Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/19/2006, PH2 - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP FOR CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION OF A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT INCLUDING 33 RESIDENTIAL council Da.9 /-7 oc� j ac Enda RepoRt ,tem Numb" T CITY OF SAN LUIS OBI SPO FROM: John Mandeville, Community Development Director Prepared By: Jaime Hill, Associate Planner SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP FOR CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION OF A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT INCLUDING 33 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND THREE COMMERCIAL SPACES AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MARSH AND NIPOMO STREETS (TR/ER 36-06). CAO RECOMMENDATION As recommended by the Planning Commission: 1. Adopt a resolution approving a tentative tract map and Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for a mixed-use project including 33 residential units and three commercial spaces at the southwest comer of Marsh and Nipomo Streets. 2. Grant a 27.5% density bonus and concession to waive the requirement for lockable storage for the nine one-bedroom units, in exchange for provision of 8% of the units as deed restricted for very-low income families (TR/ER 36-06). REPORT-IN-BRIEF The Planning Commission has recommended approval of a tentative tract map, and Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact, and granting a 27.5% density bonus and concession to waive the requirement for lockable storage for the nine 1-bedroom units, for the provision of 8% of the units as affordable to very-low income families. These entitlements are consistent with California State law, which establishes minimum threshold of density bonuses and incentives for construction of affordable units. On August 7, 2006, the Architectural Review Commission granted final approval of the design, determining that the project was well designed and provided an appropriate transition from between commercial downtown uses to the residential areas above. The project is located on the corner of Marsh Street and Nipomo Streets (see Vicinity Map, Attachment 1). Staff is recommending that the City Council approve the resolution, including the environmental determination and the density bonus as contained in Attachment 7. DISCUSSION Background On December 6, 2005, the City Council approved a General Plan Amendment and Rezoning of 1221 Nipomo from High-Density Residential (R-4) to General Retail/Downtown Commercial with the Mixed-Use overlay (C-D-MU), and rezoned the three adjacent parcels from C-D to C- D-MU (Attachment 2, City Council Resolution No. 9751 and Ordinance No. 1488 (2006 Series). The applicant has now submitted project plans for a mixed-use project including a tentative tract Council Agenda Report TR/ER 36-06 (Marpomo) Page 2 map for multiple residential and commercial condominium units. Other entitlements sought include a 27.5% density bonus for providing two very-low income affordable dwellings, a concession to waive the required 200-square feet of lockable storage for residential condominium units for each of the nine one-bedroom units; and environmental review. The Architectural Review Commission (ARC) reviewed this project on August 7, 2006, and granted final approval to the design (Attachment 4). The responsibility of the Planning Commission and City Council is to review the tentative tract map requirements for compliance with the City's Subdivision Regulations and Condominium Regulations, including the requested density bonus and exception, and the applicable General Plan Policies. On August 23, 2006, the Planning Commission reviewed the project and recommended approval of the subdivision map, density bonus and concession, and environmental document to the City Council (Attachment 5). Data Summary Address: 577, 579 Marsh and 1213, 1221 Nipomo Applicant: Bermant Homes Representative: Bruce Buckingham, Bermant Homes Zoning: C-D-MU (Downtown Commercial with a mixed-use overlay) General Plan: General Retail Environmental Status: An initial study of environmental review has been prepared for the project and a Mitigated Negative Declaration was recommended by the Deputy Director of Community Development on August 15, 2006 (Attachment 6). Site Description The project site includes four parcels of approximately 0.65 acres (28,488 square feet) of total land area at the south-west corner of Marsh and Nipomo Streets. The properties are presently developed with several commercial buildings fronting Marsh Street and two residences (including three units) along Nipomo Street which would be demolished. The four parcels will be merged prior to development of the project as part of the condominium map process. Adjacent parcels are developed with a mixture of commercial uses to the north, east, and west, and residential uses to south and south-west. The property slopes upward to the east, rising approximately seven feet from the Marsh Street property line. Vegetation is limited to street trees and other ornamental landscaping in what are now the yards of the residential dwellings. As site coverage will be nearly 93%, all existing vegetation other than street trees will be removed. The property is designated "General Retail" in the General Plan Land Use Element and zoned Downtown Commercial with the Mixed-Use overlay (C-D-MU). Zoning for the surrounding properties is as shown on the attached vicinity map (Attachment 1). Project Description The project includes "build out" of the 0.65-acre site with a mixed-use development including two new structures designed around a courtyard, and above a semi-subterranean parking garage. The commercial component includes three tenant spaces in a total of 6,180 square feet. (It is not �'1;2 I Council Agenda Report TWER 36-06 (Marpomo) Page 3 known at this time if the existing commercial tenants will relocate in the new building or in another location.) The residential component of the project includes 33 dwelling units; 18 two- bedroom flats, nine one-bedroom flats, and six two-bedroom townhomes. Two of the one- bedroom condominiums have been proposed as affordable dwellings at the "very-low" rate, fulfilling the City's Inclusionary Housing Requirement and qualifying the project for a 27.5% density bonus and one concession in accordance with California Senate Bill 435. A semi- subterranean parking podium provides 49 on-site parking spaces for the residential units. The larger building located at the corner of Marsh and Nipomo Streets, contains three levels of residential units above commercial space and parking. A small portion of the building along the Marsh Street frontage, where the residential units are above commercial spaces, reaches four stories. By taking advantage of the natural topography of the site the building remains under 50- feet in height, consistent with the maximum height standards of the C-D zone. Where the building reaches four stories along Marsh Street it is largely set back from the street above the first story to avoid appearing overly massive. Additionally, because of the site's topography and location at the northwest extent of the downtown, prevailing views of the Morros to the northeast are unobstructed. The project takes advantage of this location by utilizing portions of the roof as a common patio area to enable views of the Morros. The smaller of the two buildings, containing the townhomes, is a three story structure containing six multi-story units, each with two bedrooms. Vehicle and pedestrian access to the residential units has been provided from Nipomo Street, where a single driveway accesses the underground parking area which runs beneath most of the site. Structured parking is an efficient way to provide required parking; however, because of the grade change on the site it does add somewhat to the apparent height of the building when viewed from the adjacent property along Marsh Street. (Building height does not exceed 50 feet in any location.) Pedestrian entrances to the residences are provided to the lobby area just south of the intersection, directly to the parking area, and to the podium level near the south end of the site, adjacent to the townhomes. The proposed mixed-use development has been designed in the Mission-style, and includes characteristic details such as vertically-hung and multi-paned windows, arched doorways and decorative windows, awnings, tile work, and building projections. Stucco treatment, detailing, and window types are consistent on all four building elevations of both structures (Project Plans, Attachment 2). Evaluation The Planning Commission has considered each of the project's issue areas prior to making a recommendation of approval on the subdivision and negative declaration of environmental impact to the City Council. The Planning Commission found the subdivision and residential development project to be consistent with General Plan Policy, property development standards and the Subdivision Regulations, and previous Council direction, and therefore recommended approval of the project, as conditioned. A complete review of the issue areas summarized below can be found in the Planning Commission Staff Report(Attachment 5). g Council Agenda Report TR/ER 36-06 (Marpomo) Page 4 1. Previous Council Review The 2005 re-designation of the site as C-D-MU included three mitigation measures: that the portion of the development adjacent to the R4 zone comply with the height and setback standards of that district; that an acoustical analysis be prepared, and; that four additional parking spaces be provided to meet the needs of the additional development permitted by the rezone. With the ARC's approval of a minor street yard reduction, that is within the allowable standards of the R4 zone, the proposed project meets all of Council's requirements for this site's development. The structure adjacent to the R-4 zone is smaller in scale and respects the massing and spacing of adjacent development, a noise study was prepared and specific construction techniques for noise attenuation have been incorporated into the recommended environmental document, and the project exceeds parking standards for the entire project by eighteen spaces. 2. California Senate Bill 435: Affordable Housing To encourage the development of below market rate housing, California Senate Bill 435 was enacted into law establishing a minimum threshold of density bonuses and incentives for construction of affordable units. The applicant has proposed to dedicate two of the one-bedroom units (8% of the dwellings) as affordable dwellings at the "very-low" rate, fulfilling the City's Inclusionary Housing Requirement and qualifying the project for a 27.5%density bonus and one concession. Accordingly, the applicant has requested that the Council waive the requirement for 200-square feet of lockable storage for each of the nine one-bedroom units. Both the ARC and Planning Commission endorsed the granting of this exception, finding that it would help maximize the livable area in these smaller units, while facilitating the development of designated affordable dwellings, and units that are affordable-by-design. The City is obligated to approve the density bonus and the requested concession unless a written finding is made that the concession is not required in order to provide for affordable housing costs or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified, or the concession would have an adverse impact upon public health or safety, the physical environment, any property listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households. 3. General Plan Consistency The project site is designated as "General Retail" in the General Plan Land Use Element (LUE) map and located within the Downtown Commercial Zoning District. The General Plan contains policies on building design, intensity, and the desired character of the downtown, as well policies regarding new housing development. Consistent with several General Plan Land Use Element and Housing Element policies, this plan proposes to more intensely utilize an underdeveloped site that is close to public services,job centers, and transit services. As discussed in the Planning Commission staff report, the project was found to be consistent with Land Use Element Policies 4.16.2, 4.16.4, and 4.16.6, and Housing Element Policies 3.2.1 through 5.2.3. These policies relate to housing, land use efficiency, and design compatibility—including height. �y Council Agenda Report TR/ER 36-06 (Marpomo) Page 5 LUE policy 4.16.4, Building Height, may be of particular interest because the City Council has directed staff to analyze existing height policies. As explained in the attached Planning Commission staff report, LUE Policy 4.16.4 states that buildings in the Downtown should generally be two or three stories (35 to 50 feet). Because the height of stories can vary widely, the measure of height (35 to 50 feet) is a more precise standard to determine consistency with the policy. The height of the proposed structures measure 50 feet or less. The Architectural Review Commission and Planning Commission concluded that the proposed building heights are consistent with the policy. Policy 4.16.4 also states that building height should not block significant views or sunlight, or adversely affect street character. The building height is reduced to 35 feet adjacent to existing residences. Because the property slopes upward in the direction of the existing residences, those residences sit on foundations that are higher and maintain some views even though the proposed adjacent building is 35 feet tall. In this case, shorter buildings are not necessary to protect significant views or sunlight. The applicant has provided a shading analysis that shows only parts of the right-or-way will be shaded by the proposed new buildings. The street character is being addressed through the building architecture. The ARC and the Planning Commission found the proposed buildings to be consistent with the policy. 4. Compliance with Development Standards and Subdivision Regulations As approved by the ARC, the project complies with all of the development standards of the C-D zone, and is consistent with the Council's previous direction. The larger building fronting Marsh Street is 50 feet tall from average natural grade, within three or four stories. The smaller building adjacent to residentially developed R-4 properties has a maximum height of 35 feet, and is stepped back at the upper levels consistent with zoning standards. In both structures a variety of roof forms and articulation reduces the apparent mass of the structures. The project has been designed with 49 vehicle parking spaces, eighteen more than required for the site when credited for the existing development. Lot coverage is 93% where 100% is allowed, and the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is 2.72 where 3.0 is allowed. The FAR of 2.72 includes the fully enclosed parking garage as defined by the City's current Zoning Regulations. As directed by the Council as part of the downtown building height study, the definition of FAR will be revised regardless of the outcome of the building height limits. The revised definition will exclude parking (above and below ground) and basements from the FAR for consistency with planning and architectural practice. Therefore, the project is consistent with the existing and proposed definition of FAR. The project has been designed with 49 spaces, three more than required for the residential units and commercial tenant spaces. Because the property has a credit of 15 off-site spaces (only four of the 19 required spaces for the commercial buildings being demolished were provided on-site), the applicant has proposed to reserve the underground parking for the residents. Like many downtown commercial spaces, there would not be on-site parking provided for employees and customers of the commercial component. City regulations do not mandate the provision of on- site parking in the C-D zone where on-street parking and public structures are intended to meet the demand of downtown businesses. The applicant was required to provide or pay in-lieu fees for four additional parking spaces to meet the needs of the additional units allowed for by the rezone. Since 49 spaces are provided � -s Council Agenda Report TR/ER 36-06 (Marpomo) Page 6 on-site and 46 spaces are required, the project exceeds its requirement by three spaces. With the 15-space credit for prior development, the project technically exceeds requirements by 18 spaces. Therefore the additional four spaces required by the Council as part of the rezone have been accommodated. Unlike the strict standards for condominium projects in residential districts.for private and common open space and recreation facilities, in non-residential zones the review body has the purview to determine what is appropriate for a specific project during the review process. Both the ARC and Planning Commission endorsed the project as designed, with common outdoor areas in the central courtyard at the podium level and a roof deck taking advantage of views to the northwest. These two areas have been enhanced with ornamental landscaping, and a barbeque area and seating on the roof level to encourage residents to congregate and utilize new view opportunities. All of the townhomes and several of the units are also provided with private patio areas. Two requirements of condominium developments which do apply to projects in non-residential zones are for the provision of laundry facilities and for 200 square feet of additional storage per unit, exclusive of that in typical kitchen cabinets and bedroom closets. All of the units provide individual laundry facilities, the majority of which are within generous utility rooms or pantries. As mentioned previously, in accordance with SB 435 the applicant has requested relief from the storage requirement for the nine one-bedroom units. These units, which vary from 692 to 995 square feet (886 square foot average), have been designed to maximize storage by providing two closets in the bedroom and a hall coat closet. Environmental Review The Planning Commission has recommended a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. The initial study has been included as Attachment 6 to this staff report. Next Steps Tract maps are a two-step process made up of a tentative map and a final map. The applicant must satisfactorily complete all conditions of the tentative map before City consideration of the final map. Final maps are brought back to the Council for action on the Consent Calendar. CONCURRENCES The Fire, Building, Utilities and Public Works Departments, Housing Programs Manager, and Public Works Transportation Division all provided memos commenting on the project and providing code requirements and conditions of approval needed to meet department standards, the majority of which pertained to the architectural approval. The remaining conditions, code requirements and other department comments have been incorporated into the recommended action. I Council Agenda Report TR/ER 36-06 (Marpomo) Page 7 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. Accordingly, since the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, it has a neutral fiscal impact. ALTERNATIVES 1. Continue review of the proposed subdivision with specific direction to the applicant. 2. Approve a resolution denying the proposed subdivision, based on findings of inconsistency with the Subdivision Regulations and/or General Plan Policies as specified by the City Council. Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. City Council Resolution No. 9751 (Land Use Map) Ordinance No. 1488 (2006 Series) (Zoning Map) 3. Reduced Size Development Plans 4. ARC follow-up letter and meeting minutes . 5. Planning Commission Resolution,minutes, and agenda report 6. Initial Study of Environmental Impact 7. Draft Resolution approving a mitigated negative declaration and tentative map 8. Draft Resolution denying the project G:VHi11\Subdivisionl36-06 TR(Marpomo)\Council Rpt 1-06.doc 2-7 TOJE& Ll VICINITY MAP File No.36=06 577 & 579 Marsh and 1213 &1221. Nipomo t r Attachment 2 1 RESOLUTION NO.9751 (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,10R.PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1221 NIPOMO STREET; GP 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. The City Council finds and determines that the project's Negative Declaration_adeequately_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 theproject: 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. R 9751 Attachment. 