HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/17/2009, PH2 - REVIEW OF A HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF 81 RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS AND 1,000 SQUARE FEET OF COM couna L- "' °� /-7 10q
j acEnaa REpoRt tTmba *R
CITY OF SAN LU I S O B I S P O
FROM: John Mandeville, Community Development Director
PREPARED BY: Jaime Hill, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF A HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF 81
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS AND 19000 SQUARE FEET OF
COMMERCIAL SPACE, AND ASSOCIATED ENTITLEMENTS, (851
AND 860 HUMBERT AVENUE AND UNADDRESSED VACANT LOT:
004-951-009,GPA/R/PD/TR/ANAN/A 27-06 AND ER 123-08).
RECOMMENDATION
As recommended by the Planning Commission:
1. Adopt a Resolution amending the General Plan Land Use Element Map to change the
land use designation of the unaddressed parcel (004-951-009) from Services &
Manufacturing to Medium High Density Residential and approving a Mitigated Negative
Declaration (ER 128-08), Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Purchase of Surplus Property,
and Use Permit for development of a sensitive site.
2. Adopt a resolution of intention to abandon portions of Frederick Street and Humbert and
set a public hearing for April 21, 2009.
3. Introduce an ordinance amending the zoning of the unaddressed parcel (004-951-009)
from Manufacturing (M) to Medium-High Density Residential with the Special
Considerations overlay (R-3-S) and covering the entire site with the Planned
Development(PD)Overlay.
4. Provide direction to the Architectural Review Commission on modifications to the
project to improve site planning.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
The applicant seeks approval of a vesting tentative tract map, General Plan Amendment and
Rezoning of a portion of the site, Planned Development Zoning, Abandonment of rights-of-way,
purchase of surplus property, and use permit for development of a sensitive site to develop a
housing project including 81 new residential dwellings, 1,000 square feet of commercial space,
landscaping and other ancillary improvements. Humbert Avenue, Lawrence Drive, and Victoria
Avenue rights-of-way will all be completed with the development. The project also relies upon a
parking reduction of seven vehicle parking spaces and a 22% density bonus.
In 2006 the City Council adopted a General Plan Amendment and Rezoning of the site, and made
a Resolution of Intent to Abandon portions of right-of-way to facilitate a Housing Authority
project at this site. The Council has also contributed $600,000 of Affordable Housing funds to
the project, which have been utilized to assist in purchasing the property. Since then, the
applicant has worked with staff to design a project which is consistent with the General Plan,
City standards and policies, and the draft South Broad Street Corridor Plan.
Council Agenda Report—GPA/R/PDfMANAN/A 27-06 AND ER 123-08
March 17,2009
Page 2
On February 11, 2009, the Planning Commission determined that the project was consistent with
the General Plan and property development standards and recommended to the City Council
approval of the project. The Commission also recommended that the Council provide specific
direction to the ARC on modifications to the project to improve site planning.
DISCUSSION
Proiect Description
The project, called "Moylan Terrace," in honor of George Moylan the previous Director of
HASLO, includes development of the site with 80 townhome units, a mixed-use building
including a 2-bedroom apartment and 1,000 square feet commercial space, and associated
parking, landscaping and other on-site improvements (Attachment 1). The mixed-use building to
the west of Victoria Avenue is a 2-story structure, with 1,000 square feet of commercial space on
the ground level, with a two-bedroom apartment above. The remainder of the site to the north of
the building will be developed as a small park area, for public use. Because the entirety of the site
is designated Medium-High Density Residential (R-3) the mixed-use structure can not be
constructed until such time that the property west of Victoria Avenue is redesignated to a
commercial designation or adoption of the South Broad Street Corridor Plan.
The townhouse buildings are also mostly two-stories, with a few three-story units and design
elements, and with the exception to Building 1 and Building 2, all comply with the 35-foot height
maximum. All townhome units include either one- or two-car garages; 40 of the spaces arranged
in tandem. Two parking lots provide the additional required parking for individual units, the
commercial space, and guest parking. In total, 185 vehicle stalls, 10 motorcycle stalls and 35
short-term bicycle stalls are proposed. Additionally, each unit will have secure covered parking
for two bicycles. This is seven parking stalls less than required by code.
To minimize potential parking problems, HASLO has proposed to install additional bicycle
parking and implement a trip reduction to encourage residents to utilize alternative forms of
transportation to reduce parking needs. Such parking reductions are allowed by Section
17.16.060 D and F of the Zoning Regulations, to facilitate the development of projects which
encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation. Given the proximity of the site to transit
and the planned Railroad Safety Trail extension on the west side of the railroad tracks, the
Planning Commission saw this as a reasonable request and appropriate for an affordable housing
project that will require owner-occupancy. Because of HASLO occupancy terms these units will
be occupied by individual income-qualifying households, which typically have fewer vehicles per
household than would be found in comparable non-restricted units. It is also important to note
that while off-site parking can not be credited to a development, the street improvements that will
be made by HASLO with this development will add approximately 25 on-street parking spaces to
the area.
Once developed, the project would be further subdivided to allow for real-property ownership of
the individual townhome units. Common facilities including the parking and open landscaped
areas would be on a separate lot owned and maintained by the Homeowners Association.
HASLO would retain ownership and management of the property to the west of Victoria
C2 - *;�,
Council Agenda Report—GPA/R/PDfrR/ANAN/A 27-06 AND ER 123-08
March 17,2009
Page 3
Avenue.
Site Description
The project site includes approximately 5.05 acres of gross land area prior to dedication of right-of-
way. With the necessary public improvements approximately 4.68 acres (203,861 square feet) of
developable area remain, spanning from Humbert Avenue to Lawrence Drive, adjacent to the
railroad right-of-way.The properties and much of the street frontage are currently undeveloped.The
properties to the north and west are designated for Manufacturing (M) uses, and are developed with
a mixture of commercial business and older single-family residences. Properties to the south are
designated Medium-High Density Residential with the Planned Development overlay(R-3-PD)and
are developed with a mixture of townhomes and condominiums. Immediately to the east of the site
is the Union Pacific Railroad. Other surrounding uses include the railroad bike path, the Broad
Street Corridor, and various manufacturing, service-commercial and residential uses. Zoning
surrounding the site is shown in the attached vicinity map (Attachment 1).
The property slopes upward to the south and east, rising significantly above the adjacent rights-
of-way. To facilitate completion of Lawrence Drive and Victoria Avenue, both of which would
be designed to include sidewalks, tree-wells, and parallel parking on both sides, the elevation of
the site will be brought down significantly. There will be approximately 35,000-cubic yards of
cut, 10,000-cubic yards of which will be used on site to fill some existing depressions; a net of
25,000-cubic yards that will be removed from the site.
Background
On August 15, 2006, the City Council approved a General Plan Amendment and Rezoning of
851 and 860 Humbert from Services and Manufacturing (M) to Medium-High Density
Residential with the Special Considerations Overlay (R-3-S), and adopted a resolution to pursue
abandonment of portions of Frederick Street and Humbert Avenue rights-of-way to facilitate the
Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo's (HASLO) development of a housing project on the site
(Attachments 4, 5 and 6). Since that time the project site has been expanded to include portions
of an adjacent unused City-owned parcel. Additionally, the previously approved Intention to
Abandon has expired.
On January 21, 2009 the Architectural Review Commission (ARC)reviewed the proposed design
and provided direction to the applicant on modifications to the site planning and building design
to return to them for final approval following review by the Planning Commission and City
Council. ARC direction focused primarily on building height and detailing, and neighborhood
compatibility. The ARC directed the applicant to 1) consider options to reduce the scale of
buildings facing Lawrence Drive, 2) incorporate softer materials and colors to increase the
residential character, 3) provide a third solid waste enclosure somewhere other than Victoria
Avenue, and 4) provide additional details on landscape and open space area amenities
(Attachment 8).
On February 11, 20009, the Planning Commission recommend approval of the project to the City
Council. The Planning Commission found that the project was consistent with the General Plan,
a -3
I
Council Agenda Report—GPA/R/PD/TR/ANAN/A 27-06 AND ER 123-08
March 17,2009
Page 4
applicable property development standards, and the vision for the area as established in the draft
South Broad Street Corridor Plan. Significant public testimony was received at the hearing,
including concerns relating to traffic, parking, and neighborhood compatibility. Planning
Commission discussion focused on the affordability terms of the units and quality of the common
open spaces. The Commission added an additional condition of approval related to provisions to
continued affordability and equity accumulation, which has been included as Condition of
Approval No. 44 of the draft resolution for approval (Attachment 10). As a separate motion, the
Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that the ARC be directed to: 1) consider
modifications to the site plan to increase usable open space, including possible reconfiguration or
elimination of the Humbert Avenue cul-de-sac, 2) consider providing bike path access from the
site to the Railroad Safety Path, 3) review the width of the tandem parking garages, and 4)
consider modifying the widths of decks to have a minimum depth of 5 feet or more. The
Planning Commission staff report and hearing minutes are attached (Attachment 7).
Entitlements Requested
The site is, or is proposed to be designated as "Medium-High Density Residential" on the
General Plan Land Use Element (LUE) map and zoned R-3-S. The General Plan anticipates two
or three-story buildings with common outdoor areas and very compact private outdoor spaces.
Disposition of the unutilized City-owned property that is not needed to meet long-range goals
allows for the property's use in furthering City goals such as maintaining a compact urban form,
facilitating economic development and providing a variety of housing types, and will off-set the
significant amount of the site that is lost to the completion of rights-of-way on Lawrence,
Humbert, and Victoria, and the limited usability of the 40-foot wide strip of property west of the
Victoria Avenue connection. Consistent with General Plan Policies LUE 2.4.7, HE 3.4.2, CE
Transportation Goal 2, and COSE Policies 4.5.1 and 4.6.17, the project will provide housing
affordable to a range of households with features to encourage use of alternative modes of
transportation and energy efficiency. Additionally, the project is consistent with HE Policy
3.12.7, which identifies the Little Italy district and portions of the Broad Street corridor as
appropriate for redesignation to higher density residential designations to encourage infill
development. The Planning Commission found that the proposed project and requested
entitlements are consistent with the General Plan and applicable City policies and standards (for
a detailed discussion,please see Attachment 7). The requested entitlements include:
1. Abandonment of portions of Frederick Street and Humbert Avenue which was
previously approved by the Council is being re-processed, as the conditional approval
granted in 2006 has since expired.
2. General Plan Conformity Finding on request to purchase a portion of the 70-foot wide
strip of City-owned property just west of the railroad right-of-way. A subsequent closed
session with the City Council would provide direction to staff on negotiating the fair
market value of the property.
3. General Plan Amendment and Rezone to change the Land Use Designation of the
unaddressed vacant parcel between HASLO's property and the railroad from Services &
Manufacturing (M) to Medium-High Density Residential with the Special Considerations
overlay (R-3-S).
4. Use Permit for development of a sensitive site (consistency with ALUP safety policies
a -y
Council Agenda Report—GPA/R/PDflWANAN/A 27-06 AND ER 123-08
March 17,2009
Page 5
and "consistency requirements" and City noise standards).
5. Planned Development Rezone to allow 0-lot line development in conjunction with real
property subdivision, minor exceptions to height standards, tandem parking and parking
reduction of seven spaces. The project also utilizes a 23% density bonus for providing
over 20% low and very-low income housing. Project amenities proposed to meet Planned
Development standards include provision of 26% of the units as affordable to low and
very-low income households and achieving 30% greater energy efficiency than required
by California Title 24.
6. Vesting Tentative Tract Map for real property subdivision of the townhome units,
mixed-use structure, and common lot.
7. Environmental Review A Negative Declaration was recommended by the Community
Development Director on February 2, 2009 which included mitigation measures to
address potentially significant impacts associated with air quality, hazardous &hazardous
materials, land use & planning, and noise (Attachment 9).
Affordability
Consistent with state law, the City offers density bonuses, incentives, and reduced parking
standards for providing housing units affordable to very low, low, and moderate income
households. Although the "workforce" units would also be restricted to qualifying households,
this is not an affordable category currently recognized by the City, though it is recognized by
other agencies. Based on City standards, the project would be 27% affordable, which qualifies
the development to an increased density of at least 25% over the density otherwise allowed in the
Zoning Regulations. Given the base designation of R-3 which allows 18 units per acre, up to 22.5
units per acre would be allowed. The proposed density of the site is 22.2 units per acre. In-lieu of
requesting incentives through either the local or state law to allow for diversions from typical
development standards described above, HASLO has opted to utilize the Planned Development
provisions of the City's regulations which provides similar flexibility. Finally, it is important to
mention that although the project is considered under-parked by seven stalls according to City
standards, based on State density bonus standards only 150 parking stalls could be required, 35
less stalls than proposed.
The Moylan Terrace project meets the affordability requirements of the Planned Development
zone by allocating 27% of the units (20 ownership and 1 rental) to the City's Long-Term
Affordability Program. This program insures that the ownership units will be owner-occupied
and maintained at affordable levels for a minimum term of 45 years. These units are effectively
affordable "in-perpetuity" because the 45-year term restarts whenever the unit is sold to a new,
income-eligible household. The proposed breakdown of affordability includes two very-low,
fourteen low, and four moderate income for-sale units, and one moderate rental unit. Normally,
for-sale units in the City's program are provided at the moderate income level. Therefore, the
proposed affordability level is substantially better than the minimum requirement under the
City's PD ordinance. In fact, at 2008 sales prices, the difference represents over $1.5 million in
value that will be realized by the homeowners. Conversely, HASLO is giving up an equivalent
income potential for these units in order to improve the affordability level in their project,
consistent with their mission. Unit mix and affordability is shown in Table 1, below:
C;,) -S-
Council Agenda Report—GPA/R/PD/TR/ANAN/A 27-06 AND ER 123-08
March 17,2009
Page 6
TABLE 1: UNIT MIX
Unit Type 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom
Units Units Units
Very Low
50% or less of County median household 2 0 0
income
Low
51%-80% of County median household 8 4 2
income
Moderate Income
81%-120% of County median household 1 2 ownership 2
income
1 rental
Workforce
121%-160% of County median household 1 8 50
income
The City of San Luis Obispo previously awarded HASLO $600,000 from the Affordable
Housing Fund, which was used for property acquisition. Based on the current number of
affordable units proposed, this award breaks down to approximately $30,000 per affordable unit,
as defined by City standards. As discussed above, the value to future homeowners is expected to
be substantially greater than the City's contribution to the project and the proposed affordability
program carries out Housing Element policies. In addition to the 21 long-term affordable units,
the project also include 60 units that would sell at above-moderate prices, but well below market
price. These units are termed "workforce" housing and sell for anywhere from 10% to 25%
below the market price for a comparable sized unit. The Housing Authority intends to maintain
their own deed-restrictions for long-term affordability for any units that are sold at below market
prices.
Consistent with both agencies affordability goals, the City's Housing Programs Manager and the
Housing Authority are working diligently to improve the affordability of the "workforce" units.
In particular, the City is expecting to make a new BEGIN program application to the State in
April, when a new funding round is likely to begin. The BEGIN program is an ideal match for
the Moylan Terrace project, and would allow the affordability to be improved from the
"workforce" level to the moderate income level for approximately $75,000 to $110,000 per unit.
The program provides down-payment assistance to moderate income, first-time homebuyers,
which is repaid to the City with interest when the unit is sold.
Conclusion
Considerable effort has been made by the applicant to design a project that is consistent with the
General Plan, applicable property development standards, and the vision for the area as
established in the draft South Broad Street Corridor Plan. The type and density of development
has been planned to suit the site and character of the area, while remaining focused on providing
quality affordable housing. With the incorporation of conditions of approval and mitigation
measures included in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the design of the proposed project
would provide quality housing in an area identified in the General Plan for in-fill residential
o2-1Q
Council Agenda Report—GPA/R/PD/TR/ANAN/A 27-06 AND ER 123-08
March 17,2009
Page 7
development.
CONCURRENCES
The City's Public Works, Utilities and Building Departments have reviewed this project, and
concur with the analysis, conclusions and the Planning Commission recommendation.
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 may continue review of the project. If more information is needed, direction
should be given to staff and the applicants.
2. The Council may adopt a resolution denying the project based on findings of
inconsistency with the Subdivision Regulations and/or General Plan Policies as specified
by the City Council.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity map
2. Reduced copy of project plans
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5517-09,Minutes, and Staff Report
4. Architectural Review Commission Meeting Follow-Up
5. Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact,recommended on February 2, 2009
6. Draft Resolution amending the General Plan Land Use Map, and approving the Mitigated
Negative Declaration, Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Purchase of Surplus Property, and Use
Permit for development of a sensitive site.
7. Draft Resolution of intention to abandon portions of Frederick Street and Humbert and set a
public hearing for April 21, 2009
8. Draft Ordinance amending the Zoning Map
9. Draft Resolution denying the project
Enclosed: Full-size project plans
GACD-PLANVHMHASMCity Councii\CC report 27-06(HASLO).doc
ggpi
1y VFY'��•A �r•11 y11 II 1f.
vpqm mwh YY4411 V
aasauwi iro aarre• �- y`ra� omm1t
yyyyyyyy URdetl6N-9 P'gP VUOPMMV9PQdd. ■
� d
JmmA � clOAOm m X32 Y
" 16 � � 8
s. �#
to
o �
z
J �
n
I v
`ki I i•
b
:AJ
VI
i
ait Il a}
L-1
l
t�
�F
I s-
{.3i.
-
t!
i
i
Att2Cb
Mal
w1aR p
i■si.w`t-awe ■i�r■aa .. .. .� J. �Z 1
T+ 3
•3
s
F
ee r
f.� � � }3' Jha■� y;r',.r
■
i
p
i
Y �
Q D
.0 u
a► m
e o
y y
CIL- 1
F
�1�4� �y�spuu�� tl ! 1
v
T
fix
fill
all
00
i A
0�
� a
g gS t y
r 1, 1.
�
3Jill,, . 1
a -�
2
Attach
iS� - � 1 a1 .aaoeelno�neQ - T.1
well
+�wwAwa-Iw now
� r r
ruill
e =
as
r
r �
E
1b;
C
! 1 as
a
°a o`
1
• N ; e.
_ c
1
1
1
• II
c
0
r r
r
co
r
U.
r `
AM
tog
� c I
p
Mil
r r
r
�-l3
.r• ,a,+w. rw .w.r�ww
a •
-Attach
Cna co
oil
mill
fitaa 3
�3
p ®e Za
t q
0
m
n
m
LU
.: 17
r'
s
�rn
M1.
a-�
al
• L i � i
z1- Pal
t2��
VII
��iYl `11,1
OR
/' s/��/y/� �ir•u�' '��s'r�'�- "'� 111
AMIL 7T
OW
Mals
• 1 ,�: P � 95
GL b.^ 'r ���&x.a yal-&' 1C i♦� �^ A.,§v+���lti`a'� �aa
lip quall
i r�Nn;Tb•' S'711 e� I /���� �I '14,.x �`ly.i'!ja R "P 5."IIal
..
1
�, tr °" , I-I I 1 .`^4'r4 t'Y'"'`� w•..iM rtt� I IUe 'hP� r+ „�. I
04; IN
12
Ilow ' S\\ I�ry fir � ��IIII���,�I
rte_ lilt LIT!
Motel ■, r , u 1I
-� !,-�- 1 •w���N un,N�w 1� �d�d��I
���� ` ��--•....4�� I�1 '.ix`v d�-i'�`..rtF'' ' I •i t �j r.:'kt r
Du _ ' ;�;J
������� \ I� � IiIO��� • � �� V �\III II.I�
71 90 1
/. " . .; & .
Y:.
}
1 '
I
/
air
ON, MWWN
SON
�%% low
.viii_ r/iliiMEW
/!o o
WIS
II
�r _ r
r
2
ez
nf
Att2ebrnp
yee�p�
oat
ds 3a R 114 _
It
rli% s ° 8k:� 5 yj
34
m-
'!• o I I 1 g
A
,
\\ A I¢
\\.
' �%`',`;
Attachment 3
RESOLUTION NO. 5517-09
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF A GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT AND REZONING OR PORTION OF THE SITE, PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT REZONE, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, ABANDONMENT OF
RIGHTS-OF-WAY, PURCHASE OF SURPLUS PROPERTY,USE PERMIT FOR
DEVELOPMENT OF A SENSITVE SITE, AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR A RESIDENTIAL AND MIXED-USE
DEVELOPMENT AT 851 AND 860 HUMBERT AND THE UNADDRESSED VACANT LOT
(004-951-009); GPA/R/PD/TR/ABAN/A 27-06 AND ER 123-08 (TRACT 2977)
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
February 11, 2009, for the purpose of considering application GPA/R/PD/TR/ABAN/A 27-06
and ER 123-08, a request to allow a General Plan Amendment and Rezoning, Planned
Development Rezone, Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Abandonment of rights-of-way, Use permit
for development of a sensitive site, and Purchase of surplus property for a workforce housing and
mixed-use development; 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 Airport Land Use Commission has conducted a public hearing on
September 17, 2008 and found the proposed General Plan Amendment to be consistent with the
Airport Land Use Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission has reviewed the project and
provided the applicant specific direction on revisions to the project that shall be made to increase
neighborhood compatibility prior to final architectural review approval; 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
A. CEQA Compliance
j
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5517-09
- Attachment 3
GPA/R/PD/TR/ABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08 (HASLO)
851 & 860 Humbert Avenue, and Unaddressed Vacant Lot (004-951-009)
Page 2
1. The Planning Commission finds and determines that the project's Mitigated Negative
Declaration which was prepared by the Community Development Department on
February 2, 2009 adequately identifies that with the incorporation of recommended
mitigation measures there is no foreseeable potential for significant environmental
impacts by the proposed project.
B. General Plan and Zoning Map Amendment
2. The proposed project will provide quality affordable housing consistent with the intent of
California Government Code 65915, and that the requested density bonus, incentives and
concessions are reasonably necessary to facilitate the production of affordable housing
units.
3. The proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezoning is consistent with General Plan
Land Use Element policies regarding the expansion of housing opportunities and
maximizing the development potential of infill sites. Additionally the project is consistent
with Housing Element goals and policies which encourage facilitating housing
production and land use efficiency, including HE Policy 3.12.7, which specifically
identifies this area as potentially being appropriate for residential uses.
4. The redesignation of the unaddressed vacant parcel from an industrial designation
(Manufacturing: M) to a residential designation (Medium-High Density Residential: R-3)
would not adversely impact the overall supply of manufacturing property in the area, as
the proximity of the site to residential uses and constrained access make it undesirable for
many industrial uses.
5. The redesignation of the unaddressed vacant parcel from an industrial designation
(Manufacturing: M) to a residential designation (Medium-High Density Residential: R-3)
would not result in an inappropriate development on the site, as the Special
Considerations "S" overlay will insure that development of the site is consistent with
ALUP safety and City noise policies. The following standards shall apply to the Special
Considerations overlay for the site:
Airport Safety
a. All owners, potential purchasers, occupants (whether as owners or renters), and
potential occupants (whether as owners or renters) will receive the disclosure
document approved by the Airport Land Use Commission in conjunction with this
review prior to entering any contractual obligation to purchase, lease, rent, or
otherwise occupy any property or properties within the airport area.
b. Development of the site shall be consistent with City Zoning Regulations and
Airport Land Use Safety policies, including maximum density of persons per
acre.
c. Aviation easements will be recorded for all properties involved in the proposed
development.
Noise
d. The construction of residential uses at the site shall be accompanied by an
acoustical analysis (noise study) to ensure that interior spaces and exterior private
a-I9
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5517-09
Attachment 3
GPA/R/PD/TR%ABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08(HASLO)
851 & 860 Humbert Avenue, and Unaddressed Vacant Lot (004-951-009)
Page 3
use areas are designed to mitigate noise impacts to levels determined acceptable
by the City's General Plan Noise Element. Specific construction details shall be
identified as recommendations in the study.
e. All owners and occupants shall receive disclosure concerning the adjacent
manufacturing uses and potential noise exposure.
C. Planned Development Rezone
6. The project is consistent with the General Plan and the Airport Land Use Plan, and with
the included conditions and mitigation measures is allowed within the primary zoning
district(R-3-S).
7. The project complies with all applicable provisions of the Zoning Regulations other than
those modified by the PD rezoning, which include: 0-lot line development, exceptions to
minimum parcel size and coverage in conjunction with real property subdivision, reduced
street yards, height exception for one building, and tandem parking and a reduction of
seven spaces.
8. The approved modifications to the development standards of the Zoning Regulations,
listed in Finding No. 2, are necessary and appropriate to accommodate the superior
design of the proposed project, its compatibility with adjacent land uses, and its
successful mitigation of environmental impacts.
9. The project complies with all applicable City Design Guidelines and establishes
additional parameters to ensure development is in harmony with nature and the adjacent
neighborhood.
10. All affected public facilities, services, and utilities are adequate to serve the proposed
project.
11. The location, size, site planning, building design features, and operating characteristics of
the project are highly suited to the characteristics of the site and surrounding neighborhood,
and will be compatible with the character of the site, and the land uses and development
intended for the surrounding neighborhood by the General Plan.
12. The site is adequate for the project in terms of size, configuration topography, and other
applicable features, and has appropriate access to public streets with adequate capacity to
accommodate the quantity and type of traffic expected to be generated by the use.
13. With the incorporation of conditions of approval and mitigation measures listed in the
Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, the establishment, maintenance,
or operation of the proposed project will not, in the circumstances of the particular case, be
detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the
vicinity of the proposed use, or detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the
neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City.
D. Development of a Sensitive Site
a -a-0
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5517-09 Attachment 3
GPA/R/PD/TR/ABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08 (HASLO)
851 & 860 Humbert Avenue, and Unaddressed Vacant Lot(004-951-009)
Page 4
14. Development of the site is consistent with the intent of the "S-overlay" and will not be
detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of persons working or living at the site or
within the vicinity, as the project is consistent with ALUP safety and compatibility
policies and City noise standards.
15. As conditioned, all residents of the site will be duly noticed of both Airport operations
and adjacent noise sources.
E. Abandonments
16. The proposed abandonment of rights-of-way is consistent with the General Plan because
they are no longer needed for present or future public purposes.
17. Development of the rights-of-way as public streets would not serve any reasonable public
purpose since those properties fronting the rights-of-way gain access from other
improved streets, and there are no existing infrastructure improvements within the areas
to be abandoned.
18. The abandonment of the rights-of-way will benefit the general public be eliminating
unused right-of-way and the City's costs for maintaining additional infrastructure
improvements.
19. The proposed rights-of-way abandonments are categorically exempt from environmental
review under Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act.
F. Disposition of Surplus Property
20. The City no longer has need for the vacant property located just west of the railroad right-
of-way.
21. Disposition of this property to facilitate an affordable housing development is consistent
with the policies of the Land Use and Housing Elements of the General Plan.
G. Subdivision Findings.
22. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is
consistent with the General Plan and Airport Land Use Plan, including compatibility with
the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan.
23. The design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural
heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision.
24. As conditioned, the subdivider will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its
agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or
its agents, officers or employees to attach set aside, void or annul an approval of the City
Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff concerning a subdivision.
��
Planning Commission Resolution,No. 5517-09 -
GPA/R/PD/TR/ABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08 (HASLO) Attachment 3
851 & 860 Humbert Avenue,and Unaddressed Vacant Lot (004-951-009)
Page 5
25. The proposed vesting tentative tract map is consistent with the General Plan, including
LUE 2.4.7, HE 3.4.2 and 3.13, and CE Goal 2, COSE 4.5..1 and 4.6.17, because the
subdivision will provide residential development anticipated by the General Plan and
provide compact and sustainable housing options affordable to a variety of household
types.
26. The site is physically suited for the proposed type of development because the project has
been designed to utilize available residential density while providing quality common
open spaces and roadway connections which will benefit the general public.
27. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, is not likely to cause serious
public health or safety problems because the type of improvements are appropriate for the
location will be designed to meet existing building and safety codes.
28. The design of the subdivision, or the type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within
the proposed subdivision because such easements will be maintained.
SECTION 2. Action.
The Commission does hereby recommend adoption of said Mitigated Negative Declaration and
approval of the requests for a General Plan Amendment and Rezoning of the unaddressed parcel, as
shown on the attached Exhibit A and including the standards for the "S" overlay as described above,
and including the ALUP approved disclosure agreement which is included as Exhibit B; approval of
the abandonment of portions of Frederick Street and Humbert Avenue, as shown on attached Exhibit
C, and; the Planned Development Zoning, Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Abandonment of rights-of-
way, and purchase of surplus property, with incorporation of the following mitigation measures,
conditions, and code requirements:
A. Mitigation Measures
I. Should hydrocarbon contaminated soil be encountered during construction activities, the
APCD must be notified as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after affected
material is discovered to determine if an APCD Permit will be required. In addition,
standard APCD required procedures shall be implemented immediately after
contaminated soil is discovered.
2. Prior to any grading activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that a
geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) is
present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption
request must be filed with the District. If NOA is found at the site the applicant must
comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM.
3. If utility pipelines are scheduled for removal or relocation the project may be subject to
various regulatory jurisdictions, including the requirements stipulated in the National
Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants. These requirements include, but are not
a-a2
�--
Planning Commission Resolution i No.. 5517-09 Attachment 3
GPA/R/PD/TR/ABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08 (HASLO)
851 & 860 Humbert Avenue, and Unaddressed Vacant Lot(004-951-009)
Page 6
limited to 1) notification requirements to the APCD, 2) asbestos survey conducted by a
Certified Asbestos Inspector, and, 3) applicable removal and disposal requirements of
identified ACM.
