Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/07/2008, PH 1 - CONSIDERATION OF A MIXED-USE OVERLAY REZONING FOR THE VILLAGE AT BROAD STREET PROJECT (ER/R 70-08; council M � j acEnba RepoRt �N O D CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: John Mandeville, Community Development Direct ; By: Pam Ricci, Senior Planner SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A MIXED-USE OVERLAY REZONING FOR THE VILLAGE AT BROAD STREET PROJECT (ER/R 70-08; 2238 BROAD AND 642 & 2201 EMILY STREET) CAO RECOMMENDATION As recommended by the Planning Commission, introduce an Ordinance adding the Mixed Use (MU) overlay zoning to the Village at Broad Street Project's existing zoning designations of C- NH, C-S-H, and C-S-S-H, including reaffirmation of the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration as updated by the Addendum. DISCUSSION Previous Project Approval—The Village at Maymont On May 24, 2006, the Planning Commission approved a use permit for a mixed-use project with 91 residential units and approximately 25,000 square feet of commercial lease space, known as The Village at Maymont. The project site consists of about six acres and is located just south of Fire Station 1 between Broad Street and the railroad tracks (Attachment 1). On June 19, 2006, the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) unanimously approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration and granted final approval to the design. On June 26, 2006, the City received an appeal objecting to the project's traffic mitigation and parking reduction. The City Council denied the appeal on July 18, 2006, upholding the ARC's actions to approve the project design and Mitigated Negative Declaration.. Current Project Proposal—The Village at Broad Street Rick Moses, the current applicant, is interested in developing the project, but would like to make some design changes. His proposal includes a total of 74 residential units and about 35,000 square feet of commercial space, which would be developed within 11 different buildings. A more detailed description of the revised project is included in the attached Planning Commission agenda report (Attachment 4). To accommodate a modified project, new applications have been filed for environmental review, architectural review, a use permit, a lot line adjustment and a mixed-use overlay zoning. On September 10, 2008, the Planning Commission approved a Use Permit for the mixed-use project, and recommended to the Council approval of the request for a Mixed-Use overlay zoning. The City Council takes final action on Rezoning requests. The proposed project has been well received by all the advisory bodies that have reviewed it thus far, including the Planning Commission, Architectural Review Commission (ARC), and Cultural 1- Council.Agenda Report—ER/R 70-08 (The Village at Broad Street) Page 2 Heritage Committee (CHC), who have found the proposed land uses to be appropriate for the site and that the architectural style complements its Railroad Historical District setting. Public testimony received at the Planning Commission indicated community support for the project, including support from members of the South Broad Street Corridor Plan Working Group that viewed the project as an excellent example of the type of mixed-use development that the plan envisions and a catalyst for future redevelopment in the plan area. Data Summary Applicant: Rick Moses,RMD Development Property Owner: H&D Maymont, LLC Representative: Debbie Rudd,RRM Design Group Zoning: C-N-H, Neighborhood-Commercial and C-S-H, Service-Commercial — both with the Historic Preservation zone overlay, and C-S-S-H, Service-Commercial with the Historic Preservation and Special Consideration overlay zones General Plan: Neighborhood-Commercial and Service and Manufacturing Environmental Status: A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MIND) of environmental impact was approved by the City Council on July 18, 2006. An Addendum has been prepared to update the previously-approved MND. Consistency with the General Plan General Plan conformity is an essential element in the review of this application. The Council must make a finding that the Rezoning request is consistent with the General Plan. Overall, the project is consistent with the City's policies related to compact urban form, infill housing, and compatibility with surrounding uses. The Planning Commission made findings to support the proposed land uses at this location as consistent with the General Plan. Mixed Use Overlay Zoning The previous applicant elected not to pursue a Mixed Use (MU) overlay zoning for the site since the residential uses desired on the portions of the site zoned C-S could be requested through a Planning Commission use permit. The current applicant is requesting the MU zoning since it is in keeping with the design of his project and enables the approval of an increased building height for Building E, the Signature Building, without the need to request a variance. Section 17.55.030 of the Mixed Use zone chapter of the Zoning Regulations contains direction regarding property development standards and in particular, building height. The section states that "the application of the MU overlay to property may include establishing a higher height limit than the underlying zone, to more effectively accommodate the residential component of a mixed use project." The revised project shows that Building E, the Signature Building, would have a maximum building height of about 44 feet. The proposed building height was supported by the Architectural Review Commission with their conceptual review of the project on July 21, 2008. Building E is proposed in the same relative location as the building identified as MP-2 in the I -a- I� I Council Agenda Report—ER/R 70-08 (The Village at Broad Street) Page 3 previous project. MP-2 included a solar chimney that increased the overall building height to about 45 feet. Therefore, since a building of essentially the same height was previously envisioned in the same general location, the ARC supported the proposed building height because it can accommodate the requisite housing as called for under MU zoning, and found that the added height would not result in significant aesthetic impacts. The Planning Commission also supported a maximum building height of 45 feet here, based on the ARC's rationale for support and the findings included in the Draft Ordinance. City staff had encouraged the previous applicant to consider adding a MU overlay to the project site. The advantage of having the MU zoning here is that it would require a mix of residential and nonresidential uses on the site where such mixed-use development would otherwise be optional. If the present applicant decided to not pursue the proposed project, then the MU overlay which "runs with the land" would mandate that a future development be a mixed-use project. Planning Commission's Action On September 10, 2008, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed MU overlay zoning along with the use permit to allow the proposed mixed-use project. On a 5:0:2 vote (Commissioner Gould absent; Chairperson Stevenson recused himself since he owns property within 500 feet of the site), the Planning Commission recommends to Council approval of the Rezoning to add the MU overlay zoning over the entire project site, and reaffirmation of the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration as updated by the Addendum (Attachment 3). After reviewing the presentations from staff and the applicant team, the Commission supported the idea of adding four residential units to the second floor levels of Buildings C & D. A new condition was added to the use permit supporting the inclusion of these additional units into the project with the final details to be approved by the Architectural Review Commission along with their final design review of project plans. CONCURRENCES The comments and recommendations of various City departments are reflected in the discussion and the mitigation measures of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and incorporated in conditions and code requirements of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map. 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. Therefore, the proposed project can be found to be consistent with the General Plan, and accordingly have a neutral fiscal impact. Council Agenda Report—ER/R 70-08 (The Village at Broad Street) Page 4 ALTERNATIVE Continue the project with direction to staff and applicant if the Council desires further information or analysis to render a decision. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity map 2. Planning Commission follow-up letter with adopted Resolution No. 5505-08 3. Draft September 10, 2008 Planning Commission Minutes 4. September 10, 2008 Planning Commission Agenda Report 5. Ordinance approving the Rezoning Distributed to City Council and in Reading File: Full-size Project Plans & Application Submittal Binder. Available in Reading File: Hard Copy of Adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Village at Maymont Project; Available on-line: PDF of Adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Village at Maymont Project. T:\Council Agenda ReportACommunity Development CAR\R70-08 Village.at Broad CC report).DOC „ . . . _ - . - iii► 1 .l 1� Attachment 2 I��! I�i l�i►�I,, ��I I���I!��,Il�li►�I j►l;' l i�►J, city of sa►r1 lugs oBis o Public Works Department • 919 Palm Street • San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 September 16, 2008 Rick Moses 6320 Canoga Avenue, Suite 1500 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 SUBJECT: 2238 Broad Street - R/U 70-08 Request to add the Mixed-Use overlay zoning to the site's existing Neighborhood-Commercial and Service-Commercial zoning designations and consideration of an Addendum to update the previously-adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration; and request for a use permit to allow a mixed-use project, including exceptions for building height and a side yard setback, and a 30% shared and mixed-use parking reduction Dear Mr. Moses: The Planning Commission, at its meeting of September 10, 2008, approved your request for a use permit to allow a mixed-use project, based on findings and subject to conditions, as noted in the attached resolution. The decision of the Planning Commission is final unless appealed to the City Council within 10 days of the action. Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Commission may file an appeal with the City Clerk. 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 and must accompany the appeal documentation. Due to the City Water allocation regulations, the Planning 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 renewals for successive periods of not more than one year each. At the same September 10th meeting, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the request to add the Mixed-Use overlay zoning to the site's existing Neighborhood-Commercial and Service-Commercial zoning designations, and support the Addendum prepared to update the previously-adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration, based on the information noted in the attached resolution. The action of the Planning Commission on the Mixed-Use overlay zoning is a recommendation to the City Council and, therefore, is not final. This matter has been tentatively scheduled for public hearing before the City Council on October 7, 2008. This date, however, should be verified with the City Clerk's office at (805) 781-7102. —� V� The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805) 781-7410. R/U 70-08 (2238 Broad Streetl� 1 Page 2 Attachment 2 If you have any questions, please contact Pam Ricci at 781-7168. Sincerely, Doug Davidson, AICP Deputy Director of Community Development Development Review Attachment: Resolution #5509-08 cc: County of SLO Assessor's Office Debbie Lagomarcino Rudd 3765 S. Higuera Street, Suite 102 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 H & D Maymont, LLC c/o Richard A. Debeikes, Jr. 199 S. Los Robles Avenue, Suite 880 Pasadena, CA 91101-2459 Attachment 2 RESOLUTION NO.5509-08 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING A MIXED-USE OVERLAY ZONING, USE PERMIT, A MASTER LIST OF USES, AND A PARKING REDUCTION FOR THE VILLAGE AT BROAD STREET PROJECT U/R/ER 70-08 (2238 BROAD STREET) . WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted public hearings in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on September 10, 2008, for the purpose of considering Application U/R/ER 70-08, a mixed-use project with 74 dwellings and about 35,000 square feet of commercial floor area; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) of environmental impact was approved by the City Council on July 18, 2006, and an Addendum has been prepared to update the previously-approved MND; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by the Planning Commission and 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. Environmental Review. In conjunction with the information contained in the Addendum, the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project adequately identifies all of the potential impacts of the project and the updated mitigation measures and monitoring programs listed in Exhibit B are reasonably necessary to reduce potentially-significant impacts to less-than-significant levels. Section 2. Rezoning Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council approve application R 70-08 to add the Mixed-Use (MU) overlay to the base zonings existing at the site, based on the following findings: 1. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan, including Land Use Element Policy 3.8, Mixed Uses, which states that "Compatible mixed uses in commercial districts should be encouraged." 2. The planned development of the site and proposed uses will comply with the MU zone, are compatible with each other and their surroundings, and are consistent with the General Plan (SLO Municipal Code Section 17.55.020C.). 14 Resolution No. 5509-08 Attachment 2 Page 2 3. The project is consistent with the purpose of the Mixed-Use overlay zone which is to allow the combining of uses on a site which otherwise would be optional. 4. The mixed uses provide greater public benefits than single-use development of the site including: a. services which benefit on-site workers, as well as neighbors; b. reduced auto travel by providing services and jobs in close proximity to nearby housing; and c. support for the development of alternative transportation opportunities by providing facilities for bicycles and a bus stop and shelter. 5. The proposed building height of 45 feet is hereby approved with the Mixed-Use overlay zoning to more effectively accommodate proposed housing in Building E because: a. it is consistent with Section 17.55.030 of the Mixed-Use zone chapter of the Zoning Regulations, which states that "the application of the MU overlay to property may include establishing a higher height limit than the underlying zone, to more effectively accommodate the residential component of a mixed-use project"; b. a building of essentially the same height was previously approved in the same general location; and c. the ARC found with their conceptual review of the project on July 21, 2008, that the added height would not result in significant aesthetic impacts. 6. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in this addendum in its consideration of the Mitigated Negative Declaration ER 62-05 and finds that the preparation of a subsequent Negative Declaration is not necessary because: a. None of the circumstances included in Section 15162, which require a subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration have occurred, specifically: i. The project changes do not result in new or more severe environmental impacts. ii. The circumstances under which the project is undertaken will not require major changes to the Mitigated Negative Declaration. iii. The modified project does not require any substantive changes to previously- approved mitigation measures. b. The proposed additions and changes are minor and generally consistent with the previous mixed-use project approved for the same site by the City Council on July 18, 2006. 1 ' � Resolution No. 5509-08 Attachment 2 Page 3 c. The changes are consistent with City goals to promote the intensification of infill sites and goals to provide a variety of housing types in the community. d. The proposed scale and design of buildings will be compatible with surrounding uses with the review and approval of project plans by the City's Architectural Review Commission, consistent with the City's General Plan, Zoning Regulations, Railroad District Plan, and Community Design Guidelines. Section 3. Use Permit Findings. The following findings are hereby made by the Planning Commission in support of the proposed mixed-use project and consistent with Zoning Regulations Sections 17.08.072, 17.16.060, and 17.22.010. Mixed-Use Findings: 1. The project's mixed uses are consistent with the General Plan and are compatible with their surroundings, with neighboring uses, and with each other because (1) all of the uses proposed are allowed or conditionally allowed in the C-N and C-S zone; (2) as conditioned, adjacent environmental noise and service commercial activities will be disclosed to prospective residents of the project; and (3) the uses that are allowed have been chosen to insure compatibility and this use permit may be reviewed by the City if reasonable written complaints are received from residents of the project or the Police Department. 2. The project's design protects the public health, safety, and welfare because potential impacts, such as noise and use compatibility, have been identified and mitigated in the design of the project insuring that the project has been designed in a manner that is consistent with City standards and policies. 3. The mixed uses provide greater public benefits than single-use development of the site because it provides a large number of residential units that are affordable by design in close proximity to workplaces both on-site and within the immediate vicinity. In addition, the project has immediate access to public transportation and the City's bicycle route network. 30% Shared and Mixed-Use Parking Reduction Findings: 4. The proposed project complies with San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Section 17.16.060 A., Parking Space Requirements, in that it satisfies the intent of that section which is "... to minimize the area devoted exclusively to parking and drives when typical demands may be satisfied more efficiently by shared facilities." Moreover, the project satisfies the requirement for a shared parking reduction specified in San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Section 17.16.060 B. because there are multiple uses that share common parking areas. In addition, in accordance with the provisions of Section 17.16.060 C., the times of maximum parking demand from the proposed commercial and residential uses will not coincide. 5. A 30% parking reduction is consistent with the Air Pollution Control District's (APCD) land use planning strategies designed to reduce dependence on vehicle travel, and it can be expected � �Ia I. t Resolution No. 5509-08 �� Attachment Z Page 4 that some trips will be consolidated because of the range of different uses proposed at the site. Mandatory Finding for More Restrictive Standards: 6. Site-specific property development standards are needed to protect all proposed uses of the site, in particular residential uses. A Master Use List, which limits some of the uses normally allowed in the C-N and C-S zones is provided as Exhibit A. Special Considerations Finding: 7. The project's design and mix of uses will be compatible with railroad operations in the vicinity because the project incorporates mitigation for exposure to noise from the railroad, the site is separated from the railroad tracks by an extensive buffer of surplus railroad property, and the Cultural Heritage Committee has determined the project is consistent with Railroad District Plan and the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines "Principles of Historic Preservation" (August 25, 2008). Medical Services Findings: 8. Medical services are compatible with surrounding land uses because, as conditioned, to occupy no more than 2,000 square feet of the project's commercial lease space, adequate parking is provided on-site to accommodate the range of mixed uses. 9. The project site is located along Broad Street, a street designated as an arterial in the Circulation Element and has convenient access to public transportation because of a transit stop located at the Broad Street project frontage. 10. The proposed medical service will not significantly increase traffic in residential neighborhoods because the project site has access to Broad Street and is not located adjacent to a residential neighborhood. Public use of the proposed medical services does not require on-site traffic to pass through a residential area. 11. The proposed medical service is consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) because the overall development is consistent with the Safety Policies of the ALUP. 12. The project will not preclude service commercial uses in areas especially suited for these uses when compared with medical services because the project's location within walking distance of downtown is especially suited for a mixed-use development. Office Use in the C-S Zone: 13. Offices will be compatible with existing and proposed uses in the area because the project site has access to Broad Street, public transportation, bike routes, and will have convenience facilities for employees on site. I I E' l ` Resolution No. 5509-08 Attachment 2 Page 5 14. The project location will not significantly direct traffic to use streets in residential zones because there are no residential zones bordering the project site. 15. The project will provide adequate mitigation to address potential impacts related to noise, light and glare, loss of privacy, and other impacts on nearby residential areas because, as a mixed-use project, these considerations are an integral part of the project design. 16. The project will not preclude industrial or service commercial uses in areas especially suited for these uses when compared with offices. 17. The project will not create a shortage of C-S zoned land available for service commercial or industrial development because there are vacant, developable, and under-utilized properties throughout the City in the C-S zone better suited for industrial uses. Side Yard Setback Exception: 18. A side-yard setback exception to allow a 6.5-foot setback where an 8-foot setback would be required is approved because: a. The side-yard setback exception will not adversely affect the health, safety, and welfare or persons residing at the site or in the vicinity. b. No useful purpose would be achieved by requiring the full side yard. c. No significant fire protection, emergency access, privacy, or security impacts are likely as a result of the side-yard setback reduction. d. The exception is of a minor nature and will not significantly affect the solar access of the adjacent property. Section 4. Action. The Planning Commission hereby approves a Use Permit for Mixed- Use Project U/R/ER 70-08 and a 30% parking reduction with 16 cars parked in tandem, located at 2238 Broad Street, subject to the following conditions of approval: 1. The Inclusionary Housing Requirement for the project is one Affordable Dwelling Unit. Based on the applicant's current submittal package, the project will provide one deed- restricted Affordable Dwelling Unit within the project. 2. Garages within the project shall be used exclusively for parking vehicles and may not be used for general storage, recreation, or other uses that would prevent the parking of vehicles as required by the Zoning Regulations. 3. The Mixed-Use Project is subject to the use matrix provided in Exhibit A of this resolution. If the Zoning Regulations are ultimately amended to allow additional uses in the C-N and C-S zones, then the Community Development Director may add allowed or conditionally- allowed uses to the approved list for the project based on a finding of compatibility with the 1 .,I v Resolution No. 5509-08 Attachment 2 Page 6 mixed-use project design. All other modifications to the use matrix require the approval of the Planning Commission. 4. The proposed uses for Building F shown on submitted plans, which include recreation, tanning, media, technology, exercise, and conference rooms, are hereby approved with the use permit and do not require the processing of a subsequent use permit unless the proposed use for the building substantially changes. 5. Consistent with the concept of allowing live/work units in the C-S zone, the ground floor spaces of Buildings I & J along Emily Street are approved as "flex-spaces," meaning that they may accommodate residential uses or commercial, office, artist studios, or craftsman studios consistent with the allowed uses in the C-S zone and the limitations on use for live/work units contained in Section 17.08.130 C. of the Zoning Regulations. This design does not mandate that the ground floor space be utilized for a commercial enterprise, but allows for it depending on the needs and desires of the particular resident. 6. The residential tenant leases shall include a disclaimer, to the approval of the Community Development Director, whereby residents consent to the higher noise levels they will experience living on the project site. The leases shall state that the project site is located in an area designated for service commercial uses and the City's Noise Ordinance does not include the same protections in this area as it does for residential neighborhoods. 7. Hours of operation for all commercial uses on the project site are limited to between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., unless the Director approves an Administrative Use Permit for extended hours, except that food and beverage uses may operate from 6:00 a.m. until midnight with no live entertainment after 10:00 p.m. 8. The property managers for the project shall be required to maintain an updated and accurate parking calculation worksheet for the commercial portions of the project site. The worksheet shall be submitted to the Community Development Department with every use permit application required by this resolution. 9. This use permit shall be reviewed by the Administrative Hearing Officer if any reasonable written complaint is received from any citizen or from the Police Department. At the review hearing the Hearing Officer may establish additional conditions of approval as deemed necessary to insure on-going compatibility between commercial and residential uses on the project site. The Hearing Officer may refer the complaint to the Planning Commission at his/her discretion. 10. Medical office uses shall not occupy more than a total of 2,000 square feet of lease space. 11. The concept of adding four residential units to the project on the second floors of Buildings C & D was endorsed. Final details of how these units will be incorporated into the project shall be subject to the approval of the Architectural Review Commission along with their review of final development plans. 