
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
TR/mm-10 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo; Director of verify receipt, issuance of
required plans. Public Works approval, and building permits.
proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the.EIR
mitigation
measure.
TRleirhA l Stripe"Keep City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
Clear"legend Obispo; Director of verify installation occupancy
Public Works of the'roadway clearance.
improvement in
accordance with
the EIR mitigation
measure.
Final EIR - --- - - - 84
/Ol
Four Creeks Rezoning Project ..litigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan Attachment 3—Exhibit A
RRigabon Applicant I Party Responsible Methdd of Verification
Measure- — I Responsibilfties- for Verification Verificaflon, Timing,
TR/mm-12 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo;Director of verify receipt, issuance of
required plans. Public Works approval,and building permits.
proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
TRImrri-13 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo; Director of verify receipt, issuance of
required plans. Public Works approval,and building permits.
proper
implementation of
the Proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation,
measure.
TRIthrri-114 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo; Director of verify receipt, issuance of
required plans. Public Works approval,and building permits.
proper
implementation of
the proposed Plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
TR/mm-15 Submit and City of San Luis The City, in Prior to
implement Obispo; Director of consultation with issuance of
required plans. Public Works;.San the City Fire building permits.
Luis Obispo City Department,shall
Fire Department verify receipt,
approval,and
proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
TR/mm-16 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo; Director of verify receipt, issuance of
required plans. Public Works approval, and building permits.
proper
Final EIR 85
Four Creeks Rezoning Project litigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan _.` Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Mitigation Applicant Party Responsible Method of Verification
Measure Responsibilities for Verification Verification Twn
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance_
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
TR/mm-17 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo; Director of verify receipt, issuance of
required plans. Public Works approval,and building permits.
proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
TRJmm-20 Submit required City of San Luis City shall verity Prior to
fees. Obispo; Director of submittal of issuance of
Public Works appropriate fees. occupancy
permits.
TR/mm-21 Submit required City of San Luis City shall verify Prior to
fees. Obispo;Director of submittal of issuance of
Public Works appropriate fees. building permits.
TRtffm-21a Submit required City of San Luis City shall verify Prior to
fees. Obispo; Director of submittal of issuance of
Public Works appropriate fees. building permits.
TR/mm-22 Submit required City of San Luis City shall verify Prior to
fees. Obispo; Director of submittal of issuance of
Public Works appropriate fees. occupancy
-- -__-__ -- - -- _ erm�ts..
A0/rW Submit and - Air Pollution The City shall Prior to
implement Control District; verify receipt, issuance of
required plan. City of San Luis approval, and grading permits.
Obispo proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
Mitigation
measure._
A01mm-2 Submit and Air Pollution The City shall Prior to
implement Control District; ver'rfyreceipt, issuance of
required reports City of San Luis approval, and grading permits.
and plans. Obispo proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
Final EIR -- -- 86
—le,-?
Four Creeks Rezoning Project ,iitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan _
__ Attachment 3—Exhibit A.
Mitigation Applicant Parry Responsible Method of Verification
Measure Responsibilities _for Verification - _ Verification_ Tmin
- - -— - with the EIR -
mitigation
_ measure.
AQ/mm-3 Obtain necessary Air Pollution The City shall Prior to
permits Control District; verify receipt of issuance of
City of San Luis necessary APCD grading permits:
Obispo permits
AQ/rn64 Submit and Air Pollution The City shall Prior to
implement Control District; verify receipt, issuance of
required plan. City of San Luis approval,and grading permits.
Obispo; proper
Environmental implementation of
Monitor the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.The
Environmental
Monitor shall
verify compliance
in the field
throughout all
phases of
construction.
A0/mm-5 . Obtain necessary Air Pollution The City shall Prior to
Authority to Control District; verify receipt of issuance of
Construct City of San Luis necessary APCD grating permits.
Obispo ermfts____-
AGUmm-6 Submit and Air Pollution The City shall Prior to
implement Control District; verify receipt, issuance of
required plan. City of San Luis approval, and grading permits.
Obispo proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.The
Environmental
Monitor shall
verify compliance
in the field
throughout all
phases of
construction.
AQ/m" Conduct geologic Air Pollution The City shall Prior to
analysis and Control District; verify receipt, issuance of
submit required_ -City of San Luis_ approval,,and building ermits.
Final EIR 87
/-loy
Four Creeks Rezonin g_P_ �- -roject_
_ ___.rlitigation_Monitoring and Reporting Plan, Attachment 3-Exhi_bitA
Mitigation Applicant Party Responsible I Method of Verification
Measure Responsibilities for Verification VeAccaation Timin
- -- ------
reports,plans, Obispo proper
and/or exemptions implementation of
requests the proposed plan
in accordance
With the EIR_
mitigation
measure.
T AQ/mm-9 Conduct surveys Air Pollution The City shall Prior to Plan
and submit Control District; verify receipt, approval.
required reports, City of San Luis approval,and
plans,and Obispo proper
notifications implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
A0/mm-10 Submit and Air Pollution The City shall Prior to
implement plans Control,District; verify receipt, issuance of
that include the City of San Luis approval, and building permits.
required Obispo proper
measures. implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
AO/mm-11 Submit and Air Pollution The City shall Prior to
implement plans Control Dmstrict; verify receipt, issuance of
that include the City of San Luis approval,and building permits.
required Obispo proper
measures. implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure..
AQ/mm-12 Submit and Air Pollution The City shall Prior to
implement plans Control.District; verify receipt, issuance of
that include the City of San Luis approval,and building permits,
required Obispo proper
measures. implementation of
the proposed plan'
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
Final EIR 88
1,
Four Creeks Rezoning Project itigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan Attachment 3—Exhibit A
Mitigation Applicant Party Responsible Method of Verification
Measure Responsibilities for Verification Verification riming
A0/mm-13 Submit and Air Pollution The City shall Prior to
implement Control District; verify receipt, issuance of
required plan City of San Luis approval, and building permits.
