Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/06/2005, PH5 - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE RECLASSIFICATION FOR PROPERTY AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF NIPOMO AND counat j acenda aEpoizt -Nwnhff - - CITY OF SAN LU I S O B I S P O FROM: John Mandeville,Community Development Director .Prepared By: Jaime Hill,Associate Planner SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE RECLASSIFICATION FOR PROPERTY AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF NIPOMO AND MARSH STREETS; AMENDMENT OF CHAPTER 4.30 OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISP09S MUNICIPAL CODE MODIFYING THE DOWNTOWN PARKING IN-LIEU FEE AREA, AND; ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW(GP/R.ER 160-05). CAO RECOMMENDATION As recommended by the Planning Commission, take the following actions on the project: 1, Adopt a Resolution approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration and amend the General Plan Land Use Element map to change the land use designation for 1221 Nipomo from High-Density Residential to General Retail; 2. Introduce an Ordinance amending Section 4.30.015 of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code modifying the Downtown Parking In-Lieu Fee Area to include 1221 Nipomo; and 3. Introduce an Ordinance changing the zoning of 1221 Nipomo from High-Density Residential (R4) to Downtown Commercial with a Mixed-Use Overlay (C-D=MU), and changing the zoning of 1213 Nipomo, 577, and 579 Marsh from Downtown Commercial (C-D) to Downtown Commercial with a Mixed-Use Overlay(C-D-MU). DISCUSSION Situation The applicant is currently working on a proposal to redevelop four parcels at the southwestern comer of Marsh and Nipomo as a mixed-use project including both commercial spaces and residential units (see Vicinity Map, Attachment 1). Three of the involved parcels, 1213 Nipomo, 577 and 597 Marsh are currently designated on the General Plan Land Use Map as General Retail and zoned Downtown Commercial (C-D), which allows for mixed-use projects. The applicant has requested an amendment to the City's General Plan Land Use Map to change the designation of the fourth parcel, 1221 Nipomo„from High-Density Residential to General Retail to facilitate this future project. Application of the Mixed-Use overlay to all four parcels would ensure their ultimate development with residential uses. If the land use designation of 1221 Nipomo is changed to General Retail, it should also be included in the Parking In-Lieu Fee Area, consistent with other Downtown Commercial parcels._Entitlements requested include a General Plan Land (- Council Agenda Report GP, R, ER, 160-05 Page 2 Use Map Amendment changing the designation of 1221 Nipomo from High-Density Residential to General Retail; rezoning of the property from High Density Residential (R-4) to Downtown Commercial with the Mixed-Use Overlay (C-D-MU); rezoning 1213 Nipomo, 577 and 579 Marsh from Downtown Commercial (C-D) to Downtown Commercial with the Mixed-Use Overlay(C-D-MU); and amending Section 4.30.015 of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code modifying the Parking In-Lieu Fee Area to include 1221 Nipomo. The applicant anticipates submitting a development application, including a tentative tract map for lot mergers and air space condominiums and architectural review, (see Attachment 5, applicant's description of the mixed-use project being developed for the site). Issues of design, height, parking, mix of uses, etc. will be evaluated with submittal of specific project plans for these other entitlements. Because neither the modification of the Parking-In-Lieu-Fee-Area nor the addition of the combining zone (Mixed-Use overlay) on, the three parcels currently zoned Downtown Commercial will increase the intensity or type of development allowed,the following discussion focuses primarily upon the General Plan Amendment and rezone of 1221 Nipomo. Previous Review On November 9, 2005, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the project to the City Council. Planning Commission Resolution 5434-05, the draft minutes from the meeting, and staff report are attached (Attachments 6, 7 and 8). Although the Commission was concerned with the loss of residentially zoned property, they were satisfied that the Mixed-Use overlay would ensure the future development of residential units on the site, and at a higher density than currently allowed. Data Summary Address: 1221 Nipomo 1213 Nipomo, 577 and 579 Marsh Applicant: Bermant Homes Representative: Bruce Buckingham, Bermant Homes Existing Zoning: 1221 Nipomo: R4(High Density Residential) 1213 Nipomo, 577 and 579 Marsh: C-D (Downtown Commercial) Proposed Zoning: C-D-MU (Downtown Commercial with the Mixed Use overlay) Existing General Plan: 1221 Nipomo: High Density Residential 1213 Nipomo, 577 and 579 Marsh: General Retail Proposed General Plan: General Retail Environmental Status: A M itigated N egative D eclaration w as r ecommended b y t he D eputy Director on October 27, 2005 (ER 160-05). Final action on the initial study willbe taken by the City Council. Council Agenda Report - GP, R,ER, 160-05 Page 3 Site Description 1221 Nipomo is a rectangular-shaped site that is approximately 7,500 square feet in size and is currently developed with a single-family residence. Surrounding uses include multifamily residences, commercial and office uses, a parking lot, and Emerson Park. The property on the opposite side of Nipomo is designated as General Retail (C-D), and is developed with a shopping center and parking. General Plan and zoning designations of properties surrounding the site are shown in the attached General Plan and Zoning Maps (Attachments 2 and 3). General Plan Consistency As mentioned above, the applicant needs the General Plan Amendment to facilitate the mixed use project proposed for this site.. In order to assemble sufficient land area to accommodate the below grade parking area, mix of building types and courtyard areas, the project needs to extend beyond the three corner properties that are presently within the C-D zone. A General Plan map change is therefore needed before the project can proceed. There are several General Plan policies that support the change.in land use designation for the property. Land Use Element Policy 4.2.1 states, "Downtown residential uses contribute to the character of the area, allow a 24-hour presence which enhances security, and help to balance between jobs and housing in the community. Existing residential uses within and around the commercial core should be protected, and new ones should be developed. Dwellings should be provided fora variety of households, including singles, couples, and groups. Dwellings should be interspersed with commercial uses. All new, large commercial projects should include dwellings..." Additionally, Land Use Element Policy 3.8 states "Compatible mixed uses in commercial districts should be encouraged". The modification of this site from a residential to a mixed commercial/residential designation would not adversely impact the overall supply of residential opportunities for those living in the City or hoping to. The proposed zoning would allow a greater intensity of housing on the site than is allowed by the current R-4 zoning. With the current R-4 zoning, 24 units/acre, or 4.13 dwelling units, could be developed on the site. With the proposed C-D-MU designation, 36 units/acre, or 6.20 dwelling units would be allowed. These housing supply figures, however, are based on the assumption that any project constructed on this property will include a housing component: Normally a C-D zoning designation could allow a pure commercial project. For this reason, staff and the.Planning Commission support the use of a mixed-use or MU combining zone, which will mandate any future project to include a housing component. The inclusion of a housing component in any future site development would therefore meet the objectives of the General Plan. The proposed land use change and rezoning will facilitate the replacement of an existing single family dwelling. Housing Element Policy 3.2.1 directs that the City encourage the rehabilitation, remodeling or relocation of sound habitable housing rather than demolition, and that demolition of non-historic housing may be permitted where conservation of the existing housing would preclude the achievement of other housing objectives or adopted City goals. The residence at 1221 Nipomo has not been designated as historic and is not restricted as affordable housing. As noted above, the mixed use rezoning will help achieve other General Plan objectives. The Council Agenda Report GP, R, ER, 160-05 Page 4 existing residence will be available for relocation prior to demolition. Additional analysis of applicable General Plan policies is contained in the attached Planning Commission staff report (Attachment 8). Conclusion The General Plan amendment and rezoning, and the future mixed-use development proposal are- consistent with Land Use Element policies regarding the expansion of housing opportunities in the Downtown Planning Area. The project would also be consistent with Housing Element goals and polices on production and land use efficiency. This project would increase the City's inventory of C-D zoned land and increase opportunities for residential units above ground-level retail and in close proximity to the City's commercial center. 1221 Nipomo is adjacent to property currently zoned Downtown Commercial, and if developed as part of a mixed-use project could provide for a.transition to the High-Density Residential Development to the south. CONCURRENCES The project proposal was routed to various City departments, including the Housing Specialist, Public Works, Transportation; Utilities and Fire Departments and comments received have been incorporated into the staff recommendation and mitigation measures where appropriate. FISCAL IMPACT When the General Plan was prepared, it was accompanied by a fiscal impact analysis, which found that overall the General Plan was fiscally balanced. Amending the General.Plan for this location will not significantly, alter revenues since the new designation will not result in a significant loss of property within the R-4 zoning district, or gain of C-D zoned property. The addition of 7,500 square feet of C-D zoned land will likely result in only minor increases in City revenues. Also, the addition of two additional high density residential units and some commercial development potential will not, individually or cumulatively, significantly affect the City's fiscal stability. ALTERNATIVES 1. Deny the General Plan amendment, rezoning, and modification of the Downtown Parking In-Lieu Fee Area, based on findings of inconsistency with the General Plan or other policy documents. 2. Continue action, if additional information is needed. Direction should be given to staff. Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. General Plan Land Use.Map 3. Zoning Map 4. Parking In-Lieu Fee Map 5. Letter from the project representative dated August 29, 2005 �--jl Council Agenda Report GP, R,ER, 160-05 Page 5 6. Planning Commission Resolution#5434 7. Planning Commission Draft Minutes 8. Planning Commission Staff Report 9. Initial Study (ER 160-05) 10. Draft Resolution approving the General Plan Amendment 11. Draft Ordinance approving the amendment of the Parking In-Lieu Fee Area 12. Draft Ordinance approving the amendment of the Zoning Regulations 13. Draft Resolution denying the project G:VHiU\GPA and RZ\Map Amendments\GPS-R 160-05(1221 Nipomo)\GP-R 160-05 Council\CC 160-05 Report(12.6.05).doc r ner Retail Existing High-Density Residential, ' Proposed General Retail \ \ General Retail General Retail Genaral Retail \ Offce,-, \ High=Densi Reside ial edi Density es ential Generale i igh-D sity Re enti Public Facility \ \ � iur�=High D ity Hi h-Density, Reskential Reside 'al General Plan Map Legend GPR/R/ER 160-05 ® General Plan Boundary 1221 Nipomo M 1221 Nipomo C-D-H \ C-D C-D Currently, C-D; GD Proposed C-D-MU D \ \ O \ R Currently R-4, R-2-H C-R Proposed C-D-MU PF-H R4\ / R_3_H R-2 Zoning Map Legend Zoning Boundary M 1221 Nipomo GPR/R/ER 160-05 M 1213 Nipomo, 577 & 597 Marsh S�-8' i Attachment 5 Bermant Homes Creating Communities 5383 ItuifiAer A%vaue Suite No. 150 dams Barbnru.('A 93111 -2365 805.14;; --200 Fas 805..1461 2535 August 29,.2005 Ron Whisenand, Deputy Director of Community Development City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Subject: General Plan Amendment/Zoae Change for 1221.Nipomo Street(APN: 00- 514-012) Dear Mr. Whisenand, Bennant Homes is submitting a General Plan Amendnient/Zone Change (GPA/ZC) application for the 7,500 square foot lot located at 1221 Nipomo Street (reference attached exhibit). The property would be redesignated Downtown Commercial (C-D) from High-Density Residential (R-4). The primary reason for the GPA/ZC application is to facilitate the development of a mixed-use project on several lots located at the southeast comer of Marsh and Nipomo Streets (reference attached preliminary site plan and building perspective). The proposed project includes approximately 5;000 square feet of commercial space along Marsh Street and 36 residential units(reference attached Development Summary Table). It is. anticipated that the project application(tentative tract map and ARC review) will be submitted in October.. The total project area is approximately 28,300 square feet including the proposed 7,500 square foot lot to be redesignated C=D. The application would allow consistent zoning over the entire proposed project site and corresponding development standards. The mixed-use project is designed with a podium structure above the grade level commercial building and parking area. This allows for the most efficient project design and allows the site to achieve the residential density of 36 units per acre in the C-D Zone. Absent the proposed GPA/ZC application, development and building code standards would transition through the project site rendering the podium structure unbuildable. o5 _/0 Attachment 5 The net effect of the application is an increased density of two residential units (C-D allows 36 du/acre or 6 units on 7,500 s.f. vs. 24 du/acre in R-4 or 4 units on 7;500 s.f.). However, the area to be redesignated is proposed to be developed with 6 townhomes that would comply with the R-4 development standards for height and setbacks to provide a suitable transition to the adjacent R-4 property at the corner of Niponio and Pacific Streets. The proposed mixed-use project implements the policies of the City's General Plan by providing pedestrian oriented commercial space and a mixture of one and two bedroom residential units in the downtown. This urban in-fill type of development utilizes existing infrastructure and reduces vehicle trips as residents can walk to retail shops and services. Bermarit Homes looks forward to developing a high quality mixed-use project that further achieves the City's goals for development in the downtown. Respectfully, Bruce BuckingPiam Attachments GPA/ZC Exhibit Preliminary Site Plan & Building Perspective (6 copies) Development Summary Table(6 copies) s S MIPA St - �RA�oS�D CEPA le IoM K-1 -p G-D (221 Pt 1Po01a .E7` ATW, 00141+01z- CIMOF SAN LUIS OBISPO GEODATA SERVICES 955 MORRO STREET SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA 93401 S a �sli6i_7 05/16/200 13:24 � r � •:,.