HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/21/1989, 1 - REQUEST TO DEVELOP AN 18-UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PROJECT IN A SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS ZONE LOCA MEETING DATE:
111�i�H��III11111=1111 city of san tui s oBi spo „ a,- 9
ITEM NUMBER:
swill COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
FROM Randy Row,-,4terim Community Development Director; BY: Pam Ricci, Assoc. Planner
SUBJECT: Request to develop an 18-unit residential condominium project in a special
considerations zone located on the southwestern corner of Florence Avenue and Bushnell
Streets.
A. Tract Map (Tr 1827) - Consideration of a vesting tentative tract map creating
an 18-unit air-space residential condominium.
B. Right-of-Way Exchange - As part of the proposed tentative tract map, to allow
use of a portion of the Bishop Street right-of-way, between Bushnell Street and
the Southern Pacific Railroad, for other than street purposes in exchange for
compensating property to complete the city's preferred street alignment.
CAO RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the attached resolution approving the vesting tentative tract map and right-of-way
exchange, based on required findings, and subject to conditions recommended by the
Planning Commission..
DISCUSSION
The applicant is requesting approval of an 18-unit residential condominium project known
as Fairview Station. Ithas been considered by the Planning Commission three times, the
council twice on related matters (soil stockpiling directly to the south of the site and
Rachel Street closure) and once by the Architectural Review Commission.
Some of the key project issues that have been discussed, and satisfactorily resolved,
are: the temporary or permanent closure of Rachel Street (brought about by neighborhood
concerns with increased traffic on that street); soil contamination from past railroad
operations at the site, and the impacts of excavation and removal of those soils on truck
traffic through the neighborhood; project parking consistent with the 2.5 spaces per unit
normally required in condominium projects; private open space areas; and noise mitigation
measures.
The site is zoned R-2-S, Medium Density Residential with the Special Considerations
overlay. Planning Commission approval of a use permit is required for any development or
establishment of uses on the site. The use permit was approved by the commission on
October 11, 1989.
A vesting tentative tract map has been submitted to allow the site to be developed as air
space condominiums with individual sale of units. Approval of a vesting map confers a
"vested right" to development in substantial compliance with the ordinances, policies and
standards in effect when the application is determined complete.
SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
With mitigation measures noted in the attached initial environmental study addressing
concerns with traffic circulation, fire protection, noise mitigation and soil
contamination, no significant environmental effects are expected from the project.
RECEIVED
NOV 1 4 1989A:OwA
CITY CLERK
SAN LUIS oBlspo.CA
I����I�►�ui��llillllp i ��llll city of san Ldi s osi spo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1827
Page 2
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT TAKING ACTION
If the council denies approval of the tentative tract map, the project could not be
developed at this time as a condominium with the sale of individual units. However, the
project could proceed as an apartment project with final approval of development plans by
the Architectural Review Commission since development is consistent with the R-2-S
zoning.
Previous Review
The Architectural Review Commission granted the project schematic approval on October 30,
1989. The main issues discussed by the ARC were location of walkways, privacy between
units, locations of entries, design of entry and patio structures, types of windows to
mitigate noise, roofing materials and building colors.
On October 11, 1989, the Planning Commission approved Use Permit U 1431 (a copy of the
resolution is attached). The commission also recommended that the City Council approve
the vesting tentative tract map (Tr 1827) and Bishop Street right-of-way exchange.
On September 13, 1989, the project was continued by the Planning Commission without
discussion or public testimony to a date certain, October 1.1, 1989.
On August 15, 1989, the council discussed Rachel Street circulation alternatives. They
concluded that a physical closure of Rachel Street, whether temporary or permanent, was
not appropriate. However, they did support conditioning project approval to prohibit
construction vehicles from using Rachel Street.
On August 1, 1989, the council authorized excess soil from the French Brothers'
condominium projects at the base of Terrace Hill to be stockpiled on property at 2353
Bushnell Street (owned by Helen Milsap), directly south of the project site. The soil
has been stockpiled in anticipation of its use as fill material for the Fairview Station
project.
