Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/02/2008, PH3 - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO CREATE 23 COMMERCIAL LOTS WITH EXCEPTIONS (143, 151 & 163 SUBURBAN ROAD, TR council °°° �- j acEnaa RepoRt CITY OF SAN LUIS OBI SPO FROM: John Mandeville, Community Development Director Prepared By: Tyler Corey, Associate Planner SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO CREATE 23 COMMERCIAL LOTS WITH EXCEPTIONS (143, 151 & 163 SUBURBAN ROAD,TR 74-07). CAO RECOMMENDATION As recommended by the Planning Commission, adopt a Resolution for properties located at 143, 151 and 163 Suburban Road, which: 1. Approves a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact; and 2. Approves the Tentative Tract Map to create 23 commercial lots, based on findings and subject to conditions and code requirements. DISCUSSION Data Summary Address: 143, 151 & 163 Suburban Road Applicant: Roland Ball Trust Representative: Michael Hodge Zoning: M-SP (Manufacturing with the Specific Plan Overlay) General Plan: Services and Manufacturing Environmental Status: A Mitigated Negative Declaration was recommended by the Deputy Director on September 15, 2008 (ER 74-07). Final action on the environmental document will be taken by the City Council. Situation The City has received an application for a tentative tract map, including exceptions to the Subdivision Regulations, and environmental review to create 23 commercial lots on two existing parcels (one vacant and one developed). The site is located on the south side of Suburban Road between Short Street and Horizon Lane and is approximately 13.5 acres in area (Attachment 1). According to the City's Subdivision Regulations, Council approves or denies tentative tract maps after considering a Planning Commission recommendation. On October 22, 2008, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the tentative tract map to the City Council (Attachment 3). Site Description The project site is located on the south side of Suburban Road between Short Street and Horizon Council Agenda Report—TR 74-07 December 2,2008 Page 2 Lane within the Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP). The site has street frontage and access from Suburban Road, which forms its northerly boundary. The southern boundary of the site adjoins an agricultural field with row crops that is zoned Business Park with the Airport Area Specific Plan Overlay. The terrain is generally flat with elevations that range from approximately 115 feet near the southerly property line to 122 feet near the northerly property line. The surrounding area is primarily commercial in character with the exception of a non-conforming residential use that borders a portion of the site adjacent to Suburban Road to the east. 143 and 151 Suburban are developed with several large commercial buildings, parking, landscaping and various other site improvements (includes Artisan Tile, Trust Automation, Southpaw Sign, Performance Apparel and Ernie Ball). 163 Suburban Road is vacant and contains disturbed coastal valley grassland with various ornamental trees and shrubs along the eastern and western boundaries of the parcel. Project Description The project proposed is a tentative tract map to subdivide an existing 13.5 acre site into 23 commercial lots. The proposed parcels range in size from 9,000 square feet to 202,113 square feet. Other components include removal and reconstruction of vehicle parking and driveways, and installation of public improvements, including a new street with curb, gutter and sidewalk. Improvements to the existing detention basin are proposed to accommodate the additional development. Retaining walls are proposed along portions of the north, east and south property lines as well as near the existing property boundary between the developed and vacant portions of the site. Existing trees will be retained or removed per the project tree removal and landscape. plans. The proposed project includes the request for the following entitlements: 1. Tentative tract map for the creation of 23 commercial lots (Tract 2943) 2. Environmental Review Architectural Review of the new commercial building designs will be required in the future. Planning Commission Action On October 22, 2008, the Planning Commission, on a 6-0 vote (Christianson absent) recommended that the City Council approve the tentative tract map, based on findings and subject to conditions and code requirements (Attachment 4). The applicant's representative, Stephen Dorsi, clarified that the purpose for the smaller commercial lots was to fill a market need in the City that would allow small local businesses to be able to purchase properties and construct custom buildings that meet their specific needs. There was no public testimony on the item and Commission discussion was brief The Planning Commission hearing minutes and staff report are attached (Attachments 4 & 5). 3 -�- Council Agenda Report—TR 74-07 December 2,2008 Page 3 General Plan Consistency The Planning Commission staff report includes a complete General Plan analysis for the project. The Commission found the project consistent with the General Plan for the following reasons: 1. The parcel configuration is consistent with the building intensity anticipated by the Land Use Element. 2. The project will not increase traffic in residential areas. 3. The project does not change allowable land uses. As previously mentioned, a single-family residential use borders a portion of the site adjacent to Suburban Road to the east. This property is zoned Manufacturing with the Airport Area Specific Plan Overlay (M-SP). Single-family residential uses are not allowed in the M-SP zone. Therefore, this existing residential use is considered non-conforming. Non-conforming uses are governed by Chapter 17.10 of the Zoning Regulations. The intent of this chapter is to prevent the expansion of non-conforming uses, establish the circumstances under which they may be continued, and provide for their removal or change to a conforming use as soon as practical. Manufacturing and residential uses adjacent to one another present an inherent land use compatibility issue. In this particular case, restricting the manufacturing use, which is consistent with the General Plan, Airport Area Specific Plan and Zoning Regulations, to preserve a residential atmosphere is not appropriate given the non-conforming status of the residential use. Consistency with the Airport Area Specific Plan The project.site is located within the AASP. This plan provides a framework to guide future land use and development decisions within its planning area. The AASP is consistent with, and serves as an extension of the General Plan. Staff has reviewed Chapter 4.4 (Development Intensity Standards) of the AASP, which outlines property development standards for the subject site. The only inconsistency staff identified was that lots two and three do not meet the minimum parcel depth requirement of 100 feet, consistent with the Subdivision Regulations requirement, outlined in Table 4.4. As further discussed below, staff recommends approval of the exception requests based on findings included in Draft Resolution "A" (Attachment 6). Requested Subdivision Exceptions The applicant is requesting exceptions to the Subdivision Regulations. Specifically, lots two and three have a depth of 88.5 feet where 100 feet is the standard. The Planning Commission Staff Report includes a detailed discussion on these requested exceptions, and specifies the required findings for approval in Draft Resolution `'A" (Attachment 6). In summary, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the exceptions because they will facilitate the construction of a standard street section through the narrow portion of the site adjacent to Suburban Road, as required by the AASP. 3 � 3 7 � Council Agenda Report—TR 7407 December 2,2008 Page 4 Environmental Review The Initial Study of Environmental Impact did not identify any impacts that are considered significant and unavoidable (Attachment 7). The proposed mitigated negative declaration includes mitigation measures to reduce the identified impacts to less than significant levels. Areas where mitigation measures are recommended include air quality and geology and soils. Next Steps Tract maps are approved through a two-step process: first a tentative map, and then a final map. The applicant must satisfactorily complete all conditions of the tentative map before City consideration of the final map. Final maps are brought back to the Council for action on a future Agenda as a Consent item. FISCAL IMPACT When the General Plan was prepared, it was accompanied by a fiscal impact analysis, which found that overall the General Plan was fiscally balanced. Accordingly, since the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, it has a neutral fiscal impact. ALTERNATIVES 1. The Council could approve the project with modified findings and/or conditions. 2. The Council could deny the proposed subdivision, based on findings of inconsistency with the General Plan as specified by the Council. 3. The Council could continue review of the project, if more information is needed. Direction should be given to staff and the applicants. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Reduced scale project plans 3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5510-08 4. Draft Planning Commission minutes 5. Planning Commission staff report 6. Draft Resolution "A" as recommended by the Planning Commission and staff 7. Initial Study of Environmental Impact (ER 74-07) 8. Alternative Draft Resolution `B"to deny the proposed project G:\tcorey\CC\TR-ER 74-07(Ball Subdivision)\TR-ER 74-07rpt.doc 34 C Attachment 1 Co ROW QQ J7, & SP 1w p ....... .... RBAN -S El p o El uos-s� BP-SP VENTURE� M-SP VICINITY MAP File No. 74=07 151 & 163 Suburban 3 � Attachment 2 M 89 .... ..... . SUSIMBAN ROAD ---- ------ ------ --------------- ----------- AX ----------- �4 1 K4 . ............ ---------- -- ------ -- -------------- ------ T-T ------- - -- -------- ---- ro, t7= 441 JPD: F�- ---------- ri ------------ ---------- ---------- rk;t�-, ----------- - ---------------- As• 1, IXE To to Or El to Is oil gee E fill T 61119 I r I Ell Nil C:\Docu wa )oa,mep.WMCD SEMCES MRINGIPROT51=11 31 IMAM& u 172-TP -� 6 ------------------------------- aa. ------------------ -- -- _ _ Attachment 2 Z�-----Z-X77-� 7--Z------7—_ aft III ----------------- L -------------— MW ... ti 4 Tv ------------------ 11 d i OT,—:I ------ ---------- 97,�11711"71 (R)T 4.fIV7,7' 32 sg CAD= 4v D=MenW\Mw LJ 1172-TP q , -- �i $ Lg TAttachment 2 V AW L-I ly Alk L ------ 906%00 Ilk ------- --- - f P age 0 Oc ti vi 7T, EtXf— .......... jell L 11, 'ell l------ i4I. SLI I till act grg-, EZZ 0 iffff LL I '!k--.x pip [a I NDT C.\Dow ne ts-a A Ugh Ad CEL_MIP\172-TP gt 4-r-----t-f Attachment 2 1 -7 ­ ----------- ......--------------- M .41- I H1 'tJ I .......... Al --------------------------I l----------------J1---- ---------- ....... 119 -A --------------------- --�kl ---- T ITI MA.. --- ............. ----------------;:4 \.Q.................. N" IIIT_ 13 ........................ ...... .... ES lip lit I F it 0 J --- ---ILL ij C:\Docu and 361' deFI moomwaWy DwimerAiWCD SOWCEP 172-7P Attachment 2 C-3 6Z o � . fi C. 9F 3 1 9F § J y !3 § r OR � HOUR� 9 A 6 6 F �W r firma T��;� s�,Ne .i � a .r..r.. myaorvti.eu Prdh*wfyPI®IXIIO Plml Eevinom Lev 3w1n Ooq iM.1 � 6 �ddq�= Q5.511.1015:BD5.511.1Y18 Attachment 3 RESOLUTION NO. 5510-08 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP WITH EXCEPTIONS,AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 143, 151 & 163 SUBURBAN ROAD (TR/ER 74-07; TRACT 2943) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on October 22, 2008, for the purpose of considering TR/ER 74-07, a tentative tract map subdividing a 13.5 acre site into 23 commercial lots; and WHEREAS, said public hearing was for the purpose of formulating and forwarding recommendations to the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo regarding the project; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for the project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: Section 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Commission makes the following findings in support of the tentative tract map: 1. The design of the tentative tract map is consistent with the General Plan because the proposed parcel configuration is consistent with the building intensity anticipated by the Land Use Element, will not increase traffic in residential areas, and does not change allowable land uses. 2. The site is physically suited for the proposed type and density of development because 143 & 151 Suburban are already developed with several large commercial buildings, parking, and landscaping, and 163 Suburban is a vacant commercial site located adjacent to an existing street right-of-way with complete City services. 3. The design of the tentative tract map is not likely to cause serious health problems, substantial environmental damage, or substantially and unavoidable injure fish or wildlife or their habitat because the site does not have any creeks or other potentially-significant attachment 3 Planning Commission Resolution#5510-08 TR/ER 74-07 Page 2 habitat areas for fish and wildlife, is surrounded by urban development, and has already been developed with several large commercial buildings, parking, and landscaping. 4. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements for access through (or use of property within) the proposed subdivision since all adjacent properties are accessed independently and the resulting parcels will have separate street frontage and access from Suburban Road and Earthwood Lane. 5. The property to be divided is of such size or shape, or is affected by such topographic conditions, that it is impossible, impractical, or undesirable, in this particular case, to conform to the strict application of the regulations codified in the Subdivision Ordinance because the vacant portion of the site adjacent to Suburban Road has an irregular (narrow) shape that constrains the ability to provide for a standard street section and conforming lot depths. 6. The cost to the subdivider of strict or literal compliance with the regulations is not the sole reason for granting the modification because other findings are made to support approval and the exceptions are minor in nature and constitute only 2 out of 23 lots. 7. The modification will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare, or be injurious to other properties in the vicinity, since the exceptions will allow for a complete standard street section that will provide for adequate emergency vehicle access. 8. Granting the modification is in accord with the intent and purposes of these regulations, and is consistent with the General Plan and with all applicable specific plans or other plans of the City, because the exceptions will facilitate the construction of a complete standard street section consistent with the AASP and does not grant special privileges or modify allowable land uses within the existing M-SP zoning district. 9. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared by the Community Development Department on September 15, 2008. The Planning Commission finds and determines that the project's Mitigated Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed project. Section 2. Environmental Review. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend adoption of the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration with incorporation of the following mitigation measures: Mitigation Measures: Air Quality 1. The project site is located in a candidate area for Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA), which has been identified as a toxic air contaminant by the California Air Resources Board Attachment 3 Planning Commission Resolution#5510-08 TR/ER 74-07 Page 3 (ARB). Under the ARB Air Toxic Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations, prior to any grading activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that a geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if NOA is present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with APCD. If NOA is found at the site, the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. 