�:-�[AfaA72F�7 sem%-. -'.� -.,�i':si4 rWool!". , zao ltw k i .. 1 . � 1+Tj I �■n .� may; , 't-in ki ,WN I i• 7. L _ 1. •+fid �+i I�/:•�moi®. ` 47( )•.♦.SII I�i'�.__.::; �.•���Vp•.J I`v.i�:J� + i.I I • li ♦" i 1 11 I n� ! r .,, I I I .I . � . � Attachment 5 , odddodoo . EooLO0Lo000 . o � mcoco � or « L6 � % ® / cr ® $ . 0 . . @ . f2kg22R 'IM U- CL CL2 \ � . $ o 227CD cn a -0 \ E < # qnc & & dC -- - E D / k � & d - . . Z ƒ � / c $ o © \ . % CL $ ■ / % 0 0 E . 2 k ■ 2 § q (D § < E iF— k @ � E e o k / / 0 . g � c \ A ° . 2 2 7 CO & ° t End E22@RE � ACV) § § 2 « � m � '2 CV) (D \ EAEEE ■ . _ v CO . E \ mmmmmo Eo % ' J � \ / + rq & & & � Ea � AE2 CL . < :2 $ « t © meq \ agCC 0 0 � v0 a)gf & a » ■ a mmc @22 E � � � 77 � 2 0 $ ¢ / / < 0 LLI Attachment 6 RESOLUTION NO. 5434-05 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED.AT 1221 NIPOMO,AND; ADDITION OF A COMBINING ZONE TO 1213 NIPOMO AND 577 AND 579 MARSH STREETS, AND; AMENDMENT OF CHAPTER 4.30, SECTION 430.015 OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE TO INCLUDE 1221 NIPOMO IN THE PARIQNG-IN-LIEU FEE AREA; ER/GP/R 160-05 WHEREAS,the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on November 9, 2005, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application GP/R/ER 160-05, Bermant Homes, applicant; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo has considered testimony of the applicant,interested parties,and evaluation and recommendations by staff; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the draft mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact as prepared by staff; BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. 1. The Planning Commission finds and determines that the project's mitigated. Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed project, and reflects the independent judgment of the Commission. 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezoning is consistent with General Plan Land Use Element regarding the expansion of housing opportunities in the Downtown Planning Area and maximizing the development potential of infill sites. Additionally the project is consistent with General Plan Housing Element goals and polices which encourage facilitating housing production and land use efficiency. The proposed GP/R would increase the City's inventory of C-D zoned land, and with the Mixed-Use overlay will.increase opportunities for residential units above ground-level retail and in close proximity to the City's commercial center. .3. The modification of 1221 Nipomo from an exclusively residential use (R-4) to a mixed commercial/residential designation(C-D-MU) would not adversely impact the overall supply of residential opportunities in the City; as the inclusion of a housing component in any future site development would be insured by the mixed-use overlay. 4. The addition of the combining zone (Mined-Use overlay) on 1213 Nipomo, and 577 and 597 Marsh, the three parcels currently designated in the General Plan as General Retail andzoned Resolution No. 5434-05 Attachment 6 Page 2 Downtown Commercial, will not increase the allowed development or types of uses allowed, and is necessary to avoid having the site bisected by two Zoning districts.. 5. The Mixed-Use overlay (MU) is appropriate at this site, as it will insure that mixed residential and commercial uses will be included with the redevelopment of the site individually, or as part of a larger project. To ensure that future redevelopment of 1221 Nipomo provides a suitable ,transition to the adjacent High-Density Residential (R-4) property at the comer_of Nipomo and Pacific Streets, the following standard shall be applied the Mixed-Use overlay for this site: a. To provide a suitable transition to the adjacent High-Density Residential (R-4)property at the corner of Nipomo and Pacific Streets, the future development of 1221 Nipomo which is being redesignated as C-D-MU shall comply with the R-4 development standards for height and setbacks whether developed individually orr as part of a larger project. SECTION 2. Action. The Commission hereby recommends adoption of said mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of the request (GP/R/ER 160-05) for a general plan amendment and rezoning of 1221 Nipomo, addition of a combining zone to 1213 Nipomo and 577 and 597 Marsh, and amendment of the Municipal Code modifying the Downtown Parking In-Lieu Fee Area to include 1221 Nipomo, as shown on attached Exhibit A, B and C with incorporation of the following mitigation measures into the project: 1. To provide a suitable transition to the adjacent High-Density Residential (R-4)property" at the comer of Nipomo and Pacific Streets, the future development of 1221 Nipomo_which is being redesignated as C-D-MU shall comply with the R-4 development standards for height and setbacks whether developed individually or as part of a larger project. 2. The construction of future residential uses at shall be accompanied by an acoustical analysis (noise study) to ensure that interior spaces and exterior private use areas are designed to mitigate noise impacts to levels determined acceptable by the City's General Plan Noise Element. Specific construction details shall be identified as recommendations in the study. 3. The applicant shall provide or pay in lieu fees for the four additional parking spaces that will be generated by the increased development allowed by the redsignation of 1221 Nipomo as C-D-MU. These four(4) spaces shall not be reduced through shared or mixed-use reductions, or other parking reductions established for the Downtown Commercial zone included in Section 17.42 of the Municipal Code. On motion by Commissioner Christianson, seconded by Commissioner Loh, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commrs. Miller, Carter, Christianson, Loh and Boswell NOES: None REFRAIN: None ABSENT: Commr. Osborne VACANCY: One 47 Attachment 6 Resolution No. 5434-05 Page 3 The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 9th day of November, 2005. onald se d, Secretary Planning Commission ` O Draft Planning Commission h- -ites - 1 Attachment 7 November 9, 2005 Page 3 PUBLIC COMMENTS: Pamela Jardini, applicants representative expressed agreement with the staff report, noting that the water meter and waterline locations needs to be determined. There were no further comments from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: On motion by Commr. Carter to recommend the City Council approve the.tract_mar). Seconded by Commr. Loh AYES: Commrs. Carter, Loh, Miller, Boswell and Christianson NOES: None ABSENT: Commr. Osborne ABSTAIN: None The motion passed on a 5:0 vote. 3. 1213 and 12.21 Nipomo Street; 577 and 597 Marsh.Street. GP/R and ER 160-05; Request to amend the General Plan Land Use Map at 1221 Nipomo Street from High-Density Residential to General Retail and rezone the property from R-4 (High- Density Residential) to C-D-MU (Downtown Commercial with a mixed use overlay .zone); and rezone 1213 Nipomo; 577 & 597 Marsh Street from C-D (Downtown Commercial) to C-D-MU (Downtown Commercial with a mixed use overlay zone); and modification of the Parking Space In-Lieu Fee area; Bermant Homes, applicant. (Jaime Hill) Associate Planner Phil Dunsmore presented the staff report recommending that the Commission recommend that the City Council 1) adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (ER 160-05) and amend the General Plan Land Use Element map to change the land use designation of 1221 Nipomo from High-Density Residential to General Retail; 2) Adopt an ordinance changing the zoning at 1221 Nipomo from High-Density Residential (R-4) to Downtown Commercial with the Mixed-Use overlay (C-D-MU), and changing the zoning of 1213 Nipomo, 577 and 579 Marsh from Downtown Commercial (C-D) to Downtown Commercial with the Mixed-Use overlay (C-D-MU); and 3) Adopt an ordinance amending Chapter 4.30, Section 4.30.015 of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code modifying the Downtown Parking In-Lieu Fee Area to include 1221 Nipomo. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Bruce Buckingham, applicant's representative, agreed with the staff report and recommendation. He also provided the Commission with details of the project including how parking would function. Draft Planning Commission A. 'Aes November 9, 2665 Attachment 7 Page 4 There were no further comments from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Christianson strongly supported construction of homes on the property. Commr. Miller had questions regard,ing the mixed Use, and supported the project. Commr. Carter expressed support for redevelopment. Commr. Boswell also expressed support for redevelopment. Commr. Miller moved the staff recommendation. Seconded by Commr. Loh AYES. Com-mrs. Boswell, Loh, COrter, Christianson and Miller NOES.: None ABSENT- Commr; Osborne ABSTAIN: None The motion passed on a 5:0 vote. 4. 620 California Boulevard. U 164-05; Review of a wireless telecommunications facility camouflaged as pine tree, and reduced side yard from 10-feet to 5-feet; 0- S zone; Cingular Wireless, applicant. (Tyler Corey) Commr. Carter stepped down from participation due to a potential. conflict of interest because he it employed by a wireless telecommunications company. Associate Planner Phil Dunsmore presented the staff report, recommending approval of the use permit, based on findings and subject to conditions And one code requirement. PUBLIC COMMENTS-, Gordon Bell, agent for Cingular Wireless, was supportive of staffs recommendation and noted that the height of the facility is in relationship to the height of the trees on property.. There were no further comments from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Chairperson Boswell questioned whether this height of the facility has been approved and supported the proposed setbacks. Commr. Miller supported the camouflaged design. on. motion by-Commr.._Miller-to-approve the Use permit. As recorriniended. by staff.. Seconded by Coffirrit..Christianson. ' Attachment 8 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ITEM#3 BY: Jaime Hill, Associate Planner(781-7165) DATE: November 9, 2005 FROM: Ronald Whisenand, Deputy Director of Community Development FILE NUMBER: GP, R, E 160-05 PROJECT ADDRESS: 1221 Nipomo SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment and Rezone for property located at 1221 Nipomo, between Marsh and Pacific Streets, from High-Density Residential (R-4) to General Retail and Downtown-Commercial zoning with the Mixed-Use overlay (C-D-MU); Amendment of Chapter 4.30, Section 4.30.015 of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code modifying the Downtown Parking In-Lieu Fee Area to include 1221 Nipomo, and; Rezone of 1213 Nipomo, 577 and 579 Marsh from C-D to C-D-MU. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached Planning Commission resolution which recommends that the City Council: 1. Approve a resolution adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration (ER 160-05) and amending the General Plan Land Use Element map to change the land use designation of 1221 Nipomo from High-Density Residential to General Retail. 2. Adopt an ordinance changing the zoning at 1221 Nipomo from High-Density Residential (R-4) to Downtown Commercial with the Mixed-Use overlay (C-D-MU), and changing the zoning of 1213 Nipomo, 577 and 579 Marsh from Downtown Commercial (C-D) to Downtown Commercial with the Mixed-Use overlay(C-D-W). 1 Adopt an ordinance amending Chapter 4.30, Section 4.30.015 of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code modifying the Downtown Parking In-Lieu Fee Area to include 1221 Nipomo. BACKGROUND Situation/_Proiect Description. The City has received an application for a General Plan amendment and Rezoning (GP/R) on a. 7,500 square-foot parcel on the southwesterly side of.Nipomo Street, between Marsh and Pacific Streets. Specifically, the applicant would like to amend the property's land use designation from High-Density Residential to General Retail and it's zoning from R-410 Downtown-Commercial with the Mixed-Use overlay (C-D-MU). The applicant intends to develop this and adjoining properties at the comer of Marsh and Nipomo with a mixed-use project with underground parking (see Attachment 4,project site map). If the Commission supports the rezoning of this site to Downtown Commercial, they should also consider an amendment of Chapter 4.30, Section 4.30.015 of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code modifying the Parking In-Lieu Fee Area to include 1221 Nipomo. Additionally, because the future project will require 1221 Nipomo to be merged with the adjacent parcels, 1213 Nipomo, 577 and 579 Marsh, these existing C-D Jr'�� • i V t GP/R 160-05 (Bermant humes) 1221 Nipomo Attachment 8 Page 2 zoned parcels shall also be rezoned to have the same Mixed Use combining district (C-D-MU) (see attachments 2, 3, and 4—General Plan,Zoning, and Parking In-Lieu Fee Area maps). Because neither the modification of the Parking-In-Lieu-Fee-Area not the addition of the combining zone (Mixed-Use overlay) on the three parcels currently zoned Downtown Commercial will increase the intensity or type of development allowed, the following discussion focuses primarily upon the General Plan Amendment and rezone of 1.221 Nipomo. The Planning Commission reviews general plan/zoning amendments and environmental documents and makes a recommendation to the City Council,which takes a final action on such requests. According to the project representative, Bruce Buckingham, the primary reason for the GP/R is to facilitate the development of a mixed-use project on several lots located at the southeast corner of Marsh and Nipomo, including 1221 and 1213 Nipomo, and 577 and 579 Marsh. Preliminary project plans include approximately 5,000 square feet of commercial space along Marsh and Nipomo Streets and 36 residential units. The applicant anticipates submitting that project application, including a tentative tract map for lot. mergers and condominium air space ownership, and architectural review, in November of this year (see attachment 5, applicant's description ofproject being developed for the site). It is important to remember that the design, height, parking, mix of uses, etc., of the future project are not at issue now, but will be evaluated by the community at a later date. Data Summary Address: 1221 Nipomo 1213 Nipomo, 577 and 579 Marsh Applicant: Bermant Homes Representative: Bruce Buckingham, Bermant Homes Eidsting Zoning. 