Obispo proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
A0/mm-14 Submit and Air Pollution The City shall Prior to
implement plans Control District; verify receipt, issuance of
that include the City of San Luis approval, and building permits.
required measure. Obispo proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
A0/mm-15 N/A Air Pollution The City shall Prior to
Control District; coordinate with approval of the
City of San Luis the APCD to development
Obispo determine plan.
appropriate
mixed-use
designations and
to determine
potential uses that
would require
APCD permit
approval.
NS/mm-1 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo verify receipt, issuance of
required plan approval, and building permits.
proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
NSJmm-2 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo verify receipt, issuance of
required plan approval,and building permits.
proper
implementation of
the ro osed plan
Final EIR 89
/-/D
Four Creeks Rezoning Project .4itigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan Attachment 3-Exhibit A
Mitigation Applicant Party Responsible Method of Verification
Measure Responsibilities for Verification Verification -Timing
in accordance.
With the EIR
mitigation
measure.
NS/mm-3 Submit required City of San Luis The City shall Prior to final
report. Obispo verify receipt of inspection or
the proposed_ occupancy,
report in which occurs
accordance with first.
the EIR mitigation
measure.
NSJmm4 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall. Prior to
implement plans Obispo verify receipt, issuance of
that include the approval, and building permits.
required measure. proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
NSJmm-S Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo verify receipt, issuance of
required plan approval,and building permits.
proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.-
NS/mm-6 Submit.required City of San Luis The City shall Prior to final
report. Obispo verify receipt of inspection or
the proposed occupancy,
report in which occurs
accordance with first.
the EIR mitigation
measure.
NS/mm-7 Develop CUR City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
disclosures Obispo verify receipt of recordation of
the CC&Rs the Final Map
accordance with
the EIR mitigation
measure.
NSJmrn-8 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo verify receipt, issuance of
required plan, approval, and building permits.
-- - - - - —
-proper
Final EIR - - - - -- - - --- - ---- - ---_90
Four Creeks Rezoning Project ,.,itigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan Attachment 3—Exhibit A
Mitigation Applicant Party Responsible Method of Verification
Measure I Responsibilities for Verification Verification Timing
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
_ measure.
HAZ/mm-1 Submit and Airport Land Use The City shall Prior to
implement revised Commission;City ensure that the development
plans, if of San Luis Obispo project,is referred plan,rezoning,
necessary to the ALUC;the or general plan
ALUC shall amendment
determine approval
whether or not the
proposed project
is consistent with
the ALUP and
make any
necessary
recommendations
HAZ/ff6-2 Develop CUR City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
disclosures Obispo verify receipt of recordation of
the CC&Rs the Final Map,
accordance with
the EIR mitigation
measure.
HAZ/mm-5 Submit and Airport Land Use The City shall Prior to
implement revised Commission;City ensure that the development
plans, if of San Luis Obispo project is referred plan, rezoning,
necessary to the ALUC;the or general plan
ALUC shall amendment
determine approval
whether or not the
proposed project
is consistent with
the ALUP and
make any
necessary
recommendations
HAZ/mm-6 Submit and Airport.Land Use -The City shall Prior to
implement revised Commission;City ensure that the development
plans, if of San Luis Obispo project is referred plan, rezoning,
necessary to the ALUC;the or general plan
ALUC shall amendment
determine approval
whether or not the
proposed project
is consistent with
the ALUP and.
Final EIR - 91
r
Four Creeks Rezoning Project _—Atigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan Attachment 3—Exhibit A-
Mitigation Applicant Party Responsible Method of Verification
Measure. Res onsibilities . __for Verification Verification Timin
--- - makeany
-
necessary
recommendations
HAZ/mm-7 Develop CC&R City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
disclosures Obispo verify receipt of recordation of
the CC&Rs the Final Map
accordance with
the EIR mitigation
measure.
HAZ/mm-76Submit required City of San Luis The City shall Prior to .
documentation Obispo verify receipt of issuance of
the required occupancy
documentation permits
accordance with
the EIR mitigation
- — - - - _ _ —- measure.
HAZ/mm-7b -Develop CC&R -City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
disclosures Obispo verify receipt of recordation of
the CC&Rs the Final Map
accordance with
the EIR mitigation
measure.
UTIUmm-1 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall At the time of
implement Obispo verify receipt, application for
required plan approval,and building permits.
proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
UTIL/mm-2 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo,Director of verify receipt, issuance of
required plan Public Works approval, and building permits.
proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
UTIUnim-3 Submit required City of San Luis City"shall verify Prior to
fees. Obispo; Director of submittal of issuance of
Public Works appropriate fees. building permits.
UTIUmm-4 Submit required City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
documentation I Obispo; Director of verify receipt of I issuance of
Final EIR - - - 92
Four Creeks Rezoning Project rrlitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan_ 1 Attachment 3—Exhibit A
Mitigation Applicant Party Responsible Method of Verifieatiori
Measure Res nsibilities for Verification- Verification riming
Public Works the required 'building permits
documentation
accordance with
the EIR mitigation
measure._
AES/mm-1 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo verify receipt, issuance of
required plan approval,and grading permits.
proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
AESJmm-2 SubrM revised Architectural The City shall not Prior to
plans, if Review approve the issuance of
necessary Commission-,City project unless the grading permits
of San Luis Obispo findings identified
in the mitigation
measure can be
made.
AESImm-3 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo verify receipt, issuance of
required plan approval,and grading permits.
proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure. _
AES/mm-4 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo verify receipt, issuance of
required plan; approval,and grading permits;
install landscaping proper and prior to
and irrigation implementation of occupancy
the proposed plan clearance
in accordance
With the EIR
mitigation
measure.