2 Resolution No. 9751 (2005 Series) Page 2 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. 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. TransportaiionJTrafflc 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 mdevelopment-offlus site shall separate t}►e-" 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. Findinim 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: I. The proposed General Plan Amendment and.Rezoning is consistent with General Pian 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) 2 -�Q } Attachment 2 Resolution No.9751 (2005 Series) Page 3 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 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 Council Member Ewan seconded by Council Member Brown, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Council Members Brown, Ewan Mulholland, Vice Mayor Settle and Mayor Romero NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 6`h day of December, 2005. Mayor David F.Romero ATTEST: Audrey Hooper City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jo P.Lowell City Attorney Atta her Retail Existing High-Density Residential, Proposed General Retail General Retail General Retail Gen I Retail Offic High-Densi Reside ial edi_ _Density, General Re es ential igh=D ity Re entl Public Facility Hi h-Density Res ial iu -High D Re id al General Plan Map Legend GPR/R/ER 160-05 ® General Plan Boundary 1221 Nipomo M 1221 Nipomo �� 1 Attachment 2 ORDINANCE NO. 1488(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 MILD USE COMBINING OVERLAY(C-D-MU),AND;ADDITION OF A MIXED-USE COMBINING OVERLAY TO THE DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL ZONING AT 1213 NIPMO AND 577 AND 579 MARSH STREETS (C-D-Min; 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: SEC'T'ION 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 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. 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 01488 ��3 Attachment 2 Ordinance No. 1488(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. Transportahion/T rgfflc 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 Iviunicipal Code. SECTION 2. Findings.The City Council makes the following findings: 1. 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 ` Attach \. ment 2 Ordinance No. 1488 (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 as 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 6th day of December 2006, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the 3d day of:January 2006,on the following roll call vote: AYES: Council Members Brown, Ewan and Mulholland, Vice Mayor Settle and Mayor Romero NOES: None ABSENT: None Mayor David F.Romero ATTEST: Audrey Ho er City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jon an P. Lowell City Attorney �/S • 1 I _ • y�o. �. '6 I • Kw�• �' .- 1 1 1) 1 `(-PYA b `' •x.�. 12 1 �1 A a.2 �,! 1 � 1 z ':•1� ia+3i..rsw t 91.�WN__ 'A: Yp • is i , �� . >a �c,k drys ok��:� .. 2�r .:iia E Yy,l S I 1 / •. pry I S ^� '�� .�r••� - F... �•,nom .. wt i 9:{L��. (QC 99'� 4x6•'5 � _ � `"�' ��.y-y� 1 C `� • it. iP iiFA� , N i ; rt y 1 J 74, or y1 )j '�1`tf f � ' • l � � L J.� i. I�ask��h'?x,�'.,,. x i�.•; �' ix�,. "Fsf a i' i _ " BERA1ANTm.,n.. .. ac men 3 5m MW '2 ^a � N v i , • `1• rte- rl . ; l I � , 1 l t i It taPomosrnEer �7 l -------------------------- , r � flt - ! gr74fr ( v :e7 e_ a e 5P � § $ i � � tg $ T 8 $ !� $j f-y�dpsr&�� fP� i �_ r$ � i ► # � € � p � [#€ E t6 P F a ; r t 4 �B6 f I ! }`g€ S s. B � a Imam CM p g p p as (€! �aEa91i81'1a9 €S iS a ms,oe eb Plr,6 rrgw Om "" t Pelkefi Group a a,e: e. 000w,o, ®jos am Archkee45,LLP osss.moe � � mn: BrMmnaHme 1 ,avwh..a.aa.ser uam wotrua®xxm.w wwna Attachment I D a i O� 1 — _ — 17j � � 3 an C � _ a ® ® f® ref rt( 16 I i i G ;r - - _ :Ala - V la i Nl;MMo St amultl Ft. QMdhpPl.n "p PelkellGro w: wn: 4: omwnlc. .os. a I f '"°cn Mash h Mpom Mixed Use Arohkects.LLP wm O l acre: gryaq,p�,vp � , wPa M4�l.em4enuale, MfK:4AlOMO F.VC�ML14 4wV�1S Attac ment ER 15 s i ®+1, -- o LLD[ ;PEI LP I tot= PEI F r { r _ , d I � ' r . r ®r� Df I - 0 d -------- _ _ =-=--=- - ;-,- ,(� I NlpomoSt N + a �q s.WmFba,rm, Nx vN :. oomn4, NNS. yr' � i "s �, � . Pelken Group wre N NN6�: Marsh a-Npomo Mbced Use r•,';�a,,`g, p Nehkeots,LLP 05252aoa O y •b. NF�IITNY.a YiYYOwtl.YN, _ ll uuTT��rr N\YIYMOO NRNYOI:N- NIYNM: e o 00 0 0 © o0 Mml uji M. c ORO ONE CHO - ---_-� L-- _ - l - ��\`-■\'■. .. ..• - hHIM \\ I I _ a I' a it r I' r Ell e t j El ' I - I t ( - I ; c:1 ...... ........ -- - _ ! j u t - 0 t t I a L '--------- - -- �- - -- - -- - - ' _ -� - f_J - I � ' I I I I I I I I o b o b o bb bb D N r� a aw�ne Fano,RoorMan PeIk9rt.LL Marsh&Mportq Mixod Use ArChtteCts.LLP O � aaar: BwnrNflornn wocamavm»xm.�» »na: 8 0 OO O 00 00 O O `---_-= i! V H + SUM _ - - - irlri irM4t11•i•Mi i:•f•i1ii•NI1Ii•f 11 e :rtiq.:.....ti:if` .•rl•.,.J.I.,r rrl.ln. ..I.,•JJ. - Lilll�nla:;;:,�'I:I:1••••I•r;•I [i{ _____________ _ci}S LSi4ii�. _{{[E±i[ii1:43%1;;r",If;;1 A�;ai _____= I;;I:::II17 ::it17$l i:'I;il ;.;I;7ty: __-_ -- •c-•:t .�F HCH1 ";{L--- B t rj F r L { { i 1 ill ; It eli Ia llai :zF F] N�lpl I Itl 1lt tfhtii.iiltS t i :MMM2 r h 5 } -- nz I 11111 I L 1 Ed::crciS S G-.3 _ i i :i 3i •• itl, ".i:u�' —= ----'--=iissSi _::[r._=__ _ it • �m iF Q ,..•.. O p • ■I vF r 9 T ip � �I•�� �'i I _ IIS• �_�: � .Y ,� rl i. C i r r , y i t y y f1 t i '� �e•1 �,��,' � - iti F � f 1 if 1 1 .r: ® .. . O p e r ttltmkl � tttt / —_ ••. l � �. �. ...��,,.� mfr — i HEE rmvi \\ �I VIN"' t F 13- I I — = n I �Yif�ll � ® e - OCItMANilnii: � �� ..�. � Attachment 3 `F N roSmQ�y. N t k p _ I I I I 1c I I I I I I li I i I � I i II I I I I i I I I I I I I j it j I ! I I � I , --+,- -- - ------� I i 1, I I l I I t I I I I I I I I i i i I i I I I I I D � ' . asiia� ed�eRtlon Pelkert Gmv ArchyR (� nacr: Mereh8 Mp0m0 Mbced Use �•,'$••� Architects,LLP osa.xose J ' enlnYe Xamm m.rR�v�..Less.n Gmm _ lloCni.m acea,onr neva! I I i� �Et f4n Mh 'Fps Chi( Lx 's��ki°��43tr� �iK"r`1agfs2�u -el yM4�sY} 1 t 1 i i7p i7 XA 1 EDAM � 4 C f � d� Ilk l � I -- Attachment 4 I�����IIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIII �II�IIIIIIII � r,�,; . II IIIIII III j Cly. or SM lui OBSPO . Community Development Department•919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 August 9, 2006 REVISED Bruce Buckingham Bermant Homes 5383 Hollister Avenue #150 Santa Barbara, CA 93111 SUBJECT: ARC 36-06: 577 & 579 Marsh Street and 1213 & 1221 Nipomo Street Review of a mixed-use project; 33 residential units and 6,200 square feet of commercial space Dear Mr. Buckingham: The Architectural Review Commission, at its meeting of August 7, 2006, granted final approval to your project, based on the following findings, and subject to the following conditions, and code requirements: Findings 1. The project, with the recommended conditions and modifications, complies with property development standards for the C-D zone and mitigation measures included in Council Resolution 9751 (2005 Series). 2._ The proposed Mixed-use project,_including_the_27.5%o density. bonus will not harm the public health, safety and welfare, as the project has been designed in consistency with City standards and codes. 3. The scale and design of the project will be compatible with surrounding commercial and residential developments. 4. The proposed street yard setback reduction from 15 feet to 10 feet along Nipomo Street for the townhouse structure will not be a grant of special privilege, an entitlement inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning, because the exception is minor in nature and necessary for the development of the site given the natural topography and exiting requirements. 5. The project, with the recommended conditions, is consistent with the City's General Plan, the City's Zoning Regulations and the Community Design Guidelines. Conditions 1. Final project design and construction drawings shall be in substantial compliance with the project plans as amended and approved by the ARC. 0 .;�� The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. Attachment 4 ARC 36-06 I IT Page P 2. Include a separate full-size sheet in working drawings submitted for a building permit that list all conditions, mitigation measures and code requirements of project approval as Sheet No. 2. Reference should be made in the margin of listed items as to where in plans requirements are addressed. 3. Interior noise mitigation measures recommended in project noise study dated June 9, 2006, shall be included in project documents submitted for construction permits. These include: a. The walls, doors and windows of units that face Marsh Street shall be constructed to include sufficient noise attenuation to reduce interior levels to a CNEL of 45 dBA. This would require at a minimum the use of double-paned windows on all floors for those windows that face Marsh Street. b. Windows shall have a minimum Standard Transmission Class (STC) of 35 and be properly installed, weather-stripped, and insulated. c. Doors with a minimum STC of 35 shall be used for doorways facing Marsh Street and shall be insulated in conformance with California Title 24 requirements. d. The exterior wall facing material shall be stucco and/or shall be designed for a minimum STC of 45. e. Roof or attic vents facing Marsh Street shall be baffled. f:---Air-conditioning-or a mechanical ventilation-system shall-be offered-to potential home buyers so that windows and doors may remain closed to reduce interior noise to the extent possible. Public Works —Transportation 4. Peak Racks (Peakracks.com) or inverted "U" racks may be used for short-term bicycle parking (ribbon racks are not permitted). Building plans shall include details including rack design and location, area bikes will be take up when parked in the racks, clearances from walls, etc. and circulation for users in compliance with the manufacturer's standards. The general dimension of a bicycle is two-feet in width and six-feet in length. 5. The stairwell accessing the long-term bicycle parking shall include a minimum six- inch wide ramp for bicycles to be rolled on. 6. Through the encroachment permit process, the applicant shall be responsible for making any physical changes (signing and striping) to on-street parking resulting from the project. a -� Attachment 4 ARC 36-06 _ Page 3 7. The seating wall proposed at the corner of Marsh and Nipomo Streets shall be enlarged to provide additional seating. B. The applicant may propose replacing the existing bus stop bench and trash can on the project's Nipomo Street frontage with materials that are more aesthetically compatible with the project design. The upkeep of any non-standard features becomes the responsibility of the development, and not the City. The applicant may also propose to offer a pedestrian easement so the bus stop bench can be located at the project's building face rather than in the public sidewalk. 9. Site visibility shall be maintained at the parking garage exit. Public Works and Site/Grading 10. Site drainage shall be directed to the existing 24" RCP Stormdrain.in Marsh Street in lieu of the proposed sidewalk underdrain. Prior to discharge to the City's Stormdrainage facilities, the stormwater shall be treated in accordance with Section 10106-Water Quality of the City's Engineering Standards. 11. All new curb, gutter, and sidewalk, and driveway approach shall be constructed in accordance with City Engineering Standards and Standard Specifications. 12. The existing curb ramp at Marsh and Nipomo shall be replaced to comply with current City and ADA standards. 13. The drainage plans for accepting historic offsite drainage shall be consistent with .__._ .. the Hydrology and Hydraulics Report. Private drainage-easements shall-offered-to the upstream properties for drainage and maintenance of the drainage system of which they are beneficiaries. Urban Forester 14. The building or improvement plan submittal shall show all existing trees on the property with a trunk diameter of 3" or greater. Offsite trees along the adjoining property.lines with canopies and/or root systems that extend onto the property shall be shown for reference. The plan shall note which trees are to remain and which trees are proposed for removal. Include the diameter and species of all trees. Tree canopies should generally be shown to scale for reference. Tree removals may require approval by the City Arborist. The plan shall show all existing and proposed street trees. 15. The building or improvement plan submittal shall show all existing street trees located along the property frontage. The plan shall include the diameter and species of all trees. Tree canopies should generally be shown to scale for reference. A construction staging plan or construction phasing notes shall be 136 Attachment 4 ARC 36-06 Page 4 provided on the site plan to clarify whether the addition, work on the fagade, and/or work at the roof level will require safety pruning of the existing street trees. 16. One 15-gallon street tree may be required for each 35 lineal feet of frontage. The City Arborist shall approve the tree species, planting requirements, and whether the street trees shall be planted in tree, wells in the sidewalk area or behind the back of walk in the front yard. Contact City Arborist Ron Combs at 781-7023 for specific questions or requirements and to evaluate any existing trees. 17. New street tree plantings located in a sidewalk area shall be in tree wells in accordance with city engineering standard #8130 which includes a ductile cast iron tree grate. 18. Tree protection measures shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Arborist. The City Arborist shall review and approve the proposed tree protection measures prior to commencing with any demolition, grading, or construction. The City Arborist shall approve any safety pruning, the cutting of substantial roots, or grading within the dripline of trees. A city-approved arborist shall complete safety pruning. Any required tree protection measures shall be shown or noted on the building plans. Contact the City Arborist at 781-7023 to review and to establish any required preservation measures to be included with the building permit submittal.. 19. Where tree protection measures are required, they shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Arborist prior to commencing with any demolition, trenching, or construction. The City Arborist shall approve any safety pruning or the cutting of substantial roots. Contact the City Arborist at 781-7023 at least 48 hours prior to construction in areas where tree protection and inspection is required. Include this - — --note -on--all plans- and-specs-pertaining--to-the scope-of -work--for- this-project-if applicable. Code Requirements The following.code requirements are included for information purposes only. They serve to give the applicant a general idea of other City requirements that will apply to the project. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list as other requirements may be identified during the plan check process. Utilities 1. Water meters shall be configured, in accordance with the City's current adopted engineering standards. 2. Sewer backwater valves shall be designed in conformance with the City of San Luis Obispo criteria and Uniform Plumbing Code. o'Z _3 Attachment 4 ARC 36-06 Page 5 Public Works 3. An encroachment permit will be required from the Public Works Department for any work or construction staging in the public right-of-way. 4. A traffic control plan and/or pedestrian control plan shall be approved prior to encroachment permit issuance for work in the public right-of-way. 5. Any sections of damaged or displaced curb, gutter & sidewalk or driveway approach shall be repaired or replaced to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. 6. This project is located within the Mission Style Sidewalk District of downtown. Any new or replacement driveway approach, curb ramp, curb, gutter, and/or sidewalk shall be installed in the Mission Style per city standard #4220. 7. The parking lot design shall comply with the parking and driveway standards and Engineering Standard Section 2010.E.7. All parking spaces must be designed so that vehicles can enter in one maneuver. Furthermore, all spaces shall be designed so that vehicles can exit to the adjoining street in a forward direction in not more than two maneuvers. 8. The existing sewer lateral(s) shall abandoned per City Standards in favor of the proposed, shared lateral located along the low side of the property to serve the existing and new structures. An accessible backwater valve will be required on the building sewers for each structure in accordance with the UPC and CBC. -- 9. -The final -plan for this- proposed subdivision-shall comply with the .Waterway Management Plan, Volume III, Drainage Design Manual. The improvement plan submittal shall include an updated hydrologic and hydraulic analysis report. based on the amount of pervious surface proposed with the final plan. The building or improvement plan submittal shall include erosion control measures in accordance with Section 10.0 of the manual and stormwater quality management in accordance with Engineering Standard Section 1010.8. 10. This property is located in an AO (2' depth) Flood Zone-, the water surface or base flood elevation (BFE) of a 100-yr storm is 2' above adjacent grade. The structures must be raised or floodproofed to an elevation that is at least one foot above the BFE or 3' above the highest adjacent grade. Additional freeboard to 2' above the BFE may result in additional savings on flood insurance and is encouraged. The 11. All elevations must be based on a City Bench. Mark and noted per City datum elevations. The {dans shall note the benchmark number, location and elevation. Include a clear description of the benchmark referenced on the plans. The plans shall clarify whether the NGVD 29 or NAVD 88 datum is being used. The Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) is based on the NGVD 29. The building plans shall a -3a ARC 36-06 Attachment 4 Page 6 include topographical information prepared by a licensed surveyor or engineer. 12. All utilities, including but not limited to gas, electrical panels, telephone panels, sewer laterals, water service, fire service, and utility conduits entering the structure must be sealed to preclude infiltration of floodwater. Building service equipment such as . electrical services, water heaters, forced air units, heat pumps or condensing units shall be elevated or otherwise protected by floodgates. Sewer backwater valves shall also comply with the California Plumbing Code. 13. Prior to building plan approval the engineer/architect shall submit elevation and/or floodproofirig certificates based on the construction drawings and prior to occupancy the final certificates shall be submitted. The decision of the Commission is final unless appealed to the City Council within 10 days of the action. Any person aggrieved by the decision may file an appeal. Appeal forms are available in the City Clerk's office, or on the City's website (www.slocity.org). The fee for filing an appeal is $100.00, and must accompany the appeal documentation. While the City's water allocation regulations are in effect, the Architectural Review Commission's approval expires after three years if construction has not started, unless the Commission designated a different time period. On request, the Community Development Director may grant a single one-year extension.. If you have questions, please contact Jaime at 781-7165. Sincerely, fa � cC-i Pa Ricci, Al P Senior Planner Community Development cc: County of SLO Assessor's Office BDC Marpomo LLC 5383 Hollister Avenue Santa Barbara, CA 93111-2304 Attachment 4 ' ARC Minutes August 7, 2006 Page 3 3. 577 8.579 Marsh Street and 1213 8 1221 Nipomo Street =flteview of a mixed use project; 33 residential units and 6,200 square feet of commercial space; C-D zone; Bernard Homes, applicant. (Jaime Hill) Associate Planner Jaime Hill presented the staff report, recommending final approval to the project, based on findings and subject to conditions and code requirements. Detlev Peikert and Scott Hopkins, architects for the applicant, presented the Commission with a slide presentation, in addition to samples of tile, roof materials and paint colors. Carol Viera of FIRMA, landscape architect for the project, described the placement and size of the potted plants and trees used to break up the visual mass of the structure and provide shade. John Campanelia, applicant, was available for questions. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr: Lopes asked if the project meets the City's height standards and voiced concern with the loss of commercial space, and the privacy of the residents on Pacific Street. Commrs. Root and Hopkins expressed support for the project and discussed planters/pots and their drainage. Commr. Palazzo asked for clarification regarding the elevations of the project and adjoining residences. On motion by Commr. Hopkins to grant final approval based on findings and subiect to conditions and code requirements recommended by staff. Seconded by Commr. Palazzo. AYES: Commrs. Hopkins and Palazzo NOES: Commr. Lopes ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Commrs. Howard, Wilhelm,Chair Boudreau Commissioner Lopes voted against the motion due to concerns about neighborhood compatibility, the location/lack of screening of the gas meters, the minimal height of the patio Walls to the rear of the townhomes, and due to desire for additional setbacks on the second and third stories of the Nipomo Street elevation. a �7 Attachment 4 f ARC Minutes „� { August 7, 2006 Page 4 The motion carried on a 3:1 vote. 4. 899 Higuera_ Street. ARC 79-06; Review of a facade remodel to a downtown building; C-D-H zone; Copeland's Properties, applicant. (Jaime Hill) At the request of the applicant, the project was continued to the next regularly scheduled meeting on August 21, 2006. Because there was no one from the public wishing to speak on the item, it was continued without discussion. COMMENT & DISCUSSION: 5. Staff: A. Agenda Forecast Pam Ricci provided a forecast of items expected on the next meeting agenda. She noted that there would be two other items in addition to the Tumbling Waters and Apple items, but that they were small residential projects that the ARC had previously reviewed. B. Memorandum — Ballot Measure Campaign Guidelines for Elected Officials and Advisory Body Members. — Pam Ricci reiterated the restrictions for advisory body members in terms of their discussion of the ballot measure. C. 2007 Calendar — Pam Ricci pointed out that the regularly scheduled meeting dates in January 2007 both fell on holidays. She suggested that the ARC meet on the second and fourth Mondays in January instead. The Commission agreed to this, but Commr. Lopes noted that the fourth Monday in January ---would-conflict with-the free-Committee meeting. - - - - 6. Commission: A. Minutes: July 17, 2006 The minutes of July 17, 2006 were approved as submitted. B. Recent Project Review— Lessons Learned Commr. Lopes noted that the photographs in the agenda packet were overly dark to the point of being illegible. Pam Ricci she would talk to support staff to discuss it with the printers. The Commission again voiced their frustrations with the windows being blocked off for the Sephora tenant improvement in the Court Street project. They suggested that the white windows be darkened if possible so that they did not stand out as prominently. Commr. Root mentioned that the Carroll Building at 969 Monterey Street looked very attractive and that he really liked the look of the aged brick. He also mentioned that he had been contacted by neighbors on Grove Street regarding their concerns with the Attachmant 5 RESOLUTION NO. 5461-06 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTATL IMPACT FOR RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS IN A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MARSH AND NIPOMO STREETS; . TR/ER 36-06 (TRACT 2842) 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 August 23, 2006, for the purpose of considering application TR/ER 36-06, a request to allow a residential and commercial airspace condominium subdivision; and WHEREAS, said public hearing was for the purpose of formulating and forwarding recommendations to the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo regarding the project; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for the project;and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. 1. The proposed tentative tract map is consistent with the General Plan, including Land Use Element Policies 4.16.2, 4.16.4, and 4.16.6, and Housing Element Policies 3.2.1 and 5.2.3, because the subdivision will provide for commercial development at the street level with multiple upper level residential units. 2. The site is physically suited for the proposed type of development because it is an under- developed site that is adjacent to an existing street right-of-way. 3. As conditioned, the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development because the site is within an existing City block, services are available to serve the development, and utilities have been designed to serve the site per City standards. 4. The design of the subdivision, or the type of improvements, is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat because the site does not have any creeks or other potentially significant habitat areas for fish or wildlife. a 36 �,- --� Attachment 5 TR/ER 36-06 Resolution#5461-06 Page 2 5. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, is not likely to cause serious public health problems because the type of improvements are appropriate for the urban location will be designed to meet existing building and safety codes. 6. The design of the subdivision, or the type of improvements, will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision because no such easements exist. 7. The 27.5% density bonus is not a grant of special privilege or an entitlement inconsistent with the limitation upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning because 8% of the residential units (two dwellings) will be reserved for very low income levels. 8. The granting of relief from providing storage space required by the Subdivision Regulations for nine of the residential units is consistent with the standards of SB 435, and will facilitate the development of designated affordable dwellings and dwellings that are affordable-by- design. 9. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared by the Community Development Department on August 15, 2006. The Planning Commission finds and determines that the project's Mitigated Negative Declaration adequately identifies that there is no foreseeable potential for significant environmental impacts by the proposed project. SECTION 2. Action. The Commission hereby recommends approval of the tentative tract map for three commercial _. ._spaces-and.33-residential units and-adoption-of-said-Mitigated-Negative Declaration-(TR/ER-36_- — - 06), with incorporation of the following project conditions: 1. An affordable housing agreement consistent with the draft affordable housing proposal, shall be submitted for review and approval of the Community Development Director prior to proceeding to the City Council. 2. The final map shall indicate common and private open space areas, and the CC&R's shall describe maintenance of all common areas. 3. The applicant shall pay Park In-Lieu Fees prior to recordation of the Final Map, consistent with SLO Municipal Code Section 16.40.080. 4. Pursuant to Govemment Code Section 66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this subdivision, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review. 37 r� Attachment 5 TR/ER 36-06 Resolution#5461-06 Page 3 5. Subdivider shall prepare conditions, covenants, and restrictions (CC&R's) to be approved by the Community Development Director and City Attorney prior to finalmap approval. CC&R's shall contain the following provisions: a. All owners and occupants shall receive disclosure regarding the adjacent food services and restaurants and potential exposure to food production smoke and odors. b. Creation of a homeowners' association to enforce the CC&R's and provide for professional, perpetual maintenance of all common areas including private driveways, drainage, on-site sewer facilities, parking lot areas, walls and fences, lighting, and landscaping. c. Grant to the City the right to maintain common areas if the homeowners' association fails to perform, and to assess the homeowners' association for expenses incurred, and the right of the city to inspect the site at mutually agreed times to assure conditions of CC&R's and final map are being met. d. No parking except in approved, designated,spaces. e. Grant to the City the right to tow away vehicles on a complaint basis which are parked in unauthorized places. f. No storage of boats, campers, motorhomes, or trailers nor long-term storage of inoperable vehicles. __g. No outdoor-storage-by individual-units_except_in designated-storage areas... h. No change in City-required provisions of the CC&R's without prior City Council approval. i. Homeowners' association shall file with the City Clerk the names and addresses of all officers of the homeowners' association within 15 days of any change in officers of the association. j. CC&R's shall not prohibit location of solar clothes drying facilities on private patios which are substantially screened from view. Code requirements: The following code requirements are included for information purposes only. They serve to give the applicant a general idea of other City requirements that will apply to the project. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list as other requirements may be identified during the plan check process. 1. The map shall be recorded prior to building permit issuance in accordance with the City's subdivision regulations and the Subdivision Map Act. � ^38" Attachrr,ent 5 TR/ER 36-06 Resolution#5461-06 Page 4 2. Public improvements required as a condition, code requirement, or mitigation measure may be shown on a separate plan and approved prior to building permit issuance. Said improvements may be completed or a bond posted for their completion to allow for recordation of the map prior to the- completing of all required and/or proposed improvements. 3. The required improvements may be processed as required for Tract maps or may be processed under an encroachment permit at the discretion of the City Engineer. If an encroachment permit is used to complete all improvements, then a separate plan review fee shall be established based on the requirements for subdivisions. Depending on the proposed timing for map recordation and building permit issuance, a completion guarantee may be required per City standards. 4. The provisions of Section 16.20.220 of the Subdivision Regulations are applicable to any public improvements and generally those improvements that may have a direct impact on public improvements as determined by the City Engineer. 5. Traffic impact fees shall be paid for this development prior to building permit issuance. Credit for removal of the existing buildings will be applied based on the use of the existing development. Credit will only be applied to permanent, lawfully existing structures. 6. An encroachment permit will be required from the Public Works Department for any work or construction staging in the public right-of-way. 7. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private utilities, accesses drainage;common-driveways; and-maintenance-of the-sarre-shall-be shown on the final map or recorded separately prior to map recordation if applicable. 8. All wire utilities to the new units shall be underground. 9. Underground electrical service may be provided from the existing overhead system-provided at the rear of the property. The owner/applicant shall secure any necessary easements required to extend services to this development. 10. Any sections of damaged or displaced curb, gutter& sidewalk or driveway approach shall be repaired or replaced to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director prior to recordation of the map. 11. The existing street pavement shall be maintained in good repair during construction. The final pavement condition shall be evaluated at the completion of the project for excessive wear or damage resulting from construction operations. Pavement repairs and a slurry seal may be required per city standards if determined as being necessary by the City Engineer. 12. The existing curb grades shall be verified as being consistent with the approved street grades. If it is determined that the curb and gutter has settled to unacceptable limits, then they shall be restored to curb and gutter elevations approved by the City Engineer. Any new ;z X39 Attachment 5 TR/ER 36-06 Resolution#5461-06 Page 5 curb grade plans shall be prepared by a licensed engineer and shall be the responsibility of the owner/developer. 13. The subdivider shall dedicate a 6' (2m) wide public utility easement and a 10' (3m) wide street tree easement across the frontage of each lot. Said easements shall be adjacent to and contiguous with all public right-of-way lines bordering each lot. 14. A private sewer mainline may be proposed in-lieu of separate sewer laterals for each unit. If proposed or required by the Utilities Director, the on-site sewer main shall be privately owned and maintained by the Homeowner's Association. 15. A maintenance agreement for the sewer, paving, landscape improvements, and any other common improvements shall be recorded prior to or concurrent with the map recordation. 16. The parking lot design shall comply with the parking and driveway standards and Engineering Standard Section 2010.E.7. All parking spaces must be designed so that vehicles can enter in one maneuver. Furthermore, all spaces shall be designed so that vehicles can exit to the adjoining street in a forward direction in not more than two maneuvers. 17. The demolition of the existing building shall comply with all local, state, and federal requirements for the demolition of structures. 18. A preliminary soils report is required in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City of San Luis Obispo Subdivision Regulations. The report is required at the time of -----tentative-map submittal or if approved may-be-deferred to map recoi=dation--The report shall be referenced on the final map in accordance with the city's Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act. 19. This project shall comply with the requirements for engineered grading in accordance with the grading ordinance. The grading, drainage, and erosion control plans shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer. 20. The building plan submittal shall include a complete grading, drainage and topo plan. The grading plan shall show existing structures and grades located within 15' of the property lines in accordance with the grading ordinance. The plan shall consider historic offsite drainage tributary to this property that may need to be conveyed along with the improved on-site drainage. This development will alter and/or increase the storm water runoff from this site. The improved or altered drainage shall be directed to the street and not across adjoining property lines unless the drainage is conveyed within recorded easements or existing waterways. 21. The grading and drainage plan shall show the existing and proposed contours and/or spot elevations to clearly depict the proposed grading and drainage. Show and label the high point elevation or grade break at the yard areas, drainage arrows; and spot elevations to show positive drainage away from the building pads and foundations to an approved point of a �yo Attachment 5 TR/ER 36-06 Resolution#.5461-06 Page 6 disposal. The plan shall include the FF of the units, finish grade elevations, finish surface elevations, and parking lot drainage. 22. The building plan submittal shall include an erosion control plan and erosion control notes in accordance with the Waterway Management Plan Drainage Design Manual and to the satisfaction of the Building Official and Public Works Director. Erosion control measures shall be implemented and maintained for construction occurring between October 15 and April 15. 23. One 15-gallon street tree is required for each 35 lineal feet of frontage. A portion or all the required street trees shall be planted in the parkway per city engineering standards #8010 and #8230 prior to recordation of the map. The remaining street trees shall be planted within the street tree easement area. The final mix of species and tree locations shall'be approved to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Arborist. 24. The proposed street trees and any parkway landscaping shall be installed and maintained by the HOA. The final planting plan for the parkway and onsite landscape areas shall consider the required line-of-sight distances for vehicles exiting onto Nipomo. Mapping and Misc. Requirements 1. The improvement plans, final map preparation and monumentation shall be in accordance with the City's Subdivision.Regulations, Engineering Standards, and the Subdivision Map Act. The parcel map/final map may use Customary U.S. Units or the International System of Units (metric system). All record data shall be entered on the map in the record units, -----metric-translations should.be.in-parenthesis if applicable. . . 2. The public improvement plans and specifications shall use the International System of Units (metric system). Customary U.S. Units (English units) may be used as the primary unit as long as dual units are provided in accordance with the current Engineering Standards. On motion by Commissioner Christianson, seconded by Commissioner Carter, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commrs. Christianson, Carter, Ashbaugh,Brown, McCoy, and Chairwoman Miller NOES: Commr. Stevenson REFRAIN: None ABSENT: None The f, egoingresolution was passed and adopted this 23`d day of August, 2006. DoVg Davi son, Secretary Planning Commission G:MIRSubdivision36-06 TR(Marpomo)\PC reso 36-06.doc -q/ ATTACHMENT " DRAFT SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 23, 2006 CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Charles Stevenson, John Ashbaugh, Peter Brown, Andrew Carter, Jason McCoy, Vice-Chair Carlyn Christianson and Chairperson Andrea Miller Absent: None Staff: Deputy Director Doug Davidson, Associate Planner Jaime Hill, Assistant City Attorney Christine Dietrick, and Recording Secretary Jill Francis ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA: Commissioners or staff may modify the order of items. The agenda was accepted as written. MINUTES: Minutes of August 9, 2006. The minutes of August 9, 2006 were approved as submitted. PUBLIC COMMENT: There were no comments made from the public. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. 577 & 579 Marsh. Street and 1213 & 1221 Nigomo Street. TR and ER 36-06; Review of a tentative tract map for an airspace condominium subdivision including 33 residential units and 3 commercial units, and environmental review; C-D zone; Bermant Homes, applicant. (Jaime Hill) Associate Planner Jaime Hill presented the staff report, recommending the Commission adopt a resolution recommending approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and tentative tract map to the City Council. Staff gave a brief presentation explaining the Condominium Subdivision Regulations, and State Law 435 regarding the density bonus and concession. The applicant team then walked the Commission through the development, explaining the building design, layout, and parking. Detlev Peikert, Peikert Group Architects, described the project with graphics. Scott Hopkins, Peikert Group Architects, went into further detail on the project. ,:,Q , 4a- Planning Commission Minutes �— ATTACHMENT S August 23, 2006 Page 2 PUBLIC COMMENTS: Ernie Martin, San Luis Obispo, expressed general concerns about the height of buildings in the downtown, maintaining views to the mountains, compatibility of architecture with the Old Town area, and the increasing parking problems on Pacific, Buchon, and Islay Streets. He also expressed that he felt that this project was well designed. There were no further comments made from the public. COMMISSION.COMMENTS: The Commission discussed a variety of issues, including the term and tenure of the affordable units, parking, and property development standards. Commr. Ashbaugh focused on the height and mass of the project, and recommended that the owners of the commercial tenant spaces be awarded parking on-site. Commr. Brown had questions about the location of the transit stop on Nipomo, and recommended that additional long-term bike storage for the residents be provided on the ground level. Commr. Stevenson felt that the smoke generated by the Old Country Deli should have been addressed in the environmental document, that there should be additional commercial space, potentially on the Nipomo frontage, and that the upper story should have an additional setback. Commrs. Carter, McCoy, Christianson, and Chairwoman Miller all expressed that this is an appropriate location for a project of this type and scale, that it includes many features that we should be encouraging, such as underground parking for residents, and that it seems well designed.. On motion. by Commr. Christianson recommending approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and tentative tract map, including the 27.5% density bonus and concession to waive the requirement for lockable storage for the nine 11- bedroom units to the City Council as recommended by staff, adding a condition that owners and occupants.receive a disclaimer about adjacent food services and the airborne smoke and odors that they create. Seconded by Commr.