1221 Nipomo: R-4(High Density Residential) 1213 Nipomo, 577 and 579 Marsh: C-D (Downtown.Commercial) Proposed Zoning: C-D-MU(Downtown Commercial with the Mixed Use overlay) Existing General Plan: 1221 Nipomo: High Density Residential 1213 Nipomo, 577 and 579 Marsh:.General Retail Proposed General Plan; General Retail Environmental Status: A Mitigated Negative Declaration was recommended by the Deputy Director on October 2.7, 2005 (ER 160-05). Final action on the initial study will be taken by the City Council. Site Description 1221 Nipomo is a rectangular-shaped site that is approximately 7,500 square feet in size and is currently developed with a single-family residence..Although the parcel immediately to the north is designated. General Retail (C-D) it is currently developed with residential units (non- conforming duplex), similar to the High-Density Residential (R-4) site to the south (five-unit multi-family housing development). Surrounding uses include multi-family residences, commercial and office uses, a parking lot, and Emerson Park. The property on the opposite side J �' GP/R 160-05 (Bermant Hon,...,) Attachment 8 1221 Nipomo Page 3 of Nipomo is designated as General Retail (C-D), and is developed with a shopping center and parking.Zoning surrounding the site is shown in the attached vicinity map (Attachment 1). EVALUATION General-Plan Consistency 1221 Nipomo is designated as "High-Density Residential" on the General Plan Land Use Element (LUE) map and is currently developed with a.single-farnily residence. LUE policy 2.4.8 states, "High-Density Residential Development should be primarily attached dwellings in two- or three-story buildings, with common outdoor areas and very compact private outdoor spaces.. Other uses which are supportive of and compatible with these dwellings, such as group housing, parks, schools, and churches, may be permitted. Such development is appropriate near the college campus,the downtown core, and major concentrations of employment." The modification of this site from a residential to a mixed commercial/residential designation would not adversely impact the overall supply of residential opportunities for those living in the City or hoping to, as the inclusion of a housing component in any future site development would be'insured by the mixed-use overlay. Additionally, the proposed zoning of C-D-MU would allow a greater density of housing on the site (36 units/acre) than is allowed by the current R-4 zoning (24 units/acre). The site is currently considered to be underutilized and could be redeveloped in the future to accommodate an increase in density. However, given the site's small size (7,500 square feet) and narrow width xh 4oa� � (50 feet), its future redevelopment options are somewhat limited. With its merger with adjoining parcels, alternatives to accommodate a greater.number of housing units and a more efficient site plan are = increased. ` 1217 7Wmo.5"Wd sly MrN RgpwC"WC-0.MU The General Plan Amendment and y Rezone, and future mixed-use commercial " and residential development proposal is x T ,22tcA n.mooMy consistent with Land Use Element policies a regarding the expansion of housing ` opportunities in the Downtown Planning "'� •� �'r`� r. Area. The project would also be consistent with Housing Element goals and ; polices on production and land use efficiency. The proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone would increase 1. " Project Location GP/R 160-05 (Bermant hi .aes) Attachment 8 1221 Nipomo Page 4 the City's inventory of C-D zoned land and increase opportunities for residential units above ground-level retail and in close proximity to the City's commercial center. The site seems well- suited for a mixed-use development including commercial and residential uses for the following reasons: Increase the allowed residential density in the downtown planning area — As shown in the Vicinity Map (Attachment 1), the site is immediately adjacent to the Downtown-Commercial Zoning District. This block of Nipomo Street is split down the middle between residential and commercial General Plan and Zoning designations, and the re-designation of this small parcel would be a minor alteration to the maps. As mentioned earlier, the mixed commercial/residential designation would not adversely impact the overall supply of residential opportunities in the City, as the inclusion of a housing component in any future site development would be insured by the mixed-use overlay. Housing Element Policy 5.2.3 encourages the development of mixed-use, projects with residences above commercial uses in areas such as this, where the site is in close proximity to activity centers. This application to rezone the property would increase the residential density value for the site by 50%. Under the current R-4 zoning, the site allows for a maximum residential density of 24 du/net acre, or 4.13 units. With the rezone to C-D-MU the site's maximum residential density would increase to 36 du/net acre, or 6.20 units. The Mixed- Use overlay would ensure that the site, as well as the existing C-D parcels within the project area, are developed as a mixed-use project. Compatibility with surrounding development — Any future development of the site will be subject to Architectural Review which includes evaluation of neighborhood compatibility. To ensure that the re-designation this site from a purely residential land use to one that would allow a combination of commercial and residential uses does not negatively impact the adjacent residential development to the southeast, a mitigation measure has been proposed to ensure the site's compatibility. This mitigation measure specifies that the future development of at 1221 Nipomo shall comply with the R-4 development standards for height and setbacks despite its redesignation as General Retail and C-D-MU. This will help insure that any future project provides a suitable transition to the adjacent High-Density Residential (R4) property at the corner of Nipomo and Pacific Streets. The redevelopment of the adjacent parcels to the north, 1213 Nipomo and 277 and 579 Marsh, which are part of the downtown core, are required by Housing Element Policy 6.2.2 to include a residential component; therefore, a mixed use project including 1221 Nipomo would be a minor expansion of the type of development that will be required on the adjacent site to the north when it is redeveloped. The application of the combining zone (mixed-use overlay) would further ensure this residential component. Because it is the applicant's intent to develop these parcels together, it is recommended that the Mixed-Use overlay be applied to all the involved parcels to avoid having the site bisected by two Zoning districts once they are merged. Traffic & Circulation Nipomo and Marsh Streets provide access to the project site. The City's General Plan Circulation Element designates Marsh Street as an Arterial Street, which provides circulation between major GP/R 160-05 (Bermant h. Aes) 1221 Nipomo Attachment 8 Page 5 activity centers and residential areas. This portion of Nipomo Street is designated as a Local Street, which directly serves residential development that it fronts and channels traffic to Residential Collector Streets. According to the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (seventh edition), apartments generate approximately 6.72 average daily trips (ADT) per dwelling unit, and 0.67 p.m. peak hour trips (PPHT) per dwelling unit. Specialty retail centers generate approximately 44.32 average daily trips per 1000 square feet of gross floor area (GFA) and 5.02 p.m. peak hour trips. If the site were developed under the current zoning to its maximum potential with 4 2-bedroom residential dwelling units, it would generate 26.88 ADT and 2.68 PPHT. If the site were developed to the maximum potential with the 6 2-bedroom residential dwelling units (of approximately 1,000 square feet each) and 16,500 square feet of commercial allowed under the proposed C-D-MU zoning, the site would generate approximately 771.6 ADT (40.32 +731.28) and 86.85 PPHT (4.02 +82.83). Based on this information, the proposed land use change would allow a future project that generates additional vehicle trips beyond that typically associated with a high-density residential use (see table below). However, because of the site's downtown location, there would be unaccounted opportunities for shared trips and an . increased likelihood of patrons utilizing methods of transportation other than a car. Existing R-4 Proposed C-D-MU Actual Zoning Zoning Increase Average Daily 26.88 771.6 744.72 Trips Peak.Hour 2.68 86.85 84.17 Trips General Plan Amendment and Rezone Effect of Traffic and Trip Generation The C-D designation would both allow for two additional 2-bedroom dwelling units, and reduce the parking requirement by one-half. To ensure that adequate off-street parking is provided, the applicant would be required to provide or pay in at fees for the four additional parking spaces required for two 2-beroom dwellings under the current zoning..These four (4) spaces could not be reduced through shared or mixed-use reductions, or other parking reductions established for the Downtown Commercial zone included in Section 17.42 of the Municipal Code.. This condition would allow consistency with policies within the City's General Plan calling for increased opportunities for downtown dwellings and the intensification of downtown commercial areas, while maintaining neighborhood quality. Parking In-Lieu Fee Area In September 2002, the Council adopted an Ordinance amending Chapter 4.30, Section 4.30.010, Section 17.16.60 and adding Section 4.30.015 of the City's Municipal Code creating the Parking In-Lieu Fee Area. The boundary of this parking district currently contains all of the properties currently zoned Downtown Commercial (C-D) as well as some adjacent Office (0) and Public Facility(PF) designated parcels (see Attachment 4, Parking In-Lieu Fee Map). If the designation GP/R 160-05 (Bermant.h,..tes) 1221 Nipomo Attachment 8 Page 6 of 1221 Nipomo is changed to Downtown Commercial, the site should also be included in this parking district, consistent with the privileges and requirements applied to other C-D zoned properties, and further promoting the economic well-being of the downtown area and supporting. policies of the City General Plait. Conclusion The General Plan Amendment of 1221 Nipomo from High-Density Residential to General Retail, and Rezone to Downtown Commercial with the Mixed=Use Overlay (C-D-MU) seems appropriate at this location. This change will allow for the site to be redeveloped as part of a larger mixed commercial and residential project and create a transition between the downtown. commercial uses and.residential uses that are currently side-by-side along this block of Nipomo. A mixed-use commercial and residential project would be a boon to this area because it would: Allow for increased density near the City's commercial center. ➢ Blend with the residential development pattern in the neighborhood. ➢ Provide more potential clientele for the existing downtown commercial uses. ➢ Have site access from a parkway arterial. Result in additional people living downtown, with increase opportunities to utilize alternative forms of transportation. While staff is recommending approval of this request, it should be noted that this does not necessarily set a precedent for approving other similar,requests in the future. Although none are anticipated at this time, future requests for General Plan amendments and rezones for the remaining R'4 zoned properties in the vicinity may not.be considered consistent with General Plan Policies such as LU 4.2.1 or H 11:2.1 due to location, existing development, or other constraints. If similar rezoning requests were pursued for those sites, then the particular conditions and issues at that time would need to be taken into account. REFERRALS The project proposal was routed to various City departments, including the Housing Specialist, Public Works, Utilities and Fire Departments and comments received have been incorporated into the staff recommendation and mitigation measures where appropriate. ALTERNATIVES 1. The Commission may recommend approval of the project with modified findings and/or conditions. 2. The Conmm ssion may approve a resolution recommending that the City Council deny the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone, based on findings of inconsistency with the General Plan as specified by the Planning Commission. • • 1 GP/R 160-05 (Bermant h.,.nes) 1221 Nipomo Attachment 8 Page 7 3. The Commission may continue review of the project, if more information is needed. Direction should be given to staff and the applicants. ATTACHMENTS 4. 304"iftity-MM ZsRjjjSL4A4an — 4- Rarki 7. ion eso u ion Attachment-9—` INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM For ER 160-05 1. Project Title: General Plan Amendment and Rezone, GP/R 160-05 2 Lead Agency Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 3. Contact Person and Phone Numbere Jaime Hill, Associate Planner(805) 781-7165 4. Project Location: 1221 Nipomo 1213 Nipomo, 577 and 579 Marsh 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Bermant.Homes 5383 Hollister, Suite 150 Santa Barbara, California 93111 6. General Plan Designation: 1221 Nipomo: High Density Residential 1213 Nipomo, 577 and 879 Marsh: General Retail 7. Zoning: 1221 Nipomo: R'-4 (High Density Residential) 1213 Nipomo; 577 and 579 Marsh: C-D (Downtown Commercial) & Description of the Projects General Plan Amendment and Rezone to change 1221 Nipomo's Land Use designation from High Density Residential to General Retail, and Zoning designation from R-4 to Downtown Commercial with the Mixed-Use Overlay (C=D-MU), to accommodate a future mixed-use development project, and; amendment of Chapter 4.30, Section 4.30.015of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code modifying the Downtown Parking In-Lieu Fee Area to include 1221 Nipomo: The future project will require this parcel to be merged with the adjacent parcels, 1213 Nipomo, 577 and 579 Marsh; to avoid having the site bisected by two Zoning districts,. the Zoning designation of these parcels should also be amended from C-D to &D-MU. Because neither the modification of the Parking-In=Lieu-Fee-Area, nor the addition of the combining zone (Mixed-Use overlay) on the three parcels currently designated in the General Plan as General Retail and zoned Downtown Commercial will increase the allowed development or types of uses ` Attachment 9 allowed, there is not any potential for environmental impacts. Therefore, the following discussion focuses primarily upon the General Plan .Amendment and rezone of 1221 Nipomo from a residential designation to a commercial-residential mix. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings: The project site (1221 Nipomo) consists of a 7,500 square-foot parcel on the southwesterly side of Nipomo Street, between Marsh and Pacific Streets. A single family residence exists on the site and will be removed as part of the future project; the site is otherwise vacant. Vegetation is limited to ornamental landscaping and several non-native trees. No rare or endangered species were observed on the site as it has been disturbed by past human activities. The remainder of the project area (1213 Nipomo,, 577 and .579 Marsh) consists of a non- conforming multi-family development and commercial structures. The surrounding area is a mixture of residential and commercial uses, 1221 Nipomo being a transition site from Downtown Commercial to the north and High-Density Residential to the south.. Surrounding uses include several multi-family residences, apartments, fraternities, and commercial and_ office uses in the adjacent Downtown Commercial District. 10: Project Entitlements Requested: The applicant is requesting a General Plan (Land Use Map) amendment and rezone to accommodate a future mixed-use project. 11. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None Cmr OF SAN Luis OwsPo 2 1NmaL STUDY ENMONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2005 Attachment 9 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages., Aesthetics _ ___ . _ - Geology/Soils Public Services Agricultural Resources Hazards&Hazardous Recreation Materials Air Quality Hydrology/Water Quality x Transportation&Traffic Biological Resources Land Use and Planning x Utilities and Service S stems-- -__ Cultural Resources x Noise Mandatory Findings of Significance Energy and Mineral Population and Housing r Resources Yin FISH AND GAME FEES There is no evidence before the Department that the project will have any potential adverse..effects on fish X and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. As such, the project qualifies for a de minimis waiver with regards to the filing of Fish and Game Fees. The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish and Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code. This initial,study has been circulated to the California Department of Fish and Game for review and comment- STATE CLEARINGHOUSE This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more State agencies (e.g. Cal Trans; California Department of Fish and Game, Department of Housing and Community Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines 15073(a)). Cinr of SAN Luis OeisPo 3 lmrm.SrunY ENv RoNmENTAL CMECKusT 2005 � t 1 , • I I Attachment 9 DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made, or the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet(s) have been added and X agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. 1 find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant"impact(s) or"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze:only the effects that remain to be addressed - I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (2) have been _avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR of NEGATIVE DECLARATION,including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. w f Z�IOS� at Date Ronald Whisenand•.Deputy.Director ofCommunity Development For:John Mandeville, Printed Name Community Development Director Cm OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 4 iNmAL STUDY EHvBtoNmENTAL CHEcitusr 2005 �S�l Attachment 9 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1.. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact". answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the analysis in each section. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact"answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards(e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants,based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as-well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. The explanation of each issue should identify the significance criteria or threshold,if any, used to evaluate each question. 3. "Potentially Significant Impact'is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect.is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant.Impact"entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." "The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced). 5. Earlier analysis may be used where,pursuant to thetiering,program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration: Section 15063 (c) (3) (D)of the California Code of Regulations. Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside documentshould, where appropriate,include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached,and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. In this case,a brief discussion should identify the following:. a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately.Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal ,standards, and state whether such effectswere addressed by mitigation measures based on earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. CITY oO SAN Los OBIsPo 5 INITIAL STUDY ENYIRommE ITAL CHECKLIST 2005 Attachment 9 Issues, Discussion and Support.. . information Sources Sources Po,- Ay Potentially less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 160-05 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Inc orated 1.AESTHETICS. Would theproject: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 1,2 X b) Substantially damage scenic resources,including,but not limited 1, 10 X to,trees,rock outcroppings,open space,and historic buildings within a local or state scenic highway? C) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of 1, 10 X the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would 1,23 X adversely effect day or nighttime views in the area? Evaluation a), b), c), d) The subject property is currently surrounded by urban uses and is not within a location that is considered a scenic vista,nor is Nipomo Street itself designated as a road of scenic value within the General Plan Circulation Element. The General Plan Amendment/rezoning (GPA/R) will allow for the development of a mixed-use commercial-residential project with increased density, lot coverage, and taller buildings than the present zoning. The current R-4 zoning allows for 24 dwelling units per net acre, 60% lot coverage, and buildings with 35-foot maximum height limit. The proposed C-D-MU zoning will allow for up to 36 dwelling units per net acre, with 100% lot coverage (less the 15-foot street yard setback that is required because the site is adjacent to R-4 zoned property) and building heights up to 50 feet. Therefore, the zone change could negatively impact views and create light and glare for the adjacent residential properties given the scale of development which could be allowed. However, future site development will require review by the City's Architectural Review Commission (ARC), which will address/mitigate the project's impacts to views and other potential aesthetic issues like light/glare to a less than significant level. Additionally, the proposed Mixed-Use overlay(MU) would provide fora transition between the R4 residential zone and the C-D commercial zone which does not currently exist at this location. Conclusion The project will have a less than significant impact on area aesthetics. 2.AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would theproject: a) Convert Prime Farmland,Unique.Farmland;or Farmland of 12 X Statewide Importance(Farmland),as shown on the maps pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring'Program of the Califomia Resources Agency,to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with ezisdng zoning for agricultural use or a 9 X Williamson Act contract? C) ,Involve otherchanges in the existing•environmetit:which,.due.to 10 g their location or nature,could result iii conversion of PAM4 nd _ to:non- culnEw use? Evaluation a), b), c)The site is a small parcel that is surrounded by developed properties and public streets.The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency designates this property as Urban Land. There is no Williamson Act contract in effect on the project site. No impacts to existing on site or off site agricultural resources are anticipated with development of the project site. Conclusion The project does not have the potential to impact agricultural resources. 3. AIR QUALITY. Would thero'ect: 'a)' Violate any air duality stanuiaiti or contribute substantially to an 13,14 X existing orprojected sii tgtrality vioiatioi:? am QTY OF SAN LUIS OBISpo 6 INmAL STUDY ENvotoNlAENTAL CNEclatsT 2005 Issues, Discussion and Suppon,,,y Information Sources Sources Pott. .Aly Potentially ss an N Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 160-05 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated b) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air 13,14 X quality plan? c) Expose-sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 9, X concentrations? 13,14 .d) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of 13,14 X e) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria 13,14 X pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed qualitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Evaluation a), b),c),e)San Luis Obispo County is a non-attainment area for the State PMuo(fine particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter)air quality standard. State law requires that emissions of non-attainment pollutants and their precursors be reduced by at least 5% per year until the standards are attained. The 2001 Clean Air Plan (CAP) for San Luis Obispo County was developed and adopted by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD)to meet that requirement. The CAP is a comprehensive planning document designed to reduce emissions from traditional industrial and commercial sources, as well as from motor vehicle use. Land Use Element Policy 1.18.2 states that the City will help the APCD implement the Clean Air Plan. Temporary impacts from the project, including but not limited to excavation and construction activities, vehicle emissions from heavy duty equipment and naturally occurring asbestos, has the potential to create dust and emissions that exceed air quality standards for temporary and intermediate periods. However, this project will be subject to the City's Grading Ordinance which includes dust control measures to reduce any potential impacts. d)The project is a General Plan(Land Use Map)amendment and rezone which is necessary to accommodate a future mixed- use residential/commercial project,which will not create objectionable odors under normal circumstances. Conclusion The project does not have the potential to impact air quality. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would theproject: a) iia've:a-substantial adverse effect,either'directlyor indirectly or 5, 10 X throtigh Habitat modifications,on any species ideniif ed as a candidate;sensitive,.or special status species in local-or regional . plaiis,polici.6t,or cegulafions,or byYh California Department of Fish and Ganie or U.S.Fish-and Wildlife Service? )_ ..F#atve a'substantial adverso e$ect tin any riparian'habitaf or,• 5, 10 X other sensitive natta community idenii5ea in local or regional VI '-s;policiest or.iegalations;orbyirlie,CaLfo niaDepattineint oMsh acid Game for U.S.F3shmid WildItfe'Service? :e) .'�Conthct with any locsl.polickes or oizlmattc s*01:W-twig. 5 X biological iesotnres such as a treepreservatwnpctlic o . . oi2ltnance(a�?heritage Trees)`► '•., i3) Iiifeiferesubstantiafiy:alththemoveniettofanynative,resident 5, 10 X orbigratiory;ish or wildlife species or'with established'native, rev tor migratory walWe-corridors,or impede the use Of wildlife nttrsety situ?: o) Gon- ict wil0i the provisions otanadopted hAkta 6itservation 5 Platt,iLfiaunal Co X mtmmuycjnservatmTtPlan,or.other.approved:. ,. 1pcd,re or slate habitat,'egnservation plan? LIX Rabea,si stantial'ativetse effect on.Wirali tected wettandg:: 5 X Ctry of Sart Luts Oetsvo 7 lmnAI-SruoY Ewim NMENTAL CeEcKLmr 2005 Attachment 9 Issues, Discussion and Support,. _ information Sources Sources Po,, Ally Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER# 160-05 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated -as defined in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act(including,but not limited to,marshes,vernal pools,etc.)through direct removal,filling,hydrological inte tion,or other means? Evaluation a), b) According the Natural Diversity Database of the California Department of Fish and Game, there are no species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on or near the project site, nor is riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified. c) The project is a General Plan(Land Use Map)amendment and rezone which is necessary to accommodate a future mixed- use residentiallcommercial project, the development of which will require separate review by the City's Urban Forester and approval by the Architectural Review Commission(ARC). d) The property is completely surrounded by urban development and the proposed GPAIR will not interfere with the movement of any wildlife species or migratory wildlife corridor. e) The proposed project is a General Plan (Land Use Map) amendment and rezone which does not conflict with any local policy protecting biological resources nor any adopted habitat conservation plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local,regional,or state habitat conservation plan. f) The site.is not near any natural waterway and will therefore have no adverse effect on Federally protected wetlands. Conclusion The project does not have the potential to impact biological resources. S.CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would theproject: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a 9,18, X historic resource?(See CEQA Guidelines;150645) 20 b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an 19,21 x archaeological resource?:(See.CEQA Guidelines 15064.5) c) Directly or indirectly destioy.a unique paleontological resource 10,19 a{ or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains,including thoseinterred outside of 21 x formal.cenieteries? Evaluation a), b) Based on review of the City's Historic Site Map and Land Use Information System,the project is not located on or near a known sensitive archaeological site or historic resource. Structures that are currently on the property are not listed as Master List or Contributing Historic buildings. c) There are no known paleontological resources or unique geologic features on the project site. d) The project site is outside of the areas designated on the City's Burial Sensitivity Map as potential burial sites. Conclusion The project does not have the potential to impact cultural resources. 