4. This project exceeds the 4.0 acres of grading threshold and is near potentially sensitive
receptors, and shall comply with all applicable Air Pollution Control District regulations
pertaining to the control of fugitive dust (PM 10) as contained in section 6.5 of the Air
Quality Handbook. The following APCD standards for dust control shall be adhered to:
a. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible,
b. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent
airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency would be
required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water
should be used whenever possible'
c. All dirt stockpile areas should be sprayed daily as needed,
d. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation
and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible following
completion of any soil disturbing activities,
e. 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,
f All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using
approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in
advance by the APCD.
g. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon
as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after
grading unless seeding or soil binders are used,
h. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any
unpaved surface at the construction site,
i. 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,
j. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or
wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site, and,
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.
5. Prior to recordation of the final map, a screening level health risk assessment shall be
performed to determine potential health risks to residents of the development. Depending
on the results of the screening level health risk assessment a more comprehensive
analysis may be required.
6. All fill material on the property that will be exported during development of the site shall
be sampled and analyzed prior to transport from the property. If soil is found to be
contaminated it shall be disposed of at a permitted facility.
d -a3
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5517-09
-= Attachment 3
GPA/R/PD/TR/ABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08 (HASLO)
851 & 860 Humbert Avenue, and Unaddressed Vacant Lot(004-951-009)
Page 7
7. All owners, potential purchasers, occupants (whether as owners or renters), and potential
occupants (whether as owners or renters) shall receive full and accurate disclosure
concerning the noise, safety, or over flight impacts associated with airport operations
prior to entering any contractual obligation to purchase, lease, rent, or otherwise occupy
any property or properties within the airport area.
8. Aviation easements will be recorded for all properties involved in the proposed
development with recordation of the final map.
9. The mixed-use structure west of Victoria Avenue shall not be constructed until after
adoption of the South Broad Street Corridor Plan, or redesignation of the site to a land
use designation which allows for a combination of commercial and residential uses. Any
such Land Use changes shall be reviewed by the Airport Land Use Commission for
compliance with the Airport Land Use Plan.
10. All owners and occupants shall receive disclosure concerning the adjacent manufacturing
uses and potential noise exposure.
11. A final trip reduction plan shall be provided to, and approved by the City prior to final
map recordation.
B. Conditions
12. Final design of the project improvements shall be subject to review and approval by the
Architectural Review Commission, and shall include modifications to address the scale of
buildings facing Lawrence Drive, material changes to give architecture a more residential
feel, details of community open space and consideration of community garden space, and
provision of a third solid waste enclosure.
13. 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.
14. Easements for all public and common open spaces shall be clearly designated on the
Tract Map.
15. The tentative map describes a LLA affecting the project for which no specific
information is provided. Should the LLA not occur, the project as shown on the tentative
map is no longer valid. The details of the LLA should be provided for review to insure
there are no fatal flaws in the development proposal.
16. The final subdivision design and improvements shall comply with the South Broad Street
Corridor Plan and all other City of San Luis Obispo Design Standards, Engineering
Standards and Standard Plans and Specifications.
Attachment 3
Planning Coinmission Resolution No. 5517-09
GPA/R/PD/TR/ABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08 (HASLO)
851 & 860 Humbert Avenue, and Unaddressed Vacant Lot(004-951-009)
Page 8
17. All grading on the easterly edge of the proposed development, adjacent to railroad right-
of-way shall be completed in such a manner that the toe of any slope is a minimum of 10
feet from the railroad right-of-way in order to accommodate a future bicycle path. An
appropriate structure shall be placed at the toe of the slope to prevent erosion onto the
future bicycle path area. The slope shall be designed such that the toe of the slope is at
least five feet horizontally from the sewer main. Any structures or retaining walls shall
be at least 10 feet away from the sewer and shall be designed such that no additional load
is placed on the sewer main.
18. The tract map shall show and identify all easements described in the Title Report.
19. This development shall comply with the Waterways Management Plan. Provide a
complete hydraulic analysis, grading, drainage, and erosion control plan in accordance
with the Waterways Management Plan Volume III, Drainage Design Manual.
20. Show and note compliance with Engineering Standard 1010.B for Storm Water Quality
Management for the drainage originating from or being conveyed through the parking
lots and private streets. Run-off from adjacent streets as well as run-off from the parking
lots will require treatment under this standard.
21. The drainage flowing northerly toward Francis Avenue from the proposed project shall
be carried and discharged onto Francis Avenue in an approved drainage facility.
Appropriate drainage easements from the adjoining property owner accepting the
drainage will be required.
22. Francis Avenue shall be improved with the installation of curb and gutter on the southerly
side of the street to accommodate additional storm water flows that may be directed to
this street.
23. These streets, within the boundaries of the proposed subdivision and including transitions
to existing improvements, shall be fully designed and constructed in accordance with
current City Standards including a 40 foot curb to curb street section within a 60-foot
dedicated right-of-way, and curb, gutter, 10-foot integral sidewalk, tree wells, ramps,
signing and striping.
24. A city standard 50-foot radius cul-de-sac shall be constructed where the Humbert Avenue
public street ends. A 50-foot radius right-of way at the easterly end of Francis Avenue
shall be provided.
25. The northerly side of Lawrence Drive shall be constructed to match the existing Villa
Rosa (Tract 2066) street section except for a 5-foot detached sidewalk. Complete a 40-
foot street section within a 60-foot right of way. Curb, gutter, detached sidewalk, ramps
signing and striping shall be designed and constructed to current City standards.
26. Street lighting, utilities and landscaping shall be installed in accordance with City
standards.
o2-a-5
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5517-09 AttachmentGPA/R/PD/TR/ABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08 (HASLO) 3
851 & 860 hlumbert Avenue, and Unaddressed Vacant Lot(004-951-009)
Page 9
27. Prior to approval of improvement plans, any alternative paving materials proposed within
the public right-of-way shall be approved by the Public Works Director. Alternative
paving materials shall be maintained by the Homeowner's Association.
28. Common areas and landscaped parkways shall be owned and maintained in perpetuity for
public use by the Homeowner's Association or Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo
County. Water meters for common landscape areas, including, but not limited to
parkways, medians and pathway corridors are subject to water impact fees and shall be
paid for by the subdivider.
29. The grading plan shall include provisions to comply with the soils engineer's
recommendations, including expansive soils, preparation of paved areas and pavement
design. The soils engineer shall supervise and approve all grading operations.
30. The subdivider's engineer shall submit water demand and wastewater generation
calculations so that the City can make a determination as to the adequacy of the
supporting infrastructure. If an off-site deficiency exists, the subdivider will be required
to mitigate the deficiency as part of the overall project.
31. Sewer and water mains shall be located in accordance with City Standard #6010. All
final grades and alignments of all public water, sewer and stone drains (including service
laterals and meters) are subject to modifications to the satisfaction of the Public Works
Director and Utilities Engineer.
32. The subdivision layout and preliminary utility plans shall include provisions for irrigating
common areas, parks, and other large landscape areas with recycled water. Appropriately
sized reclaimed water mains shall be designed and constructed from the City's trunk
system to these irrigation areas. If other use areas exist beyond the proposed subdivision,
the mains shall be appropriately sized to provide for future use areas and extended to the
boundary of the tract.
33. Include site sections or partial site sections as necessary to show site utilities. Provide
utility profiles as necessary where a possible conflict may exist between utilities for final
placement and/or for constructability. Additional review may be required by the Utilities
Engineer when complete plan information is provided.
34. Existing trees on adjacent properties shall be considered and protected if construction
encroaches upon their drip lines. The large Acacia tree in the Open space shall be
protected with a fence to be installed before grading or constructions begins and remains
undisturbed until completion of this project. A small willow tree in the center of this
project is ok to be removed and shall be mitigated for within the landscape plan to
include tree plantings.
35. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall be responsible for paying
current transportation impact fees (TIF) plus a "fair share" mitigation fee for the
percentage of new trips generated by the project that will travel through the intersection /
C�
No..
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5517-09 Attachment 3
GPA/R/PD/TR/ABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08 (HASLO)
851 & 860 Humbert Avenue, and Unaddressed Vacant Lot (004-951-009)
Page 10
of Broad/South/Santa Barbara intersection as determined by the Public Works Director,
and based on the estimated intersection improvement cost.
36. Previous traffic studies prepared for the Broad Street Corridor project identify the
intersection of Broad/Lawrence as a potential candidate for a future traffic signal. This
project will add traffic to this intersection. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the
applicant will be required to pay its fair share toward the design and installation of a
future traffic signal at this intersection as determined by the Director of Public Works.
37. To minimize traffic impacts, a trip reduction plan and implementation program is
required. The plan shall include at a minimum: a) designation of a coordinator to
administer the program; b) carpool, car share, bicycling and transit information; c)
availability of long term bicycle parking for residents, information and incentives for
those who use alternative transportation such as subsides to employees
using public transit, or other measures to approval of the Public Works Director. The trip
reduction plan shall be provided to all new tenants. A draft of the plan shall be submitted
for review as part of the building permit application. Occupancy shall not be granted
until the plan has been approved by the Public Works Director.
38. Prospective tenants shall be notified of the project's requested and approved parking
reductions and tandem parking. Additionally, they should be advised that they should
ensure that the amount of on-site parking is adequate for their needs because they will not
be able to obtain on-street parking permits for any additional parking needs.
39. Garages within the project shall be used exclusively for parking vehicles and may not be
used for general storage, recreation, or other uses that would prevent the parking of
vehicles as required by the Zoning Regulations.
40. The project design shall not preclude the future construction of a bike path along the
railroad corridor at the foot of the project slope. Prior to final map recordation, the
applicant shall record an easement for the future bike path as necessary. To determine
the easement area, the applicant shall submit a site/grading plan that illustrates where this
path can be located and how this project will provide access to the future bike path.
41. The project design shall not preclude the future construction of a bicycle bridge over the
railroad tracks at Francis Street. Prior to final map and abandonment approval, the
applicant shall submit a site plan/grading plan illustrating on-site and public
improvements outside of the area identified for the Francis Street bicycle bridge,
abutments and ADA ramping.
42. Public improvements shall comply with the draft Broad Street Corridor Plan which
identifies Victoria Street as a "Village Street" and Lawrence Drive as an "Entry Street".
43. Long and short-term bicycle parking shall be provided in accordance with Table 6.5 of
the Zoning Regulations. Short-term bicycle racks shall be placed in visible locations near
public entries. Dimensioned locations and details of the short and long-term bicycle
parking (including 2x6 dimensioned area for each bicycle parking space in a residential 2
• Planning Commission Resolution No, 5517-09
Attachment 3
GPA/R/PD/TR/ABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08 (HASLO)
851 & 860 Humbert Avenue, and Unaddressed Vacant Lot(004-951-009)
Page I I
dwelling) shall be provided on the project's construction plans including rack design,
location, clearances and circulation for users in compliance with manufacturers'
standards.
44. Continued affordability provisions shall be developed to assure units remain affordable to
residents that earn low, lower, moderate and work force incomes. These provisions may
allow for equity accumulation over time. The continuance of affordability shall be
subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director prior to
issuance of building permits.
C. 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.
45. An encroachment permit will be required from the Public Works Department for any
work or construction staging in the public right-of-way.
46. A traffic control plan and/or pedestrian control plan shall be approved prior to
encroachment permit issuance for work in the public right-of-way.
47. All boundary monuments, lot corners and centerline intersections, BC's, EC's, etc..., shall
be tied to the City's Horizontal Control Network. At least two control points shall be used
and a tabulation of the coordinates shall be submitted with the final map or parcel map.
All coordinates submitted shall be based on the City coordinate system. A 3.5" diameter
computer floppy disk, containing the appropriate data compatible with AutoCAD (Digital
Interchange Format, DXF) for Geographic Information System (GIS) purposes, shall be
submitted to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
48. Prior to acceptance by the City of public improvements, the developer's engineer shall
submit a digital version of all public improvement plans& record drawings, compatible
with AutoCAD (Digital Interchange Format, DXF) for Geographic Information System
(GIS) purposes, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
49. EPA Requirement: General Construction Activity Storm Water Permits are required for
all storm water discharges associated with a construction activity where clearing, grading
and excavation results in land disturbance of one or more acres. Storm water 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 owner(s) 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).
50. A copy of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) required by the SWRCB
shall be included as part of the building permit 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.
a�a�
Planning Commission Resolution-No. 5517-09 AttachmentGPA/R/PD/TR/ABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08 (HASLO)
3
851 &860 Humbert Avenue,and Unaddressed Vacant Lot(004-951-009)
Page 12
51. Document compliance with the new draft Water Quality Board State Construction
Permit, which 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).
52. Provide a complete site utility plan. Show all existing and proposed on-site and off-site
utilities. Show the location of all overhead and underground utilities along with the
location of any utility company meters. Show all existing and proposed improvements
located within the public right-of-way if applicable.
53. Show and note that the new wire services shall be placed underground in accordance with
UBC Section 308.3 as amended locally.
54. Provide separate engineering drawings or a composite utility plan from P. G. & E.,
ATT/PacBell, and Charter for the new wire utilities if necessary. If these plans are not
available, note on the cover sheet of the plans and utility plan these engineered utility
plans will be a deferred submittal item. Further note that "The engineered utility plans
shall be submitted to the city for review and approval prior to commencing with any on-
site or off-site utility construction."
55. Complete the gas pipe sizing for the proposed gas service to these buildings. The gas
company shall review these plans for the proposed gas piping and gas meter locations.
Provide gas meter clusters as required by the gas company. Provide a copy of a signed
utility plan or separate transmittal from the gas company indicating their review and
approval of the piping as shown.
56. Show the location, size, and material of all public water mains, recycled water mainlines,
sewer mains, and public storm drain systems.
57. Show all required or proposed parking lot improvements, lot dimensions, space
dimensions, materials, space and aisle slopes, drainage, pavement markings, signage, and
striping in accordance with the Parking and Driveway Standards and disabled access
requirements of the CBC. The parking and driveway standards are available from the
Community Development Department or are available within the Engineering Standards.
The Parking and Driveway Standards are again available in U.S. Customary Units.
58. The final map preparation and monumentation shall be in accordance with the city's
Subdivision Regulations, Engineering Standards, and the Subdivision Map Act.
59. The subdivider shall dedicate a 6' wide public utility easement and a 10' wide street tree
easement across the frontage of each lot, adjacent to and contiguous with all public right-
of-way lines.
60. One Street Tree is required per. 35' lineal feet of street frontage or any part thereof. Street
trees shall be from the Master Street Tree List and planted to City of San Luis Obispo
Engineering Standards.
a-C;L?
Attachment 3
Planning Commission Resolution-,No. 5517-09 —
GPA/R/PD/TR/ABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08 (HASLO)
851 & 860 Humbert Avenue, and Unaddressed Vacant Lot(004-951-009)
Page 13
61. Final locations of fire hydrants and water meters appear shall be shown on the
improvement plans, and shall be approved by the Utility Department.
62. Eave and balcony overhangs projecting beyond the floor area shall conform to the
requirements of CBC Section 704.2.
On motion by Vice-Chairperson Multari, seconded by Commissioner Draze, and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Boswell, Draze, Meyer, Singewald, Whittlesey, Multari, and
Stevenson
NOES: None
REFRAIN: None
ABSENT: None
On a second motion by Vice-Chairperson Multari, seconded by Commissioner Boswell, and on
the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Boswell, Draze, Meyer, Singewald, Whittlesey, Multari, and
Stevenson
NOES: None
REFRAIN: None
ABSENT: None
The Commission voted to recommend that the City Council direct the Architectural Review
Commission to:
1. Consider modifications to the site plan to increase usable open space, including possible
reconfiguration or elimination of the Humbert Avenue cul-de-sac.
2. Consider providing bike path access from the site to the Railroad Safety Path.
3. Review the width of the tandem parking garages.
4. Consider modifying the widths of decks to have a minimum depth of 5-feet or more.
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this] l`" day of February, 2009.
Doug Davi son, Secretary
Planning Commission
Exhibit A: General Plan and Zoning Amendment, and Surplus Property Request
Exhibit B: ALUC approved disclosure agreement
Exhibit C: Abandonment
,� -3o
Attachment 3
SAN LUIS OBISPO
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
February 11, 2009
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Michael Boswell, Michael Draze, Eric Meyer, Airlin
Singewald, Mary Whittlesey, Vice-Chairperson Michael Multari, and
Chairperson Charles Stevenson
Absent: None
Staff: Deputy Director of Community Development Doug Davidson, Contract
Planner Jaime Hill, Deputy Director of Public Works Tim Bochum, and
Recording Secretary Janet Miller
ACEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA:
The agenda was accepted as presented.
MINUTES: The minutes of January 28, 2008, were approved as submitted.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS:
There were no comments made from the public.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. No Specific Address. O 132-08: Revocation of previous Plan Line Setback on
Broad Street and introduction of new Ordinance; City of San Luis Obispo — Public
Works Department, applicant (Jaime Hill)
Commr. Draze recused himself from item #1 due to a potential conflict of interest.
Jaime Hill, Contract Planner, presented the staff report, recommending to repeal and
revise the Broad Street Plan Line setback, from Higuera Street to Chorro/Sandercock
Streets, based on findings and subject to conditions which she outlined.
Tim Bochum, Deputy Public Works Director, gave a brief description of the transit
issues and supported the recommendation presented in the Staff report.
Commr. Singewald asked for a definition of a plan line. Ms. Hill gave the definition.
Commr. Singewald asked what the catalyst was for the project. Mr. Bochum replied
that the catalyst was the Garden Street project.
Commr. Whittlesey requested further information on the plan line set back. Mr. Bochum
replied with further explanation.
3l
Attachment 3
Planning Commission Minutes
February 11, 2009
Page 2
Vice-Chair Multari requested information on the amount of land that would be given up
in this project. Mr. Bochum replied that there would be a 10-foot loss on each side of
the subject portions of Broad Street.
Vice-Chair Multari requested information on the rational for boundaries. Mr. Bochum
replied that consideration had been made for a future transit pocket.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
There were no comments from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
There were further comments made from the Commission.
On motion by Commr. Boswell, seconded by Commr. Meyer, to repeal and revise the
Broad Street Plan Line setback. Higuera Street to Chorro/Sandercock Streets based on
findings and subject to conditions.
AYES: Commrs. Singewald, Boswell, Draze, Meyer, Whittlesey, Multari, and
Stevenson
NOES: None
RECUSED: Commr. Draze
ABSENT: None
The motion passed on a 6:0 vote.
Commr. Draze returned to the Council Chamber room.
2. 851 & 860 Humbert Avenue & Unaddressed Vacant Lot (004-951-009)
A/ABAN/TR/PD/GP/R/ER 123-08/27-06: Request for General Plan
Amendment/Rezone of the unaddressed parcel, Planned Development Zoning for
the site, Abandonment of portions of Humbert and Fredericks, purchase of City-
surplus property, Tentative Track Map, and Use Permit for development of a
Sensitive Site with 80 town home units and a mixed-use building with one
apartment and 1,000 square feet of commercial space, and associated
improvements; R-3-S zone; Housing Authority of SLO, applicant (Jaime Hill)
Jaime Hill, Contract Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the City
Council approve the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning, Planned Development
Zoning, Vesting Tentative Tract Map, purchase of surplus property and use permit, and
adopt a Resolution of intention to Abandon excess rights-of-way and Mitigated Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impact, based on findings, and subject to conditions and
code requirements.
Commr. Draze asked what the use is immediately adjacent to the multi-use lot.
Planning Commission Minutes Attachment 3
February 11, 2009
Page 3
Commr. Meyer requested information about the extent of site excavation necessary.
Ms. Hill explained the soil issue as described in the soils report.
Commr. Boswell asked if the ARC would have its hands tied by decisions made tonight.
Ms. Hill replied that they would not.
Commr. Singewald requested further information pertaining to noise impact and berm
clarification, with reference to page 8 of the Staff report. Ms. Hill gave a description of
the berm and site topography and referenced the noise attenuation measures.
Commr. Whittlesey requested clarification of the scale referred to in the Staff report on
page 8; Ms. Hill noted that a fence along the railroad tracks was not proposed at this
time.
Chairperson Stevenson questioned how height is measured, referring to the height of
the existing grade. He then asked if the report referred to a natural, former, or finished
grade height. Ms. Hill replied that existing grade was used per City standards.
Chairperson Stevenson questioned if the cul-de-sac was essential to this project. Mr.
Bochum replied that this was to demarcate the end of City right-of-way and provide for
vehicle tum-around.
Chairperson Stevenson questioned work force affordability. Ms. Hill replied that
"workforce" housing prices would be consistent with established County price ranges.
Commr. Whittlesey requested further information on the third trash enclosure discussion
with the ARC. Ms. Hill explained the direction given by ARC and indicated the third
enclosure would be on Humbert.
Carol Hatley, applicant, thanked the Staff for their work on the report. Ms. Hatley gave
a brief description of the affordable design nature of the project. She noted that an HOA
would be managing parking and commute issues. Ms. Hatley referred to the community
garden project, color, and massing discussed by the ARC.
Vice-Chair Multari requested information on resale restrictions. Ms. Hatley replied that
the housing authority would work with the City and provide some restrictions.
Vice-Chair Multari asked for clarification on the ownership of the units. Ms. Hatley
explained that an HOA would be created and that the Housing Authority would retain
ownership of the mixed-use building and lot.
Vice-Chair Multari asked if there would be any special financing available for
purchasers. Ms. Hatley replied that they would be assisting owners with available state,
federal, and local homebuyer programs.
Michael Codron, Housing Programs Manager and member of the Executive Board of
the Workforce Housing Coalition, provided context for the project and noted his support
C�_ 33
Planning Commission Minutes Attachment 3
February 11, 2009
Page 4
for the project. Mr. Codron referenced a letter submitted by the Coalition supporting the
project. Mr. Codron discussed mixed-income projects and deed restrictions.
Leonard Grant, LGA Architect, gave a description of the project. He discussed how the
project was consistent with the draft Broad Street Corridor Plan. Mr. Grant discussed
the contemporary industrial design of buildings. Mr. Grant noted that the parking
requirements were being met and discussed the community garden and garbage
enclosures.
Vice-Chair Multari requested clarification on setbacks. Mr. Grant explained that street
yard setbacks on Lawrence were 10-15 feet.
Commr. Meyer requested porch and deck specifications. Mr. Grant explained that
porches were 6-8 feet in depth and 12-feet in length and that decks were 4-6 feet in
depth and 11 feet in length.
Commr. Whittlesey requested further information on energy efficiency. Mr. Grant
referenced Title 24 and noted the solar energy and cross ventilation.
Chairperson Stevenson questioned if the cul-de-sac at Humbert was needed. Mr. Grant
replied that he would be willing to work with the City on an alternative.
Chairperson Stevenson questioned unbundling parking spaces. Mr. Grant replied that
the applicant was willing to think creatively on parking.
Commr. Whittlesey questioned if the trash company would be able to back up through
the parking lot between buildings 5 and 6. Mr. Grant replied that the garbage company
could make a tum in an adjacent drive.
Commr. Meyer requested bicycle access. Mr. Grant replied that there were vertical
constraints for the site and the applicant would continue to discuss bicycle access with
Staff.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Monte Allen, San Luis Obispo, does not support the project. He is concerned with
parking and architectural design of the project. He noted that the density is too high for
the area.
Mitch Browne, San Luis Obispo, did not support the project. He stated he was
concerned with overflow parking in the area. He does not support tandem parking. He
noted that parking shortages and garbage operations affect the livability of the project.
Steve Delmartini, San Luis Obispo, supports equity given to the workforce housing. He
noted that Villa Rosa faced similar problems when it was being developed.
Jeff Hood, San Luis Obispo, does not support the project. He noted increased traffic
issues with density and safety concerns.
a -3V
i
Planning Commission Minutes Attachment 3
February 11, 2009
Page 5
Jim Perry, San Luis Obispo, does not support the project. He noted increased traffic
issues with density.
Jerry Rioux, Executive Director of the San Luis Obispo Housing Trust Fund, supports
the project. He suggested that a Work Force category designation be added.
David Singer, San Luis Obispo, does not support this project. Mr. Singer is concerned
with height and parking issues. He would like to see an Environmental Impact Report
conducted.
There were no further comments made from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Vice-Chair Multari suggested a sliding scale for equity as well as purchase price. Mr.
Multari is concerned with a windfall for the first owners. He would like to see some form
of continued affordability discouraging flipping of property.
Commr. Meyer is concerned about the amount of outdoor space. He questioned
shifting for buildings to provide additional outdoor space.
Commr. Singewald is generally impressed with the project. He supported the low-
income housing provided. Mr. Singewald agreed with Vice-Chair Multari concerning the
equity issue of ownership. He had questions about how qualifying incomes were
determined, and if they were based on family and unit size.
Commr. Draze supported continued affordability of housing. He recognizes the
dilemma of density and massing in neighborhoods. Mr. Draze discussed his support of
the bicycle path connections and railroad crossing in area. He is concerned with the
relinquishment of public right-of-way.
Commr. Whittlesey endorsed continued affordability. She asked for clarification on
owner occupation requirement noted in the Staff report. Ms. Whittlesey would like to
see further discussion on the conditions along with the completion timeline for the
mixed-use building.
Commr. Meyer requested clarification on mixed use. Mr. Meyer expressed concern with
the bicycle path access from the site.
Chairperson Stevenson is concerned with livability of the project site. He is concerned
with the space available for children with present building topology and design. Mr.
Stevenson suggested moving buildings #13 & #14 along with #12, #11, and #9 north
enough to widen the common space. He did not support the open community site
location across the street as a playground.
Commr. Boswell suggested providing direction on affordability, access to bicycle trail,
and trying to find additional open space.
Planning Commission Minutes
Attachment 3
February 11, 2009
Page 6
Commr. Meyer is concerned with the lack of open space.
Chairperson Stevenson noted that it is critical for open space direction.
Doug Davidson noted that staff works closely with the housing authority and could
review and approve final language for equity sharing and continued affordability
requirements.
Vice-Chair Multari requested the motion include additional finding #44 for continued
affordability for lower-income homeowners to include equity. Staff would oversee
affordability language.
On motion by Vice-Chair Multari, seconded by Commr. Draze to approve the proiect as
recommended with an added condition that continued affordability provisions shall be
developed to assure units remain affordable to residents that earn low, lower, moderate
and work-force incomes. These provisions may allow for equity accumulation over time
The continuance of affordability shall be subiect to review and approval by the
Community Development Director prior to issuance of building permits and the
additional finding recommended by staff.
AYES: Commrs. Singewald, Draze, Boswell, Meyer, Whittlesey, Multari, and
Stevenson
NOES: None
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: None
The motion passed on a 7:0 vote.
On motion by Vice-Chair Multari, seconded by Commr. Boswell the Commission
recommended that the Council direct the ARC to consider increasing usable common
open space and reconfigurement of the Humbert cul-de-sac provide direct
Perpendicular access to the bike path review width of the tandem parking spaces and
increase dimensions of the r)roposed decks to a minimum of 5 feet
AYES: Commrs. Singewald, Draze, Boswell, Meyer, Whittlesey, Multari, and
Stevenson
NOES: None
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: None
The motion passed on a 7:0 vote.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION:
1. Staff
a. Agenda Forecast
2. Commission
� -3�
Planning Commission Minutes Attachment 3
February 11, 2009
Page 7
ADJOURMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by
Janet Miller
Recording Secretary
Approved by the Planning Commission on _February 25, 2009
Ryan Betz
Su ising Administrative Assistant
c?" — 3-7-
Attachment 3
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ITEM#2
BY: Jaime Hill,Associate Planner(781-7165) DATE: February 11, 2009
FROM: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director of Community Development`>i
FILE NUMBER: GPA/R/PDfMABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08 (County Tract Map No. 2977)
PROJECT ADDRESS: 851 &860 Humbert Avenue&Unaddressed Vacant Lot(004-951-009)
SUBJECT: GPA/R/PD/TR/ABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08 - Review of a proposed workforce
housing development consisting of 81 residential dwellings and 1,000 square feet of commercial
space with landscaping and other ancillary improvements, on a 4.68 acre site between Humbert Ave.
and Lawrence Drive, and including: General Plan Amendment and Rezoning of a portion of the site,
Planned Development Zoning, Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Abandonment of rights-of-way,
purchase of surplus property, Use Permit for development of a sensitive site, and Environmental
Review, on R-3-S &M zoned property located adjacent to the railroad right-of-way, within the South
Broad Street Corridor Planning Area(Tract 2977).
RECOMMENDATION
Recommend that the City Council approve the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning, Planned
Development Zoning, Vesting Tentative Tract Map, purchase of surplus property and use permit, and
adopt a Resolution of intention to Abandon excess rights-of-way and Mitigated Negative Declaration
of Environmental Impact, based on findings, and subject to conditions and code requirements.
BACKGROUND
Previous Review
On August 15, 2006, the City Council approved a General Plan Amendment and Rezoning of 851 and
860 Humbert from Services and Manufacturing (M) to Medium-High Density Residential with the
Special Considerations Overlay (R-3-S), and adopted a resolution to pursue abandonment of portions
of Frederick Street and Humbert Avenue rights-of-way to facilitate the Housing.Authority of San Luis
Obispo's (HASLO) development of a workforce housing project on the site(Attachments 5, 6 and 7).