1 - 13 Resolution No. 5509_08 Page 7 Attachment Z Utilities Condition: 12. The development of the site triggers the Utilities Department Sewer Lateral Abandonment Policy. This policy states that any existing sewer lateral to the property must be abandoned at the main as a condition of development, unless the lateral is intended for use with the proposed development and it passes a video inspection. If the sewer lateral is intended for this purpose, the owner shall submit a VHS videotape documenting the internal condition of the pipe to the Utilities Department for approval. Public Works/Site Grading Conditions: 13. This development shall comply with the Waterway Management Plan Volume III, Drainage Design Manual. An updated preliminary hydrologic and hydraulic analysis report dated May 20, 2008, has been received. The final report shall be submitted along with plans submitted for a building permit including review by Cal Trans. 14. The final drainage design and site improvement plans for this development shall consider the historic upslope drainages from the UPRR right-of-way. The drainage system shall be designed to accept and convey any upslope drainage that is tributary to this development in a non-erosive manner to an approved outlet. 15. This development will create more than 10,000 square feet of impervious surfaces. As such, the project shall implement a system to improve the quality of the runoff from the new parking areas and streets in accordance with Engineering Standard #1010.B, current engineering practices and Best Management Practices as noted in the California Stormwater Quality Handbook Section 5. 16. The required water quality analysis report shall be prepared by a licensed engineer. The report shall include the final calculations and analysis for the proposed treatment of the parking lot runoff in accordance with Engineering Standard Section 101O.B. The report shall show treatment for runoff for 28% of the 2-year storm event or from a 1"/24-hour storm event. The plans shall show any bypass structures or systems accordingly. A separate conveyance system to keep roof drainage from draining through the parking may be required. 17. The current site development and prior site uses allowed for some filtering and passive treatment of the runoff from the UPRR right-of-way. The project will generally remove the existing passive treatment. The proposed drainage system shall provide a method to remove silt and sediment from this off-site drainage source. 18. With improvements to Broad Street outlined in project mitigation measures, the communications vault may remain in place. However, the applicant may be required to make some structural modifications to the vault to accommodate this. -Iq RPage 8 esolution No. 5509-08 ` 1 Attachment Z 19. The public portion of Emily Street within the project may be developed to half street width consistent to City standards and with the approval by the Director of Public Works to insure that efficient vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation can be accommodated. 20. Boardwalk-style sidewalk consistent with the architectural guidelines of the Railroad District Plan will be required along the site's Roundhouse Avenue frontage. 21. One street tree is required per 35 lineal feet of street frontage or any part thereof. Street trees shall be chosen from the Street Trees for Major Streets List "High St. to City Limits" for the Broad Street frontage and from the Master Street Tree List for all other street frontages. All street trees shall be planted to City of San Luis Obispo's engineering standards. 22. All existing trees that are approved to remain by the Architectural Review Commission as part of their final approval of project plans shall be retained with project development. These trees are required to have a tree protection plan submitted by a Certified Arborist and approved by the City Arborist. This plan is to include tree protection fencing and be installed before any grading construction or any other work begins. 23. Trees selected to be installed within the drainage setback should reflect riparian or creek tree plantings (see Natural Resource Manager). Existing street trees along Broad Street should be incorporated into the landscape plan. On motion by Commissioner Christianson, seconded by Commissioner Carpenter, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Christianson, Carpenter, Multari, Ashbaugh, and Brodie NOES: None REFRAIN: Stevenson ABSENT: Gould The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 10`h day of September, 2008. Doug Davids n, Secretary Planning Commission 14 Resolution No. 5509-08 C, Page 9 Attachment 2 Master Use Permit List For the Mixed-Use Project known as The Village at Broad Street 2238 Broad Street U/ER 70-08 Uses Allowed and Conditionally Allowed in the C-N zoned portion of the project site: 1. Allowed Uses: o ATM's o Convenience Store o Copying and Quick Printer Service o General retail — 2,000 sf or less o Groceries, liquor, specialty foods o Live/work units o Mixed-use project o Mobile home as temporary residence at building site o Multi-family dwellings o Office-supporting retail, More than 2,000 sf, up to 5,000 sf o Office-Accessory o Office— supporting retail, 2,000 sf or less o Personal services o Produce stand o Recreational vehicle as temporary dwelling (See Section 17.08.010.C.4) o Residential Support Services o Restaurant 2. Uses Allowed with Director's of Chief Building Official's Approval by Letter: o Office— Temporary, real estate sales office in tract (See Section 17.08.010.C.1) o Office — Temporary, on-site mobile home as a construction office (See Section 17.08.010.C.2.a) o Outdoor temporary and/or seasonal sales (See Section 17.08.020) o Office — Temporary, mobile home as a construction office not located on- site(See Section 17.08.010.C.2.b) o Parades, Carnivals, Fairs, Festivals on private property (See Section 17.08.010.C.7) o Special event, on private property I �� Resolution No. 5509-08 Attachment 2 Page 10 o Temporary or Intermittent Uses (See Section 17.08.010.C.8) 3. Uses Allowed with Administrative Use Permit Approval: o Extended hour retail (See Condition 5 of PC Resolution approving U 62-05) o General retail —More than 2,000 sf, up to 15,000 sf 4. Home Occupation Permit Required: o Home Occupation 5. All Other Uses are Not Allowed: Uses Allowed and Conditionally Allowed in the C-S zoned portions of the project site: 1. Allowed Uses: o ATM's o Banks and financial services o Business support services o Catering Service o Convenience store o Copying and Quick Printer Service o Fitness/health facility o Furniture, furnishings, and appliance stores o Live/work units o Maintenance service, client site services o Mixed— use project o Office — Accessory o Office — Processing o Office — Production and administrative o Personal services o Photo and film processing lab o Photographer, photographic studio o Produce stand o Restaurant o Studio — Art, dance, martial arts, music, etc. o Vending machines (See Section 17.08.050) o Work/live units I IJL� Resolution No. 5509-08 Attachment 2 Page 11 2. Uses Allowed with Director's of Chief Building Official's Approval by Letter: o Day care — Day care center o Medical Service — Clinic, laboratory, urgent care o Medical Service — Doctor's office o Office— Temporary, real — estate sales office in tract (See Section 17.08.010.C.1) o Office— Temporary, on-site mobile home as a construction office (See Section 17.08.010.C.2.a) o Office— Temporary, mobile home as a construction office not located on— site (See Section 17.08.010.C.2.b) o Outdoor temporary and/or seasonal sales (See Section 17.08.020) o Parades, Carnivals, Fairs, Festivals on private property (See Section 17.08.010.C.7) o Special event on private property 3. Uses Allowed with Administrative Use Permit Approval: o Auto parts sales, with installation o Banks and financial services o Bar/tavern o Equipment rental o Extended hour retail (See Condition 5 of PC Resolution approving U 62-05) o Furniture and fixtures manufacturing, cabinet shop o Laboratory — Medical, analytical, research, testing o Manufacturing — Light o Nightclub o School — Specialized education/training o Temporary or Intermittent Uses (See Section 17.08.010.C.8) 4. Home Occupation Permit Required: o Home Occupation 5. All Other Uses are Not Allowed: DRAFT SAN LUIS OBISPO Attachment 3 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 10, 2008 ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Michael M'ultari, Amanda Brodie, Dan Carpenter, Carlyn Christianson, Vice-Chairperson John Ashbaugh, Chairperson Charles Stevenson, Absent: Commr. Diana Gould Staff: Associate Planner Pam Ricci, Deputy Community Development Director Doug Davidson, and Recording Secretary Janet Miller ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA: The Public Comment and Commission Discussion items were taken in advance of the Public Hearing. MINUTES: The minutes of August 27, 2008 were approved as amended. PUBLIC COMMENT: Dan Caldon noted concerns with the 300 Lawrence Drive project plans in terms of the structural integrity of the retaining wall, encroachment onto his property, and required public improvements. He suggested that changes to plans that have occurred are not minor and that the project should be put back on a future agenda for discussion. Shawn McNabb expressed concerns with the same project mostly focused on the required public improvements. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. 2238 Broad Street. R/U 70-08: Request to add the mixed-use overlay zoning to the site's existing Neighborhood-Commercial and Service-Commercial zoning designations and consideration of an Addendum to update the previously-adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration,• and request for a use permit to allow a mixed-use project, including exceptions for building height and a side yard setback, and a 30% shared and mixed-use parking reduction; C-N-H, C-S-H, and C-S-S-H zones; Rick Moses applicant (Continued from August 27, 2008, meeting) (Pam Ricci) Chairperson Stevenson recused himself from the meeting due to a potential conflict of interest because he owned property within 500 feet of the project site. Pam Ricci, Senior Planner, presented the staff report, recommending approval of the project. She provided information on the site's context, the Commission's purview, a summary of the current project, an overview of the differences between the current and previously approved project, and the project's relationship to the South Broad Street Corridor Plan. She also noted that if the Commission supported the addition of four units to Buildings C & D, then Condition 11 should be added, which calls for the details of the / I� 1 Draft Planning Commission Mil�_.es September 10, 2008 Attachment 3 Page 2 needed changes to elevations to accommodate the additional units to be approved by the ARC. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Rick Moses, applicant, thanked staff for their work on the project and noted the applicant team's outreach efforts to gain public input on the design prior to project hearings. He mentioned that the Mixed-Use overlay zoning was requested to allow Building E to be taller to accommodate more residential units in the project. Debbie Rudd, RRM Design Group, displayed a pedestrian shed map to illustrate how the project would be neighborhood-serving and encourage people to walk or ride bicycles to the site. She discussed highlights of the new project design including how the new main street opens up views into the project from Broad Street, the additional brick work in buildings, and goals to obtain a LEED neighborhood development certification. She mentioned that the residential units would be apartments rather than condos, and that the project would contain a variety of amenities including convenient bike parkingAockers, a pool and a common recreation building. She summarized the various street and circulation improvements proposed as part of the project and noted that the project would bring new energy to the neighborhood. Jeff Dillon; RRM Design Group, provided an overview on the project building design and discussed the concept of adding some residential units to Buildings C & D. He noted how Building E, the Signature building, incorporated design elements from the former Roundhouse. He concluded by showing a three-dimensional fly-through video of the project. Dan Kallal, San Luis Obispo, noted that he was part of the South Broad Street.Corridor focus group, and supported the project. He mentioned that the project would encourage people to walk and bike to the site and that the 30% parking reduction was warranted because of this. Shawn McNabb, San Luis Obispo, noted that he was part of the South Broad Street Corridor focus group, and supported the project. He appreciated the proposed "flexible" spaces in the units along Emily Street that could accommodate a mix of living and work areas, the provision of new workforce housing, and the pedestrian orientation of the development. Nathan White, San Luis Obispo, noted his excitement about the project as a resident in the area. He stated that housing should be provided in close proximity to commercial spaces in the urban core. Ian Anderson, San Luis Obispo, noted his support for the project. He felt that the mixed-use design and location near the core of the city would reduce traffic generation and that the height exception and parking reduction were warranted. William Byars, San Luis Obispo, noted that he was the President of Villa Rosa. Homeowners Association and also part of the South Broad Street Corridor focus group, Draft Planning Commission Mit._,es Attachment 3 September 10, 2008 Page 3 and strongly supported the project. He felt that the mixed use character of the project would add life to the site and the area, and that the project was a flagship for the corridor plan that would set a high standard for future development. Rodger Maggio, Fire Marshal, mentioned that property line openings proposed would need to comply with applicable building codes. There were no further comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Multari asked staff to clarify in general where the parking to sere residential and commercial uses were provided on the site, which Pam Ricci pointed out on the site plan noting that all of the residential units had designated parking. He expressed concern that there be turnaround areas provided to the parking lot in the southeast corner of the property where there were dead-ends, and suggested that refinements to the design be made to the approval of the ARC. He also asked staff to summarize the pros and cons to the proposal to have two driveways onto Broad Street. Pam Ricci noted that the two driveways help to enhance circulation through the project and give drivers additional choices. She noted that concerns with having a second driveway were addressed through improvements to the design of the driveway entry to improve safety and properly direct drivers. Commr. Brodie inquired about how parking would be allocated among the commercial uses including restaurants on site and clarification regarding the bus stop design. Pam Ricci noted that the commercial parking was still somewhat speculative as specific tenants were not yet known. She pointed out that the required amount of parking could vary significantly depending on the range of uses ultimately established at the site. She noted that Condition No. 8 mandated that a running total of the project's parking requirements be maintained for the Community Development Director's review to assure that adequate parking is maintained. Commr. Christianson asked staff to comment on the impacts of the project on view corridors. Pam Ricci responded that the new design improved on this because of the angled and more open configuration of the front commercial buildings. Vice Chairperson Ashbaugh asked staff to verify that follow-up documents included the revised number of residential units proposed. On motion by Commr. Christianson, seconded by Commr Carpenter, the Commission: approved a use permit to allow the mixed-use development, based on. findings and subject to conditions, including a new condition supporting the addition of four residential units to the second floors of Buildings C & D and recommended that the Citv Council approve the proposed. Mixed Use (MU) overlay zoning and support the Addendum proposed to update the previously-approved Mitigated Negative. Declaration based on findings. AYES: Commrs. Christianson, Carpenter, Multari, Brodie, Vice Chairperson Draft Planning Commission W._.es September 10, 2008 Page 4 Attachment 3 Ashbaugh NOES: None RECUSED: Chairperson Stevenson ABSENT: Commr. Gould The motion carried on a 5: 0 vote. 2. Staff A. Agenda Forecast Doug Davidson provided an agenda forecast. 3. Commission a. Discussion of the City Council's decision to allow owners in the area bounded by Foothill and Los Osos Valley Road to proceed with an annexation application separately from the Land Use Element Update process. Commissioner Multari expressed his concern that the annexation request was presented to Council without Planning Commission input. He offered a written statement to the Commission containing language to send to the Council and asked the other Commissioners for feedback. The Commission discussed the issue and on a 5:1 vote (Commissioner Carpenter dissenting), moved to send a letter to Council requesting initiation of the community involvement process related to the General Plan update as soon as possible to coordinate the community planning process with this private amendment application. ADJOURMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:21 pm. Respectfully submitted by Janet Miller Recording Secretary Attachment 4 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT ITEM#1 BY: Pam Ricci, Senior Planner' MEETING DATE: September 10, 2008 FROM: Doug Davidson,Deputy Director,Development Review FILE NUMBER: U/R/ER 70-08 PROJECT ADDRESS: 2238 Broad Street SUBJECT: Requests to add the Mixed-Use overlay zoning to the site's existing Neighborhood- Commercial and Service-Commercial zoning designations and consideration of an Addendum to update the previously-adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration; and use permit to allow a mixed- use project, including exceptions for building height and a side yard setback, and a 30% shared and mixed-use parking reduction for a revised version of a previously-approved, mixed-use project proposed on the east side of Broad Street, just south of Fire Station 1, in the Railroad Historic District. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution that: 1. Recommends approval to the City Council of the Mixed Use (MU) overlay zoning, including reaffirmation of the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration as updated by the Addendum;and 2. Approves a master use permit for the mixed-use project, including a 30% shared and mixed-use parking reduction and use of tandem parking, based on findings and subject to conditions of approval and code requirements. BACKGROUND: Previous Review (The Villaee at Maymont) On May 24, 2006, the Planning Commission approved a use permit for a mixed-use project with 91 residential units and approximately 25,000 square feet of commercial lease space, known as The Village at Maymont. On .June 19, 2006, the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) unanimously approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration and granted final approval to the design. On June 26, 2006, the City received an appeal submitted by Terry Mohan objecting to the project's traffic mitigation and parking reduction. The City Council denied the appeal on July 18, 2006, upholding the ARC's actions to approve the project design and Mitigated Negative Declaration. Situation Rick Moses, the current applicant, is interested in developing the project, but would like to make some design changes. To accommodate a modified project, new applications have been filed for environmental review, architectural review, a use permit, lot line adjustment and a mixed-use overlay zoning. Zoning regulations require a Planning Commission Use Permit for mixed-use projects in the Service-Commercial zone. The Planning Commission has the authority to [ ,)-3 U/WER 62-05 (2238 BroaL;_ Attachment 4 The Village at Broad Page 2 approve the required use permit, and reviews and makes a recommendation on zoning amendments to the City Council, which takes a final action on such requests. With the MU rezoning and the use permit, Planning Commission review should focus on: 1) the appropriateness of the proposed Mixed-Use overlay zoning; 2) compliance with Zoning Regulation design and performance standards for mixed-use projects, and 3)project parking. Data Summary Applicant: Rick Moses, RMD Development Property Owner: H&D Maymont,LLC Representative: Debbie Rudd, RRM Design Group Zoning: C-N-H, Neighborhood-Commercial and C-S-H, Service-Commercial — both with the Historic Preservation zone overlay, and C-S-S-H, Service-Commercial with the Historic Preservation and Special Consideration overlay zones General Plan: Neighborhood-Commercial and Service and Manufacturing Environmental Status: A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) of environmental impact was approved by the City Council on July 18, 2006. An Addendum has been prepared to update the previously-approved MND. Site Description The project site is located in the Railroad Historic District. It occupies approximately six acres on the east side of Broad Street between Santa Barbara Avenue and Alphonso Street. Access to the site is available from three streets - Broad Street, Alphonso Street, and Roundhouse Avenue. Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way adjoins the site on the east. Fire Station No. 1 is located immediately to the north. To the south and west are offices, service-commercial uses, and houses. The site has been developed with various commercial and residential buildings and uses over the years, but none of the past buildings remain. Vegetation consists mainly of weedy grasses except for the ornamentals on the adjacent Rabobank property. A palm, several pepper trees, and eucalyptus trees are along the eastern boundary of the site. A small wetland at the southeastern comer of the site supports willows, sedges, cattails, and saltgrass. Pro iect Description The current project known as The Village at Broad Street includes 34,350 square feet of commercial space and 70 residential units, consisting of 38 one-bedroom units and 32 two- bedroom units, which would be developed within 11 different buildings. Because some commercial uses typically allowed in the Service Commercial and Neighborhood Commercial zones may not be appropriate in a mixed-use project, a modified list of uses for the site was developed for the site consistent with the previous use permit approval (Exhibit A of Attachment 7). The revised project includes a new driveway connection to Broad Street. The design of this project has been modified since initially submitted to respond to both the requirements of the City and Caltrans. To address potential concerns with traffic safety and circulation, the following elements became part of the design: I 'P U/R/ER 62-05 (2238 Broa4,- The Village at Broad Attachment 4 Page 3 • Access to Broad Street is limited to right-in, right-out movements; • Parking was eliminated in close proximity to the driveway approach and roundabout; • A "pork-chop" island was added at the entry to separate entering and exiting vehicles and keep exiting vehicles directed to the nearest right-turn or through lane in Broad Street. Some of the notable proposed changes between the Village at Maymont and the Village at Broad include: Project Features Village at Maymont Village at Broad Commercial space 25,000 square feet 34,350 square feet Residential Units 91 condominiums 70 residences Access to Broad Street Single driveway Two driveways Roundabout location Emily Street in front of Part of project Main Street signature building near Broad Southern triangular piece near Not a part of project plans. Surface parking proposed. railroad tracks Broad Street Building Backs of building facing Main Street oriented to allow Orientation street. for views into project. One of the project's key components is the proposed Main Street on the north side of the project site closest to Broad Street. The Commercial "Main Street" is lined with single-story buildings. This area is set aside for commercial uses and would contain four separate single-story commercial buildings displaying traditional downtown-style architecture with the following floor areas: Building A (6,600 square feet), Building B (4,600 square feet), Building C (8,200 square feet), and Building D (3,300 square feet). Flexibility is built into the design of the project to enable the creation of individual tenant spaces in buildings of various sizes. No residential units are currently shown on submitted plans. However, the applicant is considering the possibility of adding some studio apartments on the upper floors of Buildings C & D based on conceptual direction provided by the Architectural Review Commission. These are the commercial buildings along the Main Street that are the most distant from the Broad Street noise source and as such more appropriate for potential residential units. Building E is known as the project's "Signature Building". It will contain 11,600 square feet or retail spaces on the ground floor and have 26 units on the second and third floors. This building has been designed with a fagade that emulates the shape and forms of the former Roundhouse that previously existed nearby. Directly behind Building E is a carport and further to the east are Buildings G & H, which are residential buildings that contain a total of 8 apartment units each. These units will have two spaces assigned to them in tandem. Tandem parking spaces were also approved with the previous project. To the south of Building E and adjacent to the pool, is Building F, which is a recreational building with a gym, spa, and meeting room to serve all residents of the project. i X� U/R/ER 62-05 (2238 Brok.,— ' � — Attachment 4 The Village at Broad Page 4 The final set of residential buildings is located in the northeast corner of the property. Buildings I & J are three stories and each contain 9 residential units, and Building K is two stories and contains 10 units. The spaces along Emily Street are town-house type units that have the potential to be used as live/work units. The applicant's project description identifies the ground floor areas of these units as "flex-spaces" that could be used for either residential use or some small-scale commercial enterprise. The Village at Broad will contribute to the historic character of the Railroad Historic District by incorporating features of the original Roundhouse and brick warehouses. The apartment dwellings along Emily Street (Buildings G, H, I, J, and K) will have the feel of railroad and industrial warehouses converted to residential lofts. While there are several different architectural styles within the Village at Broad, the buildings will be compatible with one another given their orientations to streets and property lines and complementary colors and building materials. The project materials consist of mainly brick surfaces accented with cornices, moldings, hand-troweled plaster, metal roofs, canopies, and railings reflective of the historic railroad area. Attention has been given to screening parking areas for the residential units from street views by placing them between and under buildings. As with the previous application, the applicant is requesting a 30% shared and mixed-use parking reduction to maintain flexibility in attracting potential tenants and take advantage of the mixed-use character of the project. The triangular area to the south of the wetland is proposed to be used as surface parking. EVALUATION After several proposals for more traditional commercial development failed to get ultimate City support, The Village at Maymont project was enthusiastically supported and approved in 2006. The proposed village design concept with multiple buildings, outdoor use areas and smaller parking lots was found to be preferable to prior proposals that included one or two large buildings amid an unbroken expanse of parking. The mixed-use village site is located in the northeastern corner of the South Broad Street Corridor Plan. Since the Maymont project preceded the corridor plan, it is cited as a positive example to the evolving land use and mixed-use character that are guiding tenets of the corridor plan. The revised project further reinforces the village character with a focus on providing workforce housing near the downtown, creating a safe, comfortable circulation pattern for pedestrians and a greater commitment to sustainability and green technology. The proposed automobile circulation through the site and connections to Broad Street are also consistent with the draft corridor plan. Circulation through the site will provide a connection from Roundhouse Avenue to Alphonso Street. It is the City's goal to ultimately provide a vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian connection from Roundhouse to Victoria and Woodbridge Streets. This project will help to achieve that goal. The revised project design has been reviewed by both the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) and Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC). The ARC reviewed the project conceptually on July 21, 2008, generally supporting project changes, especially the reconfiguration of the main street which allows for more open views into the project from Broad Street and eliminatesr } -A U/R/ER 62-05 (2238 Broai,- _ .