On June 14, 1989, the Planning Commission continued consideration of the use permit with
direction to return with: more information regarding proposed grading (including
excavation needed to remove contaminated soils); to have feedback from the council on the
temporary and/or permanent closure of Rachel Street; and to provide additional project
parking (specifically for Units 1 & 19).
On April 26, 1989, the Planning Commission reviewed the project for the first time.
After extensive public testimony and commission discussion, the commission continued
action on the project at the request of the applicant. With the continuance, the
commission directed that more information return to them on the Bishop Street
abandonment, affordable housing program, noise mitigation measures, private open space
areas for individual units, Rachel Street traffic impacts and project parking
requirements.
I
/w
���►��i�H�IVIIIIiI�Ip�Nu�l���l city of san Luis osispo
= COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1827
Page 3
Data Summary
Address: 2175 (formerly 980) Florence Avenue
Applicant: P.E.T.R.A. Enterprises
Representative: Erik Justesen, RRM
Zoning: R-2-S
General Plan: Medium Density Residential
Environmental Status: A Negative Declaration of environmental impact with
mitigation measures was granted by the Community Development
Director on April 5, 1989.
Project Action Deadlines: December 11, 1989 (tract map processing deadline per the
Subdivision Map Act)
Site Description
Site topography is not uniform, but the majority of it is fairly flat (average cross
slope does not exceed 10°x). The site generally slopes from the northeast to the
southwest increasing in steepness nearer the adjacent railroad right-of-way.
Elevations at the site have been raised by an approved grading permit allowing fill
materials from the Terrace Hill Tract to be deposited on the site.
Site vegetation includes grasses and a 24" diameter Pepper tree which is proposed to be
removed. An existing concrete retaining wall and pit used for former railroad operations
on the site are proposed to be removed.
i
Neighborhood land uses include the railroad tracks and single family houses. The first
phase of a condominium project is under construction on property bordering Terrace Hill
to the northeast of the site.
Proiect Description
The applicant is proposing to construct an 18-unit residential condominium project on the
currently vacant site bordered by Florence and Bushnell Streets. The project has been
designed with a central open space area surrounded by buildings and parking and driveway
areas on the west (railroad) and south (Bishop Street) sides of the site. Ten individual
buildings are proposed. Four buildings contain a single unit, four buildings contain two
units and two buildings include three units. Both attached and detached garages are
included in the project. All units, except Unit 6, have at least one assigned parking
space in a garage.
EVALUATION
A. PROJECT'S CONSISTENCY WITH CITY REGULATIONS
1. Density:
The applicants have deleted a unit since the project was originally submitted, reducing
the total number of project units from 19 to 18. The General Plan designates this site
as medium density residential allowing 12 units per net acre. The subject site
consisting of 1.79 acres has a maximum development potential of 21.5 equivalent units. /
City of San LUIS OBISpo
AMoZe COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1827
Page 4
The applicant's proposal to construct 11 2-bedroom and 7 3-bedroom units has an
equivalent density of 21.5, consistent with density standards.
2. Parking:
a. Total Proiect Parking:
The applicants were directed by the Planning Commission to add parking spaces to meet
the 2.5 auto spaces per unit parking ratio that the commission has usually required
in residential condominium projects. By deleting a unit, the applicants were able to
meet this requirement since the overall project parking requirement was lowered and
additional space was available on the site to provide parking.
The current project parking requirement based on the 2.5 parking ratio is 45 spaces.
The project site plan meets that requirement by providing 46 auto parking spaces (or
a parking ratio of 2.56 auto spaces per unit), 18 uncovered spaces and 28 spaces in
garages. The minimum parking requirement for the project based on standards included
in the zoning regulations is 43 auto spaces and two motorcycle .and two bicycle
spaces.
b. Parking Spaces for Units 1 & 18•
The Planning Commission gave the applicants direction to provide some convenient
on-site parking for the two units contained in the building in the far northeastern
corner of the site, nearest the intersection of Florence Avenue and Bushnell Street
(Units 1 & 18). These two units are located farthest away on the site from provided
uncovered parking spaces. Previously, no garage spaces were assigned to them.