Since that time the project site has been expanded to include portions of an adjacent unused City-
owned parcel. Additionally, given the time delays the previously approved Intention to Abandon has
expired. On January 21, 2009 the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) reviewed the proposed
design and provided direction to the applicant on modifications to the site planning and building
design to return to them for final approval following review by the Planning Commission and City
Council. ARC direction focused primarily on the height and detailing of the structures, and
neighborhood compatibility. They directed the applicant to 1) consider options to reduce the scale of
buildings facing Lawrence Drive, 2) incorporate softer materials and colorsto increase the residential
feel, 3) provide a third solid waste enclosure somewhere other than Victoria Avenue, and 4) provide
additional details on landscape and open space area amenities (ARC Follow-Up,Attachment 8).
Data Summary
Address: 851 and 860 Humbert, and APN 004-951-009 (unaddressed vacant lot)
a -3K
GPA/R/PDfMABWA 27-uu and ER 123-08 (HASLO) Attachment 3
851 & 860 Humbert Avenue, and Unaddressed Vacant Lot(004-951-009)
Page 2
Portions of Frederick Street and Humbert Avenue,east of Broad Street
Applicant: Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo County(HASLO)
Representative: Jason Blakenship, Innovative Housing Solutions,Inc.
Zoning: R-3-S (Medium-High Density Residential with Sensitive Site Overlay), and
M (Manufacturing) — proposed for redesignation to R-3-S (Medium-High Density
Residential with Sensitive Site Overlay)
General Plan: Medium-High Density Residential and Services & Manufacturing (proposed for
redesignation to Medium-High Density Residential)
Environmental Status: A Mitigated Negative Declaration was recommended by the Community
Development Director on February 4, 2009.
Site Description
The project site includes five parcels and approximately 5.05 acres of gross land area prior to dedication
of right-of-way.With the necessary public improvements approximately 4.68 acres(203,861 square feet)
of developable area remain, spanning from Humbert Avenue to Lawrence Drive, adjacent to the railroad
right-of-way. The properties and much of the street frontage are currently undeveloped. The properties
to the north and west are designated for Manufacturing (M) uses, and are developed with a mixture of
commercial business and older single-family residences. Properties to the south are designated Medium-
High Density Residential with the Planned Development overlay (R-3-PD) and are developed with a
mixture of townhomes and condominiums. Immediately to the east of the site is the Union Pacific
Railroad. Other surrounding uses include the railroad bike path, the Broad Street Corridor, and various
manufacturing, service-commercial and residential uses.
Project.Description
The project, called "Moylan Terrace," in honor of George Moylan the previous Director of HASLO,
includes development of the 4.68-acre site with 80 townhome units, a mixed-use building including a.2
bedroom apartment and 1,000 square feet commercial space, and associated parking, landscaping and
other on-site improvements. The 80 single-family attached units include 54 three-bedroom units, 14
two-bedroom units, and 12 one-bedroom units. The townhome units are distributed into 14 buildings,
twelve of which include six attached units each, and two buildings which include four attached units
each. The buildings are mostly two-story, with a few three-story units and design elements, and with
the exception to Building 1, all comply with the 35-foot height maximum. All townhome units
include either one- or two-car garages. The central parking lots provide the additional required
parking for individual units, the commercial space, and guest parking. The mixed-use structure to the
west of Victoria Avenue is also a 2-story structure, with 1,000 square feet of commercial space on the
ground level, with a two-bedroom apartment above. Parking for this structure is within an uncovered
parking lot immediately to the south of the building, near the corner of Victoria and Lawrence Drive.
The remainder of the site to the north of the building will be developed as a small park area, for public
use. Because the entirety of the site is designated Medium-High Density Residential (R-3) the mixed-
use structure could not be constructed until such time that the property west of Victoria Avenue was
redesignated to a commercial designation or adoption of the South Broad Street Corridor Plan..
The townhome buildings have been arranged around a central open space area running
perpendicularly from Victoria Street (which will be built-out as part of the project) and adjacent to a
central parking area further to the east. The buildings themselves are oriented in groups of two, with
vehicle access to the attached garages from parking courts between the structures. Pedestrian access
to the individual residential units would be from the remaining three sides of the building, some from
39
GPA/R/PDnWABAN/A 27-vo and ER 123-08 (HASLO) Attachment 3
851 &860 Humbert.Avenue, and Unaddressed Vacant Lot(004-951-009)
Page 3
walkways between buildings, some from the common area, and others directly from the adjacent
streets. Once developed, the project would be subdivided to allow for individual real-property
ownership of the individual townhome units. Common facilities including the parking open
landscaped areas would be on a separate lot owned and maintained by the Homeowners Association. '
HASLO would retain ownership and management of the property to the west of Victoria Avenue.
The property slopes upward to the south and east, rising significantly above the adjacent rights-of-
way. To facilitate completion of Lawrence Drive and Victoria Avenue, as well as site access .for
vehicle parking, the elevation of the site will be brought down significantly. There will be
approximately 35,000-cubic yards of cut, 10,000-cubic yards of which will be used on site to fill
some existing depressions; a net of 25,000-cubic yards that will be removed from the site. Vegetation
on the site is limited to a small willow tree in the center of the site and a large Acacia tree in the open
space area at the north end. The City Arborist has determined that the loss of the willow will be
adequately mitigated with the proposed landscape palate, but has provided conditions to ensure the
protection of the Acacia during construction. Landscaping includes turf areas with native and other
draught tolerant grasses, shrubs and groundcovers, and a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees to
balance sun exposure and shading with year-round color. The parking courts and trash enclosures all
have planting areas for climbing vines to screen and soften the aesthetics of these features.
EVALUATION
Entitlements Requested
Project plans include 80 affordable and workforce townhouse units, one mixed commercial/residential
building with 1,000 square feet of commercial space and one residential apartment unit, completion of
Humbert Avenue, Lawrence Drive, and Victoria rights-of-way, and associated on and off-site
improvements.Requested entitlements include:
• General Plan Amendment and Rezone to change the Land Use Designation of the
unaddressed vacant parcel between HASLO's property and the railroad from Services &
Manufacturing (M) to. Medium-High Density Residential with the Special Considerations
overlay(R-3-S)
• Planned Development Rezone to allow 0-lot line development in conjunction with real
property subdivision, an exception to height standards to allow Building 1 to exceed height
maximums by 1-foot 5.5 inches (total building height of 36-feet 5.5 inches from existing
grade), street yard setbacks from 15-feet to 10 feet in select locations, tandem parking and
parking reduction of seven spaces (additional bicycle parking and trip reduction plan are
proposed). The project also utilizes a 23% density bonus for providing over 20% low and
very-low income housing. Project amenities proposed to meet Planned Development
standards include provision of 26% of the units as affordable to low and very-low income
households and achieving 30% greater energy efficiency than required by California Title 24
• Vesting Tentative Tract Map for real property subdivision of the townhome units, mixed-
use structure, and common lot
• Use Permit for development of a sensitive site (consistency with ALUP safety policies and
"consistency requirements" and City noise standards)
• Abandonment of portions of Frederick Street and Humbert Avenue which was previously
approved by the Council is being re-processed, as the conditional approval granted in 2006
has since expired
02— /"
GPA/R/PDfMABAN/A 27-vo and ER 123-08 (HASLO) Attachment3 '
851 &860 Humbert Avenue, and Unaddressed Vacant Lot(004951-009)
Page 4
• General Plan Conformity Finding on request to purchase a portion of the 70-foot wide strip
of City-owned property just west of the railroad right-of-way
• Environmental Review
The following discussion provides an evaluation of consistency with City policies and standards, the
requested entitlements, including: 1) General Plan policies and development standards, 2) the draft
South Broad Street Corridor Plan, 3) Abandonment of rights-of-way, 4) Disposition of surplus
property, 5) General Plan Amendment and Rezoning of that parcel, and development of a Sensitive
Site, 6)Planned Development Zoning, and 7)Environmental Review.
1)General Plan Consistency
The site is, or is proposed to be designated as "Medium-High Density Residential' on the General
Plan Land Use Element(LUE)map and zoned R-3-S.The General Plan anticipates attached dwellings
in two or three-story buildings with common outdoor areas and very compact private outdoor spaces.
Consistent with General Plan policies the project proposes a compact development with.a variety of
floor plans and common amenities. Based on staffs detailed review, the development proposal can be
found consistent with numerous General Plan policies. Relevant policies are listed below in bold
print with staff s analysis following in italics.
General Plan LUE Policy 2.4.7 Medium-High Density Residential. Medium-High Density
Residential development should be primarily attached dwellings in two- or three-story
buildings, with common outdoor areas and very compact private outdoor spaces. Other uses
which are supportive of and compatible with these dwellings, such as group housing, parks,
schools, and churches, may be permitted. Such development is appropriate near employment
centers and major public facilities.
Staffs Analysis. The project includes 80 attached townhouse units, grouped in 12 six-unit buildings
and two four-unit buildings. These 14 buildings are primarily two-stories, with third story elements.
Each of the units has a small, private patio and access to the lineal parkway and other landscaped
areas on the site. The site is close to existing retail and commercial uses, and is at the center of the
South Broad Street Corridor, which is envisioned as a new neighborhood mixed-use area. The
project will provide the,first redevelopment in the area consistent with the vision expressed in the
draft Broad Street Corridor Plan, and provide housing consistent with this General Plan policy.
General Plan HE Policy 3.4.2 Include both market-rate and affordable units in apartment and
residential condominium projects and intermix the types of units. Affordable units should be
comparable in appearance and basic quality to market-rate units.
Staff"s Analysis. This project is being developed to provide home ownership and rental opportunities
at below market-rate. Although a real property subdivision rather than condominium project, the
project is similarly designed with attached units and common open space and amenities. The 80
ownership units will be sold at a range of prices, including 21 units considered affordable by City
standards. The remaining 60 units will be sold as "workforce housing" a category not currently
recognized by the City, but priced according to County definitions. The one apartment unit will also
be rented at below market rate. Because the project is limited to 86 'front doors" on the site by
Airport Land Use policies related to density, the project includes a high number of three-bedroom
units. The proposed unit mix maximizes the density on the site, while remaining in compliance with
Airport standards. The unit mix is as follows:
Attachment 3
GPA/R/PDfMABAN/A 27-,,., and ER 123-08 (HASLO)
851 & 860 Humbert Avenue, and Unaddressed Vacant Lot(004-951-009)
Page 5
Very Low
50% or less of County median household income 2 0 0
Low
51%-80% of County median household income 8 4 2
Moderate Income1 2 ownership 2
81%-120% of County median household income 1 rental
Workforce 1 8 50
121%-160% of County median household income
The various units have been distributed throughout the buildings and will be indistinguishable from
one another in terms of quality and design. Therefore, the proposed project can be found consistent
with this policy, as it will provide a range of affordability and unit types.
General Plan HE Policy 3.12.7 Consider amendments to the General Plan to rezone
commercial, manufacturing or public facility zoned areas for residential use, to promote
higher-density, infill or mixed-use housing where land development patterns are no longer
valid and where impact to Low Density Residential areas is minimal. .
Staff's Analysis: The Little Italy district and portions of Broad Street corridor are identified as being
appropriate for redesignation from-Service- Commercial to higher residential designation. This
project includes compact residential development in an area previously designated for
manufacturing uses, consistent with this General Plan policy..
General Plan CE Transportation Goal 2 Reduce people's use of their cars by supporting and
promoting alternatives such as walking,riding buses and bicycles,and using car pools.
Staff`''s Analysis: This site represents an infill housing opportunity close to services and transit
facilities, and a future bicycle and pedestrian bridge which would connect the neighborhood west of
the railroad tracks to the Railroad Safety Bike Path. As part of this project review staff analyzed
potential alignments of the future bridge, and given existing topography and right-of-way determined
that the most feasible connection would be from the end of Francis Street connecting to Little Terrace
Hill. The proposed development reserves City-ownership of necessary property and right-of-way for
that connection. Additionally, HASLO has proposed to provide additional on-site bicycle parking and
to develop a trip reduction plan to encourage residents to utilize alternative forms of transportation
to reduce on-site parking needs and vehicle trips.
General Plan COSE Policy 4.5.1 Solar access standards To encourage use of solar energy,
reasonable solar access shall be provided and protected.
General Plan COSE Policy 4.6.17 Require solar power for new dwellings Within new single-
family residential projects of 20 or more dwelling units, 5% of the total number of dwellings
shall be built with photovoltaic solar collectors...Multi-family residential developments shall be
exempt from this requirement, except for common-use facilities such as recreation rooms, spas
or swimming pools. �_ t 0%,
L
GPA/R/PD[MABANIA 27-Lfo and ER 123-08 (HASLO) — t 1 9 ply
851 &860 Humbert Avenue, and Unaddressed Vacant Lot(004-951-009) Attachment 3
Page 6
StmTs Analysis: As one of the project goals is to provide energy efficient units, HASLO provided a
solar study identifying shading on the winter solstice. This exhibit demonstrates that even on the
darkest day.of the year, shading of both on-site and adjacent structures will be minimal(Attachment
3, Solar Study). Additionally, HASLO has proposed to utilize solar power for the mixed-use building
and site lighting in the parking and common areas as this will reduce ongoing HOA costs and fees for
all residents in the development.
2)Draft South Broad Street Corridor Plan
The project is one of the first major redevelopments within the Draft Broad Street Corridor Planning
Area, which is currently being refined prior to review by the Planning Commission and City Council.
This is also the largest developable site in the planning area. Although the guidance and standards
included within this plan have not yet been adopted, the,project was designed to be consistent with the
vision and future improvements for the area. The plan emphasizes mixed-use and multi-family
developments, and provides policies to support a pedestrian friendly, eclectic commercial area.
Although the Housing Authority's primary goal is to provide affordable housing options, they have
designed the project to reflect the goals in the draft plan, such as individual street-facing entrances,
use of parking courts accessed from Humbert Avenue and Lawrence Drive, commercial/residential
mixed-use and public open space along Victoria, and simple building designs reflective of the
industrial character of the area.
3)Abandonments
In 2006 the City Council made a Resolution of Intention to Abandon portions of Frederick Street and
Humbert Avenue rights-of-way, conditioned upon HASLO's securing all of the project discretionary
entitlements necessary for their affordable housing project. Because that conditional abandonment has
since expired the City must again make findings in support of the abandonment.
In order to abandon the rights-of-way, the California Streets and Highways Code require the Planning
Commission to determine whetherthe abandonment is consistent with the City's General Plan. This
means that a determination needs to be made on whether the rights-of-way will be needed for present
or future public purposes. In additional, continued access to any City or public utility services and
improvements needs to be properly preserved. As discussed by the Planning Commission and City
Council in 2006, the General Plan Circulation Element designates Fredrick Street and Humbert
Avenue as local streets. The abandonment of these portions of Fredrick and Humbert does not conflict
with future circulation or infrastructure needs since the excess rights-of-way are unimproved
segments of road which are not necessary to serve any.properties and do not contain any public or
private utilities. All of the adjacent properties will retain access to public rights-of-way as shown on
project plans. Since all of the adjacent parcels.would maintain adequate access from improved streets,
abandonment of these segments of road would not conflict with any General Plan circulation goals.
Unless the rights-of-way are owned in fee by the City, the underlying property reverts back to the
adjacent property owners when abandoned. According to the Lot Book Guarantee documents the
rights-of-way are not owned by the City and would be reverted back to adjacent property owners if
abandoned.
-Lf3
GPA/R/PDfMABAN/A 27-,,., and ER 123-08 (HASLO) Attachment
3
851 & 860 Humbert Avenue, and Unaddressed Vacant Lot(004-951-009)
Page 7
4) Surplus Prooerty
When the City Council determines that unutilized City-owned property will not reasonably be
needed to meet long-range goals and is therefore surplus, they can authorize the sale of that
property. Sale of surplus property allows for its use in furthering City goals such as maintaining
a compact urban form, facilitating economic development and providing a variety of housing
types. The HASLO project includes a request that a portion of the 46,174 square foot(1.06 acre)
parcel located between HASLO property and the railroad right-of-way be declared as surplus
property. Use of 21,515 square feet (0.49 acres) of this property would be used primarily to
satisfy required building setbacks and to allow, for the entire slope face to be on HASLO
property, alleviating the City of future maintenance obligations. Use of this area would off-set the
significant amount of the site that is lost to the completion of rights-of-way on Lawrence,
Humbert, and Victoria, and the limited usability of the 40-foot wide strip of property west of the
Victoria Avenue connection.
The portion of the City-owned property requested by HASLO is a small, landlocked area that
includes an unutilized slope bank, and sewer and high-pressure gas lines. HASLO has requested
to take ownership of the western portion of the lot, providing an easement over the utilities lines.
The area at the toe of the slope and the northern portion of the site which will be needed for the
future bike path and bikelpedestrian bridge ramps will be maintained by the City. These property
line adjustments and easements are shown on the Vesting Tentative Map.
5) General Plan Amendment and Rezoning and Development of a Sensitive Site
For HASLO to utilize portions of the City-owned parcel as part of the development site it would need
to be redesignated to the same General Plan Land Use Designation and.Zoning as the remainder of the
site. The property is currently designated Services & Manufacturing and zoned Manufacturing (M),
and would be redesignated as Medium-High Density Residential with the Special Considerations
overlay (R-3-S). Special considerations would be consistent as those of the remainder of the site,
which are intended to ensure that development is consistent with Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP)
safety policies and City noise standards. The General Plan Amendment was reviewed by the Airport
Land Use Commission(ALUC) on September 17, 2008 and found consistent with applicable policies.
The Special Considerations "S" overlay was applied to this site to ensure that development is
consistent with ALUP safety policies and "consistency requirements," and with City noise standards
which require attenuation of noise levels above 45 dB for indoor spaces and 60 dB for outdoor
activity areas.
Airport policies require that all owners an occupants receive full disclosure concerning noise, safety
or overflight impacts associated with airport operations prior to entering into contractual obligation to
occupy structures within the airport area, and that aviation easements be recorded for all properties;
these requirements have been included in the recommended conditions of approval.. Airport policies
also restrict the density on the site, which is a combination of the number of residential units and
commercial occupancies. As measured by the ALUP this site would accommodate 86 residential
units, less density associated with the commercial development. Because of the relatively small
amount of commercial space proposed the residential density would not be reduced. Therefore the
project is consistent with ALUP policies and requirements.
a -LIV
GPA/R/PDfMABAN/A 27-uv and ER 123-08 (HASLO) Attachment 3
851 & 860 Humbert Avenue, and Unaddressed Vacant Lot(004-951-009)
Page 8
According to the Noise Contour Map in the General Plan Noise Element, the project site is located
within an area susceptible to 60-65 decibels (dB) L.dn due to railroad noise. Maximum noise
exposure for residential uses is 45 dB for indoor spaces and 60 dB for outdoor activity areas. In their
earlier review of the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning of the site, the City Council recognized
that development of the site with a residential project could expose people to unacceptable noise
levels; if not properly mitigated. At that time they required that the development proposal be
accompanied by an acoustical analysis (noise study) to ensure that interior spaces and exterior private
use areas are designed to acceptable noise levels. The applicant has provided a noise study evaluating
the impacts from railroad noise on the proposed residences. The study concludes that sound levels at
this location are lower than to the north or south due to the existing berm on the east side of the
project, as well as the absence of an at-grade crossing, and that the residences have been sited to be
outside of the area subject to noise inundation area. Therefore, the noise level at the site will be in
compliance with City standards without additional mitigation.
6)Planned Development Rezone
The PD overlay zone is intended to provide for flexibility in the application of zoning standards to
proposed development. The purpose is to allow consideration of innovation in site planning and other
aspects of project design, and more effective design responses to site features, land uses on adjoining
properties, and environmental impacts than the development standards of the underlying zone would
produce without adjustment. The City expects each planned development project to be of significantly
higher design quality, including more effective and attractive pedestrian orientation, environmental
sensitivity, energy efficiency, and more efficient use of resources, than would be achieved through
conventional design practices and standards.
The applicant has requested a PD rezone for the project primarily to allow 0-lot line development,
exceptions to minimum parcel size and coverage in conjunction with real property subdivision.
Typically, attached ownership units would be part of a one-lot condominium subdivision. As proposed,
each of the townhome units would be on an individual ownership lot ranging in size from 636 to 2,055
square feet, with nearly. 100% coverage. Common areas would be on a separate parcel, owned and
maintained by the Home Owners Association. The mixed-use building would be on a separate lot, and
would be owned and operated by HASLO. Despite the high individual site coverage, overall coverage is
33%, well below the 60% allowed in the R-3 zone. This ownership scheme is preferable to the Housing
Authority due to their funding sources and loans which will be available to qualified home buyers.
Other diversions from zoning standards include variable street yard setbacks down to approximately 10-
feet in certain locations, where a 15-foot setback is required, an exception to height standards to allow
Building 1 to exceed height maximums by 1-foot 5.5 inches (total building height of 36-feet 5.5
inches from existing grade), and tandem parking and a.reduction of seven spaces (additional bicycle
parking and free bus passes for residents is proposed). During the conceptual.review of the project the
ARC discussed the requested setback and height exceptions, and found them to be appropriate for the
site and acceptable deviations from standard requirements..
Parking for the project is provided in attached one- and two-car garages, some of which include
tandem spaces, and in surface parking accessed via Humbert Avenue. A second smaller parking area
located near the comer of Lawrence Drive and Victoria Avenue serves the commercial structure and
residential apartment. In total, 185 vehicle stalls, 10 motorcycle stalls and 35 short-term bicycle stalls
are proposed. Additionally, each unit will have secure covered parking for two bicycles. This is seven
stalls less than required by code. ^,/s
GPA/R/PDrMABAN/A 27-w and ER 123-08 (HASLO) Attachment 3
851 &860 Humbert Avenue, and Unaddressed Vacant Lot(004-951-009)
Page 9
To minimize potential parking problems, HASLO has proposed to.install additional bicycle parking
and implement a trip reduction to encourage residents to utilize alternative forms of transportation to
reduce parking needs. Such parking reductions are allowed by Section 17.16.060 D and F of the
Zoning Regulations, to facilitate the development of projects which encourage the use of alternative
modes of transportation where appropriate. Given the proximity of the site to transit and the planned
Railroad Safety Trail extension on the west side of the railroad tracks, staff sees this as reasonable
request and appropriate for an affordable housing project that will require owner-occupancy. Because
of HASLO occupancy terms these units will be occupied by individual income-qualifying
households, which typically have fewer vehicles per household than would be found incomparable
non-restricted units. It is also important to note that while off-site parking can not be credited to a
development, the street improvements that will be made by HASLO with this development will add
approximately 25 on-street parking stalls to the area.
In order to approve a PD rezone, the project must incorporate a minimum of two of four mandatory .
project features and the review authority must make all eight required findings.
Mandatory Project Features: The project proposes to fulfill its mandatory feature requirements by: 1)
providing 26% of the residential units as affordable to households of very low, low or moderate
income as described in greater detail above; and 2) Achieving a minimum of 30% greater energy
efficiency than the minimum required by California Code of Regulations Title 24. This will be
accomplished through the use of green building techniques, the incorporation of solar panels on
several of the structures, and thoughtful site planning to allow for natural light and heating.
Required Findings: In addition to meeting its mandatory feature requirements, the review authority
may approve a rezoning to apply the PD overlay zoning district only after first making all eight of the
required findings. The findings pertain to the project's consistency with the General Plan, applicable
specific plans, primary zoning district, and Design Guidelines, as well as appropriateness of the
project design and adequacy of proposed features and facilities. As discussed earlier in this report, the
project has been.redesigned consistently with applicable General Plan-policies and the proposed
configuration and quality of improvements is suited to the characteristics of the site and surrounding
neighborhood. Staff.believes that all of these findings can now be made, and has recommended
language included in the draft Resolution (Attachment 9).
7)Environmental Review
On February 4, 2009, the Community Development Director recommended a Mitigated Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impact (Attachment 4). The Initial Study identifies potentially
significant impacts associated with air quality, hazardous &hazardous materials, land use&planning,
and noise, and provides recommendations for mitigation measures that if incorporated into the project
would reduce the potential impacts to below the threshold of significance. While many of these
mitigation measures would effect the development phase of the project, such.as including provisions
for ensuring that air quality protection and proper treatment of any hazardous material uncovered
during grading activities, other measures will effect the ongoing operations of the project. These
include requiring the development and implementation of a trip reduction plan and various provision
of various disclosures to occupants regarding airport operations and nearby noise sources. With the
incorporation of the recommended mitigation measures the potential impacts to the environment will
be reduced below a level of significance. ! `/
��
GPA/R/PD[MABAN/A 27-W and ER 123-08 (HASLO) Attachment 3
851 & 860 Humbert Avenue, and Unaddressed Vacant Lot(004-951-009)
Page 10
Conclusion
Considerable effort has been made by the applicant to design a project that is consistent with the
General Plan, applicable property development standards, and the vision for the area as established in
the draft South Broad Street Corridor Plan. The type and density of development has been planned to
suit the site and character of the area, while remaining focused on providing quality affordable
housing. With the incorporation of conditions of approval and mitigation measures included in the
Mitigated Negative Declaration, the design of the proposed project would provide quality housing in
an area identified in the General Plan for in-fill residential development. For these reasons, staff
recommends the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt
the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts, and project entitlements.
ALTERNATIVES
1. The Commission may provide direction to the applicant and staff on modifications that should
be made to the project design for better consistency with General Plan policies and property
development standards.
2. The Commission may recommend that the City Council deny the General Plan Amendment
and Rezoning of a portion of the site, Planned Development Zoning, Vesting Tentative Tract
Map, Abandonment of rights-of-way, and purchase of surplus property, based on findings of
inconsistency with the General Plan.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity map
2. Reduced copy of project plans
3. Solar Study
4. Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact,recommended on February 4, 2009
5. Council Ordinance 1496 (2006 Series) amending the Zoning Map from(M)Manufacturing to
R-3-S (Medium-High Density Residential with Special Considerations Overlay for the
Humbert Street property
6. Council Resolution 9834 (2006 Series) approving the MND and amending the LUE map
from Services and Manufacturing to Medium-High Density Residential for the Humbert
Street property
7. Council Resolution 9835 (2007 Series) of intention to abandon portions of Humbert Avenue
and Frederick Street
8. January 21, 2009 ARC Meeting Follow-Up
9. Draft Planning Commission Resolution
Enclosed: Full-size project plans
GACD-PL1NVHiIlUWL0IPC report 27-06(HASIA)Ax
a-q7
' Attachrfient 4
fl�I�lllll��� VIII -� ,
Illi IofSM1UiS0B1SWc�a �
Community Development Department•919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218
January 26, 2009
Housing Authority of SLO
487 Leff Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
SUBJECT: ARC 2T-06: 851 & 860 Humbert
Review of an 80-unit residential condominium project, with one
mixed-use building containing one apartment and 1,000 square feet
of commercial space, with 15 buildings and associated right-of-way
and site improvements
Gentlemen:
The Architectural Review Commission, at its meeting of January 21, 2009, continued
consideration of the project to a date uncertain with the following direction:
1. To address the concern with the scale of the buildings facing Lawrence Drive,
consider the following options:
a. Look at recessing the third level of buildings facing the street.
b. Locate the taller buildings to less sensitive parts of the site such as along the
eastern boundary of the property near the railroad tracks.
c. Move taller portions of buildings toward the back of buildings, rather than at
the street facades.
2. Look at ways to give the proposed architecture a more residential feel such as
adding wood or wood-appearing elements, softer material selections for certain
building details, and a color palette that provides a smoother transition from
surrounding developments.
3. Provide details of proposed improvements to the community open space area
including the possibility of allocating some space for a community garden.
4. Incorporate trees with edible fruits into the landscaping plan.
a-
�� The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled In all of its services,programs and activities.
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410.
�'� Attachment 4
• ARC 27-06 (851 &860 Humblen —
Page 2
5. If a third trash enclosure is required in the development, then it should be placed in
a less obtrusive location than the street yard along Victoria.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 781-7168.
rSincerely,
l J�
/CU
Pam Ricci, AIC
Senior Planner
cc: County of SLO Assessor's Office
Jason Blankenship
191 S. Oak Park Blvd., #10
Grover Beach, CA 93433
o2 - y�
-Attachment 5
INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORINT
For ER 123-08
1. Project Title: General Plan Amendment and Rezone, including Planned Development Zoning,
Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Abandonments, Use Pemut, and Residential Development
including 81 workforce housing units, 1,000 square feet of commercial area, and associated
improvements; GP/R/ 123-08 and A/ARC/TR/PD/ABAN 27-06.