AES/mm-5 Submit revised Architectural The City shall not Prior to
plans,if Review approve the issuance of
necessary Commission;City project unless the grading permits
of San_ Luis Obispo findings identified
in the mitigation
measure can be
Final EIR 93 }
Four Creeks Rezoning Project .litigation Monitoring and Reporting.Plan-- Attachment 3-Ezhibit.A
Mitigation Applicant Party Responsible Method of Verification
Measure Responsibilities for Verification Verification Timing
made
AESJmim6 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo verify receipt, issuance of
required plan approval, and building permits.
proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
AESJmm-7 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo verify receipt, issuance of
required plan approval,and building permits.
proper
implementation of.
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.The
Plan shall also be
field verified by a
Certified Arborist
AESJmm-8 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo verify receipt; issuance of
required plan approval,and building permits.
proper
implementation,of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
- -- - -_ - -- - - measure.
AESImm-9 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo verify receipt, issuance of
required plan approval,and building permits.
proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
INSIG1mm-f Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior to
implement Obispo verify receipt, issuance of
required plan approval, and grading permits.
proper .
Final EIR - 94
Four Creeks Rezoning Project _Otigation_Monitoring and Reporting Plan Attachment 3—Exhibit A
Mitigation
Applicant. Party Responsible Method of Verification Measure Responsibilities I for Verification Verification j ming
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
I-N-SIG/rhm-2 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall Prior-to
implement Obispo verify receipt, issuance of
required plan approval, and grading permits.
proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
With the EIR
mitigation
measure.
Reta-in—City_ City of-San Luis The City shall Prior to
approved Obispo; verify that a commencement
archaeologist to Environmental qualified of initial grading
conduct worker- Monitor archaeologist has and grubbing,
training been retained to
conduct worker-
training;
Environmental
Monitor shall be
present at and
verify training
-onsite
INSIG/m-4 Submit and City of San Luis The City shall During
implement Obispo verify receipt, construction.
required plan, if approval,and
necessary proper
implementation of
the proposed plan
in accordance
with the,EIR
mitigation
measure.
INSIGImm-5 Dedicate land or City of San Luis City shall verify Prior to land use
pay required fees Obispo submittal of permit issuance
-appropriate fees.
INSIG/mrn-6 Provide the City of San Luis The City shall Prior to initiating
required signage Obispo; Director of verify installation construction
Public Works of required
signage.
INSIGImin-7 Keep all City of San Luis The City and the During
equipment off of Obispo; Environmental construction
the paved Environmental Monitor shall activities.
Final EIR 95
/—//0)
Four Creeks Rezoning Project .,Mitigation Monitoring,and Reporting Plan _ Attachment 3—Exhibit A
Mitigation Applicant Party Responsible Method of I Verificatiorr
Measure— 1, Responsibilities, -- for-Verification . Verification_. Timin
roadway to the Monitor verify that all
maximum extent equipmentis kept
feasible off the paved
roadways;in
accordance with
the EIR mitigation
measure..
INSIGImm-8 Retain flag person City of San Luis The City and the During
to guide motorists Obispo, Environmental construction
And bicyclists, as Environmental Monitor shall activities.
necessary Monitor verify that a flag
person is onsite,
in accordance
with the EIR
mitigation
measure.
INSIGImm-97 Replace all City of San Luis The City shall Upon-
damaged
pondamaged bicycle Obispo verify that all completion of
lanes bicycle lanes have construction
been replaced. adjacent to
Broad Street
INSIG/mm40 Implement City of San Luis The City and the During
required Obispo Environmental construction
measures Monitor shall
verify that all
construction solid
waste
minimization
measures have
been
implemented,.in
accordance with
the EIR mitigation
measure.
INSIG/mm-11 Implement City of San Luis The City and the During the long-
required Obispo Environmental term occupancy
measures Monitor shall phase of the
verrfy that all project
occupancy solid
waste
minimization
measures have
been
implemented, in
acco_ rdance with
the EIR mitigation
measure:
Final EIR — 96
Four Creeks General Plan Map Amendment - Exhibit B
Existing:
0
ORCUTT
� 9
Services and Manufacturing
o i
i
Creekston
i Tumbling Waters
• / .., -' \� X90
O
i
Proposed:
o
ORCUTT
:............ ............................................
_Y Community Commercial
0
,t:::r ................. ......:::::: aye\
High Density Residential
........................:t::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :.
:::t:::a::::::::::..........
fes ; ::..
r.:::::::::::::......•: :::.:.......:.:.;;.
..
.................................
...........
... ...................
- Community Commercial
j
0
C
r I
council memoizancbum
city of san Luis osispo, cornmumty aEVeldm�Ent aEpaatmcht ,
DATE: November 10, 2005
TO: City Council � q"
VIA: Ken Hainpian, CAO
FROM: Michael Draze, Deputy Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Planning Commission Minutes (10-12=05)
On November 9, 2005,, the Planning Commission approved the draft minutes from their review
of the Four Creeks Project. The approved minutes are attached to supplement the agenda packet
for the Council's November 15`h meeting..
Cc:. Michael Codron, Associate Planner
Jonathan Lowell, City Attorney
RECEIVED
NUV 10 2005
SL0 CITY CLERK
,ErtbUNICIL' .8-CDD DIR
f2CAO � FIN DIR
ACAO FIRE CHIEF
ATTORNEY 9PW DIR
,OCLERWORIG .0'POLICE CHF
E] DEPT HEAbS ZREC DIR
RED FILE _ . Lim DIR
ME ING AGENDA --`" -M-WR DIR
DA �� ' ITEM #. .'P�h a `"ph 3
i
SAN LUIS OBISPO
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
October 12, 2005
CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE.OF ALLEGIANCE:
The San Luis Obispo Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. on
Wednesday, October 12, 2005 in the Council Chamber of City Hall; 990 Palm Street,
San Luis Obispo.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commrs. Andrea Miller, Orval Osborne, Andrew Carter, Carlyn
Christianson, Vice Chair Jim Aiken and Chairperson Michael Boswell
Absent: Commr. Alice Loh
Staff: Deputy Director Ronald Whisenand, Associate Planner Michael Codron,
Housing Programs Manager Doug Davidson, Assistant City Attorney
Christine Dietrick, Deputy Public Works Director Tim Bochum and
Recording Secretary Kim Main and Raquel Rodriguez
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA.