Sheet # 2 of submitted architectural plans indicates garage and surface parking
assignments for the entire project. All units, with the exception of Unit 6, now
have garage spaces assigned to them. Some assigned garage spaces for different units
are in the same buildings, but are separated by walls and have separate and lockable
entries.
Garage spaces are now provided for Units I & 18 to address the concern of having
convenient on-site parking for those units. The garage space for Unit 1 is located
in the garage attached to Unit 2, and the garage space for Unit 18 is located in the
gargage attached to Unit 17. One uncovered parking space for Unit 1 and Unit 18 are
provided in the northwestern parking lot.
The commission concluded that provision of the two garage spaces for Units 1 and 18
provide reasonable assigned parking for those units.
3. Condominium Regulations:
Minimum requirements of the condominium regulations including provision of private and
total open space areas, storage areas and solar water heating need are met. The site
plan includes a table that lists the amount of qualifying private open space that each of
the units will be providing. Private open space areas are generally delineated with a
dashed line around project units on the site plan. The amount of total project open
space required and provided is also shown. Submitted plans and calculations indicate /�
that open space requirements will be exceeded
city of san Luis oBi spo
COUNUL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1827
Page 5
Solar collector locations are shown on the site plan. It appears that the roof angles
along with the orientations of buildings will adequately accommodate solar collectors.
The ARC will be reviewing collector details when final development plans are considered.
Qualifying storage areas (at least 200 cubic feet of enclosed, weatherproof and lockable
private storage space, exclusive of cabinets and closets within the unit) are shown on
floor plans.
4. Street Yard Exceptions:
The minimum street yard requirement for projects in the R-2 zone is 20 feet. The site
has three street yards. Frontage improvements will be installed along Bushnell Street
and Florence Avenue with project development. The city is requesting additional property
to be dedicated with the project to provide for the extension of Bishop Street on the
south side of the site, but is not requiring the developer to install street improvements
with development of the project. The proposed right-of-way exchange is discussed in a
later portion of this report.
a. Bushnell Street and Florence Avenue:
The site plan indicates that variable street yard setbacks are proposed along the
project's Bushnell Street and Florence Avenue frontages. Plans show variable street
yards along the two streets, with 20-foot average setbacks along both frontages. The
commission indicated support for some,relaxation of street yard standards because of
the staggered building setback design, approving a minimum of a 15-foot street yard
along these two streets.
b. Bishop Street:
A variance was approved by the Planning Commission along with the use permit to allow
a zero-foot street yard along the site's south property line adjacent to the
right-of-way for the Bishop Street extension. Whether or not the street is ever
developed, the southerly on-site driveway will be at the property line with the
proposed realignment of the street right-of-way.
Technically, the area of the site adjacent to the right-of-way is considered a street
yard. In the R-2 zone, a 20-foot street yard setback needs to be maintained along
all streets, whether existing or proposed. Driveways are allowed within a required
.street yard to access parking, but not to parallel the street the entire length of
the frontage within the required setback as proposed.
If Bishop Street is ever extended, an overpass will need to be constructed (see
discussion later in this report in Section C, Right-of-Way Exchange). The level of
Bishop Street adjacent to the site leading to the overpass will be substantially
higher than the site. Because of the grade differential, it is estimated that a
future 5-foot retaining wall will need to be installed along the south side of the
project's southernmost driveway to accommodate construction of the overpass.
Variance approval was conditioned on the installation of plant materials along the
�" driveway to soften the appearance of the proposed retaining wall.
11111111illll1�41�� city Of San CUs OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1827
Page 6
B. ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS
1. Noise:
The primary reason that the "S", Special Considerations, overlay zoning was placed on
this site is because of potential noise impacts from the adjacent railroad right-of-way.
The Noise Element map indicates that noise levels at this site are between 60 and 70 Ldn
(Ldn = average day/night noise levels measured in decibels). City noise standards
require interior noise levels not exceeding 45 Ldn and exterior noise levels not
exceeding 65 Ldn.