2. Construction activities can generate fugitive dust, which could be a nuisance to local residents and businesses in close proximity to the proposed construction site. The following mitigation measures will adequately control dust and minimize potential violations for the project. All of these fugitive dust (PM10) mitigation measures must be included on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD prior to land use clearance for map recordation and grading. a. Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible. b. Use water truck or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water shall be used whenever possible. c. All dirt stock-pile areas should be sprayed daily as needed. d. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall beimplemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil-disturbing activities. e. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD. f. Vehicle speed for all vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the site. g. 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. h. 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. i. Plant shade trees along southern exposures of buildings to reduce summer cooling needs as well as planting trees on both sides of the roads to reduce the reflective radiating heat of asphalt roads. j. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. k. 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. Attachment 3 Planning Commission Resolution#5510-08, TR/ER 74-07 Page 4 3. The standard construction equipment mitigation measures for reducing nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions are listed below and in section 6.3.1 of the Air Quality Handbook. These measures are applicable to all projects where construction equipment will be used. 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). 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. Maximize, to the extent feasible, the use of on-road heavy-duty equipment and trucks that meet the ARB's 1998 or newer certification standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines. e. 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 and/or job sites to remind drivers and operators of the 5-minute idling limit. 4. Develop a comprehensive Construction Activity Management Plan for the future development of the individual lots (not the roadway and other public improvements) designed to minimize the amount of large construction equipment operating during any given time period. The plan shall be submitted to the APCD for review and approval prior to the start of construction. The plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following elements: a. Schedule construction truck trips during non-peak hours to reduce peak-hour emissions. b. Limit the length of the construction work-day period if necessary. C. Phase construction activities if appropriate. 5. APCD has determined the operational impacts of the project through the use of URBEMIS2007 computer model, a tool for estimating vehicle travel, fuel use, and the 'resulting emissions related to this project's land uses. The results of the model using conservative County average trip distances demonstrated that the operational impacts will likely exceed APCD's CEQA Tier I significant threshold value of 10 lbs./day for NOx, reactive organic gases (ROG), and PM10. As a result of this estimated threshold exceedence, this project must implement all applicable Standard Mitigation Measures and at least 10 Discretionary Mitigation Measures listed below. Standard Mitigation Measures(All Required) a. Provide on-site bicycle parking at a rate of one bicycle parking space for every 10 car parking spaces. b. Provide on-site eating, refrigeration, and food vending facilities to reduce employee lunchtime trips. Planning Commission Resolution#5510-08 Attachment 3 TR/ER 74-07 Page 5 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. 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.). Discretionary Mitigation Measures (At Least 10 Required) a. Provide on-site bicycle parking at a rate of one bicycle parking space for every 10 car parking spaces. b. Increase street shade tree planting. C. Increase shade tree planting in parking lots to reduce evaporative emissions from parked vehicles. d. Provide on-site banking (ATM) and postal services. e. Provide on-site child care facilities for employees. f. Provide on-site housing for employees. g. Implement on-site circulation design elements in parking lots to reduce vehicle queuing and improve the pedestrian environment with designated walkways. h. Provide pedestrian signalization and signage to improve pedestrian safety. i. 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. j. 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. k. 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. 1. Install an electric vehicle charging station with both conductive and inductive charging capabilities. in. Employ or appoint an Employee Transportation Coordinator. n. Implement a City- approved Trip Reduction Program. o. Provide for shuttle/mini bus service. p. Increase the quality of existing bicycle routes/lanes or add bicycle routes/lanes which access the project. q. Implement compressed work schedules. r. Implement a telecommuting program. S. Implement a lunch-time shuttle to reduce single-occupant vehicle trips. t. Participate in an employee "flash pass" program, which provides free travel on transit buses. 3��5 Attachment 3 Planning Commission Resolution#5510-08 TR/ER 74-07 Page 6 u. 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. V. If the development is a large grocery store or large retail facility, provide home delivery service for customers. w. Shade tree planting along southern exposures of buildings to reduce summer cooling needs. x. Use roof material with a solar reflectance value meeting the EPA/DOE Energy Star® rating to reduce summer cooling needs. y. Use built-in energy-efficient appliances where applicable. Z. Use double-paned windows. aa. Use low-energy parking lot and street lights (e.g. sodium). bb. Use energy-efficient interior lighting. cc. Use low-energy traffic signals (e.g. light emitting diode). dd. Install door sweeps or weather stripping if more energy-efficient doors and windows are not available. ee. Install high-efficiency or gas space heating. ff. Replace diesel fleet vehicles with cleaner fueled low-emission vehicles (e.g. school buses, transit buses, on and off-road heavy-duty vehicles, lighter-duty trucks and passenger vehicles). gg. Retrofit existing equipment to reduce emissions through methods such as catalyzed diesel particulate filters, diesel oxidation catalysts, or other approved technologies. ➢ Monitoring Program: Construction phase air quality mitigation measures are monitored by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD), through a complaint-based enforcement system. Plans submitted for a building or grading permit must be accompanied with all required APCD approvals and show compliance with the requirements listed above. The City Building Inspector and Public Works Inspector for the project are instructed to contact APCD in the event of a probable violation. Members of the public can also call APCD if they are concerned about dust or other emissions from a construction site. Geology and Soils 1. Building plans and specifications for common tract improvements shall incorporate all recommendations included in the Soils Engineering Report prepared by Earth Systems Pacific dated May 8, 2007, subject to the approval of the Chief Building Official. 2. Soils engineering reports shall be submitted with each building permit application for individual lot development subject to the approval of the Chief Building Official. Monitoring Program: Project plans submitted for building permits will be reviewed for compliance with these requirements by Community Development Department staff. Attachment 3 Planning Commission Resolution#5510-08 TR/ER 74-07 Page 7 Section 3. Recommendation. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of application TR/ER 74-07 with incorporation of the following conditions and code requirements into the project: Conditions: 1. The use of well water for irrigation purposes from the existing well on Lot 1 to serve Lots 22 and 23 is not allowed per City policy. Policy 1.15.1 in the Water and Wastewater Element of the General Plan contains provisions that may allow a single well on either Lot 22 or Lot 23 to serve the irrigation needs of both lots, subject to approval by the Utilities Director. 2. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval by the City of this subdivision, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review. 3. The proposed project shall comply with post-development stormwater treatment in accordance with City Standard 101OB. Include complete details, detail references, and plan notes for the proposed BMPs and improvements necessary to provide reasonable stormwater treatment. Revise the site plan, civil plans, utility plans, and landscape plans to recognize all proposed treatment measures. The plans may include but are not limited to infiltration, detention and settling, biofiltration, filtration, and flow-through separation. 4. The new draft Water Quality Board State Construction Permit requires dischargers to replicate the pre-project runoff water balance (for this permit, defined as the amount of rainfall that ends up as runoff) for the smallest storms up to the 85th percentile storm event (or the smallest storm event that generates runoff, whichever is larger). Depending upon the time of application to record the parcel map and/or timing to complete the construction of public improvements, the project may be subject to the new Board regulations. 5. A separate covenant agreement to install the ultimate street improvements upon the continuation of the street shall be recorded in conjunction with the recordation of the map. The public improvement plans shall include any additional detailing required to complete said future improvements. Code Requirements: The following code requirements are included for information purposes only. They serve to give the applicant a general idea of other City requirements that will apply to the project. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list as other requirements may be identified during the plan check process. The project is subject to all requirements in effect at the time of the building permit or map vesting date. �' I attachment 3 Planning Commission Resolution #5510-08 TR/ER 74-07 Page 8 1. Any building permits issued for work required to satisfy the conditions of the subdivision shall receive final inspection approvals or shall have substantially completed all work to the satisfaction of the Building Official prior to recordation of the map. 2. The area of the hammerhead fire apparatus turn-around on Earthwood shall be posted "No Parking Fire Lane." 3. A complete subdivision improvement plan, prepared by a registered civil engineer, shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval. All grades, layout, staking and cut-sheets necessary for the construction of street paving and frontage improvements shall be the responsibility of the developer. The subdivision improvement plan shall include all public and private subdivision improvements in accordance with the tentative map, conditions of approval, the Subdivision Map Act, City Subdivision Regulations, Airport Area Specific Plan, and all local codes and ordinances. 4. New wire utilities outside the subdivision boundaries, but necessary to provide service to the subdivision shall be completed with no net increase in the number of utility poles unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. 5. Separate utilities, including water, sewer, gas, electricity, telephone, and cable TV shall be served to each parcel to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and serving utility companies. Utilities to new or existing structures shall be underground unless otherwise excepted by City ordinance. 6. Street lighting and all associated facilities, including conduits, sidewalk vaults, fusing, wiring, and luminaries, shall be provided on the westerly side of the proposed driveway approach per City Standards. The light shall be spaced to honor the existing street light locations and to provide reasonable separation between the existing lights. Off-site street lighting improvements, alterations, or upgrades may be required along roadways leading to and from the proposed development to complete the necessary public improvements. 7. The existing driveway approaches located along the frontage of proposed Parcel 23 and serving the existing development shall be upgraded or replaced to comply with current City and ADA standards. Current standards require a minimum 4' level sidewalk extension behind the driveway approach. 8. A public pedestrian easement shall be recorded with the map if adequate right-of-way does not exist for any proposed ADA sidewalk extension that will occur on private property and outside of the existing public right-of-way. 9. The subdivider shall dedicate a 15' wide public utility easement and a 10' wide street tree easement across the frontage of each parcel. These easements shall be adjacent to and contiguous with all public right-of-way lines bordering each parcel. 3-fig Attachment 3 Planning Commission Resolution#5510-08 TR/ER 74-07 Page 9 10. A private sewer mainline may be proposed in lieu of separate sewer laterals for each unit. If proposed or required by the Utilities Director, the on-site sewer main shall be privately owned and maintained by the Homeowner's Association. 11. A maintenance agreement for any private utilities, paving, landscape improvements, storm drain systems, detention basins, and any other common improvements, must be recorded prior to or concurrent with the recordation of the map. 12. The public improvement plan submittal shall include an erosion control plan and erosion control notes in accordance with the Waterways Management Plan Drainage Design Manual and to the satisfaction of the Building Official and Public Works Director. 13. EPA Requirement: General Construction Activity Storm Water Permits are required for all stormwater discharges associated with a construction activity where clearing, grading, and excavation results in land disturbance of one or more acres. Stormwater discharges of less than one acre, but which is part of a larger common plan of development or sale, also require a permit. Permits are required until the construction is complete. To be covered by a General Construction Activity Permit, the owners of land where construction activity occurs must submit a completed "Notice of Intent" (NOI) form, with the appropriate fee, to the State Water Resources Control Board(SWRCB). 14. A copy of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) required by the SWRCB shall be included as part of the building and/or grading permit plan submittal. The WDID Number issued by the Board shall be noted on all plans that involve regulated land disturbing activities. 15. The proposed street trees and any parkway landscaping shall be installed and maintained by the Property Owner Association or shall otherwise be covered by a maintenance agreement to be recorded prior to or concurrent with the recordation of the map. The maintenance agreement shall include watering of the trees and common area landscape, at least during the establishment period and/or until responsibility may be reasonably transferred to the adjoining property owner(s). 