Chairman Boswell asked the Commission to consider special review procedure for the
three items on the agenda, which are closely related. Per the staff recommendation,
Chairman Boswell suggested that staff provide one presentation on all three agenda
items and that the public be asked to provide testimony for all three items at one time.
Chairman Boswell stated that the Commission would discuss and resolve each agenda
item individually after the public portion of the hearing closed. The agenda was
accepted with these special review provisions.
MINUTES: Minutes of September 28, 2005.
The minutes were approved as submitted.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
There were no comments made from the public.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. 861 and 963 Orcutt.Road and 3330 and 3370 Broad Street. GPA and ER 114-
02. Amend the General Plan Map to redesignate approximately 17 acres of vacant
land from Services and Manufacturing to High-Density Residential and Community
Commercial; and review of the Final El for the 4-Creeks project; City of San Luis
Obispo, applicant. (Michael Codron)
Planning Commission Minutes
October 12, 2005
Page 2
Associate Planner Michael Codron presented the staff report recommending the
Commission make a recommendation to the City Council to approve the General Plan
amendment and certify the Final Environmental Impact Report for the project, including
Mitigation measures, a monitoring program, findings of significant environmental effects
and a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Planner Codron continued with a
presentation of all three agenda items.
Housing Programs Manager Doug Davidson described the proposed affordable housing
component of the Tumbling Waters and Creekston projects.
Abblicant Presentations:
The applicants for agenda items#2 and#3 presented their project proposals:
Jim Murar (Orcutt Associates, LLC) Applicant, provided an overview of the Tumbling
Waters project and answered questions from the Commission.
William Tickell (W.E.T. Inc.) Owner, Applicant and Architect, provided an overview of
the Creekston project and answered questions from the Commission.
Carol Florence, Oasis Associates, spoke in support of the Creekston project and further
explained the project details. She submitted a letter into the record addressing
conditions of approval and specifically requested that the Commission find an
alternative to transportation mitigation measure 14, which requires access through the
Creekston site between the Broad Street and Orcutt Road driveways.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
The public was given an opportunity to comment on all three agenda items:
Brett Cross, Residents for Quality Neighborhoods, expressed support for the project
and appreciation for the developers of Tumbling Waters whose outreach program
improved the community's understanding of the project. He discussed comments that
he had made on the draft EIR and said that solar electric facilities, and components of
universal design should be incorporated into the project. He said that the proposed
height for the Creekston loft buildings would be precedent setting.
Eileen Graham, 3055 Duncan Lane, asked the Commission to consider the pedestrian
traffic pattern in the area because of a work-training program for disabled persons that
is located on Duncan Lane, which creates pedestrian traffic. She indicated that a fatal
accident occurred some years ago near the Duncan/Orcutt intersection.
There were no further comments made from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commr. Carter noted his concern with the 57-foot building height in the Creekston
project and felt it should not be allowed, suggesting a building height of 41 feet. He also
a
Planning Commission Minutes{.,_ _.
October 12, 2005
Page 3
noted concern with the access into the property, the need for a left hand turn lane on
Broad Street, and consideration of relocating the Orcutt Driveway to the project.
On motion by-Commr. Christianson. to recommend that the City Council approve-the
General Plan.amendment and: certify the Final Environmental Impact.Report. for .the
proiect.. .including_ mitigation measures, a monitoring program, findings of significant
environmental effects and a Statement of Overriding Consideration. Seconded by
Commr. Aiken.
AYES: Commrs. Miller, Osborne, Aiken, Christianson and Boswell
NOES: Comms. Carter
ABSENT: Commr. Loh
ABSTAIN: None
The motion carried on a 5:1 vote.
2. 861 and 953 Orcutt Road. TR and PD 151-03; Consideration of a tentative tract
map and Planned Development rezoning from M-PD to R-4-PD for a housing
project on a 11.63 acre site to include 178 dwelling units; and environmental review,
M-PD zone; Parc North Associates, LLC, applicant. (Michael Codron)
COMMISSION-COMMENTS:
On motion by Commr., Carter recommend that the. City Council approve the proposed
Tentative Tract. Mari and PD Rezoning-for the. Tumbling Waters project, based on
findings and subiect to conditions of approval..Seconded by Commr. Osborne.
AYES: Commrs. Miller, Osborne, Aiken, Carter; Christianson and Boswell
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commr_. Loh
ABSTAIN: None
The motion carried on a 6 :0 vote
3. 791 Orcutt Road and 3330 and 3360 Broad Street. TR and PD; 164-02;
Consideration of a tentative tract map and Planned Development rezoning from C-
SS to R-4-PD and C-C-PD for a housing project with 86 dwellings and 10,000 sq.
ft. of commercial space; C-S-S zone; William Tickell, applicant. (Michael Codron)
Commr. Carter reiterated his concern with the 57-foot building height in the Creekston
project and felt it should not be allowed, suggesting a building height of 47 feet He
further discussed concerns with access to the property, the need for a left hand tum
lane on Broad Street, and consideration of relocating the Orcutt Driveway to the project.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
On motion by Commr. Osborne recommend that the Citv Council approve the proposed
Tentative Tract Map and PD Rezoning for Creekston project,.based on findings and
Planning Commission Minutes
October 12, 2005
Page 4
subiect_to_conditions of approval with modifications to the staff recommendation to
approve a creek setback reduction for lots 35 and 36,. and modification to the-list of
allowed uses for .the commercial -portion of the proiect to allow. .Business Support
Services, Family Day Care Homes,. Office Supporting Retail. 2.000 so. ft. with use
permit approval.. Seconded.by Commr., Aiken.
AYES: Commrs. Miller, Osbome, Aiken, Christianson, and Boswell
NOES: Commr. Carter
ABSENT: Commr. Loh
ABSTAIN: None
The motion carried on a 5:1 vote
4. Staff
A. Agenda forecast
Deputy Director Ronald Whisenand gave an agenda forecast on upcoming'items.