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo,CA 93401
3. Contact Person and Phone Number. Jaime Hill,Associate Planner(805)250-7973 ext 19202
4. Project Location: 851 and 860 Humbert,and APN 004-951-009(unaddressed vacant lot)
Portions of Frederick Street and Humbert Avenue,east of Broad Street
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo County
487 Leff Street
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
6. General Plan Designation: 851 and 860 Humbert:Medium-High Density Residential
Unaddressed vacant lot: Services&Manufacturing
7. Zoning: 851 and 860 Humbert:Medium-High Density Residential with Special
Considerations Overlay(R-3-S)
Unaddressed vacant lot: Manufacturing(M)
1. Description of the Project:
The applicant has proposed a General Plan Amendment and Rezone to change the Land Use
Designation of the unaddressed vacant parcel from Services & Manufacturing (M)to Medium-
High Density Residential with the Special Considerations overlay (R 3-S). Additionally,
requests applying to the entire development site include a Planned Development Rezone,
Vesting Tentative Tract Map, and Use Permit for development of a site considered sensitive
due to railroad noise, surrounding land uses, and the airport safety area. The project is a
workforce housing development consisting of 14 residential buildings containing a total of 80
single family attached units (54 three-bedroom units, 14 two-bedroom units, and 12 one-
bedroom units), and one mixed use building including a two-bedroom rental apartment and
1,000 square feet of commercial space. Twelve of the buildings include six attached units, and
two buildings include four attached units each. The buildings are mostly two-story, with a few
Attachment 5
three-story units and design elements. All units include either one- or two-car garages. The
central parking lot provides the additional required parking for individual units and guest
parking. The Council had previously reviewed and made a resolution of their intention to
abandon portions of Frederick Street and Humbert Avenue (ABAN/ER 27-06), but that
conditional approval has since expired.
The proposed mixed use structure west of the Victoria Avenue could not be constructed until
the adoption of the Broad Street Corridor Plan and associated land use designations,or until the
site is redesignated from Medium-High Density Residential with the Special Considerations
overlay(R-3-S)to Retail Commercial(C-R),or other commercial designation.
Elements of the Planned Development that would otherwise require exception to City standards
include: 0-lot line development in conjunction with real property subdivision, an exception to
height standards to allow Building 1 to exceed height maximums by 1-foot 5.5 inches (total
building height of 36-feet 5.5 inches from existing grade), parking reduction of seven spaces
(additional bicycle parking and trip reduction plan for residents is proposed), and varying street
yard setbacks from 10 to 15-feet, where 15-feet are required. The project also utilizes a 23%
density bonus for providing 200/a low and very-low income housing.Project amenities proposed
to meet Planned Development standards include provision of 26% of the units as affordable to
low and very-low income households and achieving 301/o greater energy efficiency than
required by California Title 24.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings: The subject properties are vacant lots separated by
undeveloped portions of Frederick Street and Humbert Avenue. In 2007 the City Council passed
a resolution (Resolution No. 9835, 2007 Series) stating their intention to abandon portions of
these streets, subject to approval of other entitlements necessary for the project to move forward.
The three irregularly shaped parcels encompass a total of approximately 5.05 acres. The
properties to the north and west are designated for Manufacturing (M) uses, and are developed
with a mixture of commercial business and older single-family residences. Properties to the south
are designated Medium-High Density Residential with the Planned Development overlay (R-3-
PD) and are developed with a mixture of townhomes and condominiums. Immediately to the east
of the site is the Union Pacific Railroad_ Other surrounding uses include the railroad bike path,
the Broad Street Corridor, and various manufacturing, service-commercial and residential uses.
10. Project Entitlements Requested:
The applicant is requesting a General Plan (band Use Map) amendment and rezone, Planned
Development Zoning, Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Use Permit, and Architectural Review of an
81 unit housing development with 1,000 square feet of commercial space.
11. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
The site is within Airport Safety Area S-2, which mandates that General Plan and Zone
reclassification requests be brought before the Airport Land Use Committee for a determination
of compliance with the Airport Land Use Plan. On September 17, 2008 the ALUC reviewed the
project and request to redesignate the parcel adjacent to the railroad to R-3-S and found the
proposed residential land use designation consistent with Airport Land Use Plan safety policies.
Crnr of Saw Luis OeEpo 2 IwnuL STuav EmmomawraL CHEcKusT 2009
—57
Attachment 5
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,involving at least
one impact that is a"Potentially Significant Impact'as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Geology/Soils Public Services
Agricultural Resources X Hazards&Hazandous Recreation
Materials
X Air Quality Hydrology/water Quality Transportation&Traffic
Biological Resources X Land Use and Planning Utilities and Service
Systems
Cultural Resources X Noise Mandatory Findings of
S'
Energy and Mineral Population and Housing
p�,,�
+.� }<P` �i:,fit'G,F. >f r �•r.;71 .ely..
Resources 2 'x. YTS . yYs �Y'•uSr ::�31
I
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 minimi s 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)).
Curr of SAN Luis OwsPo 3 INmu STUDY ENvmmommENTAL CNEcttusT 2009
Attachment 5
DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,and
a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been
made, or the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet(s) have been added and X
agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IlVIPACT 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.
S.
2-
Date
Doug Davidson,Deputy Director of Community Development For:John Mandeville,
Printed Name Community Development Director
CITY OF SAN Luis Oempo 4 INmAL STunY EwutoNmENTAL CNEcwusT 2009
�-53
Attachment 5
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IWACTS:
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except"No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the
information sources a lead agency cites in the analysis in each section. A "No Impact" answer is adequately
supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one
involved(e.g.the project falls outside a fault rapture 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. 11he 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 bas 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 subsmntiated.
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
Curr of SAN Luis Owspo 5 IwnAL Snuov ErrvurommmTAL CHEcKuscr�2009
Attachment 5
issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources SMM POWUtially POftliBUY LM ThM No
s4a6cad S*RMCW sipfficm h*Wt
ER#123-08 LUM
Nfifissfian
hwmvmgftd
1.AESTHETICS. Would the ProJect:
a3 s+h ? 1,2,
10
1,9, X
10
Sdub d-
1, 10, X
26
d) Crea#e i4w* 23,26 X
Evaluation
a), b)The subject properties are currently surrounded by urban uses and are not within a location that is considered a scenic
vista,nor are Frederick Street or Humbert Avenues designated as roads of scenic value within the General Plan Circulation
Element There are no features on the site that contribute to scenic resources in the area
c� d) The General Plan Amendment/rezoning (GPA/R) will allow for redevelopment of the additional property adjacent to
the Railroad ngbt-of-way with residential uses. The current Mainifitcturing zoning designation on this parcel a would
currently allow for mixed-use projects with residential densities of 24-units per acre,with approval of a Planning Commission
Use Permit,with up to 75%lot coverage, a floor area ration of 1.5,and buildings up to 35-feet in height The proposed R-3
zoning would allow for up to IS dwelling units per net acre,with 60%lot coverage and building height up to 35-feet The
land use designation change would result in reduced lot coverage and development of residential rather than commercial
structures.
The proposed development has been designed to respond to the sites topography and context, and consistency with City
standards pertaining to multi-family housing and the draft Broad Street Corridor plan. Site plans, architecture, and building
details are routinely reviewed by the City's Architectural Review Commission (ARC), who retain the authority to require
modifications to the project to address any impacts to views and other potential aesthetic issues like light/glare to a less than
significant level. In addition to review by the ARC,both the Pbmmg Commission and City Council will be required to make
findings about the appropriateness of the requested Planned Development standards and overall project design.The ARC has
reviewed the conceptual site plan and architecture and has provided specific direction to the applicant on minor modifications
to the unit layout to improve neighborhood compatibility and reduce potential impacts to adjacent properties.They found that
the proposed height exception for Building I would not be an m4xict as it is located away from sensitive receptors,and that
the variable setbacks would create some interest and relief along the project fivratage.
Conclusion
The project has been designed consistently with the goals and guidelines specified in relevant City documents,and with the
incorporation of project conditions applied by the Architectural Review Commission and City Council the project will not
impact area aesthetics.
2.AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would the project:-
ij Convert Prime Fariolandlinique Farmland,a Farmland of 11, 12 X
Stattvdde Importmice(Farmland),As shqVom: the'
pit ,maps
ithi land. . �4 1
pmuimt to. Form MM*g and Monitoring of
to
the CilffortiJaResdurm-Agii -tiofi�-iig�cul 0001 UiO
b). C61"ct with.eing zilhtaj for,49r
Mdur 9 X
W1116tison Act
c) lavoltrb'oiltet changes in the-existM&"*bii�tk 4noo -
9
dick location or natuiv,,could restilt.in conversion of FaM
Evaluation
CRY OF SAN Luis 0eispo 6 IwTiAL STUDY ENviRoNmENTAL CHEcKusT 2009
Attachment 5
uateag Impact
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources sources Potmtiany Potentially Lrss Thur xo
Sigaifleaat s4fficant sigo;scant tmpacx
Iffiftedon
kworporated
ER#123-08 issues
a),b),c)The site is currently undeveloped despite being surrounded by urban uses and public streets.The Farmland Mapping
and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency designates these properties as Urban Land. There is not a
Williamson Act contract in effect on the project site. No impacts ro existing on-site or off-site agricultural resources are
anticipated with fimae development of the prc jecL
Conclusion
The proiect does not have the potential to impact agricultural resources.
3. AIR OUALITY. Would�theproject:
a)'. :tl'ied11te atty sif`,�gbafstj+�,aadar�tl�COtrt;��e+-siili'stis�ally-to 13,14 X
b j "G4attcE' vStlt or obit�i��> Ietne6[da.le alit a�n t , 13,14 X
o)
14086. M,=VetRmglpont 8, X
1314
F >l.
ri� �C��r{e�afe'yrobJ0ctxaUaTe�dt?fsaAgrnmtie r' 13,14 X
e) RBsttl-111 rfiaElV y, 59der tXeidg£ 2s� h irlt�r3a 13,14 X
potlu�nt,�'Or'�bictt�e�+��c�te�ba.�s - e1rt ';� ;
app>tfedetlrs«ata btehtgatttsT
= §Wd
o +edlrive
_ f y
Evaluation
a),b),c),e)San Luis Obispo County is a non-attainment area for the State PMIa(fine particulate matter 10 microns or less in
diameter)air quality standard. State law requires that emissions of non-attaroment pollutants and their precursors be reduced
by at least 5%per year until the standards are attained. The 2001 Clean Air Plan(CAP) for San Luis Obispo County was
developed and adopted by the Air Pollution Control District(APCD)to meet that requirement.The CAP is a comprehensive
planning document designed to reduce emissions from traditional industrial and commercial sources,as well as from motor
vehicle use. Land Use Element Policy 1.182 states that the City will help the APCD implement the Clean Air Plan.
Temporary impacts from the development of the sites, including but not limited to excavation and construction activities,
vehicle emissions from heavy duty equipment and naturally occurring asbestos,has the potential to create dust and emissions
that exceed air quality standards for temporary and intermediate periods. The area of disturbance includes 5.23 acres, with
approximately 35,000 cubic yards of earth excavated to a maximun depth of Ili-feet, 10,000 cubic yards of which will be
reused on site as fill material. The remaining 25,000 cubic yards will be transported off site. The Air Pollution Control
District (APCD) reviewed preliminary project plans and found that the project was consistent with the Smart Growth
Principles adopted by the SLO County Board of Supervisors and may of the land use planning goals in the Clean Air Plan.
The APCD offered several requirements for both the construction and operational phases of the project to ensure that there
would be no impacts to sensitive receptors in the area,or future project residents. These measures have been included in the
recommended mitigation measures, below. With compliance with APCD standards and the City's Grading Ordinance,
potential impacts will be satisfactorily mitigated.
d)The project is a General Plan(Land Use Map)amendment and rezone,and right-of-way abandonment,and development of
81 residential units,a small commercial space,and associated improvements,which will not create objectionable odors under
normal circumstances.
Mitigation Measure:Air Qual�yii
1) Should hydrocarbon contaminated soil be encountered during construction activities,the APCD must be notified as soon
as possible and no later than 48 hours atter affected material is discovered to determine if an APCD Permit will be
required. In addition, standard APCD required procedures shall be implemented immediately atter contaminated soil is
Crnr of Saw Luis Ompo 7 lurnAL STuoy ENVIRONMENTAL CHEcKusT 2009
P—Z
Attachment 5
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources smaces PowafiOy PoNndany I Less Than No
Sigc&AW sipfflo d sipiseant rmpmd
ER#123-08 IMMunkss finpw
Mitigation
discovered.
2) Prior to any grading activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that a geologic evaluation is conducted to
determine if Naturally Occu ring Asbestos(NOA)is present withm the area that will be disturbed.If NOA is not present,
an exemption request must be Sled with the DistncL If NOA is found at the site the applicant must comply with all
requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM.
3) If utility pipelines are scheduled for removal or relocation the project may be subject to various regulatory jurisdictions,
including the requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants. These
requirements include,but are not limited to 1)notification requirements to the APCD,2)asbestos survey conducted by a
Certified Asbestos Inspector,and,3)applicable removal and disposal requirements of identified ACM.
4) This project exceeds the 4.0 acres of grading threshold and is near potentially sensitive receptors,and shall comply with
all applicable Air Pollution Control District regulations pertaining to the control of fugitive dust(PM 10)as contained in
section 6.5 of the Air Quality Handbook. The following APCD standards for dust cool shall be adhered to:
a.Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible,
b. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site.
Increased watering frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable)
water should be used whenever passible'
c. All dirt stockpile areas should be sprayed daily as needed,
d. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans should be
implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities,
e. Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month atter initial grading should be
sown with a fast germinating native grass seed and watered until vegetation is established,
£ All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders,jute
netting,or other methods approved in advance by the APCD.
g. All roadways,driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible.In addition,building
pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used,
h.Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site,
L 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,
j. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment
leaving the site,and,
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.
5) Prior to recordation of the Snap map, a screening level health risk assessment shall be performed to determine potential
health risks to residents of the development.Depending on the results of the screening level health risk assessment a more
comprehensive analysis may be required.
Conclusion
The project does not have the potential to create or otherwise impact long term air quality. Mitigation measures have been
recommended which would be applied to insure compliance with APCD standards related to ground disturbing activities.No .
further mitigation is necessary. With compliance with APCD mitigation measures and City standards related to grading, the
project does not have the potential to' air
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would theproject:
4 Have a substintial adverse effect,either dttc*Jou mdiiectiyv or 5,9 X
through Habitat modificakibs,ft4my Vecres lded d;irs=a,
candidate,sensitive,or s teci l status sp'ataes ul i ox iegtonal
plattg,�blicres,dr:r�guYtahous:.or bY,Jhe�tia'1�5t
of Piste and=fame of IJ S E' Yancf is
b)_ %Haute a substantial adverse ut3iaot;umany i,;h -or 5,9 X
other sir nsitzve aatpral cpmmuaut}cidetitdim tq¢al of regional
plans,policrea,or attMns oi<bi+dre�Ct�c�t
bl Fish slid.Game orU 5,Fislxand'�tt dltl�e $1lii
CmY OF SAN LUIS 0sram 8 1NmAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CNEcK usT 2009
a_s�L-
Attachment 5
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources PakIltially Pooe1111ady LOW TbW No
significant Significant signisrmp
ER#123-08 rssues Unim
r on
hicmwrybd
�y
d blct� >rge$oi ,sh�'paayfe� etin olx} FTS' J 5>8 X
•3*Oft)ag
4 N -
d) s� maueai i+fstlaaaversteot r 5,9 X
brm #atQr}+ 'fit l vc�rlci}espacres o7 1# dam--•0
,. ;esuleztt-�imrgratdry•w7d�fe dor3�dots��or�'f�`ie •pfd'r
fhrov�soaosofadiedt� t{grw 5
x
Plan, lati�et tacsmtrtt► yonon 'la inr otherprgye�,;
'ko region t�rstate`hatittatcop erst ►11 a 7
d) 1 { s obstamtltd�ersa eetou fedeYalir ted w�tlads; 5 X
as m9��0 04'bfthe least' et7ic (may b}rr
tur� itcad�, es;i%ernal-g�to�s;ei��u �e�
relnova'1;�tltng,.l�ikrblogical mt �bir,or gthet means
Evaluation
a),b),c)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
sites,nor is riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified The City's Urban Forrester has reviewed the
project plans and determined that the small willow tree in the center of this project is below can be removed and will be
adequately mitigated for with implementation of the proposed landscape plan. The large Acacia tree in the northeast corner
of the site will be protected in place.
d) The properties and rights-of-way are completely surrounded by urban development and the proposed development will not
interfere with the movement of any wildlife species or migratory wildlife corridor.
e) The project site is designated in the General Plan for urban uses consistent with the proposed density.Development of the
site 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.
ID The sites are not near any natural waterway and will therefore have no adverse effect on Federally protected wetlands.
Conclusion
The project does not have the potential to impact biological resources.
5.CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the Droieck
a): Cause s siibstanliai adverse cbaage•in fii-,& ritibee of a 5,9, x
historic resoutce?,{$e ,CQ �imcl4lities 1� 4 5) : ' 18 20
b) Cause a stibstantial:adverse chane m;tloaig�ii$ uce of en r 5>9, x
inich$eolagrcalsesoiutae?(SeL'EQA. ufcca lbiS45) 19,21
c). b1iacd .or indirectly.
,desiruyagii?goe.pa(tedtu ]ogieal.%ounce` 9,19 X
or .
site. unique.geologic feature?
d) Disturb wyliuman remaims,*Iudiaglhose interod ootside of ' 9, 19, X
brinal cemeteries2 . . 21
Evaluation
a),b)Based on review of the City's Historic Site Map and Land Use Information System,the subject sites are not looted on
or near a known sensitive archaeological site or historic resource.Both sites are currently vacant and are not listed as Master
List or Contributing Historic properties.
c) There are no known paleontological resources or unique geologic features on the project sites or street rights-of-way.
crrT of Sart Luis OeisPo 9 INmnL STuirn ENvato AI ENTAL CHEcwusT 2009
a-fig'
Attachment 5
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Souncessomoes Pot®8ally PotenfiCy L=Teen No
signiscant Significant S*fflcaat enpwt
ER# 123-08hfifigulim
rscoes Unless bV=
Ia�
d) The project sites and street rights-of-way are outside of the areas designated on the City's Burial Sensitivity Map as
potential burial sites.
Conclusion
The nroject does not have the pokatial to impact cultural resources.
6. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would theproject:
a) :t tctth becl�al Coss�etVII p) 7 5 X
b) IJse0n bke resouxrt V, aeff cid 5 X
I f • � tp
E ~Ross ofavtiblys�# fimaE►wp rperala�vs°iCce 5 X
==tit rv�t,�dlt�of value to��_r�grdn�h�tl>evresrde�p�tlue ,
Statel
E cation
a) b) The proposed development will not conflict with adopted energy conservation plans or promote the use of non-
renewable resources in an efficient manner.Consistent with the policies contained in the General Plan Conservation and Open
Space Element,the project has been designed to minimize the use of conventional energy for space heating and cooling,water
heating,and illumination by means of proper design and orientation,including the provision and protection of solar exposure.
Additionally,the project will achieve a minimmn of 30%greater energy efficiency than the minimmn required by California
Code of Regulations Title 24. This will be accomplished through the use of green building techniques,the incorporation of
solar panels on the site to augment the energy needs of common lighting and facilities, and thoughtful site phummg to allow
for natural light and heating.
c)No known mineral resources exist within the project site that would be of value to the region or to the residents of the State.
Conclusion
The liroject does not have the potential to impact energy and mineral resources.
7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) F,xgo .people or slructt 'os 1 tj stibst av
effec45,idclitdmg.ri�k4floss;_mlOyodeatitmval
I. D ligq 22 X
-mast-iexent AC insfi Pr►ojti
rssymd flte.5iate Cecilogrst for [c o:Cruel ori other,.
.. summa["eutlenCe:of�k`no�vri' f•7` . ,
II Btunteg.seismi+ �rzstut►ti g?. 22 X
l2l Seismic-rel9red gmtund Saar,uCcnd�gigne>actPi3 11 X
IV LdSGdes or milows'F 11 X
b) tarros(Baal ezd§ion or lltelos�of topsoil? 's 11 X
e) Bc located on a gev7ogic upit qr sod that>s t+pstablo,ortitek 11 X
would-become unst$ble as a result of}>ie oJeCk;and poCenti�lly,.
result att.on or o$site hmzlslldes,lateral spteadiug,subsidence;
liquefabtion,prootlse3
dj .Se dczcsted oa expansive soas defined itt T'a1ile 1$ 1-1 gf the 11 X
LJilsfarm, dmg'Cnde(19Q4Jy.fig subs phal rl a;tq 1tfiC ';:
-
Evaluation
a) c) San Luis Obispo County, including San Luis Obispo is located within the Coast Range Geomorphic province, which
extends along the coastline from central California to Oregon. This re 'on is characterized by extensive foldirig,bunting,bulting,and
Curr of Saw Luis OeisPo 10 IwmnL STuov Ewwtowait:wrat CwEamw 2009
CZ—S1
Attachment 5
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sow= I roWnhauy Pokftdly Lm Ibm No
significant S*mifi= Significant ra�pacx
ER#123-08 Lnm unim Impact
Mesion
fracturing of variable intensity. In general,the folds and faults of this province comprise the pronounced northwest trending
ridge-valley system of the central and northern coast of California
Under the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act,the State Geologist is required to delineate appropriately wide special
studies zones to encompass all potentially and recently-active fault traces deemed sufficiently active and well-defined as to
constitute a potential hazard to structures from surface faulting or fault creep. In San Luis Obispo County,the special Studies
Zone includes the San Andreas and Los Osos faults.The edge of this study area extends to the westerly city limit line,near
Los Osos Valley Road According to a recently conducted geology study(source 25),the closest mapped active fault is the
Los Osos Fault,which rims 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,looted 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 limes on the project sites or within close proximity,the site is located in an area of"High Seismic
Hazards,"specifically Seismic Zone 4,which means that future buildings constructed on the site will most likely be subjected
to excessive ground shaking in the event of an earthquake. Any new development must be designed in compliance with
seismic design criteria established in the California Building Code for Seismic Zone 4. To minimize this potential impact,the
Uniform Building Code and City Codes require new structures to be built to resist such shaking or to remain standing in an
-
earthquake
b) The site has sat vacant for many years, and its last known use was as a railroad`wye",used to turn trains around The
Property has steep topography with sparse vegetation, and is surrounded on all sides by lower projects. Development of the
site will result in approximately 30% lot coverage with structures; the remaining portions of the site being covered with
parking and circulation areas, and significant landscape vegetation The Uniform Building Code contains standards
requirements that address soil erosion and loss of topsoil associated with site redevelopment
c), d) The Safety Element of the General Plan indicates that the project sites have a high potential fir liquefaction,which is
true for most of the City, and the sites contains highly expansive soils as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building
Code (2001), though due to the significant amount of unconsolidated fill in the area native soil characteristics may not be
present. Recommendations included in a soils report,which is routinely required as part of any development application,are
sufficient to mitigate potential hazards from building in these areas. In general, the presence of expansive soils requires
additional base for roadways and fiat work and deeper footings for building foundations.
Conchrsion
The project does not have the potential to impact geologyor soil resources.
S. ElAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATF.Rrai S, Would t&he pro'ect:
a) :CYeate a sr fi" cagt)3a td fo.�ltepub�6t t a�.rror�netTt 26 X
tiuoutgh(lie eiise,16113 e,traor disposal ofliirdous
b} :CreSte asigmficant azarsY to tho puiblid hi 26, X
tl�rrrugl ressbnably£ eeb)e upset aedcidgYconctans 31,32
involving the release df haiddM,-,a tis#s mto the;
,envitbatrae4't
'C) "F�'hazerd us.emissioas:ois handle hazardous dr acu�y..: 9,26
X
hazardous materaals�substatlu x,or vvalstb min mei ggarter
il�4f e : m$ i issed so '
Sejf114r3o`esngo(pcesofouls 26, X
asrn[ 'hda�t>sttFacelyhqus.tt9tta9ss 31,32
ct
e) B lgcated a sift whp is'nchYde�d ptt a hat afhYde 9 X
mat�nhls.si�co�ipiTed pito c3ave�ent�de.� ;
Crry of Saw Luis Owsao 11 Yana.STUDY F-wVOWNW NTAL CHECKuST 2009
;_(,C)
Attachment 5
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources sow Poicofiauy Potentially 1=Thm Duo
Significant Significant Sip ficent Impact
ER#123-08 tssnM Unless bVad
hwmvorftd
a 85 ult}e ,3f wtuuldVA
s4o WV.
Ftr a]pro, tot 24 X
`5-- "tu?x/14+ A►r4�lY �lL.
j ;� Tetr3wocr• jragtezvha, 4 X
piwr
. 9e pgr sue&eta a sit ask ofose;'tlijry, 4 X
ar mu hulmgv1lt *.110-finds at0
.aBji�b�ar0a§>iYr+dvh�ete�rt '�aelartntnr3�cl'
'•vlritfx�+ildlalds� "
Evaluation
a) The proposed development includes residential uses with some minor commercial space, which will not increase the
likelihood of the routine use,transport,or disposal of hazardous materials.
b), d) Both sort studies and an expanded Phase 11 environmental assessment were conducted at the project site in order to
evaluate the conditions of soil, and the impact of historic railroad operations on and near the property. Native soils beneath
the site consist of silty and sandy clay underlain by volcanic and sedimentary bedrock of the Cretaceous-Jurassic age
Franciscan Formation. Shallow bedrock appears at depths as little as 5-feet in some locations,whereas other locations have
as much as 22-feet of fill material present.Fill soils consist dominantly of dark greenish-gray to black sandy gravel,concrete
fragments and asphalt fragments.Foreign objects within the fill mchrde glass,brick,metal,wood and wire.Sort samples were
analyzed for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons(TPH)and total lead. Concentrations of lead detected in the soul samples ranged
from 4.8 to 48 (parts per million) ppm and are below the regulatory action level of 50 ppm in soil. Typical background
concentrations for lead in the area are in the range of 5-10 ppm. T'PH were detected in concentrations exceeding 100 pats
ppm,the regulatory action limit.Various samples concentrations ranged from 17,000 ppm from a sample of asphaltic material
encountered at 20 feet bgs to 260 ppm collected at 15 feet bgs. While five of the six soul samples were found to contain
elevated levels of petroleum hydrocarbons,only two soil samples exhibited field evidence of hydrocarbons.It is likely that the
detected hydrocarbons are associated with asphalt fragments in the fill.
The City of San Luis Obispo Fire Department and County Environmental Health Division observe an action limit of 100 ppm
for petroleum hydrocarbons in soil.Soils containing less than 100 ppm for petroleum hydrocarbons are not regulated,nor are
those containing asphalt fragments.A mitigation measure has been recommended to insure that fill material exported from the
site be sampled and analyzed prior to transport,and that proper handling is done.
c) The project is approximately '/+mile from an existing school site(Sinsheimer Elementary School),however,the project
will not involve hazardous emissions or include handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,substances or waste.
e) The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code§65962.5.
f) The project site is designated in the Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) as being within Safety Area S-2, which limits the
density to 12 front doors per acre. As measured by the ALUP,the properties measured out to the centerline of the adjacent
rights-of-way contain 7.21 acres and would be allowed 86 front doors,less the density allocated to commercial floor area The
proposed project includes 81 residential units and 1,000 square feet of commercial space.Anticipated use of the commercial
space would result in one person per 200—300 square feet gross floor area.As a worst-case scenario this would result in five
additional persons on the site, which according to Figure 8 in the ALUP would not result in any reduction to the allowed
residential density.Therefore,site density would be less than that allowed for by the Airport Land Use Commission(ALUC).
As a previous mitigation measure to ensure compliance with ALUC policies, the site was designated as a Sensitive Site(S-
overlay). Three standards applied, which required that all owners, potential purchasers, occupants (whether as owners or
renters),and potential occupants(whether as owners or renters)will receive full and accurate disclosure concerning the noise,
safety, or overflight impacts associated with airport operations prior to entering any contractual obligation to purchase,lease,
Crry of SAN taus OsisPo 12 INMAL Srumr EwvotomwEHrAL CHEcKL r 2009
Attachment 5
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources $MM si �� In pact
ER#123-08 Issm Unims hoped
M>vgwon
m
rent, or otherwise occupy any property or properties within the airport area; that development of the site be evaluated for
consistency with the City Zoning Regulations and Airport Land Use Safety policies, including maximum density of persons
per acre,with development not to exceed a total of 86 front doors;and requiring that aviation easements will be recorded for
all properties involved in the proposed development.The S-overlay requires that these measures be reviewed through the use
permit process. As discussed above, the project has been designed consistency with ALUC density standards. Mitigation
measures have been recommended to ensure that the notification requirements be satisfied through incorporation of noticing
into the final CC&R's,and that necessary easements are incorporated onto the final map.
Prior to construction of the proposed mixed-use structure west of Victoria Avenue the site will require redesignation to a
commercial land use.This General Plan Land Use change will be reviewed by the ALUC for consistency with the ALUP.A
mitigation measure has been recommended below,in Section 10:Land Use and Planning
g) The project has been reviewed by the Fire Marshall and will not conflict with any emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan.
h) The Safety Element of the General Plan identifies the site as having low potential for impacts from wildland fires.
Mitigation Measures:Hazards and Hazardous Materials
6) All fill material on the property that will be exported during development of the site shall be sampled and analyzed prior
to transport from the property.If soil is found to be contaminated it shall be disposed of at a permitted facility.
7) All owners,potential purchasers, occupants(whether as owners or remers), and potential occupants(whether as owners
or renters) shall receive full and accurate disclosure concerning the noise, safety, or overflight impacts associated with
airport operations prior to entering any contractual obligation to purchase,lease,rent,or otherwise occupy any property
or properties within the airport area
8) Aviation easements will be recorded for all properties involved in the proposed development with recordation of the final
map.
Conclusion
The project has been designed consistent with both City and Airport Land Use Commission policies, and with the
incorporation of mitigation measures related to notification and aviation easements does not have the potential to create
hazards or otherwise'mopact hazardous materials.