16. Tree protection measures must be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Arborist. The City Arborist shall review and approve the proposed tree protection measures prior to any demolition, grading, or construction. The City Arborist must approve any safety pruning; the cutting of substantial roots, or grading within the dripline of trees. A City-approved arborist must complete safety pruning. Any required tree protection measures shall be noted on the public improvement plans. Contact the City Arborist at 781-7023 to review and to establish preservation measures to be included with the public improvement plan submittal. On motion by Commissioner Ashbaugh, seconded by Commissioner Gould, and on the following roll call vote: /�� Attachment 3 Planning Commission Resolution#5510-08 TR/ER 74-07 Page 10 AYES: Commissioners Multari, Gould, Brodie, Carpenter, Stevenson, and Ashbaugh NOES: None REFRAIN: None ABSENT: Commissioner Christianson The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 22nd day of October 2008. Doug Davidson, Secretary Planning Commission Attachment 4 DRAFT SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 22, 2008 ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Michael Multari, Amanda Brodie, Dan Carpenter, Vice- Chairperson John Ashbaugh, and Chairperson Charles Stevenson. Absent: Commr. Cadyn Christianson Staff: Associate Planner Tyler Corey, Associate Planner Phil Dunsmore and Recording Secretary Janet Miller ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA: Commissioners or staff may modify the order of items. MINUTES: The minutes of October 8, 2008 were approved as submitted. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. 143, 151, and 163 Suburban Road. TR/ER 74-07: Environmental review and tentative tract map to create 23 commercial lots with exceptions; M-SP zone; Roland Ball Trust, applicant (Tyler Corey) Tyler Corey, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending approval of the tentative tract map and mitigated negative declaration of environmental impact to City Council, based on findings and subject to conditions and code requirements. Chair Stevenson questioned the smaller lot size proposed with the subdivision. Stephen Dorsi, project applicant, clarified that the purpose for the smaller commercial lots was to fill a market need in the City that would allow small local businesses to be able to purchase lots and construct buildings that meets their specific needs. If larger lots were needed, prospective buyers could purchase 2 or more of the parcels. Cmmr. Ashbaugh asked whether architectural guidelines could be developed and approved for the project to streamline the architectural review process for subsequent development. Mr. Corey replied that architectural guidelines could be reviewed and approved by the ARC for the entire tract, which could streamline the design review process for those projects found to be consistent with the approved architectural guidelines. 3 ,2-t Draft Planning Commission Minutes Att8Cht11@Itt 4 October 22, 2008 Page 2 PUBLIC COMMENT: There were no comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Cmmr Ashbaugh moved for approval Cmmr Gould seconded motion for approval On motion by Commr. Ashbaugh Seconded by Gould AYES: Commrs. Multari, Gould, Brodie, Carpenter, Chairperson Stevenson, Vice Chairperson Ashbaugh NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: Commr. Christianson The motion carried on a 6: 0 vote. 1010 Broad Street. U 111-02 To allow new art center building in S-overlay zone ithin downtown Historic District; SLO art Center, Attn: Karen Kile, Applicant (Phil smore) Phil Duns e, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending the Planning Com ' sion adopt the resolution, recommending the City Council deny the use permit base findings and subject to conditions. Staff stated that the design of the proposed new b ing is the key issue of the review process. Staff stated that the design of the proposert center building must be evaluated for consistency with applicable City policies, o nces, and guidelines. Staff further explained the role of city staff and the advisory bo i s was to determine and make recommendations on whether proposed development i onsistent with the City's policies, ordinances and guidelines, not what `good' design is. Bruce Fraser, applicant, stated that he to strong exception to the staff report and findings. He stated that this is a unique face with a unique mission, and that it is setting a precedent for the downtown. Wayne Barcelon, Barcelon Jang Architects, San Fran i co, stated that the scale of building is fluid in regard to the uses of the center and tha a circulation patterns are designed to engage the public. He further stated that the ing of the community, beyond the adjacent buildings, was considered in design. Cmmr. Brodie, questioned the choice of stone. Mr. Barcelon stated the rker stone is textured, that the upper level stone is smooth, and it was designed to red the mass of the building. --�-ate Chair Stevenson requested the building's height be addressed. Mr. Barcelona sta Attachment 5 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ITEM# 1 BY: Tyler Corey, Associate Planner(781-7169) DATE: October 22, 2008 FROM: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director of Community Development D � FILE NUMBER: TR/ER 74-07 (County Tract Map No. 2943) PROJECT ADDRESS: 143, 151 & 163 Suburban Road SUBJECT: Environmental review and consideration of a tentative tract map to create 23 commercial lots with exceptions for property located on the south side of Suburban Road between Short Street and Horizon Lane. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION Recommend that the City Council approve the tentative tract map, and mitigated negative declaration of environmental impact for the project, based on findings and subject to conditions and code requirements. BACKGROUND Situation/Project Description The City has received an application for a tentative tract map, including exceptions to the Subdivision Regulations, and environmental review to create 23 commercial lots on two existing parcels (one vacant and one developed) totaling approximately 13.5 acres on the south side of Suburban Road between Short Street and Horizon Lane. The proposed parcels range in size from 9,000 square feet to 202,113 square feet. Other components of the subdivision include removal and reconstruction of vehicle. parking and driveways, and installation of public improvements, including a new street with curb, gutter and sidewalk. Improvements to the existing detention basin are proposed to accommodate the additional development. Retaining walls are proposed along portions of the north, east and south property lines as well as near the existing property boundary between 143 & 151 and 163 Suburban Road. Existing trees will be retained or removed per the project tree removal and landscape plans. The Planning Commission reviews tentative tract maps and environmental documents and makes a recommendation to the City Council, which takes a final action on such requests. Data Summary Address: 143, 151 & 163 Suburban Road Applicant: Roland Ball Trust Representative: Michael Hodge Zoning: M-SP (Manufacturing with the Specific Plan Overlay) General Plan: Services and Manufacturing Environmental Status: A Mitigated Negative Declaration was recommended by the Deputy Director on September 15, 2008 (ER 74-07). Final action on the environmental document will be taken by the City Council. 3-a-3 Attachment 5 TR/ER 74-07 (143, 151 & ro3 Suburban Road) Page 2 Site Description The project site is located on the south side of Suburban Road between Short Street and Horizon Lane within the Airport Area Specific Plan(AASP). The site has street frontage and access from Suburban Road, which forms its northerly boundary. The southern boundary of the site adjoins an agricultural field with row crops. The terrain is generally flat with elevations that range from approximately 115 near the southerly property line to 122 feet near the northerly property line. The surrounding area is primarily commercial in character with the exception of a residential use that borders a portion of the site adjacent to Suburban Road to the east. 143 & 151 Suburban is developed with several large commercial buildings, parking, landscaping and various other site improvements. 163 Suburban Road is vacant and contains disturbed coastal valley grassland with various ornamental trees and shrubs along the eastern and western boundaries of the parcel. Zoning surrounding the site is shown in the attached vicinity map (Attachment 1). EVALUATION Section 66474 of the California Government Code specifies the findings for approval of a tentative map. These findings include: 1. The proposed tentative map and its design and improvements are consistent with the General Plan; and 2. The site is physically suited for the type and density of development; and 3. The design of the subdivision will not cause substantial environmental damage or cause serious public health problems; and 4. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with public easements through or within the property. The following discussion evaluates the proposed tentative tract map for consistency with these findings. General Plan General Plan conformity is essential in reviewing this application. The City must make a finding that a tentative map approval is consistent with the General Plan. The General Plan designates the subject site as Services and Manufacturing. The proposed parcel configuration is consistent with this designation because subsequent development of the site will be compatible with the building intensity anticipated by the Land Use Element. In addition, the subdivision will not increase traffic in residential areas and does not change allowable land uses. Staff has found no policies in other elements of the City's General Plan that conflict with the proposed subdivision design. 3-a`� � Attachment 5 TR/ER 74-07 (143, 151 &`'i o3 Suburban Road) A Page 3 Conformance with Subdivision Regulations The applicant is requesting exceptions to the Subdivision Regulations. Specifically, lots 2 & 3 have a depth of 88.5 feet where 100 feet is the standard. The Subdivision Ordinance, Chapter 16.23, specifies that the Council must make the following findings in order to approve exceptions: 1. That the property to be divided is of such size or shape, or is affected by such topographic conditions, that it is impossible, impractical or undesirable, in the particular case, to conform to the strict application of the regulations codified in this title; and 2. That the cost to the subdivider of strict or literal compliance with the regulations is not the sole reason for granting the modification; and 3. That the modification will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, or be injurious to other properties in the vicinity; and 4. That granting the modification is in accord with the intent and purposes of these regulations, and is consistent with the general plan and with all applicable specific plans or other plans of the city. Staff is recommending approval of the requested exceptions for lots 2 & 3 and details the required findings in the Draft Planning Commission Resolution (Attachment 4). In summary, these findings discuss the need for a standard street section, irregular shaped lot and adequate emergency vehicle access. The requested exceptions are minor in nature and constitute only 2 out of 23 lots. The exceptions will facilitate the construction of a standard street section through the narrow portion of the site adjacent to Suburban Road, as required by the AASP. Consistency with the Airport Area Specific Plan The project site is located within the AASP. This plan provides a framework to guide future land use and development decisions within its planning area. The AASP is consistent with, and serves as an extension of the General Plan. Staff has reviewed Chapter 4.4 (Development Intensity Standards) of the AASP, which outlines property development standards for the subject site. The only inconsistency staff identified was that lots 2 & 3 do not meet the minimum parcel depth requirement of 100 feet, consistent with the Subdivision Regulations requirement, outlined in Table 4.4: As discussed above, staff recommends approval of the exception requests based on findings included in the Draft Planning Commission Resolution (Attachment 4). Environmental Review The Initial Study of Environmental Impact does not identify any impacts that are considered significant and unavoidable (Attachment 3). The proposed mitigated negative declaration includes mitigation measures to reduce the identified impacts to less than significant levels. Areas where mitigation measures are recommended include air quality and geology and soils. The technical studies conducted for the project are available for review by the Planning ` Attachment 5 TR/ER 74-07 (143, 151 & i 63 Suburban Road) Page 4 Commission and public in the Community Development Department in City Hall, 919 Palm Street. OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS This item was distributed to various City departments and comments received have been included as project conditions and code requirements where appropriate. RECOMMENDATION Recommend that the City Council approve the tentative tract map, and mitigated negative declaration of environmental impact for the project, based on findings and subject to conditions and code requirements. ALTERNATIVES 1. The Commission may recommend approval of the project with modified findings and/or conditions. 2. The Commission may approve a resolution recommending that the City Council deny the proposed subdivision, based on findings of inconsistency with the General Plan as specified by the Planning Commission. 3. The Commission may continue review of the project, if more information is needed. Direction should be given to staff and the applicants. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 6 Draft Resolution "A" RESOLUTION NO. (2008 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO CREATE 23 COMMERCIAL LOTS LOCATED AT 1439 151 & 163 SUBURBAN ROAD (TR/ER 74-07) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on October 22, 2008, and recommended approval of Application TR/ER 74-07, a request to create 23 commercial lots with exceptions; 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 December 2, 2008, for the purpose of considering Application TR/ER 74-07; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for the project, as prepared by staff and reviewed by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Council has duly considered all evidence, including the recommendation of the Planning Commission, testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Council makes the following findings: 1. The design of the tentative tract map is consistent with the General Plan because the proposed parcel configuration is consistent with the building intensity anticipated by the Land Use Element, will not increase traffic in residential areas and does not change allowable land uses. 2. The site is physically suited for the proposed type and density of development because 143 & 151 Suburban are already developed with several large commercial buildings, parking and landscaping, and 163 Suburban is a vacant commercial site located adjacent to an existing street right-of-way with complete City services. 3. The design of the tentative tract map is not likely to cause serious health problems, substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidable injure fish or wildlife or their habitat because the site does not have any creeks or other potentially significant habitat 3-Ji ` Attachment 6 Resolution No. (2008 Series) Page 2 areas for fish and wildlife, is surrounded by urban development and has already been developed with several large commercial buildings, parking and landscaping. 4. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements for access through (or use of property within) the proposed subdivision since all adjacent properties are accessed independently and the resulting parcels will have separate street frontage and access from Suburban Road and Earthwood Lane. 5 The property to be divided is of such size or shape, or is affected by such topographic conditions, that it is impossible, impractical or undesirable, in the particular case, to conform to the strict application of the regulations codified in the Subdivision Ordinance because the vacant portion of the site adjacent to Suburban Road has an irregular (narrow) shape that constrains the ability to provide for a standard street section and conforming lot depths. 