The Commission also approved the proposed 2006 meeting schedule, changing the
meetings in November from the 2nd and 4th Wednesdays to the 3rd and 5d'
Wednesdays, to avoid conflicts with the Veteran's Day Holiday and Thanksgiving
Holiday while still offering the same number of meetings to the citizens, and canceling
the last meeting in 2006 which would fall on December 27d', between the Christmas and
New Year's Holidays.
Due to quorum issues, the Commission cancelled the next regular meeting of the
Planning Commission, scheduled for October 26, 2005.
ADJOURMENT:
With no further business before the Commission, the meeting adjourned at 10:45 p.m.
to the regular meeting scheduled for November 9, 2005, at 7:00 p.m. in Council
Chamber.
Respectfully submitted by
Kim Main
Recording Secretary
RED FILr Page 1 of.1
{ :ECEIVED I
MEETING AGENDA
Audrey Hooper-Four Creeks NUV 15 200 lDATE -IS- ITEM #Q,6L-4 c�,Av- 't I
TCSC1T�l- ERK
From: <ANCARTER@aol.com>
To: <asettle@slocity.org>, <cmulholland@slocity.org>, <jewan@slocity.org>, <dromero@slocity.org>,
<khampian@slocity.org>, <pbrown@slocity.org>,<ahooper@slocity.ofg>
Date: 11/14/2005 8:2.3 PM
Subject: Four Creeks
One other thing I forgot to point out in my a-mail yesterday was that the EIR did not specifically study the impacts at
McMillan and Orcutt(where the driveway comes out). The impacts at Duncan/Orcutt/Sacramento were studied as
were the general impacts to Orcutt Road. COLA
ew.a:I
Z COUNCIL L2,C00 DIR
Andrew Carter [3 CAO DeFIN DIR
1283 Woodside Drive ffACAO Q'FIRE CHIEF
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 'ATTORNEY DPW DIR
ancarter@aol.com 13CLERK/ORIG [?.POLICE CHF
805-594-1906 0 DEPT HEADS Le'REC DIR
�T�a�une 2"UTIi C'nR
p P i 6 ij;- i DIR
file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\slouser\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}00001.HTM 11/15/2005
Page 1 of 3
Allen Settle-Four Creeks Project REQ FiLE -'
RECEIVED
Dq alts M #- _ 1 NOV 14 2-1 IVI NBA 005
From: <ANCARTER@aol.com> �n CLERK
To: <asetde@slocity.org>,<cmulholland@slocity.org>,<jewan@slocity.org>,<dromero
<pbrown@slocity.org>
Date: 11/13/2005 1:33 PM
Subject: Four Creeks Project
CC: <khampian@slocity.org>,<AHooper@slocity.org>,<jmandeville@slocity.org>,<mdraze@slocity.org>,
<mcodron @ slocity.org>
Dear Council:
I am writing about the two Four Creeks projects(Tumbling Waters and Creekston)which are on your agenda this Tuesday.
Three specific items are before you. Item 1 is an EIR certification and General Plan amendment(rezoning from
manufacturing to high density residential)for the two projects. Item 2 is the PD zoning and tentative tract map for Tumbling
Waters. Item 3 is the PD zoning and tentative tract map for Creekston.
I was the sole"no" vote on Items 1 and 3 when these matters came before the Planning Commission. Both items passed 5 to
1. I voted"yes"on Item 2,which passed 6 to 0. (Your packet incorrectly states that the vote on Item 2 at the PC was 5 to 1.)
I thought.I would explain my votes because I continue to feel very strongly about the two issues which caused me to vote
"no." Both pertain to the Creekston project.
Before I do that,however,let me say that I have no concerns about rezoning the entire area from Manufacturing to High
Density Residential. We desperately need additional housing in this community,and this location is a perfect place for it.
I also have no concerns with the Tumbling Waters project. It is well designed. It meets the City's criteria for"affordable by
design." The developers have gone out of their way to involve community groups like RQN and the Workforce Housing
Coalition in planning for the project. The developers are also prepared to exceed the City's inclusionary housing
requirements!
Creekston Concerns
What are my concerns with the Creekston project? I'm concerned about the proposed 57 foot height of the two loft buildings,
where 35 feet is the normal height limit in residential zones. (I was prepared to go as high as 47 feet which is the height I
supported for Tumbling Waters.) Put also concerned about traffic flow in,out,and through the project.
These concerns led me to vote against Item.3. They also led me to vote against Item 1 because of how these issues are dealt
with in the EIR. I couldn't certify the EIR. In particular,I could not make the finding at the bottom of page 1-75 of your
packet. That finding says reducing the height of the loft buildings to 45 feet is "infeasible" because"The proposed building
height of 57-feet for the loft buildings is necessary to achieve high density development within the available development
areas of the site." I also disagreed with the some of the transportation mitigation measures proposed for the Creekston
project,specifically the removal of the left-turn access into Creekston from southbound Broad Street(TR/mm-9,page 1-44 of
your packet).
57 Feet
In my opinion, a 57 foot height is not necessary to achieve high density development at this location. The last 12 feet of the
two loft buildings is taken up by penthouse apartments--two in each building fora total of four. According to the density
calculations on page 3-29 of your packet,there are currently 86.5 density units in 3.6 acres of net space. This equals a
density of 24.0. Remove the four penthouses(I density unit each)and you would have 825 density units on 3.6 acres,or a
density of 22.9. That's a reduction of less than 5%,and 22.9 dwelling units per acre is still very dense. If greater residential
density is desired,then some of the 10,000 square feet of commercial space proposed at this location could be converted to
residential.
I also can't support going from a normal height limit of 35 feet to a proposed height of 57 feet when the last 12 feet of height
are designed solely to benefit the owners of four penthouse apartments. It's hard for me to put the views those owners will
have from the penthouses ahead of views the rest of us will have of the project from the street.