-Carter. AYES: Gommrs. Ashbaugh, Christianson, McCoy, Carter, Brown, and Miller NOES: Commr. Stevenson ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None The motion carried on a 6:1 vote Commr. Stevenson voted no due to concern about the ratio of residential to commercial floor area, the reduction of commercial floor area on the site, and concern with the adequacy of the mitigated negative declaration concerning the effect of smoke to sensitive receptors. Attachment 5 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT ITEM#2 BY: Jaime Hill, Associate Planner(781-7165) MEETING DATE: August 23, 2006 FROM: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director(Development Review) FILE NUMBER: TR/ER 36-06 PROJECT ADDRESS: 1221 Nipomo SUBJECT: Review of a tentative tract map for residential and commercial air-space condominium units, including a 27.5% density bonus and an exception to the Subdivision Regulations, and the associated Mitigated Negative Declaration. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution recommending approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and tentative tract map to the City Council. BACKGROUND Situation On December 6, 2005, the City Council approved a General Plan Amendment and Rezoning of 1221 Nipomo from R-4 to C-D-MU, and rezoning of the remaining three parcels from C-D to C- D-MU, to facilitate the development of a mix=use project (Attachment 3, City Council — ---Resolution No-9751 and-Ordinance No. 1488 (2006 Series)). The applicant has now submitted project plans for a mixed-use project including a tentative tract map for multiple residential and commercial condominium units. Other entitlements requested include a 27.5% density bonus for providing two very-low affordable dwellings, a concession to waive the 200-square feet of lockable storage required for residential condominium units for the nine one-bedroom units, and environmental review. The Architectural Review Commission (ARC) reviewed this project on August 7, 2006, and granted final approval to the design. The responsibility of the Planning Commission and City Council is to review the tentative tract map requirements for compliance with the Subdivision Regulations and the City's Condominium Regulations, including the requested density bonus and exception, and the applicable General Plan Policies. Data Summary Address: 577, 579 Marsh and 1213, 1221 Nipomo Applicant: Bermant Homes Representative: Bruce Buckingham, Bermant Homes Zoning: C-D-MU (Downtown Commercial with a mixed-use overlay) General Plan: General Retail Environmental Status: An initial study of environmental review has been prepared for the project and staff has determined that the project will result in less than significant � -yy - A*tachment TR/ER 36-06 (Marpomo) Page 2 impacts when developed in accordance with the recommended Negative Declaration(Attachment 5). Site Description The project site includes four parcels of approximately 0.65 acres (28,488 square feet) of total land area at the south-west comer of Marsh and Nipomo Streets. The properties are developed with several commercial buildings fronting Marsh Street and two residences (including three units) along Nipomo Street which would be demolished. The four parcels will be merged prior to development of the project as part of the condominium map process. Adjacent parcels are developed with a mixture of commercial uses to the north, east, and west, and residential uses to south and south-west. The property slopes upward to the east, rising approximately 7 feet from the Marsh Street property line. Vegetation is limited to street trees and other ornamental landscaping in what are now the yards of the residential dwellings. As site coverage will be nearly 93%, all existing vegetation other than street trees will be removed. The property is designated "General Retail" in the General Plan Land Use Element and zoned Downtown Commercial with the Mixed-Use overlay(C-D-MU). Project Description The project includes "build out" of the 0.65-acre site with a mixed-use development including two new structures designed around an courtyard, above a semi-subterranean parking garage. The residential component of the project includes 33 dwelling units; 18 two-bedroom flats, nine one- bedroom flats, and six two-bedroom townhomes. Two of the one-bedroom condominiums have been proposed as affordable dwellings_at the "very-low" rate, fulfilling the City's Inclusionary____ Housing Requirement and qualifying the project for at 27.5% density bonus in accordance with Senate Bill 435. A semi-subterranean parking podium provides 49 on-site parking spaces. The larger building located at the corner of Marsh and Nipomo Streets, contains three levels of residential units above commercial space and parking. A small portion of the building along the Marsh Street frontage, where the residential units are above commercial spaces, reaches four stories. However, by takingadvantage of the natural topography of the site the building remains under 50-feet in height, consistent with the maximum height standards of the C-D zone. Portions of the roof of this building have been designed as a common patio area to take advantage of the views of the Morros to the north. The smaller of the two buildings, containing the townhomes, is a three story structure containing six multi-story units, each with two bedrooms. Vehicle and pedestrian access to.the residential units has been provided from Nipomo Street, where a single driveway accesses the underground, or podium parking area; which runs beneath most of the site. Podium parking is an efficient way to provide required parking; however, because of the grade change on the site it does add somewhat to the apparent height of the building when viewed from the adjacent property along Marsh Street. Pedestrian entrances would be provided to the lobby area just south of the intersection, directly to the parking area, and to the podium level near the south end of the site, adjacent to the townhomes. —y� Attachment 5 TR/ER 36-06 (Marpomo) Page 3 The proposed mixed-use development has been designed in the Mission-style, and includes characteristic details such as vertically-hung and multi-paned windows, arched doorways and decorative windows, awnings, tile work, and building projections. Stucco treatment, detailing, and window types are consistent on all four building elevations of both structures. EVALUATION The General Plan goals that new projects be compatible with existing surrounding development and acknowledge site context are also tenets in many of the applicable infill and multi-family development guidelines contained in the Community Design Guidelines. With the incorporation of changes recommended by the ARC, staff feels that the design of the proposed mixed-use development achieves these goals, contributing a significant number of new dwellings to the downtown, and beautifying the western gateway to the commercial district. Additionally, the December 2006 City Council action approving the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning of 1221 Nipomo (the southernmost of the four parcels making up the project site) included three mitigation measures related to compatibility with adjacent residences, noise, and parking. The following discussion of City policies and standards also addresses these mitigation measures. 1. General Plan Consistency The project site is designated as "General Retail" in the General Plan Land Use Element (LUE) map and located within the Downtown Commercial Zoning District. The General Plan contains policies on-building design, intensity, and the desired character of the downtown, as well policies regarding new housing development. These policies are listed below in bold print and staff's analysis follows in italics. Land Use Element General Plan LUE Policy 4.16.2 Upper Floor Dwellings. Existing residential uses shall be preserved and new ones encouraged above street level. Staffs Analysis: The project includes 33 new residential units, ranging in size from 700 square feet to nearly 1,900 square feet, built above 6,000 square feet of ground level retail. This represents considerably more intense development of the site, which currently includes three housing units and approximately 9,000 square feet of retail area. Therefore, the project will represent a significant increase in downtown dwelling units, consistent with this General Plan policy. General Plan LUE Policy 4.16.6 Sidewalk Appeal. Street facades, particularly at the street level, should include windows,signs, and architectural details which can be appreciated by people on the sidewalk. Staff's Analysis: The Marsh Street elevation includes three individual storefronts, with recessed entries, display windows, and decorative bulkheads. A variety of window and roof forms, landscaping and undulations of the fagade at the street level also contribute to providing an interesting pedestrian experience. The Marsh Street elevation provides a transition to the U Attachment 5 TR/ER 36-06 (Marpomo) Page 4 residential neighborhood to the south, with increasing setbacks and landscape planters, and a pedestrian entrance to the podium level. General Plan LUE Policy 4.16.4 Building Height. New buildings should fit within the existing vertical scale. They should respect street-level views of the hills, allow sunlight to reach public open spaces, and defer to a few tall, "landmark" buildings. Generally, new buildings should be not exceed two or three stories(about 35 to 50 feet). Where necessary to protect significant views,sunlight, and street character, new buildings should be limited to two stories, or about 25 to 35 feet tall. A few taller, landmark buildings (about five stories or 75 feet) may be developed where they will not obstruct views or sunlight for public spaces. These taller buildings would be more appropriate at mid-block than at corners, and their floors above the second or third level should be set back to maintain a lower street fagade. The tall buildings should include publicly accessible, open viewing spaces at the upper levels. Stalfs Analysis: The project has been designed with an average height of 50 feet, with the majority of the development contained within three stories. Along the Marsh Street frontage where the development includes ground floor retail, the building rises to four levels. Because of the location of the site at the southwest corner of the downtown, and the down-slope of the site towards Marsh Street, the height will not impact views of the surrounding hills, and the area that would be shaded is.limited to street right-of-way. A solar analysis has been provided indicating the shading that will be created by this project (see project plans A5.13). Although a small percentage of the. development does exceed three stories, given the topography of the site and location at the edge of the downtown, the ARC determined that the scale and massing of the project is appropriate, and is compatible with existing and anticipated development in the area. The upper floors have been stepped back to maintain a low street-level faFade and pedestrian scale. The townhouse building proposed for the south side of the project closest -to the adjoining residential development is significantly lower in height (maximum of 35 feet) and with the ARC's approval of a minor street yard reduction meets required setbacks for the R4 zone, consistent with Council approval of the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning. Housing Element General Plan HE Policy 3.2.1 Encourage the rehabilitation, remodeling or relocation of sound or rehabitable housing rather than demolition. Demolition of non-historic housing may be permitted where conservation of existing housing would preclude the achievement of other housing objectives or adopted City goals. Staffs Analysis The residential units which would be replaced as part of this project, 1213, 1213 '/z, and 1221 Nipomo Street, have not been designated as historic, are not enforceably restricted as affordable housing, and will be available for relocation prior to demolition. The addition of 33 residential units, including two which would be designated as affordable, more than compensates for the loss of the three units. Therefore, the proposed project can be found consistent with this policy, as it will a -yr7 Attachment 5 TR/ER 36-06 (Marpomo) Page 5 provide more intensive use of the site with units that are generally "affordable-by-design" and conveniently located. General Plan HE Policy 5.2.3 Encourage the development of housing above ground-level retail stores and offices to provide housing opportunities close to activity centers and to use land efficiently. Staffs Analysis The proposed project includes street level commercial spaces with residential ownership units above. The development plan maximizes the allowable residential density of the site by providing two very-low affordable units, and utilization of the 27.5% density bonus that is automatically granted under state law SB 435. 2. Communi1y Design Guidelines Project plans were reviewed by the ARC for consistency with the Community Design Guidelines for the downtown, and for infill and multi-family residential development. The ARC found that the design provides for an interesting and inviting public face with the commercial frontage along Marsh Street, while providing a transition to the residential area up Nipomo Street by locating the residential entrances along this frontage and scaling down the units at the southern extent of the site. Specific Design Guideline policies are listed below in bold print, followed by staff's analysis in italics. Community Design Guideline Policy 4.2.B.2 New structures should not be significantly taller or shorter than adjacent structures unless the proposed structure. can._provide_a visual transition from the height of adjacent structures to its higher proportions. Staff's Analysis Although the condominium building is significantly taller than the adjacent office use to the west, several design techniques have been used to provide a visual transition. The northwest corner of project has been stepped back from the street along the upper stories approximately 7 feet, and the roof height lowered and articulated. Additionally, the building has been set back from the western side property line about 5 feet, to allow room for decorative landscaping to soften the transition. It should be noted that the adjacent property is also designated C-D, without any historic designation, and therefore has the potential to be redeveloped with much greater intensity than is currently on the site. Along the south and southwest extents of the site, where the project abuts the High-Density Residential zone, the townhouse building has been designed within the standards for the R-4 zone to ensure compatibility, and to provide a transition to the adjacent residential development. Community Design Guideline Policy 4.2.0 New structures and remodels should provide storefront windows, doors, entries, transoms, awnings, cornice treatments and other architectural features that complement existing structures, without copying their �7 A'tachmant TR/ER 36-06 (Marpomo) Page 6 architectural style. Staffs Analysis Both the commercial and residential frontages of the project provide details which are consistent with the characteristic proportions and rhythm of the downtown. The Mission-style theme is found in the nearby Old Town residential neighborhood and in commercial buildings such as Mission Community Bank, San Luis Trust Bank, and Merrill Lynch. The articulation and variation of wall and roof planes, and variety in window design, spacing and articulation complements other notable downtown buildings. 3. Property Development Standards As indicated in Table 1 below, the project complies with all of the development standards of the C-D zone. However, Council action on the rezone of the southernmost parcel required compliance with the development standards for height and setbacks of the R4 zone, rather than the C-D standards. The smaller building containing the townhomes is proposed in this location. While the building complies with side yard setbacks along the south and west property lines, and with the 35-foot height maximum, the applicant has requested a 10-foot street yard setback where 15 feet is typically required. A 10-foot setback is within the allowable standards of the R-4 zone, and therefore is not contrary to the Council action. The ARC determined that this is a minor reduction, and found that the proposed building setback provides a sufficient and pleasant .: transition from the adjacent R-4 property, given the open form of the stairwell and proposed landscape planters which soften its appearance. _ The larger building fronting Marsh Street is 50 feet tall from average__natural grade, within three _ or four stories. Adjacent to Marsh Street the building consists of ground level retail with three levels of residences above. The massing of the building has been broken up by dividing the faeade into a series of bays, with differing windows, roof styles, and ornamental detailing. Human scale details are also provided through the provision of bulkheads, display windows, and recessed entries. The smaller building adjacent to residentially developed R4 properties has a maximum height of 35 feet, and with a 9-foot 7-inch side yard is stepped back at the upper levels consistent with zoning standards. Here also a variety of roof forms and articulation reduces the apparent mass of the structure. The seven foot difference in elevation between Marsh Street and Pacific Street is also used to reduce the apparent height and mass of the project. The slope of the site allows for more flexibility in the building design accommodating the vaned and attractive roof forms, and allowing the creation of the partially subterranean parking without excessive grading. As shown in the South and East building elevations and the North/South site section, sub-grade, podium parking has been partially dug into the hillside. _q9 Attachment 5 TR/ER 36-06 (Marpomo) Page 7 TABLE 1: Project Statistics and Code Requirements STANDARD CODE REQUIREMENT' PROVIDED Minimum Parcel Size . 12,000 s .ft. 63,162 square feet Building Setbacks: Street Yard Condominiums 0 feet 0-5 feet Townhomes 15 feet 10 feet(approved by ARC) Side Yard Condominiums 0 feet 0-5 feet Townhomes 5 feet 5 feet Building Height (above natural grade) Condominiums 50 feet 50 feet Townhomes 35 feet 35 feet Max.Lot Coverage 100% 93% Floor Area Ratio — bldg. floor area to 3 0 2 08 site area (LUE Policy3.5.8) Density 36 units/acre x 0.0654 acres 29.94 =23.54 units+27.5% bonus for providing 8%of units (2 units designated as affordable to Very Low Incomes = 30.01 DensityUnits very-low income) Parking 46 spaces for new development+4 spaces required by Council Reso. 49 9751 (2006)rezoning— 15 spaces_credit_for existing..__. off-site parking=35 total Bicycle spaces 15% of auto (46) =7 Long term 50% of req. =4 4 _Short term 50% of r .