Since noise levels at the site were in the upper threshold of the range for normally
acceptable outdoor noise levels included in the noise element, staff directed the
applicant to submit a noise study evaluating noise impacts (Donald O. Asquith, The Morro
Group, March 1989). This noise study is attached to the initial study prepared for the
project and incorporated into it by reference.
The noise study indicates that existing noise levels at the site based on current
railroad operations and freight traffic are approximately 59 decibels and within accepted
standards. The report provides for the worst case scenario in terms of noise impacts by
analyzing noise levels at the site with a three-fold increase in freight traffic. The
conclusion is that with worst-case conditions, maximum allowed exterior noise levels will i
be exceeded in the western most parking area and maximum interior noise levels exceeded
in western most buildings with windows open.
In terms of exterior noise, areas specifically designed for outdoor uses such as common
recreation areas need to meet noise standards. It would be acceptable for noise levels
in the western most parking lot to be exceeded since areas planned for common open space
use are provided in the center of the project where noise is attenuated by buildings to
acceptable levels and residents will only be subjected to excessive noise levels in the
parking lot sporadically.
Logically, concerns with interior noise impacts are greatest for those units contained in
the westernmost buildings on the site located closest to the railroad tracks. The noise
study concludes that allowed maximum interior noise levels may be exceeded in these units
under worst-case conditions on hot days when windows facing the tracks might be open.
The study suggests a mitigation measure to require air conditioning in these units which
would allow ventilation without opening windows.
The commission expressed concern for requiring air conditioning in these units because of
the high energy demands of such systems. Goals and policies contained in the city's
energy element encourage "alternatives which require less conventional energy, use,of
natural ventilation, and less reliance on mechanical systems." Staff has modified the
mitigation measure contained in the project's initial study to delete any mandatory
requirement for air conditioning and/or other mechanical ventilation systems in these
units, but left in language requiring suitable building construction techniques to insure
conforming interior noise levels. The commission wanted windows to remain openable in
affected units, rather than to be fixed. l
�������u��IIIIIII�II►►�������II MY Of San tins OBISp0
COUNCIL AGENDA I EPOFM
Tract 1827
Page 7
2. Soil Contamination:
A grading permit was issued for the project site to allow fill materials from the nearby
Terrace Hill tract to be deposited there in 1985. Soils reports done at that time.
indicated the presence of a petroleum sump at the site.
Lab analysis of soil extracted from recent borings on the site indicates that soil is
contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons at a concentration exceeding established local
and state levels. Mitigation in the attached initial study states that the applicant
will be required to submit a hazardous materials abatement plan evaluating contamination
and outlining steps for cleanup, and that all hazardous materials need to be removed from
the site.
An expanded environmental site assessment prepared by Earth Systems Environmental, Inc.
(ESE), and several correspondences from ESE and the applicants regarding the contaminated
soils issue have been received. These reports and correspondences provide more specific
information on the amount of contaminated soils and how the soils will be removed from
the site.
The reports indicate that the primary contaminant at the.site is heavy fuel oils,
petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), associated with the past railroad use at the site.. There
are two categories of contaminated soils at the site, those with TPH concentrations of
1000 mg/kg or higher and those with concentrations between 100 mg/kg and 1000 mg/kg..
Those soils in the higher contamination category (1000 mg/kg TPH) represent a 3' -4'
thick zone in the central portion of the site consisting of about 400 cubic yards. These
soils must be completely removed from the site and transported to an approved waste
facility. The attached letter from Bob Kitamura dated September 18, 1989, discussing
removal of contaminated soils indicates that it will take about five trucks with a
capacity of 20 cubic yards four days to remove these soils. Trucks will be making a
one-way run to the petroleum waste facility in Mc Kittrick. As excavation progresses,
analytical testing will be conducted on-site by a mobile laboratory to verify the levels
of soils contamination.
Those soils in the lower contamination category (100 mg/kg - 1000 mg/kg TPH) exceed city
action levels and need to be treated, but do not necessarily need to be removed from the
site. It is estimated that approximately 1500 cubic yards of soil fall into this
category.
Soils in this lower category of contamination are commonly treated by bioremediation.