I'm also concerned about the precedent that 57 feet will set in a residential area far from the urban core. Based on
information Michael Codron provided to the PC,the highest current building outside the urban core is the Embassy Suites at
file://C:\Documents%20and%2OSettings\slouser\Local%2OSettings\Temp\GW}000O1.H... 11/14/2005
Page 2 of 3
49 feet,and it's in a commercial zone. The highest buildings in the urban core are the Anuerson Hotel at 59 feet and the new
Palm/Morro garage at 54 feet. If the Creekston project is built as designed,the two loft buildings will be the second highest
buildings in town. And they're nowhere near the urban core.
Viewshed Impacts
At the PC,there was discussion about how much the 57 foot tall lofts will impact the viewshed. If that ends up being a focus
of your discussion,I would urge you to make sure you believe the visual representations being presented to you are accurate.
I would also remind you that the views from Broad and from Orcutt need to be considered. (AES Impact 4 on page 1-75 of
your packet focuses on the views from Orcutt.) I would urge you in particular to look at page 14 of the PC packet
which represents a view of the project from orcutt.
I hope you will walk the site and the neighborhood.. One thing you will realize is that the potential impact of the lofts varies
dramatically from how far away you are from the site and trees and from what elevation.you are looking at them. What also
matters is the relative location of the trees in the eucalyptus grove since they are not of one height and since there are breaks
in the trees. Also,some of the trees are on the Tumbling Water site. (I don't know if these trees are scheduled to be cut down
or not.)
Two representations of the viewshed impact are provided in your packet(page 34). I have concerns about the accuracy
of both visuals. And neither visual addresses the view from Orcutt.
The top visual on page 3-4 of your packet presents a cutaway view of the Creekston area that no one will ever see. In
addition,the highest tree in the eucalyptus grove is apparently being used as a stand-in for tree height even though the heights
of the trees in the grove vary.
The.second visual may accurately represent what the southern loft building will look like against the trees. It does not
accurately represent what the northern loft building will look like. That's because the trees at the north end of the grove are
not as tall as those at the south end.
There also seems to be some inconsistency between these visuals and the photo illustrations in the EIR,page AES-13. As I
recall,the bottom visual on that page is supposed to represent a loft height of 45 feet,not 57 feet,and the middle visual is
supposed to represent a height of 57 feet with the trees removed. These visuals show the buildings higher up the trees than
the ones in your packet. (Please note,the loft buildings have been moved from west to east on the site since these photo
illustrations were done,but I'm not sure this would impact these visuals that dramatically.)
In case you are not able to walk the site,I've attached some photographs I've taken of the site from various locations.
"Comer 1"and"Comer 2"provide two different perspectives of the view from the corner of Broad and Orcutt. I was
standing in the same place for both shots. "Corner 1"is a zoom out. "Comer.2" is a zoom in.
"Entrance 1" and"Entrance 2" show two different views from the Broad Street entrance to the new retail center at Broad and
Orcutt. "Entrance 1"is from across the street.. "Entrance 2"is from the sidewalk in front of the center.
"McMillan"is taken from the comer of Orcutt and McMillan. "Driveway" is taken from where the Creekston driveway
will meet Orcutt once it is widened.
"Internal" shows the eucalyptus grove from on the Creekston property., You'll note the height difference in the trees from left
(north)to right(south). Also,the left most trees are on the Tumbling Waters property.
"PC 14"attempts to duplicate the Orcutt view on page 14 of the PC packet. (I don't have a panoramic lens so I only get the
left hand side of the PC visual. "Orcutt" is taken from Orcutt Road near McMillan.
Circulation
With respect to Creekston circulation,I believe a left-turn entrance from Broad into the Creekston project is needed. Most of
the traffic to this project will be coming from downtown. Without this turning lane,you force traffic trying to access the
Broad Street entrance to the Creekston project to make a U-turn at Rockbridge or Capitolio.
I also believe the Orcutt driveway for Creekston needs to be moved east on Orcutt. Right now,the driveway is scheduled to
be across from McMillan. Given the.speed of traffic coming downhill on eastbound Orcutt and the number of cars trying to
turn left onto McMillan,it will be very difficult for cars to turn left out of the Creekston project onto westbound Orcutt. If
the Creekston driveway is moved east,it will be easier to make the left turn onto Orcutt. It will also be possible to provide a
merge lane for traffic making that turn.
Under any entrance/exit scenario;a normal street is needed through the Creekston project. The 20 foot wide turfblock street
file:HC:\Documents%20and%20Settings\slouser\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}000O1.H... 11/14/2005
Page 3 of 3
currently proposed will discourage people from trying,to find the safest way in and out. -
Summary
I support the Tumbling Waters project completely. I urge you,however,to reduce the height of the Creekston loft buildings,
make the circulation fixes to the Creekston project proposed above,and make appropriate changes to the EIR findings_and
mitigation measures that deal with these Creekston issues. .
Andrew Carter
1283 Woodside Drive
San Luis Obispo,CA 93401
ancarter@aol.com
805-594-1906 l`9 COUNCIL -91 CDD DIR
❑c CAO Ln FIN DIR
€i ACAO ff FIRE CHIEF
®ATTORNEY t PW DIR
CLERK/ORIG ff POLICE CHF
❑ DEPT HEADS E REC DIR
®, Ale t UTIL DIR-,
6� Z962cOa nHR DIR
file://C:\Documents%20and%2OSettings\slouser\Local%2OSettings\Temp\GW}000O1.H... 11/14/2005
S
wu+w+
_ I
s
� 1
� wu
"Ari OA # y a#NAgt�.�
o .r.-- ,e,s,•• r,.� pLL��,r�'.t. •,�,� t r yGj �'d �y}��', t $ . s• ,ra .hL.
r v a''�y'i�.•.,� � as T4�T,�k 3tli'"Y' r4 �1 A1�DT,gt��.�{u �Pj w�• <
o e ,"' ��i FC 4���t+�' Y"^' 7.M- , �'.sw5 �W �c��� S. �m`�"3Y"rYY.( A ��;e `�A• s 1 -
� 4�3'i ;8rd�r iFiS�' ..rt .k spa•, i ��,a „y�,.