9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALM. Would the ro'eet:
a)` Viohue ` sitar brvts 6,8 X
xe9ulremeurs
b) ;'Sub Y tILes or 17,8 X
subsiai qtly v '�owaawaiet-rechii:ti stt t't tttt e v tt1 1 ''
a�thet de co m aq ar volurtue oia)�vf kfrtr tical
nearby wells wottid dropto44)eveI w�icf wbut8aot
e�rst�ng land»sere fot whrch perairts eve b�ai"�pude�
c) Create Or eairtribtite runliff6,26 X
�P h3 of-exrshng ar Platmed storm vxatet draiitage,s or
prow. eaddif4onal sources of rmhoslqPce.waters
(incluiding,l'iut not lmmit6d to,wetlattcls,lrparian ettas,Potlds,
'sPrmgs, m9r,%lakRs>.
:`S Bally alte,c tare erpswr$dr d-getpatfegn the s;* 6,26 X
a[eamapieprler.:whrchwoitii}fesuit s at sioi or
eubstantiatly t11e e�istirhg deatpE4:of th6 s 26 X
MCm OF SAN Luis OBISPO 13 INmAL Sruov ENviRomft-NrAL CHEcrnJBT 2008
C;) , ��
Attachment �
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources so= Poftfisuy > r.a' mart No
sigri;&aat sigriisoam S*ff m rmpact
ER#123-08 tssm untm 4ad
on
emporated
Ia
r:A
'lacOhrutSitrg�$lOD- 1 '. 9 X
gj y'AJace lfl( 40 hax d'ueasanu:U whuc4 9,26 X
`�'M"w�de�Vf~`+.e`M1l��+t'{11;�Y!!�5 YV 'i n r• i;i n .
h} `fir .tliCeptolectiRfrodaecalsit.ws)�§3h .a►tb 26 X
putlVsznfac �vatctsY .'
' t}l piofacta mid, ror fteiav r'zittalit5y 26 X
1 tilssi3lYed ta�.ti1rb! V
Evaluation
a), b) The project has been designed consistently with water quality standards and 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.
c), d) h) i) Physical improvement of the project site will be required to comply with the drainage requirements of the City's
Waterways Management Plan. This plan was adopted for the purpose of insuring water quality and proper drainage within
the City's watershed. The Waterways Management Plan requires that site development be designed so that post-development
site drainage does not exceed pre-development run-ofE This can be achieved through a combination of detention and use of
pervious surfaces to increase water absorption on-site. Compliance with the requirements of the plan is sufficient to mitigate
any potentially significant impacts of the project in the area of water quality and hydrology. The Preliminary Drainage Report
and Hydraulic Design prepared by Above Grade Engineering has been evaluated by the Public Works Department, who
determined that the project has been designed consistent with the requirements of the Waterways Management Plan.
e),f),g)'Ihe project site is not within either the 100-year or 500-year flood zones per the Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map. All future development will need to comply with the City's local ordinances,Flood Damage
Prevention Regulations and Waterways Management Plan. Site drainage will be adequately evaluated as part of the required
Architectural Review and Building Permit processes that will occur with any future development of the sites.
Conclusion
The project does not have the potential to impact water quality or hydrology. Drainage patterns have been evaluated for
consistency with existing City codes as part of the standard development review process.No further mitigation is necessary.
10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would thepjeet:
a) ` Cotdffet �vi6r Iieabie land use 1151W.polrcy, di r gulatiotr Of 1 X
tun agency with jutTsdnCho6 over theVra�t ,'opted lar die
pi q)o .of avnidiug of rut rgafiing anenvirontt i81'eSeot7 ,
b) RhYsrcally1nd�mi es4hed 1 9 X
. .
c} .' orarclt vgitlt ffiryappkaab9e ivairFift�bastrVadgai plmi or aatau e1 5 X
on 2
a), c) The proposed project has been designed consistently with General Plan Land Use, Circulation, and Housing Element
policies which call for the expansion of housing opportunities and giving preference to residential uses over commercial uses
where appropriate,and the efficient use of land use close to existing services.The Little Italy District,as the area surrounding
the project site is known, is specifically called out in Housing Element Program 63.7.a as a location where the land
development pattern is no longer valid, and which may be appropriate for rezoning from mamrf wftzr ng to a residential
designation. The project has also been designed in consideration of the draft Broad Street Corridor Plan, which has been
endorsed by the City Council and is being refined prior to adoption. This plan identifies Victoria Avenue as a future
commercial center,developed to encourage pedestrian usage.Adoption of that plan will include redesignation of the area west
of Victoria for commercial uses, which would allow for the proposed mixed-use structure. As the site is now designated
Medium-High Density Residential(R-3)the land use designation will need to be modified to one which allows for mixed-use
development prior to initiation of construction of this portion of the project A mitigation measure has been recommended to
Carr of Sara Luis Ostspo 14 hortnt_STumr ENvotom B fAL Crier =T 2009
c;z-63
Attachment 5
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Somoes PoronUony PoteeBany L=Than No
signmCmt s4aificeat Sigaficaat bVact
ER#123-08 Issm Unim fact
Nfifigisficm
hicarporated
ensure this.
b) The abandonment of these portions of Fredrick Street and Humbert Avenue, which are designated as local streets in the
General Plan Circulation Element, does not conflict with firiue circulation needs since the excess rights-of-way are
unimproved segments of road which are not necessary to serve any properties,and necessary improvements at the terminus of
these streets will be constructed as part of this project. All of the parcels that are adjacent to these segments of road will
retain existing access to public rights-of-way; 881 Francis will cantinne to take access from Francis, 860 Humbert will
continue to take access from Humbert (at the end of a new cul-de-sacl and 851 will have access from the cul-de-sacs
proposed the ends of both Francis and Humbert. Since the portions of the right"f-way requested for abandonment would
only affect three parcels, which would maintain adequate access from improved streets, abandonment of these segments of
road would not conflict with any City General Plan or circulation goals.Additionally,as part of this project review,the City
evaluated the feasibility of potential sites for an anticipated pedestrian/bicycle bridge near in the vicinity. Potential locations
at the end of Lawrence Drive,Humbert Avenue, and Francis Street were evaluated to determine where the most reasonable
location for the future connection could be made. It was determined that due to existing elevations,the length of the required
bridge span, and the availability of right-of-way,the most feasible location for the Anure bridge would be at the terminus of
Francis Street,which would not be effected by the proposed project.
Mitigation Measure:Land Use and Planning
9)The mixed-use structure west of Victoria Avenue shall not be constructed until after adoption of the South Broad Street
Corridor Plan, or redisignation of the site to a land use designation which allows for a combination of commercial and
residential uses. Any such Land Use changes shall be reviewed by the Airport Land Use Commission for compliance
with the Airport Land Use Plan.
Conclusion
The workforce housing project has been designed consistently with General Plan policies which encourage the efficient use of
land in close proximity to existing services and infrastructure.Additionally,consideration has been given to design the project
consistent with the as-yet adopted visions established in the draft Broad Street Corridor Plan.Although not formally adopted
at this time, the project could be constructed under existing standards contained within the Zoning Regulations. Should the
project proponent wish to proceed with this phase of the project prior to adoption of the Corridor Plan and subsequent land
use changes,they could go forward of a General Plan Amendment and Rezone of the site individually.No further mitigation
is
11.NOISE. Would the project result in:
:a} ErcpoaCe$ ebP1e t4 ptl t[ 3,24, X
levers as delinetl b}!' ieuitsrbliisp6 lase 29
`Elemedt,'&''V ne vL' i(6a revels xce4s o£s s:-
establusli�d�t#he;Tif4rse ?'
b) A sdbst aTtapnpar�r}c,perxadre,olr'Pem'O ent increase iu 26 X
-.'-aun�nantnorurelevelsxrdheprgjoGt -vrcrprtyabviselevCls�' '
w�notYC tfib prlijeist� .
c) F.xposme ofris tq orgenerativn of exces$ive grouh'dbortie 3,15 X
vibration or:giarrodbotae rtme levels?
d) For a project l24 X
two miles of a public aapoi#Or*purl lie.pse aupart,wodtd,the
projeQt_ xpose people reSiQifig or.avotg iri;the pRoject area to. .
Evaluation
a),(1)According to the Noise Contour Maps in the Noise Element and the Airport Land Use Plan a portion of 851 Humbert is
located within an area susceptible to 65 decibels (dB)Ldn due to railroad noise. Maximum noise exposure for residential
uses is 45 dB for indoor spaces and 60 dB for outdoor activity areas.To ensure that development of the site with a residential
Curr of Sun Luis OausPo 15 Iwnnr.STUDY E.mmsotamrrnt.CmEcK rsT 2009
Affacf-, en" ,L
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources S0°ce' " * 5 b tit
ER#123-08
lWM unless bVed
bixuporated
project would not expose people to unacceptable noise levels created by adjacent railroad operations and industrial uses,the
applicant has provided an acoustical analysis (noise study)to ensure that interior spaces and exterior private use areas are
designed to mitigate noise impacts to levels determined acceptable by the City's General Plan Noise Element The noise
analysis and addendum prepared by 45dB.com concludes that sound levels at this location are lower than to the north or south
due to the existing berm on the east side of the project,as well as the absence of an at-grade crossing,and that the residences
have been sited to be outside of the area subject to noise inundation area. Therefore, the noise level at the site will be in
compliance with City standards without additional mitigation. Despite this, previous Council direction required that all
owners and occupants receive disclosure concerning the adjacent manufachuing uses and potential noise exposure. A
mitigation measure has been recommended that this disclosure be incorporated into the final CC&R's for the projecL
b) Construction activities will temporarily increase ambient noise levels. Temporary construction noise is regulated by the
City's Noise Ordinance,which regulates times of construction and maximum noise levels that may be generated. The project
will have to meet the noise standards mined in the Ordinance, which includes limitations on the days and hours of
construction.No further mitigation is necessary.
c) The project will not expose people to the generation of excessive groundbome noise levels or vibration.
Mitigation Measure:Noise
10) All owners and occupants shall receive disclosure concerning the adjacent manufacturing uses and potential noise
exposure.
Conclusion
Acoustic studies have shown that noise levels at the site are currently within acceptable noise levels, as established by the
General Plan. However, as the site is directly adjacent to the railroad and multiple commercial and industrial uses, a
mitigation measure has been recommended to ensure that future residents are aware of the adjacent railroad and
marmfiwtriring uses and potential noise exposure.No further mitigation is necessary.
12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the Project:
y
a :hpdnoe mal- ofnulhor iUn ena..e6rc_ 1,7, X
( bY-'ProPQ .des bifsineS§ s 26
induect�x.: r'ezaunPle-thhrough,estensXon'try, gds or other
ARO.
b)""; usp�$ce s»bste>xdal rtuurbeTs ofexisonw, u;mg orf p'V 9 X
a tau cobatfati!ai, of {eplaci;mern ]icunsntg,:
elgieoilieiefi
Evaluation
a) The proposed project includes development of 81 residential units, 1,000 square feet of commercial space, and the
completion of adjacent rights-of-way. The project site is currently undeveloped, and being bordered by urban development
represents an opportunity for infill development, consistent with General Plan policies. This type of development is
encouraged because it can take advantage of existing facilities for water, sewer, storm drainage, transportation and parks.
Additionally, the proposed residential units will be sold at below-market rate,with 26%of the units sold for moderate-low,
low, or very-low income groups. The remaining units will be sold as `workforce' housing, which although not officially
recognized by the City,is defined by San Luis Obispo County.
b)Both properties and the rights-of-way are currently undeveloped.
Conclusion
The project does not have the potential to impact population or housing.
13.PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
CrtY OF SAN(.urs OBISPO 16 1NInAL STUDY ENmoNuEwmi.CNEcKusT 2009
a— S
Attachment 5
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Intrmation Sourcessour Poeauany room� pa
Si�ificam sigoisceor S;0ilicant Impact
ER#123-08 rsM uukss hupw
Nfifigatim
hiomporaled
provision,or need,of new or physically altered government facilities,the construction of which could muse
significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times,or other
pPerformance objectives for any of the public services:
4 ;i T�YW3fi ` r �KI' t 8 X
n #.xPr TY`^..',.FW4F�a3t.. � S A $ v♦ } v Ytv 1 M.y 8 X
p8 X
e ' ' adS aad oth$r tt8rfsptataaou 4n$rasttt1c41tre? ° 8 X
r""t31lYeC b8 , 8 X
Evaluation
a), b),d),e),fl As an infill site,adequate public services(fire,police,roads and other transportation infiastructure,and other
public facilities)are available to service the site.As shown on project plans,development of the site would include build-out
of Lawrence Drive and Humbert Street, and connection of the two by Victoria Avenue. These improvements have been
designed consistent with Circulation Element Policies, Public Works Design Standards, and the guidance provided by the
draft South Broad Street Corridor Phm.
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 Goverment 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 any development.
Conclusion
No resource deficiencies have been identified with respect to public services.
14.RECREATION. Would the Droiect.
a) Increase> us�v£exisg8 n $hb °°c�psi 1 ar 8 X
.o#hea fadtes such# ,tu> t�cl:,
deteri44Rn oflYe"fam�ity dnre�g
b} aclude to atioi i t>#ctbt�"es:ofa 1 �61i 25 x
e>�ttsmiOu�fre�re tae E►;� aiu i}dvelse
Evaluation
a)Future site development will add incrementally to the demand for parks and other recreational facilities. However,given
common open spaces which will be developed with the project no significant recreational 'impacts are expected to occur.
Additionally,Park Land In-Lieu fees will be required to be paid to the City to help finance additional park space,maintenance
or equipment in the vicinity,per existing City policy,with recordation of the final map.Collection of these fees helps to offset
the impacts of new projects on the City's recreational facilities.The project site is located near existing recreational facilities
such as Meadow Park and Sinsheimer Park.
b) Recreational facilities developed on the site include both a private linear parkway through the center of the site,
perpendicular to Victoria Avenue, and a small park area at the southwest comer of Humbert Avenue which will be available
to the public. HASLO intends to retain ownership of the mired-use building, parking, and open space area west of Victoria
Avenue, and has expressed that it is their intention to allow the area to be used by the public. Provision of this space will
provide needed opportunities for passive recreational areas in the vicinity.
Conclusion
Park and recreation facility demand will increase incrementally with the development of the project.Park-in-lieu fees are set
at a level considered to be sufficient to offset the effects of the additional demand for park facilities.No further mitigation is
Crry of Sart Luis OsisPo 17 INmAL Sway Ewutom mmTAL CHEcKusT?009
Attachment 5
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Sources Pownti* Potentially Less Than No
s;goiscent S*MMC t S*Mcant impact
ER#123-08 Issoes unless kv8d
Muigation
Incorporicted
15. TRANSPORTATIONM AMC. Would the projece
r '.Ca4>siw�n.' irx "# Ca[ abs ..int �pr 2, 15, X
x a
Mftl
ow
26
"'r ;' 25
w ,
26 30
b� ' 0d;e' W �wa1y' feos 2, 15, X
stasdafd herb thi ckrw$'_ , 30
rtc'y',�i^de�droatB'andbrt�� ,- '` � `•
C) StiITyaseazatxluetoi*sguTeegr: i 2,26 X
cl>xv�s'or�anier�ectio�)4r-' 3n�t�le'-usbs�C�g. ,`-, .
d) Itasulf m �mergZcy a�cessq
2,26 X
t) sultur nlad g Cvap mars t slpel r 26 X
fj !Coailict.with adopted tnllbie3 si�P,ltb,y "altet ht�� 2 X
Ise Piaa3gt trag tt s t1 ,,re, ,
Evaluation
a), b), c), d) The subject properties can be accessed via several small Local Streets, including Lawrence, Francis and
Humbert,all of which directly access Broad Street The City's General Plan Circulation Element designates Broad Street as a
Highway/Regional Route,which connect the city with other parts of the county and is used by people traveling throughout the
county and state and is designated as a primary traffic carrier. The aforementioned Local Streets which serve the site are
designed to directly serve the residential development that they front and channel traffic to Residential Collector Streets.The
abandonment of portions of Fredrick Avenue and Humbert Street does not conflict with the General Plan Circulation Element
or impeded future circulation needs since the excess rights-of-way are unimproved segments of road which are not necessary
for to serve any properties,nor planned for improvemem. All of the parcels that are adjacent to these segments of road will
retain existing access to public rights-of-way; 881 Francis will continue to take access from Francis, 860 Humbert will
continue to take access from Humbert (at the end of a new cul-de-sac), and 851 will have access from the cul-de-sacs
proposed the ends of both Francis and Humbert. Additionally, the completion of Victoria Avenue will provide parallel
passageways to disperse traffic in the vicinity. The proposed residential use is expected to generate 500-600 average daily
trips (ADT), which can be effectively managed through the effected intersections, and which is only a small portion of the
traffic expected with the adoption and implementation of the South Broad Street Corridor Plan.
Rick Engineering recently completed a Draft Traffic Impact Analysis which describes traffic conditions in the South Broad
Street Corridor (SBSC) and evaluates possible effects of the proposed South Broad Street Corridor Plan. The Analysis
describes existing and projected traffic volumes,street intersection operations,and collision data;and also discusses planned
street improvements under the SBSC Plan,neighborhood traffic conditions,pedestrian,bicycle and public transit access. The
report concludes that adoption of the SBSC Plan has the potential to increase traffic volumes and congestion in the corridor,
however,traffic impacts could be reduced to less than significant levels with adoption of the reports recommended mitigation
measures as part of the Plan. Some of the report's major findin are:
• Over a 20-year period,the Plan would accommodate up to about 400 added dwellings and up to about 640,000 square
feet of new commercial floor area in the 150 acre planning area.
• The project would have potentially significant traffic impacts at the following intersections: Broad/Santa Barbara
Avenue/South Street,Broad/Woodbridge Street,Broad/Lawrence Drive,Broad/Orcutt Road,Orcutt Road/Laurel Lane,
Broad/Capitolio Way,Broad/Tank Farm Road.
• Traffic signals and pedestrian crosswalks are warranted at the intersections of Broad/Woodbridge Street and
BroadaAwrence Drive;and a third signalized intersection at Broad/Stoneridge Drive is recommended.
CnY of SAN Luis Mom 18 INITIAL STUDY EnvirrOM ENTnL CHEMIST 800q
Attachment 5
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources son= > S � �No
S
ER#123-08 lssm Unless 1
1n
• Provide traffic calming measures on Woodbridge and Lawrence,such as speed limit signs,speed humps or speed
tables,mid-block slow points or"chic:ames"(a type of small-scale traffic barrier,sometimes with landscaping),and
bulb-outs to discourage cut-through traffic and slow traffic speeds.
• Provide a raised,landscaped median along Broad Street to beautify the corridor and to limit left turns and u-turns to
designated intersections.
• And add tum lanes and several locations along Broad Street to ease traffic movements.
These impacts associated with the SBSCP,which foresees the type and density of the proposed project,and recommended
mitigation measure will be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council prior to adoption of that plan.
e), f) The proposed residential and commercial unit mix generates a par ang requirement of 192 vehicle parking spaces, 10
motorcycle spaces,and 10 short term bicycle parking spaces.Additionally,two covered and secure bicycle spaces per unit are
required. HASLO has proposed to reduce vehicle spaces by seven, offsetting their loss with 25 additional bicycle parking
stalls and inplemeffing a trip reduction plan which would provide information and incentives to residents who opt not to
drive. In addition to reducing traffic generated by the development and panting demand, reducing resident's reliance on
vehicles for transportation needs will also meet HASLOs goal of reducing operational costs for residents.To insure that the
trip reduction plan is carried out in an effective manner, a mitigation measure has been recommended that a final trip
reduction plan be provided to and approved by the City prior to final map recordation. With implementation of a trip
reduction plan and payment of Traffic Impact Fees, parking demands for the site will be effectively reduced as people
transition to other modes of ti-dasportation.
g)The project site is located within ALUP Safety Zone S-2 and the 65 dB single event noise contour of the ALUP,but is not
directly in a flight path where occupants would be subject to hazards associated with airport operations or frequent excessive
noise levels.
Mitigation Measure:Traffic and Circulation
11)A final trip reduction plan shall be provided to and approved by the City prior to final map recordation.
Conclusion
The project does not have the potential to create impacts to traffic or transportation, including airport operations. With the
recommended mitigation measure to insure that an adequate hip reduction plan is implemented, impacts to localized traffic
and Parking will be reduced below a threshold of sigafficance. No firther mitigation is
16.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the roject:
A). -EiOw"edvesstewtitet:fiati5ent; 6- oftNt"O J1 6,26 X
Regto Water QPM CdntPbl Bhatti?
b) R.qurre or re salt in the coq;UGftop•os tc►n of rtew;water 6,26 X
-treatgoeint;wagte'v9atsr tbuia�vt� t�
dry#acr7rh oyn"the c+ot ruetroa of chepause
si8m6anl eevfrQn euttll e ?
c) ':Pave Sufficnentrvater`su�s�U dt�atn able to seta iho*bjdd 6,26 X
from eKistimg entitlettlents oft resources,or are new and
eicpanded waterrasotuee4 aeed6d7
d) Resuit-in a determ tt$tion by the_wastewater 004r ? 6,26 X
w> servies otmay ser#�ea t}rroheet t rt Itas; q�raCe
acrtt<o serve tli lt '-Sh1ed f'4
provt�et'sexgltt,2 , k�,
e) 'g server!try a landfill wltbtsicrehtpel�itteif sapacrt$�tq 6,26 X
atodatetbe.pivhect'ssa$dwaste;drspoaEt> �cls?
fj. Co�pl}c with. ecteral,state;an±dlocal''stat uilreguia)orris 6,26 X
Crnr oP SAN Lars Oswpo 19 INmAL SnmY ENvatomm"AL CHEcxL sT 2009
�b�
Attachment 5
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources sma= I
sib �� No
knpad
ER#123-08 bsM mess impart
IMPtim
lararpamted
i '�X ;'wrrr. ,-- ,+�.: err �"•�y _y,^` �,c "C>,"-^5-.
Evaluation
a), b) This project has been reviewed by the City's Utilities Engineer and no resourcelinfiastrucque deficiencies have been
identified. Site and infrastructure development has been reviewed for consistency with City policies and standards,and water
impact fees will be required to ensure that new development pays its fair share of the cost of conshrrcting the water supply,
treatment and distribution facilities that will be necessary to serve it
c) The City has adopted Water Allocation Regulations to insm that increased water use by new development and land use
changes do not jeopardize adequate water service to current and new customers. Section 17.89.030 of the regulations states
that a water allocation shall be required to: "obtain a connection to the city water system for a structure or facility not
previously connected, change the use of land or buildings, whether or not a construction permit is also required, obtain a
construction permit" Compliance with the City standards and State requirements will assure that impacts to water supplies
are less than significant.
d)The City wastewater treatment plant and existing sewers in the vicinity have sufficient capacity to serve the project sites.
The developer will be required to construct private sewer facilities to convey wastewater to the nearest public sewer. The on-
site sewer facilities have been designed 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 frees are set at a level
intended to offset the potential impacts of each new residential unit in the project.
e) f)The project includes 81 residential units and 1,000 square feet of commercial space. Solid Waste from the City of San
Luis Obispo is deposited at Cold Canyon landfill, which has adequate capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
disposal needs. Receptacles for solid waste will be provided Because the majority of the landscape area will be maintained
by the Homeowners Association or HASLO,green waste will be handled by contracted maintenance personnel.
Conclusion
The pwiect does not have the potential to'impact utilities and service
17.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
8)s'--�es->3ae�ecfliare the tti:�'�i+� ;aP�te",
e3rYavninegt, trq)I3+tedae�het. f$ X
sspe � a`6sl oi~�nviicllisfe,�'Ea dt�pT�c�v; lf�
cammunl�y,r+eduee evrruibex otC t�e-re o�a. .ur '
endamgctt plant oc aal of e1 # soatezit exKsmlpl�s of
the 'oar ofCalt�gzii8- ;oY
As discussed in the biological section of this study,there are no species identified as a candidate, sensitive,or special status
species in local or regional plans,policies,or regulations,or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S.Fish and
Wildlife Service on or near the project site, nor is riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified With
regard to historical resources, the project is not located on or near a known sensitive archaeological site or historic resource.
There are no known paleontological resources or unique to is features on theproject site.
b)'Does the project have inct§that#enrlivtdalj+ b X
tulnrilatively considerable?.{"Clnntll$tivei conaidprale"
means tlietdie mcdrantbntal efts ofa:` Sect are considerable
when viewed moon.tteehtid with the es a�`fhe p }ects,
8ie.�'t�Ctsafo�b�ent�±o11 ,
The impacts identified in this initial study are specific to this project and would not be categorized as cumulatively significant
Because the project site is within the South Broad Street Corridor planning area, area-wide cumulative impacts associated
with that proposed plan will be analyzed separately. Impacts of the proposed project could be considered a subset of the
larger ro'ecL
CrTY of SAN Luis Oeisro 20 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHEcKusT 2009
Attachment 5
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Soares Poteati* Poieobeuy Less Tho No
Sivffw nt s gaisceat S*fficmd �rt
ER#123-08 bsnes Unless hnpad
Maim
v4
With the incorporation of the recommended mitigation measures,the project will not result in substantial adverse impacts on
humans.
18.EARLIER ANALYSES.
� � .°$� ���,(t>��c►t i0ol��etS�&'Ve,.
b�gn adeiisre}y a ut . arizer E bY�leltlu�' c . Sod,�l3ti ' c} „ 'fin fi18 a'Qtoi:•'
N/A
-b} c�ts'icl�grl>�itelq her ,,. 1 fZvtrx��- ' ,ve �s
N/A
:SM95N
N/A
19. SOURCE REFERENCES.
1. City of SLO General Plan Land Use Elemait,August 1994
2. City of SLO General Plan Circulation Element,November 1994
3. City of SLO General Plan Noise Elemant,May 1996
4. City Of SLO General Plan Sa&ty Element,July 2000
5. City of SLO General Plan Conservation and Open Spam Element,April 2006
6. City of SLO Water and Wastewater Element,July 1996
7. City of SLO General Plan Housing Elaawt,May 2004
8. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code
9. City of San Lias Obispo,Land Use Inventory Database
10. Site visit
11. USDA,Natural Resources Conservation Service,Soil Survey of San Luis Obispo Corm
12. Website of the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency:
http://www.consrv.ca.gov/dhp/FMW/
13. Clean Air Plan for San Luis Obispo County,Air Pollution control Distri 2001
14. CEQA Air Qwaity HandbOOk,Air Pollution Control District,2003
15. Institute of Transportation Engineers,Trip Generation Manual,6m Edition,on file in the Community Development
Department
16. City of San Luis Obispo Noise Guidebook 1996
17. 2002 City of San Luis Obispo Water Resources rt
18. City of San Luis Obispo,Historic Resource Preservation Guidelines,on file in the Community Development
Department
19. City of San Luis Obispo,Archaeological Resource Preservation Guidelines,on file in the Community
Development Department
20. City of San Luis Obispo,Historic Site Map
21. City of San Luis Obispo Burial Sensiti
22. San Luis Obispo Quadrangle Map,prepared by the State Geologist in compliance with the Alquist-PriolO
Eardiquake Fault Zoning Act,effective January 1 1990
23. 1 City of San Luis Obispo community Design Guidelines
24. San Luis Obispo County Land Use Plan
25. 1 Draft South Broad Street Corridor Plan
CrrY OF SAN LUIS 0e13PO 21 INMAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2009
C�-�?G
Attachment 5
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources Souris poft*ay PoftbaUy LssThm No
sigmfiosd siguificMA significant hnpwt
ER#123-08 bsm unkm hVW
bttigwon
bwmporftd
26. Project Plans
27. Archeological Resources Survey&b4nd AssessnieM prewed by Central Coast Archaeology on Aug,6 2008
28. Project Dmmage Report and lbdmulw DesiM prqmvd by Above Grade Engmeaw on June 30 2008
29. Sound Level Assessment and Addendun36 pmPared by 45dBxorn,on March 10 and July 10 2008
30. Final Draft South Broad Strwt Corridor Plan Traffic Impact Analysis,prepared by RICK Engineering on
December 5 2008
31. SotUs Engineering Report,prepared by Geosolutions Inc.on January 17 2008
132. Expanided Phase 11 Env Assessment prepared by Secor Intemational on September 14 2000
Required Mitigation and Monitoring Program
Mitieation Measure: Air Ouality
1) Should hydrocarbon contaminated soil be encountered doming construction activities, the APCD must
be notified as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after affected material is discovered to
determine if an APCD Permit will be required. In addition,standard APCD required procedures shall
be implemented immediately after contaminated soil is discovered.
➢ Monitoring Program:
All permitting requirements shall be shown on grading and building plans, including APCD
Enforcement.Division contact information.
2) Prior to any grading activities at the site,the project proponent shall ensure that a geologic evaluation
is conducted to determine if Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA)is present within the area that will
be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with the District. If NOA is
found at the site the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review and approval of grading
plans by the Public Works Department.