6. ENERGY AND MIIVERAL RESOURCES. Would theproject: a) Conflict yvith adopted energy conservatititt pians? 6 X b) Use oon-ienewable resdul=s in a wasteful:and inefficient f }( manner:? - - c ..Adit 7i in'theloss o avaihbr " ;si a ltrioawrCmineiral-tesource. 6 X CRY of SAN Luis Owspo 8 IwnAL SrunY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2005 57 Attachmprqt Issues, Discussion and Supportiu.,. .tformation Sources Sources Pota. �iy Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 160-05 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Inco ornted that:would be of value to the region and the residents of the Evaluation a) b)The GPA/R will not conflict with adopted energy conservation plans or promote the use of non-renewable resources in an efficient manner. Future development on the site must comply with the policies contained in the General Plan Energy Element. The Energy Element states that, "New development will be encouraged to minimize the use of conventional energy for space heating and cooling, water heating, and illumination by means of proper design and orientation, including the provision and protection of solar exposure." The City implements energy conservation goals through enforcement of the California Energy Code, which establishes energy conservation standards for residential and nonresidential construction. Future development of this site must meet those standards. The City also implements energy conservation goals through Architectural Review. Project designers are asked to show how a project makes maximum use of passive means of reducing conventional energy demand, as opposed to designing a particular image and relying on mechanical systems to maintain comfort. c)No known mineral resources exist within the project site that would be of value to the region or to the residents of the State. Conclusion The project does not have the potential to impact energy and mineral resources. 7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would theproject: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,including risk of loss,injury or death involving: L Rupture of a known earthquake fault,as delineated in the 22 X mostiecent Mquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault'ZoningMap issued by the State Geologist"for the area,or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? IL Strong seismic.ground shaking? 22 X III. Seismic-related ground failure,including liquefaction? 11 X IV_ Landslides or mudflows? 9 X b) Re.auili in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 11 X c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil.that is unstable;or that` 11 X would become-unstable as a result of the projec4 and potentially result in on or off site landslides,lateral spreading;subsidence, liquefaction;or collapse? d) .Be located on expansive soil,as defined in Table.l g-1-B of the 11 X Uidf n-in guilding Code(1994),creating substantial nsim'to7ife, i _T Evaluation a) c) San Luis Obispo County, including San Luis Obispo is located within the Coast Range Geomorphic Province, which extends along the coastline from central California to Oregon.This region is characterized by extensive folding, faulting, and fracturing of variable intensity. In general, the folds and faults of this province comprise the pronounced northwest trending ridge-valley system of the central and northern coast of California. Under the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act,the State Geologist is required to delineate appropriately wide special studies zones to encompass all potentially and recently-active fault traces deemed sufficiently active and well-defined as to constitute a potential hazard to structures from surface faulting or fault creep. In San Luis Obispo County,the special Studies Zone includes the San Andreas and Los Osos faults.The edge of this study area extends to the westerly city limit line,near Los Osos Valley Road.According to a recently conducted geology study(source 25), the closest mapped active fault is the Los Osos Fault,which runs in a northwest direction and is about one mile from the City's westerly boundary. Because portions of this fault have displaced sediments within a geologically recent time(the last 10,000 years),portions of the Los Osos fault are considered"active". Other active faults in the region include:the San Andreas located about 30 miles to the Cm of Sm Lues OBE&& 9 ImnALL Snmv ENvtftor MBffu Cttt:cta.tsr 2005 3 (o Issues, Discussion and Supports,. information Sources Sources Potc.. ily Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 160-05 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Inco rated northeast,the Nacimiento,located approximately 12 miles to the northeast,and the San Simeon-Hosgri fault zone,located approximately 12 miles to the west. Although there are no fault lines on the project site or within close proximity,the site is located in an area of"High Seismic Hazards,"specifically Seismic Zone 4, which means that future buildings constructed on the site will most likely be subjected to excessive ground shaking in the event of an earthquake. New structures must be designed in compliance with seismic design criteria established in the California Building Code for Seismic Zone 4. To minimize this potential impact, the Uniform Building Code and City Codes require new structures to be built to resist such shaking or to remain standing in an earthquake. b)The site is basically flat and development of the site with up to 100%coverage by a mixture of uses rather than only the 60%coverage by residential structures allowed by the current zoning would not have any greater impact on soil erosion or loss of topsoil.The Uniform Building Code contains standards requirements that address soil erosion and loss of topsoil associated with future site development. c),d)The Safety Element-of the General Plan indicates that the project site has a high potential for liquefaction, which is true for most of the City, and.the site contains highly expansive soils as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (2001). Recommendations included in a soils report are sufficient to mitigate potential hazards from building in these areas. In general, the presence of expansive soils requires additional base for roadways and flat work and deeper footings for building foundations. Conclusion The project does not have the potential to impact geology or soil resources. & HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the pri iect: a) •Create A significant hazard to the.public or the environment 25 X °thirough the routine.use,trans Dlpof hazar3ouspd' of materials? b) . Create asignificant hazard to the public or the environment 25 X through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardousina_terialsinto the environment? c) Einit hazardous emissions'or-handle hazardous or acutely 9,25 X hazardous materials,snbsfances,or waste within one-quarter mue_df an existing or proposed school? •'d} Expose petiole or.structures to existing sources of hazardous 25 X :emissions or hazardousor-acutay.hazardous materials. substances,or-waste? e)" Ap located on a site which is indltided:oaa hstiof hazardous 9 X gnaoegials sites compiled pursuant to Oovemment;Code SecteQij :65962.5and,as_a resuk itwouldcreate'a,sig!ificant;:ha aird in e ptablie Or tlt' -Lnvironment?. {]r amici}eet lot *tttna an airpnrt:Iand use platT or.within 24 X tWb4nilesnfa it pot airport,-wauld the.proieet ies rtt wit haiaxlt*thepeopleresidiiigorworkjngif,5he'pt`ujectarea?: i ,g) Impair implementation of,or physically-mlerfere'witli,.fhe 4 X :adopted emergency response ghat or emergency evacuation plan_, h). .Eitpose:people or stttictta?@s Ca asjgitjfgant nsk Qf'Msrtii}',: 4 X .oit death,involKing wildland fires,incltuiitig i9heEe,wildlaads are adjacent to.mbanized areas or where residents are intermixed with vidldlands? CITY OF SAN Luis 081spo 10 INmAL STuoY ENvtRONMENTAL CKEcKusT 2005 s�7 Issues, Discussion and Supporti.., .,[formation Sources Sources Pots. -.ally Atta9 Potentially an No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER# 160-05 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Inco orated Evaluation a) The project does not involve the routine use, transport,or disposal of hazardous materials. b), d), The site does not contain any known hazardous substances and is not located in an area of high risk, nor will the proposed land use change cause any hazardous emissions or require handling of hazardous wastes. c) The project is within t/a mile from an existing school site (Mission College Prep), however, the project will not involve hazardous emissions or include handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,substances or waste. e) The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code §65962.5. f) The project site is outside of the Airport Land Use Plan area. g) The project has been reviewed by the Fire Marshall and will not conflict with any emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. h) The Safety Element of the General Plan identifies the site as having low potential for impacts from wildland fires. Conclusion The project does not have the potential to create or otherwise impact hazards or hazardous materials. 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would theproject: at)- Violate.any water quality standards or waste discharge 7,28 X i tequwemenW.. b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or'ime'rfere 18,28 X substantially with groundwater recharge such diatthere-would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level(e.g.The production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop.to a level.which wonld.iiot support existiag u='for ufor whioh'permitsltave beeti.graiited)? c) Create or contribute runoff waterwhich would exceed the 7,28 X eapacity.,of existing orplanned storm watef:drainage systems or provide additional sources bf nmoff into surface waters (including,-but not lmiited to,wetlands,riparian.areas,:ponds; springs,.creels,streams,avers,lakes;.estuaries,iidal.areas,bays,' .dc .E )�. +3),: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or 7,28 X ,.,. area.m a manaer.wIucli would,restiltin autr"sub'stal errisioti<or siltKdQfi>Oaiteor SUSite? , e). Sufi1. "... , alttx'The.extstmg-drainage pattern Af the sire- 28 X areama itlnatiule>'which`�vottld:r�s�]tansiibstaittlal;flotidin9 gnsite or offsrte? ,f) Mace bbusing within a I W-Yiartlood hazaid'aiea as mapper']on` 9 X a Federal Flood Hazard B.pp idary or Flood Insitratice Rate'Map- or other$ood`hazard delineation map?. A) Place wtthttt I00-yearflooiThazardarea stx&Wfes which 9,25 X tGoq d;'m ede cir.redKee(I]ood flows? h) Vilill the project itttoduce typi cal,storm water pollutantsinto- 25 X ground carsiirface waters? _ 3!fFelI ibelirgjecratter.ground water or surface water quality, 25.28 X CRY of SAN Luis OsisPo 1 1 INmA.L STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CNECIO.ISf 21105 5 -3S' Issues, Discussion and Supporhi,g Information Sources sources Pot..._�tiy Potentiauy Uss Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER# 160-05 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Inco rated tempeiatar e,dissolved oz n,or turbidity? Evaluation a),b)The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Future site development will be served by the City's sewer and water systems and will not use or otherwise deplete groundwater resources. c), d)h) i)Physical improvement of the project site will be required to comply with the drainage requirements of the City's Waterways Management Plan. This plan was recently adopted for the purpose of insuring water quality and proper drainage within the City's watershed. The Waterways Management Plan requires that site development be designed so that post- development site drainage does not exceed pre-development run-off. This can be achieved through a combination of detention and use of pervious surfaces to increase water absorption on-site. Compliance with the requirements of the plan is sufficient to mitigate any potentially significant impacts of the project in the area of water quality and hydrology. Future development plans will be evaluated by the Public Works Department and must be designed in a manner that is consistent with the requirements of the Waterways Management Plan. e),f),g)A small portion of the project site is located in the 100-year flood zone while the majority of the site falls within the 500-year flood zone per the Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map. All future development will need to comply with the City's local ordinances,Flood Damage Prevention Regulations and Waterways Management Plan,which include local code requirements to verify that the impact, if any, would be insignificant with less than a 517o increase in peak flows or velocity of floodwaters.Site drainage will be adequately evaluated as part of the required Architectural Review and Building Permit processes that will occur with any future development of the site. Conclusion The project does not have the potential to impact water quality or hydrology. Drainage patterns will be evaluated for consistency with existing City codes as part of the future development of the site.No further mitigation is necessary. 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would theproject: a)' Conflict with applicabie land use plan,'policjr,•orregulation of I X an agency with jurisdiction over ;the..project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? b) -Physically divide an established community? 