L��� ne-r
4
fk.rAlp
11"
• f A.,a1 Z� r '�" �i V =2 i i • r, SAA ft 47 >
it
Skil~• '{�_.t,_�'A� , ,�L, _ .�•�y �,• , � � � r'•� � s _ "i:
tat A
Ps
rdr xn�t Yr R1ti'yt"y#tr C+ 1r-
can; i
v P ro
x > O,cam
u 31L ay 4c r
Sy. `"' ~sc.rrj i•?�R, - �'J"-t'r a w_Ma3 'Y.['3� ,l' �' '{`SPiin?"� '., -gn
I},�,Y^. �•f"v..P`-- t;➢fq" J•'s+,,�'z`F"
4;,
f.r^4 .,.s.,, '. x+. !•.�'fi c,F.• e�`.^}"f� „i t S+"�.qs+v -•.'-,x , ;
� ^ . sr;i•'` •a�J+* Iq
swR c+aT�+}»n na•.- tf .t {x. .. yy,
+•a�+^T=t ��✓~''�' ',�-p'Yr ">.N.^Rn .3Y� �yg s Yfr'. p„"Ta"+w• .x%°.. eiG r .rsr •T.
-
Kx:.,
r��•..°*�M-iTrt'.�'`""KfeJf'9 can ..f�mY'��i '.�� -r n. '�' ,1. c "• '
.nas _�r.+' '$t:oQ R+'a�J..^J�'"'J �t •5'2f � +WA .5 ,,,.y: 7�jd w`fk��'fk zi'' "^�L .r�-.:
Ji"-C�[•M yfJ�w�'..etn �M.warJ�i� � c`..y J'�ft.'R�'.{�?�'X�. 'xi t 1�.. �`�' X-u s '" -t-. �'' u`�r `... .x"+�C
�anr� ��� •`i� p�ri ` r ,��t�` '�"#�4`' .}ya� w+,. x +�"r ,�+a� �+.`�*� s,+ .,cw.Y.+7 ���'�'^�tn r�� .y.
sx�i;�,6 �'iWK+�tr�pa.e.r ra9f�b�171���f'+sif s��,}x��,��'sr�..Mv�-y �,�T��' �Y�^'�< Ri�'>fYt, x ,n,Y•,p�o'�CtnEwiiS�y':$
� � u ,{ `"4aJ,r-� < ca'rr� "✓i"-` ', -�,�f� Mse "'�a���' " r ''�� ',�{'r ;�'-�
ef+[=�
A f ♦F
v t 1
'�' �C \',k.`•'�.�A�]• f lYrt. W`Fv� tr "C .t a i �'l r4n �t� 1 �.f �le+.� 1 Ir
of !.
r .s 417. � +�,S '�♦ �� !���,�k��^; ���3 e3, :I � � r' r' � y
-
i.
1jr
,;��
t{
r •K:•ra � '
t i 71 T -ZI 'la `I1 IA�
A,i
it}n�NA �rrh� -� ^.'e yw,w6 �, o r� rte i 5 r{ ty'f' ,1w�,�� 'ti+ n °'Sr� �.. rte: 7•.:
V• ems♦ �t� i At a
Y'b'['7��.¢1i. 4a v� t L,tt t tjA� `� tQ y rk , J"sots.
fiy pv}.y j f isle. 1:.,4
p 1' �Y `L d ? ri ..t t °tv,�, i ��,-Y c i �} J 1 XJ ^yt7 �6 `'Yii1 ti ' ♦ z; z G 5y Y.. �}�'ry
t Lf`,
-�M1C
� L$7 u- r
fa
r i In ya t✓' lr�S, f ` ) aY v'ri r v Zie"'n' t '� } Y/
aetytk-z Oat tL. F"°• a nt` o- � at r, yudV'. , a r,-` ..5
,.A ,ry, t� r 1t"' , }.'� 1 "+}� -. ,,.ta ,�,.' s5* •'V � kyr.,, i
n'' �Cv'S r.� r" »e. p'� a�t�,a .1L4. X 9� t S+_�(�•[ C t ao��, ^T 6' �'„t 4'i �le < v
• .q�9� .r;�r�e'�S* / A'X4 �}� J •rl iW '� 3pyCl t la9fiJ} .Et�itn L � ,n ySi.K.�y 1 ,
t^}�,t �' n S d 1�•P' 9""'- 7�7 btytiV`f^i-�P� r',.,y i "ai • a �" Y"�� �
�Y s+ rT �1fr•1� �L '4d.Sc��tMi yk� , �l}.�'+tL11I�'k ^'S, y�e i.
Yt r Jit �h�`i F, ,��Y4 �� " ''d vs t•Txt'`V'i'' E � ,{ 3 ,a r .�'FA
Y
,g
I -moi � 9 � .� ����psi IJYv I „--,q.�� -YatA• 1� -�t
342 � 1., .. � '...�• --- •/� 'f..
r.
+ Syr,♦ n , . 5�. "4Y trti`. .,p H �� ! .'i t �. 4 S Yttb'`y�.
'f .L sii' {V , �� t „ 1 I_.C.a tt�" •,i V�' Y u � l�'t.
♦.'v
-i. ,. . � ./�' b� i 4'-e � r�'31'�;n 7 F v ':1"nv ` y heti i.•i � t .� .� 4 >e;,,,.
7 Jyh{�•' 'tf'•r'1 +y`Q fJt l tl� Y�J M• '> i� S+,1ti � / •-v�+v 1,� t ,. f w ..
�Y Y � - [9� .ii„ yG�2J.f shy f V�Y � � �t� � t L. S '� n.:S + C i�y,�' n*.{' `�•.