-- The Village at Broad Attachment 4 Page 5 the backs of buildings facing Broad. Initial direction to the applicant regarding the revised project plans is included in Attachment 5. The CHC reviewed the project on August 25, 20081 and found that the revised design was consistent with Railroad District Plan and the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines "Principles of Historic Preservation" (Attachment 4). The following evaluation addresses project General Plan conformity, Zoning Regulation compliance, and overall compatibility with surrounding development. Zoning Regulations require use permit approval based on certain findings for several aspects of this project: • A mixed-use project in the C-S zone • A 10% shared parking reduction • A 20% mixed-use parking reduction • Office uses in the C-S zone • Medical office uses in the C-S zone • Uses in a Special Considerations district • A minor side yard setback exception for Building C. 1. General Plan Conformity General Plan conformity is essential in reviewing this application. The City must make a finding that a development approval is consistent with the General Plan. Planning staff did an analysis of project consistency with affected General Plan polices, which is available in the project file. Overall, the project is consistent with policies related to compact urban form, infill housing, and compatibility with surrounding uses. In addition, the City's Zoning Regulations (Section 17.02.050) state that the City's regulations and standards will be interpreted and applied in a manner consistent with the General Plan. The proposed mixed-use project is consistent with the site's land use designation of Service Commercial and Neighborhood Commercial. It is an allowed use within the C-N district and allowed in the C-S district with the approval of a Planning Commission Use Permit. The southeastern portion of the project site has the Special Consideration (S) overlay zoning along with its base zoning of Service Commercial due to concerns regarding compatibility with railroad operations. All new uses in the Special Considerations zone require approval of a use permit. The required Planning Commission Use Permit to accommodate a mixed-use project in the C-S zone serves as a Master Use Permit for the development project and also addresses the special considerations for this area. As approved by the Planning Commission, the findings can be made to support the proposed land uses at this location as consistent with the General Plan. 2. Housing Element Consistency and Affordable Housing The Housing Element supports increased housing production, and includes many policies that support variety in housing location, type, size, tenure and style. Because of the number of units proposed and the fact that the average unit size is less than 1,000 square feet, the project is essentially affordable by design, and therefore, only required to provide one designated affordable unit per Tables 2 and 2A of the Housing Element. The applicant intends to designate one deed-restricted affordable unit within the project to satisfy the inclusionary housing requirement. � /�� U/R/ER 62-05 (2238 Broac., The Village at Broad Attachment 4 Page 6 3. Mixed Use Overlay Zoning The previous applicant elected not to pursue a Mixed Use overlay zoning for the site since the residential uses desired on the portions of the site zoned C-S could be requested through a Planning Commission use permit. The current applicant is requesting the MU zoning since it is in keeping with the design of his project and enables the approval of an increased building height for Building E, the Signature Building, without the need to request a variance. Section 17.55.030 of the Mixed Use zone chapter of the Zoning Regulations contains direction regarding property development standards and in particular, building height. The section states that "the application of the MU overlay to property may include establishing a higher height limit than the underlying zone, to more effectively accommodate the residential component of a mixed use project." The revised project shows that. Building E, the Signature Building, would have a maximum building height of about 44 feet. The proposed building height was supported by the Architectural Review Commission with their conceptual review of the project on July 21, 2008. Building E is proposed in the same relative location as the building identified as NV-2 in the previous project. MP-2 included a solar chimney that increased the overall building height to about 45 feet. Therefore, since a building of essentially the same height was previously envisioned in the same general location, the ARC supported the proposed building height as it. accommodated the requisite housing as called for in the cited section from the MU zoning chapter, and found that the added height would not result in significant aesthetic impacts. City staff had encouraged the previous applicant to consider adding a MU overlay to the project site. The advantage of having the MU zoning here is that it would require a mix of residential and nonresidential uses on the site where such mixed-use development would otherwise be optional. If the present applicant decided to not pursue the proposed project, then the MU overlay running with the land would mandate that a future project was a mixed-use project. 4. Mixed Use Standards Section 17.08.072, Mixed Use Projects, of the Zoning Regulations includes site development and performance standards for review of all new mixed-use projects in the City. With the Planning Commission staff report prepared for the previous project in 2006, staff reiterated each component of the mixed-use section, and noted below each cited section how the project conforms to these standards. The applicant took this text from the 2006. staff report and updated the discussion for the revised project (Attachment 3). This updated analysis is also included in the binders distributed to the Planning Commission as part of the project description. Instead of repeating the entire discussion in this report, staff has provided the following summary of the key elements disused. A. Design considerations. One of the more significant site constraints to the project design is noise exposure, both from Broad Street on the west side of the project and the railroad on the east. The project was evaluated using noise exposure standards from the Noise Element in a noise analysis done for the original project as part of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and an updated analysis completed U/R/ER 62-05 (2238 Broac; J Attachment 4 The Village at Broad Page 7 for the revised project. These analyses concluded that noise exposures from Broad Street created the highest decibel readings and most affected suitable locations for residential units on the project site. Accordingly, the project design shows that the residential units are located more toward the rear of the site, where they are buffered from commercial traffic along Broad Street and potential noise, odors, and glare from surrounding development. Railroad noise is offset by the distance between the project's rear boundary and the tracks (roughly 250 feet). Outdoor use areas are sheltered by buildings and retaining walls. In order to address potential land use conflicts between the project and Fire Station 1 to the immediate north, a 6-foot high block wall along the common property line will be constructed as part of the approved dispatch center project. This helps to provide noise attenuation and screening between the two properties as well as security for the Fire Department's critical operations. The applicant plans to reconfigure parking for the Rabobank on the south side of the property near Broad Street In conjunction with the project's lot line adjustment, the developer will need to record a common driveway easement for portions of drives to be used by the project and the bank. The commercial uses contained within the project will benefit both residents living in the project itself as well as in nearby neighborhoods. To encourage residents to walk rather than drive to the site, the project will include signal enhancements for pedestrians crossing Broad Street at the intersection with South and Santa Barbara, plazas, tree-lined walkways, and street furniture. B. Mix of uses. The Planning Commission is being asked to make a recommendation on a Master Use Permit for the project. The uses listed were previously approved for the prior project and include various types of offices, retail uses including restaurants and various personal and business services, and other light-industrial uses as consistent and appropriate for the C-N and C-S zones (see Exhibit A of Attachment 7). Uses such as vehicle services, construction related sales and services, and large and/or heavy manufacturing operations, would not be permitted in the new development because of compatibility issues. Previous Transportation conditions were taken out of the Draft Resolution since they are all included as mitigation measures (see Exhibit a of Attachment 6) and incorporated into the resolution by reference. Zoning regulations also require findings for office and medical uses in the C-S zone. Staff recommends limiting the allowed square footage for medical offices because of their greater parking demand. Condition No. 3 includes provision for the Community Development Director to add allowed or conditionally allowed uses to the approved list for the project based on a finding of compatibility with the mixed use project design if the Zoning Regulations are ultimately amended to allow additional uses in the C-N and C-S zones that may be appropriate within the project. All other modifications to the use matrix would require the approval of the Planning Commission. C. Maximum density. The density for the proposed project is approximately 14 density units per net acre.. This is based on the equivalent density of 57.08 units (38 one-bedroom units and 32 two-bedroom units) U/R/ER 62-05 (2238 Broaa, Attachment 4 The Village at Broad Page 8 proposed on about 4.13 acres of C-S zoned property. The maximum allowed density in the C-S zone is 24 units per net acre. D. Site layout and project design standards. The site improvements and living spaces within the project have been laid out to take advantage of views of surrounding hills and shelter the residences from Broad Street traffic noise. Loading areas for the commercial buildings comply with City standards and are located to minimize conflicts with on-site uses and be as unobtrusive as possible. Trash and recycling enclosures are provided at several locations throughout the site to provide efficient and convenient facilities for both residential and commercial uses in the project. There is a standard that calls for residential units to not occupy ground floor space within the first 50 feet of floor area measured from each building face adjacent to a street. Two of the residential buildings along Emily Street, Buildings I & J would appear to be in conflict with this standard. The Mixed-Use Overlay Zone allows flexibility in the location of uses to further the intent and purpose of the zoning to have more effective and efficient mixed-use projects. In the case of Buildings I & J, the ground floor of these residential units is designed to be a "flex- space", meaning that it could accommodate commercial, office, artist studios, craftsman studios or residential (Condition No. 5). This design does not mandate that the ground floor space be utilized for a commercial enterprise, but allows for it depending on the needs and desires of the particular resident. A very minor side yard setback exception is requested for Building C, a commercial building located 6.5 feet away from the north property line shared with Fire Station 1. The adjacent property is a parking and service area for the Fire Department which is separated from the site by a block wall. The highest portion of the wall facing this property line is a parapet that reaches a maximum height of 26 feet. Most of the wall is at 22 feet in height. The portion of the wall at 26 feet in height would require an 8-foot setback; therefore, the applicant is requesting a 1.5-foot setback exception for the building. Findings are included in the draft resolution supporting approval of this minor exception request. Staff finds that the variation in roof heights afforded by the higher parapets here makes the building more interesting and aesthetically pleasing. E. Performance standards. This section of the mixed use regulations highlights lighting, noise and hours of operation. In terms of lighting, Mitigation Measure No. 4 simply acknowledges that project lighting would comply with the Community Design Guidelines. With the ARC's final review of development plans, conformance with standards calling for certain illumination levels and shielded lighting would be reviewed in detail. In terms of noise, mitigation measures are included to insure consistency with Noise Element standards for both interior spaces and exterior outdoor use areas. Condition No. 6 includes a standard requirement for residential projects in the C-S and M zones for the disclosure to renters of the potential for increased noise levels. Condition No. 9 allows for review of the use permit by the Hearing Officer in the event of a complaint, including noise related complaints. Condition No. 7 is the same condition previously approved which sets base hours of operation for all commercial uses to be limited to between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., unless the Director approves I �- o U/R/ER 62-05 (2238 Broa4; = Attachment 4 The Village at Broad Page 9 an Administrative Use Permit for extended hours, and provides an exception that food and beverage uses may operate from 6:00 a.m. until midnight with no live entertainment after 10:00 p.m. This is consistent with the code in terms of having appropriate restrictions in place and the flexibility for a particular use to request extended hours of operation through a use permit where the potential impacts to area residents could be properly evaluated. F. Requirements for Use Permit projects. The project is expressly encouraged by the Land Use Element which promotes a compact urban form, and by the Housing Element, which encourages a variety of housing types in the City. Staff has generally included previously approved conditions and mitigation measures to ensure compliance with standards that address compatibility issues. The Planning Commission may add any additional conditions that they feel are necessary and appropriate to insure on-going compatibility between uses in the project may be implemented. The project's mixed uses are consistent with the General Plan and are compatible with their surroundings, with neighboring uses, and with each other because: 1. All of the uses proposed are allowed or conditionally allowed in the C-N and C-S zone; 2. As conditioned, adjacent environmental noise and commercial-service activities will be disclosed to prospective residents of the project; and 3. The uses that are allowed have been chosen to insure compatibility and this use permit may be reviewed by the City if reasonable written complaints are received from residents of the project or the Police Department. 5. Parkin Project applicants are seeking to reduce the area of the site given over to car parking as much as possible without compromising the overall success of the project. They are asking for a 10% shared-use parking reduction; an additional 20% mixed-use parking reduction and the use of tandem parking for 16 of the residential units. With no approved reductions, the total parking requirement for the project is estimated to be 347 spaces based on the applicant's requested uses. Plans show 268 spaces provided, with 32 of those spaces provided in tandem for the exclusive use of 16 designated residential units. A full 30% parking reduction would lower the total parking requirement to 243 spaces. The Zoning Regulations state, "It is the City's intent, where possible, to consolidate parking and minimize the area devoted exclusively to parking and drives when typical demands may be satisfied more efficiently by shared facilities." With use permit approval a 10% reduction is allowed where two or more uses share common parking areas. Up to an additional 20% is allowed where the times of maximum parking demands will not coincide. Parking for residential uses may be arranged in tandem subject to the approval of the Director or a hearing body such as the Planning Commission or the ARC. On-site parking will include a mixture of uncovered spaces and covered spaces. Each residence will have at least one parking space. Additionally, business employees and residents of the site will have convenient access to the City's bicycle transportation network and public transit. Short- and long-term bicycle parking is provided throughout the site. Because there are three underlying parcels, the developer will need to record a common parking and access easement. � -3f U/R/ER 62-05 (2238 Broa,- Attachment 4 The Village at Broad Page 10 Details of the parking calculation are included in Attachment 3,Project Description. 6. Environmental Review On July 18, 2006, the City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MIND) of environmental impact for the previously approved project on the site. A Notice of Determination was filed with the County Clerk on June 21, 2006. Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines allows a lead agency to prepare an addendum to a previously adopted Negative Declaration if there are changes or additions that have occurred in the project description since the initial study was originally prepared, but there are not new environmental impacts, or changes in circumstances that require substantial modifications to the MND or approved mitigation measures Findings to support this conclusion are included in both the Addendum (Attachment 6)and the Draft Resolution (Attachment 7). Since the project has changed somewhat, the Addendum serves to update the project description, discuss any changes to the evaluation of environmental issue areas from the previous MND, and identify any modifications to mitigation measures. The Addendum updates the previously approved initial study. Because of its size, the previous MND is available for review in electronic form. A hard copy is also available for review by the Commission or interested members of the public in the Community Development Department at 919 Palm. The environmental initial study was released for public comment on May 18, 2006. The initial study identified several areas of potentially significant impact. Of particular concern with this project are aesthetics, noise and traffic.. Mitigation recommended to address noise issues focuses mainly on methods of construction and placement of residential uses relative to Broad Street traffic. Noise from the railroad is offset by the distance to the tracks (200+ feet) and the fact that trains moving in and out of the train station are traveling at a relatively slow speed. Traffic generation and impacts on affected intersections are addressed in a traffic study prepared by Penfield and Smith. Although this project and the prior Village at Maymont project would generate substantially less traffic than previous commercial proposals for this site, some of the intersections that will be impacted are operating at or near less than acceptable levels of service. Recommended mitigation included two northbound left turn lanes on Broad at South Street, a raised landscaped median on Broad Street, pedestrian safety signals, fair share contribution to a future traffic signal at Broad and Woodbridge, a right-in, right-out limitation on the project driveway to Broad, and provision for a future road connection from Alphonso Street to Woodbridge Street on the east side of Broad Street. ALTERNATIVES 1. The Planning Commission can continue the project if additional information is needed or if more time is needed to fully evaluate the proposal. 2. The Planning Commission can deny the project if the Commission cannot make the required findings in support of the mixed-use project or request parking reduction. Attached: ( / — Attachment 1: Vicinity Map U/R/ER 62-05 (2238 Broan�,- ° ' Attachment 4 The Village at Broad Page 11 Attachment 2: Project Plans Attachment 3: Applicant's detailed project description Attachment 4: 8-25-08 CHC follow-up letter Attachment 5: 7-21-08 ARC follow-up letter and minutes Attachment 6: Addendum to previously-approved Mitigated Negative Declaration Attachment 7: Draft Resolution for a Mixed Use Permit and Parking Reduction, with Exhibit A, Master Use List and Exhibit B, Mitigation Summary 6,04- d+xchet O here., Provided for Commissioners sca 1�}}zach menf-2� Full Size Project Plans Application Submittal Binder Available at 919 Palm Street Hard Copy of Adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Village at Maymont Project Available on-line PDF of Adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Village at Maymont Project L.ViUage at Broad(70-08)\Staff Reports\U 70-08 Village at Broad PC report i �35 • r r � _ . N 1 F � 1 J� fro J. Y S F l: i / � ,r <�>•.c �' 1� J ails 1 { � . V� r 4 a 4,` • SCA�=AT` {r,4"Y ,. . . . : _ , - iii► 1 .l �- r . ♦ 1 1 I VICINITY MAP File No. 70=08 2238 Broad Stre_et Attachment 4 Attachment 2 Mj Cu ru a ssq � s � NL Q� o � o m I 1 6 �r✓Z Vie., C a aJ jy�, yL f d Y f �d r ©•l I � J , �c �v1 nt,l 4 r• J.-3 � �' Attachment 4 Q tai* 1 9 x� 1 1► O 111i_! I1 tI I +; i I1 j �L \ 2 UQQ IIIA �il fie [ 1��1 ]lI�1 SII �� ,i i �i i — — - ' V_LTMUS_OSNOH_dWfit _ it 12 A � s I \ /I �• w p , , , Y \\ ter.. /5� �` �# r =, j o• f! \. � .\' r.a, � �!� �\ `,- i , •wcice,.® 41;:-q V a ! - / 1;: WWW 10111111 to to �\ j ✓ lel 4 ' V Attachment 4 I N 4 §Z C S �.O R 9 Q O a� Z}♦ ra,:, z.Cu o $'c. lj� .... i 1 ,f a �, m� asase I �1 ;li ........ '�sa ............ ....---- !!!� \A\ `c CLIP!� tw ° � ' Attachment 4 l Hill Q §Z N 8 2 t� W o�z mt3 'Coca .; m'3' LL aO ,aro •. a. Hm o. f ^� O a a}t tt trF cc m r � d �C m e f 55 n a! !q stag ................. s m �1 f :seas ,G e � 0• .Q` 1 Attachment 4 JIM g � W 4— RM C W YW _ V y 103 zrd0 v,v QL/� Z 4-1 a O l� g � / UW ZO s ._.I• C Jl_ � I—' P a a. _s 4f �4 C •uo� • U v. 2 � J � J s • i 7 a I S gg 6`rr` V C �d asaae 9 ................................ I ! m Hill t --- .------------ ............. a r if Y/ o ;_a N Attachment 4 Q 50 � 8 a. Z 0 z� yy yy i i� O QJ mS, a5a f e F = scam .................. s aaa:a k r. � a o u CL o Attachment 4 a ^O L a �N LL� N O Z 5m o� o� LL gm LLl P f .......... ..... .... F I 1 i i t� g !s` k i , eQ � t Attachment 4 r` Q . 40 a =°L s ov) 00 Z L Qib 04.0 u e a w n � V1 TP I W s e a� �? coo 'o It U. i W a Z 21 0 ;g J t O ' iY ° G if 3g "sg I {a sa i� sg is It f ; ] SY ! 9 ] is ;g IV 4 el f ;€ C i. �fi � 1 -N [ E� � I f E ] � 11 Li 11 I I 1 ■■ I I i■■I- IID I i I p ■�"i� mn INE "' I u"}I IC 'li I I S +IIL�^iw I .on I I yl III y I ry ,Ilhal! ai III I 'i�n� o.l ' 9D 1 i' t III Ib 5�� ��� I�i✓r`. v.:zi - I ■mai—!� �0 — 1'.��i��� 00 Il����j' 'd III�.f31 3�w1 Attachment 4 CGI ^o C ui .. ca Z 00 aY nG CO O J�� 1.I .y o s. 1 �1 0— UM: o 1 arm 9: o ms m Pi I i esaae W amHill h W m � s°osa a i E �P Attachnue t 4 1 moi. J §Z a g 0 OSPLL lI L- to Om 2 u� u ZCYC m> � o � m L o I—' e 1 O np tl� O 6 Illi �� m 0 •1L 1• p I I m� m m m LL -Z-�}7� 7 it Q Z alli 1 o r/ tw A E t Attachmen"4 a� >L We 111 g° ,�°ySvW am a€ €ss zo � i11 k m u cLf o� I s I > ° vm 0 1 I li s, e I i Hill 3� gs •. m W �� � sows s I � : Qac Q r� N ; p� AttachnWt 4 ;Z aN sqLL 0 L Q� to� u� z o� m; � o t � m H � c a ay s_E s8e It ira e 1. it 1 - H _ 3 e �- 41 x 1; 1 e e 5a it 1� .a rCL1 h � �,Ir ' AttachmpAt 4 44, '0 1 W� W V Eno 3 3° .aaa ZCM] ML m mgt u� .Oi a v o ao U .... NK 7 fill g2 st, g esae m'S m'z e m m s- !� saaa6 2 i c Jill ticI � to ' >_ Attachmwt 4 sop LL Cc zoo 54-1 Attachment 4 .z W 11 WW,N.) $$ YJ o YA Y I J I II m 11 s c a ez / J C m 0 0 I � r fill + I i i � I� •, I I ria vs I\ oC asaae II� Y P m Hill f saaaa e � s. n O 'r =t .ILLI t I 1i � � e1I Attachment 4 o CL s l o f m � p ■ a ' S • a �; • :e .,r I • t 411 e� 1 {Y? Ali 1 It _ f .tiJ P • • �1 r i "� �►�.4'� ,,� ! �s�1= rte' `�� :l,9. `111,F" � pr 0 >�.�.� 'i•y �/ -r wnt ' Fav �.,,rd ra4i��y� ad g. t►., O 04 It 0 °�► t•�,t�:^ ♦Ia ;':��` �� rpt; ` ,R�f.:,t nil yyh � q !I •iT..� .�.� ,l y ni j Attachment 4 i V Ibb 64 M 1 S __r:_ .�• t � pedis N Wit 11 Y113 ca Yco g !! qqMIN Q @ggq qg4g4 }y 644 00 hill Aph i CL ��Y3c°aex CL1P rye AA,, Q • Ea°�€ W � QLuW o � � o J m i o OL O \ Z G o O co I ,1 \, L \ :Pk O -�� cc � Q crju o / i �yt 16 LV Zj O o t a m �� Attachwnt 4 lg Y Y Y S V cr 7 8 4@ fe ✓! @i E 4 i a Y 9 ^O 1� T • C� I �$ qng le lei�p SSi ep'Y R Q� Sa iz 9e di f^€e d 0 o O F- ! 6 • e I I LL'4W a B 23 CL ki 40 R 4 f �� , Attachment 4 \Y M l U i1 alil@@Ul.ir5 i9 Q �e9!li514i;EeilE6�ie��ee���tF zL = °°°e to i:.e�iela 1 � Yer � 1 i l a0 LD ell e 0 �� Pe �' �r S •• 1 n rn , At . . \ p '1S 1'LLnOS l� I r h n 61i %' N11 1, Attachr vnt 4 6 6, j E q Ls i >— 3..L !j; !1 ,E F SIE L LL,EL 9 a) o } N1.L� o 11 ,�, L 9i E _ 7Vd 133HIS OSNOH yy grE ggi i .'Si .- ,��- - -----,----- `� c I4G d d) � I Attachmegt 4 V isssppp s8 9zQj eeleaelltB��!!