6. The cost to the subdivider of strict or literal compliance with the regulations is not the sole reason for granting the modification because other findings are made to support approval and the exceptions are minor in nature and constitute only 2 out of 23 lots. 7. The modification will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, or be injurious to other properties in the vicinity since the exceptions will allow for a complete standard street section that will provide for adequate emergency vehicle access. 8. Granting the modification is in accord with the intent and purposes of these regulations, and is consistent with the general plan and with all applicable specific plans or other plans of the City, because the exceptions will facilitate the construction of a complete standard street section consistent with the AASP and does not grant special privileges or modify allowable land uses within the existing M-SP zoning district. 9. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared by the Community Development Department on September 15, 2008. As recommended by the Planning Commission, the City Council finds and determines that the project's Mitigated Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed project. SECTION 2. Environmental Determination. The City Council finds and determines that the project's Mitigated Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed project, and reflects the independent judgment of the City Council. The Council hereby adopts said Mitigated Negative Declaration and incorporates the following mitigation measures and monitoring programs into the project: Air Quality 1. The project site is located in a candidate area for Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA), which has been identified as a toxic air contaminant by the California Air Resources Board (ARB). Under the ARB Air Toxic Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, 3-2� Attachment 6 Resolution No. (2008 Series) Page 3 Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations, prior to any grading activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that a geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if NOA is present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with APCD. If NOA is found at the site the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. 2. Construction activities can generate fugitive dust, which could be a nuisance to local residents and businesses in close proximity to the proposed construction site. The following mitigation measures will adequately control dust and minimize potential violations for the project. All of these fugitive dust (PM10) mitigation measures must be included on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone of such persons shall be provided to the APCD prior to land use clearance for map recordation and grading. (A)Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible. (B)Use water truck or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed(non-potable) water shall be used whenever possible. (C)All dirt stock-pile areas should be sprayed daily as needed. (D)Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities. (E)All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD. (F) Vehicle speed for all vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the site. (G)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. (H)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. (I) Plant shade trees along southern exposures of buildings to reduce summer cooling needs as well as planting trees on both sides of the roads to reduce the reflective radiating heat of asphalt roads. (J) Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. (K)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. 3__aq 1 Attachment 6 Resolution No. (2008 Series) Page 4 3. The standard construction equipment mitigation measures for reducing nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions are listed below and in section 6.3.1 of the Air Quality Handbook. These measures are applicable to all projects where construction equipment will be used. (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). (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)Maximize to the extent feasible, the use of on-road heavy-duty equipment and trucks that meet the ARB's 1998 or newer certification standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines. (E)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 and/or job sites to remind drivers and operators of the 5 minute idling limit. 4. Develop a comprehensive Construction Activity Management Plan for the future development of the individual lots (not the roadway and other public improvements) designed to minimize the amount of large construction equipment operating during any given time period. The plan shall be submitted to the APCD for review and approval prior to the start of construction. The plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following elements: (A)Schedule construction truck trips during non-peak hours to reduce peak hour emissions. (B)Limit the length of the construction work-day period, if necessary. (C)Phase construction activities, if appropriate. 5. APCD has determined the operational impacts of the project through the use of URBEMIS2007 computer model, a tool for estimating vehicle travel, fuel use and the resulting emissions related to this project's land uses. The results of the model using conservative County average trip distances demonstrated that the operational impacts will likely exceed APCD's CEQA Tier I significant threshold value of 10 lbs/day for NOx, reactive organic gases (ROG) and PM10. As a result of this estimated threshold exceedence, this project must implement all applicable Standard Mitigation Measures and at least 10 Discretionary Mitigation Measures listed below. Standard Mitigation Measures (All Required) (A)Provide on-site bicycle parking at a rate of one bicycle parking space for every 10 car parking spaces. 3 �30 Attachment 6 Resolution No. (2008 Series) Page 5 (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. (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.). Discretionary Mitigation Measures (At Least 10 Required) (A)Provide on-site bicycle parking at a rate of one bicycle parking space for every 10 car parking spaces. (B)Increase street shade tree planting. (C)Increase shade tree planting in parking lots to reduce evaporative emissions from parked vehicles. (D)Provide on-site banking(ATM) and postal services. (E) Provide on-site child care facilities for employees. (F) Provide on-site housing for employees. (G)Implement on-site circulation design elements in parking lots to reduce vehicle queuing and improve the pedestrian environment with designated walkways. (H)Provide pedestrian signalization and signage to improve pedestrian safety. (I) 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. (J) 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. (K)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. (L) Install an electric vehicle charging station with both conductive and inductive charging capabilities. (M)Employ or appoint an Employee Transportation Coordinator. (N)Implement an City approved Trip Reduction Program. (0)Provide for shuttle/mini bus service. (P) Increase the quality of existing bicycle routes/lanes or add bicycle routes/lanes which access the project. (Q)Implement compressed work schedules. (R)Implement a telecommuting program. (S) Implement a lunch-time shuttle to reduce single occupant vehicle trips. -3---3( Attachment 8 Resolution No. (2008 Series) Page 6 (T) Participate in an employee "flash pass" program, which provides free travel on transit buses. (U)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. (V)If the development is a large grocery store or large retail facility, provide home delivery service for customers. (W)Shade tree planting along southern exposures of buildings to reduce summer cooling needs. (X)Use roof material with a solar reflectance value meeting the EPA/DOE Energy Star® rating to reduce summer cooling needs.. (Y)Use built-in energy efficient appliances, where applicable. (Z)Use double-paned windows. (AA)Use low energy parking lot and street lights (e.g. sodium). (BB)Use energy efficient interior lighting. (CC)Use low energy traffic signals (e.g. light emitting diode). (DD)Install door sweeps or weather stripping if more energy efficient doors and windows are not available. (EE) Install high efficiency or gas space heating. (FF) Replace diesel fleet vehicles with cleaner fueled low emission vehicles (e.g. school buses, transit buses, on and off road heavy duty vehicles, lighter duty trucks and passenger vehicles). (GG)Retrofit existing equipment to reduce emissions through methods such as catalyzed diesel particulate filters, diesel oxidation catalysts, or other approved technologies. i Monitoring Program: Construction phase air quality mitigation measures are monitored by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD), through a complaint based enforcement system. Plans submitted for a building or grading permit must be accompanied with all required APCD approvals and show compliance with the requirements listed above. The City Building Inspector and Public Works Inspector for the project are instructed to contact APCD in the event of a probable violation. Members of the public can also call APCD if they are concerned about dust or other emissions from a construction site. Geology and Soils 6. Building plans and specifications for common tract improvements shall incorporate all recommendations included in the Soils Engineering Report prepared by Earth Systems Pacific dated May 8, 2007, subject to the approval of the Chief Building Official.. 7. Soils engineering reports shall be submitted with each building permit application for individual lot development, subject to the approval of the Chief Building Official. ? -3;)- Attachment 6 Resolution No. (2008 Series) Page 7 ➢ Monitoring Program: Project plans submitted for building permits will be reviewed for compliance with these requirements by Community Development Department staff. SECTION 3. Action. The Council does hereby approve Application TR/ER 74-07 with incorporation of the following conditions and code requirements into the project: Conditions: 1. The use of well water for irrigation purposes from the existing well on Lot 1 to serve Lots 22 and 23 is not allowed per City policy. Policy 1.15.1 in the Water and Wastewater Element of the General Plan contains provisions that may allow a single well on either Lot 22 or Lot 23 to serve the irrigation needs of both lots, subject to approval by the Utilities Director. 2. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this subdivision, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review. 3. The proposed project shall comply with post-development stormwater treatment in accordance with City Standard 1010B. Include complete details, detail references and plan notes for the proposed BMPs and improvements necessary to provide reasonable stormwater treatment. Revise the site plan, civil plans, utility plans, and landscape plans to recognize all proposed treatment measures. The plans may include but are not limited to infiltration, detention and settling, biofiltration, filtration, and flow-through separation. 4. The new draft Water Quality Board State Construction Permit requires dischargers to replicate the pre-project runoff water balance (for this permit, defined as the amount of rainfall that ends up as runoff) for the smallest storms up to the 85`h percentile storm event (or the smallest storm event that generates runoff, whichever is larger). Depending upon the time of application to record the parcel map and/or timing to complete the construction of public improvements, the project may be subject to the new Board regulations. 5. A separate covenant agreement to install the ultimate street improvements upon the continuation of the street shall be recorded in conjunction with the recordation of the map. The public improvement plans shall include any additional detailing required to complete said future improvements. Code Requirements: 1. Any building permits issued for work required to satisfy the conditions of the subdivision shall receive final inspection approvals or shall have substantially completed all work to the satisfaction of the Building Official prior to recordation of the map. 3 .-33 Attachment 6 Resolution No. (2008 Series) Page 8 2. The area of the hammerhead fire apparatus turn-around on Earthwood shall be posted "No Parking Fire Lane". 3. A complete subdivision improvement plan, prepared by a registered civil engineer, shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval. All grades, layout, staking and cut-sheets necessary for the construction of street paving and frontage improvements shall be the responsibility of the developer. The subdivision improvement plan shall include all public and private subdivision improvements in accordance with the tentative map, conditions of approval, the Subdivision Map Act, City Subdivision Regulations, Airport Area Specific Plan and all local codes and ordinances. 4. New wire utilities outside the subdivision boundaries, but necessary to provide service to the subdivision shall be completed with no net increase in the number of utility poles unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. 5. Separate utilities, including water, sewer, gas, electricity, telephone, and cable TV shall be served to each parcel to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and serving utility companies. Utilities to new or existing structures shall be underground unless otherwise excepted by City ordinance. 6. Street lighting and all associated facilities including conduits, sidewalk vaults, fusing, wiring, and luminaries shall be provided on the westerly side of the proposed driveway approach per City Standards. The light shall be spaced to honor the existing street light locations and to provide reasonable separation between the existing lights. Off-site street lighting improvements, alterations, or upgrades may be required along roadways leading to and from the proposed development to complete the necessary public improvements. 7. The existing driveway approaches located along the frontage of proposed Parcel 23 and serving the existing development shall be upgraded or replaced to comply with current City and ADA standards. Current standards require a minimum 4' level sidewalk extension behind the driveway approach. 8. A public pedestrian easement shall be recorded with the map if adequate right-of-way does not exist for any proposed ADA sidewalk extension that will occur on private property and outside of the existing public right-of-way. 9. The subdivider shall dedicate a 15' wide public utility easement and a 10' wide street tree easement across the frontage of each parcel. These easements shall be adjacent to and contiguous with all public right-of-way lines bordering each parcel. 10. A private sewer mainline may be proposed in lieu of separate sewer laterals for each unit. If proposed or required by the Utilities Director, the on-site sewer main shall be privately owned and maintained by the Homeowner's Association. 3-3J -'� Attachment 6 Resolution No. (2008 Series) Page 9 11. A maintenance agreement for any private utilities, paving, landscape improvements, storm drain systems, detention basins, and any other common improvements must be recorded prior to or concurrent with the recordation of the map. 12. The public improvement plan submittal shall include an erosion control plan and erosion control notes in accordance with the Waterways Management Plan Drainage Design Manual and to the satisfaction of the Building Official and Public Works Director. 13. EPA Requirement: General Construction Activity Storm Water Permits are required for all stormwater discharges associated with a construction activity where clearing, grading and excavation results in land disturbance of one or more acres. Stormwater discharges of less than one acre, but which are part of a larger common plan of development or sale, also require a permit. Permits are required until the construction is complete. To be covered by a General Construction Activity Permit, the owners of land where construction activity occurs must submit a completed "Notice of Intent" (NOI) form, with the appropriate fee, to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 14. A copy of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) required by the SWRCB shall be included as part of the building and/or grading permit plan submittal. The WDID Number issued by the Board shall be noted on all plans that involve regulated land disturbing activities. 