=4 8 Motorcycle spaces: 1 per 20.cars=2 2 Notes: I. City of San Luis Obispo, Zoning Regulations,June 24, 2004 2. Applicant's Project Plans dated May 25, 2006 3. See discussion on parking below 4. Parking The project has been designed with 49 spaces, three more than required for the residential units and commercial tenant spaces. Because theproperty has a credit of 15 off--site spaces (only four of the 19 required spaces for the commercial buildings being demolished were provided on-site), the applicant has proposed to reserve the underground parking for the residents. Like many downtown commercial spaces, there would not be on-site parking provided for employees and customers of the commercial component. City regulations do not mandate the provision of on- site parking in the C-D zone where on-street parking and public structures are intended to meet the demand of downtown businesses. Attachment 5 TR/ER 36-06 (Marpomo) Page 8 The applicant was required to provide or pay in-lieu fees for four additional parking spaces to meet the needs of the additional units allowed for by the rezone. Since 49 spaces are provided on-site and 46 spaces are required, the project exceeds its requirement by three spaces. With the 15-space credit for prior development, the proJect technically exceeds requirements by 18 spaces. Therefore the additional four spaces required by the Council have been accommodated. 5. Noise According to the Noise Contour Map in the General Plan 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. In their earlier review of the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning of the site, the City Council recognized that development of the site with a mixed-use commercial and residential project could expose people to unacceptable noise levels, if not properly mitigated. The Council required that the development proposal be accompanied by an acoustical analysis (noise study) to ensure that interior spaces and exterior private use areas are designed to acceptable noise levels, and to ensure that the parking structure associated with the development did not create a noise burden on adjacent properties. The applicant has provided a noise study evaluating the impacts from vehicular traffic on the proposed residences, and the potential impacts of the underground parking and associated mechanical equipment on adjacent noise-sensitive uses. The study concludes that the existing residences to the south will not be adversely impacted by the parking operations, and that the outdoor use areas within the courtyard and the majority of the roof deck of the proposed project willl sufficiently shielded within the development, and therefore will not require further mitigation. However, the study recommends several construction techniques_ tomitigate-the-__ interior noise levels within the residences facing Marsh Street. These have been included as mitigation measures in the recommended Mitigated.Negative Declaration. 6. Condominium Standards Unlike the strict standards for condominium projects in residential districts for private and common open space and recreation facilities, in non-residential zones the review body has the purview to determine what is appropriate for a specific project during the review process. This more flexible standard is reflective of the different housing type that is anticipated in non- residential zones, and the differing residential groups likely to be attracted to more urban home ownership. The ARC endorsed-the project as designed, with common outdoor areas in the central courtyard at the podium level and a roof deck taking advantage of views to the northwest. These two areas have. been enhanced with ornamental landscaping, and a barbeque area and seating on the roof level to encourage residents to congregate. All of the townhomes and several of the units are also provided with private patio areas. Two requirements of condominium developments which do apply to projects in non-residential zones are for the provision of laundry facilities and for 200 square feet of storage per unit, exclusive of that in typical kitchen cabinets and bedroom closets. All of the units provide individual laundry facilities, the majority of which are within generous utility rooms or pantries. a � � Attachment 5 TR/ER 36-06 (Marpomo) Page 9 The applicant has requested relief from the storage requirement for the nine one-bedroom units. These units, which vary from 692 to 995 square feet (886 square foot average), have been designed to maximize storage by providing two closets in the bedroom and a hall coat closet. Accommodating the required storage areas in these units would significantly compromise the livable space. As previously mentioned, in accordance with SB 435, the applicant is entitled to one concession beyond the density bonus. Staff believes that this is a minor exception, and that the one bedroom units will contribute to lower priced market rate units, beyond the two very-low income restricted units. Additionally, the project does comply with the required long-term bicycle parking in the parking garage, thereby providing for the most foreseeable use of these storage areas—bicycle storage. OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS The Fire, Building, Utilities and Public Works Departments, Housing Programs Manager, and Public Works Transportation Division all provided memos commenting on the project and providing code requirements and conditions of approval needed to meet department standards, the majority of which pertained to the architectural approval..Three design areas in particular proved challenging: 1) designing suitable trash facilities convenient for both the commercial and residential tenants, which met the requirements of SLO Garbage; 2) designing the various stairwells and passages to meet exiting requirements as reviewed by the Chief Building Official, and; 3) insuring that vehicles exiting the underground parking had suitable line-of-sight to ensure pedestrian safety. The applicant has worked well with staff and was able to address all of these issues without compromise of the integrity of the design concept. The remaining conditions, code requirements and other department comments have been incorporated into the recommended action. ALTERNATIVES 1. Continue the item. An action to continue the item should include a detailed list of additional information or project modifications required. 2. Recommend denial of the project to the City Council. Action denying the application should include the basis for denial. If the condominium map is denied, then the applicant could still potentially develop the site with an apartment project. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Vicinity map Attachment 2: Reduced scale architectural project plans Attachment 3: City Council Resolution No. 9751 and Ordinance No. 1488 (2006 Series) Attachment 4: ARC Follow-Up Letter, August 7, 2006 Attachment 5: Initial Study of Environmental Review ER 1-06 Attachment 6: Resolution recommending approval of the tentative tract map to City Council Enclosed: Tentative Tract Map GAMIMubdivision136-06 TR(Marpomo)\PC rpt 36-06.DOC Attachment �►�I���I�ulll IIIIIIIIIII p �►�����IIN�Illlln � II II C tyof SW_ en ,s OBISPO 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM For ER 36-06 1. Project Title: The Marpomo 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street. San-Luis Obispo, CA 93401 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Jaime Hill; Associate Planner (805) 781-7165. 4. Project Location: 577, 579, and 595 Marsh Street, and 1213, and 1221 Nipomo Street, City of San Luis Obispo 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Applicant: Bermant Homes 5383 Hollister,#150 Santa Barbara, Ca 93111 Representative: Bruce Buckingham 5383 Hollister, #150 Santa Barbara, Ca 93111 6. General Plan Designation; General Retail 7. Zoning: C-D-MU(Downtown Commercial with the Mixed-Use overlay) .8. Description of the Project: The project entails build out of the 0.65-acre site with a mixed=use development, and a tentative tract map for commercial and residential air-space condominium units. The project includes two new structures designed around an atrium, above a semi:subterranean parking garage containing 49 parking spaces. The residential component of the project includes 33 dwelling units; 18 two- bedroom condominiums and nine one-bedroom condominiums, and six two-bedroom townhomes. Two of the one-bedroom condominiums: have been proposed as affordable dwellings, at the "very low" rate, therefore meeting City Inclusionary Housing Standards and qualifying the project for a 27.5% density bonus. Other entitlements requested include an exception to property development standards to allow a 10-foot street yard setback along a portion of Nipomo Street where 15 feet is required, and an exception to the Subdivision Regulations to.waive the 200 Square feet of storage The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services,programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. Attachment 6 required for residential condominiums for the nine 1-bedroom units. The project site includes four parcels of approximately 0.65 acres (28,488 square feet) of total land area at the south-west corner of Marsh and Nipomo Streets. The properties are developed with several commercial buildings fronting Marsh Street and two residences (including three units) along Nipomo Street which would be demolished. The four parcels will be merged prior to development of the project as part of the tentative tract map process. The property slopes upward to the east, rising approximately 7-feet from the Marsh Street property line. Vegetation is limited to 6 trees and other ornamental landscaping in what are now the rear yards of the residential dwellings. As site coverage will be nearly 93% all existing vegetation will be removed. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings: Adjacent parcels are developed with a mixture of commercial uses to the north, east, and west, and residential uses to south and south-west. The parcels adjacent to the north, east, and west are designated Downtown Commercial (C-D) and are developed with restaurants, offices, and retail establishments. The parcels to the south and south-west are designated High-Density Residential (R-4) and are developed with multi-unit residential developments. Although the site is not within an historic district nor designated as historic itself, it does lie between the Downtown Historic District and the Old Town Historic.District. 10. .Project Entitlements Requested: The applicant has requested review and approval of a tentative tract map for commercial and residential air-space units, architectural review, and exceptions to property development standards to allow a 10-foot street yard along a portion of Nipomo Street where 15 feet is required. In accordance with Senate Bill 435, the applicant has also requested a 27.5% density - —bonus for r-ovidin 8%of the-proposed Posed dwellin gs as very low income units, and one concession P g to the Subdivision Regulations to waive the required 200 square feet of lockable storage for the nine one-bedroom units. 11. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None a -� y Attachment 6 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 Transportation&Traffic Biological Resources Land Use and Planning Utilities and Service S stems Cultural Resources X Noise Mandatory Findings of Significance Energy and Mineral Population and Housing � 3 ,. Resources 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 Fisfiand-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)). Attachment 6 DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been X made, or the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet(s) have been added and agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant" impact(s) or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR of NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. �'l �s lob Signat&e Date Doug Davidson, Deputy Director Development Review John Mandeville,Community Development Director Printed Name for �- Attachment 6 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 the tiering,program EIR,or other CEQA process,an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D) of the California Administrators Code. Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate,include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached,and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. In this case,a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on earlier analysis. C) .Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project Attachment Issues, Discussion and Supporti At6rmation Sources Sources Pote t_ Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant impact ER#36-06 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Page No.6 Incorporated I.AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 1, 10 X b) Substantially damage scenic resources,including,but not limited 1,2, 8 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 10, X the site and its surroundings? 20, 25 d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would 20,25 j X adversely effect 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 are Nipomo or Marsh Streets designated as roads of scenic value within the General Plan Circulation Element. The project site contains no scenic resources, such as significant trees or rock outcroppings. The project will not create a new source of substantial light or glare.. The proposed mixed-use project involves redevelopment of four parcels substantially surrounded by urban development.The project includes 33 residential units, three commercial tenant spaces, podium parking,and a tentative tract map for air space commercial and residential condominium units.The project also entails two exceptions to City standards,including allowing a 10-foot street yard along a portion of Nipomo Street where 15 feet is required, and waiving the requirement for providing 200 square feet of lockable storage for the nine one-bedroom units. These concessions are consistent with SB 435, which allows the applicant to request minor exceptions to development standards which facilitate the development of affordable units. The project has been reviewed by the City's Architectural Review Commission (ARC), which determined that the project will not impact views or create other aesthetic impacts. The ARC determined that the project design is appropriate for the location at the edge of the downtown, and provides an adequate transition between the R-4 residential zone to the south and the C-D commercial zone. Conclusion No impacts have been identified relating to aesthetics. The project has been reviewed and approved by the City's Architectural Review Commission, who determined that the project provided a high level of architectural integrity and aesthetic quality. No further mitigration is required. 2.AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would theproject: a) Convert Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland,or Farmland of, Statewide Importance(Fartnland),as shown on she maps 9, 11, X pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of 12 the California Resources Agency,to non-agricultural use_? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,or a 9 X Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment Which,due to 10 X their location or nature,could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Evaluation a),b), c)The site is designated as Urban Land by the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. The project will not convert prime farmland to any non-agricultural use. The project site is within the Downtown Planning Area and will not conflict with any agricultural zoning or Williamson Act contract. The project is an in-fill development that will not result in changes that could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural uses. Conclusion The vroiect will not have any impact on agricultural resources. 3. AIR QUALITY. Would theproject: Attachment 6 Issues, Discussion and Supportirly-:fitormation Sources Sources Potet�y., ,J Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER#36-06 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Page No.7 Incorporated a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an 13, 14 X existing or projected air quality violation? . b) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air 12 X quality plan? c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 25 X concentrations? d) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of 25 X people? e) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard 25 X (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 PMto(fine particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter)air quality standards. State law requires that emissions of non-attainment pollutants and their precursors be reduced by at least 5%per year until the standards are attained. The 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. According to the Air Pollution Control District's(APCD)"CEQA Air Quality Handbook,"land uses that cause the generation of 10 or more pounds per day (PPD) of reactive organic gases, oxides or nitrogen, sulfur dioxide, or fine particulate matter have the potential to affect air quality significantly. A 50-unit apartment complex generates over 10 pounds of these pollutants. Since the site is proposed to be developed with 33 condominium dwellings and a net reduction of approximately 3,000 square feet of commercial space, the project is of a size that is below APCD's air quality significance thresholds. Therefore,the project and resulting development will not generate a significant impact on long-tetra air quality impacts. d)The project is a mixed-use condominium development and will not create objectionable odors under normal circumstances. Conclusion The project does not exceed APCD thresholds and air quality mitigation measures are not required. The City's Grading Ordinance includes dust control measures that will apply to the project. The project includes energy conservation features such as a courtyard configuration to bring natural light into the interior of the building, canvas awnings to shade most of the east and west facing glass, high efficiency Low-E double pane windows,and high efficiency furnaces,washer/drier units, and high efficiency tankless on demand)water heaters in most units. No further mitigation is required. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would theproject: a) Have a substantial adverse effect,either directly or indirectly or 1,6, X through habitat modifications,on any species identified as a.. 11 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? b) Have,a substantial adverse effect,on any riparian habitat or 11 X other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,policies,or regulations,or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S.Fish and'Wildlife Service? c) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting . 6, 11 biological resources,,such as a tree preservation policy or X ordinance(e.g.Heritage Trees)? d Interfere substantial) with the movement of an napvexesident Attachment E Issues, Discussion and Supportii'�.;, rFttbrmation Sources sources i;c tl�y Potentially less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER#36-06 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Page No. 8 Incorporated or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native 11 X resident or migratory wildlife corridors,or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation Plan,Natural Community Conservation Plan,or other approved 6 X local,regional,or state habitat conservation plan? f) Have a substantial adverse effect on Federally protected wetlands as defined in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,marshes,vernal pools,etc.) 6 X through direct removal,filling,hydrological interruption,or other means? Evaluation a), b), c), e),f) The site is not within a riparian corridor and there are no creeks on the property. No endangered, threatened or other protected species have been reported on the project site. There are no local ordinances or habitat conservation plans that affect the property or that identify the site as potential habitat for any protected species of plant or animal. Although several trees are proposed for removal, the City's Urban Forester has reviewed the project and determined that standard City Code Requirements pertaining to tree protection measures (for trees on adjacent properties) and street tree requirements will adequately compensate for any loss of tree canopy. 