@!SF E' g� to \ _1332115 OSNOHdIV QJ e I �V C \ t GS ,0, alvnaad 01 i 1 . e' g L e a �5 ` ° 1 a 27F 4 as ` E � a � 133a1s e w.nas ' 1 gEg cj a S�S K PSP �0 P 3Snoyory�o� E P2AP0 y �; C i�; THEILLAGE ISRCJCA'D" PROJECT DESCRIPTION STREET Attachment 3 Vision Village at Broad logically unifies urban living into a community with characteristics that preserve the historic quality, and contribute to the authenticity of the Railroad District area. This is a place where you will find a balanced mix of uses that offer retail destinations, restaurant establishments, and residential units. Incorporating sustainable design elements into the village design and architecture is a key component of the project. The village is designed to be pedestrian oriented, tucking the residential parking lots and garages behind the buildings. The village main street is lined with retail and restaurant uses that open onto wide sidewalks with street trees and benches, with a large heritage tree located in the center of the round-a-bout. This main street culminates at the central plaza and signature building. This public plaza is envisioned as the heart to the village, with restaurants and outdoor seating, a fountain, and public art, where people can congregate and come together as a community. The Village at Broad brings new energy to this area of town while, capturing the historic character of the Railroad District. The plan fosters a sense of community by encouraging walking and providing gather spaces for people to relax, play and interact. Architecture Village at Broad evokes components of the historic Railroad District by incorporating architectural features of the original railroad Roundhouse and brick warehouses. The architectural styles represent the evolution of architecture and uses along the railroad from the warehouse buildings of the tum of the century, to the industrial and commercial buildings of the early to mid 1900's. The project materials consist of mainly brick surfaces accented with cornices, moldings, hand troweled plaster, metal roofs, canopies and railings reflective of the historic railroad area. The village commercial "Main Street', is lined with traditional downtown commercial style architecture. The commercial structures are single story with variable height spaces to give the buildings the needed massing to frame the street and to avoid flat, unarticulated rooflines. This commercial Main Street terminates at the three story signature building with ground floor retail and two levels of residential stacked flats above. The curved brick arcade on the front of the signature building reiterates the elements of the original roundhouse, with the hint of new construction emerging from behind. The apartment dwellings on Emily Street and at the back of the site have the feel of railroad and industrial warehouses converted to residential use. The two buildings fronting on Emily Street have strong influences of mid century industrial warehouses converted to residential lofts. These units have a ground floor flexible-space with a bedroom loft space above. The flexible space can be used as artist studios, craftsman workshop, home office or as a living space. The buildings behind the signature building reflect the turn of the century brick warehouses that were historically found around the railroads. Though each cluster of buildings has a distinct architectural style, the colors and materials will tie them together to unify the Village at Broad. i THEt_I:.LAGE BR " PROJECT DESCRIPTION STREET Amenities Village at Broad provides various amenities for the project residents as well as the surrounding neighborhoods. The design places emphasis on the pedestrian experience, with enhanced streetscapes and a variety of gathering areas. Within walking distance to the surrounding neighborhoods residents will find a place to gather, dine, or grab a cup of coffee. Visitors and residents will have opportunities to participate in neighborhood events such as a farmer's market or outdoor entertainment. A community building with a pool, exercise room, kitchen, media and conference room is located along the tree lined riparian area for The Village at Broad residents to enjoy. It offers residents the opportunity to be more active, engaged, and independent of automotive travel. The riparian area will be enhanced with natural and native landscaping for an added serene experience for the entire community to benefit from. Circulation The Village at Broad provides a circulation pattern that logically connects the surrounding neighborhoods and helps implement the City's long term goal of connecting Victoria Street to Emily Street. The main entry to the project is off of Broad Street, with secondary access points off of Roundhouse Street and Alphonso Street. To enhance safe and efficient flow of traffic in and out of the project there is also a right-in/right out access drive to the Main Street round-a-bout from Broad Street. The design results in a well- connected auto, pedestrian, and bicycle friendly neighborhood. The internal street network cues the user towards the private or public realm, using architectural elements, special paving, parking options and signage. The proposed project is conditioned to include road improvements along Broad Street. To improve traffic flow on Broad Street it will be widened with an additional left turn lane from NB Broad Street onto WB South Street, a new right tum lane, a raised median, and a bike lane. The proposed road improvements will greatly improve peak hour circulation and LOS for the Broad and South Street intersection. Sustainability _ The Village at Broad Street strives to be considered the sustainability bar to which all other projects compare themselves. The design team is committed to certifying the project through the United States Green Building Council's (USGBC) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Neighborhood Development (LEED-ND) evaluation and certification process and SLO Green Build Residential Multi-Family GreenPoints program. These two programs, selected for their applicability to a project of this type, offer third-party verification of the projects demonstrated sustainability commitment. (If we use the SLO Green Build process, it is considered a self-certification process, not to be confused with a third-party verification. If they actually get rated by Build It Green for using the same checklist, it can be considered a third-party verification.) The project has utilized both checklists during the 'initial design phase to guide design solutions and material selections to maximize energy efficiency, and to reduce the project's carbon footprint. Some notable features included in the project are: • Locating the project on a previously developed infill site with proximity to established city infrastructure in an established community. Reduced automobile dependence by providing the following: RMI'd -2- - AT _. Tril VILAGE BAnao Q PROJECT DESCRIPTION S T RE E T o Reduced price transit passed for local bus transit and rail o Connecting to an existing bike trail system (Bob Jones and rail/trail) o Proximity to community supported services, such as child care, schools, churches, laundry, grocery and parks. Walking distance to everything residents will need to live, work, learn, and play • Locating the project on a contaminated site, which will be mitigated before the start of the project • If residents choose to travel greater distances, notably the project is located within a '/i mile of bus and train stations, an established bicycle trail network and other low impact travel options. Residents and employees will be provided with a reduced price mass transit pass to further encourage taking advantage of these options. • The project has been designed to include 34,350sf of retail space, and 70 rental units on site. • The project's contractor, JW Design, has committed to reducing pollution and to establishing a construction activity pollution prevention program and plans to divert more than 50%of all construction waste from landfills • Previously developed infill site, which reduces sprawl and preserves valuable green space • Located adjacent to existing City infrastructure, including the City's reclaimed water line, allowing for the use of non-potable water for irrigation • Incorporates a variety of uses including residential units of various sizes. • Design team intends to model all systems holistically to reduce energy use, and to include high quality, low energy use fixtures, furnishings, finishes and appliances such as, o Ultra low-flow plumbing fixtures and Energy Star appliances throughout o Recycled content in the projects infrastructure, including roadways and sidewalks Light fixtures selected to provide safe streets without light pollution • Intend to use passive solar an ventilation strategies to decrease load on conventional conditioning systems • Intend to decrease the environmental impact of the building materials by choosing materials that contain recycled content and are harvested and manufactured locally when feasible. Background/Situation The City approved Village at Maymont, an application for a use permit to allow a lot line adjustment, a 30% parking reduction, architectural review, street abandonment, and environmental review for a mixed-use project on vacant land along Broad Street between Fre Station #1 and Rabobank. This project has evolved and is being resubmitted as Village at Broad Street. Under new ownership, we are requesting; architectural review, planning commission review, environmental review addendum, a lot line adjustment, and a mixed-use overlay. The project site is zoned both Neighborhood- Commercial and Service-Commercial. . Site Description The project site is located in the City's Railroad Historic District. It occupies approximately 6 acres on the east side of Broad Street between Santa Barbara and Alphonso Streets. Access to the site is available from three streets - Broad Street, d 3 �-(� TH E l AT ,A LAG E Bftacbrr PROJECT DESCRIPTION S T ISE E T Alphonso Street, and Roundhouse Avenue. Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way adjoins the site on the east. The City's Fire Station #1 is located immediately to the north. To the south and west are Rabobank, offices, service-commercial uses, and houses. The site is vacant. Vegetation consists mainly of non-native grasses. A palm, several pepper trees and eucalyptus trees are along the eastern boundary of the site. A small wetland at the southeastern corner of the site supports willows, sedges, cattails, and saltgrass. Site constraints include noise from both Broad Street and the railroad; a wetland located in the southern triangle; and traffic circulation related to traffic volume on Broad Street and access to and through the site. Data Summary Applicants: Rick Moses, Rick Moses Development Property Owner: H & D Maymont, LLC Representative: RRM Design Group Zoning: C-N-H, Neighborhood-Commercial & C-S-H, Service-Commercial — both with the Historical Preservation overlay General Plan: Neighborhood-Commercial.& Services & Manufacturing Environmental Status: A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact was certified by the Deputy Director for the Village at Maymont. An Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration is being requested. Summary The following evaluation addresses project General Plan conformity, Zoning Regulation compliance, and overall compatibility with surrounding development. Zoning Regulations require use permit approval based on certain findings for several aspects of this project: • A mixed-use overlay in the C-S/C-N zone • A 10% shared parking reduction • A 20% mixed-use parking reduction • Uses in a Special Considerations district • Height/yard setback exception on North property line adjacent to Fire Station No.1 Though the changes are minor, an addendum to the environmental review - Mitigated Negative Declaration for Village at Maymont will be needed for the Village at Broad Street. Please refer to the attached updated Noise and Traffic Analyses. General Plan Conformity _ General Plan conformity is essential in reviewing this application. The City must make a finding that a development approval is consistent with the General Plan. The project is consistent with policies related to compact urban form, infill housing, and compatibility with surrounding uses. d , -4- . .. ..... . .. THE + `�� � V LLAG E B t u PROJECT DESCRIPTION S T R E E T In addition, the City's Zoning Regulations (Section 17.02.050)state that the City's regulations and standards will be interpreted and applied in a manner consistent with the General Plan. The proposed mixed-use project is consistent with the site's land use designation of Commercial Service and Neighborhood Commercial. It is an allowed use within the C-N district and conditionally allowed in the C-S district. The Special Considerations overlay zone requires a Use Permit for any new use at this location. Housing Element Consistency and Inclusionary Housing The Housing Element supports increased housing production, and includes many policies that support variety in housing location, type, size, tenure and style. Because of the number of units proposed and the fact that the average unit size is less than 1,000 square feet, the project is essentially affordable by design, and therefore, only required to provide one designated affordable unit per Tables 2 and 2A of the Housing Element. Please refer to the Inclusionary Housing Attachment. Context Parcels immediately surrounding the project site are zoned Service-Commercial, Manufacturing and Public Facility. Properties in the vicinity - across Broad Street and across the railroad tracks - are zoned for neighborhood commercial and residential uses. The project will effectively anchor one end of the upcoming South Broad Corridor Plan. Given the mix of uses already in this part of town, a mixed-use project on this particular site seems very appropriate. Please refer to the Pedestrian Shed Map. Site Planning Earlier design charettes conducted by the Village at Maymont applicant and project representatives with City staff and representative from the Planning Commission and City Council identified a village design concept with multiple buildings, outdoor use areas and smaller parking lots as preferable to one or two large buildings amid an unbroken expanse of parking. Village at Broad St. applicant is proposing a similar design concept with a few changes. Please refer to Key Design Differences Table below. The proposed building setbacks, parking design, and coverage are consistent with General Plan and property development policies. The site improvements and living spaces have been laid out to take advantage of views of surrounding hills and shelter the residences from Broad Street traffic noise. The site layout, has been designed to have buildings fronting Broad Street, Emily Street and internal streets, with residential parking and garages tucked behind the buildings. Circulation through the site will provide a connection from Roundhouse Avenue to Alphonso Street. It is the City's goal to ultimately provide a vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian connection from Roundhouse to Victoria and Woodbridge Streets. This project will help to achieve that goal. RMI'd -5- ` ��� AT � Q rN THE N-"IAGE B�� PROJECT DESCRIPTION 5 TREE T Key Design Differences Topic Village at Maymont Village at Broad Circulation Weak connection between Direct connection between Main Main Street and central Street and central plaza. Improved plaza. pedestrian connections. New access drive to Main Street from Broad Street(right in/right out only). Building Orientation Back of buildings facing Main Street reoriented to have Broad Street. Individual building fronts visible from Broad residential units were narrow, Street, leading into a central plaza, with awkward spaces. and project's signature building. Retail Square Footage 25,150 sq.ft. 34,350 sq.ft. Residential 91 units for sale 70 units leased Community Building Not proposed With pool, patio, gym, kitchen, conference and media room. LEED ND Not proposed Project designed to meet LEED ND certification requirements Temporary Parking Lot Not proposed This parking lot will allow for overflow and employee parking. Mixed-Use Overlay Not proposed The Mixed-Use Overlay allows residential and commercial flexibility. City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations-Mixed-Use Standards In 2003 the City Council amended the Zoning Regulations to establish site development and performance standards for review of all new mixed-use projects in the City. The evaluation below follows the City's new performance standards for mixed-use projects, with staff's analysis provided in italics: Zoning Regulations- Section 17.08.072- Mixed-Use Projects A. Design considerations. A mixed-use project shall be designed to achieve the following objectives. 1. The design shall provide for internal compatibility between the different uses. The residential units are located above and behind the retail and restaurant uses. 2. Potential noise, odors, glare, pedestrian traffic, and other potentially significant impacts on residents shall be minimized to allow a compatible mix of residential and nonresidential uses on the same site. The residential units are located more toward the rear of the site, where they are buffered from commercial traffic along Broad Street and potential noise, 6 1' �� AT P Q � - THE ;1LLAG E B AkMRRQ PROJECT DESCRIPTION STREET odors, and glare from surrounding development. The area of the site adjacent to San Luis Garbage is proposed as a temporary parking lot. Railroad noise is offset by the distance between the project's rear boundary and the tracks (roughly 250 feet). Outdoor use areas are sheltered by buildings and retaining walls. 3. The design of the mixed-use project shall take into consideration potential impacts on adjacent properties and shall include specific design features to minimize potential impacts. The two properties most affected by this project are the fire station and Rabobank. There will be a screen wall at the east and south sides of the fire station property. Project developers have worked with Rabobank to reconfigure parking for the bank along (Name of Street former Maymont Drive). In conjunction with the project's lot line adjustment, the developer will need to record a common driveway easement for portions of drives to be used by the project and the bank. 4. The design of a mixed-use project shall ensure that the residential units are of a residential character and that privacy between residential units and between other uses on the site is maximized. The proposed building architecture is generally commercial or industrial in character, reflecting the design pattern in the area and the guidelines in the Railroad Distract Plan. With this said, the dwellings themselves are identifiably residential largely because of the window treatment and balcony areas, similar to what might be expected in more urban areas. 5. The design of the structures and site planning shall encourage integration of the street pedestrian environment with the nonresidential uses through the use of plazas, courtyards, walkways, and street furniture. Plazas, tree-lined walkways, and street furniture are all proposed as part of this plan. in addition, the project includes the potential to close some of the private street area for outdoor events. 6. Site planning and building design shall be compatible with and enhance the adjacent and surrounding residential neighborhood in terms of scale, building design, color, exterior materials, roof styles, lighting, landscaping, and signage. The site is not immediately adjacent to a residential neighborhood. However, the site planning and building design is consistent with the intent of the proposed South Broad Street Corridor Plan. B. Mix of uses. A mixed-use project may combine residential units with any other use, or combination of uses allowed in the applicable zoning district by Section 17.22.010; provided that where a mixed-use project is proposed with a use required by Section 17.22.010 to have Use. Permit approval in the applicable RM d 1-�� AT P_. THE 'b 1"A GE BRA 4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION S T RE E T zoning district, the entire mixed-use project shall be subject to that permit requirement. The Planning Commission is being asked to make a recommendation on a Master Use Permit for the project. The uses include various types of retail uses including restaurants and various personal and business services, and other light-industrial uses as consistent and appropriate for the C-N and C-S zones. C. Maximum density. The residential component of a mixed-use project shall comply with the maximum density requirements of the applicable zoning district; except that the residential component of a mixed-use project in the C-S or M zoning districts shall not exceed 24 dwelling units per net acre. The density for the proposed project is 14 density units per net acre. D. Site layout and project design standards. Each proposed mixed-use project shall comply with the property development standards of the applicable zoning district, and the following requirements. 1. Location of units. Residential units shall not occupy ground floor space within the first 50 feet of floor area measured from each building face adjacent to a street, or any ground floor space in the CD zoning district. The Mixed-Use Overlay Zone allows flexibility in the location of uses. The project locates residential units with `flexible spaces"along Emily Street. The ground floor of these residential units is designed to be a `flex-space" These flex-spaces can accommodate commercial, office, artist studios, craftsman studios or residential. 2. Loading areas. Commercial loading areas shall be located as far as possible from residential units and shall be screened from view from the residential portion of the project to the extent feasible. There are 4 loading areas associated with the retail located away from residential units. Since most buildings are designed to be viewed from all sides, there is no real place to locate a loading zone that would be wholly screened from view. 3. Refuse and recycling areas. Areas for the collection and storage of refuse and recyclable materials shall be located on the site in locations that are convenient for both the residential and non-residential uses. Trash collection facilities are provided at 6 locations on the site as shown on Plan Sheet A-1. The enclosures are designed with (2) 3-yard containers per location, and are anticipated to be picked up once a week (Building E has (3) 3 yard containers). There are indoor trash receptacles inside Building E, and A. The proposed configurations, location and size meet the standards established by the garbage company. Please refer to the written email approval from San Luis Garbage. AT Q .� THE XLLLAGE Bmg& 4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ISTREET E. Performance standards. 1. Lighting. Lighting for the commercial uses shall be appropriately shielded to not negatively impact the residential units. The lighting selected for the project is consistent with the Railroad District Plan and is scaled for pedestrian areas, building perimeter, streetscapes and storefronts. All lighting will be shielded to prevent glare and "night-sky" illumination pollution. Please refer to the Plant List and Site Amenities Booklet. 2. Noise. All residential units shall be designed to minimize adverse impacts from non-residential project noise, in compliance with the City's noise regulations. Construction techniques will be used to minimize noise in interior areas. The construction assemblies per the City of San Luis Obispo Noise Guidebook will be implemented. 3. Hours of operation. A mixed-use project proposing a commercial component that will operate outside of the hours from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. shall require the Director's approval to ensure that the commercial use will not negatively impact the residential uses within the project. Because this is a project that proposes to have restaurants open for the residents and surrounding neighbors, we propose operating hours of 6 am to 11 pm. F. Requirements for Use Permit projects. A mixed-use project that requires Use Permit approval in compliance with Subsection B., or that is located in the C-S or M zoning districts is subject to the following requirements. 1. Property development standards. The approval of a Use Permit for a mixed-use project may include: a. Less restrictive standards than required by the applicable zoning district, to the extent allowed by Use Permit approval in other sections of these regulations, to make particular use combinations more feasible. Parking - Parking reduction of 30% is requested, as described in the "Parking"discussion of this report. Height - Building E(the centrally located mixed-use building) is proposed to be 44'high. The underlying zone allowable height is 35 Setback - Height/yard setback exception of 1.5 feet on a portion of the north property line adjacent to Fire Station No.1. (the previous project Village at Maymont needed a 2 foot setback exception). Please refer to Solar Study exhibit. ) (, rM d -9 - 1— v � BIN AT { �? rx> _1LLAGE BRO ' PROJECT DESCRIPTION $TRE E 2. Mandatory findings for approval. The approval of a Use Permit for a mixed- use project shall require that the review authority first make all of the following findings, as applicable. a. The project's mixed uses are consistent with the general plan and are compatible with their surroundings, with neighboring uses, and with each other; The project is expressly encouraged by the Land Use Element which promotes a compact urban form, and by the Housing Element, which encourages a variety of housing types in the City. The project's mixed uses are consistent with the General Plan and are compatible with their surroundings, with neighboring uses, and with each other because (1) all of the uses proposed are allowed or conditionally allowed in the C-N and C-S zone, and(2) the uses that are allowed have been chosen to insure compatibility. b. The project's design protects the public health, safety, and welfare; and The project is designed in a manner that protects public health, safety and welfare, and consistent with City policies and standards. c. The mixed uses provide greater public benefits than single-use development of the site. This finding must enumerate those benefits, such as proximity of workplaces and housing, automobile trip reduction, provision of affordable housing, or other benefits consistent with the purposes of this Section. The project provides residential units that are "affordable by design." In addition, the project has immediate access to public transportation and the City's bicycle route network. The mix of uses that are anticipated are appropriate, and will provide housing (including affordable housing) in close proximity to workplaces both on-site and within the immediate vicinity, thereby reducing reliance on automobiles. 