Bioremediation is a process where soils are isolated and injected with special bacteria
that break down and digest contaminants in the soil, degrading the oil into nonhazardous
by-products. The soils are monitored until target concentrations are maintained. Once
these concentrations are achieved, the soils can be reused under roadways and in driveway
and parking lot areas.
The applicants at first indicated that they would be pursuing the bioremediation
approach, but then decided it would be best to transport less contaminated soils off the
site also. They felt that future project residents and neighbors of the project would
feel more comfortable if all contaminated soils were completely removed since any
associated health or safety concerns would be eliminated. /_
i111111�ii��IIIIIIIIIPp1""����IU city of san WIS OBISPO
Was COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1827
Page 8
The less contaminated soils can be transported to a standard landfill. It is estimated
that it will take about 7.5 days, with 5 trucks making two round trips per day, to remove
the 1500 cubic yards of soil in the less contaminated category.
The City Fire Department has indicated their support for the applicants' work plan. A
copy of the work plan, ESE's remedial plan and the Fire Department's memo are all
attached to this report. A copy of the expanded environmental assessment prepared by ESE
is available for council review in the project file.
The Planning.Commission asked for clarification of the project grading statistics and
more information on the impacts of soil contamination cleanup on the overall grading
operation. Corrected cut and fill totals indicate that about 6000 cubic yards of fill
will be needed for the project.
On August 15, 1989, the applicants received approval by the council of an early grading
permit to allow stockpiling of excess soils from the French Brothers' condominium
projects at the base of Terrace Hill on Helen Milsap's property directly to the south of
the project site. Approximately 6000 cubic yards of soil is being stockpiled on Mrs.
Milsap's property at 2353 Bushnell Street. Required fill for the project balances with
the amount of stockpiled soil available. However, it will still be necessary to import
approximately 1900 cubic yards of soil to the site to compensate for the contaminated
soils that are proposed to be removed.
The 1900 cubic yards of fill that needs to be imported to the site represents about 100
truck loads of dirt. To minimize impacts of this amount of truck traffic on the.
neighborhood, conditions of the tract map limit construction activity to certain weekday
hours, require construction vehicles to access the site by Bishop Street via Johnson
Avenue and require installation of signage to warn construction vehicles of the
restriction.
C. AREAWIDE CIRCULATION AND TRAFFIC IMPACTS
1. Bishop Street Right-of-Way Exchange:
Bishop Street currently dead-ends at Busnell Street, although a 60-foot right-of-way
extension on the southerly boundary of the site is shown on the original subdivision map,
the County Assessor's map and other city maps. The city's preferred alignment for a
future Bishop Street extension differs from the right-of-way location shown on these maps
(see attached Bishop Street/South Street alignment plan). For this reason, the
applicants have asked to use a portion of the existing Bishop Street right-of-way that is
outside the city's preferred alignment (shown on tract map and site plan with a shading
screen) for part of an on-site driveway and for landscaping.
The right-of-way for the extension of Bishop Street adjacent to the site is a linkage in
a street network that would allow for the future connection of the area east of the
railroad tracks with the city core - Bishop Street would extend westerly to South Street
(see attached plan). The city at this time wants to preserve its options to develop this
street connection project in the future. Therefore, before the city agrees to allow a
portion of the existing right-of-way to be used for other than public street purposes, it.
is asking for additional private property south of of the existing Bishop Street.
right-of-way to be dedicated to the city to accommodate the desired alignment.
�������N►�iNlllll�p ��lll city of san Luis oBispo
Emme COUNCIL AGENOA REPORT
Tract 1827
Page 9
The proposal to allow use of existing city right-of-way within the project (along with
the dedication requirement) had initially been presented as a street abandonment. City
engineering staff later concluded that the desired realignment could be handled as a
right-of-way exchange shown on the submitted tract map, rather than a formal abandonment
per the Streets and Highways Code Procedures. The tentative map shows the necessary
dedication of right-of-way to complete the desired street alignment including required
slope banks.
In order to extend Bishop Street to the west, an overpass will need to be constructed to
span the railroad tracks. The finish grade of the roadway leading to the overpass
adjacent to the project site will be significantly higher than that of Bushnell Street
and the project site. Sections through the site and the overpass to help visualize the
possible future streets relationship to the project taken at two locations, the corner of
Bishop and Bushnell and the southwestern corner of the site, are attached.