15. The proposed street trees and any parkway landscaping shall be installed and maintained by the Property Owner Association or shall otherwise be covered by a maintenance agreement to be recorded prior to or concurrent with the recordation of the map. The maintenance agreement shall include watering of the trees and common area landscape, at least during the establishment period and/or until responsibility may be reasonably transferred to the adjoining property owner(s). 16. Tree protection measures must be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Arborist. The City Arborist shall review and approve the proposed tree protection measures prior to any demolition, grading, or construction. The City Arborist must approve any safety pruning, the cutting of substantial roots, or grading within the dripline of trees. A City-approved arborist must complete safety pruning. Any required tree protection measures shall be noted on the public improvement plans. Contact the City Arborist at 781-7023 to review and to establish preservation measures to be included with the public improvement plan submittal. Attachment 6 Resolution No. (2008 Series) Page 10 On motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 2"d day of December, 2008. Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: Audrey Hooper, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Lowell, City Attorney 3 -3� Attachment 7 . �III�881�111111 IIIIIIIIIIIII - 'ci ® s�►n hu19-OBIW lmi&-. Community Development Department • 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM For ER 74-07 1. Project Title: Emie Ball Subdivision 2. Lead Agency Naive and Address: City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Tyler Corey, Associate Planner (805) 781-7169 4. Project Location: • 143 & 151 Suburban Road (APN#053-258-002) • 163 Suburban Road(APN#053-258-001) 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Roland Ball Trust 1026 Chorro Street, Suite 6 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 6. General Plan Designation: Services &Manufacturing 7. Zoning: Manufacturing with the Specific Plan Overlay (M-SP) 22 CITY OF SAN LUIS Omspo 1 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 aDThe City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. Attachment 7 8. Description of the Project: The project is a map to subdivide two existing parcels (one vacant and one developed) totaling approximately 13.5 acres into 23 commercial lots with exceptions to the Subdivision Regulations for the lot depth requirement. The parcels range in size from 9,000 square feet to 202,113 square feet. Other components of the subdivision include removal and reconstruction of vehicle parking and driveways, and installation public improvements, including a new street with curb, gutter and sidewalk. Improvements to the existing detention basin are proposed to accommodate the additional development. Retaining walls are proposed along portions of the north, east and south property lines as well as near the existing property boundary between 143 & 151 and 163 Suburban Road. Existing trees will be retained or removed per the project tree removal and landscape plans. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings: The project site is located on the south side of Suburban Road between Short Street and Horizon Lane within the Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP). The site has street frontage and access from Suburban Road, which forms its northerly boundary. The southern boundary of the site adjoins an agricultural field with row crops. The terrain is generally flat with elevations that range from approximately 115 near the southerly property line to 122 feet near the northerly property line. The surrounding area is primarily commercial in character with the exception of a residential use that borders a portion of the site adjacent to Suburban Road to the east. 143 & 151 Suburban is developed with several large commercial buildings, parking, landscaping and various other site improvements. 163 Suburban Road is vacant and contains disturbed coastal valley grassland with various ornamental trees and shrubs along the eastern and western boundaries of the parcel. 10. Project Entitlements Requested: The applicant is requesting approval of a tentative tract map and environmental review. Future applications to be reviewed by the City include Architectural Review of the new commercial building designs. 11. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None. �D �r CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 2 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 \ /1 Attachment 7 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a"Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics X Geology/Soils Public Services Agricultural Resources Hazards & Hazardous Recreation Materials X Air Quality Hydrology/Water Quality Transportation&Traffic Biological Resources Land Use and Planning Utilities and Service Systems Cultural Resources Noise Mandatory Findings of Significance Energy and Mineral Population and Housing f Resources r FISH AND GAME FEES There is no evidence before the Department that the project will have any potential adverse effects on fish X and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. As such, the project qualifies for a de minimis waiver with regards to the filing of Fish and Game Fees. The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish and Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code. This initial study has been circulated to the California Department of Fish and Game for review and comment. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more State agencies (e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Game, Department of Housing and Community Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines -15073(a)). .A, 3 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 3 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL.CHECKLIST 2008 -� Attachment 7 DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, X there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made, or the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet(s) have been added and agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant"impact(s) or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR of NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. ar�Aln� 1 lS b Signa a Date Doug Davidson. Deputy Director of Community Development For:John Mandeville, Printed Name Community Development Director CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 4 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 Attachment 7 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: I. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the analysis in each section. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved(e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A"No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants,based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. The explanation of each issue should identify the significance criteria or threshold, if any,used to evaluate each question. 3. "Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more"Potentially Significant Impact"entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a"Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17,"Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced). 5. Earlier analysis may be used where,pursuant to the tiering,program EIR,or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D) of the California Code of Regulations. Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. In this case,a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 3- �fl CITY OF SAN Luis OBISPO 5 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 Attachment 7 Issues, Discussion and Supporting,-information Sources Sources Poteni;_.:J Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant impact ER # 7407 issues Unless impact Mitigation incorporated 1.AESTHETICS. Would theproject: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 1,2 X b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,but not limited X to, trees, rock outcroppings, open space, and historic buildings within a local or state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of 1,2,3, X the site and its surroundings? 4 d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would X adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Evaluation a) The project site is not located within the viewshed of a scenic vista identified in Figure 11 of the Conservation and Open Space Element,Scenic Roadways and Vistas map, including views to and from public places, such as parks, plazas, grounds of civic buildings and publicly accessible open space. b) The project site is not located near a local or state scenic highway identified in Figure I 1 of the Conservation and Open Space Element,Scenic Roadways and Vistas map. c) d) Future lot development with commercial buildings will require review by the City's design review board, the Architectural Review Commission(ARC). In particular, the ARC scrutinizes new commercial buildings proposed throughout the City to insure that they have an appropriate scale, rhythm and design that are compatible with existing development, the AASP and the Community Design Guidelines. The ARC will have the main discretionary responsibility for insuring that the project design is in proper scale with surrounding development, and enhances, rather than detracts from, the character of the surrounding area. Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact. 2.AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would theproject: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of 1,6 X Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a X Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to X their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? Evaluation a) b) c) The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency designates this property as Urban Land. The property is zoned Manufacturing and there is no Williamson Act contract in effect on the project site. The proposed subdivision will not contribute to conversion of farmland, and may relieve pressure to develop similar land outside of the City's Urban Reserve Line. Conclusion: No Impact. 3. AIR QUALITY. Would theproject: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an 1,7 X existing or projected air quality violation? b) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air X quality plan? c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant X concentrations? 3 CITY OF SAN Luis OBISPO 6 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potent...y Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 74 07 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated d) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of X people? e) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria X pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed qualitative thresholds for ozoneprecursors)? Evaluation a)b)c)d)e) This project has been reviewed by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD). The APCD implements the 2001 Clean Air Plan (CAP) for San Luis Obispo County. The CAP is a comprehensive planning document designed to reduce emissions from traditional industrial and commercial sources, as well as from motor vehicle use. Conservation & Open Space Element Program 2.3.2 states that the City will help the APCD implement the Clean Air Plan. The following mitigation measures are required of the project to meet the requirements of the CAP and reduce project impacts to a less than significant level: Conclusion: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. Mitigation Measures 1. The project site is located in a candidate area for Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA), which has been identified as a toxic air contaminant by the California Air Resources Board (ARB). Under the ARB Air Toxic Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations, prior to any grading activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that a geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if NOA is present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with APCD. If NOA is found at the site the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. 2. Construction activities can generate fugitive dust, which could be a nuisance to local residents and businesses in close proximity to the proposed construction site. The following mitigation measures will adequately control dust and minimize potential violations for the project. All of these fugitive dust(PM10)mitigation measures must be included on grading and building plans. In addition,the contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone of such persons shall be provided to the APCD prior to land use clearance for map recordation and grading. (A) Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible. (B) Use water truck or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water shall be used whenever possible. (C) All dirt stock-pile areas should be sprayed daily as needed. (D) Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities. (E) All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders,jute netting,or other methods approved in advance by the APCD. (F) Vehicle speed for all vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the site. (G) 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. (H) 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. (1) Plant shade trees along southern exposures of buildings to reduce summer cooling needs as well as planting trees on both sides of the roads to reduce the reflective radiating heat of asphalt roads. 3 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 7 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 i Attachment 7 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potenir_4 Potentially txs than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 7407 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated (J) Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. (K) 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. 3. The standard construction equipment mitigation measures for reducing nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions are listed below and in section 6.3.1 of the Air Quality Handbook. These measures are applicable to all projects where construction equipment will be used. (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). (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) Maximize to the extent feasible, the use of on-road heavy-duty equipment and trucks that meet the ARB's 1998 or newer certification standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines. (E) 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 and/or job sites to remind drivers and operators of the 5 minute idling limit. 4.Develop a comprehensive Construction Activity Management Plan for the future development of the individual lots(not the common tract improvements) designed to minimize the amount of large construction equipment operating during any given time period. The plan shall be submitted to the APCD for review and approval prior to the start of construction. The plan shall include,but not be limited to,the following elements: (A) Schedule construction truck trips during non-.peak hours to reduce peak hour emissions. (B) Limit the length of the construction work-day period, if necessary. (C) Phase construction activities, if appropriate. 