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 16,18, X historic resource?(See CEQA Guidelines 15064.5) 22,23 .la) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an 15,17, X archeological resource?(See CEQA Guidelines 15064.5). 22,23 c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource 6, 15, X or site or unique geologic feature? 22,23 d) Disturb any human remains,including those interred outside of F22, 7,18, X formal cemeteries? 23 Evaluation a) Based on review of the City's Historic Site Map and Land Use Information System,the Cultural Resources Inventories and Historic Structure Analyses prepared for the sites, and staff research, the structures that are currently on the property are not listed as Master List or Contributing Historic buildings.The project will remove the two existing residences (three units)and two commercial structures from the site. Both residences, at 1213 Nipomo and 1221 Nipomo Street, were built in the late 1940's,after WWII but prior to 1950, while the three commercial buildings,577,579 and 595 Marsh Street,were constructed in 1969, 1967,and 1952,respectively. Although the two residences are older than 50 years,staff has determined that they do not represent historic resources. The potential for a structure to be found historically significant is based on a number of criteria including, style, design, age, architect, environmental design continuity, history-person, history-event and history- context as described in the Historical Preservation Program Guidelines. The City's Building Demolition Code includes specific provisions to encourage the conservation of older structures in the City. The requirements of the code include a 90-day "cool-off' period during which the buildings proposed for demolition would be advertised as available for relocation. The Code also requires photo and historic documentation of structures over 50 years old. The City keeps the documentation in the Community Development Department Library for future research. With these code requirements in place,no further mitigation is necessary. b) Based on review of the City's Historic Site Map and Land Use Information System, the Cultural Resources Inventories and Historic Structure Analyses prepared for the sites, and staff research, the project is not located on or near a known a — fie 0 �P��C``fY18Rf Issues, Discussion and SupportiN,,-ho rmation Sources Sources Pota Y Potentiauy Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER#36-06 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Pae No.9 Incorporated sensitive archaeological site or historic resource. The City's Archeological Resource Preservation Guidelines require preliminary archeological studies for properties that are considered sensitive sites. The project site does not meet the criteria for sensitive site designation because it is more than 200 feet away from the City's major creeks and known archeological sites. The site is also outside of a historical district and the property is not on the City's Inventory of Historic Resources. These factors indicate that the project will have no impact on archeological resources. c), d) The project site does not contain any known paleontological or geological resources and is not within an area where .burials are likely,as indicated by the City's Burial Sensitivity Map,on file in the Community Development Department. Conclusion Based on the City's Historic Resource Criteria for Building Evaluation and Recommendations, the buildings proposed for demolition are not historic resources. However, the project site contains structures that are over 50 years old (1213 and 1221 Nipomo) that are proposed for demolition. The requirements of the Building Demolition Code will require proper documentation of these structures and will potentially provide for their relocation. No further mitigation is required. 6. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the ro'ect: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? 7,22 X b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient 22 g manner? c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the 10 X State? Evaluation a) The development will not conflict with adopted energy conservation plans or promote the use of non-renewable resources in an inefficient manner. b)Development on the site must comply with the policies contained in the General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element,which 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. The project includes energy conservation features such as a courtyard configuration to bring natural light into the interior of the building,canvas awnings to shade most of the east and west facing glass,high efficiency Low-E double pane windows,and high efficiency furnaces, washer/drier units,and high efficiency tankless(on demand)water heaters in most units. c)There are no known mineral resources on the project site that would be of value to the region or the State. Conclusion No further mitigation is required beyond compliance with City established energy conservation standards and all applicable State requirements. The City's Development Standards for New Condominium Projects (SLOMC 17.82.110)requires solar water heating to be provided to each unit unless equivalent energy savings can be made through other means. The Architectural Review Commission has reviewed the mixed-use project, and found that the energy conservation features incorporated into the project are adequate. 7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would theproject: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse 5, 8 g effects,including risk of loss,injury or death involving: I. Rupture of a known earthquake fault,as delineated in the 8, 19 X most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area,or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Attachment Issues, Discussion and Supportik,�torrration Sources Sources PoteI_ 1y Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER#36-06 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Pae No. 10 Incorporated H. Strong seismic ground shaking? 8, 19 X III. Seismic related ground-failure,including liquefaction? 8, 19 X IV. Landslides or mudflows? 8, 19 X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 8, 19, X 25 C) Be located on a geologic trait or soil that is unstable,or that 8, 19 X would become unstable as a result of the project,and potentially result in on or off site landslides,lateral spreading,subsidance, liquefaction,or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil,as defined in Table 18-1-B of the 8 X Uniform Building Code(1994),creating substantial risks to life or property? Evaluation a) 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 fracttuing 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 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 property slopes upward to the south,rising approximately 7-Feet from the Marsh Street property line. The Uniform Building Code contains standards requirements that address soil erosion and loss of topsoil associated with site development. The project will not result in the loss of topsoil as most of the site(93%)will be covered by impervious surfaces. The soils engineering report includes specific recommendations to insure that foundations are designed to withstand settlement. 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 Development will be required to comply with the Uniform Building Codes and City Codes which require new structures to be built to resist such shaking or to retrain standing in an earthquake,and proper documentation of soil characteristics for Attachment Issues, Discussion and Supportik_,,, ormation Sources Sources pots. d potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant ]tnpact ER#36-06 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Pae No. 11 Incorporated designing structurally sound buildings. The Building Division of the Community Development Department routinely reviews project for their compliance with the recommendations of the soils engineering report for the site. No further mitigation is required. 8: HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the r('ect: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment 25 X though the routine use,transport or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create-a significant hazard to the public or the environment 10,25 X through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the' environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely 9,25 X hazardous materials,substances,or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? J) Expose people or structures to existing sources of hazardous 9, 10 X emissions or hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances,or waste? e) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous 9 X materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and,as a result,it would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? f) For a project located within an airport land use plan,or within 9 X + two miles of a public airport,would the project result in a safety hazard for the people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of,or physically interfere with,the 5,25 X adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of lose,injury, 5,25 X or death,involving-wildland fires,including-where wildlandsare adjacent to urbanized areas or where residents are intermixed with wldlands? Evaluation a), b), c), d), e) The site does not contain any know hazardous substances and is not located in an area of high risk. As a mixed-use condominium development the project will not emit any hazardous emissions or require handling of hazardous wastes. The site is not on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 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 Chief Building Official,and will not conflict with any emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. h) The Safety Element of the General Plan identifies the site as having a low potential for impacts from wildland fires. Conclusion The project will not involve any impacts with respect to hazards or hazardous materials. 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALM. Would the miect: ). Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge 8,24, X Requirements? 25 b): 'Substantially deplete groundwater supplies Vor interfere 8,24, g substantially with groundwater recharge suehthat themwould be' 25 / Attachment 6 Issues, Discussion and Supportic1formation Sources sources Po ly Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER#36-06 Issues Unless . Impact Mitigation Pae No. 12 Incorporated a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level(eg,The production rate of preexisting nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the 24,25 X capacity of existing or planted storm-water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or 24,25 X area in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite? e) Substantially alter the Existing drainage pattern of the site or 24,25 X area in a manner which would result in substantial flooding onsite or offsite? f) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on 24,25 X a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which 24,25 X would impede or redirect flood flows? h Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 24,25 1 X Evaluation a),b),h) The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. All of the commercial and residential units will be served by the City's sewer system and run-off is required to be directed to an approved point of disposal, in this case a storm drain. The project will be served with water by the City's Utilities Department and will not use or otherwise deplete groundwater resources or negatively effect water quality. c), d),e) Development of the site will increase the amount of impervious surfaces on the site and affect the absorption rate, drainage patterns and the amount and rate of surface runoff. To assure that potential drainage impacts are minimized to a level of insignificance, the development has been designed to meet all applicable City codes,.including City grading and drainage standards. The drainage system report and analysis prepared for the mixed-use project has been reviewed by the City's Public Works Department and determined to adequately address site drainage and run-off. f), g) The project site is within the boundaries of an area subject to inundation from flood waters in 500-year and 100-year storms.However,as documented by the drainage system report and analysis prepared for the mixed-use project,and reviewed by the City's Public Works Department,the project has been designed in compliance with the City's Waterways Management Plan,thereby eliminating potential impacts. Conclusion No impacts have been identified with respect to water quality or hydrology. Drainage plans have been evaluated for consistency with existing City codes as part of the development approval process and through architectural review. No further mitigation is required. 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING- Would theproject- Conflictwith applicable land use plan,poligy,, or regulation of 1, 8, X an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the, 25 purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? b) Physically divide an established community,? 1,2 X 10,25 c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural 6, 10, X conummity conservation plansT 25 Evaluation e —� y A°fachment 6 Issues, Discussion and Support&_.dformation Sources Sources pore _.� Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER#36-06 Issues Unless impact Mitigation Page No. 13 Incorporated a) The General Plan Land Use Map designates the site General Retail, which is implemented through the Downtown- Commercial zoning district and Mixed-Use overlay (C-D-MU). The mixed-use commercial and residential development is consistent with Land Use Element policies regarding the expansion of housing opportunities in the Downtown Planning Area. The project is also be consistent with Housing Element goals and polices on housing production and land use efficiency.The proposed project will increase opportunities for individuals and groups to reside downtown in close proximity to the City's commercial center. To insure that the recent redesignation of the southern-most portion this site from R-4 to C-D-MU does not negatively impact the adjacent residential development to the southeast, the City Council required that the southern-most portion of the development comply with the R-4 development standards for height and setbacks to ensure the site's compatibility. This portion of the site, which is proposed for the residential townhomes, is limited to 35-feet in height,and complies with the side yard setbacks along the south and west property lines. The ARC approved a minor street yard reduction for a 10-foot street yard setback where 15 feet is typically required. This reduction is within the allowable standards of the R-4 zone, and therefore approval was not contrary to the Council action. The project site is zoned C-D-MU (Downtown-Commercial Zoning district and Mixed-Use overlay) with a maximum allowable density of 36 units per net acre, or 23.54 density units for this 0.0654 acre site. The applicant is proposing to dedicate two of the one-bedroom condominiums as affordable dwellings at the "very low" rate, therefore meeting City Inclusionary Standards and qualifying the project for a 27.5% density bonus in accordance with Senate Bill 435. With this density bonus,the maximum density allowed for the site is 30.01 density units.The project has been designed with a density equivalent of 29.94 density units. Senate Bill 435 also requires that an incentive or concession be granted to the applicant for providing 8% very low income units. The applicant has requested an exception to the Subdivision Regulations Condominium Standards to waive the 200- square feet of lockable storage for the nine 1-bedroom units. Given the size and design of the units, with multiple closets in the bedroom and hallway, and provision of a lockable bicycle storage area for the use of the residents,this will not constitute a hardship of any great matter to the residents of the development. b) The project site includes four contiguous land parcels which will be merged as part of the Condominium tract map,on a 0.654 acre site. The project will be served by existing streets and will be bordered by other residential and commercial uses. The project will not physically divide an established community. C) The project will not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation plans. Conclusion The project has been designed consistently with the General Plan and Zoning Regulations and will not create any impacts to land use and planning. The street setback reduction granted by the ARC and exception to waive the 200-square feet of lockable storage for nine of the 33 units, are minor in nature and do not conflict with policies adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. 11.NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of people to or generation of"unacceptable"noise levels as defined by the San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise 4,21, X Element,or general noise levels in excess of standards 25 established in the Noise Ordinance? b) A substantial temporary,periodic,or permanent increase in 4,21, ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing 25 X without the project? c) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne 4, 10, X vibration or groundborne noise levels? 21,22 d) For a project located within an airport land use plan,or within 10 two miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the X Attachment 6 Issues, Discussion and Supporttormation Sources Sources Po _ 1y Potentially Less Than No Sigaificant Significant Significant Impact ER#36-06 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Pae No. 14 Incorporated rodect expttsepeogie rest tngtor workmg m�theProlectHarea toi w, excesstypoise level ? Rzt l Evaluation a) The project site is within an area determined by the City's Noise Element to exceed the noise standards for residential development. The Noise Element requires all outdoor use areas to have an average noise level of 60 dB. Interior noise areas must have.a maximum average noise level of 45 dB. In order to address the potentially significant noise impacts on the project,the applicant has submitted an acoustical analysis,prepared by Rincon Consultants.The acoustical analysis concludes that prior to project development, traffic noise from Marsh Street exceeds the 60 dBA recommended by the City's Noise Element.However,because of the attenuating effects of the proposed buildings that will generally block the outdoor use areas from the noise source (traffic on Marsh Street) resulting noise levels will be approximately 40 dBA in the courtyard, well below allowable levels. Noise levels at the edge of the roof deck would be approximately 66.4 dBA. However, as a person moves away from the edge of the building, the building itself would act as a noise attenuation sound barrier, reducing noise levels to below 60 dBA.Therefore, approximately 73%of the roof top garden would be within the City noise standard. The study concludes that development of the project will satisfy the City's noise exposure criteria for interior noise levels if specific recommendations are incorporated. Staff is recommending the incorporation of mitigation measures to insure that these recommendations are carried through to the construction drawings for the project. The project itself will also create additional noise, due to the parking operations and mechanical exhaust vent for the underground garage. The noise analysis concluded that the design of the ramp and the attenuating properties of the project itself would negate potential adverse impacts on the adjacent residential sensitive noise receptor. Likewise, the analysis concluded that the design of the exhaust fan, within a sound-proofed room within the parking structure, and placement of the two exhaust vents on top of the 2nd story,30 feet above the foundation level,will be minimal to offsite receptors. b) During construction, there will be a temporary increase in ambient noise levels. This type of noise is regulated by the City's Noise Ordinance, which regulates times of construction and maximum noise levels that may be generated. If noise levels exceed the Noise Ordinance thresholds,the property owner would be subject to possible citations. c),d)The project will not expose people to the generation of excessive groundborne noise levels or vibration. The project is outside of the Airport Land Use Plan area and is not directly in a flight pathwhere occupants would be subject to noise from aircraft operations. Mitigation Measures:Noise 1.The walls,doors and windows of units that face Marsh Street shall be constructed to include sufficient noise attenuation to reduce interior levels to a CNEL of 45 dBA.This would require at a minimum the use of double-paned windows on all floors for those windows that face Marsh Street. 