Because of this grade differential, the applicant, as a condition of project approval, is
required to dedicate a portion of the southeast corner of the site to allow for the
development of an offset cul-de-sac for Bushnell Street. This cul-de-sac would only need
to be developed if the overpass is eventually constructed. Project plans and the tract
map provide for the dedication of the cul-de-sac.
2. Rachel/Bishop Street Traffic Impacts:
At the April 26th Planning Commission meeting when the project was first considered,
neighbors of the project, including several residents on Rachel Street and one neighbor
on Bishop Street, expressed concerns with the impact of the project on traffic levels of !
the two streets. With its motion for project continuance, the commission asked staff to
evaluate potential traffic impacts on the two streets.
On June 14, 1989, staff included in its report to the commission a traffic study which
establishes a baseline for traffic on the two streets, quantifies additional trip ends
attributable to the project, nearby condominiums under construction and potential future
projects, and then evaluates project and cumulative development impacts on traffic. This
study is attached to this report.
In response to the Rachel Street traffic issue, the applicants' representative presented
a plan showing circulation alternatives for streets in the vicinity of the project.
Instead of the present connection between the two streets, the applicants' plan shows
cul-de-sacs at the end of Rachel Street and Florence Avenue with an emergency access
drive between (reduced plan attached to this report).
The Planning Commission wanted to receive feedback from the council on the Rachel Street
closure idea prior to taking an action on the use permit. The council considered the
Rachel Street circulation alternatives at their August 15th meeting. The council
concluded that neither a temporary or permanent closure of the street was appropriate.
They did support conditioning project approval to prohibit construction vehicles from
using Rachel Street to access the site, leaving it up to the developers to instruct their
construction crews of the routing restriction.
�- 9
���n��i�H�mIIIIIII�I ���U city of San 1u1S OBISpo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 1827
Page 10
ALTERNATIVES
1. The council may approve the tract map with findings and conditions as recommended or
others as the commission deems appropriate.
2. The council may continue review.
3. The council may deny the project citing appropriate findings.
OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW
No other department has objected to the approval of this project. The Public Works
Department has noted required fees and improvements and specified conditions of the tract
map. The Fire Department is requiring installation of an on-site hydrant and will be
overseeing removal of contaminated soils from the site.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached draft resolution which:
A. Concurs with the Community Development Director's determination of a negative
declaration based on the finding that there is no substantial evidence that the
project will have a significant effect on the environment with the incorporation of
recommended mitigation measures; and
B. Approves the vesting tentative tract map for Tract 1827, including the Bishop Street
right-of-way exchange, based on recommended findings and conditions.
Attachments: Draft Resolution
P.C. Resolution #4098-89 approving Use Permit U 1431
Vicinity Map
Reductions of tract map and project plans
Initial Study ER 13-89
Letter from Applicants' Representative dated 10-5-89 & 8-14-89
P.C. Minutes of 4-26-89, 6-14-89 & 10-11-89
C.C. Minutes of 8-1-89, 8-15-89
Soil Contamination Work Plans
Letter from Mike Smith, Hazardous Materials Inspector; dated 9-26-89
Bishop/South Street Alignment
Bishop Street Sections
Rachel Street Circulation Alternatives
Traffic Study
Memos from Fire, Police & Engineering re: Rachel Street closure
Enclosed: Tract Map 1827
Project Architectural Plans
pr#7:tr1827
/�M
i
RESOLUTION NO. (1989 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO GRANTING APPROVAL OF VESTING TENTATIVE MAP FOR
TRACT 1827 LOCATED AT 980 FLORENCE AVENUE
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings• That this council, after consideration of the vesting
tentative map of Tract 1827 and the Planning Commission's recommendations, staff
recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following findings:
1. The design of the tentative map and proposed improvements are consistent with the
general plan.
2. The site is physically suited for the type and density of development allowed in an
R-2-S zone.
3. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause
serious health problems, substantial environmental damage or substantially and
unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat..
4. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvement will not conflict with
easement for access through (or use of property within) the proposed subdivision.
5. The proposed project has been granted a negative declaration of environmental impact
based on the following mitigation measures being incorporated into the project:
a. The applicant shall provide for the future alignment of Bishop Street by the
dedication of additional right-of-way south of the existing dedication with
the proposed abandonment.
b. The applicant shall dedicate a portion of the southeast corner of the property
to allow for the development of an offset cul-de-sac for Bushnell Street if
the Bishop Street overpass is constructed. The cul-de-sac would be necessary
to terminate Bushnell if the overpass is constructed because of the grade
differential between the grades of Bushnell and the overpass.
All buildings and improvements need to be appropriately set back from the
cul-de-sac right-of-way.
C. The applicant shall install one on-site fire hydrant adjacent to the driveway
in the southwest corner of the project to the approval of the Fire Department.
d. The applicant shall incorporate building techniques such as use of windows
with double glazing in appropriate locations to provide interior noise levels
that conform with the 45 decibel interior standard in those units contained in
buildings located along the westerly side of the site.
l
e. A hazardous materials abatement plan shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department and Hazardous Materials Inspector which includes:
Resolution No. (1989 Series)
Tract 1827
Page 2
(1) A preliminary soils report including map and site history indicating the
extent and location of contamination.
(2) If soil contamination is found, the plan shall demonstrate how the site
will be restored.
(3) A building permit shall not be issued for the project until the site
satisfies the requirements of the Community Development Director and
Hazardous Materials Inspector with respect to the removal of hazardous
materials and restoration of the site.
SECTION 2. Conditions_. The approval of the vesting tentative map for Tract 1827
shall be subject to the following conditions:
1. All lots shall be served by individual sewer, water and utilities. All new utilities
within the tract shall be placed underground in easements to the approval of the
appropriate utility company and the City Engineer. Water meters shall be Flustered
in the public sidewalk to the approvaLof the Public Works Department and the
Utilities Department.
2. Final map shall show a 6-foot public utilities easement and 10-foot wide street tree
easement along the project's public street frontages.
3. Final map shall note entire common lot area as a blanket utility easement (exclusive
of buildings) acceptable to the utility companies and City Engineer.
4. All on-site driveways, nonstructural parking improvements, and utilities shall be
installed as subdivision improvements.
5. On-site sewer and water lines shall be private and maintained by the homeowner's
association.
6. All grading shall comply with the recommendations contained in the soils report
prepared for the property.
7. Subdivider shall install an on-site hydrant to the approval of the City Fire
Department.
8. Subdivider shall prepare conditions, covenants, and restrictions (CC&R's) to be
approved by the City Attorney and Community Development Director prior to final map
approval. CC&R's shall contain the following provisions:
a. Creation of a homeowners' association to enforce the CC&R's and provide for
professional, perpetual maintenance of all common area including private
driveways, water and sewer mains, drainage, parking lot areas, walls and fences,
lighting, and landscaping in a first class condition.
1
r-\
Resolution No. (1989 Series)
Tract 1827
Page 3
b. Grant to the city the right to maintain common area if the homeowners'
association fails,.'to perform, and to assess the homeowners' association for
expenses incurre, and the right of the city to inspect the site at mutually
agreed times to assure conditions of CC&R's and final map are being met.
C. No parking except in approved, designated spaces.
d. Grant to the city the right to tow away vehicles_ on a complaint basis which are
parked in unauthorized places.
e. Prohibition of storage or other uses which would_ conflict with the use of
garages for parking purposes.
f. No outdoor storage of boats, campers, motorhomes, or trailers nor long-term
storage of inoperable vehicles.
g. No outdoor storage by individual units except in designated storage areas.
h. No change in city-required provisions of the CC&R's without prior City Council
approval.
L Homeowners' association shall file with the City Clerk the names and addresses
of all officers of the homeowners' association within 15 days of any change in
officers of the association.
j. Provision of appropriate "no parking" signs and red curbing along interior
roadways as required by the City Fire Department.