3) If utility pipelines are scheduled for removal or relocation the project may be subject to various
regulatory jurisdictions, including the requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for
Hazardous Air Pollutants. These requirements include, but are not limited to 1) notification
requirements to the APCD, 2) asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Inspector, and, 3)
applicable removal and disposal requirements of identified ACM.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Cay of Sm Luis Oswo 222 ImTuu STwv Ewvor mwffAL CHEcKusT 2009
Attachment 5
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources SMM Poftnt auy Poaem aur mem Than No
Signi6c m S*fficant .ftafficant kvax
ER#123-08 bsmURI= Inv=
Incmwmftd
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review and approval of grading
plans by the Public Works Department.
4) This project exceeds the 4.0 acres of grading threshold and is near potentially sensitive receptors, and
shall comply with all applicable Air Pollution Control District regulations pertaining to the control of
fugitive dust(PM10) as contained in section 6.5 of the Air Quality Handbook. The following APCD
standards for dust control shall be adhered to:
a. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible,
b. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from
leaving the site. Increased watering frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed
15 mph. Reclaimed(non-potable)water should be used whenever possible'
c. All dirt stockpile areas should be sprayed daily as needed,
d. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape
plans should be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing
activities,
e. 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,
£ All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical
soil binders,jute netting,or other methods approved in advance by the APCD.
g. All roadways,driveways, sidewalks, etcto be paved should be completed as soon as possible. In
addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil
binders are used,
h. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at
the construction site,
i. 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 bete top of load and top of trailer) in
accordance with CVC Section 231.14,
j. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off
trucks and equipment leaving the site,and,
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.
➢ Monitoring Program:
All dust control measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition,the contractor
or builder should designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order
increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of.dust offsite. 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
finished grading of the area
Crrr of Sax Luis Owpo 23 IrannL Stunr ENvmoNYEHTw.CHECf0.w 2009
OL--Z(?-
Attachment 5
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources SOUM POWUft* PaU ti fly Los Than No
sip ficemt Significant Sig"CEM bVX9
ER#123-08 rsS UnIm t
m
5) Prior to recordation of the final map, a screening level health risk assessment shall be performed to
determine potential health risks to residents of the development. Depending on the results of the
screening level health risk assessment a more comprehensive analysis may be required
➢ Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of detailed plans submitted
for the final tract map, improvement plans, and building permits by the Community Development
Department.
Mitigation Measures: Hazards and Hazardous Materials
6) All fill material on the property that will be exported during development of the site shall be sampled
and analyzed prior to transport from the property. If soil is found to be contaminated it shall be
disposed of at a permitted facility.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of final grading plans and
associated documents by the Community Development and Fire Departments.
7) All owners, potential purchasers, occupants (whether as owners or renters), and potential occupants
(whether as owners or renters) shall receive full and accurate disclosure concerning the noise, safety,
or overflight impacts associated with airport operations prior to entering any contractual obligation to
purchase, lease,rent,or otherwise occupy any property or properties within the airport area.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of final CC&W s submitted
with final map and associated documents by the Community Development Department.
8) Aviation easements will be recorded for all properties involved in the proposed development with
recordation of the final map.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of final map and associated
documents by the Community Development and Public Works Departments.
Mitigation Measure:Land Use and Planning
9) The mixed-use structure west of Victoria Avenue shall not be constructed until after adoption of the
South Broad Street Corridor Plan, or redisignation of the site to a land use designation which allows
Crrr of Sun Lull Osos o 24 IwnAL STwY Euvaomrrat.CHEcKusT 2009
g--73
Attachment 5
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources sources Ply PotendOy Less lbau No
sigai8cam sigifiC= s;goifi rmpad
ER#123-08 LW= Unim
Mptim
for a combination of commercial and residential uses. Any such Land Use changes shall be reviewed
by the Airport Land Use Commission for compliance with the Airport Land Use Plan.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of building permit
applications by the Community Development Department
Mitigation Measure: Noise
10)All owners and occupants shall receive disclosure concerning the adjacent manuf xturing uses and
potential noise exposure.
➢ Monitoring Program:
Noise disclosure shall be incorporated into the project CC&R's and recorded on the individual deeds
along with the Final Subdivision Map,prior to final inspection of the construction.
Mitigation Measure: Traffic and Circulation
11) A final trip reduction plan shall be provided to, and approved by the City prior to final map
recordation.
Monitoring Program:
Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of final map and associated
documents by the Community Development and Public Works Departments.
Cmr oP Sm Luis OwsPo 25 INmni.Snw EwRomwEwAL CmEcKwT 2oot1
Attachment 6
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX (2009 Series)
AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FROM SERVICES &
MANUFACTURING TO MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR OF THE
UNADDRESSED PARCEL (APN. 004-951-009) AND APPROVING A VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP,PURCHASE OF SURPLUS PROPERTY,USE PERMIT
FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A SENSITIVE SITE,AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR A RESIDENTIAL AND
MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT 851 AND 860 HUMBERT AND THE
UNADDRESSED VACANT LOT (004-951-009); (TRACT 2977)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palin Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, on February 11, 2009, for the purpose of considering application R/PDfMABAN/A
27-06 and ER 123-08, a request to allow a General Plan Amendment and Rezoning, Planned
Development Rezone, Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Abandonment of rights-of-way, Use permit
for development of a sensitive site, and Purchase of surplus property fora workforce housing and
mixed-use development; 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 March
17, 2009, for the purpose of considering the project; 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.
BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. CEOA Compliance Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City
Council makes the following findings:
1. The project's Mitigated Negative Declaration which was prepared by the Community
Development Department on February 2, 2009 and reviewed by the Planning
Commission adequately identifies that with the incorporation of recommended mitigation
measures there is no foreseeable potential for significant environmental impacts by the
proposed project.
2. The proposed project will provide quality affordable housing consistent with the intent of
California Government Code 65915, and that the requested density bonus, incentives and
concessions are reasonably necessary to facilitate the production of affordable housing
units.
SECTION 2. General Plan Amendment amending the Land Use Map from.Services &
Manufacturing to Medium-Hi Density_ Residential for the unaddressed lot (004-59.1409).
Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the following findings:
Resolution No. XXXX (2005 aeries) Attachment 6
Page 2
3. The proposed General Plan Amendment is, consistent with General Plan Land Use
Element policies regarding the expansion of housing opportunities and maximizing the.
development potential of infill sites. Additionally the project is consistent with Housing
Element goals and policies which encourage facilitating housing production and land use
efficiency, including HE Policy 3.12.7, which specifically identifies this area as
potentially being appropriate for residential uses.
4. The redesignation of the unaddressed vacant parcel from an industrial designation
(Service & Manufacturing) to a residential designation (Medium-High Density
Residential) would not adversely impact the overall supply of manufacturing property in
the area, as the proximity of the site to residential uses and constrained access make it
undesirable for many industrial uses.
SECTION 3. Subdivision Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council
makes the following findings:
5. The proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map, together with the provisions for its design
and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan and Airport Land Use Plan,
including compatibility with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs
specified in the General Plan.
6. The design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural
heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision.
7. As conditioned, the subdivider will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its
agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or
its agents, officers or employees to attach set aside, void or annul an approval of the City
Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff concerning a subdivision.
8. The proposed vesting tentative tract map is consistent with the General Plan, including
LUE 2.4.7, HE 3.4.2 and 3.13, and CE Goal 2, COSE 4.5.1 and 4.6.17, because the
subdivision will provide residential development anticipated by the General Plan and.
provide compact and sustainable housing options affordable to a variety of household
types.
9. The site is physically suited for the proposed type of development because the project has
been designed to utilize available residential density while providing quality common
open spaces and roadway connections which will benefit the general public.
10. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, is not likely to cause serious
public health or safety problems because the type of improvements are appropriate for the
location will be designed to meet existing building and safety codes.
11. The design of the subdivision, or the type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within
the proposed subdivision because such easements will be maintained.
c5t—
Resolution No. XXXX (200s,-,3eries) _ Attachment 6
Page 3
SECTION 4. Disposition of Surplus Property.Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the
City Council makes the following findings:
12. The City no longer has need for the vacant property located just west of the railroad right-
of-way.
13. Disposition of this property to facilitate an affordable housing development is consistent
with the policies of the Land Use and Housing Elements of the General Plan.
SECTION 5. Use Permit for development of a Sensitive Site Findings. Based upon all
the evidence, the City Council makes the following findings:
14. Development of the site is consistent with the intent of the "S-overlay" and will not be
detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of persons working or living at the site or
within the vicinity, as the project is consistent with ALUP safety and compatibility
policies and City noise standards.
15. As conditioned, all residents of the site will be duly noticed of both Airport operations
and adjacent noise sources.
SECTION 6. Action. The City Council does hereby approve the General Plan Amendment,
Vesting Tentative Tract Map, disposition of surplus property, and adoption of a Negative
Declaration for property located at 851 and 860 Humbert and the unaddressed vacant parcel
(Application GPA/R/PD/TR/ABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08; Tract 2977), with incorporation of
the following project mitigation measures,conditions and code requirements:
A. Mitigation Measures
1. Should hydrocarbon contaminated soil be encountered during construction activities, the
APCD must be notified as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after affected
material is discovered to determine if an APCD Permit will be required. In addition,
standard APCD required procedures shall be implemented immediately after
contaminated soil is discovered.
2. Prior to any grading activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that a
geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) is
present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption
request must be filed with the District. If NOA is found at the site the applicant must
comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM.
3. If utility pipelines are scheduled for removal or relocation the project may be subject to
various regulatory jurisdictions, including the requirements stipulated in the National
Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants, These requirements include, but are not
limited to 1) notification requirements to the APCD, 2) asbestos survey conducted by a
Certified Asbestos Inspector, and, 3) applicable removal and disposal requirements of
identified ACM.
Resolution No. XXXX (2005-.jeries) AttaCi`,rnent 6
Page 4
4. This project exceeds the 4.0 acres of grading threshold and is near potentially sensitive
receptors, and shall comply with all applicable Air Pollution Control District regulations
pertaining to the control of fugitive dust (PM10) as contained in section 6.5 of the Air
Quality Handbook. The following APCD standards for dust control shall be adhered to:
a. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible,
b. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent
airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency would be
required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water
should be used whenever possible'
c. All dirt stockpile areas should be sprayed daily as needed,
d. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation
and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible following
completion of any soil disturbing activities,
e. 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,
f. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using
approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in
advance by the APCD.
g. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon
as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after
grading unless seeding or soil binders are used,
h. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any
unpaved surface at the construction site,
i. 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,
j. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or
wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site, and,
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.
5. Prior to recordation of the final map, a screening level health risk assessment shall be
performed to determine potential health risks to residents of the development. Depending
on the results of the screening level health risk assessment a more comprehensive
analysis may be required.
6. All fill material on the property that will be exported during development of the site shall
be sampled and analyzed prior to transport from the property. If soil is found to be
contaminated it shall be disposed of at a permittedfacility.
7. All owners, potential purchasers, occupants (whether as owners or renters), and potential
occupants (whether as owners or renters) shall receive full and accurate disclosure
concerning the noise, safety, or overflight impacts associated with airport operations prior
to entering any contractual obligation to purchase, lease, rent, or otherwise occupy any
property or properties within the airport area.
Resolution No. XXXX (2005 ,3eries)
Page 5 Attachm, ent 6
8. Aviation easements will be recorded for all properties involved in the proposed
development with recordation of the final map.
9. The mixed-use structure west of Victoria Avenue shall not be constructed until after
adoption of the South Broad Street Corridor Plan, or redisignation of the-site to a land use
designation which allows for a combination of commercial and residential uses. Any such
Land Use changes shall be reviewed by the Airport Land Use Commission for
compliance with the Airport Land Use Plan.
10. All owners and occupants shall receive disclosure concerning the adjacent manufacturing
uses and potential noise exposure.
11. A final trip reduction plan shall be provided to, and approved by the City prior to final
map recordation.
B. Conditions
1. Final design of the project improvements shall be subject to review and approval by the
Architectural Review Commission, and shall include modifications to address the scale of
buildings facing Lawrence Drive, material changes to give architecture a more residential
feel, details of community open space and consideration of community garden space, and
provision of a third solid waste enclosure.
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. Easements for all public and common open spaces shall be clearly designated on the
Tract Map.
4. The tentative map describes a LLA affecting the project for which no specific-
information
pecificinformation is provided. Should the LLA not occur, the project as shown on the tentative
map is no longer valid. The details of the LLA should be provided for review to insure
there are no fatal flaws in the development proposal.
5. The final subdivision design and improvements shall comply with the South Broad Street
Corridor Plan and all other City of San Luis Obispo Design Standards, Engineering
Standards and Standard Plans and Specifications.
6. All grading on the easterly edge of the proposed development, adjacent to railroad right-
of-way shall be completed in such a manner that the toe of any slope is a minimum of 10
feet from the railroad right-of-way in.order to accommodate a future bicycle path. An
appropriate structure shall be placed at the toe of the slope to prevent erosion onto the
future bicycle path area. The slope shall be designed such that the toe of the slope is at
Resolution No. XXXX (200:-,3eries) Attachment 6
Page 6
least five feet horizontally from the sewer main. Any structures or retaining walls shall
be at least 10 feet away from the sewer and shall be designed such that no additional load
is placed on the sewer main.
7. The tract map shall show and identify all easements described in the Title Report.
8. This development shall comply with the Waterways Management Plan. Provide a
complete hydraulic analysis, grading, drainage, and erosion control plan in accordance
with the Waterways Management Plan Volume III,Drainage Design Manual.
9. Show and note compliance with Engineering Standard IOIO.B for Storm Water Quality
Management for the drainage originating from or being conveyed through the parking
lots and private streets. Run-off from adjacent streets as well as run-off from the parking
lots will require treatment under this standard.
10. The drainage flowing northerly toward Francis Avenue from the proposed project shall
be carried and discharged onto Francis Avenue in an approved drainage facility.
Appropriate drainage easements from the adjoining property owner accepting the
drainage will be required.
11. Francis Avenue shall be improved with the installation of curb and gutter on the
southerly side of the street to accommodate additional storm water flows that may be
directed to this street.
12. These streets, within the boundaries of the proposed subdivision and including
transitions to existing improvements, shall be fully designed and constructed in
accordance with current City Standards including a 40 foot curb to curb street section
within a 60-foot dedicated right-of-way, and curb, gutter, 10-foot integral sidewalk, tree
wells, ramps, signing and striping.
13. A city standard 50-foot radius cul-de-sac shall be constructed where the Humbert
Avenue public street ends. A 50-foot radius right-of way at the easterly end of Francis
Avenue shall be provided.
14. The northerly side of Lawrence Drive shall be constructed to match the existing Villa
Rosa (Tract 2066) street section except for a 5-foot detached sidewalk. Complete a 40-
foot street section within a 60-foot right of way. Curb, gutter, detached sidewalk, ramps
signing and striping shall be designed and constructed to current City standards.
15. Street lighting, utilities and landscaping shall be installed in accordance with City
standards.
16. Prior to approval of improvement plans, any alternative paving materials proposed
within the public right-of-way shall be approved by the Public Works Director.
Alternative paving materials shall be maintained by the Homeowner's Association.
Resolution No. XXXX (200y-,jeries) - Attachment 6
Page 7
17. Common areas and landscaped parkways shall be owned and maintained in perpetuity
for public use by the Homeowner's Association or Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo
County. Water meters for common landscape areas, including, but not limited. to
parkways, medians and pathway corridors are subject to water impact fees and shall be
paid for by the subdivider.
18. The grading plan shall include provisions to comply with the soils engineer's
recommendations, including expansive soils, preparation of paved areas and pavement
design. The soils engineer shall supervise and approve all grading operations.
19. The subdivider's engineer shall submit water demand and wastewater generation
calculations so that the City can make a determination as to the adequacy of the
supporting infrastructure. If an off-site deficiency exists, the subdivider will be required
to mitigate the deficiency as part of the overall project.
20. Sewer and water mains shall be located in accordance with City Standard #6010. All
final grades and alignments of all public water, sewer and storm drains (including service
laterals and meters) are subject to modifications to the satisfaction of the Public Works
Director and Utilities Engineer.
21. The subdivision layout and preliminary utility plans shall include provisions for
irrigating common areas, parks, and other large landscape areas with recycled water.
Appropriately sized reclaimed water mains shall be designed and constructed from the
City's trunk system to these irrigation areas. If other use areas exist beyond the proposed
subdivision, the mains shall be appropriately sized to provide for future use areas and
extended to the boundary of the tract.
22. Include site sections or partial site sections as necessary to show site utilities. Provide
utility profiles as necessary where a possible conflict may exist between utilities for final
placement and/or for constructability. Additional review may be required by the Utilities
Engineer when complete plan information is provided.
23. Existing trees on adjacent properties shall be considered and protected if construction
encroaches upon their drip lines. The large Acacia tree in the Open space shall be
protected with a fence to be installed before grading or constructions begins and remains
undisturbed until completion of this project. A small willow tree in the center of this
project is ok to be removed and shall be mitigated for within the landscape plan to
include tree plantings.
24. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall be responsible for paying
current transportation impact fees (TIF) plus a "fair share" mitigation fee for the
percentage of new trips generated by the project that will travel through the intersection
of Broad/South/Santa Barbara intersection as determined by the Public Works Director,
and based on the estimated intersection improvement cost.
25. Previous traffic studies prepared for the Broad Street Corridor project identify the
intersection of Broad/Lawrence as a potential candidate for a future traffic signal. This
Resolution No. XXXX (2005-,3eries) Attachment 6
Page 8
project will add traffic to this intersection. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the
applicant will be required to pay its fair share toward the design and installation of a
future traffic signal at this intersection as determined by the Director of Public Works.
26. To minimize traffic impacts, a trip reduction plan and implementation program is
required. The plan shall include at a minimum: a) designation of a coordinator to
administer the program; b) carpool, carshare, bicycling and transit information; c)
availability of long term bicycle parking for residents, information and incentives for
those who use alternative transportation such as subsides to employees
using public transit, or other measures to approval of the Public Works Director. The trip
reduction plan shall be provided to all new tenants. A draft of the plan shall be submitted
for review as part of the building permit application. Occupancy shall not be granted
until the plan has been approved by the Public Works Director.
27. Prospective tenants shall be notified of the project's requested and approved parking
reductions and tandem parking. Additionally, they should be advised that they should
ensure that the amount of on-site parking is adequate for their needs because they will not
be able to obtain on-street parking permits for any additional parking needs.
28. Garages within the project shall be used exclusively for parking vehicles and may not be
used for general storage, recreation, or other uses that would prevent the parking of
vehicles as required by the Zoning Regulations.
29. The project design shall not preclude the future construction of a bike path along the
railroad corridor at the foot of the project slope. Prior to final map recordation, the
applicant shall record an easement for the future bikepath as necessary. To determine the
easement area, the applicant shall submit a site/grading plan that illustrates where this
path can be located and how this project will provide access to the future bikepath.
30. The project design shall not preclude the future construction of a bicycle bridge over the
railroad tracks at Francis Street. Prior to final map and abandonment approval, the
applicant shall submit a site plan/grading plan illustrating on-site and public
improvements outside of the area identified for the Francis Street bicycle bridge,
abutments and ADA ramping.
31. Public improvements shall comply with the draft Broad Street Corridor Plan which
identify Victoria Street as a "Village Street" and Lawrence Drive as an "Entry Street".
32. Long and short-term bicycle parking shall be provided in accordance with Table 6.5 of
the Zoning Regulations. Short-term bicycle racks shall be placed in visible locations near
public entries. Dimensioned locations and details of the short and long-term bicycle
parking (including 2x6 dimensioned area for each bicycle parking space in a residential
dwelling) shall be provided on the project's construction plans including rack design,
location, clearances and circulation for users in compliance with manufacturers'
standards.
a -$�
Resolution No. XXXX (2005-aeries) At',ach MP.nt 6
Page 9
33. Continued affordability provisions shall be developed to assure units remain affordable
to residents that earn low, lower, moderate and work force incomes. These provisions
may allow for equity accumulation over time. The continuance of affordability shall be
subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director prior to
issuance of building permits.
C. 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.
34. An encroachment permit Will be required from the Public Works Department for any
work or construction staging in the public right-of-way.
35. A traffic control plan and/or pedestrian control plan shall be approved prior to
encroachment permit issuance for work in the public right-of-way.
36. All boundary monuments, lot corners and centerline intersections, BC's,EC's, etc..., shall
be tied to the City's Horizontal Control Network. At least two control points shall be used
and a tabulation of the coordinates shall be submitted with the final map or parcel map.
All coordinates submitted shall be based on the City coordinate system. A 3.5" diameter
computer floppy disk, containing the appropriate data compatible with Autocad (Digital
Interchange Format, DXF) for Geographic Information System (GIS) purposes, shall be
submitted to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
37. Prior to acceptance by the City of public improvements, the developer's engineer shall
submit a digital version of all public improvement plans & record drawings, compatible
with Autocad (Digital Interchange Format, DXF) for Geographic Information System
(GIS)purposes, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
38. EPA Requirement: General Construction Activity Storm Water Permits are required for
all storm water discharges associated with a construction activity where clearing, grading
and excavation results in land disturbance of one or more acres. Storm water 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 constriction is complete. To be
covered by a General Construction Activity Permit, the owner(s) 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).
39. A copy of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) required by the SWRCB
shall be included as part of the building permit 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.
40. Document compliance with the new draft Water Quality Board State Construction
Permit, which 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
�)_- S3
- Attacf ,ent 6
Resolution No. XXXX (200y aeries)
Page 10
storms up to the 85fl' percentile storm event (or the smallest storm event that generates
runoff, whichever is larger).
41. Provide a complete site utility plan. Show all existing and proposed on-site and off-site
utilities. Show the location of all overhead and underground utilities along with the
location of any utility company meters. Show all existing and proposed improvements
located within the public right-of-way if applicable.
42. Show and note that the new wire services shall be placed underground in accordance
with UBC Section 308.3 as amended locally.
43. Provide separate engineering drawings or a composite utility plan from P. G. & E.,
ATT/PacBell, and Charter for the new wire utilities if necessary. If these plans are not
available, note on the cover sheet of the plans and utility plan these engineered utility
plans will be a deferred submittal item. Further note that "The engineered utility plans
shall be submitted to the city for review and approval prior to commencing with any on-
site or off-site utility construction"
44. Complete the gas pipe sizing for the proposed gas service to.these buildings. The.gas
company shall review these plans for the proposed gas piping and gas meter locations.
Provide gas meter clusters as required by the gas company. Provide a copy of a signed
utility plan or separate transmittal from the gas company indicating their review and
approval of the piping as shown.
45. Show the location, size, and material of all public water mains, recycled water mainlines,
sewer mains, and public storm drain systems.
46. Show all required or proposed parking lot improvements, lot dimensions, space
dimensions, materials, space and aisle slopes, drainage, pavement markings, signage, and
striping in accordance with the Parking and Driveway Standards and disabled access
requirements of the CBC. The parking and driveway standards are available from the
Community Development Department or are available within the Engineering Standards.
The Parking and Driveway Standards are again available in U.S. Customary Units.
47. The final map preparation and monumentation shall be in accordance with the city's
Subdivision Regulations, Engineering Standards, and the Subdivision Map Act.
48. The subdivider shall dedicate a 6' wide public utility easement and a 10' wide street tree
easement across the frontage of each lot, adjacent to and contiguous with all public right-
of-way lines.
49. One Street Tree is required per. 35' lineal feet of street frontage or any part thereof.
Street trees shall be from the Master Street Tree List and planted to City of San Luis
Obispo Engineering Standards.
50. Final locations of fire hydrants and water meters appear shall be shown on the
improvement plans, and shall be approved by the Utility Department.
a-�
Resolution No. XXXX (200: series) Attacm ent 6
Page 11
51. Eave and balcony overhangs projecting beyond the floor area shall conform to the
requirements of CBC Section 704.2.
On motion of , seconded by and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 17`h day of March, 2009.
Mayor David F. Romero
ATTEST:
Audrey Hooper, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
J ath well, City Attorney
GAMPLANVI-IONAR .MCity CounciACC Reso 27-06(approval)GPA.ER.TR.GPC.A.doc
C;L
i '
Attachment 7
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX (2009 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO OF
INTENTION TO ABANDON PORTIONS OF FREDERICK STREET AND HUMBERT
AVENUE RIGHTS-OF-WAY; ABAN 27-06
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 February 11, 2009, for the purpose of considering application
GPA/R/PDfMABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08, and making a General Plan determination and
formulating a recommendation to the City Council on a request for abandonment of excess
rights-of-way including portions of Frederick Street and Humbert Avenue; and
WHEREAS, research of the title report shows that the City of San Luis Obispo does not
have fee ownership of land underlying the Street rights-of-way; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission found that the proposed rights-of-way
abandonment is consistent with the City's General Plan, and recommended that the City Council
approve the abandonment, based on findings and subject to conditions as indicated in the
Planning Commission Resolution, incorporated herein by reference; 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 March
17, 2009, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application ABAN 27-06, Housing Authority
of San Luis Obispo County, applicant; and
BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Action-Intention to Abandon. It is the intention of the City of San Luis
Obispo to abandon portions of Frederick Street and Humbert Avenue as shown on the map
marked Exhibit A, on file in the office of the City Clerk, pursuant to Section 8300 et seq. of the
State of California Streets and Highways Code, and that the abandonment shall be based on the
following findings:
Findings
1. The proposed abandonment of rights-of-way are consistent with the General Plan because
they are no longer needed for present or future public purposes.
2. Development of the rights-of-way as public streets would not serve any reasonable public
purpose since those properties fronting the rights-of-way gain access from other
improved streets, and there are no existing infrastructure improvements within the areas
to be abandoned.
3. The abandonment of the rights-of-way will benefit the general public be eliminating
unused right-of-way and the City's costs for maintaining additional infrastructure
o��gT
Resolution No. XXXX (200> jeries) Attachment 7
Page 2
improvements.
4. The proposed rights-of-way abandonments are categorically exempt from environmental
review under Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act.
SECTION 2. Copies of the map showing the particulars of the proposed abandonment are
on file in the office of the City Clerk, at 990 Palm Street.
SECTION 3. Tuesday, April 21, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the City
Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California is the time and place set for hearing
all persons interested in or objecting to the proposed abandonment, which time is more
than fifteen (15) days from the passage of this resolution.
SECTION 4. This resolution, together with the ayes and noes, shall be published once in
full at least ten (10) days before the public hearing on the proposed street rights-of=way
abandonment, in The Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this city.
SECTION 5. The City engineer shall post at least three (3)public notices of the proposed
abandonment in prominent locations near the portion of the street rights-of-way to be
abandoned at least fourteen (14) days before the date set for the hearing in accordance
with Section 8322 of the Streets and Highways Code.
SECTION 6. The City Engineer shall notify utility companies affected by the proposed
abandonments within ten (10) days after adoption of the Resolution of Intention in
accordance with Section 8347 of the Streets and Highways code.
On motion of , seconded by and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 17"' day of March, 2009.
Mayor David F. Romero
ATTEST:
Audrey Hooper, City Clerk
Resolution No. XXXX (200eries) Attachment 7
:-)
Page 3
APPROVID AS TO FORM:
Jo th well, City Attorney
GACD-PLAMMINHASMCity Council\CC Reso 27-06(approval)Aban.doc
•
MA♦ �A♦
kw WE
i�♦ ♦����� ���♦
♦���eAW������������� �,i
W.
MAP ILWA
ILegend
Proposed Abandonment selection
Attachment 8
ORDINANCE NO. XXXX (2009 Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
AMENDING THE ZONING MAP FOR THE UNADDRESSED PARCEL AT APN. 004-
951-009 FROM MANUFACTURING (M) TO MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL WITH THE SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS OVERLAY (R-3-S) AND
APPLYING THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) OVERLAY TO THE ENTIRE
SITE; GPA/R/PD/TR/ABAN/A 27-06 AND ER 123-08
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 February 11, 2009, for the purpose of considering application
GPA/R/PDfMABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08, a request to allow a General Plan Amendment
and Rezoning, Planned Development Rezone, Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Abandonment of
rights-of-way, Use permit for development of a sensitive site, and Purchase of surplus property
for a workforce housing and mixed-use development; 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 March
17, 2009, for the purpose of considering the project; 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.
BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Zoning Map Amendment Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City
Council makes the following findings:
1. The proposed Rezoning is consistent with General Plan Land Use Element policies
regarding the expansion of housing opportunities and maximizing the development
potential of infill sites. Additionally the project is consistent with Housing Element goals
and policies which encourage facilitating housing production and land use efficiency,
including HE Policy 3.12.7, which specifically identifies this area as potentially being
appropriate for residential uses.
2. The redesignation of the unaddressed vacant parcel from an industrial designation
(Manufacturing: M) to a residential designation (Medium-High Density Residential: R-3)
would not adversely impact the overall supply of manufacturing property in the area, as
the proximity of the site to residential uses and constrained access make it undesirable for
many industrial uses.
3. The redesignation of the unaddressed vacant parcel from an industrial designation
(Manufacturing: M) to a residential designation (Medium-High Density Residential: R-3)
would not result in an inappropriate development on the site, as the Special
�/
Resolution No. XXXX (200:-series) Attachment 8
Page 2
Considerations "S" overlay will insure that development of the site is consistent with
ALUP safety and City noise policies. The following standards shall apply to the Special
Considerations overlay for the site:
Airport Safety
a. All owners, potential purchasers, occupants (whether as owners or renters), and
potential occupants (whether as owners or renters) will receive the disclosure
document approved by the Airport Land Use Commission in conjunction with this
review prior to entering any contractual obligation to purchase, lease, rent, or
otherwise occupy any property or properties within the airport area.
b. Development of the site shall be consistent with City Zoning Regulations and
Airport Land Use Safety policies, including maximum density of persons per
acre.
c. Aviation easements will be recorded for all properties involved in the proposed
development.