3. Mandatory findings for more restrictive standards. To require property development standards more restrictive than those of the underlying zone, such as a curtailed list of allowable uses, the review authority must make one of the following findings: a. Site-specific property development standards are needed to protect all proposed uses of the site, in particular residential uses; or To ensure compatibility between commercial and residential uses on the site, some of the uses that would normally be allowed in the C-N and C- S zone will be prohibited in this development. These uses include automobile services, construction related sales and services, and large and/or heavy manufacturing operations. RM 10 l /�� AT THE Ni"A G E B A PROJECT DESCRIPTION $ b. Site-specific property development standards are needed to make the project consistent with the intent of these regulations; or c. The preponderance of the development proposed for the site is of a type not normally permitted in the underlying zone, so property development standards for the zone where such development is normally found are appropriate. Only finding a. is required. Parking The project design balances the need for safe and functional parking with creating a mixed-use pedestrian oriented development. A 10% shared-use parking reduction; an additional 20% mixed-use parking reduction and the use of tandem parking for 16 of the residential units is being requested. With no approved reductions, the total parking requirement for the project is estimated to be 337 spaces based on the applicant's requested uses. Plans show 268 spaces provided, with 32 of those spaces provided in tandem for the exclusive use of 16 designated residential units. The Zoning Regulations state, "It is the City's intent, where possible, to consolidate parking and minimize the area devoted exclusively to parking and drives when typical demands may be satisfied more efficiently by shared facilities."With use permit approval a 10% reduction is allowed where two or more uses share common parking areas. Up to an additional 20% is allowed where the times of maximum parking demands will not coincide. Parking for residential uses may be arranged in tandem subject to the approval of the Director or a hearing body such as the Planning Commission or the ARC. On-site parking will include a mixture of uncovered spaces and covered spaces. Each residence will have at least one covered parking space. Additionally, business employees and residents of the site will have convenient access to the City's bicycle transportation network and public transit. Opportunities for shared off-site parking at the Mid-State Bank are not currently part of this application but may be explored in the future. Please refer to parking statistics below. Bike Parking - Short- and long-term bicycle parking is provided throughout the site consistent with requirements. There have been extra short term bike parking spaces provided for both residential and commercial uses. Please refer to the parking statistics which follows. AT {"(�p • � THE iLLAGE BROAD PROJECT DESCRIPTION STREET Attachment 4 Project Statistics Commercial Lease Space: Retail Lease Space 25,350 sf Restaurant Lease Space: 8,800 sf Customer Use Area Kitchen/Food Prep.Area Total Commercial Lease Space 34,150 sf Residential Units: Total 1 Bedroom Units(850 sq.ft.average) 38 Units Total 2 Bedroom Units-(1,050 sq.ft.average) 32 Units Total Residential Units 70 Units PARKING ANALYSIS Residential Parking Requirement: 1 Bedrooms: 1.5 Spaces/Unit 57 Spaces - 2 Bedrooms:2 Spaces/Unit 64 Spaces Guests: 1 Space/5 Units 14 Spaces Total Required Residential Parking 135 Spaces Commercial Parking Requirement: Retail Lease Space:_1 Space/300 sq.ft. 1 85 Spaces Restaurant Lease Space: 1 /60 sq.ft.Customer+1 /100 sq.ft. Food Prep. 127 Spaces Total Required Commercial Parking 212 Spaces Total Parking Required For Project 347 Spaces Parking Provided: Surface Parking 182 Spaces Residential Carports 16 Spaces Residential Garages 70 Spaces Total Parking Provided(79 spaces less than required) 268 Spaces Parking Reduction: 104 Spaces Percent Reduction,Requested 30% Motorcycle Parking: Required Auto Parking/20 (=17.33) Motorcycle Parking Provided 22 Motorc des Bike Parking: Residential Bike Spaces: Req. Long Term(2 x Total Units) (=140.00) Long Tenn Spaces Provided 140 Bicycles Req.Short Tenn(10%of Required Auto Parking x.15) (=6.75) Short Term Spaces Provided 18 Bicycles Commercial Bike Spaces: Req. Long Term(400%6 of Required Auto Parking x. (=12.70) Long Term Spaces Provided 16 Bicycles Req.Short Term(50%of Required Auto Parking x.15) (=15.87) Short Terris Spaces Provided 30 Bicycles Total Bicycle Parking Provided 204 Bicycles Wild - 12- r } ATQ . THE .�AGE BROAD PROJECT DESCRIPTION STREET Attachment Environmental Review A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact was certified by the Deputy Director for the Village at Maymont. An Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration is being requested. An update traffic analysis has been prepared by Penfield and Smith. Please refer to attached updated Traffic Analysis. An update noise analysis has been prepared by Colia Acoustical. Please refer to attached updated Noise Analysis. Public Art Proposal ....._........._......__. The City of San Luis Obispo requires that all new non residential development contribute public art. The public art amount is to equal to one-half of one percent of that portion of the total construction costs in excess of one hundred thousand dollars, for each building permit, computed using the latest Uniform Building Code (UBC). In lieu of placement of approved public art, the applicant may pay as a voluntary alternative. The project applicant is committed to work with the City of San Luis Obispo to meet the requirement of the mandatory public art contribution. W 'd - 13- !�3 LJ Attachment 4 �►IIQ�1111�1111118h1�����������������ll 11 11 l� ��� Citytu-I' S OBISPO Community Development Department • 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 August 29, 2008 Rick Moses 6320 Canoga Avenue, Suite 1500 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 SUBJECT: ARC 70-08: 2238 Broad Street Review revised, previously-approved mixed-use development project located in Railroad Historic District Dear Mr. Moses: The Cultural Heritage Committee, at its meeting of August 25, 2008, voted 5:0 to recommend to the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) that it find the project consistent with the Railroad District Plan (RDP) and with the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines "Principles of Historic Preservation," based on findings, and subject to a condition: Findings: 1. The proposed building materials, such as brick and smooth-troweled plaster, and the forms, bulk, scale, and architectural detailing of proposed buildings are consistent with the architectural guidelines contained within the Railroad District .Plan and will promote the character of the Railroad Historic District. 2. The design of Building E, the Signature Building, has a curved fagade and arch forms which are reminiscent of the historic railroad roundhouse structure that stood near the site. 3. The proposed mix of residential and commercial uses is consistent with land-use patterns discussed in the Railroad District Plan that promote developments that allow people to live near work places and services. Condition: 1. Boardwalk-style sidewalk as called for in the Railroad District Plan shall be installed along the project's public street frontage on Roundhouse Avenue and shall be reflected on plans submitted for final review by the ARC. OThe 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. ARC 70-08 (2238 Broad Street) Attachment 4 Page 2 The decision of the CHC is a recommendation to the ARC and, therefore, is not final. This matter has been tentatively scheduled for review before the Planning Commission on September 10, 2008, and will return to the ARC for further review on a date to be determined. These dates should be verified with the project planner. If you have any questions, please contact Pam Ricci at (805) 781-7168. Sincerely, Kim Murry Deputy Director of Community Development Long-Range Planning cc: County of SLO Assessor's Office Debbie Lagomarcino Rudd 3765 S. Higuera Street, Suite 102 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 H & D Maymont, LLC c/o Richard A. Debeikes, Jr. 199 S. Los Robles Avenue, Suite 880 Pasadena, CA 91101-2459 l�l�l�l�l�� IIIIIIII Attachment 4 ►eiH►fllllillillllllll��� �I IIII cat of san l�u�s om ysly Community Development Department• 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 July 24, 2008 Attachment 5 Rick Moses 6320 Canoga Avenue; Suite 1500 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 SUBJECT ARC 70-08: 2238 Broad Street Conceptual review of a revised version of a previously-approved mixed-use project Dear Mr. Moses: The Architectural Review Commission, at its meeting of July 21, 2008, continued consideration of the project to a date uncertain with the following comments as preliminary direction: 1. Volumes within the Main Street buildings should be authentic. The use of windows and elements giving buildings a two-story exterior appearance that did not match the internal use of space was discouraged. 2. Increase the variety of the materials, roof forms, and storefront details of the tenant spaces within the Main Street buildings to make them more distinctive from one another. 3. Utilize more detailed cornices within the commercial buildings. 4. Introduce more modern details and elements into the outlying residential buildings. 5. Make sure that details, such as the finishes for proposed metal elements, are complementary with the base materials of buildings. 6. The Commission supported a maximum building height of 44 feet for Building E, the "Signature Building," given its location in the center of the project and the fact that it accommodated the development of housing units. 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. ARC 70-08(2238 Broad Street) Page 2 Attachment Q If you have any questions, please call me at (805) 781-7168. Sincerely, 02 G G� Pam Ricci, AICP Senior Planner cc: County of SLO Assessor's Office Debbie Lagomarcino Rudd 3765 S. Higuera Street, Suite 102 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 H & D Maymont, LLC' c/o Richard A. Debeikes, Jr. 199 S. Los Robles Avenue, Suite 880 Pasadena, CA 91101-2459 ARC Minutes July 21, 2008 Attachment 4 Page 4 Vice-Chair Wilhlem described the building as handsome and felt that it would class up the corner. He mentioned that the design harkened back to 1930-1940s era Santa Barbara Spanish Colonial buildings. Commr. Duffy suggested that the applicant consider adding something unique to the design of the northern building tower. A motion was made by Commr. Palazzo, seconded by Vice-Chair Wilhelm, recommending granting final approval to the project, based on findings, and subiect to staff's conditions. AYES: Commissioners Palazzo, Wilhelm, Duffy, Hopkins, Weber, and Root NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: Commissioner Howard The motion passed on a 6:0 vote. The Commission took a break from 6:40 p.m. to 6:45 p.m. Commissioner Jim Duffy recused himself from item 3. 3. 2238 Broad Street. ARC 70-08; Conceptual review of a revised version of a previously-approved mixed-use project; C-N-H, C-S-H, & C-S-S-H zones; Rick Moses, applicant. (Pam Ricci) Pam Ricci, Senior Planner, presented the staff report, recommending continuation to a date uncertain providing preliminary comments to the applicant and staff on the conceptual project. She explained some notable differences between the current project and the previously-approved one. Debbie Rudd, RRM Design, stated that all the residential units would be apartments and not condos anymore. She explained that the commercial buildings closest to Broad street will be low, single-story buildings and, as the property goes back to the mixed-use building and residential buildings, the height increases to three stories. She described the architecture as being inspired by tum-of-the-century brick warehouses. Rick Moses, Developer, stated they have made changes to the project design based on the feedback they received after their initial outreach to representatives from advisory bodies, the Council, South Broad Street Corridor Working Group, and City staff. He explained that the changes really connect the project to Broad Street. Jeff Dillon, architect, explained that the original Roundhouse structure inspired the proposed design of the proposed Building E, known as the "Signature Building." He spoke in detail about proposed colors, materials, and other building details as well as responded to Commission questions. ( l l ��J ARC Minutes - July21, 2008 5 Page 5 Attachment 4 PUBLIC COMMENTS: Terry Mohan, San Luis Obispo, said he is disappointed that the residential units have decreased in number but was pleased to see that the units would be rental apartments rather than condominiums as previously proposed. He noted that this project will increase traffic substantially and make turning onto Broad more difficult and wanted to see a traffic light installed at one of the project entrances. He felt that the proposed materials will make the residential units very expensive and difficult to sell. There were no further comments from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: The ARC was very impressed with the caliber of the presentation and the thought and detail that had gone into the revised design. Generally, the reaction to the project changes was positive, especially the reconfiguration of the main street which allows for more open views into the project from Broad Street and eliminates the backs of buildings facing Broad. Commr. Weber appreciated the presentation and felt that it was a beautiful project. He noted that his main concern was with the authenticity of the "one-story" commercial buildings near Broad Street. He did not support false windows on the commercial buildings that created the illusion of two-story buildings for one-story spaces. Commr. Palazzo stated he liked the previous design of Building B, which he described as the "funky" building and would like the applicant to consider adding it back in. Commr. Hopkins felt that this is a nice project at the right place and time. He appreciated how the design is based on historical buildings but wanted to see some modern elements introduced into some of the rear buildings. He felt that alternating brick and plaster on the commercial buildings seemed almost too intentional. Vice-Chair Wilhelm felt that the northernmost entrance is awkward being so close to a large intersection and would prefer that it was closed off and strictly for pedestrian use only. He felt there was too much brick proposed in this project. He would like to see more variations between the storefronts. He suggested having a functional railroad car to help tie the project to the Railroad District. He stated to increase authenticity in the commercial buildings that the inside should match the outside in height. He would like to see more cornice details used. Chairperson Root felt that making the architecture authentic is really important and liked the idea of tumbled brick. He supported the contemporary look of buildings I and J. He felt that a traffic signal at Alphonso Street would help with traffic flow. He felt that the curved face of Building E is a nice touch. He agreed with Vice-Chair Wilhelm about the northern most entrance being closed and used for pedestrians only. He felt that it would 1 -IP ARC Minutes Attachment 4 July 21, 2008 Page 6 be an awkward entrance and difficult for all the traffic on Broad Street. He felt the forms and surfaces need to be well thought out. A motion was made by Commr. Weber, seconded by Commr. Hopkins, continuing action to a date uncertain and incorporating the following items as preliminary direction: 11 Volumes within the Main Street buildings should be authentic. The use of windows and elements giving buildings a two-story exterior appearance that.did not match the internal use of space was discouraged; 2) Increase the variety of the materials, roof forms, and storefront details of the tenant spaces within the Main Street buildings to make them more distinctive from one another; 3) Utilize more detailed cornices within the commercial buildings: 4) Introduce more modern details and elements into the outlying residential buildings; 5) Make sure that details, such as the finishes for proposed metal elements, are complementary with_ the base materials of buildings; 6) The Commission supported a maximum building height of 44 feet for Building E, the Signature Building." given its location in the center of the poiect.and the fact that it accommodated the development of housing units. AYES: Commissioners Weber, Hopkins, Palazzo, Wilhelm, and Root NOES: None RECUSED: Commr. Duffy ABSENT: Commissioner Howard The motion passed on a 5:0 vote. 5. Staff A. Agenda Forecast Pam Ricci provided an agenda forecast for the upcoming August 0 meeting. She noted that three commissioners, Zeljka Howard, Jim Duffy, and Greg Wilhelm would be absent from that meeting and stressed the importance that the remaining four commissioners commit to attending the meeting to allow for a quorum of members to be present for the review of the two projects included on that agenda. 6. Commission: A. Recent Project Review - Lessons Learned Commr. Palazzo expressed concern with the quality of the plans submitted for the review of Item No. 1, pointing out the difficulty of reading them because of the amount of clutter they included and their inaccuracies. Commr. Hopkins questioned whether the colors ofZthe new metal buildings on the south side of Tank Farm Road were consistent with what the ARC had reviewed and approved. Attachment 4 Attachment 6 Addendum to Initial Study ER 62-05 For Village at Broad Street Mixed-Use Project (New City File Nos: ER, ARC, U, R 70-08) 1. Project Title: Village at Broad Street (formerly Village at Maymont) 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: Pamela Ricci, Senior Planner (805) 781-7168 4. Project Location: 2238 Broad Street, east side of Broad Street, just south of Fire Station 1 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: RMD Development 6320 Canoga Avenue, Suite1500 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 6. General Plan Designation: Neighborhood Commercial & Services & Manufacturing 7. Zoning: C-N-H, Neighborhood-Commercial & C-S-H, Service-Commercial both with the Historical Preservation overlay, and C-S-S-H, Service-Commercial with the Historical Preservation and Special Consideration overlays 8. Description of the Project: Plans show that the revised version of the previously approved, mixed-use project would include 34,350 square feet of commercial space and 70 residential units of I � Addendum to Initial Study EF.I-::4-05 -= Attachment 4 For Village at Broad Street(City File Nos. 70-08) Page 2 various types and sizes. Some of the more notable differences between the current project and the previously approved one are listed below: Project Features Village at Maymont Village at Broad Commercial space 25,000 square feet 34,350 square feet Residential Units 91 70 Access to Broad Street Single driveway Two driveways Roundabout location Emily Street in front of Part of project Main Street signature building near Broad Southern triangular piece Not a part of project plans. Surface parking proposed. near railroad tracks Broad Street Building Backs of building facing Main Street oriented to Orientation street. allow for views into project. One of the project's key components is the proposed Main Street on the north side of the project site closest to Broad Street. This area would contain four separate single-story commercial buildings with the following floor areas: Building A (6,600 square feet), Building B (4,600 square feet), Building C (8,200 square feet), and Building D (3,300 square feet). Flexibility is built into the design of the project to enable the creation of individual tenant spaces in buildings of various sizes. No residential units are currently shown on submitted plans. However, the applicant is considering the possibility of adding some studio apartments on the upper floors of Buildings C & D based on conceptual direction provided by the Architectural Review Commission. These are the commercial buildings along the Main Street that is the most distant from the Broad Street noise source and as such more appropriate for potential residential units. Building E is known as the project's "Signature Building". It will contain 11,600 square feet or retail spaces on the ground floor and have 26 units on the second and third floors. This building has been designed with a fagade that emulates the shape and forms of the former Roundhouse that previously existed nearby. Directly behind Building E is a carport and further to the east are Buildings G & H, which are residential buildings that contain a total of 8 apartment units each. To the south of Building E is a recreational building to sere all residents of the project. The final set of residential buildings is located in the northeast comer of the property. Buildings I & J are three stories and each contain 9 residential units, and Building K is two stories and contains 10 units. The spaces along Emily Street are town-house type units that have the potential to be used as live/work units. 1 -�I Addendum to Initial Study EF. ;&-05 --. For Village at Broad Street(City File Nos. 70-08) Attachment 4 Page 3 Attention has been given to screening parking areas for the residential units from street views by placing them between and under buildings. As with the previous application, the applicant is requesting a 30% shared and mixed-use parking reduction to maintain flexibility in attracting potential tenants and take advantage of the mixed-use character of the project. The triangular area to the south of the wetland is proposed to be used as surface parking. 9. Project Entitlements Requested: The applicant has applied for architectural review of project plans, a Rezoning to add the Mixed Use overlay zoning over the existing zoning categories on the site, and a Planning Commission Use Permit, and environmental review, which includes acceptance of the previously approved Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures, as amended by this Addendum. 10.Surrounding Land Uses and Settings: The project site is located in the City's railroad historic district. It consists of three separate parcels and occupies approximately six acres on the east side of Broad Street between Santa Barbara and Alphonso Streets. Access to the site is available from three streets - Broad Street, Alphonso Street, and Roundhouse Avenue. Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way adjoins the site on the east. The City's Fire Station No. 1 zoned Public Facility is located immediately to the north. To the south and west are offices, service-commercial uses, and houses. Properties to the east across the railroad tracks are zoned and developed with residential uses. The project will effectively anchor one end of the upcoming South Broad Street Corridor Plan Area. The site has been developed with various buildings and uses over the years, but none of the past buildings are remaining. Vegetation consists mainly of weedy grasses except for the ornamentals on the Mid State Bank property. A palm, several pepper trees and eucalyptus trees are along the eastern boundary of the site. A small wetland at the southeastern corner of the site supports willows, sedges, cattails, and saltgrass. 11. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g. permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): Caltrans - for work in the adjacent Broad Street right-of-way. 12. Previous Environmental Review On July 18, 2006, the City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) of environmental impact for the previously approved project on the site. A Notice of Determination was filed with the County Clerk on June 21, 2006. A copy of the mitigation measures approved with the adopted MND is attached. The entire MND document is available on the City's website. Addendum to Initial Study EF.`_.-05 For Village at Broad Street(City File Nos. 70-08) Attachment 4 Page 4 Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines allows a lead agency to prepare an addendum to a previously adopted Negative Declaration if only "minor technical changes or additions" have occurred in the project description since the initial study was originally prepared. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The amended Project Description affects the conclusions contained in the following sections of initial study ER 62-05: Section 3.1 —Aesthetics The applicant has applied for a Mixed Use, MU, overlay zoning for the property. City staff had encouraged the applicant to pursue such a rezoning back in 2006 to assure that if the project did not move forward that a new development would also be mandated to develop the site with mixed uses. Section 17.55.030 of the Mixed Use zone chapter of the Zoning Regulations contains direction regarding property development standards and in particular, building height. The section states that "the application of the MU overlay to property may include establishing a higher height limit than the underlying zone, to more effectively accommodate the residential component of a mixed use project." There is an existing mitigation measure that reads: 1. All project and building plans shall show buildings limited to 35 feet in height, per City zoning regulations, to help preserve the scenic viewsheds surrounding the proposed project site. These regulations allow an additional 10 feet for certain architectural features. MP-2 its proposed to be 45 feet tall. The mitigation measure is intended to insure that views of the Santa Lucia range to the east are maintained with project development. The revised project shows that Building E, the Signature Building, would have a maximum building height of about 44 feet. The proposed building height was supported by the Architectural Review Commission with their conceptual review of the project on July 21, 2008. Building E is proposed in the same relative location as the bu..ilding identified as MP-2 in the previous project. MP-2 included a solar chimney that increased the overall building height to about 45 feet. Therefore, since a building of essentially the same height was previously envisioned in the same general location, there will not be significant aesthetic impacts associated with the redesigned project. The recommendation is for the mitigation measure to be updated through the Addendum to make it more consistent with the current proposal: 1. All project and building plans shall generally show buildings limited to 35 feet in height, per City zoning regulations, to help presence the scenic viewsheds 1 - 81 Addendum to Initial Study Elk 05 Attachment 4 For Village at Broad Street (City File Nos. 70-08) Page 5 surrounding the proposed project site. Building E may exceed that height through approval of the Mixed Use overlay zoning and required Planning Commission Use Permit, and with final architectural approval by the Architectural Review Commission of the project design. Section 3.1 — Air Duality In addition to the mitigation measures recommended in the previous initial study prepared by Padre Associates, Inc. in May of 2006, recommended mitigation measures were added from consultation with the local Air Pollution Control District (APCD). The recommended mitigation form APCD was divided into mandatory requirements and a menu of suggested mitigations if determined to be feasible. In general with the updated list of mitigation measures, these mitigation measures have been left intact. However, those voluntary mitigations that the applicant indicated were not feasible were eliminated. Mitigation Measure No. 9 was eliminated because a Health Risk Assessment had been conducted on adjacent property that did not find any significant concerns. In consultation with the Fire Department, it was determined that based on the conclusions of this study along with the applicant's completion of site remediation that another Health Risk Assessment was not necessary. Section 3.4— Biological Resources A small wetland area exists in the southeasterly part of the project site where the property narrows into a triangle shape adjacent to the railroad property. Previous proposals to develop the site discussed the possibility of undergrounding the drainage and removing the wetland or bridging the wetland. The approved Village at. Maymont did not include any specific development proposal for the southern triangle. The current proposal shows that the wetland area will be retained, enhanced and developed as a project amenity, which is supported by the City's Natural Resources Manager and Community Development Department. The wetland is not identified on City maps as a creek where a 20-foot setback would be required. However, a majority of proposed development in the current project surrounding the wetland will maintain a 20-foot setback. On the southern edge of the wetland there are locations where a retaining wall and driveway will border the edge of the wetland to accommodate the development of a parking lot beyond. The City's Natural Resources Manager has reviewed the project plans and determined that the proximity of development will not adversely impact the habitat value of the wetland significantly. In fact, the Natural Resources Manager has determined that the current proposal will result in improved habitat value because of planned enhancements to riparian planting. Therefore, because there will not be significant adverse impacts to the habitat value of the existing wetland with development of the project there are not new impacts that require mitigation. Addendum to Initial Study Ek�L-05 - J Attachment 4 For Village at Broad Street(City File Nos. 70-08) Page 6 Section 3.8— Hazards & Hazardous Materials Previous Mitigation Measure No. 28 detailed the needed requirements for hazardous material remediation of the site. This mitigation is no longer necessary as remediation activities have been completed and the City Fire Department has issued the project site a clean bill of health. Similarly, Mitigation Measure No. 12 calling for consultation with APCD during site clean-up has already been accomplished. Therefore, this mitigation measure was also eliminated. Section 3.11 - Noise Technical Appendix G contained the acoustical analysis dated December 20, 2005 which was prepared by Colia Acoustical Consultants of Newport Beach. That study included noise measurements taken at various locations on the site and analyzed the impacts to future development from the Broad Street and railroad noise sources based on performance standards for land uses contained in the City's Noise Element. Mitigation measures recommended by the study focused mainly on methods of construction and placement of residential uses relative to Broad Street traffic. Noise from the railroad was found to be offset by the distance to the tracks (200+ feet) and the fact that trains moving in and out of the train station are traveling at a relatively slow speed. The applicant hired Colia Acoustical Consultants to prepare an updated study dated May 5, 2008 to look at the potential noise impacts to the project given that the configuration and alignment of buildings has changed and the location of some land uses also is a little different. The findings and recommendations of the new study are very similar to the prior study. In terms of overall noise impacts, the elimination of residential units in close proximity to the Broad Street noise source actually reduces overall impacts with the modified project. Providing acceptable interior noise levels (45 decibels) can be fairly easily accommodated through use of certain building materials and construction techniques. Mitigation measure wording was modified slightly to reflect the recommendations of the updated noise study. Reducing exterior noise levels to acceptable levels is generally more difficult to achieve, but given the distance of proposed residential units from both Broad Street and the railroad, outdoor spaces fall within acceptable noise contours and additional noise mitigation is not required. Section 3.15 —Transportation/Traffic Traffic generation and impacts on affected intersections are addressed in a traffic study prepared by Penfield and Smith. With the previous mixed-use project reviewed in 2006, the report concluded that the project would generate substantially less traffic than previous proposals for this site, but some of the intersections that will be impacted are operating at or near less than acceptable levels of service. Recommended mitigation included two northbound left turn lanes on Broad at South Street, a raised landscaped median on Broad Street, pedestrian safety signals, fair share contribution to a future Addendum to Initial Study Ef �-05 Attachment 4 For Village at Broad Street (City File Nos. 70-08) Page 7 traffic signal at Broad and Woodbridge, a right-in, right-out limitation on the project driveway to Broad, and provision for a future road connection from Alphonso Street to Woodbridge Street on the east side of Broad Street. Penfield & Smith prepared a supplemental traffic analysis for the revised project dated May 20, 2008. The report concluded that the revised project would result in an increase of 88 external average daily trips, a decrease of 2 external AM trips, and increase of 9 external PM trips. The added traffic did not significantly impact Level of Service (LOS) at the adjacent Broad/South-Santa Barbara street intersection, which would remain at LOS D, which is considered as an acceptable LOS by the City's Circulation Element and Caltrans thresholds. The modified project did not result in new significant impacts that required new or substantially modified mitigation measures. However, some mitigation measures have been updated to reflect current conditions to make them more accurate or eliminated if the revised design already accomplished the identified mitigation. The revised project includes a new driveway connection to Broad Street. The design of this project has been modified since initially submitted to respond to both the requirements of the City and Caltrans. To address potential concerns with traffic safety and circulation, the following elements became part of the design: • Access to Broad Street is limited to right-in, right-out movements; • Parking was eliminated in close proximity to the driveway approach and roundabout; • A "pork-chop" island was added at the entry to separate entering and exiting vehicles and keep exiting vehicles directed to the nearest right-tum or through lane in Broad Street. As part of the 1994 update of the City's Circulation Element, the City Council identified a significant, adverse impact for unacceptable levels of service (LOS) at certain major intersections and along most arterial streets (including Broad Street) and adopted the following Statement of Overriding Considerations: "Accommodating projected traffic levels (due to reasonable share of anticipated regional growth), while avoiding significant land-use and aesthetic impacts would follow from adding or widening roadways and changing intersections, and the City's inability to substantially change people's individual travel choices". The Statement of Overriding Considerations retained Broad Street as a roadway with 4 travel lanes in lieu of requiring the widening of the roadway to 6 travel lanes. A draft traffic impact study recently prepared by Rick Engineering for the South Broad Street Corridor Plan raised the 4-lane vs. 6-lane issue once again. The issue will be addressed through the environmental review process and public hearings for the South Broad Street Corridor Plan which are anticipated to occur well after the public hearings for the Village at Broad project. City staff is not recommending that the Village at Broad project be conditioned to provide an additional through travel lane on Broad Street, l,gy Addendum to Initial Study EFt_�_—_-05 Attachment 4 For Village at Broad Street (City File Nos. 70-08) Page 8 however, adequate building setbacks are provided as part of the project should the City decide to widen Broad Street to 6 lanes in the future. DETERMINATION In accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of San Luis Obispo has determined that this addendum to Initial Study ER 62-05 is necessary to document changes or additions that have occurred in the project description since the initial study was originally prepared. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in this addendum in its consideration of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) ER 62-05 and finds that the preparation of a subsequent MND is not necessary because: 1. None of the following circumstances included in Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines have occurred which require a subsequent MND: a. The project changes do not result in new or more severe environmental impacts. b. The circumstances under which the project is undertaken will not require major changes to the MND. c. The modified project does not require any substantive changes to previously approved mitigation measures. 2. The proposed additions and changes are minor and generally consistent with the previous mixed-use project approved for the same site by the City Council on July 18, 2006. 3. The changes are consistent with City goals to promote the intensification of infill sites and goals to provide a variety of housing types in the community. 4. The proposed scale and design of buildings will be compatible with surrounding uses with the review and approval of project plans by the City's Architectural Review Commission, consistent with the City's General Plan, Zoning Regulations, Railroad District Plan, and Community Design Guidelines. Attached: Attachment A: List of recommended mitigation measures for the revised project Attachment B: List of previously adopted mitigation measures dated June 19, 2006 Available electronically: The Village at Maymont Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ER 62-05 by Padre Associates, Inc. dated May, 2006. L:\Village at Broad(70-08)\ERVAddendum to Village at Broad Initial Study % �� Attachment 4 Attachment A Addendum to ER 62-05(ER 70-08) Mitigation Required by the City for the Village at Broad Project- 1. All project and building plans shall generally show buildings limited to 35 feet in height, per City zoning regulations, to help preserve the scenic viewsheds surrounding the proposed project site. Building E may exceed that height through approval of the Mixed Use overlay zoning and final architectural approval by the Architectural Review Commission. 2. Prior to issuance of grading and buildings permits for the proposed project, the Architectural Review Commission (ARC), in consultation with City staff and other reviewing authorities, shall ensure that the project adheres to the Community Design Guidelines with regards to the Historical Preservation Zone. The ARC, City staff, and other reviewing authorities shall not approve the project unless the following specific findings can be made: a) The project maintains a high quality of craftsmanship in development through use of authentic building styles, design elements, and materials. b) The project buildings are clustered to achieve a "village" scale. The various buildings are designed to create a visual and functional relationship with one another. c) The project buildings provide a sense of human scale. The project buildings incorporate significant wall and roof articulation to reduce apparent scale. Roofs are multi-planed to avoid large, monotonous expanses. Horizontal and vertical wall articulation is expressed through the use of elements, such as wall offsets, recessed windows and entries, awnings, and second floor setbacks. d) The project buildings incorporate setbacks at the ground floor level and/or upper levels (stepped-down) along street frontages, such that they do not visually dominate the adjacent neighborhood. e) The project buildings' elements are in proportion. Building designs demonstrate continuity, harmony, simplicity, rhythm, and balance and are in proportion to one another. f) The project's internal streets are designed with comprehensive streetscapes including sidewalks with canopy trees. g) The project's bike parking is planned as an integral part of the overall design and not simply located in "left over" areas. h) Landscaping is used to help define outdoor spaces, soften the project structures' appearance, and to screen parking, loading, storage, and equipment areas i) Where visual screening at ground level is required (for those portions of the development visible from Broad Street), the project utilizes a combination of elements as appropriate, such as walls, berms, and landscaping. D—//`O b ER 7008(Addendum to ER 62-05) Attachment = Page 2 j) The project maintains views of the South Street Hills and the Santa Lucia Foothills to the greatest extent possible. 3. To minimize impacts to residential development that overlooks the project site, the roofs of proposed project buildings shall be non-reflective and designed with muted tones in hue to mitigate visual impacts related to light and glare consistent with standards in the Community Design Guidelines, Section 6.1C. 4. All outdoor lighting shall be directed downward, consistent with the San Luis Obispo Community Development Design Guidelines. 5. This measure focuses on reducing ozone formation from project-related ozone precursors, NOX and ROG, which is also referred to as Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC). The primary source of these emissions would be ROG released during application of paint to the proposed residential and commercial structures. The rate of ozone formation is greatest during periods of clear weather, low winds and high temperatures. All of the following measures shall be implemented to prevent exceedances of the State 1-hour ozone standard: a) Paint emissions shall not exceed the 185 pound per day significance threshold (88 gallons per day based on 2.08 pounds VOC per gallon); b) Paint emissions shall not`exceed the 2.5 ton per quarter significance threshold (2,403 gallons per quarter based on 2.08 pounds VOC per gallon); c) For architectural coatings, APCD regulations limit the VOC content of coating materials used to 100 to 730 grams per liter, depending on the type of coating. Refer to Table 433-1 of Rule 433 of the San Luis Obispo County APCD Rule Book for a detailed listing of the architectural coatings and associated VOC limit; and d) A record of paint use shall be kept during construction so as to show adherence to these mitigations. The use of\pre-coated materials, or naturally colored materials and high transfer efficiency painting methods (e.g., HVLP, brush/roller, etc.) to the maximum extent feasible would reduce the amount of paint used and facilitate compliance with the thresholds. 6. The following measures shall be fully implemented during the construction period to reduce PM 10 impacts to a level of less than significant: a) All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized for construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/ suppressant, covered with a tarp or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover; b) All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant; c) All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by presoaking; 2 �'V7 ER 70-08(Addendum to ER 62-05)" p11t1Ch111@C1t 4 Page 3 d) When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least six inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained; e) All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden; f) Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage piles., said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emissions utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant; g) Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends 50 or more feet from the site and at the end of each workday; and, h) Any site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and trackout. i) Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible; j) Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible; k) Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities; 1) Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading should be sown with a fast germinating native grass seed and watered until vegetation is established; m)AII disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD; n) All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; o) Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site; p) All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114; q) Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site, if track out occurs it should be clean up immediately; and r) Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto /-88' ER 70-08(Addendum to ER 82-05) �.r Attachment 4 Page 4 l adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed Water should be used where feasible. 7. During construction, the applicant shall implement the following standard construction equipment mitigation measures for reducing NOx and other combustion emissions (diesel particulate matter): See section 6.3.1 of the Air Quality Handbook: a) Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer's specifications; b) Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment with ARB certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off-road); and, c) Maximize, to the extent feasible, the use of diesel construction equipment meeting ARB's 1996 and newer certification standard for off-road, heavy-duty diesel engines; d) All on and off-road diesel equipment shall not be allowed to idle for more than 5 minutes. Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas to remind drivers and operators of the 5 minute idling limit; e) In any area where haul or trucks or other construction related truck may be queuing, signs shall be posted to limit idling and queuing areas should be located away from residential areas and other sensitive resources; and, f) Prior to any work beginning, the applicant shall install ten (10) diesel oxidation catalysts (DOC), or two (2) catalyzed diesel particulate filters (CDPF) on the construction equipment that shall generate the greatest emissions (i.e., loader loading soil for off-site transport). 8. The applicant shall only install APCD-approved wood-burning devices in the new dwelling units consistent with APCD Rule 504. These devices include: a) All EPA-Certified Phase II wood burning devices; b) Catalytic wood-burning devices which emit less than or equal to 4.1 grams per hour of particulate matter which are not EPA-Certified but have been verified by a nationally-recognized testing lab; c) Non-catalytic wood-burning devices which emit less than or equal to 7.5 grams per hour of particulate matter which are not. EPA-Certified but have been verified by a nationally-recognized testing lab; d) Pellet-fueled woodheaters; and, e) Dedicated gas-fired fireplaces. 9. If utility pipelines are scheduled for removal or relocation; or building(s) are removed or renovated, this project may be subject to various regulatory jurisdictions, including the requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40CFR61, Subpart M — asbestos NESHAP). The requirements include, but are not limited to: (1) notification requirements to the l-87 • ER 70-08(Addendum to ER 62-OS)'-__`- Attachment 4 Page 5 District, (2) asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Inspector, and (3) applicable removal and disposal requirements of identified ACM. 10. Prior to any grading activities at the site, the project proponent shall update the existing geotechnical investigation to determine if Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) is present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with the District. If NOA is found at the site, the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. This may include development of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan and an Asbestos Health and Safety Program for approval by the APCD. 11. To reduce NOX, PM10, and ROG emissions during operation of the project, the project proponent shall implement the following, where applicable or feasible: RESIDENTIAL a) Link cul-de-sacs and dead-end streets to encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel; b) Include traffic calming modifications to project roads, such as narrower streets, speed platforms, bulb-outs and intersection modifications designed to reduce vehicle speeds, thus encouraging pedestrian and bicycle travel; c) Include easements or land dedications for bikeways and pedestrian walkways; d) Provide continuous sidewalks with adequate lighting and crosswalks at intersections; e) If the project is located on an established transit route, improve public transit accessibility by providing transit turnouts with direct pedestrian access to the project; f) Increase street shade tree planting; g) Provide outdoor electrical outlets to encourage the use of electric appliances and tools; h) Provide on-site bicycle parking for multi-family residential developments. i) Increase number of bicycle routes/lanes; j) Build new homes with internal wiring/cabling that allows telecommuting, teleconferencing and telelearning to occur simultaneously in at least three locations throughout the home; k) Provide pedestrian signalization and signage to improve pedestrian safety; and, COMMERCIAL a) Provide on-site bicycle parking. One bicycle parking space for every 10 car parking spaces is considered appropriate; b) Provide on-site eating, refrigeration and food vending facilities to reduce employee lunchtime trips; c) Provide preferential carpool and vanpool parking spaces; d) Provide shower and locker facilities to encourage employees to bike and/or walk to work, typically one shower and three lockers, for those businesses with /' 70 ER 70-08(Addendum to ER 62-05) Page 6 Attachment 4 25 or more full-time employees; and, e) Increase the building energy efficiency rating by 10% above what is required by Title 24 requirements. This can be accomplished in a number of ways (increasing attic, wall, or floor insulation, installing double pane windows, using efficient interior lighting, etc.). SITE DESIGN FOR COMMERCIAL COMPONENT a) Increase street shade tree planting; b) Increase shade tree planting in parking lots to reduce evaporative emissions from parked vehicles; c) Provide on-site housing for employees; d) Implement on-site circulation design elements in parking lots to reduce vehicle queuing and improve the pedestrian environment with designated walkways; and, e) Provide pedestrian signalization and signage to improve pedestrian safety. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND a) If the project is located on an established transit route, improve public transit accessibility by providing a transit turnout with direct pedestrian access to the project or improve existing transit stop amenities; b) Provide incentives to employees to carpool/vanpool, take public transportation, telecommute, walk, bike, etc by implementing the Transportation Choices Program. The applicant should Contact SLO Regional Rideshare at 541-2277 to receive free consulting services on how to start and maintain a program; c) Provide Transportation Choices Program information centers on alternative transportation modes at the site (i.e. a transportation kiosk). Contact SLO Regional Rideshare for appropriate materials at 541-2277; d) Install an electric vehicle charging station with both conductive and inductive charging capabilities; e) Employ or appoint an Employee Transportation Coordinator; f) Develop and implement a City-approved Trip Reduction Program,- g) rogram;g) Increase the quality of existing bicycle routes/lanes or add bicycle routes/lanes which access the project; h) Encourage tenants to implement compressed work schedules; i) Encourage tenants to implement a telecommuting program; j) Encourage tenants to participate in an employee 'flash pass" program, which provides free travel on transit buses; and k) Encourage tenants to include teleconferencing capabilities, such as web cams or satellite linkage, which will allow employees to attend meetings remotely without requiring them to travel out of the area. 12. Initial rough grading operations and vegetation removal shall be conducted prior to, or after, the typical migratory bird nesting season (March 1 - August 1) to avoid any potential impact to migratory bird nesting activity. Therefore, initial grading should /41 ER 70-08(Addendum to ER 62-05) ) Page 7 Attachment 4 be conducted between the months of August and February. 13. If Measure BIO-1 is infeasible, pre-construction surreys shall be conducted prior to any initial grading activity and vegetation removal to identify any potential bird nesting activity, and: a) If any nest sites of bird species protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act are observed within the vicinity of the project site, then the project shall be modified and/or delayed as necessary to avoid direct take of the identified nests, eggs, and/or young; and, b) If active nest sites of raptors and/or birds species of special concern are observed within the vicinity of the project site, then CDFG shall be contacted to establish the appropriate buffer around the nest site. Construction activities in the buffer zone shall be prohibited until the young have fledged the nest and achieved independence. 14. Prior to ground disturbance, a focused botanical survey shall be conducted to determine the presence or absence of special-status plant species which have the potential to exist onsite, including, but not limited to Obispo Indian Paintbrush, Jones' Lamp, Adobe Sanicle, and Condon's Tarplant. This survey shall be scheduled to occur during the appropriate blooming period for the subject plant species, prior to scheduled site disturbance. If a special-status plant species is identified within the project site and impacts are unavoidable, the applicant shall consult with the CDFG and City Natural Resources Manager to determine if a Sensitive Plant Restoration Plan or other mitigation is necessary. 15. The amount of construction-related disturbance should be limited to the extent feasible. During construction, the project impact area should be clearly delineated with high-visibility construction fencing to prevent unnecessary impacts to wetlands identified onsite. In particular, a 20-foot setback shall be established per top-of- creek-bank of the existing drainage, pursuant.to the City's creek setback ordinance (see Figure 2-6). Prior to any earth disturbance, exclusionary fencing shall be erected at the boundaries of all construction areas to avoid equipment and human intrusion into adjacent habitats. The fencing shall remain in place and be maintained throughout construction. 16. A qualified historical archaeologist shall conduct a pre-construction phase I survey to determine potential impacts to cultural resources, including the historic roundhouse. Additionally, this person shall conduct a crew orientation to inform project personnel of potential impacts to cultural resources for the project site, and proper procedures in the event a resource is encountered. 17. A halt-work condition shall be in place during all ground disturbing activities. In the /_� 9R ER 70-08(Addendum to ER 62-05) Page 8 event that cultural resources are encountered, all work within the vicinity of the find should stop. A professional archaeologist shall be retained to assess such finds and make recommendations. 18. If any human remains are inadvertently uncovered during ground disturbing activities, all activity shall cease within 25 feet of the burial, and the County Coroner must be notified, pursuant to Section 7050.5 of California's Health and Safety Code. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission, and follow the procedures outlined in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e). 19. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the geotechnical study shall be updated so that the original design recommendations can be reviewed and modified according to the details of the proposed The Village at Broad project. Ground shaking hazards to the proposed project cannot be eliminated; however, they will be reduced through implementation of the following: a) Cut and fill operations at the project site shall be consistent with all recommendations included in the updated geotechnical investigation (Converse 1996) and City regulations. Only material recommended and approved by the geotechnical engineer and approved by the City shall be used; b) Design and construction of the proposed project shall conform to all relevant seismic regulations and recommendations made by state-licensed civil, geotechnical, and structural engineers for the specific project; and, c) All other recommendations concerning loading, retaining walls, grading and drainage systems in the geotechnical technical shall be implemented and updated as needed. 20. Recommended site preparation shall conform to the recommendations of the updated geotechnical investigation (Converse 1996) with regards to grading, including removal of vegetation and unsuitable soils/materials and the use of acceptable fill materials, as approved by the Geotechnical Engineer. 21. In terms of ground settlement, the proposed project shall conform to the updated geotechnical investigation's recommendations for spread footings as per the following: a) Footings should be founded at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade and should be at least 18 inches wide, or as specified in the updated geotechnical investigation. 22. A construction dewatering system shall be implemented as per the updated geotechnical investigation's recommendations. 23. A permanent underdrain system shall be implemented as per the updated /-13 l ER 70-08(Addendum to ER 62-05) _ Attachment 4 Page 9 geotechnical investigation's recommendations. 24. Building floor slabs shall be constructed according to recommendations specified in the updated geotechnical investigation report. 25. Immediately following construction, all remaining bare areas with exposed soils shall be planted with grass or appropriate vegetation to promote the natural stabilization of site soils and reduce soil loss. 26. The applicant shall comply with NPDES General Construction Activities Storm Water Permit Requirements established by the CWA. Pursuant to the NPDES Storm Water Program, an application for coverage under the statewide General Permit shall be obtained for project development. The applicant shall file a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the SWRCB's Division of Water Quality. The filing shall describe erosion control and storm water treatment measures to be implemented during and following construction and provide a schedule for monitoring performance. These BMPs would serve to control point and non-point source pollutants in storm water and constitute the project's SWPPP for construction activities. The SWPPP will include the following measures: a) Fill slope-surface stabilization measures, such as temporary mulching, seeding, and other suitable stabilization measures to protect exposed erodible areas during construction, and installation of earthen or paved interceptors and diversion at the top of cut of fill slopes where there is a potential for erosive surface runoff; b) Erosion and sedimentation control devices, such as energy absorbing structures or devices, will be used, as necessary, to reduce the velocity of runoff water to prevent polluting sedimentation discharges; c) Installation of mechanical and/or vegetative final erosion control measures within 30 days after completion of grading; d) Confining land clearing and grading operations to the period between April 15 and October 15 to avoid the rainy season; and, e) Minimizing the land area disturbed and the period of exposure to the shortest feasible time. 27. Proposed erosion control will be provided per the erosion control plans. Post- construction mitigation measures to mitigate onsite drainage impacts shall be provided by lined drainage ditches, landscaping, and the underground detention basin with a metering outlet. The existing drainage course, which passes through the southern portion of the site, conveys drainage from an upstream railroad cross- culvert to a culvert at the Alphonso Street cul-de-sac. Historic drainage conditions and amounts shall be maintained. ER 70-08(Addendum to ER 62-05) Attachment 4 Page 10 28. Stormwater runoff from all improved areas of a development or redevelopment site resulting in 930 m2 of impervious surface, shall be treated in accordance with the BMPs published in the most current addition of the California Stormwater Quality Association's Best Management Practice Handbook. For the purposes of water quality design, peak flow BMPs shall be designed to treat the runoff from 28% of the 2 year storm event and volumetric BMPs shall be design to treat the runoff from a 25mm/24-hour storm event. 29. The applicant shall ensure that the construction contractor employs the following noise reducing measures: a) Standard construction activities shall be limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday; b) All equipment shall have sound-control devices no less effective than those provided by the manufacturer. No equipment shall have un-muffled exhaust pipes; and, c) Stationary noise sources shall be located as far from sensitive receptors as possible, and they shall be muffled and enclosed within temporary sheds, or insulation barriers or other measures shall be incorporated to the extent possible. 30. To meet the City's threshold of 60 dB CNEL for exterior sounds levels and 45 dBA CNEL for interior noise levels in the areas of residential dwellings, the applicant shall implement the following building materials and methods recommendations contained in Appendix G, Noise Study: a) The projected railroad noise impact at the closest building line is projected to be 55 dB CNEL or Ldn (CNEL and Ldn are essentially equivalent). The projected roadway noise impact by on-site measurement and computer model is as high as 69.8 dBA CNEL at Building B. b) The following glazing requirements for the project to meeting the state and City interior noise criteria of 45 dBA CNEL are summarized below: 1. 1/4-inch glass or any other window with a Sound Transmission Class (STC) rated 27 windows or greater on all elevations of Buildings A-F on all floors. 2. Standard Single Strength Glass (SSB) on all other residential windows of the project. c) Entry doors should be solid core, filled metal (or equivalent), and must be fully weather-stripped at all perimeters in noise zones 60 CNEL or higher. All interior noise levels are specified to be less then 45 CNEL as recognized by the City noise standards. These recommendations are made with doors and windows closed. Since windows and doors must be closed to meet the interior noise standard, mechanical ventilation must be provided which meets the air change requirements of the UBC in all units. ER 70-08(Addendum to ER 62-05) ------ Attachment 4 Page 11 31. Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit, a sign shall be posted at the entrance to the development prohibiting commercial deliveries between the hours of 10 PM and 6 AM. 32. During construction, the following will be implemented: a) Trucks (delivery, hauling, and transportation trucks) should be scheduled outside the A.M. and P.M. peak period (7:00 to 9:00 A.M. and 4:00 to 6:00 P.M.); b) Construction-related traffic shall use on-site roads wherever possible; and, c) Warning signs should be placed on Broad Street prior to and during construction to notify through traffic of trucks entering and exiting the site. 33. Santa Barbara / High St. This intersection is forecast to operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour. The project will add traffic in excess of the City's traffic impact threshold to this intersection. The addition of exclusive tum lanes on the minor street and a two way left turn lane on the major street, restores the intersection operation to LOS C. The recently completed widening of Santa Barbara Street helps to accommodate these identified improvements. 34. Santa Barbara / Roundhouse Rd. This intersection is forecast to operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour. The project will add traffic in excess of the City's traffic impact threshold to this intersection. The addition of exclusive turn lanes on the minor street and a two way left turn lane on the major street, restores the intersection operation to LOS C. The recently completed widening of Santa Barbara Street helps to accommodate these identified improvements. 35. Broad, Santa Barbara, South Street Intersection and Broad Street Widening. Prior to final occupancy and subject to the approval of the Public Works Director and Caltrans, the applicant/developer shall dedicate the necessary right-of way, design, and construct the improvements to accommodate the following cross-section of Broad Street (at South Street) from the southwestern curb line: one 5400t bike lane, two 11-foot travel lanes, one 3-foot raised median with irrigation and landscaping, four 11-foot travel lanes, one 4-foot bike lane, and one 12-foot turn lane. Traffic impact fees credits may be requested for a portion of the improvements made to the Broad Street frontage in front of Fire Station #1. 36. Broad Street / Woodbridge Rd. This intersection is forecast to operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour. The project will add traffic in excess of the City's traffic impact threshold to this intersection. The addition of exclusive turn lanes on the minor street will not restore the intersection operation to LOS D. This intersection has been identified by the City as a potential future candidate for a traffic signal for the purposes of providing a protected pedestrian crossing of Broad Street. Prior to /-9j� ER 70-08(Addendum to ER 62-05) `� Attachment 4 Page 12 the issuance of building permits, the applicant will be required to pay the project's fair share toward the design and installation of a future traffic signal at this intersection as determined by the Public Works Director. 37. Broad Street / Santa Barbara-South Street intersection. Pedestrian Mitigations. Due to the mixed-use nature of the proposed project, which is in proximity to a community park and on a safe route to school, the project is anticipated to generate pedestrian traffic through the signalized intersection at Broad Street and Santa Barbara-South Street. The existing intersection is substantially skewed, creating long crossing distances, particularly on the north, south and east legs. This skew has also necessitated a right tum on red restriction, due to poor visibility between northbound drivers making a right tum and pedestrians crossing Broad Street at the south leg of the intersection from west to east. The applicant shall realign the pedestrian crosswalk on Broad Street to reduce the pedestrian crossing distance. Additionally, the applicant shall design and install eight countdown pedestrian indicators. A common problem for pedestrians at signalized intersections is a lack of understanding of what the pedestrian indications mean. This lack of understanding can result in pedestrians being stuck in the crosswalk while opposing traffic has green light and causes other pedestrians to wait at the curb unnecessarily. Countdown pedestrian indications are designed to reduce this confusion, by informing pedestrians how much time remains for them to cross the street. Traffic impact fee credits may be requested for a portion of the cost of the pedestrian indicators. 38. Broad Street. The applicant shall be responsible for the design and installation of signage, striping, and raised landscape median improvements on Broad Street between South and Alphonso Streets. Signing and striping improvements shall be extended through each intersection to provide the necessary lane transitions. 39. Future Connection to Victoria. It is the City's goal to ultimately provide a vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle connection from the subject property to Victoria and Woodbridge Streets as providing this connection will improve the projects circulation. The applicant will pay a proportional share of the cost of the Victoria Street connection to Alphonso based on actual frontage of the project property on the new street, which will be determined in the future when the layout of the street is designed and the costs of the road improvements are known. 40. Emily/Alphonso Connection. A vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle access connection and easement shall be maintained from the terminus of Emily Street to Alphonso Street. Such easement shall be recorded prior to occupancy. 1-�'� ER 70-08(Addendum to ER 62-05) Attachment 4 Page 13 41. Internal Circulation. Private streets and drive aisles shall be designed to comply with the City's standards. 42. Bus Pullout. The transit pullout on Broad Street shall remain as an interim stop until the center portion of the site is developed to include a pullout between Buildings F& I (within a public access easement) with turning radiuses illustrating northbound access from Alphonso Street and continuing onto westbound Roundhouse. Once the on-site transit pullout is in use, signing and striping shall be changed so the pull out can be used as a deceleration lane for motorists entering the northerly driveway. 43. Railroad Safety Trail Connection. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a site plan and grading design illustrating how an ADA accessible path can be provided from the subject property to the Railroad Safety Trail as indicated on project plans. 44. Railroad Crossing. Figure #2 Streets Classification Map in the City of San Luis Obispo Circulation Element shows a proposed railroad crossing between Roundhouse Avenue and Bishop Street. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall make an irrevocable offer of dedication for a 16-foot easement along the project's Roundhouse Avenue frontage for future slope bank grading necessary to accommodate the railroad crossing. 45. Through their review of plans, support materials, and the analysis of staff of the proposed project, the Planning Commission shall evaluate and make findings to support a shared and mixed use parking reduction of up to 30% based on a determination that there are shared facilities and that demand from various uses will not coincide, consistent with section 17.16.060 C. of the City's Municipal Code. 46. Mitigation that is determined by the Director to be infeasible or unreasonable with respect to the scale, type, and location of the project, or that can be accomplished by a functional equivalent included in the project design may be amended, deleted or modified by the Director to meet the intent of the original measures. r%UaCiif ent 4 1 Exhibit B Mitigation Required by the City for the Village at Maymont Project- June 19,2006 1. All project and building plans shall show buildings limited to 35 feet in height,per City zoning regulations,to help preserve the scenic viewsheds surrounding the proposed project site. These regulations allow an additional 10 feet for certain architectural features. MP-2 is proposed to be 45 feet tall. 2. Prior to issuance of grading and buildings permits for the proposed project, the Architectural Review Commission (ARC), in consultation with City staff and other reviewing authorities, shall ensure that the project adheres to the Community Design Guidelines with regards to the Historical Preservation Zone. The ARC, City staff, and other reviewing authorities shall not approve the project unless the following specific findings can be made: a) The project maintains a high quality of craftsmanship in development through use of authentic building styles,design elements,and materials. b) The project buildings are clustered to achieve a 'village' scale. The various buildings are designed to create a visual and functional relationship with one another. c) The project buildings provide a sense of human scale.The project buildings incorporate significant wall and roof articulation to reduce apparent scale. Roofs are multi-planed to avoid large, monotonous expanses. Horizontal and vertical wall articulation is expressed through the use of elements, such as wall offsets,recessed windows and entries,awnings,and second floor setbacks. d) The project buildings incorporate setbacks at the ground floor level and/or upper levels(stepped-down) along street frontages,such that they do not visually dominate the adjacent neighborhood. e) The project buildings' elements are in proportion. Building designs demonstrate continuity, harmony, simplicity, rhythm,and balance and are in proportion to one another.. f) The project's internal streets are designed as if they were pleasing public streets,with comprehensive streetscapes including sidewalks,and planting strips between curb and sidewalk with canopy trees. g) The project landscaping is planned as an integral part of the overall design and not simply located in "left over" areas. Landscaping is used to help define outdoor spaces, soften the project structures' appearance,and to screen parking,loading,storage,and equipment areas h) Where visual screening at ground level is required (for those portions of the development visible from Broad Street),the project utilizes a combination of elements as appropriate,such as walls, berms,and landscaping. i) The project maintains views of the South Street Hills and the Santa Lucia Foothills to the greatest extent possible. 3. To minimize impacts to residential development that overlooks the project site,the roofs of proposed project buildings shall be non-reflective and designed with muted tones in hue to mitigate visual impacts related to light and glare consistent with standards in the Community Design Guidelines,Section 6.1 C. 4. All outdoor lighting shall be directed downward, consistent with the San Luis Obispo Community Development Design Guidelines. 5. This measure focuses on reducing ozone formation from project-related ozone precursors, NO,and ROG, which is also referred to as Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC). The primary source of these emissions would be ROG released during application of paint to the proposed residential and commercial structures. Attachment 4 — ER 62-05 June 19,2006 Page 2 The rate of ozone formation is greatest during periods of clear weather, low winds and high temperatures. All of the following measures shall be implemented to prevent exceedances of the State 1-hour ozone standard: a) Paint emissions shall not exceed the 185 pound per day significance threshold (88 gallons per day based on 2.08 pounds VOC per gallon); b) Paint emissions shall not exceed the 2.5 ton per quarter significance threshold (2,403 gallons per quarter based on 2.08 pounds VOC per gallon); c) For architectural coatings,APCD regulations limit the VOC content of coating materials used to 100 to 730 grams per liter, depending on the type of coating. Refer to Table 433-1 of Rule 433 of the San Luis Obispo County APCD Rule Book for a detailed listing of the architectural coatings and associated VOC limit;and d) A record of paint use shall be kept during construction so as to show adherence to these mitigations. The use of pre-coated materials, or naturally colored materials and high transfer efficiency painting methods (e.g., HVLP, brush/roller, etc.) to the maximum extent feasible would reduce the amount of paint used and facilitate compliance with the thresholds. 6. The following measures shall be fully implemented during the construction period to reduce PM10 impacts to a level of less than significant: a) All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized for construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/ suppressant,covered with a tarp or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover; b) .All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant; c) All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by presoaking; d) When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least six inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained; e) All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday.The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden; f) Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emissions utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant; g) Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends 50 or more feet from the site and at the end of each workday;and, h) Any site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and trackout. i) Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible; j) Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed(non-potable)water should be used whenever possible; JOD - Agi% elt 4 June 19,2006 Page 3 k) Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities; 1) Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading should be sown with a fast germinating native grass seed and watered until vegetation is established; m) All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders,jute netting,or other methods approved in advance by the APCD; n) All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; o) Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site; p) All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil,or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114; q) Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets,or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site, if track out occurs it.should be clean up immediately;and r) Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. 7. During construction, the applicant shall implement the following standard construction equipment mitigation measuresfor reducing NOx and other combustion emissions(diesel particulate matter): See section 6.3.1 of the Air Quality Handbook: a) Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer's specifications; b) Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment with ARB certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off-road);and, c) Maximize, to the extent feasible, the use of diesel construction equipment meeting ARB's 1996 and newer certification standard for off-road,heavy-duty diesel engines; d) All on and off-road diesel equipment shall not be allowed to idle for more than 5 minutes. Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas to remind drivers and operators of the 5 minute idling limit; e) In any area where haul or trucks or other construction related truck may be queuing, signs shall be posted to limit idling and queuing areas should be located away from residential areas and other sensitive resources;and, f) Prior to any work beginning, the applicant shall install ten (10) diesel oxidation catalysts (DOC), or two (2) catalyzed diesel particulate filters (CDPF) on the construction equipment that shall generate the greatest emissions(i.e., loader loading soil for off-site transport). 8. The applicant shall only install APCD-approved wood-burning devices in the new dwelling units consistent with APCD Rule 504. These devices include: a) All EPA-Certified Phase II wood burning devices; b) Catalytic wood-burning devices which emit less than or equal to 4.1 grams per hour of particulate matter which are not EPA-Certified but have been verified by a nationally-recognized testing lab; T AWent 4 June 19,2 Page 4 c) Non-catalytic wood-burning devices which emit less than or equal to 7.5 grams per hour of particulate matter which are not EPA-Certified but have been verified by a nationally-recognized testing lab; d) Pellet-fueled woodheaters;and, e) Dedicated gas-fired fireplaces. 9. As part of subsequent permitting for the proposed project, the APCD may require the project proponent to complete a screening-level health risk assessment to determine potential health risks to residents of the proposed project. Depending on the results of the screening level health risk assessment, a more comprehensive analysis may be required. Recommendations/requirements resulting from these analyses shall be implemented by the project proponent. 10. If utility pipelines are scheduled for removal or relocation; or building(s) are removed or renovated, this project may be subject to various regulatory jurisdictions, including the requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40CFR61,Subpart M—asbestos NESHAP). The requirements include, but are not limited to: (1) notification requirements to the District, (2)asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Inspector, and (3) applicable removal and disposal requirements of identified ACM 11. Prior to any grading activities at the site, the project proponent shall update the existing geotechnical investigation to determine if Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) is present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with the District. If NOA is found at the site,the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. This may include development of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan and an Asbestos Health and Safety Program for approval by the APCD 12. The applicant shall work with the APCD to secure all necessary permits that may be required to address site clean up issues 13. To reduce NOX, PM10, and ROG emissions during operation of the project, the project proponent shall implement the following,where applicable or feasible: RESIDENTIAL a) Link cul-de-sacs and dead-end streets to encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel; b) Include traffic calming modifications to project roads, such as narrower streets, speed platforms, bulb-outs and intersection modifications designed to reduce vehicle speeds,thus encouraging pedestrian and bicycle travel; c) Include easements or land dedications for bikeways and pedestrian walkways; d) Provide continuous sidewalks separated from the roadway by landscaping and-on-street parking.Adequate lighting for sidewalks must be provided,along with crosswalks at intersections; e) If the project is located on an established transit route, improve public transit accessibility by providing transit turnouts with direct pedestrian access to the project; f) Increase street shade tree planting; g) Provide outdoor electrical outlets to encourage the use of electric appliances and tools; h) Provide on-site bicycle parking for multi-family residential developments. i) Increase number of bicycle routes/lanes; j) Build new homes with internal wiring/cabling that allows telecommuting, teleconferencing and telelearning — ER 62-05 June 19,2006 Page 5 to occur simultaneously in at least three locations throughout the home; Attachment 4 k) Provide pedestrian signalization and signage to improve pedestrian safety;and, 1) Locate a crosswalk with an on demand pedestrian signal on Broad Street between Funston Avenue and Caudill Street or construct pedestrian islands in the median of Broad Street, from the intersection with South Street up to Caudill Street. COMMERCIAL a) Provide on-site bicycle parking. One bicycle parking space for every 10 car parking spaces is considered appropriate; b) Provide on-site eating, refrigeration and food vending facilities to reduce employee lunchtime trips; c) Provide preferential carpool and vanpool parking spaces; d) Provide shower and locker facilities to encourage employees to bike and/or walk to work, typically one shower and three lockers for every 25 employees;and, e) Increase the building energy efficiency rating by 10%above what is required by Title 24 requirements.This can be accomplished in a number of ways (increasing attic, wall, or floor insulation, installing double pane windows, using efficient interior lighting,etc.). SITE DESIGN MITIGATION FOR THIS COMMERCIAL PROJECT a) Increase street shade tree planting; b) Increase shade tree planting in parking lots to reduce evaporative emissions from parked vehicles; c) Provide on-site banking(ATM)and postal services; d) Provide on-site child care facilities for employees; e) Provide on-site housing for employees; f) Implement on-site circulation design elements in parking lots to reduce vehicle queuing and improve the pedestrian environment with designated walkways;and, g) Provide pedestrian signalization and signage to improve pedestrian safety. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MITIGATION a) If the project is located on an established transit route, improve public transit accessibility by providing a transit turnout with direct pedestrian access to the project or improve existing transit stop amenities; b) Provide incentives to employees to carpool/vanpool,take public transportation,telecommute,walk,bike,etc by implementing the Transportation Choices Program. The applicant should Contact SLO Regional Rideshare at 541-2277 to receive free consulting services on how to start and maintain a program; c) Provide Transportation Choices Program information centers on alternative transportation modes at the site (i.e. a transportation kiosk).Contact SLO Regional Rideshare for appropriate materials at 541-2277; d) Install an electric vehicle charging station with both conductive and inductive charging capabilities; e) Employ or appoint an Employee Transportation Coordinator; f) Implement an APCD approved Trip Reduction Program; H03 -= ER 62-05 June 19,2006 Page 6 Attachment 4 g) Provide for shuttle/mini bus service; h) Increase the quality of existing bicycle routes/lanes or add bicycle routes/lanes which access the project; I) Implement compressed work schedules; j) Implement a telecommuting program; k) Implement a lunch-time shuttle to reduce single occupant vehicle trips; 1) Participate in an employee"flash pass"program,which provides free travel on transit buses; m) Include teleconferencing capabilities, such as web cams or satellite linkage,which will allow employees to attend meetings remotely without requiring them to travel out of the area;and, n) If the development is a large grocery store or large retail facility, provide home delivery service for customers. 14. Initial rough grading operations and vegetation removal shall be conducted prior to, or after, the typical, migratory bird nesting season (March 1 - August 1) to avoid any potential impact to migratory bind nesting activity. Therefore,initial grading should be conducted between the months of August and February. 15. If Measure BIO-1 is infeasible, pre-construction surveys shall be conducted prior to any initial grading activity and vegetation removal to identity any potential bird nesting activity,and: a) If any nest sites of bird species protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act are observed within the vicinity of the project site, then the project shall be modified and/or delayed as necessary to avoid direct take of the identified nests,eggs,and/or young;and, b) If active nest sites of raptors and/or birds species of special concern are observed within the vicinity of the project site, then CDFG shall be contacted to establish the appropriate buffer around the nest site. Construction activities in the buffer zone shall be prohibited until the young have fledged the nest and achieved independence. 16. Prior to ground disturbance, a focused botanical survey shall be conducted to determine the presence or absence of special-status plant species which have the potential to exist onsite, including, but not limited to Obispo Indian Paintbrush, Jones' Lamp, Adobe Sanicle, and Condon's Tarplant. This survey shall be scheduled to occur during the appropriate blooming period for the subject plant species, prior to scheduled site disturbance. If a special-status plant species is identified within the project site and impacts are unavoidable,the applicant shall consult with the CDFG and City Natural Resources Manager to determine if a Sensitive Plant Restoration Plan or other mitigation is necessary. 17. The amount of construction-related disturbance should be limited to the extent feasible. During construction, the project impact area should be clearly delineated with high-visibility construction fencing to prevent unnecessary impacts to wetlands identified onsite. In particular, a 20-foot setback shall be established per top-of-creek-bank of the existing drainage, pursuant to the City's creek setback ordinance (see Figure 2-6). Prior to any earth disturbance,exclusionary fencing shall be erected at the boundaries of all construction areas to avoid equipment and human intrusion into adjacent habitats. The fencing shall remain in place and be maintained throughout construction. 18. A qualified historical archaeologist shall conduct a pre-construction phase I survey to determine potential impacts to cultural resources, including the historic roundhouse. Additionally, this person shall conduct a crew orientation to inform project personnel of potential impacts to cultural resources for the project site, and proper procedures in the event a resource is encountered. 19. A halt-work condition shall be in place during all ground disturbing activities. In the event that cultural resources are encountered, all work within the vicinity of the find should stop. A professional archaeologist J—loaf ER 62-05 June 19,2006 Page 7 Attachment 4 shall be retained to assess such finds and make recommendations. 20. If any human remains are inadvertently uncovered during ground disturbing activities,all activity shall cease within 25 feet of the burial, and the County Coroner must be notified, pursuant to Section 7050.5 of California's Health and Safety Code. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission, and follow the procedures outlined in the CEOA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e). 21. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the geotechnical study shall be updated so that the original design recommendations can be reviewed and modified according to the details of the proposed The Village at Maymont project. Ground shaking hazards to the proposed project cannot be eliminated;however,they will be reduced through implementation of the following: a) Cut and fill operations at the project site shall be consistent with all recommendations included in the updated geotechnical investigation (Converse 1996) and City regulations. Only material recommended and approved by the geotechnical engineer and approved by the City shall be used; b) Design and construction of the proposed project shall conform to all relevant seismic regulations and recommendations made by state-licensed civil, geotechnical, and structural engineers for the specific project;and, c) All other recommendations concerning loading, retaining walls, grading and drainage systems in the geotechnical technical shall be implemented and updated as needed. 22. Recommended site preparation shall conform to the recommendations of the updated geotechnical investigation (Converse 1996) with regards to grading, including removal of vegetation and unsuitable soils/materials and the use of acceptable fill materials,as approved by the Geotechnical Engineer. 23. In terms of ground settlement, the proposed project shall conform to the updated geotechnical investigation's recommendations for spread footings as per the following: a) Footings should be founded at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent.final grade and should be at least 18 inches wide,or as specified in the updated geotechnical investigation. 24. A construction dewatering system shall be implemented as per the updated geotechnical investigation's recommendations. 25. A permanent underdrain system shall be implemented as per the updated geotechnical investigation's recommendations. 26. Building floor slabs shall be constructed according to recommendations specified in the updated geotechnical investigation report. 27. Immediately following construction, all remaining bare areas with exposed soils shall be planted with grass or appropriate vegetation to promote the natural stabilization of site soils and reduce soil loss. 28. To minimize impacts, hazardous materials remediation shall be completed in accordance with the approved FS/RAP,as follows: a) Excavation of Lead, TPH, and VOC-impacted soils that contain constituents at concentrations that exceed cleanup criteria; b) Transportation and disposal and Lead-impacted soil to a permitted disposal facility; c) Stockpile and onsite treatment of the excavated TPH and VOC-impacted soil via above-ground vapor extraction; d) Transportation of the TPH-impacted soil exceeding the concentration level of 100 milligrams per /- JOS ER 62-05 June 19,2006 Attaint 4 kilogram (mg/kg) for gasoline range and 1000 mg/kg for diesel and crude oil range to a permitted recycling facility; e) Onsite treatment of the extracted groundwater from excavation pits via activated carbon canister and disposal of the treated water to sewer system under an approved permit by the City of San Luis Obispo Sanitation Department; f) Import of soils for backfill of the excavation; g) Compaction and grading of the site to desired finished grade; h) Repavement of the site;and I) Performing annual monitoring of the groundwater monitoring wells onsite and offsite of the property. 29. The applicant shall comply with NPDES General Construction Activities Storm Water Permit Requirements established by the CWA. Pursuant to the NPDES Storm Water Program,an application for coverage under the statewide General Permit shall be obtained for project development. The applicant shall file a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the SWRCB's Division of Water Quality. The filing shall describe erosion control and storn water treatment measures to be implemented during and following construction and provide a schedule for monitoring performance. These BMPs would serve to control point and non-point source pollutants in storm water and constitute the project's SWPPP for construction activities. The SWPPP will include the following measures: a) Fill slope-surface stabilization measures, such as temporary mulching, seeding, and other suitable stabilization measures to protect exposed erodible areas during construction, and installation of earthen or paved interceptors and diversion at the top of cut of fill slopes where there is a potential for erosive surface runoff; b) Erosion and sedimentation control devices, such as energy absorbing structures or devices, will be used, as necessary, to reduce the velocity of runoff water to prevent polluting sedimentation discharges; c) Installation of mechanical and/or vegetative final erosion control measures within 30 days after completion of grading; d) Confining land clearing and grading operations to the period between April 15 and October 15 to avoid the rainy season;and, e) Minimizing the land area disturbed and the period of exposure to the shortest feasible time. 30. Proposed erosion control will be provided per the erosion control plans. Post-construction mitigation measures to mitigate onsite drainage impacts shall be provided by lined drainage ditches, landscaping, and the underground detention basin with a metering outlet. The existing drainage course, which passes through the southern portion of the site, conveys drainage from an upstream railroad cross-cufvert to a culvert at the Alphonso Street cul-de-sac. Historic drainage conditions and amounts shall be maintained. 31. Stormwater runoff from all improved areas of a development or redevelopment site resulting in 930 m2 of impervious surface, shall be treated in accordance with the BMPs published in the most current addition of the California Stormwater Quality Association's Best Management Practice Handbook. For the purposes of water quality design, peak flow BMPs shall be designed to treat the runoff from 28% of the 2 year storm event and volumetric BMPs shall be design to treat the runoff from a 25mm/24-hour storm event. 32. The applicant shall ensure that the construction contractor employs the following noise reducing measures: a) Standard construction activities shall be limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday; l-1v6 ER 62-05 June 19,2006 Attaclhmtnt 4 b) All equipment shall have sound-control devices no less effective than those provided by the manufacturer. No equipment shall have un-muffled exhaust pipes;and, c) Stationary noise sources shall be located as far from sensitive receptors as possible,and they shall be muffled and enclosed within temporary sheds, or insulation barriers or other measures shall be incorporated to the extent possible. 33. To meet the City's threshold of 60 dB CNEL for exterior sounds levels and 45 dBA CNEL for interior noise levels in the areas of residential dwellings, the applicant shall implement the following building materials and methods recommendations contained in Appendix G,Noise Study: a) The projected roadway noise by on-site measurement and computer models is high as 71.2.dBA CNEL.at Buildings TCI and TC2. No common areas are near these buildings that are indicated on the plans. No patios, balconies, or decks for noise sensitive uses as defined by the City s Noise Element shall be allowed on Buildings TC1 and TC2 on the west elevations facing Broad Street. b) The following glazing requirements for the project to meeting the state and City interior noise criteria of 45 dBA CNEL are summarized below: 1. 1/4-inch glass or any other window with a Sound Transmission Class (STC) rated 27 windows or greater on the west elevations of Buildings TC1 and TC2 on all floors. 2. 3/16-inch glass or any other window with an STC rating of 25 or greater on the north and south elevations of Buildings TCi and TC2 on all floors. 3. Standard Single Strength Glass(SSB)on all other windows of the project. c) Entry doors should be solid core, filled metal (or equivalent), and must be fully weather-stripped at all peri- meters in noise zones 60 CNEL or higher. Since windows and doors must be closed to meet the interior noise requirements, mechanical ventilation must be provided which meets the air change requirements of the UBC in all units. 34. Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit, a sign shall be posted at the entrance to the development prohibiting commercial deliveries between the hours of 10 PM and 6 AM. 35. During construction,the following will be implemented: a) Trucks (delivery, hauling, and transportation trucks) should be scheduled outside the A.M. and P.M. peak period(7:00 to 9:00 A.M.and 4:00 to 6:00 P.M.); b) Construction-related traffic shall use on-site roads wherever possible;and, c) Warning signs should be placed on Broad Street prior to and during construction to notify through traffic of trucks entering and exiting the site. 36. Santa Barbara/ High St. This intersection is forecast to operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour. The project will add traffic in excess of the City's traffic impact threshold to this intersection. The addition of exclusive tum lanes on the minor street and a two way left turn lane on the major street, restores the intersection operation to LOS C. This would require removal of on-street parking and/or widening of Santa Barbara Street. The City has identified such a project in their TIF program. Prior to construction, the applicant shall pay its traffic impact fees toward this future mitigation. 37. Santa Barbara / Roundhouse Rd. This intersection is forecast to operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour. The project will add traffic in excess of the City's traffic impact threshold to this intersection. The addition of exclusive tum lanes on the minor street and a two way left tum lane on the major street, restores the intersection operation to LOS C. This would require removal of on-street parking and/or widening of Santa Barbara Street. The City has identified such a project in their TIF program. Prior to construction,the applicant shall pay its traffic impact fees toward this future mitigation. /-/v? ER 62-05 June 19;2006 Page 10 Attachment 4 38. Broad, Santa Barbara, South Street Intersection and Broad Street Widening. Prior to final map recordation and subject to the approval of the Public Works Director and Caltrans, the applicant/developer shall dedicate the necessary right-of way,design, and construct the improvements to accommodate the following cross-section of Broad Street (at South Street) from the southwestern curb line: one 5-foot bike lane, two 11-foot travel lanes, one 3-foot raised median with irrigation and landscaping,four 11-foot travel lanes,one 4-foot bike lane, and one 12-foot tum lane. Traffic impact fees credits may be requested for a portion of the improvements made to the Broad Street frontage in front of Fire Station#1. 39. Broad Street/Woodbridge Rd. This intersection is forecast to operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour. The project will add traffic in excess of the City's traffic impact threshold to this intersection. The addition of exclusive tum lanes on the minor street will not restore the intersection operation to LOS D. This intersection has been identified by the City as a potential future candidate for a traffic signal for the purposes of providing a protected pedestrian crossing of Broad Street. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant will be required to pay the project's fair share toward the design and installation of a future traffic signal at this intersection as determined by the Public Works Director. 40. Broad Street / Santa Barbara-South Street intersection. Pedestrian Mitigations. Due to the mixed-use nature of the proposed project,which is in proximity to a community park and on a safe route to school,the project is anticipated to generate pedestrian traffic through the signalized intersection at Broad Street and Santa Barbara-South Street. The existing intersection is substantially skewed, creating long crossing distances, particularly on the north,south and east legs.This skew has also necessitated a right tum on red restriction, due to poor visibility between northbound drivers making a right tum and pedestrians crossing Broad Street at the south leg of the intersection from west to east. 41. As shown on Sheet EX2, prepared by the Public Works Department and dated April 7,2006, the applicant shall realign the pedestrian crosswalk on Broad Street to reduce the pedestrian crossing distance. 42. Additionally, the applicant shall design and install eight countdown pedestrian indicators. A common problem for pedestrians at signalized intersections is a lack of understanding of what the pedestrian indications mean. This lack of understanding can result in pedestrians being stuck in the crosswalk while opposing traffic has green light and causes other pedestrians to wait at the curb unnecessarily.Countdown pedestrian indications are designed to reduce this confusion, by informing pedestrians how much time remains for them to cross the street.Traffic impact fee credits may be requested for a portion of the cost of the pedestrian indicators. 43. Broad Street. The applicant shall be responsible for the design and installation of signage, striping, and raised landscape median improvements on Broad Street between South and Alphonso Streets. Signing and striping improvements shall be extended through each intersection to provide the necessary lane transitions. 44. Future Connection to Victoria. It is the City's goal to ultimately provide a vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle connection from the subject property to Victoria and Woodbridge Streets. Providing this connection will improve the project's circulation. As such, the project's site design shall not preclude this connection and the applicant shall make an irrevocable offer to dedicate the right of way necessary for this connection and pay for'/s of the cost of the roadway improvements. 45. Emily/Alphonso Connection. A vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle access connection and easement shall be maintained from the terminus of Emily Street to Alphonso Street. Such easement shall be recorded prior to occupancy. 46. Internal Circulation. Private streets and drive aisles shall be designed to comply with the City's standards. 47. Bus Pullout. As shown on Sheet EX2, prepared by the Public Works Department and dated April 7, 2006, the applicant shall design and install a bus pullout,shelter and associated amenities in compliance with City /- /08 — - ER 62-05 June 19 2006 Attaili6ent 4 standards on the site's Broad Street frontage. All transit improvements shall be installed prior to occupancy clearance. 48. Maymont Place Aisle. Parking for vehicles entering Maymont Place shall be set back 50-60 feet to reduce the potential of vehicles stacking out onto Broad Street or blocking pedestrian access while waiting for a vehicle to back out of the end parking space. 49. Railroad Safety Trail Connection. Prior to the issuance of a building permit,the applicant shall submit a site plan and grading design illustrating how an ADA accessible path can be provided from the subject property to the Railroad Safety Trail as indicated on project plans. 50. Railroad Crossing. Figure#2 Streets Classification Map in the City of San Luis Obispo Circulation Element shows a proposed railroad crossing between Roundhouse Avenue and Bishop Street. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall make an irrevocable offer of dedication for a 16400t easement along the project's Roundhouse Avenue frontage for future slope bank grading necessary to accommodate the railroad crossing. 51. Prior to issuance of grading and buildings permits for the proposed project, the Planning Commission, in consultation with City staff and other reviewing authorities, shall ensure that during ma>amum parking of the project, demand from various uses will not coincide, consistent with section 17.16.060 of the City's Municipal Code. 53. Mitigation that is determined by the Director to be infeasible or unreasonable with respect to the scale,type, and location of the project, or that can be accomplished by a functional equivalent included in the project design may be amended,deleted or modified by the Director to meet the intent of the original measures. Attachment 5 ORDINANCE NO. (2008 Series) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO ADD THE MIXED-USE (MU) OVERLAY TO THE EXISTING ZONING CATEGORIES ON THE SITE FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 2238 BROAD STREET,AND 642 & 2201 EMILY STREET; R/ER 70-08 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on September 10, 2008, and approved Use Permit#U 70-08 to allow the proposed mixed-use development with 74 dwellings and about 35,000 square feet of commercial floor area, and recommended to the Council approval of the proposed MU overlay zoning (R/ER 70-08); and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall; 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on October 7, 2008, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application R/ER 70-08, RMD Development, applicant; 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 considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) of environmental impact that was previously approved by the Council on July 18, 2006, and the Addendum prepared to update the MND and endorsed by the Planning Commission;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 ORDAINED,by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. 1. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan, including Land Use Element Policy 3.8, Mixed Uses, which states that "Compatible mixed uses in commercial districts should be encouraged." 2. The planned development of the site and proposed uses will comply with the MU zone, are compatible with each other and their surroundings, and are consistent with the General Plan (SLO Municipal Code Section 17.55.020C.). 3. The project is consistent with the purpose of the. Mixed Use overlay zone which is to allow the combining of uses on a site which otherwise would be optional. 4. The mixed uses provide greater public benefits than single use development of the site including: H/0 Attachment 5 Ordinance No. (2008 Series) Page 2 a. services which benefit on-site workers, as well as neighbors; b. reduced auto travel by providing services and jobs in close proximity to nearby housing; and c. support for the development of alternative transportation opportunities by providing facilities for bicycles and a bus stop and shelter. 5. The proposed building height of 45 feet is hereby approved with the Mixed Use overlay zoning to more effectively accommodate proposed housing in Building E because: a. it is consistent with Section 17.55.030 of the Mixed Use zone chapter of the Zoning Regulations, which states that "the application of the MU overlay to property may include establishing a higher height limit than the underlying zone, to more effectively accommodate the residential component of a mixed use project"; b. a building of essentially the same height was previously approved in the same general location; and c. the ARC found with their conceptual review of the project on July 21, 2008 that the added height would not result in significant aesthetic impacts. 6. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in this addendum in its consideration of the Mitigated Negative Declaration ER 62-05 and finds that the preparation of a subsequent Negative Declaration is not necessary because: a. None of the circumstances included in Section 15162, which require a subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration have occurred, specifically: i. The project changes do not result in new or more severe environmental impacts. ii. The circumstances under which the project is undertaken will not require major changes to the Mitigated Negative Declaration. iii. The modified project does not require any substantive changes to previously approved mitigation measures. b. The proposed additions and changes are minor and generally consistent with the previous mixed-use project approved for the same site by the City Council on July 18, 2006. c. The changes are consistent with City goals to promote the intensification of infill sites and goals to provide a variety of housing types in the community. d. The proposed scale and design of buildings will be compatible with surrounding uses with the review and approval of project plans by the City's Architectural Review Commission, consistent with the City's General Plan, Zoning Regulations, Railroad District Plan, and Community Design Guidelines. Attachment 5 Ordinance No. (2008 Series) Page 2 SECTION 2. Action. The Zoning Regulations Map Amendment (R/ER70-08) is hereby approved as identified within Exhibit A. SECTION 3. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in the Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty(30)days after its final passage. INTRODUCED on the day of , 2008, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the day of , 2008, on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: City Clerk Audrey Hooper APPROVED AS TO FORM: ity mey Jonathan Lowell GACD-PLANTricciWillage at Broad\Village at Broad MU Rezoning J- IIa- Attachment 5 f, 4 fit s C13 C." Add MU ,mac o J >asp overlay to _ ,� ¢, fl o°�� '" ►` underlying zoning Ir _ �-Pilo ' m }+ "� �O sit �• 6 —Wei dy it Rezoning Map 70-08 Exhibit A