2.Windows shall have a minimum Standard Transmission Class(STC)of 35 and be properly installed, weather-stripped,and insulated. 3.Doors with a minimum STC of 35 shall be used for doorways facing Marsh Street and shall be insulated in conformance with California Title 24 requirements. 4.The exterior wall facing material shall be stucco and/or shall be designed fora minimum STC of 45. 5.Roof or attic vents facing Marsh Street shall be baffled. 6.Air conditioning or a mechanical ventilation system shall be offered to potential home buyers so that windows and doors may remain closed to reduce interior noise to the extent possible. - Attachment e Issues, Discussion and Supporti ; .Afo-rmation Sources Sources Po _ otendauy cess Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER#36-06 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Page No. 15 Incorporated Conclusion The applicant has had an acoustical analysis prepared for the site and the project can be designed to meet the standards contained in the City's Noise Element for exposure of residents to transportation noise sources. Although a small portion of the roof deck will exceed the City's standards for outdoor use areas noise levels, it is only for a minor portion of the total available area,which is not necessary for meeting any City standard.Mitigation measures are recommended to insure that the recommendations of the acoustical analysis for noise attenuation are carried through to the construction drawings for the project.No further mitigation is necessary 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the ro'ect: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly 1,3, (for example by proposing new homes or businesses) or 10,25 X indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people 3, 10, necessitating the construction of replacement housing 25 X elsewhere? Evaluation a), b) The population added by this project is within the General Plan's projection and will not induce substantial growth in the area or result in population exceeding local and regional growth projections. The project site is surrounded by urban development and the development of the site represents an in-fill development opportunity. This type of development is encouraged because it can take advantage of existing facilities for water,sewer,storm drainage,transportation and parks. The applicant is proposing to dedicate two of the one-bedroom condominiums as affordable dwellings at the"very low"rate, therefore meeting City Inclusionary Standards and providing 8% very low income units, qualifying the project for a 27.5% density bonus in accordance with Senate Bill 435.With this density bonus, the maximum density allowed for the site is 30.01 density units. The project has been designed with a density equivalent of 29.94 density units, allowing for the site to be developed with about six more units that would otherwise be allowed. The project site is presently developed with three small units which are rented on short term bases. As a result, significant numbers of people will not be displaced by the project. Conclusion The population growth created by the project is considered to be less than significant since the development is consistent with General Plan policies and Zoning Regulation standards, and development of the project site has been accounted for in the population estimates contained in the City's General Plan. With the incorporation of the two affordable units the project will incrementally help the City meet goals established within the Housing Element to meet the needs of residents of all income levels. 13.PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision,or need,of new or physically altered government facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times,or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? 8,25 X b) Police protection? 8,25 X c) Schools? 8,25 X d) Parks? 8,25 X e) Roads and other transportation infrastructure? 8,25 X Other public facilities? 8,25 X Evaluation a) b), d), e), f) No potential impacts have been identified to any public services the projects location adjacent to existing Attachment E Issues, Discussion and SupportiR,, .Af6rmation Sources Sources Po �•. :� Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER#36-06 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Pae No. 16 Incorporated development of similar scale and height. 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 on 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 each residence. Conclusion The project has been routed to City Departments for review and comments on the proposal. As part of each routing, the reviewing department is required to certify that serving the project will not result in a deficiency to any City facility or resource. All reviewing departments have indicated their ability to serve this project. 14.RECREATION. Would theproject: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or 8 X other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or 25 X expansion of recreational facilities,which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Evaluation a) The project will add incrementally to the demand for parks and other recreational facilities. However, given the urban character of the project, the size of the dwelling units, and the expected number of residents, no significant recreational impacts are expected to occur with development of this site. Park Land In-Lieu fees will be collected, with credit given for the existing lots,to insure adequate provision of park facilities for the new residents of the project,per existing City policy. b) The project does not include the construction of recreational facilities beyond small,private and common patio areas. The construction of these facilities will not have an adverse physical effect on the environment because they are designed as an integral part of this compact development. Conclusion Park and recreation facility demand will increase incrementally,and not significantly,with the development of the project. 15. TRANSPORTATIONfMAFFIC.Would theproject: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the 2,25 X existing traffic load and capacity of the Street system.? . b) Exceed,either individually or cumulatively,a level of seivice" 2,25 X standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads and highways? c) Substantially increase hazards due to design features(e.g:.sharp 25 X curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible use's�e,g. farm equipment)? A) Resuli in-inadequate emergency access? 25 X e) Result in inadequate parking capacity oMite or offsite? 8, 10, X 25 f) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative , 2,25 X transportation(e.g. bus turnouts,bicycle racks)? . ' g) Conflict with the with San Luis Obispo County Airport Land 9 X Use Plan resulting in substantial safety risks from hazards,noise, or a change in air trafficpatterns? Evaluation �, Ci fYIQi7T 13 Issues, Discussion and Supporti k . ormation Sources Sources Foil!- ,? potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER#36-06 Issues Unless hnpact Mitigation Page No. 17 Incorporated a), b)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. The proposed mixed-use development, with 33 1- and 2-bedroom residential dwelling units (ranging from approximately 700 square feet to 1,900 square feet) and 6,189 square feet of commercial tenant space, will generate approximately 487.68 ADT(221.76+265.92)and 52.23 PPHT(22.11 +30.12). Based on historic traffic counts for the area, the Public Works Transportation Division has determined that these additional trips can be accommodated without impacting the level of service determined acceptable for Nipomo and Marsh Streets. Additionally, because of the site's downtown location, there would be unaccounted opportunities for shared trips and an increased likelihood of residents and patrons utilizing methods of transportation other than a car. c), d) Vehicle access to the project has been accommodated through a single in-out driveway located along the Nipomo frontage. Site line visibility,driveway ramp angle,and provision of an alternative pedestrian path has been confirmed to meet City standards and ensure vehicle and pedestrian safety. e) The project has been designed with 49 spaces, three more than would be required for the residential units and commercial tenant spaces. Because the property has a credit of 15 off-site spaces (only four of the 19 required spaces for the commercial buildings being demolished were provided on-site), the applicant has proposed to reserve the underground parking for the residents.Like marry downtown commercial spaces,there would not be on-site parking provided for employees and customers of the commercial component. City regulations do not mandate the provision of on-site parking in the C-D zone where on- street parking and public structures are intended to meet the demand of downtown businesses. As part of the Council action on the rezone of the southernmost parcel that is part of the site, the applicant was required to provide or pay in-lieu fees for four additional parking spaces to meet the needs of the additional units that the rezone allowed for.Since 49 spaces are provided on-site and 46 spaces are required,the project exceeds its requirement by 3 spaces.With the 15-space credit for prior development, the project technically exceeds requirements by 18 spaces. Therefore the additional four spaces required by the Council have been accommodated. f) In accordance with City standards,long term bicycle lockers and a long term bicycle storage"cage"have been provided in within the parking level for the commercial and residential uses respectively. Residents of the project will have access to transit stops throughout the downtown,including the regional transit hub at Osos and Palm Streets. e) The project is outside of the Airport Land Use Plan area. Conclusion The project will add incrementally to existing traffic conditions in the City, but the City's Transportation Division has determined that development of the project as proposed will not have an effect on the level of service on adjacent streets. Parking proposed by the project meets Zoning Regulations requirements. No impacts have been identified with respect to transportation and traffic. 16.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the ro'ect: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable 7,25 g Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction or expansion of new water 7,25 X treatment,wasterwater treatment,or storm drainage facilities. the construction of which could cause significant environmental - Ailachmenf issues, Discussion and Supporti N, .. formation Sources sources Po Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER#36-06 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Page No. 18 Incorporated effects? c) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project 7,25 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, 25 X which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand and addition to the provider's existing commitment? e) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to 7,25 X accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? f) Comply with federal,state,and local statutes and regulations 7,25 X related to solid waste? Evaluation a), b) This project has been reviewed by the Utilities Department staff. Comments note that the project is subject to water impact fees which were adopted to ensure that new development pays its fair share of the cost of constructing the water supply,treatment and distribution facilities that will be necessary to serve it. c) The City Water&Wastewater Management Element projects the City water needs at its ultimate build-out of 56,000 people.The project site is included in the anticipated build-out,because it was in the Urban Reserve at the time the element was adopted. The 2001 Water Resources Report indicates that there is currently 142 acre feet of water available to allocate to in-fill development(development within the 1994 City Limits). d) The City wastewater treatment plant has adequate capacity to serve this development. The existing sewers in the vicinity have sufficient capacity to serve the development. 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. Subdivision improvement plans and building plans will be checked for compliance with UPC standards. 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. To help reduce the waste stream generated by this project,consistent with the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element,recycling facilities must be accommodated on the project site and a solid waste reduction plan for recycling discarded construction materials must be submitted with the building permit application.The project is required by ordinance to include facilities for recycling to reduce the waste stream generated by the project,consistent with the Source Reduction and Recycling Element. Conclusion No impacts have been identified relative to utilities or service systems. The City has adopted a solid waste recycling ordinance to insure recycling of construction debris.No further mitigation is required. 17.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the X environment,substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or 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 rehists? ? a -70 Issues, Discussion and Supportihi .Aformation Sources Sources Po 1_ Potentially less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER #36-06 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Page No. 19 Incorporated As indicated in the Table on Page 3, the project has the potential to have adverse impacts related to noise if mitigation measures are not incorporated.Six mitigation measures related to noise attenuation have been recommended. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited,but X cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other current projects,and the effects of probable future rojects) The impacts identified in this initial study are specific to this project and would not be categorized as cumulatively significant. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause X substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly? LT J As indicated in the Table on Page 3,the project has the potential to have adverse impacts on humans related to noise levels if mitigation measures are not incorporated.Six mitigation measures related to noise attenuation have been recommended. 18.EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering,program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case a discussion should identify the following items: a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. The San Luis Obispo Land Use Plan Element update and Final EIR can be found at the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department at 919 Palm Street,San Luis Obispo,California. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier,anai sis. Not applicable. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions of the project. Not applicable. 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 Housing Element,May 2004 4. City of SLO General Plan Noise Element 5. City of SLO General Plan Safe Element 6. Citv of SLO General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element,April 2006 7. City of SLO Water and Wastewater Element,July 1996 8. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code 9. City of San Luis Obispo,Land Use Inventory Database 10. Site Visit 11. USDA,Natural Resources Conservation Service,Soil Survey of San Luis Obispo County 12. Website of the Fatatland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency: http://www. onsrv.caov/d /FM T/ 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. City of San Luis Obispo,Archaeological Resource Preservation Guidelines,on file in the Community Development Department 16. City of San Luis Obispo,Historic Site Ma Attachment E Issues, Discussion and Support .y-tntormation Sources sources PoU._j- Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER#36-06 Issues unless Impact Mitigation Page No.20 Incorporated 17. City of San Luis Obispo Burial Sensitivity Ma 18. City of San Luis Obispo,Historic Resource Preservation Guidelines,on file in the Community, Development Department 19. San Luis Obispo Quadrangle Map,prepared by the State Geologist in compliance with the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake It Zoning Act,effective January 1, 1990 20. City of San Luis Obispo Community Design Guidelines 21. Noise Study Prepared by Rincon Consultants,Inc.on.June 9,2006;and addendum submitted August 15,2006 22. Cultural Resources Inventory Prepared by Bertrando&Bertrando,in December 2004,for 579&595 Marsh Street, and 1213 Ni omo Street 23. Cultural Resources Inventory Prepared by Bertrando&Bertrando,in April 2005,for 577 Marsh Street and 1221 Ni omo Street 24. Drainage System Report and Analysis Prepared by Keith V.Crowe,-on June 20,2006 25. 1 Pro'ect Plans 1. Mitigation Measure: Noise The walls, doors and windows of units that face Marsh Street shall be constructed to include sufficient noise attenuation to reduce interior levels to a CNEL of 45 dBA.This would require at a minimum the use of double- paned windows on all floors for those windows that face Marsh Street. ➢ 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 Windows shall have a minimum Standard Transmission Class(STC)of 35 and be properly installed,weather- stripped,and insulated. ➢ 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. 3. Mitigation Measure: Noise Doors with a minimum STC of 35 shall be used for doorways facing Marsh Street and shall be insulated in conformance with California Title 24 requirements. ➢ 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. 4. Mitigation Measure: Noise The exterior wall facing material shall be stucco and/or shall be designed for a minimum STC of 45. ➢ Monitoring Program: -7a _ Attache-nent Issues, Discussion and Support -Anfirmation Sources sources P potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER#36-06 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Pae No. 21 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. 5. Mitigation Measure: Noise Roof or attic vents facing Marsh Street shall be baffled. ➢ 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. 6. Mitigation Measure: Noise Air conditioning or a mechanical ventilation system'shall be offered to potential home buyers so that windows and doors may remain closed to reduce interior noise to the extent possible. ➢ 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. i Attachment 7 RESOLUTION NO.####-06 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS IN A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MARSH AND NIPOMO STREETS; TR/ER 36-06 (TRACT 2842) 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 August 23, 2006 pursuant to an application filed by Bermant Homes, and recommended approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact and subdivision map to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo has considered testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and evaluation and recommendations by staff; and WHEREAS; the City Council has considered the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact as prepared by staff; BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council 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 City Council. The Council hereby adopts said Mitigated Negative Declaration and incorporates the following mitigation measures into the project: Noise 1. The walls, doors and windows of units that face Marsh Street shall be constructed to include sufficient noise attenuation to reduce interior levels to a CNEL of 45 dBA. This would require at a minimum the use of double-paned windows on all floors for those windows that face Marsh Street. 