Noise
d. The construction of residential uses at the site shall be accompanied by an
acoustical analysis (noise study) to ensure that interior spaces and exterior private
use areas are designed to mitigate noise impacts to levels determined acceptable
by the City's General Plan Noise Element. Specific construction details shall be
identified as recommendations in the study.
e. All owners and occupants shall receive disclosure concerning the adjacent
manufacturing uses and potential noise exposure.
SECTION 2. Planned Development Rezone Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the
City Council makes the following findings:
4. The project is consistent with the General Plan and the Airport Land Use Plan, and with
the included conditions and mitigation measures is allowed within the primary zoning
district (R-3-S).
5. The project complies with all applicable provisions of the Zoning Regulations other than
those modified by the PD rezoning, which include: 0-lot line development, exceptions to
minimum parcel size and coverage in conjunction with real property subdivision, reduced
street yards, minor height exceptions, and tandem parking and a reduction of seven spaces.
6. Mandatory Planned Development project features are satisfied by the provision of more
than 25 percent of the residential units at rates affordable to households of very low, low
or moderate incomes, and achieving a minimum of 30 percent greater energy efficiency
than required by California Code of Regulations Title 24.
7. The approved modifications to the development standards of the Zoning Regulations,.
listed in Finding No. 2, are necessary and appropriate to accommodate the superior
design of the proposed project, its compatibility with adjacent land uses, and its
successful mitigation of environmental impacts.
8. The project complies with all applicable City Design Guidelines and establishes
Attachment 8
Resolution No. XXXX (200: oeries)
Page 3
additional parameters to ensure development is in harmony with nature and the adjacent
neighborhood.
9. All affected public facilities, services, and utilities are adequate to serve the proposed
project.
10. The location, size, site planning, building design features, and operating characteristics of
the project are highly suited to the characteristics of the site and surrounding neighborhood,
and will be compatible with the character of the site, and the land uses and development
intended for the surrounding neighborhood by the General Plan.
11. The site is adequate for the project in terms of size, configuration topography, and other
applicable features, and has appropriate access to public streets with adequate capacity to
accommodate the quantity and type of traffic expected to be generated by the use.
12. With the incorporation of conditions of approval and mitigation measures listed in the
Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, the establishment, maintenance,
or operation of the proposed project will not, in the circumstances of the particular case, be
detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the
vicinity of the proposed use, or detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the
neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City.
SECTION 3. Action. The Zoning Regulations Map Amendments are hereby approved
as identified within Exhibit A for the rezoning of the unaddressed parcel, and including the
standards for the "S" overlay as described above, and including the ALUP approved disclosure
agreement which is included as Exhibit B, and the Planned Development Zoning overlay for the
entire site.
SECTION 4. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council
members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage
in the Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into
effect at the expiration of thirty(30) days after its final passage.
INTRODUCED on the day of ,
2009, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the
day of 2009, on the following roll call vote:
On motion of seconded by and
on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 17th day of March, 2009.
a-93
Resolution No. XXXX (200,_,eries) Attachment 8
Page 4
Mayor David F. Romero
ATTEST:
Audrey Hooper, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
onath well, City Attorney
GACD-PLAWMMASLO\Ciry Council\CC Ordinance 27-06(approval)Zoning.doc
PpOr
Legend
PD OveM4y
M to R-3-S
R-3-S
851 & 860 Humbert and 004-951 -009
GPAIR/PDITR/ABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08
Attachment 9
Draft Resolution of Denial
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX (2009 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING
AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FROM SERVICES &
MANUFACTURING TO MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND ZONING
MAP FROM MANUFACTURING (M) TO MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
WITH THE SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS OVERLAY (R-3-S)FOR OF THE
UNADDRESSED PARCEL (APN. 004-951-009),PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD)
OVERLAY ZONING,VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, PURCHASE OF
SURPLUS PROPERTY,USE PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A SENSITIVE SITE,
ABANDONMENTS OF RIGHTS-OF-WAY,AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTDRIVE; GPA/R/PD/TR/ABAN/A 27-
06 AND ER 123-08(TRACT 2977)
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 February 11, 2009, for the purpose of considering application R/PD/TR/ABAN/A
27-06 and ER 123-08, a request to allow a General Plan Amendment and Rezoning, Planned
Development Rezone, Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Abandonment of rights-of-way, Use permit
for development of a sensitive site, and Purchase of surplus property for a workforce housing and
mixed-use development; 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 March
17, 2009, for the purpose of considering the project; 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.
BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. That this Council, after consideration the requests for amendments to the
General Plan and Zoning Maps, planned development rezoning, vesting tentative tract map,
purchase of city property, use permit for development of a sensitive site, abandonments of rights-
of-way, and environmental review, and considering the Planning Commission's
recommendations, staff recommendations, public testimony, and reports thereof, makes the
following findings:
[Council specifies findings related to the General Plan and Zoning Map amendments,
planned development rezoning, vesting tentative tract map, purchase of city property, use
permit for development of a sensitive site or abandonments of rights-of-way]
SECTION 2. Denial. The City Council does hereby deny the amendments to the
General Plan and Zoning Maps, planned development rezoning, vesting tentative tract map,
purchase of city property, use permit for development of a sensitive site, abandonments of rights-
C;��
Resolution No. XXXX (200:-oecies) - Attachment 9
Page 2
of-way, and Negative Decoration for property located at 851 and 860 Humbert Avenue and the
unaddressed parcel known as 004-951-009 (Application R/PDnWABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-
08; Tract 2977.
On motion of seconded by and on
the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 17th day of March, 2009.
Mayor David F. Romero
ATTEST:
Audrey Hooper, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Jonathan Lowell, City Attorney
GACD-PLANUHiUViASLO\City Council\CC Reso 77-07(denial).doc
V ��
1
To: The Mayor and Council of San Luis Obispo
From: Diane Diamond, 2864 Victoria Ave., San Luis Obispo,CA 93401
Subject: Moylan Terrace
Date: March 12, 2009
Before any large projects are approved along the Broad Street Corridor,the Corridor Plan
needs to be finalized and funded. As it stands, the area between South Street and Tank
Farm Road is already highly impacted with traffic.
No projects should be approved without adequate parking facilities. We cannot wish
away the fact that most adults in San Luis Obispo County have an automobile. The
present Villa Rosa project was approved with inadequate parking and that has led to
ongoing problems and disputes in the neighborhood. Another project with inadequate
parking will further impact the neighborhood.
It cannot be taken for granted that people will park two cars in a tandem parking garage.
Residents will have complicated schedules and they will not play musical cars in order to
accommodate tandem parking. Homeowner associations cannot be expected to be
enforcers of poorly planned parking rules.
A huge project with little green space invites several dangers. In front of Moylan Terrace
is a densely trafficked street;behind are railway tracks with several freight trains a day
rumbling through. Moylan Terrace is"workforce"housing so will presumably have
many small children.
A complete EIR is needed before any city approval is given to the project. Effects on air
quality, noise, water and safety need to be known. Proportion of green space to buildings
also needs further consideration.
The City and residents of Stoneridge and Villa Rosa want to see our area be residentially
friendly. We welcome more"workforce"housing in the area, but we want this done
carefully and proportionally. The Moylan Terrace project as now proposed is just too
dense,too industrial,and too much of a parking problem and traffic hazard to be
approved. A modified plan would enhance the livability of the San Luis Obispo
community.
_ NzYn� E-raj c.
�i GfCCUNCIL 2rCDD DIR
FED FELE `I Z GA6 Cry A&Z B'FIN DIR
— MEET IN1.0 AQEii!UA Oy'ASAOftra�,nc [T-FIRE CHIEF
J� O ATTORNEY p'PW DIR
DATE 3 I o ITEM 131CLERKiORICn ZPOLICE CHF
7D P HEADS ff REC DIR
2rUTIL DIR
nlCaJ tim�5
COLI VC4L
cxr-f mama.
�C-l-rc2rc.
Page 1 of 1
Council,SloCity
011111
From: Sally Hillis[sallyhillis@pobox.com] Sent: Sun 3/15/2009 11:22 AM
To: Council,SloCity
Cc:
Subject Moylan Terrace
Attachments:
March 15, 2009
The Mayor and Council of San Luis Obispo,
As residents of Villa Rosa, we are writing to you to share our
interest and concems for the proposed Moylan Terrace project on Broad.
Street in San Luis Obispo. We support this project but only after
certain modifications are made. The changes we suggest are not
unreasonable, and at this stage,they are doable.
There are serious traffic and parking problems that need to be
addressed now, before this, or any other project in our area,
proceeds. Everyone who lives in this area knows that traffic on Broad
St is a mad house. There are no traffic lights between Orcutt and ELM FILE
South Street,and the posted speed limit is so high that traffic goes
racing through here creating a serious safety problem now. In the - MEETING AGE.1A
near future, when the Laurel Creek Homes housing project on Orcutt is
completed,traffic in this area will even be worse. DATE3lLW-id- ITL-L. i " �H z
We feel that it's an absolute necessity to lower the speed limit and
put a traffic light at Lawrence and Broad St. It is almost impossible
for a pedestrian to cross Broad Street there currently, and difficult
for cars to make make safe tums into and out of residential areas.
Before you add more residences, Broad Street needs to be tamed; it's
noisy and unsafe. It needs to be paved with a substance similar to
what is used on Broad Street north of South Street which is quieter. � '� cc C--07Aa4-
We know there is a Broad Street Corridor project in the works, but E-'�G CUNCIL aZDD DIR
these things need to be done before another residential development is C Calrly 1X9e 2--FIN DIR
permitted. C'� Ss C"Mcr-2-FIRE CHIEF
-A10RNEY 'ZIPW
L' DIR
In addition to current traffic problems, there is also a parking C'rCLERK/ORIG 2-POLICE CHF
problem in this area. In the past, previous Council members didn't ❑ DEPT HEADS C' REC DIR
i -Plr�
require the developers to build adequate parking for the number of ,- Z-UTIL DIR
units they built. Please don't allow developers to reduce parking _ —I` "�-� GVHR DIR
requirements again.This creates a problem that only gets worse and it A1-A )TUR65 CouwGL
is impossible to correct after the fact. Since this is a designated
mixed use area, we share parking with local businesses including many C" rRGe
trucks.The impact of several large trucks parking on the street makes C4J7tlC
parking for the residents worse.
Thank you for listening to our views. Potential parking, noise and
safety issues are large and need complete review. Who better than us
to share our concerns with you? We know what it is like to live in
this area on a daily basis. It could be improved without a huge effort.
Respectfully,.
Donald and Sarah Hillis
2854 Victoria Ave.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
https:Hmail.slocity.org/exchange/slocitycouncit/Inbox/Moylan%2OTerrace.EML?Cmd=open 3/16/2009
Page 1 of 1
Council, SloCity
From: WILLIAM BYARS[bill.byars@prodigy.net] Sent: Mon 3/16/2009 12:04 PM
To: Council,SloCity
Cc:
Subject Proposed Moylan Terrace Housing Development
Attachments:
Mr Mayor and City Council members,
The proposed Moylan Terrace housing development is scheduled to be presented to you for your initial consideration on March
17th. As homeowners in the immediate area,we would like to draw your attention to what we consider to be the two worst aspects
of the proposed development:
1. A high density of dwellings but very little green space.
2. Lack of a safe crossing over the adjacent railroad tracks to Sinsheimer Park.
Elaborating on these aspects in turn:
The density of dwelling units in the proposed development seems to be very high for this neighborhood. While this density may be
allowable under R3 zoning, it appears to have resulted In some undesirable design compromises. For example,the architect has
proposed a site plan layout with most buildings arranged in closely spaced rows reminiscent of army barracks. There is very little
green space in this layout Such an arrangement would create a poor living environment for the residents. The buildings also
incorporate two car garages with tandem parking. Tandem parking garages generally do not achieve the desired result in practice
owing to the difficulty in switching cars each day if the occupants work different hours. Inevitably one of the cars from each such
garage would be parked in the limited outside parking area which would then fill up and overflow into neighboring streets.
The project would be located immediately across the railroad tracks from Sinsheimer Park but there is currently no safe way for the
residents to cross the tracks. The project's many family dwellings would Introduce a significant number of children into an area
where currently there are very few If any. The lack of a safe crossing poses a serious risk to the children who would want to play in
the park because of the lack of green space at Moylan Terrace.
We would like to request that Council members give serious consideration to reducing the density of the project in order
to provide more green space and side-by-side parking garages. This would create a much better living environment for the
residents and would reduce parking problems, We also request the Council to condition any approval of the project on the prior or
concurrent construction of a.safe crossing over the railroad tracks in the project's vicinity.
Sincerely,
Ruth and Bill Byars
905 Lawrence Drive
San Luis Obispo
i<GOUNCIL
TCDD DI
1,-D FILE Rr-49AGC/rz /Vz [,rHN DIR
1R AGA15 'ssrcivgatrer,--'FIRE CH!;-'-
- MEE i, ROG AC-Ei DA 2-ATTORNEY ?'Pw Q
'CL ,R
DATE I 1 L! 01 l� ERK/ORIG ?'PQLICE G: i
11 11 D PT HEADS iyREc: pin
�L13k�UT)L (J'
�_f(1-l_ uNL _ �•a i-�
N �rm�s Cou uCkL
(It ry ntcz
https:Hmail.slocity.org/exchange/slocitycounciVInbox/Proposed%2OMoylan%20Terrace%... 3/16/2009
_- r;-D FILE
MEE-i IN IG AGENDA
�������iiIllllilllllP10 �IIIIIII
DATE 3 c f T E[:�
11'1 E11'1012a1'1 C�U1'1'1
Date: March 16, 20092v SPH E- SIL
%COUNCIL C�CDD DIR
To: City Council rdGAO' n-" nae Z'FIN DSR
L3'A2k8A5srcenntcR-2T1RE CHIEF
Via: Ken Hampian, City Manager EATTORNEY 2rpw DIR
21'CLERKI0RIG 12'POLICE CHF
❑ DEPT HEADS ZREC Din
From: John Mandeville, Community Development Director « . Z-UTIL 00
By: Jaime Hill, Associate Planner -nes ��cNci
�C�� M6�
Subject: Item PH-2 March 17`x' City Council Meeting (HASLO Moylan Terrace) Cir_
Council member Carter has asked several questions about the proposed Moylan Terrace
housing development. Because other council members may share some of these
questions, the following information is being presented for all council members.
Question 1) Page 2-1 says the City has invested $600K to date in the project. I could
have sworn that there were additional City moneys already invested before Council
approved this $600K. Also, page 2-6 says we're looking to use BEGIN money as
well. How much? Is that the additional $600K or $700K, HASLO was talking
about needing when we approved the first $600K or is that some other City money.
The net of all this is how much have we put in so far and how much more are we
likely to put in?
The City originally committed $600,000 in Affordable Housing Fund monies as a loan to
HASLO. Council subsequently authorized conversion of this loan to a grant at the request
of HASLO. At the Council hearing for conversion of the loan, HASLO indicated that
they anticipated the need for additional funding before the project was constructed,
however no requests for additional funding have been submitted. At this time, HASLO is
still exploring other funding options, including through the State's BEGIN program and a
Proposition 1C grant.
An additional $110,000 of City Affordable Housing Fund monies will go towards the 16-
unit R-3 apartment site adjacent to Moylan Terrace which is not part of this entitlement
package. This money was originally approved for the North Chon o site owned by
HASLO, but that project was not feasible as an affordable housing development and the
property was sold.
Question 2) Is there some back story to the proposed mixed used building? Does
HASLO have plans for the commercial portion? On its face, the mixed use building
seems like an odd add-on.
I 1
After the completion of the Victoria Avenue connection the two existing lots isolated on
the west side of the street are left with a width of only 40-feet. The narrow width makes
this area difficult to utilize, and it was originally proposed for detention/open space area.
Various road alignments were evaluated in efforts to widen the area west of Victoria, but
in order to have the intersections at Lawrence and Humbert function properly the street
had to line up without any curves or off-sets. Despite the difficulty of developing the
long, narrow parcels, HASLO worked with staff to utilize the site in a way that would be
consistent with the goals for Victoria Avenue outlined in the draft South Broad Street
Corridor Plan (SBSCP).
In that plan Victoria Street is a vital urban corridor important to pedestrian circulation. A
detention basin or parking lot would have created a dead space along that corridor.
HASLO has proposed a mixed-use structure which would allow for ground-floor
commercial space, with a rental unit above. The remainder of the area west of Victoria
will be developed as a pocket-park. HASLO would retain ownership and maintenance
responsibilities for the building and park space. Various uses for the commercial space
have been discussed, including a community room that could be rented out for art
exhibits or neighborhood meetings, as a retail space for Growing Grounds (similar to the
storefront maintained on Broad Street in the Downtown), or as a coffee shop.
.Question 3) Page 2-2 references 25 on-street spaces. (Blueprint page T-2 says 24.)
Where are those spaces? Presumably on both sides of Victoria, but are we counting
both sides of Lawrence and Humbert or just the HASLO sides of those streets?
Although on-street parking is not included in the project's parking calculation, a fairly
significant amount of public parking will be created with the completion of Victoria
Avenue, Lawrence Drive, and Humbert Avenue. The additional on-street parking
included in this calculation is on both sides of Victoria and on the HASLO sides of
Lawrence and Humbert. Modifications to the street design directed by the Planning
Commission and inclusion of a third trash enclosure adjacent to Building 11 would result
in 2- 3 fewer on-street spaces on Humbert.
Question 4) I'd like to see the calculations for private open space and shared open
space. Condo projects have requirements for both. How well does this project
currently meet those open space requirements?
The project was previously evaluated for compliance with Planned Development
standards rather than condominium standards,which provide for more flexibility in how
amenities are provided. Per your request, a quick calculation shows that all units have
ground level patio ranging from 92 sf to 117 sf, and 5 of the 6 floor plans also have
second floor deck ranging from 33 sf to 63 sf. Public open space accounts for .
approximately 85,500 sf, or a little more than 1,000 sf per ownership unit.
Question 5) Am I correct that Villa Rosa also has a R-3-PD zoning?
That is correct,Villa Rosa is zoned R-3-PD.
Question 6) Do you happen to know what parking reduction was provided to Villa
Rosa? That is, x spaces were normally required, but y spaces were allowed.
Staff's research did not identify any parking reduction granted to Villa Rosa. However, it
may have been the case that two parking spaces per unit, regardless of bedroom count,
may have been allowed. Staff is aware that Villa Rosa residents continue to indicate that
there was a parking variance granted for Villa Rosa project. Staff however was not able
to confirm this.
Question 'n On page 24, there is a statement that reads "based on State density
bonus standards only 150 parking stalls could be required." Is that applicable? Do
State standards supersede our own?
State standards do supersede our own and the statement is applicable, but the Housing
Authority has agreed to provide the amount of parking shown on the plans and to
implement a trip reduction plan to encourage use of alternative modes.
The State Density Bonus Law (SB 1818) was adopted in 2005 and has been amended
twice since. The law provides minimum requirements for density bonuses and certain
property development standards when affordable housing is provided. The City has its
own Affordable Housing Incentives(SLOMC 17.90), which also provide developers with
the ability to request exceptions to property development standards in exchange for
affordable housing.
Some aspects of the City's Affordable Housing Incentives are more flexible than the State
version and developers have continued to voluntarily follow the City's incentives, as is
the case with the current proposal. The Housing Element update proposes a program to
revise the City's incentives to be consistent with the State density bonus law.
Question 8) Page 24 refers to a $1.5 million difference vs. 2008 sale prices. Since
prices were falling throughout 2008, it's not clear what specific month for prices was
used. More importantly,what is the difference using current 2009 prices?
More information will be presented on this during the meeting. The prices used in the
agenda report were for the Fourth Quarter of 2008, and the medium condo price in the
City of SLO for the quarter was $435,000 (www.slowatch.com). The $1.5 million figure
is a conservative estimate of the total value, which we will calculate more accurately for
the presentation.
Question 9) On page 2-6, am I correct to understand that BEGIN funds would be
used to transform some of the above moderate units to moderate? How many
currently above moderate units are we likely to be talking about?
Using the County's sales prices for above moderate or workforce housing, we estimate
that the buy-down cost for a three-bedroom unit would be $77,400. Therefore, if the City
were to put in an additional $600,000 and the State were to approve BEGIN funds for
$600,000 we could convert an additional 15 three-bedroom units to moderate
affordability. The City would ultimately be paid back this investment and we would then
get to keep the State's $600,000 with interest.
Other funding sources are also being pursued.
Question 10) Could you please provide back-up to the chart on page 2-6 — namely,
HH Income thresholds and proposed sale prices for each cell in the chart.
Below are the tables from our Affordable Housing Standards that include this information
and we will expand the table for the presentation.
TABLE 1: 2008.A.NN U L\'CONM LLIHTS S
GROUP
ONLINUMBER OF PERSONS HOUSEHOLD
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S
-ERY LOW 23.450 26.800 30.150 33.500 36.200 38.850 41.550 44.200
LOWER 37.500 42.900 48.250 53.600 57,900 62.200 66.450 70.750
MEDIAN 46.900 53.600 60.300 67.000 72,400 77.700 83.100 88,400
MODERATE 56.300 64.300 72.400 80.400 86.500 93.300 99.700 106.100
updated apriL 2008.from California State Depamueut of Housing and Cowanunity Development(HCD)Official Income
Limits.
TABLE 2: 2008 RENT/S_NLES AFFORDABILITY ST-tNTA"S
INCOME DWELLING SIZE
GROUP
STUDIO 1-BDRM 2-BDRM 3-BDRM 4-BDRM
M XbKVM
VERYLOW M oatWy Rent $536 $670 $754 $871 $971
Sales Price $70,350 $80,400 $90,450 $104,550 $116,550
70777 Rent $704 $804 $905 $1,046 $1,166
LOWER
Sales Price $112,500 $128,700 $144,750 $167,250 $186,600
Monthly Rent $977 $1,117 $1,256 $1,396 $1,508
MODERATE
Sales Price 1 $197,050 $225,050 1 $253,400 $292,600 $326,51
Question 11) Page 2-8. Is the proposed R-3 apartment site currently owned by
HASLO? If so, how does HASLO plan to provide parking for that site — 16 units
per the blueprint? ' It also looks like that site isn't getting half of the abandoned
portions of Frederick and Humbert. Is that legal?
HASLO now has ownership of the site identified as the "future 16-unit apartment
building", as well as the parcel immediately to the west. It is staffs understanding that
they have done some preliminary design work to ensure that they can get the desired 16
apartments and their required parking onto that site. As part of this map, they have
included a lot line adjustment (LLA) which transfers the adjacent site's portion of the
abandonments to the subject projects site. Because both lots are held in common
ownership this is perfectly legal.
Question 12) Comparing page 2-8 and the blueprint page T-2. Is the northern tip of
the rezoned area owned by HASLO or not? This would be north of Bldgs 1 & 2,
along Frederick, going up to Francis? If owned by HASLO, what is the plan for
that land and the abandoned portion of Frederick that will go to it?
The northern point of the site is currently part of the property owned by HASLO, but is
not included in the proposed development area. HALSO purchased the site labeled
"future 16-unit apartment building" from an individual who also owns the adjacent
property to the north, fronting Francis Street. Part of their purchase agreement with that
adjacent property owner was that following entitlements of the Moylan Terrace project
they would instigate a lot line adjustment (LLA) to transfer the northern corner of their
property, and the entire width of that abandoned portion of Frederick Street, to him. This
property swap leaves both HASLO and the adjacent property owner with more logical
developable areas.
Question 13) Has the Fire Department signed off on these plans with respect to
access to all buildings?
The Fire Department has reviewed the plans and has indicated that the proposed project
allows for required access to all the buildings.
Question 14) Page 2-20 and elsewhere make reference to only one building being
over 35 ft, yet blueprint pages A-3.1 & A-3.2 show that two will be — both Bldg. 1 &
2.
That was an error in the Planning Commission staff report, which was clarified in the
presentation. You are correct that both Building 1 and Building 2 exceed the 35-foot
height maximum by 1.88 ft and 0.63 ft respectively, as measured from average natural
grade. Although the buildings will have actual heights of 32.38 ft, the padding of the site
necessary for drainage purposes elevates the grade under these buildings about 6.5 ft.
Question 15) Page 2-24 and elsewhere talk about an "LLA." What is that?
The lot line adjustment (LLA) references the property line adjustment between the
northern point of the HASLO property and the neighboring property to the west, fronting
Francis Street;as described in response to Question No. 12.
Question 16) Where do the public facility financing plans stand for the Broad Street
area? What requirements does this project have to pay into those plans? What is
the plan for financing and the assumed timing of the Francis street bicycle bridge?
An evaluation of the cost of public improvements envisioned in the South Broad Street
Corridor Area Plan is being conducted. Since the plan is still in draft there is not an
adopted financing plan nor have implementation measures been identified. This project
will, however, be assisting in implementation of the plan by installing Victoria Avenue
across the frontage of the property. Additionally, project conditions of approval to
reduce traffic impacts include paying the project's fair share toward the signalization of
the Broad/Lawrence intersection and improvements at the Broad/South/Santa Barbara
intersection. Similar mitigation measures were also imposed on the Village at Broad
Street project which is also within the Broad Street Corridor area. An evaluation of three
possible locations for the bike bridge was conducted and the Francis Street location was
determined to be the most cost-effective. Grant funding is being explored for financing
the Francis Street bicycle bridge. Timing of installation of the bridge will be dependent
on funding..
Question 17) Page 2-33 talks about a fence along the RR tracks not being proposed
at this time, yet blueprint page L-I shows such a fence. Which is correct?
The landscape plan depicts the 42-inch decorative iron picket fence which will be built
with the project at the top of the slope bank. The fencing discussion at the Planning
Commission was in reference to the 6-foot tall safety fencing that will need to be
installed between the future bicycle path and the railroad tracks, similar to the fencing
that separates the existing Railroad Safety Path from the tracks to the east.
Question 18) Page 2-36 shows the PC requiring access to the proposed bicycle path,
yet that has been left out of our motion? Why? It also seems like the rest of the
PC's provisions have been left out, in particular the idea to remove the cul-de-sac at
the end of Humbert. Why?
The Planning Commission motion included a recommendation that the Council provide
direction to the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) on modifications to be
incorporated into the final project design. Because this is just direction from the Council
to the ARC, it would not be part of the resolution, but if supported by the Council would
be conveyed to the ARC by staff.
Some initial evaluation of the Planning Commission's direction has already occurred, and
will be included in the staff and applicant presentations.
19) Page 246 talks about needing to make "all 8 of the required findings." What 8
findings are being referenced? Are those in the PD ordinance? If so, is that
ordinance in the Zoning regs or the LUE? (I'm not sure where to go find the
general PD requirements.)
In order to approve a Planned Development overlay rezoning the Council must make the
eight findings listed in Section 17.50.060B of the Zoning Regulations, and included on
page 2-92 /93 of your staff report.
Question 20) Also, please point me to where I can find general background on "the
intent of S overlays" (as stated in the Council resolution)?
Special Consideration (S) zones are described in Section 17.56 of the Zoning
Regulations. In this case, the S-zone overlay was applied to the site in 2006 when the
Council changed the land use designation from Services & Manufacturing (M zoning) to
Medium-High Density Residential (R-3), Council Ordinance 1496 (2006 Series). The
purpose of the S-overlay was to ensure compliance with City noise standards and the
Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) safety policies.
21) On page A-2.1 of the blueprints. What is the need for an "accessible garage" if
the unit with that garage is not itself accessible? (There are stairs in it.)
In order to meet Building Department standards for accessibility, a unit must be designed
to provide ADA compliant access to habitable floor area including at a minimum one
bathroom. Accessibility includes provisions of universal design, such as lower counters
in bathrooms, grab bars, easy-to-operate door levers, etc., and is not limited to wheelchair
access. Accessible access to the entire unit is not.stipulated by Building Code.
PLEASE NOTE! Track changes have now been turned on to enable
the Clerk's staff to see what changes have been made since we have
begun building the 02/03 tentative agenda. Please do not turn off. We
will accept all changes at the end of the day on 1/20 and will turn off
track changes for future entries.
i
���������iiulllllllllll�"""'illlllll
council mcmomnOum
. • 4.if -
DATE: March 13, 2009 RECEIVED
TO: City Council MAR 13 2009
/
VIA: Ken Hampian, CAO r01' SLO CITY CLERK
FROM: Doug Davidson, Community Development Deputy Director
SUBJECT: Housing Authority Project on Humbert St. —Council Meeting March 17, 2009
Attached are two revised Resolutions for Public Hearing #2 on the March 17`h agenda. These
revisions are the result of discussions this week between the applicant and Public Works
Department to slightly modify a few conditions for clarification. In the Abandonment
Resolution new conditions were added to ensure that the abandonments are not finaled until the
project receives all its project entitlements. In the project approval Resolution a condition was
added at the end to provide flexibility by subjecting the conditions to the approval of the
Community Development and Public Works Director. The City Attorney's Office has reviewed
and accepted the modifications.
Please call Contract Planner Jaime Hill (441-4975) or Doug Davidson at extension #177 (781-
7177) if you have any questions.