�yJ.M1: I�Jt. i. /.n [s r' y� "yea. 1 1 �S a + l: t � r•' A
.. +5.'L'+i .u� � 11'. � •.. � Jx {J' ' q.:T ter'+�_. +� ..
v.:. c'.. ill. +�:. � �;y. „,�"� 'R+•LaLr� .yr.rinra��yi�...t''La�.+_..
�^ �..�,r �._..+-ysnr.�..�� �,..y��aw.'�sr���, �v+-+f!v''X' �I"F' ?"r• a .r^`"•�"1' .r,..G� y �:
�r'
.rep�F, ...- ;•• -�SLi`^i� ��:'..`�c+74S1+t c� :�w3'i aF..i:JF':F7 lh -i�f •+sr '"� wC �,%� 2
r
i
t
y:
L'KY�� ..,�.• �::'r�.J•�.N4� l �u(�4rF �y� ,pP a 1 � w�. �`�M �! �[ ��� �
y it y
R
}
• � M
K F)T�CY" ?..�✓�j*� P •v�w.s `'�-�+1.'•�' � > i '7��.�j�'�f'* ..�, ."'.P' � S.rC wu. >
n^C'Y.°"w�":� �K�1M1l A'q....�r�..1+>.s'4•.w+�'w S:y,. �`f" ^r'S-+<•i�rsa-.a yl ,j—t yry�.4' i �T�, �"ES,,, 1 v _
v
Y�/.n h � /'1 r `�5�1 .fi+..S 'Jk� .4 W'$'La•:7 'vta. r„ 1 ��...ynrtt� �y"� �'M`f.}��.s� T' _.4 � ..'��`'_y�""".:E [ '
.�..f..,M �'t ,`�.!L:r "`>•v��, :.. �� w'+iLR',.,.rte ? 45` 'I�W..��Atr7, ^F'tL• '.�Y a�a, r.� u, T o .
-n.�.. sy4'F'-^�'r�"r. yny !ta} 'ti:T. '� 'a bo"4��{ '�Y c _ ✓ <
..1 ...A a, .yiP"S✓� '+��'y.'✓tic.� � ��:"'„✓i� icy°
.. n
"Ali
\�J•y���jc. ,h< f :. 4 �"''r4d.�r�� i`.rirt i,l�y^'�'1'� �1: ^tr'-�1Y�r'�
zi
2
.- ,.- �ua+t fi�^`w---'..^. F•i5j? t.y4"-
f - ,tw qr. '^ Yyfi 1 -•�S'a` . C" a�rft'',$vt <f. y.r;�i• ',• ,,, -1Mr? §ur. a.w -'ya`1t�ti/"��:.q< i' •Ku4•v
`",�, +4'-•-n�-'7"
1 '7 LH Sk. � dx s�' ,t+�.�_�c,�� v fi°•t�^,�2}..-.,<-. �;r� �ril4
N y� �y'��n
"�4'( n�'{1'�- ''ry' •+=^f.SK " -�,,.:Y,go +' �k ,j •"iJr��,.��",,�, &.tit , .,,ry^'�a��'T•�.,�•+Y���""'`4"�Z4`7r� s�;;�'., T JS �, 14�� �'k M,,u ! •'b rt�•TZ'�5..n'-i�yr���JJv"<�`,j� � F"i�+:%,. .i�.'1:�r`'•ti,�.}.n,�Tau'.�,,b�-
ill � a K � � ifiar r c3jy�jf r tb'- mac-. ��a rJ��fi v,r:;•��++�rlt�o.X �ivt•^'-wy=-a`'+'� yy ' �
.r �,. .ti 'Cr ,..� +»e��h. �tli,�,'.y"' �ll��yvti"vr.. �W'i� RM�h �•rn r-*ZR'' •ti<!x'.r^k'�"+-. ' , }{. ��,. �
t -!.�riy�..:!�•J. r i �}. La�.J r'r N ^ ,1 rG..l iT� � `ry, by f f4;...1�.}°+��, K" �a
4i Ft "t
y .esti•C/'. fya-�. •'Y!'a r r �j,1'.k..rc "`4'' �++..'M�FA.3 r '4r.kv a ;�W�+�M?. .0-�, ,,W '�`w��`4• n � .1 '�
� tn".r�<?•^ + �'M"�'Y v `',.'ys•-'aaP' -°-y n t. �4ray f�f ��r lnx'•_� y �•? Irv;,-r tet.. .a J`.t,H.�r C�,S„t'�C
�`-ti �,. �L .-•r h�. T � _ � "4i�L f"� "'�'�`•�''yFlt"'t" w 7r�'��-' �,x , 'v�`r�.
'• a.F a. S t yr a>-.- 'a 4i.'r 4 } s. � gt,n -� 'v 5 �4
< � 1 h -'rrt�� p.�s, ��� M1+s (.J �'4tii �'+.,�.+ ti..rS � �•l\. f'�'� r�,,,y �! kms•.
�,� 'f} y r.� \. f �r �<.�.`.��i S � 4 M Y .yl.w"�±C'f '!•k/R-'Lw vK-^4G'af {•rK:�M�� � ��. i 1\r
\ a.• mum �",�y. r'" vY4�4�c� .r.-.lis fqw ac7-v..r�!`r• i,S�.. � � �3C ! r
6/Jate^ �. s•+ ,, � Z•� r .f.�Yct� -'—+t.
•�;�'�l f ✓ � s rn of '�'C. r r u/"y,4 Q� "�f ✓� c-y x w
+ r�Sa'r�'- � �.. . �. •�-�'4',ra ��a n�.r= / � ,i'• ver `�-t'�X+r'•'s+`Hca-+.� � s.4� .
+,.�\`1�.}� Y 7'w'i• f� �'1 R"4'yZ._"5 C' � �.. �q 'Jr''r:' � '"'R g,�f J'^ v l :<�`�tJ' 6 � }- ��
r»'('•J�"��' •..v1j��`���-r;��Y' t-.l�a � rr 1 �w,�� \ H�M"�'�Xw -�4��'�.Y4,T't^�� <'if.� " w. iflc,,',y1 .c kF' ,�1 -�rrr