1,9 X c) :Conflict with any applicable.habitat conseivation plan or natural 5 X community conservation lass? a) The proposed GPA/R does not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect The GPA/R would change the land use designation of the site from High-Density Residential (R-4) to Downtown Commercial with the Mixed Use Overlay(C-D-MU)to accommodate a future mixed-use residential commercial project. The impact of the rezone on the Citywide supply of High Density Residential (R-4) properties by modifying the site to a mixed commercial/residential designation would not adversely impact the overall supply of residential opportunities for those living in the City or hoping to, as the proposed zoning of C-D-MU would allow a greater density of housing on the site(36 unitstacre)than is allowed by the current R-4 zoning (24 unitstacre). The GP/R and future mixed-use commercial and residential development proposal is consistent with Land Use Element policies regarding the expansion of housing opportunities in the Downtown Planning Area. The project will also be consistent with Housing Element goals and polices on production and land use efficiency. The proposed GP/R will increase the City's inventory of C-D zoned land and increase opportunities for residential units above ground-level retail and in close proximity to the City's commercial center. To ensure that the redesignation of this site from a purely residential use to a designation which would allow a combination of commercial and residential uses does not negatively impact the adjacent residential development to the southeast,a mitigation measure has been proposed to ensure the site's compatibility. Mitigation Measure: Land Use and Planning 1) To provide a suitable transition to the adjacent High-Density Residential (R-4) property at the comer of Nipomo and Crrr of Sart Luis Oetsao 12 IwnAL STUDY EtWI ammEwAL CHECKLisT 2005 chment' 9 Issues, Discussion and Supporta,y information Sources sources Potn:.Ay Potentially Less That, No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER# 160-05 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Pacific Streets the future development of this site which is being redesignated shall comply with the R-4 development standards for height and setbacks. Conclusion The General Plan Amendment and Rezoning of the property from High Density Residential (R-4) to Downtown Commercial with the Mixed Use Overlay(C-D-MU)is an issue of neighborhood compatibility,housing,and traffic increase.The proposed project to re-designate this site for a mixed use commercial-residential project would provide a transition from the High Density Residential (R-4) units to the south and the Downtown Commercial (C-D) retail uses to the north which currently does not exist.Under the C-D-MU designation a mixture of commercial uses and residential density of up to 36 units per acre would be allowed, as compared to the 24 units per acre allowed with the current R-4 designation. This increased development potential could generate proportionally more traffic to the site and increase parking demand in the immediate vicinity. Any future development project at the site will be subject to Architectural Review which includes evaluation of neighborhood compatibility.With the incorporation of the proposed requirement no further mitigation is required. 11.NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of people to or generation of"unacceptable"noise 3,16 X levels as defined by the San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise Element or general noise levels in excess of standards established in the Noise Ordinance? b) A substantial temporary,periodic,or permanent increase in 8 X ambient noise levels in the project vicinity.above levels existing without the project? c) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne 3,16 X vibration-or groundbome noise levels? A) For#project located within an atrportland.useplan,iii•within 24 }( ..twom lesof a.public airport cir public,use airport,would the project expose people residigg-br working in.the;project area to" excessive noise levels? Evaluation a) According to the Noise Contour Map in the Noise Element, the project site is located within an area susceptible to 60-65 decibles (dB) Ldn due to transportation noise. Maximum noise exposure for residential uses is 45 dB for indoor spaces and 60 dB for outdoor activity areas. Development of the site with a mixed-tae commercial and residential project could expose people to unacceptable noise levels, if not properly mitigated. A mitigation measure has been recommended to ensure that noise impacts are identified and reduced to a less than significant level. b) The construction of a future development project will temporarily increase ambient noise levels. Construction noise is regulated by the City's Noise Ordinance, which regulates times of construction and maximum noise levels that may be generated. The project will have to meet the noise standards contained in the Ordinance, which includes limitations o the days and hours of construction.No further mitigation is necessary. c) The project will not expose people to the generation of excessive groundborne noise levels or vibration. d) The project is outside of the Airport Land Use Plan area. Mitieation Measure:Noise 2) The construction of future residential uses shall be accompanied by an acoustical analysis (noise study) to ensure that interior spaces and exterior private use areas are designed to mitigate noise impacts to levels determined acceptable by the City's General Plan Noise Element.Specific construction details shall be identified as recommendations in the study. rCm OF SAN Luis OBtsao 13 INmAL Srunv EwutoNmENTnu CHr crtusr 2005 5- 0 Attachment 9 Issues, Discussion and Suppor6..,f Information Sources sources Pot. .ally Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER# 160-05 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Inco rated Conclusion Development of the site with a mixed-use commercial and residential project could expose people to unacceptable noise levels, if not properly mitigated. A mitigation measures has been recommended to ensure that noise impacts are identified and reduced to a less than significant level.No further mitigation is necessary. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would theproject: .a) Induce substantial poptilation growth iii.an area,either-directly 1,26 X (for example by proposing 'new homes'or businesses). or indirectly (for example, through extension of loads or,other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people 1,26 X necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Evaluation a)The proposed project will amend the City's General Plan, to allow higher density housing than is currently allowed on the site. According to 2003 California Department of Finance(CDF)estimates, there was an average of 2.3 persons per occupied household in the City of San Luis Obispo. Under the existing land use and zoning designation of High Density Residential (R-4), the site could accommodate 4.0 dwelling units and 9 people. If the property was designated Downtown Commercial, the site could accommodate 6 dwelling units and 14 people. Based on these assumptions, the GPA/R will allow for a slight increase in population and housing. While a slight increase in population can be expected, the anticipated increase is within the General Plan's projection and will not induce substantial growth into the area or result in population exceeding local and regional growth projections. 1221 Nipomo is underdeveloped with only a single family dwelling, and is bordered by urban development,therefore representing an infill development opportunity.This type of development is encouraged because it can take advantage of existing facilities for water,sewer,storm drainage,transportation and parks. b) The site of the future mixed-use project, of which 1221 Nipomo is part, is currently developed with single family and multi-family dwellings and commercial structures. The proposed GPA/R would increase the density allowed on the site, and increase housing opportunities for residents. Development of the property with apartments or condominiums could be a beneficial impact on affordable housing. The City's Inclusionary Housing Requirement requires that any future project with five or more lots or dwellings to either construct affordable units or pay an in-lieu fee. The proposed Mixed-Use overlay would insure that future development of the site has a residential component. Compliance with the City's Inclusionary Housing Requirements will be implemented and evaluated at the time of development permit application. Conclusion The population growth created by the project is considered less than significant. This change is consistent with Land Use and Housing Element policies encouraging a variety of housing es,efficient infill development,and compact urban form. 13.PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision,or need,of new or physically altered government facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times,or other performance objectives for an of the btic services: a): 'Fire protection? 8 X b),- •$G1ice.prateetion? 8 X c)' Schools?` 8 X d) Parlcg? 8 X e) Roads and other iransportanotrinfmstractuie? - 2,8 X r ther ublic,fi"ities? 8 X ation , e), f) As an infill site, adequate public services (fire, police, roads and other transportation infiastructure, and other Crm of SAN Luis OBim 14 INITIAL STUDY EwmNMENTAL Q-mcKusT 2005 5-V Attachment. 9 Issues, Discussion and Supporting information Sources Sources Potn _Jy Potentially tessThan No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER# 160-05 issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated public facilities) are available to service the property. Whether the site is developed with commercial or residential uses will not significantly alter the levels of public service available to the site. Future development must comply with applicable City codes and State regulations and building permits will be issued to insure consistency with these requirements. c)The school districts in the State are separate governing bodies with authority to collect fees to finance school construction and parcel acquisition. Section 65955 of the Government Code prohibits the City from denying a subdivision or collecting any fees beyond those required by the school district itself, to mitigate effects of inadequate school facilities. Any effect that the additional children will have of school facilities will be mitigated in whole or in part by the districts per square foot fees, charged at the time of building permit issuance for any development. Although the allowed residential density for the site would increase with the proposed land use designation and zoning, it should be noted that the number of school-aged children might be slightly lower than allowed under the current designation, because mixed use developments tend to attract fewer young families that traditional multi-family housing units,catering instead to young professionals and retirees. d) Park in-lieu fees are required to be paid as part of the future condominium subdivision to insure that City residents have adequate access to park facilities as required by the Parks and Recreation Element of the General Plan. Conclusion No resource deficiencies have been identified with respect to public services. 14. RECREATION. Would the ro'ect: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or 8 g otherrecreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? - b) Include reaeationai facilities or,require the construction or. - 25 X expansion of recreational facilities;which might have ani adverse h "cal effect on the enDiromnent?. Evaluation a)Future site development will add incrementally to the demand for parks and other recreational facilities. However, given the size of the parcel and associated residential density(six dwelling units), no significant recreational impacts are expected to occur. Additionally, Park Land In-Lieu fees will be required to be paid to the City to help finance additional park space, maintenance or equipment in the vicinity,per existing City policy, if a tentative map were pursued resulting in the creation of additional parcels or condominium units. The City also collects a Dwelling Unit Construction tax that goes to a Park Improvement Fund with building permits for multi-family projects where further subdivision of parcels is not necessarily proposed. Collection of these fees help offset the impacts of new projects on the City's recreational facilities. The project site is located near existing recreational facilities such as Emerson Park and Sinsheimer Park. b)No site specific development plan is proposed at this time. However, given the size of the parcel, future site development is not likely to include the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. Conclusion Park and recreation facility demand will increase incrementally with the development of the project. Park-in-lieu fees are set at a level considered to be sufficient to offset the effects of the additional demand for park facilities.No further mitigation is required. 15. TRANSPORTATIONf AFFIC. Would theproject: "a) 'Oatise an lige iii ttaf6c which is substantial in•relatioti ttithe 16 X eit istitig tafficload and capacity of the street system? ;b) -Exeeed,:eittier individually or ctmtulativeiy a livel of service 16 g standard established:by tha6tnutt3r congestfpn'management agency ftp:designated roads_and highways? C) Siifistarifially increase hazardstlue to design'fea4ues ie:g strap 25 g vCrrr of Sew Luis OslsPo 15 Imnnt.STuov Ermaortatt.ntra.CHEcta.isT 2005 5 -Ya ► Attachment 9 Issues, Discussion and Supportii,y information Sources sources Poto.__.ally Potentially Uss Titan No Significant Significant Significant Itnpact ER # 160-05 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Inco rated curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses(e.g. farm equipment)? d} Result in inadequate emergency access? 25 X e) Result in inadequate parking capacity onsite or offsite? 