COUNCIL TCDD DIR
pCA0 ;'FIN DIR �-D Fii
E ACAO r FIRE CHIEF
B ATTORNEY f PW DIR 1� RG.E •�
- �111EE i iit
19-1 CLERK/ORIG Z POLICE CHF D 1 _i_,
O DEPT HEADS � REC DIR DATE
Z UTIL DIR
c 7- r-IRDIH 1
K NEUJTinrES � �L ('oc..�rCiL
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX(2009 Series)
AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FROM SERVICES&
MANUFACTURING TO MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR OF THE
UNADDRESSED PARCEL(APN.004-951-009)AND APPROVING A VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP,PURCHASE OF SURPLUS PROPERTY,USE PERMIT
FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A SENSITIVE SITE,AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR RESIDENTIAL AND
MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT 851 AND 860 HUMBERT AND THE
UNADDRESSED VACANT LOT(004-951-009); (TRACT 2977)
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 February 11,2009, for the purpose of considering application R/PD/TR/ABAN/A
27-06 and ER 123-08, a request to allow a General Plan Amendment and Rezoning, Planned
Development Rezone,Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Abandonment of rights-of-way,Use permit
for development of a sensitive site,and Purchase of surplus property for a workforce housing and
mixed-use development;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 March
17,2009,for the purpose of considering the project;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.
BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. CEOA Compliance Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City
Council makes the following findings:
1. The project's Mitigated Negative Declaration which was prepared by the Community
Development Department on February 2, 2009 and reviewed by the Planning
Commission adequately identifies that with the incorporation of recommended mitigation
measures there is no foreseeable potential for significant environmental impacts by the
proposed project.
2. The proposed project will provide quality affordable housing consistent with the intent of
California Government Code 65915, and that the requested density bonus, incentives and
concessions are reasonably necessary to facilitate the production of affordable housing
units.
SECTION 2. General Plan Amendment amending the Land Use May from Services &
Manufacturing to Medium-High Density Residential for the unaddressed lot (004-591-009).
Based upon all the evidence,the City Council makes the following findings:
Resolution No.XXXX(2009 Series) -
Page 2
3. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with General Plan Land Use
Element policies regarding the expansion of housing opportunities and maximizing the
development potential of infill sites. Additionally the project is consistent with Housing
Element goals and policies which encourage facilitating housing production and land use
efficiency, including HE Policy 3.12.7, which specifically identifies this area as
potentially being appropriate for residential uses.
4. The redesignation of the unaddressed vacant parcel from an industrial designation
(Service & Manufacturing) to a residential designation (Medium-High Density
Residential) would not adversely impact the overall supply of manufacturing property in
the area, as the proximity of the site to residential uses and constrained access make it
undesirable for many industrial uses.
SECTION 3. Subdivision Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council
makes the following findings:
5. The proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map, together with the provisions for its design
and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan and Airport Land Use Plan,
including compatibility with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs
specified in the General Plan.
6. The design of the subdivision provides,to the extent feasible,for future passive or natural
heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision.
7. As conditioned,the subdivider will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its
agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or
its agents,officers or employee?to attac,4 set aside, void or annul an approval of the C_ ity _. - oeieted:h
Council,Planning Commission,or City Staff concerning a subdivision.
8. The proposed vesting tentative tract map is consistent with the General Plan; including
LUE 2.4.7, HE 3.4.2 and 3.13, and CE Goal 2, COSE 4.5.1 and 4.6.17, because the
subdivision will provide residential development anticipated by the General Plan and
provide compact and sustainable housing options affordable to a variety of household
types.
9. The site is physically suited for the proposed type of development because the project has
been designed to utilize available residential density while providing quality common
open spaces and roadway connections which will benefit the general public.
10.The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, is not likely to cause serious
public health or safety problems because the type of improvements are appropriate for the
location will be designed to meet existing building and safety codes.
11.The design of the subdivision, or the type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within
the proposed subdivision because such easements will be maintained.
'Resolution No.XXXX(2009 Series) -
Page 3
SECTION 4.Disposition of Surplus Property Findings. Based upon all the evidence,the
City Council makes the following findings:
12.The City no longer has need for the vacant property located just west of the railroad right-
of-way.
13. Disposition of this property to facilitate an affordable housing development is consistent
with the policies of the Land Use and Housing Elements of the General Plan.
SECTION 5. Use Permit for development of a Sensitive Site Findings. Based upon all
the evidence,the City Council makes the following findings:
14.Development of the site is consistent with the intent of the "S-overlay" and will not be
detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of persons working or living at the site or
within the vicinity, as the project is consistent with ALUP safety and compatibility
policies and City noise standards.
15. As conditioned, all residents of the site will be duly noticed of both Airport operations
and adjacent noise sources.
SECTION 6. Action. The City Council does hereby approve the General Plan Amendment,
Vesting Tentative Tract Map, disposition of surplus property, and adoption of a Negative
Declaration for property located at 851 and 860 Humbert and the unaddressed vacant parcel
(Application GPA/R/PD/TR/ABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08; Tract 2977), with incorporation of
the following project mitigation measures,conditions and code requirements:
A. Mitigation Measures
1. Should hydrocarbon contaminated soil be encountered during construction activities, the
APCD must be notified as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after affected
material is discovered to determine if an APCD Permit will be required. In addition,
standard APCD required procedures shall be implemented immediately after
contaminated soil is discovered.
2. Prior to any grading activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that a
geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) is
present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption
request must be filed with the District. If NOA is found at the site the applicant must
comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM.
3. If utility pipelines are scheduled for removal or relocation the project may be subject to
various regulatory jurisdictions, including the requirements stipulated in the National
Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants. These requirements include,but are not
limited to 1) notification requirements to the APCD, 2) asbestos survey conducted by a
Certified Asbestos Inspector, and, 3) applicable removal and disposal requirements of
identified ACM.
Resolution No.XXXX(2009 Series)
Page 4
4. This project exceeds the 4.0 acres of grading threshold and is near potentially sensitive
receptors, and shall comply with all applicable Air Pollution Control District regulations
pertaining to the control of fugitive dust (PM10) as contained in section 6.5 of the Air
Quality Handbook. The following APCD standards for dust control shall be adhered to:
a. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible,
b. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent
airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency would be
required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water
should be used whenever possible'
c. All dirt stockpile areas should be sprayed daily as needed,
d. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation
and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible following
completion of any soil disturbing activities,
e. 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,
f. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using
approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in
advance by the APCD.
g. All roadways,driveways,sidewalks,etc. to be paved should be completed as soon
as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after
grading unless seeding or soil binders are used,
h. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any
unpaved surface at the construction site,
i. 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,
j. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets,or
wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site,and,
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.
5. Prior to recordation of the final map, a screening level health risk assessment shall be
performed to determine potential health risks to residents of the development. Depending
on the results of the screening level health risk assessment a more comprehensive
analysis may be required.
6. All fill material on the property that will be exported during development of the site shall
be sampled and analyzed prior to transport from the property. If soil is found to be
contaminated it shall be disposed of at a permitted facility.
7. All owners, potential purchasers,occupants(whether as owners or renters), and potential
occupants (whether as owners or renters) shall receive full and accurate disclosure
concerning the noise,safety,or overflight impacts associated with airport operations prior
to entering any contractual obligation to purchase, lease, rent, or otherwise occupy any
property or properties within the airport area.
Resolution No. XXXX(2009 Series) —
Page 5
8. Aviation easements will be recorded for all properties involved in the proposed
development with recordation of the final map.
9. The mixed-use structure west of Victoria Avenue shall not be constructed until after
adoption of the South Broad Street Corridor Plan, or red-signation of the_site_to a land___- Deleted:
use designation which allows for a combination of commercial and residential uses. Any
such Land Use changes shall be reviewed by the Airport Land Use Commission for
compliance with the Airport Land Use Plan.
10. All owners and occupants shall receive disclosure concerning the adjacent manufacturing
uses and potential noise exposure.
11.A final trip reduction plan shall be provided to, and approved by the City prior to final
map recordation.
B. Conditions
1. Final design of the project improvements shall be subject to review and approval by the
Architectural Review Commission,and shall include modifications to address the scale of
buildings facing Lawrence Drive,material changes to give architecture a more residential
feel, details of community open space and consideration of community garden space, and
provision of a third solid waste enclosure.
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. Easements for all public and common open spaces shall be clearly designated on the
Tract Map.
4. The tentative map describes a LLA affecting the project for which no specific
information is provided. Should the LLA not occur,the project as shown on the tentative
map is no longer valid. The details of the LLA should be provided for review to insure
there are no fatal flaws in the development proposal.
5. The final subdivision design and improvements shall comply with the South Broad Street
Corridor Plan and all other City of San Luis Obispo Design Standards, Engineering
Standards and Standard Plans and Specifications.
6. All grading on the easterly edge of the proposed development, adjacent to railroad right-
of-way shall be completed in such a manner that the toe of any slope is a minimum of 10
feet from the railroad right-of-way in order to accommodate a future bicycle path. An
appropriate structure shall be placed at the toe of the slope to prevent erosion onto the
future bicycle path area. The slope shall be designed such that the toe of the slope is at
Resolution No. XXXX(2009 Series)
Page 6
least five feet horizontally from the sewer main. Any structures or retaining walls shall
be at least 10 feet away from the sewer and shall be designed such that no additional load
is placed on the sewer main.
7. The tract map shall show and identify all easements described in the Title Report.
8. This development shall comply with the Waterways Management Plan. Provide a
complete hydraulic analysis, grading, drainage, and erosion control plan in accordance
with the Waterways Management Plan Volume III,Drainage Design Manual.
9. Show and note compliance with Engineering Standard 1010.13 for Storm Water Quality
Management for the drainage originating from or being conveyed through the parking
lots and private streets. Run-off from adjacent streets as well as run-off from the parking
lots will require treatment under this standard.
10. The drainage flowing northerly toward Francis Avenue from the proposed project shall
be carried and discharged onto Francis Avenue in an approved drainage facility.
Appropriate drainage easements from the adjoining property owner accepting the
drainage will be required.
11. Francis Avenue shall be improved with the installation of curb and gutter on the
southerly side of the street to accommodate additional storm water flows that may be
directed to this street.
12. These streets, within the boundaries of the proposed subdivision and including
transitions to existing improvements, shall be fully designed and constructed in
accordance with current City Standards including a 40 foot curb to curb street section
within a 60-foot dedicated right-of-way, and curb, gutter, 10-foot integral sidewalk, tree
wells,ramps,signing and striping.
13. A city standard 50-foot radius cul-de-sac shall be constructed where the Humbert
Avenue public street ends. A 50-foot radius right-of way at the easterly end of Francis
Avenue shall be provided.
14. The northerly side of Lawrence Drive shall be constructed to match the existing Villa
Rosa(Tract 2066) street section except for a 5-foot detached sidewalk. Complete a 40-
foot street section within a 60-foot right of way. Curb, gutter, detached sidewalk,ramps
signing and striping shall be designed and constructed to current City standards.
15. Street lighting, utilities and landscaping shall be installed in accordance with City
standards.
16. Prior to approval of improvement plans, any alternative paving materials proposed
within the public right-of-way shall be approved by the Public Works Director.
Alternative paving materials shall be maintained by the Homeowner's Association.
Resolution No.XXXX(2009 Series) - -
Page 7
17. Common areas and landscaped parkways shall be owned and maintained in perpetuity
for public use by the Homeowner's Association or Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo
County. Water meters for common landscape areas, including, but not limited to
parkways, medians and pathway corridors are subject to water impact fees and shall be
paid for by the subdivider.
18. The grading plan shall include provisions to comply with the soils engineer's
recommendations, including expansive soils, preparation of paved areas and pavement
design. The soils engineer shall supervise and approve all grading operations.
19. The subdivider's engineer shall submit water demand and wastewater generation
calculations so that the City can make a determination as to the adequacy of the
supporting infrastructure. If an off-site deficiency exists, the subdivider will be required
to mitigate the deficiency as part of the overall project.
20. Sewer and water mains shall be located in accordance with City Standard #6010. All
final grades and alignments of all public water,sewer and storm drains(including service
laterals and meters) are subject to modifications to the satisfaction of the Public Works
Director and Utilities Engineer.
21. The subdivision layout and preliminary utility plans shall include provisions for
irrigating common areas, parks, and other large landscape areas with recycled water.
Appropriately sized reclaimed water mains shall be designed and constructed from the
City's trunk system to these irrigation areas. If other use areas exist beyond the proposed
subdivision, the mains shall be appropriately sized to provide for future use areas and
extended to the boundary of the tract.
22. Include site sections or partial site sections as necessary to show site utilities. Provide
utility profiles as necessary where a possible conflict may exist between utilities for final
placement and/or for constructability. Additional review may be required by the Utilities
Engineer when complete plan information is provided.
23. Existing trees on adjacent properties shall be considered and protected if construction
encroaches upon their drip lines. The large Acacia tree in the Open space shall be
protected with a fence to be installed before grading or constructions begins and remains
undisturbed until completion of this project. A small willow tree in the center of this
project is ok to be removed and shall be mitigated for within the landscape plan to
include tree plantings.
24. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall be responsible for paying
current transportation impact fees (TIF) plus a "fair share" mitigation fee for the
percentage of new trips generated by the project that will travel through the intersection
of Broad/South/Santa Barbara intersection as determined by the Public Works Director,
and based on the estimated intersection improvement cost.
25. Previous traffic studies prepared for the Broad Street Corridor project identify the
intersection of Broad/Lawrence as a potential candidate for a future traffic signal. This
Resolution No.XXXX(2009 Series)
Page 8
project will add traffic to this intersection. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the
applicant will be required to pay its fair share toward the design and installation of a
future traffic signal at this intersection as determined by the Director of Public Works.
26. To minimize traffic impacts, a trip reduction plan and implementation program is
required. The plan shall include at a minimum: a) designation of a coordinator to
administer the program; b) carpool, carshare, bicycling and transit information; c)
availability of long term bicycle parking for residents, information and incentives for
those who use alternative transportation such as subsides to employees
using public transit,or other measures to approval of the Public Works Director. The trip
reduction plan shall be provided to all new tenants. A draft of the plan shall be submitted
for review as part of the building permit application. Occupancy shall not be granted
until the plan has been approved by the Public Works Director.
27. Prospective tenants shall be notified of the project's requested and approved parking
reductions and tandem parking. Additionally, they should be advised that they should
ensure that the amount of on-site parking is adequate for their needs because they will not
be able to obtain on-street parking permits for any additional parking needs.
28. Garages within the project shall be used exclusively for parking vehicles and may not be
used for general storage, recreation, or other uses that would prevent the parking of
vehicles as required by the Zoning Regulations.
29. The project design shall not preclude the future construction of a bike path along the
railroad corridor at the foot of the project slope. Prior to final map recordation, the
applicant shall record an easement for the future bikepath as necessary. To determine the
easement area, the applicant shall submit a site/grading plan that illustrates where this
path can be located and how this project will provide access to the future bikepath.
30. The project design shall not preclude the future construction of a bicycle bridge over the
railroad tracks at Francis Street. Prior to final map and abandonment approval, the
applicant shall submit a site plan/grading plan illustrating on-site and public
improvements outside of the area identified for the Francis Street bicycle bridge,
abutments and ADA ramping.
31. Public improvements shall comply with the draft Broad Street Corridor Plan which
identify Victoria Street as a"Village Street" and Lawrence Drive as an"Entry Street".
32. Long and short-term bicycle parking shall be provided in accordance with Table 6.5 of
the Zoning Regulations. Short-term bicycle racks shall be placed in visible locations near
public entries. Dimensioned locations and details of the short and long-term bicycle
parking (including 2x6 dimensioned area for each bicycle parking space in a residential
dwelling) shall be provided on the project's construction plans including rack design,
location, clearances and circulation for users in compliance with manufacturers'
standards.
Resolution No.XXXX(2009 Series)
Page 9
33. Continued affordability provisions shall be developed to assure units remain affordable- Formatted:Bullets and Numbering
to residents that earn low, lower, moderate and work force incomes. These provisions
may allow for equity accumulation over time. The continuance of affordability shall be
subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director prior to
issuance of building permits, Deleted:I
Formatted:Indent:Left: 0.25"
3 ...LI °�� '. r .i,�. ;"rfrlfr -nn:n�r'm:at 1�Lin.. ;nit I � .' '.•�. _I.'.nn �u;n�rlLi;: !I'll; hr i! ;.nh.t..i:tial•
i n 11(. rvr 10th Ihr an�nn'rd pl-.1� and n'1 mil';t:�!i�e, �u•��s ..r. .m'l rondit on, n' allporal, Formattem numbeIndentred
Left: 7+
•'tc, ,r f.I:. -.�,,.i..�'m ^rcr�n,I:-N: to t ol-I i')' o.0th t it lit. id ,�.. �'. 'l'..:u n:n'• (l tnuui..ion, ('irN Outline numbered ,2,3,Level:7+
1 1 a - Numbering Style:1,2,3,...+Start
1, ill.!Al.I itc�iu::al l:r�•ictvl'ntnmi.,.,uni dir,•t 1�on. Fin,,! r,i,..:r,ns 51,111 he nJ)Drocot to tiv' at:t+Alignment:Left+Aligned at:
'i 10;o' ofIIll,-(bnnuunityDcu•loprnrntDIngtor ill -1I'nh;g•Wo! Director".. 6.11"+Tab after: 0"+Indent at;
6,36",Tabs: 0.5",List tab
C. Code requirements. The following code requirements are included for information purposes Formatted:Font:(Default)Georgia,
only. They serve to give the applicant a general idea of other City requirements that will apply 10 pt _ --
to the project. This is not intended to bean exhaustive list as other requirements maybe
identified during the plan check process.
15. An encroachment permit will be required from the Public Works Department for any- Formatted:Bullets and Numbering
work or construction staging in the public right-of-way.
_A traffic control plan and/or pedestrian control plan shall be approved prior to- Formatted:Bullets and Numbering
encroachment permit issuance for work in the public right-of-way.
All boundary monuments,lot comers and centerline intersections,BC's,EC's,etc...,shall- Formatted:Bullets and Numbering
be tied to the City's Horizontal Control Network. At least two control points shall be used
and a tabulation of the coordinates shall be submitted with the final map or parcel map.
All coordinates submitted shall be based on the City coordinate system. A 3.5" diameter
computer floppy disk, containing the appropriate data compatible with Autocad(Digital
Interchange Format, DXF) for Geographic Information System (GIS) purposes, shall be
submitted to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
�._ Prior to acceptance by the City of public improvements, the developer's engineer shall- Formatted:Bullets and Numbering
submit a digital version of all public improvement plans & record drawings, compatible
with Autocad (Digital Interchange Format, DXF) for Geographic Information System
(GIS)purposes,to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
1�1. EPA Requirement: General Construction Activity Storm Water Permits are required for Formatted:Bullets and Numbering
all storm water discharges associated with a construction activity where clearing,grading
and excavation results in land disturbance of one or more acres. Storm water 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 owner(s) 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).
4o. copy of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) required by the SWRCB- Formatted:Bullets and Numbering
shall be included as part of the building permit and/or grading permit plan submittal. The
Resolution No. XXXX(2009 Series)
Page 10
WDID Number issued by the board shall be noted on all plans that involve regulated land
disturbing activities.
41. Document compliance with the new draft Water Quality Board State Construction- ;,wrmnatbed-Bullets and Numbering_J
Permit, which 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).
43. Provide a complete site utility plan. Show all existing and proposed on-site and off-site -- Formatted:Bullets and Number ng
utilities. Show the location of all overhead and underground utilities along with the
location of any utility company meters. Show all existing and proposed improvements
located within the public right-of-way if applicable.
43. Show and note that the new wire services shall be placed underground in accordance- Formatted:Bullets and Numbering
with UBC Section 308.3 as amended locally.
43. Provide separate engineering drawings or a composite utility plan from P.. G. & E.;- Formatted:Bullets and Numbering_)
ATT/PacBell, and Charter for the new wire utilities if necessary. If these plans are not
available, note on the cover sheet of the plans and utility plan these engineered utility
plans will be a deferred submittal item. Further note that "The engineered utility plans
shall be submitted to the city for review and approval prior to commencing with any on-
site or off-site utility construction.,,
45. Complete the gas pipe sizing for the proposed gas service to these buildings. The gas-- i Formatted:Bullets and Numbering
company shall review these plans for the proposed gas piping and gas meter locations.
Provide gas meter clusters as required by the gas company. Provide a copy of a signed
utility plan or separate transmittal from the gas company indicating their review and
approval of the piping as shown.
46. Show the location, size,and material of all public water mains, recycled water mainlines,- Formatted:Bullets and Numbering
sewer mains,and public storm drain systems.
43. Show all required or proposed parking lot improvements, lot dimensions, space- -- ;Formatted:Bullets and Numbering
dimensions, materials,space and aisle slopes,drainage,pavement markings, signage, and
striping in accordance with the Parking and Driveway Standards and disabled access
requirements of the CBC. The parking and driveway standards are available from the
Community Development Department or are available within the Engineering Standards.
The Parking and Driveway Standards are again available in U.S.Customary Units.
48. The final map preparation and monumentation shall be in accordance with the city's Forma Bullets and Numbering )
Subdivision Regulations,Engineering Standards,and the Subdivision Map Act.
49. The subdivider shall dedicate a 6' wide public utility easement and a 10' wide street tree- i Formatted:Bullets and Numbering
easement across the frontage of each lot,adjacent to and contiguous with all public right-
of-way lines.
Resolution No. XXXX(2009 Series) -
Page 11
50. One Street Tree is required per. 35' lineal feet of street frontage or any part thereof.- -- Formatted:Bullets and Numbering !
Street trees shall be from the Master Street Tree List and planted to City of San Luis
Obispo Engineering Standards.
I. Final locations of fire hydrants and water meters appear shall be shown on the- Formatted:Bullets and Numbering
improvement plans,and shall be approved by the Utility Department.
�2. Eave and balcony overhangs projecting beyond the floor area shall conform to the- I Formatted:Bullets and Numbering
requirements of CBC Section 704.2.
On motion of seconded by and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 17`"day of March,2009.
Mayor David F.Romero
ATTEST:
Audrey Hooper,City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Jonathan Lowell,City Attorney
G:\CD-PLAMHiIMASLG\City Council\CC Raw 27-06(approval)GPA.ER.TR.GPC.A.dm
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX(2009 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO OF
INTENTION TO ABANDON PORTIONS OF FREDERICK STREET AND HUMBERT
AVENUE RIGHTS-OF-WAY; ABAN 27-06
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 February 11, 2009, for the purpose of considering application
GPA/R/PDfMABAN/A 27-06 and ER 123-08, and making a General Plan determination and
formulating a recommendation to the City Council on a request for abandonment of excess
rights-of-way including portions of Frederick Street and Humbert Avenue;and
WHEREAS,research of the title report shows that the City of San Luis Obispo does not
have fee ownership of land underlying the Street rights-of-way;and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission found that the proposed rights-of-way
abandonments ALe consistent with the City's General Plan, and recommended that the City_ - - Deleted:is
Council approve the abandonments, based on findings and subject to conditions as indicated in
the Planning Commission Resolution,incorporated herein by reference; 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 March
17,2009,pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application ABAN 27-06,Housing Authority
of San Luis Obispo County,applicant;and
BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Action-Intention to Abandon. It is the intention of the City of San Luis
Obispo to abandon portions of Frederick Street and Humbert Avenue as shown on the map
marked Exhibit A,on file in the office of the City Clerk, pursuant to Section 8300 et seq. of the
State of California Streets and Highways Code, and that the abandonments shall be based on the
following findings and conditions:
A. Findings
1. The proposed abandonments of rights-of-way are consistent with the General Plan
because they are no longer needed for present or future public purposes.
2. Development of the rights-of-way as public streets would not serve any reasonable public
purpose since those properties fronting the rights-of-way gain access from other
improved streets, and there are no existing infrastructure improvements within the areas
to be abandoned.
3. The abandonments of the rights-of-way will benefit the general public be eliminating
unused right-of-way and the City's costs for maintaining additional infrastructure
. Resolution No. XXXX(2009 Series) --
Page 2
improvements.
4. The proposed rights-of-way abandonments are categorically exempt from environmental
review under Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act.
13.Conditions
1. The street abandonmerLs shall not be finalized by the City until after all of the proiect^.,- Deleted:
discretionary approvals have been secured by the Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo Formatted:Bullets and Numermg
(HASLO) for their housing proiect.
2. The rights-of-wav necessary to complete the.cul-de-sacs at the. Francis and Humbert---- Formatted:Bullets and Numbering
street ends shall be irrevocably offered or re-offered for dedication to the City concurrent
with or prior to final street abandonments. The required offers shall reflect City standard
cul-de-sac designs to the satisfaction of the Citv Engineer.
3. A public pedestrian.and vehicle-access easement shall be provided from Humbert to---- Formatted:Bullets and Numbering
Lawrence in the area of the former Victoria Ave. abandonment to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer. Said easement or dedication shall be offered to the City concurrent with
or prior to final street abandonment.
4. The final development proposal shall incorporate design features that will help to reduce---- Formatted:Bullets and Numbering
direct motor vehicle access from.the site-and/or adioining street ends to the railroad tracks
and railroad right-of-way.
SECTION 2. Copies of the map showing the particulars of the proposed abandonments are
on file in the office of the City Clerk,at 990 Palm Street.
SECTION 3. Tuesday,April 21,2009,at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the City
Hall,990 Palm Street,San Luis Obispo,California is the time and place set for hearing
all persons interested in or objecting to the proposed abandonment,which time is more
than fifteen(15)days from the passage of this resolution.
SECTION 4. This resolution,together with the ayes and noes,shall be published once in
full at least ten(10)days before the public hearing on the proposed street rights-of-way
abandonment, in The Tribune,a newspaper published and circulated in this city.
SECTION 5. The Cityj✓ngineer shall post at least three(3)public notices of the proposed Deleted:e
abandonment in prominent locations near the portion of the street rights-of-way to be
abandoned at feast fourteen(14)days before the date set for the hearing in accordance
with Section 8322 of the Streets and Highways Code.
SECTION 6. The City Engineer shall notify utility companies affected by the proposed
abandonments within ten(10)days after adoption of the Resolution of Intention in
accordance with Section 8347 of the Streets and Highways code.
Resolution No.XXXX(2009 Series)
Page 3
On motion of seconded by and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 17`h day of March,2009.
Mayor David F.Romero
ATTEST:
Audrey Hooper,City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Jonathan Lowell,City Attorney
GXD-PLAMMIMASLOCity CowcMCC Rm 27-06(appmvol)Abaa.doc
II- COUNCIL 1CDDDIR
ICAO FIN DIR RECEIVED
ACAOFIRE CHIEF
March 12,2009 ATTORNEY PW DIR MAR 13 2009
CLERK/ORIG POLICE CHF
❑ DEPT HEADS REC DIR SLO CITY CLERK
2858 Victoria Avenue --F16- UTIL DIR
San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 HR DIR
'0 �7/,W� Y- e-it y,v!6 z ,c e.`-EX./4
To:The Honorable Dave Romero and San Luis Obispo City Council Members
RE: March 17 Moylan Terrace Agenda Item
Greetings: We are homeowners at Villa Rosa,the PUD directly south of the proposed Moylan
Terrace project. We support the need for affordable housing within the City and look forward to
new housing on the site.However,we have a number of concerns about the present proposal.
Density:with the density bonus for affordable housing,the proposal squeaks in just under the
allowed 22.5 units per net acre,vs. 13 units at Villa Rosa.We understand the idea of economy of
scale and the need to keep building costs per unit low. However,the site presents a number of
problems for building out to maximum density,notably parking and traffic,especially because
the scale is so large(81 units).
Tandem parlung and a requested reduction in total parldng spaces:both requests add to on-
street parking needs.We don't buy the argument that the 60 units of"work force"housing
proposed for Moylan Terrace will average fewer vehicles per unit than the number of adult
workers living in them. The logistics of tandem parking are too daunting for most residents to
bother with.When Villa Rosa was developed,the City allowed a reduction in parking spaces.
Even with side by side rather than tandem parking,we have suffered ever since. Parking along
Lawrence is already maxed out from Villa Rosa overflow and the large number of trucks from
neighboring businesses that park on the street during the day.Victoria north of Humbert is also
stressed by parking needs of currentresident's and small businesses'
The proposed trip reduction program is a great idea,but it is difficult to implement and monitor.
What data are available to indicate where workers will be employed and whether public transit
can support their work schedules?
Sequence of Events: The major City plans for this neighborhood are still in draft form,e.g.the
Draft South Broad.Street Corridor Plan and the Rick Engineering Draft Traffic Impact Analysis.
It is counter-intuitive to approve a large residential project prior to finalization of those plans,
which presumably should lock in funding and assure completion of improvements such as traffic
signals,the Victoria extension,and the widening of Lawrence prior to or concurrent with
housing construction.
Public Safety: a pedestrian bridge or underpass to cross the railroad tracks is required before
children can safely live at Moylan Terrace. What assurances are in the forefront?
EIR: the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact is insufficient to study the
problems of noise(from the railroad),traffic,parking, site grading and public safety that the
proposal raises. We request that a fiill EIR be completed before the project is approved.
In short,we recommend that the Council defer action on the PD Rezone entitlements until
these problems are addre
�--
Sincerely, Susan and David F 541-6811 FAD FfL
MEET HHG AGEi'IDA
DATE� E E,[ 1: 2;WZ