2. Windows shall have a minimum Standard Transmission Class (STC) of 35 and be properly installed, weather-stripped, and insulated. 3. Doors with a minimum STC of 35 shall be used for doorways facing Marsh Street and shall be insulated in conformance with California Title 24 requirements. 4. The exterior wall facing material shall be stucco and/or shall be designed for a minimum STC of 45. 5. Roof or attic vents facing Marsh Street shall be baffled. 6. Air conditioning or a mechanical ventilation system shall be offered to potential home buyers so that windows and doors may remain closed to reduce interior noise to the extent possible. 2 7y Resolution No.####-06 Attachment 7 The Marpomo 36-06 Page 2 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. SECTION 2. Findings. That this Council, after consideration of the tentative tract map, density bonus, and concession, and considering the Planning Commission's recommendations, staff recommendations,public testimony, and reports thereof, makes the following findings: 1. The proposed tentative tract map is consistent with the General Plan, including Land Use Element Policies 4.16.2, 4.16.4, and 4.16.6, and Housing Element Policies 3.2.1 and 5.2.3, because the subdivision will provide for commercial development at the street level with multiple upper level residential units. 3. The site is physically suited for the proposed type of development because it is an under- developed site that is adjacent to an existing street right-of-way. 4. As conditioned, the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development because the site is within an existing City block, services are available to serve the development, and utilities have been designed to serve the site per City standards. 5. The design of the subdivision, or the type of improvements, is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat because the site does not have any creeks or other potentially significant habitat areas for fish or wildlife. 6. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, is not likely to cause serious public health problems because the type of improvementsare appropriate for the urban location and will be designed to meet existing building and safety codes. 7. The design of the subdivision, or the type of improvements, will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision because no such easements exist. 9. .The 27.5% density bonus is not a grant of special privilege or an entitlement inconsistent with the limitation upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning because 8% of the residential units (two dwellings) will be reserved for very-low income levels. 10. The granting of relief from providing storage space required by the Subdivision Regulations for nine of the residential units is consistent with the standards of SB 435, and will facilitate the development of designated affordable dwellings and dwellings that are affordable-by- design. 02 —7s Resolution No.####-06 _ Attachment 7 The Marpomo 36-06 Page 3 SECTION 3. Action. The City Council does hereby adopt said mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the request for a tentative tract map including a 27.5% density bonus and concession with'incorporation of the following conditions and code requirements: Conditions: 1. Eight percent of the residential units within the project (two units) shall continue to be available to qualifying very-low income households, consistent with the policies and standards established in California State Law SB 435. An affordable housing agreement shall be recorded (prior to occupancy) in conformance with the City's Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. 2. The final map shall indicate common and private open space areas, and the CC&R's shall describe maintenance of all common areas. 3. The applicant shall pay Park In-Lieu Fees prior to recordation of the Final Map, consistent with SLO Municipal Code Section 16.40.080. 4. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the. City and/or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this subdivision, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review. 5. Subdivider shall prepare conditions, covenants, and restrictions (CC&R's) to be approved by the Community Development Director and City Attorney prior to final map approval. CC&R's shall contain the following provisions: a. All owners and occupants shall receive disclosure regarding the adjacent food services and restaurants and potential exposure to food production smoke and odors. b. Creation of a homeowners' association to enforce the CC&R's and provide for professional, perpetual maintenance of all common areas including private driveways, drainage, on-site sewer facilities, parking lot areas, walls and fences, lighting, and landscaping. c. Grant to the City the right to maintain common areas if the homeowners' association fails to perform, and to assess the homeowners' association for expenses incurred, and the right of the city to inspect the site at mutually agreed times to assure conditions of CC&R's and final map are being met. d. No parking except in approved, designated spaces. e. Grant to the City the right to tow away vehicles on a complaint basis which are parked in unauthorized places. f. No storage of boats, campers, motorhomes, or trailers nor long-term storage of inoperable vehicles. �2— 7�e � l Resolution No.####-06 Attachment 7 The Marpomo 36-06 Page 4 g. No outdoor storage by individual units except in designated storage areas. h. No change in City-required provisions of the CC&R's without prior City Council approval. i. Homeowners' association shall file with the City Clerk the names and addresses of all officers of the homeowners' association within 15 days of any change in officers of the association. j. CC&R's shall not prohibit location of solar clothes drying facilities on private patios which are substantially screened from view. Code requirements: The following code requirements are included for information purposes only. They serve to give the applicant a general idea of other Cityrequirements that will apply to the project. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list as other requirements may be identified during the plan check process. 1. The map shall be recorded prior to building permit issuance in accordance with the City's subdivision regulations and the Subdivision Map Act. 2. Public improvements required as a condition, code requirement, or mitigation measure may be shown on a separate plan and approved prior to building permit issuance. Said improvements may be completed or a bond posted for their completion to allow for recordation of the map prior to the completing of all required and/or proposed improvements. 3. The required improvements may be processed as required for tract maps or may be processed under an encroachment permit at the discretion of the City Engineer. If an encroachment permit is used to complete all improvements, then a separate plan review fee shall be established based on the requirements for subdivisions. Depending on the proposed timing for map recordation and building permit issuance, a completion guarantee may be required per City standards. 4. The provisions of Section 16.20.220 of the Subdivision Regulations are applicable to any public improvements and generally those improvements that may have a direct impact on public improvements as determined by the City Engineer. 5. Traffic impact fees shall be paid for this development prior to building permit issuance. Credit for removal of the existing buildings will be applied based on the use of the existing development. Credit will only be applied to permanent, lawfully existing structures. 6. An encroachment permit will be required from the Public Works Department for any work or construction staging in the public right-of-way. 7. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private utilities, 72 Attachment 7 Resolution No.####-06 _ The Marpomo 36-06 Page 5 access, drainage, common driveways, and maintenance of the same shall be shown on the final map or recorded separately prior to map recordation if applicable. 8. All wire utilities to the new units shall be underground. 9. Underground electrical service may be provided from the existing overhead system provided at the rear of the property. The owner/applicant shall secure any necessary easements required to extend services to this development. 10. Any sections of damaged or displaced curb, gutter& sidewalk or driveway approach shall be repaired or replaced to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director prior to recordation of the map. 11. The existing street pavement shall be maintained in good repair during construction. The final pavement condition shall be evaluated at the completion of the project for excessive wear or damage resulting from construction operations. Pavement repairs and a slung seal may be required per city standards if determined as being necessary by the City Engineer. 12. The existing curb grades shall be verified as being consistent with the approved street grades. If it is determined that the curb and gutter has settled to unacceptable limits, then they shall be restored to curb and gutter elevations approved by the City Engineer. Any new curb grade plans shall be prepared by a licensed engineer and shall be the responsibility of the owner/developer. 13. The subdivider shall dedicate a 6' (2m) wide public utility easement and a 10' (3m) wide street tree easement across the frontage of each lot. Said easements shall be adjacent to and contiguous with all public right-of-way lines bordering each lot. 14. A private sewer mainline may be proposed in-lieu of separate sewer laterals for each unit. If proposed or required by the Utilities Director, the on-site sewer main shall be privately owned and maintained by the Homeowner's Association. 15. A maintenance agreement for the sewer, paving, landscape improvements, and any other common improvements shall be recorded prior to or concurrent with the map recordation. 16. The parking lot design shall comply with the parking and driveway standards and Engineering Standard Section 2010.E.7. All parking spaces must be designed so that vehicles can enter in one maneuver. Furthermore, all spaces shall be designed so that vehicles can exit to the adjoining street in a forward direction in not more than two maneuvers. 17. The demolition of the existing building shall comply with all local, state, and federal requirements for the demolition of structures. 18. A preliminary soils report is required in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City of San Luis Obispo Subdivision Regulations. The report is required at the time of tentative map submittal or if approved may be deferred to map recordation. The report shall — 7? Resolution No.####-06 ATTACHMENT '7 The Marpomo 36-06 Page 6 be referenced on the final map in accordance with the city's Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act. 19. This project shall comply with the requirements for engineered grading in accordance with the grading ordinance. The grading, drainage, and erosion control plans shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer. 20. The building plan submittal shall include a complete grading, drainage and topo plan. The grading plan shall show existing structures and grades located within 15 feet of the property lines in accordance with the grading ordinance. The plan shall consider historic offsite drainage tributary to this property that may need to be conveyed along with the improved on- site drainage. This development will alter and/or increase the storm water runoff from this site. The improved or altered drainage shall be directed to the street and not across adjoining property lines unless the drainage is conveyed within recorded easements or existing waterways. 21. The grading and drainage plan shall show the existing and proposed contours and/or spot elevations to clearly depict the proposed grading and drainage. Show and label the high point elevation or grade break at the yard areas, drainage arrows, and spot elevations to show positive drainage away from the building pads and foundations to an approved point of disposal. The plan shall include the finish floor of the units, finish grade elevations, finish surface elevations, and parking lot drainage. 22. The building plan submittal shall include an erosion control plan and erosion control notes in accordance with the Waterway Management Plan Drainage Design Manual and to the satisfaction of the Building Official and Public Works Director. Erosion control measures shall be implemented and maintained for construction occurring between October 15 and April 15. 23. One 15-gallon street tree is required for each 35 lineal feet of frontage. A portion or all the required street trees shall be planted in the parkway per City Engineering Standards #8010 and#8230 prior to recordation of the map. The remaining street trees shall be planted within the street tree easement area. The final mix of species and tree locations shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Arborist. 24. The proposed street trees and any parkway landscaping shall be installed and maintained by the HOA. The final planting plan for the parkway and onsite landscape areas shall consider the required line-of-sight distances for vehicles exiting onto Nipomo. Mapping and Miscellaneous Requirements 25. The improvement plans, final map preparation and monumentation shall be in accordance with the City's Subdivision Regulations, Engineering Standards, and the Subdivision Map Act. The parcel map/final map may use Customary U.S. Units or the International System of Units (metric system). All record data shall be entered on the map in the record units, metric translations should be in parenthesis if applicable. n Resolution No.####-06 Attachment 7 The Marpomo 36-06 Page 7 26. The public improvement plans and specifications shall use the International System of Units (metric system). Customary U.S. Units (English units) may be used as the primary unit as long as dual units are provided in accordance with the current Engineering Standards. A On motion by seconded by , and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 2006. Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: Audrey Hooper, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jonat an Lowell, City Attorney G:VHill\Subdivision\36-06 TR(Marpomo)\Council Reso 36-06.doe nn Attachment 8 RESOLUTION NO.XXXX (2006 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL DENYING A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS IN A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MARSH AND NIPOMO STREETS; TR/ER 36-06 (TRACT 2842) 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 August 23, 2006 pursuant to an application filed by Bermant Homes, and recommended approval of the mitigated negative declaration and subdivision map to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo has considered testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and evaluation and recommendations by staff, and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact as prepared by staff, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. That this Council, after consideration the tentative tract map for a mixed- use development including 33 residential and three commercial air-space units; including a density bonus and concession, 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 tentative tract map is hereby denied. 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 2006. Attachment 8 Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: City Clerk Audrey Hooper APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Jonathan Lowell GAMiMubdivision\36-06 TR(Marpomo)\Council Reso 36-06(Denial).doc Planning Commission Minute _ - Attachment 5 July 26, 2006 Page 2 — - Commr. Ashbaugh asked if the Council had reviewed floor plans, questioned whether it was presented to the Council as a work/live project, noted that he felt the public's concerns should be given full consideration, and expressed concern about setting a precedent with the approval of this project. Commr. Carter discussed the project design particulars and asked staff about the open area across the creek. Commr. Christianson reiterated her feelings when the project was first presented as residential along the driveway, and expressed support for the work/live nature of the project. Commr. McCoy felt the project gives the community an opportunity to experiment with the work/live concept. Commr. Miller agreed that the project presents an opportunity to attempt a work/live project. Commissioners Stevenson and Ashbaugh did not support the concept due to basic concerns with the applicability of the work/live concept, the history of opposition to residential uses at this location, and the potential for enforcement difficulties. On motion by Commr. Christianson to adopt a resolution to approve a work/live component based on findings and subject to conditions and code requirements. Seconded by Commr. Carter. AYES: Commrs. Miller, Brown, McCoy, Carter and Christianson NOES: Commrs. Ashbaugh, Stevenson ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None The motion carried on a 5 :2 vote. 2. City-Wide- R/TA, SP and .,Request to amend the Zoning Regulations and Airport Area Specific Plan to allow temporary parking in the BP zone, and environmental review; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant. t Associate Planner Jaime Hill presented the staff report and gave a brief presentation explaining the proposed text amendments, and pointing out that individual development proposals would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. She recommended the Commission adopt the resolution recommending approval to the City Council of the proposed changes to the Zoning Regulations and Airport Area Specific Plan, and recommend adoption of the proposed Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for the project. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no further comments made from the public. mLn . c-6 kd of 9Vtw. re� ^ya O/w ' nu1 Las rte. it� r w+ cam,�web-- Planning Commission Minute' l�*taChfTi�flt J July 26, 2006 Page 3 COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Stevenson had questions about the definition of "temporary" and "intermittent," and the types of improvements that are generally made to temporary parking lots. Commissioners Ashbaugh and Brown commented that they would like to see more shared parking facilities in the future, rather than additional large parking lots. On motion by Commr. Ashbauqh to adopt the resolution recommending the Council approve the proposed changes to the Zoning Regulations and Airport Area Specific Flan, and recommend adoption of the proposed Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for the Droiect. Seconded by Cornmr. Christianson AYES: Commrs. Miller, Ashbaugh, Brown, McCoy, Carter, Stevenson, and Christianson NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None The motion carried on a 7 : 0 vote. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 3. Staff A. Agenda Forecast Deputy Director Doug Davidson gave an agenda forecast of upcoming agenda items and projects. He reminded the Commission of the Community Development Department's move to 919 Palm Street, and noted that the office would be closed on Friday, August 11th and Monday, August 14th. 4. Commission ADJOURMENT: g With no further business before the commission, the meeting adjourned at 8:05 p.m. to the regular meeting of the Planning Commission scheduled for Wednesday August 9, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street. Respectfully submitted by Jill Francis Recording Secretary Approved by Planning Commission on August 9, 2006. ' R.Stuart, CM C�D�iane SL Management Assistant -y3