25 X f) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative 2 X transportation(e.g.bus turnouts,bicycle racks)? g) Conflict with the with San Luis Obispo County Airport Land 25 X Use Plan resulting in substantial.safety risks from hazards,noise, or a change in air trafficpatterns? Evaluation a) b) c) d) Nipomo and Marsh Streets provide access to the project site. The City's General Plan Circulation Element designates Marsh Street as an Arterial Street, which provides circulation between major activity centers and residential areas. This portion of Nipomo Street is designated as a Local Street, which directly serves residential development that it fronts and channels traffic to Residential Collector Streets. According to the Institute of Transportation Engineer's(ITE)Trip Generation Manual(seventh edition),apartments generate approximately 6.72 average daily trips(ADT)per dwelling unit, and 0.67 p.m.peak hour trips(PPHT)per dwelling unit. Specialty retail centers generate approximately 44.32 average daily trips per 1000 square feet of gross floor area(GFA)and 5.02 p.m.peak hour trips. If the site were developed under the current zoning to its maximum potential with 4 2-bedroom residential dwelling units,it would generate 26.88 ADT and 2.68 PPHT. If the site were developed to the maximum potential with the 6 2-bedroom residential dwelling units(of approximately 1,000 square feet each)and 1.6,500 square feet of commercial allowed under the proposed C-D-MU zoning,the site would generate approximately 771.6 ADT(40.32+731.28) and 86.85 PPHT(4.02+82.83). Based on this information,the proposed GP/R would allow a future project that generates additional vehicle trips beyond that typically associated with a high-density residential use(see table below).However, because of the site's downtown location,there would be unaccounted opportunities for shared trips and an increased likelihood of patrons utilizing methods of transportation other than a car. With the incorporation of the mitigation measure discussed below,the traffic impacts of the increased development potential of the site will remain consistent with policies within the City's General Plan call for increasing opportunities for downtown dwellings and the intensification of downtown commercial areas,while maintaining neighborhood quality. e) The designation of this site as Downtown Commercial would confer all of the property development standards of this zone upon the parcel, including those regarding parking.In the C-D zone parking is reduced by one-half for dwellings, food services and entertainment facilities,and to one space per 500 square feet for all other lues.The 7,590 square foot lot zoned R-4 permits a density of 4.18 dwelling unit equivalents(24 du/ac). With the rezoning to C-D,the site would permit a density of 6.27 dwelling unit equivalents(36 du/ac);an addition of 2.09 dwelling unit equivalents.These additional dwelling unit equivalents equate to the addition of two 2-bedroom dwelling units and the provision of four additional parking spaces.The additional density and other commercial development allowed on the site could increase the parking demand generated by the site.To ensure the provision of adequate off street parking and mitigate the potential impact of increased parking demand as a result of the development of two additional 2-bedroom dwelling units as allowed with the rezone,a mitigation measure has been recommended to ensure that the development of this site under the C-D designation does not negatively impact parking opportunities in the downtown. f) Future site development will require review by the ARC for compliance with City's policies and standards supporting/requiring alternative transportation,such as,bus turnouts and bicycle parking. h) The project is outside of the Airport Land Use Plan area. Mitigation Measure:Transgortation/Traffrc 3)The applicant shall provide or pay in lieu fees for the four additional parking spaces.These four(4)spaces shall not be reduced through shared or mixed-use reductions,or other parking reductions established for the Downtown Commercial zone CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPo 16 lNmAL STUDY EwRoNmENTAL CNEcKi w 2005 Issues, Discussion and Supportint, information Sources Sources Pok ... Ay Potentially Less Than No �, Significant Significant Significant Impact ER# 160-05 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Inco orated included in Section 17.42 of the Municipal Code. Conclusion Transportation and Traffic Impacts, including parking, will be less than significant. Although traffic and parking demand will increase incrementally with the development of a future project at this site, its location on the periphery of the downtown makes it appropriate for a more urban use. Traffic and parking fees are set at a level considered to be sufficient to offset the effects of the additional demand.No further mitigation is required. 16.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would theproject: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable 7,28 X Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or insult in the construction or expansion of new water 28 X treatment,waste water treatment,water quality control,or storm drainage facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project 7,28 X from existing entitlements and resources,or are new and expanded water resources needed? d) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider 7,28 X which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity.to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitment? e) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted.capacity to 8 X accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? f) Comply with fedetaL state,and local statutes and,regulations 8,25 X related to solid waste? Evaluation a), b)The GPA/R will allow for the development of a project with slightly higher water demands. However, the incremental change is not considered to be significant. This project has been reviewed by the City's Utilities Engineer and no resource/infrastructure deficiencies have been identified. Future site development is subject to water impact fees which were adopted to ensure that new development pays its fair share of the cost of constructing the water supply, treatment and distribution facilities that will be necessary to serve it. c)The City has adopted Water Allocation Regulations to insure that increased water use by new development and land use changes do not jeopardize adequate water service to current and new customers. Section 17.89.030 of the regulations states that a water allocation shall be required to: "obtain a connection to the city water system for a structure or facility not previously connected; change the use of land or buildings, whether or not a construction permit is also required; obtain a construction permit." Compliance with the City standards and State requirements will assure that impacts to water supplies are less than significant. d) The City wastewater treatment plant and existing sewers in the vicinity have sufficient capacity to serve the project site. The developer will be required to construct private sewer facilities to convey wastewater to the nearest public sewer. The on- site sewer facilities will be required to be constructed according to the standards in the Uniform Plumbing Code. Impact fees are collected at the time building permits are issued to pay for capacity at the City's Water Reclamation Facility. The fees are set at a level intended to offset the potential impacts of each new residential unit in the project. e) f) Background research for the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB939) shows that Californians dispose of roughly 2,500 pounds of waste per month. Over 90% of this waste goes to landfills, posing a threat to groundwater, air quality, and public health. Cold Canyon landfill is projected to reach its capacity by 2018. The Act requires each city and county in California to reduce the flow of materials to landfills by 50% (from 1989 levels) by 2000. The GPA/R will allow for the development of a project with slightly higher solid waste generation. However, this incremental change is not expected to create significant impacts to solid waste disposal. Future site development will be required to comply with the iiCITY of San Lues Oetspo 17 kffuI STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CNEenw 2005 5-� q t Aftachmpot g Issues, Discussion and Supportiriy information Sources Sources Pote•.-.ply Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER# 160-05 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Inco rated City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element. Conclusion Less than significant impacts have been identified relative to utilities and services stems. 17.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. -A) Does the project have the potential iodegrade,thequality.ofthe.. X environment,substantially reduce-the':hiibitat•pl a fish.or wildlife species,cause a fish or wildlife_population to drop below.self- sustaining levels,threaten to.eliminate a plant qr animal community,reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate'important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? As discussed in the biological section of this study, there are no species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans,policies,or regulations,or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on or near the project site, nor is riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified. With regard to historical resources, the project is not located on or near a known sensitive archaeological site or historic resource. There are no known paleontological resources or unique geologic features on theproject b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited,but X cumulatively considerable? (."Ctnnulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a'pMect are considerable When viewed in connection with the effects of the past pi)ojects, the effects of other current projects,and the effects of}icobable &lure projects The impacts identified in this initial study are specific to this project and would not be tate orized as cumulatively significant. C) Does the project have etivironmental effects which willcause': .; X substantial adverse effect on htrrn2n:b6ngs;'either directly of •gdir With the incorporation of the recommended mitigation measures, the project will not result in substantial adverse impacts on humans. 18.EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analysis may be.used"whale;,pursitaut to.the tiering, progra...`'EIR gr other'CE A fin Q process,one or:more effects have been-adequately analyzed in an-eat3ier EIR or i4egative.Declaration. 'Section 15063(c) (3)-(D). -In;this case a-discurssion sliould,identifY the following.items: a "Eatliec atial used.'•Iden '.earlier anal -anditite where they are available for review. N/A b)• Impacts adequately addressed. Identify""ich effects froii the above checklist'were.adthin the scope of and:Adegtiately analyzed in.an earlier document putstiattt to applicableiegat standards;and.state,whether s6ch effects.were addressed by NIA niiti atiori measures based oa the ear`liar'anal sis: � _: , •.. . : ; e) Mitrgatiom a sures -For effete that-ate eSs xhanISigat(icatit wiih Mrtiemoh Incorporated;" describe•the autigaaon tpoe cums whicft w�e.mcotpctrated do refined fratn the�arl%er dgeamdrit and theeittent to which'they address:s ; _,-coiid�,ttotiS:of the "ecu.. � , N/A 19. SOURCE REFERENCES. 1. City of SLO General Plan Land Use Element,August 1994 2. City of SLO General Plan Circulation Element,November 1994 3. City of SLO General Plan Noise Element,May 1996 4. City of SLO General Plan Safety Element,July 2000 5. City of SLO General Plan Conservation Element,July 1973 6. 1 City of SLO General Plan Energy Conservation Element,April 1981 7. City of SLO Water and Wastewater Element,July 1996 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 18 INmAL STUDY ENviRONUIENTAL CNEcKusT 2005 Issues, Discussion and Supportmy information Sources SourcesPote. dly Potetitinity cess Than No Significant Significant Significant impact ER# 160-05 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation -Incorporated -8. Cit of San Luis Obispo Municipal,Code 9. City of San Luis Obispo,Land Use Inventory Database - 10. Site Visit 1.I.. USDA,Natural Resources Conservation Service, Soil Survey of San Luis Obispo Count 12. Website of the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency: http://www.consrv.ca.gov/dlrp/FMMP/ 13. Clean Air Plan for San Luis Obispo County,Air Pollution Control District,2001 14. CEQA Air Quality Handbook.Air Pollution Control District,.2003 _ 15. Institute of Transportation Engineers,Trip Generation Manual,6 Edition,on file in the Community Development Department 16.. City of San Luis Obispo Noise Guidebook,May 1996 IT 2002 City of San Luis Obispo Water Resources Report 18. City of San Luis Obispo,Historic Resource Preservation Guidelines,on file in the Community.Development Department 19. City of San Luis Obispo,Archaeological Resource Preservation Guidelines,on file in the Community Development Department 20. City of San Luis Obispo,Historic Site Iola _ 21. City of San Luis Obisl5o Burial Sensitivity Ma 22. San Luis Obispo Quadrangle Map,prepared by the State Geologist in compliance with the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act,effective January 1, 1990 23. -City of San Luis Obispo Corfirminity Design Guidelines 24. 1 San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan 125. 1-2001-Uniform BuildingCode 26. it ofSLO General Plan Housing Element,May 2004 Required Mitigation and Monitoring Program 1. Mitigation Measure: band Use and Planning To provide a suitable transition to the adjacent High-Density Residential (R4)property at the corner of Nipomo and Pacific Streets, the future development of this site which is being redesignated.as C-D-MU shall comply with the R-4 development standards for height and setbacks.. ➢ Monitoring Program: Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community Development Department staff. 2. Mitigation Measure: Noise The construction of future residential uses shall be accompanied by an acoustical analysis(noise study)to ensure that interior spaces and exterior private use areas are designed to mitigate noise impacts to levels determined acceptable by the City's General Plan Noise Element.Specific construction details shall be identified as recommendations in the study. ➢ Monitoring Program: Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans and the acoustical analysis submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community Development Department staff. 