5.APCD has determined the operational impacts of the project through the use of LIRBEMIS2007 computer model,a tool for estimating vehicle travel, fuel use and the resulting emissions related to this project's land uses. The results of the model using conservative County average trip distances demonstrated that the operational impacts will likely exceed APCD's CEQA Tier I significant threshold value of 10 lbs/day for NOx, reactive organic gases (ROG) and PMIO. As a result of this estimated threshold exceedence, this project must implement all applicable Standard Mitigation Measures and at least 10 Discretionary Mitigation Measures listed below. Standard Mitigation Measures(All Required) (A) Provide on-site bicycle parking at a rate of one bicycle parking space for every 10 car parking spaces. (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. (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.). Discretionary Mitigation Measures(At Least 10 Required) (A) Provide on-site bicycle parking at a rate of one bicycle parking space for every 10 car parking spaces. (B) Increase street shade tree planting. (C) Increase shade tree planting in parking lots to reduce evaporative emissions from parked vehicles. (D) Provide on-site banking(ATM)and postal services. 3 ,yq CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 8 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 Al ta^;-ment 7 Issues, Discussion and Supportiny information Sources Sources PotenL_..y Potentially Less ThanNo Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 7407 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Inco orated (E) Provide on-site child care facilities for employees. (F) Provide on-site housing for employees. (G) Implement on-site circulation design elements in parking lots to reduce vehicle queuing and improve the pedestrian environment with designated walkways. (H) Provide pedestrian signalization and signage to improve pedestrian safety. (I) 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. (J) 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. (K) 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. (L) Install an electric vehicle charging station with both conductive and inductive charging capabilities. (M)Employ or appoint an Employee Transportation Coordinator. (N) Implement an City approved Trip Reduction Program. (0) Provide for shuttle/mini bus service. (P) Increase the quality of existing bicycle routes/lanes or add bicycle routes/lanes which access the project. (Q) Implement compressed work schedules. (R) Implement a telecommuting program. (S) Implement a lunch-time shuttle to reduce single occupant vehicle trips. (T) Participate in an employee"flash pass" program,which provides free travel on transit buses. (U) 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. (V) If the development is a large grocery store or large retail facility,provide home delivery service for customers. (W)Shade tree planting along southern exposures of buildings to reduce summer cooling needs. (X) Use roof material with a solar reflectance value meeting the EPA/DOE Energy Star©rating to reduce summer cooling needs. (Y) Use built-in energy efficient appliances,where applicable. (Z) Use double-paned windows. (AA) Use low energy parking lot and street lights(e.g. sodium). (BB) Use energy efficient interior lighting. (CC) Use low energy traffic signals(e.g. light emitting diode). (DD) Install door sweeps or weather stripping if more energy efficient doors and windows are not available. (EE) Install high efficiency or gas space heating. (FF) Replace diesel fleet vehicles with cleaner fueled low emission vehicles (e.g. school buses,transit buses,on and off road heavy duty vehicles, lighter duty trucks and passenger vehicles). (GG) Retrofit existing equipment to reduce emissions through methods such as catalyzed diesel particulate filters, diesel oxidation catalysts,or other approved technologies. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would theproject: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or indirectly or 178, X through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a 30,31 candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect, on any riparian habitat or X other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting X biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance(e.g. Heritage Trees)? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident X CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 9 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 J Attac'-lrnenf 7 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potent...., Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 74-07 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation X Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional.or state habitat conservation plan? f) Have a substantial adverse effect on Federally protected X wetlands as defined in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marshes, veinal pools, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Evaluation a)b) Three reports were prepared for the project evaluating both plant and animal resources on the site. The Botanical Reports were prepared by V. L. Holland, Ph.D. dated October 2007 and April 2008, and the Wildlife Survey Report was prepared by Francis Villablanca,Ph.D. dated February 2008. The Botanical Reports concluded that no rare or endangered plant species were found on the site and none are expected to occur. The site vegetation has been highly disturbed over the years and currently consists mostly of introduced grasses and forbs. Portions of the site are almost completely devoid of vegetation due to automobile and human traffic, spreading of wood chips, rodent activity, and other disturbances. Therefore, impacts to native vegetation would be considered less than significant. The Wildlife Survey Report finds that the site represents marginal wildlife habitat and that no raze or endangered species were found on the site and none are expected to occur. The only permanent residents are predicted to be grassland species that can breed in disturbed settings. A protocol survey for the Burrowing Owl failed to detect any owls on-site. Avian species listed in Table 1 of the report were only occasional visitors, or entirely absent and clearly not habitually roosting, hunting nor feeding on-site. Therefore, impacts to wildlife would be considered less than significant. According to the Natural Diversity Database of the California Department of Fish and Game,there are no species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on or near the project site, nor is riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified. c) Three non-native trees are proposed to be removed. Sheets I R L-1 of project plans indicates their size and location. The City Arborist has reviewed the project and supports the removal requests. Potentially significant impacts resulting from the proposed tree removals would be reduced to a less than significant level with the installation of new on-site landscaping and street trees as shown on Sheet L-1 of project plans,which has been reviewed and approved by the City Arborist. d) The property is surrounded by urban development on three sides and the proposed commercial subdivision will not substantially interfere with the movement of any wildlife species or migratory wildlife corridor. e) The proposed project will not conflict with any local policy protecting biological resources nor any adopted habitat conservation plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. f) The site is not near any natural waterway and will therefore have no adverse effect on Federally protected wetlands. Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact. 5.CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would theproject: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a 11,23, X historic resource?(See CEQA Guidelines 15064.5) 24,25, 26,27 b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an X CITY OF SAN LUIS OBIsPO 10 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 -3/ I u Af?chm, ant 7 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Poten>__y Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 74 07 issues unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated archaeological resource?(See CEQA Guidelines 15064.5) c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource X or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of X formal cemeteries? Evaluation a) b) c) d) A Phase 1 Cultural Resource Inventory was prepared for the site by Bertrando R Bertrando Research Consultants dated January 12,2007. The report includes an evaluation of archival records and a survey of the property. The results of the report found no significant cultural resources present in the project area. Two loci of historic material were identified but not recorded as archaeological sites and not considered to be significant cultural resources as defined in the California Public Resources Code. As a result, no further cultural resource investigations were recommended. The site is located outside of the City's burial sensitivity areas that are mapped and on file in the Community Development Department. Based on review of the City's Historic Site Map and Land Use Information System, the project is not located on or near a known sensitive archaeological site or historic resource. Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact. 6. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would theproject: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? 1 X b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient X manner? c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource X that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? Evaluation a)b) The project will not conflict with adopted energy conservation plans or promote the use of non-renewable resources in an inefficient manner. Future site development must comply with the policies contained in the Energy chapter of the General Plan's Conservation and Open Space Element(COSE). The City implements energy conservation goals through enforcement of the California Energy Code, which establishes energy conservation standards for residential and nonresidential construction. Future development of this site must meet those standards. The City also implements energy conservation goals through Architectural Review. Project designers are asked to show how a project makes maximum use of passive means of reducing conventional energy demand, as opposed to designing a particular image and relying on mechanical systems to maintain comfort. c) There are no known mineral resources on the project site that would be of value to the region or to the residents of the State. Conclusion: No impact. 7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would theproject: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse 5,9, effects,including risk of loss,injury or death involving: 10 I. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated in the X most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area,or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? 11. Strong seismic ground shaking? X III. Seismic-related ground failure,including liquefaction? X IV. Landslides or mudflows? X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that X would become unstable as a result of the project,and potentially CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 11 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 3'�q rY ac�rrea t 7 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources sources Potent y Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 74 07 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated result in on or off site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction,or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the X Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Evaluation a), c) San Luis Obispo County, including the City of San Luis Obispo, is located within the Coast Range Geomorphic Province, which extends along the coastline from central California into Oregon. This region is characterized by extensive folding, faulting, and fracturing of variable intensity. In general, the folds and faults of this province comprise the pronounced northwest trending ridge-valley system of the central and northern coast of California. Under the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act, the State Geologist is required to delineate appropriately wide special studies zones to encompass all potentially and recently-active fault traces deemed sufficiently active and well-defined as to constitute a potential hazard to structures from surface faulting or fault creep. In San Luis Obispo County, the special Studies Zone includes the San Andreas and Los Osos faults. The edge of this study area extends to the westerly city limit line, near Los Osos Valley Road. According to a recently conducted geology study, the closest mapped active fault is the Los Osos Fault, which runs in a northwest direction and is about one mile from the City's westerly boundary. Because portions of this fault have displaced sediments within a geologically recent time (the last 10,000 years), portions of the Los Osos fault are considered "active". Other active faults in the region include: the San Andreas, located about 30 miles to the northeast, the Nacimiento, located approximately 12 miles to the northeast,and the San Simeon-Hosgri fault zone, located approximately 12 miles to the west. Although there are no fault lines on the project site or within close proximity, the site is located in an area that is primarily comprised of soil types D & E per the California Building Code Soil Classifications, which means that future buildings constructed on the site will most likely be subjected to excessive ground shaking in the event of an earthquake. New structures must be designed in compliance with seismic design criteria established in the California Building Code. To minimize this potential impact, the California Building Code and City Codes require new structures to be built to resist such shaking or to remain standing in an earthquake. a), b), c), d) A Soils Engineering Report was prepared for the project by Earth Systems Pacific. The report concluded that the site is suitable, from a soils engineering standpoint, for the proposed tract, provided the recommendations presented in the report are implemented in the design and construction. It should be noted that the recommendations apply only to the common tract improvements, not the fixture development on the individual lots. Soils engineering reports for individual lot development will be required to be submitted with the building permit application and will depend upon the specific building concepts and grading plans for the individual lots. Conclusion: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. Mitigation Measures: 1. Building plans and specifications for common tract improvements shall incorporate all recommendations included in the Soils Engineering Report prepared by Earth Systems Pacific dated May 8, 2007, subject to the approval of the Chief Building Official. 2. Soils engineering reports shall be submitted with each building permit application for individual lot development, subject to the approval of the Chief Building Official. S. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the pro'ect: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment 4,5, X through the routine use, transport or disposal of hazardous 11,12, materials? 