3. Mitigation Measure: Transportation/Traffic CrrY OF SAN LUIS OHISPO 19 INITIAL STUDY ENvtRONUENTAL CHECKLIST 2005 ISSU@S, Discussion and Supportii,y Information Sources Souris Pot�..A" Potentially Less nan No- Significant Significant Significant. Impact ER# 160-05 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation - - - - - -- Incorborated The applicant shall provide or pay in lieu fees for the four additional parking spaces.These four(4)spaces shall not be reduced through shared or mixed-use reductions,or other parking reductions established for the Downtown Commercial zone included in Section 17.42 of the Municipal Code. ➢ Monitoring Program: Compliance with.this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans submitted for building permit primarily by the Community Development Department staff. Parking in-lieu fees shall be paid prior to building permit issuance for the proposed development project if applicable. Parking calculations for redevelopment of this site shall separate the provision of these four parking spaces from the project's other parking requirements so the provision of these spaces are not reduced through shared or mixed-use reductions,or other parking reductions established for the Downtown Commercial zone included in Section 17.42 of the Municipal Code. CRY of SAN Luis OBISPo 20 INRWL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CNEeKLIST 2005 Attachment 10 RESOLUTION NO.XXXX (2005 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND AMENDING THE LAND USE ELEMENT MAP FROM HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO GENERAL RETAIL, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1221 NIPOMO STREET; GP 166-05 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on November 9, 2005, and recommended approval of the project; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on December 6, 2005, and,has considered testimony of interested parties, the records of the Planning Commission hearing and action, and the evaluation and.recommendation of staff-, and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the draft Negative Declaration of environmental impact as prepared by staff and reviewed by the Planning Commission; and. WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff;presented at said hearing. BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council finds and determines that the project's Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed project; and reflects the independent judgment of the City Council. The Council hereby adopts said Negative Declaration and incorporates the following mitigation measures into the project: Land Use and Planning 1. To provide a suitable transition to the adjacent High-Density Residential (R-4) property at the comer of Nipomo and Pacific Streets, the future development of this site which is being redesignated as C-D-MU shall comply with the R-4 development standards for height and setbacks. Monitoring Program: Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community Development Department staff.. Noise 2. The construction of future residential uses shall be accompanied by an acoustical analysis (noise study) to ensure that interior.spaces and exterior private use areas are designed to Attachment 10 Resolution No.XKXX(2005_Series) Page 2 mitigate noise impacts to levels determined acceptable by the City's General Plan Noise Element. Specific construction details shall be identified as recommendations in the study. Monitoring Program: Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans and the acoustical analysis submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community Development Department staff. Transportation✓Traffic 3. The applicant shall provide or pay in lieu fees for the four additional parking spaces. These four(4) spaces.shall not be reduced through shared or mixed-use reductions, or other parking reductions established for the Downtown Commercial zone included in Section 17.42 of the Municipal Code. Monitoring Program: Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans submitted for building permit primarily by the Community Development Department staff. Parking in-lieu fees shall be paid prior to building permit issuance for the proposed development project if applicable. Parking calculations for redevelopment of this site shall separate the provision of these four parking spaces from the project's other parking requirements so the provision of these spaces are not reduced through shared or mixed-use reductions, or other parking-reductions established for the Downtown Commercial zone included in Section 17.42 of the Municipal Code. SECTION I Findings. That this Council, after consideration of the amendment to the Land Use Element Map from High-Density Residential to General Retail, and considering the Planning Commission's recommendations, staff recommendations, public testimony, and reports thereof, makes the following findings:. 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezoning is consistent with General Plan Policy regarding the expansion of housing opportunities in the Downtown Planning Area, maximizing the development potential of infill sites, facilitation of housing production and land use efficiency. 2. A General Retail land use designation is appropriate for this site as it allows for the development of a mixed.use project, which will provide a transition between the existing High-Density Residential (R-4) development to the south and General Retail (C-D) development to the north. 3. The land use amendment and project will implement the. City's goal of maintaining a compact urban form by increasing the maximum density allowed and more fully utilizing the 51q1 Attachment 10 Resolution No..XXXX(2005:Series) Page 3 potential of this site,which is adjacent to the downtown core. 4. The project's Mitigated Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed project, and reflects the independent judgment of the Commission. SECTION 3. The Land.Use Element Map is hereby amended as shown on Exhibit A. SECTION 4. The Community Development Director shall cause the amendment to be. reflected in documents, which are on display in City Hall and are available for public viewing and use. 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: City Clerk Audrey Hooper APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Jonathan Lowell G:VHill\GPA and RZ\Map Amendment\GPS-R 160-05(1221 Nipomo)\GP-R 160-05 Council\Council GPA Resolution 160-05.doc - IbIt "- ner Retail achment Existing High-Density Residential, Proposed General Retail General Retail General Retail Gen al Retail Offic \ High-Densi Reside ial edi Density General Re i es ential igh-D ity Re ' enti Public Facility Hi h-Density Res al w High D ity Re ide al General Plan Map Legend GPRJR/ER 160-05 0 General Plan Boundary 1221 Nipomo M 1221 Nipomo . 5-75 Attachment 11 ORDINANCE NO. XXXX (2006 Series) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AMENDING CHAPTER 430 OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO'S MUNICIPAL CODE MODIFYING THE DOWNTOWN PARKING IN-LIEU FEE AREA TO INCLUDE 1221 NIPOMO; GP/R/ER 160-05 WHEREAS, the City requires that all new development provide adequate parking to meet newly created demand; and WHEREAS, the City currently has a parking in lieu fee program established for eligible properties in the downtown with the C-D zoning designation;.and WHEREAS, the Planning-Commission conducted a public hearing on November 9, 2005 and recommended approval a General Plan amendment and rezoning of 1221 Nipomo to Downtown Commercial (C-D), and including amendment to the City's Municipal Code for it's .inclusion in the Parking In-Lieu Fee Area; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on December 6, 2005, and has considered testimony of interested parties, the records of the Planning Commission hearing and action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff, and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed revision is consistent with the General Plan, the purposes of the Downtown Parking In-Lieu Fee Area, and other applicable City ordinances; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the property as described in a separate resolution approving the General Plan Map amendment; and BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. The City Council makes the following findings: 1. The inclusion of 1221 Nipomo in the Downtown Parking In-Lieu Fee Area is consistent with the. General Plan text policies, which encourage a walkable commercial core, with parking provided in peripheral structures. 2. 1221 Nipomo may benefit by participation in the Downtown Parking In-Lieu Fee Program, thereby promoting the,economic well being of the downtown area and supporting policies of the City General Plan. SECTION 2. The amendment of Section 4.30.015 of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code modifying the Downtown Parking In-Lieu Fee Area is hereby approved as identified within Exhibit A. Attachment 11 Ordinance No. XXXX (2006 Series) Page 2 SECTION 3. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in the Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage. INTRODUCED on the day of , 2005, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the day of ; 2006;on the following roll call vote:. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: City Clerk Audrey Hooper APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Jonathan Lowell G:VHiU\GPA and RZ\Map Amendments\GPS-R 160-05(1221 Nipomo)\GP-R 160-05 CounciKouncil Parking Ordinance 160-05.doc 5 �3 IIS � t C] Attachment 12 ORDINANCE NO.XXXX (2006 Series) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AMENDING THE ZONING MAP FOR THE PROPERTY AT 1221 NIPOMO FROM HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R4) TO DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL WITH THE MIXED USE COMBINING OVERLAY (C-D-MU),AND; ADDITION OF A MIXED=USE COMBINING OVERLAY TO THE DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL ZONING AT 1213 NIPOMO AND 577 AND 579 MARSH STREETS (C-D=MU); GP/R/ER 160-05 WHEREAS,the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on November 9, 2005 and recommended approval of amendments to the City's Zoning Map; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on December 6, 2005, and has considered testimony of interested parties, the records of the Planning Commission hearing and action, and the evaluation.and recommendation of staff-, and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed revisions are consistent with the General Plan,the purposes of the Zoning Regulations, and other applicable City ordinances; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the property as described in a separate resolution approving the General Plan Map amendment; and BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council finds and determines that the project's Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed project; and reflects the independent judgment of the City Council. The Council hereby adopts said Negative Declaration and incorporates the following mitigation measures into the project: Land Use and Planning 1. To provide a suitable transition to the adjacent High-Density Residential (R-4) property at the comer of Nipomo and Pacific Streets, the future development of this site. which is being redesignated as C-D-MU shall comply with the R4 development standards for height and setbacks. Monitoring"Program: Compliance with this requirement-shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community Development Department staff. Noise 2. The construction of future residential uses shall be accompanied by an acoustical analysis ,(noise study) to ensure that interior spaces and exterior private use areas are designed to 57 -55 Attachment 12 Ordinance No. XXX (2006 Series) Page 2 mitigate noise impacts to levels determined acceptable by the City's General Plan Noise Element. Specific construction details shall be identified as recommendations in the study. Monitoring Program: Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans and the acoustical analysis submitted for architectural review and building permit primarily by the Community Development Department staff._ Transportation/Traffic 3. The applicant shall provide or pay in lieu fees for the fouf additional parking spaces. These four(4) spaces shall not be reduced through shared or mixed-use reductions, or other parking reductions established for the Downtown Commercial zone included in Section 17.42 of the Municipal Code. Monitoring Program: . Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans submitted for building permit primarily by the Community Development Department staff. Parking in-lieu fees shall be paid prior to building permit issuance for the proposed development project if applicable. Parking calculations for redevelopment of this site shall separate the provision of these four parking spaces from the project's other parking requirements so the provision of these spaces are not reduced through shared or mixed-use reductions, or other parking reductions established for the Downtown Commercial zone included in Section 17.42 of the Municipal Code. SECTION 2.. Findings. The City Council makes the following findings: L. The rezonings are consistent with the General Plan text policies and implements Housing Element goals by allowing increased residential density in the downtown. 2. The proposed rezoning of 1221 Nipomo to C-D-MU will increase the residential density allowed on the property, and with the Combing designation will provide a transition from the residential uses to the south to the commercial core. 3. The application of the Mixed-Use combining zone is necessary and appropriate to ensure a residential component is part of any future redevelopment of the properties, and that future projects are compatible with adjacent land uses. 4. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared by the Community Development Department on October 27, 2005. The City Council finds and determines that the project's mitigated 5 —SS o Attachment 12 Ordinance No. XXXX (2006 Series) Page 3 Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed project. SECTION 3. The Zoning Regulations Map Amendment (R 160-05) is hereby approved 8 identified within Exhibit A. SECTION 4. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, . in the Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty(30) days after its final passage. INTRODUCED on the day of , 2005, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the day of 2006, on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: City Clerk Audrey Hooper APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Jonathan Lowell G:UHill\GPA and RZ\Map Amendments\GPS-R 160-05(1221 Nipomo)\GP-R 160.05 CounciKouncil Zoning Ordinance 160-05.doc 5-5- 7 GD ac ment 12 GD Currently. C-D, C-D Proposed C-D-MU D O R Currently R-4, R-2-H GR Proposed C-D-MU PF-H R-4 R-3-H R-2 Zoning_ Map Legend Zoning Boundary M 1221 Nipomo GPR/R/ER 160-05 m 1213 Nipomo, 577 & 597 Marsh S -SFS Attachment 13 RESOLUTION NO. XXXX (2005 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING_ A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1221 NIPOMO,AND;ADDITION OF A COMBINING ZONE TO 1213 NIPOMO AND 577 AND 579 MARSH STREETS,AND; AMENDMENT OF CHAPTER 430,SECTION 4.30.015 OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE TO INCLUDE 1221 NIPOMO IN THE PARKING-IN-LIEU FEE AREA;ER/GP/R 160-05 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on November 9, 2005, and recommended approval of the project; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on December 6, 2005, and has considered testimony of interested parties, the records of the Planning Commission hearing and action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff-, and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the draft Negative Declaration of environmental impact as prepared by staff and reviewed by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner_ required by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. That this Council, after consideration of the amendments to the Land Use Element Map, Zoning Regulations Map, Chapter 4.30, Section 4.30.015 of the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, and environmental review, and considering the Planning Commission's recommendations,staff recommendations, public testimony, and reports thereof, makes the following findings: [Council specifies findings] SECTION 2. Denial. The amendments to the Land Use Element Map, Zoning Regulations Map, and Municipal Code-are hereby denied. On motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: 5-51 Attachment 13 Resolution No.XXXX(2005_Series) Paget ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this_day of , 2005. Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: City Clerk Audrey Hooper APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Jonathan Lowell G:NINAGPA and RZNNap Amendments\GPS-R 160-05(1221 Nipomo)\GP-R 160-05 Council\Council Resolution(Denial) 160-05.doc 5- & o