13,14 b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment X through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPo 12 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 3,y - Attachment 7 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentla4 Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 74 07 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely X hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Expose people or structures to existing sources of hazardous X emissions or hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances,or waste? e) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous X materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, it would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? f) For a project located within an airport land use plan, or within X two miles of a public airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for the people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, the X adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of lose, injury, X or death, involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residents are intermixed with wildlands? Evaluation a)b)c) The proposed project will not create a hazard to the public through the use or transport of hazardous materials, or create a hazard through reasonably foreseeable upset conditions. The project will not emit any hazardous emissions. d) A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was prepared for the project by Earth Systems Pacific dated November 13,2007. The purpose of the Phase I ESA was to evaluate areas of potential environmental concern that may be present as a result of past hazardous substance use, handling or storage on or near the site. The assessment has revealed no indications of improper use,storage or disposal of hazardous substances on or near the project site. e) The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code§ 65962.5. f) The project site is approximately 1.5 miles west of the San Luis Obispo County Airport,within the Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP). Specifically, the site is located within Airport Safety Area S-1c, an area adjacent to aircraft operations at less than 500 feet above ground level. As a method of addressing safety, specific policies contained in the ALUP limit non-residential density to 75 people per acre. This ALUP policy is implemented through City Zoning Regulations Section 17.22.010.I,which prohibits uses from being established that are inconsistent with the ALUP. Typically, compliance with ALUP policies is evaluated at the time of Architectural Review,Use Permit or Business License Zoning Clearance. g) The project has been reviewed by the Fire Marshall and will not conflict with any emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. h) The Safety Element of the General Plan identifies the site as having a low potential for impacts from wildland fires. Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact. 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would theproject: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge 1,11, X requirements? 14,15, 32 b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere X substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be CITY OF SAN Luis OBISPO 13 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 3-41 Adac?irr2n. 7 Issues, Discussion and Supportiny"lnformation Sources Sources Potent-J Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 7407 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Inco orated a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g. The production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the X capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide additional sources of runoff into surface waters (including, but not limited to, wetlands, riparian areas, ponds, springs, creeks,streams,rivers, lakes,estuaries,tidal areas,bays, ocean, etc.)? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or X area in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite? e) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or X area in a manner which would result in substantial flooding onsite or offsite? f) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on X a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which X would impede or redirect flood flows? h) Will the project introduce typical storm water pollutants into X ground or surface waters? i) Will the project alter ground water or surface water quality, X temperature,dissolved oxygen,or turbidity? Evaluation a), b) The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Site development will be served by the City's sewer and water systems and will not use or otherwise deplete groundwater resources. b) d) e) f) g) h) i) Physical improvement of the project site will be required to comply with the drainage requirements of the City's Waterways Management Plan (WWMP). This plan was adopted for the purpose of insuring water quality and proper drainage within the City's watershed. The WWMP requires that site development be designed so that post-development site drainage does not exceed pre-development run-off. This can be achieved through a combination of detention and use of pervious surfaces to increase water absorption on-site. A Drainage System Report and Analysis prepared by Keith V. Crow, Consulting Engineer, concluded that the project fully complies with the City's WWMP. Compliance xvith the WWMP is considered adequate to mitigate potentially significant impacts related to runoff, drainage, flood hazards and water quality. Plans submitted for a building permit application will be evaluated by the Public Works Department and must be designed in a manner that is consistent with the requirements of the WWMP. Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would theproject: a) Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of 1,3,41 X an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the 5,16, purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? 17,18, 19,21 b) Physically divide an established community? X c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural X cornmiunityconservationplans? Evaluation a)The project is located in an area designated Services &Manufacturing on the General Plan Land Use Element map,zoned CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 14 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 3-6v Afta&-nan? 7 Issues, Discussion and Supportiny Information Sources Sources Potent.. _ Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 74 07 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Manufacturing with the Specific Plan overlay (M-SP) and within the AASP. The subdivision of the property into 23 commercial lots, as proposed,would not conflict with any plan or policy adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. b) c)The project will not physically divide an established community or conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plans. Conclusion: No Impact. 11.NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of people to or generation of "unacceptable" noise 4,12, X levels as defined by the San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise 19 Element, or general noise levels in excess of standards established in the Noise Ordinance? b) A substantial temporary, periodic, or permanent increase in X ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? c) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome X vibration or groundborne noise levels? d) For a project located within an airport land use plan, or within X two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Evaluation a) The project will not generate unacceptable noise levels or expose people to noise levels in excess of standards established in the Noise Ordinance. The project site is located outside of any noise contour in the City's Noise Element that would require mitigation. b)Construction of the proposed project will temporarily increase ambient noise levels. This type of noise is regulated by the City's Noise Ordinance, which regulates times of construction and maximum noise levels that may be generated. If noise levels exceed the Noise Ordinance thresholds,the property owner would be subject to possible citations. c)The project will not expose people to the generation of excessive groundborne noise levels or vibration. d) According to the Airport Land Use Plan noise contours, the site is located within an area susceptible to 50 decibles (0) due to projected noise generated from the airport. This exposure level is well below any mitigation threshold established by the Noise Element. In addition, service and manufacturing land uses are not considered noise sensitive. Therefore, noise impacts to future land uses on the project site would be considered less than significant. Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would theproject: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly 3,18 X (for example by proposing new homes or businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people X necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Evaluation a) b) c) The population added by this project is within the General Plan's projection and will not induce substantial growth into the area or result in population exceeding local and regional growth projections. The project site is bordered by urban CITY OF SAN LUIS C81SPO 15 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 J / I »t2a-chm-znt 7 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potent._.. Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 74-07 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated development and development of the site represents an in-fill development opportunity. This type of development is encouraged because it can take advantage of existing facilities for water,sewer,storm drainage,transportation and parks. The project site does not currently contain residential uses; therefore,housing or people will not be displaced by the project. Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact. 13. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision, or need, of new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? X b) Police protection? X c) Schools? X d) Parks? X e) Roads and other transportation infrastructure? X Other public facilities? X Evaluation a) b) d) e) f) No potential impacts have been identified to any public services because of the scale of the project and its location within a developed portion of the City. Future development must comply with all applicable City Codes and State regulations. c) The school districts in the state are separate governing bodies with authority to collect fees to finance school construction and parcel acquisition. Section 65955 of the Government Code prohibits the City from denying a subdivision or collecting any fees beyond those required by the school district itself, to mitigate effects of inadequate school facilities. Any effect that the additional children will have on school facilities will be mitigated in whole or in part by the districts per square foot fees, charged at the time of building permit issuance for each new building. Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact. 14.RECREATION. Would theproject: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or 21 X other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated'? b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or X expansion of recreational facilities,which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Evaluation a)The project will add incrementally to the demand for parks and other recreational facilities. However,given the size of the project (23 commercial lots) no significant recreational impacts are expected to occur with development. Park Land In-Lieu fees will be collected to insure adequate provision of park facilities for the project,per existing City policy. b) The project does not include the construction or expansion of recreation facilities. Conclusion: Less Than Si nificant Impact. 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would theproject: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the 4,17. X existing traffic load and capacity of the street system? 22 b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service X standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads and highways? c) Substantially increase hazards due to design features (e.g. sharp X i� CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 16 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 A<Iac�malnt 7 Issues, Discussion and Supporting-Information Sources sources Poteni,_..q Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 74 07 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? d) Result in inadequate emergency access? X e) Result in inadequate parking capacity onsite or offsite? X f) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative X transportation(e.g.bus turnouts,bicycle racks)? g) Conflict with the with San Luis Obispo County Airport Land X Use Plan resulting in substantial safety risks from hazards,noise, or a chane in air trafficpatterns? Evaluation a)b) c) Suburban Road provides access to the project site. The City's General Plan Circulation Element Classifies Suburban Road as a Local Street. The Element states that Local Streets should have two travel lanes, a maximum ADT of 1,500 vehicles, and a maximum speed of 25 miles per hour. The proposed project will not result in changes to this criteria. The project includes the development of a new public street with curb, gutter and sidewalk that provides access to the proposed lots consistent with City standards. The Public Works Department has reviewed the project and determined that the existing and planned road system has sufficient unused capacity to accommodate the added vehicular traffic. d) The Fire Marshal has reviewed the project and determined that the site can be adequately accessed by emergency vehicles in its present design. e) The project involves the removal and relocation of 30 on-site parking spaces to accommodate the subdivision. Since an equal number of parking spaces will be created to replace the existing 30 spaces,parking impacts are not expected to occur as a result of the project. In addition, City parking standards contained in Table 6 of the Zoning Regulations will apply to all new development proposed on the resulting parcels. f)Future lot development with commercial buildings will require review by the ARC for compliance with City's policies and standards supporting/requiring alternative transportation,such as,bus turnouts and bicycle parking. g) The project site is located within Airport Safety Area S-lc, but is not directly in a flight path where occupants would be subject to excessive noise levels or hazards associated with airport operations. Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact. 16. UTILITrES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would theproject: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable 11,16, X Regional Water Quality Control Board? 22,28. 29,32 b) Require or result in the construction or expansion of new water X treatment, wastewater treatment, water quality control, or storm drainage facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project X from existing entitlements and resources, or are new and expanded water resources needed? d) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, X which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitment? e) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to X accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? f) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations X related to solid waste? CITY OF SAN LUIS OBIsPo 17 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 Ailac�rnent 7 Issues, Discussion and Supportirig Information Sources Sources Poteni.-.,3 Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant impact ER # 74-07 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Evaluation a), b) This project has been reviewed by the City's Utilities Engineer and no resource/infrastructure deficiencies have been identified. Future site development is subject to Water and Wastewater Impact Fees, which were adopted to ensure that new development pays its fair share of the cost of constructing the water supply, treatment and distribution facilities that will be necessary to serve it. c) The City has adopted Water Allocation Regulations to insure that increased water use by new development and land use changes do not jeopardize adequate water service to current and new customers. Section 17.89.030 of the regulations states that a water allocation shall be required to: 'obtain a connection to the city water system for a structure or facility not previously connected; change the use of land or buildings, whether or not a construction permit is also required; obtain a construction permit." Payment of the City's Water Impact Fee and compliance with the City's standards and State requirements will assure that impacts to water supplies are less than significant. d) The City wastewater treatment plant and existing sewers in the vicinity have sufficient capacity to serve the project site. The developer will be required to construct private sewer facilities to convey wastewater to the nearest public sewer. The on- site sewer facilities will be required to be constructed according to the standards in the Uniform Plumbing Code. Impact fees are collected at the time building permits are issued to pay for capacity at the City's Water Reclamation Facility. The fees are set at a level that is intended to offset the potential impacts of each component of the project. e) f) Background research for the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB939) shows that Californians dispose of roughly 2,500 pounds of waste per month. Over 90% of this waste goes to landfills, posing a threat to groundwater, air quality, and public health. Cold Canyon landfill is projected to reach its capacity by 2018. The Act requires each city and county in California to reduce the flow of materials to landfills by 50%(from 1989 levels)by 2000. To help reduce the waste stream generated by this project,consistent with the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element, recycling facilities must be accommodated on the project site and a solid waste reduction plan for recycling discarded construction materials must be submitted with the building permit application. The project is required by ordinance to include facilities for recycling to reduce the waste stream generated by the project,consistent with the Source Reduction and Recycling Element. Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact. 17.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the X environment,substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Without mitigation, the project could have the potential to have adverse impacts on all of the issue areas checked in the Table onPage 3. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but X cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable futureProjects) The impacts identified in this initial study arespecific to this project and would not be tate orized as cumulatively significant. c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause X substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? With the incorporation of mitigation measures,the project will not result in substantial adverse impacts on humans. CITY OF SAN LUIS OwsPo 18 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 3-q Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potem._..y Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 7407 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 18.EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case a discussion should identify the following items: a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. N/A b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. N/A c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions of the project. N/A 19. SOURCE REFERENCES. 1. City of SLO General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element,May 2006 2. Community Design Guidelines,City of San Luis Obispo,May 2003 3. City of SLO General Plan Land Use Element, September 2004 4. Airport Area Specific Plan,August 2005 5. City of SLO General Plan Safety Element,July 2000 6. Website of the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency: http://www.consrv.ca.gov/dlrp/FNMP/ 7. CEQA Air Quality Handbook,Air Pollution Control District, 2003 8. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 12.24,Tree Regulations 9. San Luis Obispo Quadrangle Map, prepared by the State Geologist in compliance with the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act,effective January 1, 1990 10. Soils Engineering Report prepared by Earth Systems Pacific dated May 8,2007 11. City of San Luis Obispo Land Use Inventory and Geographic Information System,current database 12. County of San Luis Obispo Airport Land Use Plan for SLO County ort,May 2005 13. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared by Earth Systems Pacific Dated November 13,2007 14. Flood Insurance Rate Ma (Community Panel#060304-625 C dated July 18, 1985 15. City of SLO Waterways Management Plan,May 2006 16. City of San Luis Obispo Water and Wastewater Management Element,June 2004 17. City of San Luis Obispo Circulation Element,November 1994 18. City of San Luis Obispo Housing Element,May 2004 19. City of San Luis Obispo Noise Element and Noise Guidebook,May 1996 20. City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations,February 2007 21. City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Element and Master Plan,June 2001 22. City of San Luis Obispo Subdivision Regulations,March 2006 23. City of San Luis Obispo,Historical Preservation Program Guidelines,February 1987 24. City of San Luis Obispo, Archaeological Resource Preservation Guidelines,October 1995 25. City of San Luis Obispo,Historic Site Ma 26. City of San Luis Obispo Burial Sensitivity Ma 27. Cultural Resources Inventory prepared by Bertrando&Bertrando Research Consultants dated January 12,2007 28. City of SLO Source Reduction and Recycling Element,on file in the Utilities Department 29. City of San Luis Obispo Water Allocation Re ulations,June 1995 30. Botanical Reports prepared by V.L. Holland,Ph.D.dated October 2007 and April 2008. 31. Wildlife Survey Report prepared by Francis Villablanca,Ph.D. dated February 2008 32. Drainage System Report and Analysis prepared by Keith V.Crowe,Consulting Engineer,dated August 29,2007 MECITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 19 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 / 3,s - Attachment 7 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources sources Potenli—V Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 74-07 Issues unless Impact Mitigation Inca orated Attachments: REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS Mitigation Measure: Air Quality 1. The project site is located in a candidate area for Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA), which has been identified as a toxic air contaminant by the California Air Resources Board (ARB). Under the ARB Air Toxic Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading,Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations, prior to any grading activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that a geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if NOA is present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with APCD. If NOA is found at the site the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. 2. Construction activities can generate fugitive dust, which could be a nuisance to local residents and businesses in close proximity to the proposed construction site. The following mitigation measures will adequately control dust and minimize potential violations for the project. All of these fugitive dust(PM 10) mitigation measures must be included on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone of such persons shall be provided to the APCD prior to land use clearance for map recordation and grading. (A) Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible. (B) Use water truck or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water shall be used whenever possible. (C) All dirt stock-pile areas should be sprayed daily as needed. (D) Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities. (E) All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders,jute netting,or other methods approved in advance by the APCD. (F) Vehicle speed for all vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the site. (G) 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. (H) 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. (I) Plant shade trees along southern exposures of buildings to reduce summer cooling needs as well as planting trees on both sides of the roads to reduce the reflective radiating heat of asphalt roads. (J) Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. (K) 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. 3. The standard construction equipment mitigation measures for reducing nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions are listed below and in section 6.3.1 of the Air Quality Handbook. These measures are applicable to all projects where construction equipment will be used. (A) Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer's specifications. �A CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 20 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 3 � - Attachment 7 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources sources Foot_eni,­iF Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 74-07 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated (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). (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) Maximize to the extent feasible, the use of on-road heavy-duty equipment and trucks that meet the ARB's 1998 or newer certification standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines. (E) 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 and/or job sites to remind drivers and operators of the 5 minute idling limit. 4.Develop a comprehensive Construction Activity Management Plan for the future development of the individual lots(not the roadway and other public improvements) designed to minimize the amount of large construction equipment operating during any given time period.The plan shall be submitted to the APCD for review and approval prior to the start of construction. The plan shall include,but not be limited to, the following elements: (A) Schedule construction truck trips during non-peak hours to reduce peak hour emissions. (B) Limit the length of the construction work-day period, if necessary. (C) Phase construction activities, if appropriate. 5. APCD has determined the operational impacts of the project through the use of URBEMIS2007 computer model, a tool for estimating vehicle travel, fuel use and the resulting emissions related to this project's land uses. The results of the model using conservative County average trip distances demonstrated that the operational impacts will likely exceed APCD's CEQA Tier I significant threshold value of 10 lbs/day for NOx, reactive organic gases (ROG) and PM10. As a result of this estimated threshold exceedence, this project must implement all applicable Standard Mitigation Measures and at least 10 Discretionary Mitigation Measures listed below. Standard Mitigation Measures(All Required) (A) Provide on-site bicycle parking at a rate of one bicycle parking space for every 10 car parking spaces. (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. (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.). Discretionary Mitigation Measures(At Least 10 Required) (A) Provide on-site bicycle parking at a rate of one bicycle parking space for every 10 car parking spaces. (B) Increase street shade tree planting. (C) Increase shade tree planting in parking lots to reduce evaporative emissions from parked vehicles. (D) Provide on-site banking(ATM) and postal services. (E) Provide on-site child care facilities for employees. (F) Provide on-site housing for employees. (G) Implement on-site circulation design elements in parking lots to reduce vehicle queuing and improve the pedestrian environment with designated walkways. (H) Provide pedestrian signalization and signage to improve pedestrian safety. (I) 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 projector improve existing transit stop amenities. (J) 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. (K) Provide Transportation Choices Program information centers on alternative transportation modes at the site(i.e. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 21 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 Attachments 7 Issues, Discussion and Supporting`Information Sources sources Potent;_.' Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER # 74-07 Issues Unless impact Mitigation Incorporated a transportation kiosk). Contact SLO Regional Rideshare for appropriate materials at 541-2277. (L) Install an electric vehicle charging station with both conductive and inductive charging capabilities. (M)Employ or appoint an Employee Transportation Coordinator. (N) Implement an City approved Trip Reduction Program. (0) Provide for shuttle/mini bus service. (P) Increase the quality of existing bicycle routes/lanes or add bicycle routes/lanes which access the project. (Q) Implement compressed work schedules. (R) Implement a telecommuting program. (S) Implement a lunch-time shuttle to reduce single occupant vehicle trips. (T) Participate in an employee"flash pass"program,which provides free travel on transit buses. (U) 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. (V) If the development is a large grocery store or large retail facility,provide home delivery service for customers. (W)Shade tree planting along southern exposures of buildings to reduce summer cooling needs. (X) Use roof material with a solar reflectance value meeting the EPA/DOE Energy Star@ rating to reduce summer cooling needs. (Y) Use built-in energy efficient appliances,where applicable. (Z) Use double-paned windows. (AA) Use low energy parking lot and street lights(e.g. sodium). (BB) Use energy efficient interior lighting.. (CC) Use low energy traffic signals(e.g. light emitting diode). (DD) Install door sweeps or weather stripping if more energy efficient doors and windows are not available. (EE) Install high efficiency or gas space heating. (FF) Replace diesel fleet vehicles with cleaner fueled low emission vehicles (e.g. school buses,transit buses,on and off road heavy duty vehicles, lighter duty trucks and passenger vehicles). (GG) Retrofit existing equipment to reduce emissions through methods such as catalyzed diesel particulate filters, diesel oxidation catalysts,or other approved technologies. Monitoring Program: Construction phase air quality mitigation measures are monitored by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD), through a complaint based enforcement system. Plans submitted for a building or grading permit must be accompanied with all required APCD approvals and show compliance with the requirements listed above. The City Building Inspector and Public Works Inspector for the project are instructed to contact APCD in the event of a probable violation. Members of the public can also call APCD if they are concerned about dust or other emissions from a construction site. Mitigation Measure: Geology and Soils 6. Building plans and specifications for common tract improvements shall incorporate all recommendations included in the Soils Engineering Report prepared by Earth Systems Pacific dated May S, 2007,subject to the approval of the Chief Building Official. 7. Soils engineering reports shall be submitted with each building permit application for individual lot development,subject to the approval of the Chief Building Official. Monitoring Program: Project plans submitted for building permits will be reviewed for compliance with these requirements by Community Development Department staff. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 22 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2008 3 ,- 5,g ,I Attachment 8 Draft Resolution `B" RESOLUTION NO. (2008 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO CREATE 23 COMMERCIAL LOTS LOCATED AT 1439151 & 163 SUBURBAN ROAD (TR/ER 74-07) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on October 22, 2008, and recommended approval of Application TR/ER 74-07, a request to create 23 commercial lots with exceptions; 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 December 2, 2008, for the purpose of considering Application TR/ER 74-07; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for the project, as prepared by staff and reviewed by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Council has duly considered all evidence, including the recommendation of the Planning Commission, testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Council makes the following findings: [Council specifies findings] SECTION 2. Denial. The tentative tract map proposed at 143, 151 & 163 Suburban Road (TR/ER 74-07) is hereby denied. r Attachment 8 Resolution No. (2008 Series) Page 2 On motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 2"d day of December, 2008. Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: Audrey Hooper, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jonathan Lowell, City Attorney