9. All units shall be numbered in accordance with an addressing plan approved by the
Community Development Department.
10. Subdivider shall install a unit identification plan with directory at each of the
project entrances to the approval of the Community Development Department.
11. Subdivider shall install street lighting as determined by the City Engineer per City
and P.G. & E. standards.
12. Project construction activity, including grading operations, shall be limited to the
weekday hours from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and construction vehicles shall use Bishop
Street via Johnson Avenue to access the project site.
13. The applicant shall submit a dust management plan to limit dust generation from
construction activities on the site and from construction vehicles transporting soil
to and from the site to the approval of the Community Development Director and the
Chief Building Official.
14. The applicant shall install signage on Rachel and Bishop Streets to keep construction
vehicles from using Rachel Street. Wording and precise locations of the signs shall
be to the approval of the City Engineer and the Community Development Director.
f=�3
l
r-1
Resolution No. (1989 Series)
Tract 1827
Page 4
SECTION 3. Code Requirements. The approval of the vesting tentative map for Tract
1827 shall be subject to the following code requirements:
1. Tract corners shall be set by a registered civil engineer or land surveyor.
2. A registered civil engineer or land surveyor shall certify that the structures are
located correctly prior to release of structures for occupancy.
3. Subdivider shall pay water and sewer charges and park in-lieu fees as calculated by
the City Engineer prior to final map approval. Sewer and water connections to the
Bushnell Street sewer and water mains may require reimbursement for said mains to be
paid prior to recordation of the final'map.
4. Subdivider shall install one street tree per 35 feet of property frontage to city
standards to the approval of the Public Works Department.
5. The subdivider shall install curb, gutter and sidewalk, and street paveout along all
frontages.
On motion of seconded by
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this - _ day of
1989.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Resolution No. (1989 Series)
C Tract 1827
Page 5
APPROVED:
City A 'nistrative Officer
t tto e
Community Development Director
t
1
SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 4098-89
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
did conduct a public hearing in the City Council Chambers of the San
Luis Obispo City Hall, San Luis Obispo, California on October 11,
1989, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application No. U1431
by P.E.T.R.A. Enterprises (Bruce Houseman & Gary Smee) , applicants.
USE PERMIT REQUESTED:
To allow an 18-unit residential condominium on a sensitive
site.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
On file in the office of Community Development, City Hall.
GENERAL LOCATION:
980 Florence Avenue
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT:
Medium-density Residential
PRESENT ZONE:
R-2-S
WHEREAS, said commission as a result of its inspections,
investigations and studies made by itself, and in behalf and of
testimonies offered at said hearing, has established existence of the
following circumstances:
1. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health,
safety, or welfare of persons living or working on the site or
in the vicinity, because project features address the concerns
of the special considerations zone.
2 . The development is appropriate at the proposed location and
will be compatible with surrounding development.
3 . The proposal conforms to the general plan and meets zoning.
ordinance requirements, including the concerns of the special
considerations zone. /6/
Resolution No. 4098-89
Use Permit U1431
Page .2
4 . The proposed project has been granted a negative declaration of
environmental impact- based on the following mitigation measures
being incorporated into the project:
a. The applicant shall provide for the future alignment of
Bishop Street by the dedication of additional right-of-way
south of the. existing dedication with the proposed
abandonment.
b. The applicant shall dedicate a portion of the southeast
corner of the property to allow for the development of an
offset cul-de-sac for Bushnell Street if the Bishop Street
overpass is constructed. The cul-de-sac would be
necessary to terminate Bushnell if the overpass is
constructed because of thegrade differential between the
grades of Bushnell and the overpass.
All buildings and improvements need to be appropriately
set back from the cul-de-sac right-of-way.
�-
C. The applicant shall install one on-site fire hydrant
adjacent to the driveway in the southwest corner of the
project to the approval of the Fire Department.
d. The applicant shall incorporate building techniques such
as use of windows with double glazing in appropriate
locations to provide interior noise levels that conform
with the 45 decibel interior standard in those units
contained in buildings located along the westerly side of
the site.
e. A hazardous materials abatement plan shall be submitted to
the Community Development Department and Hazardous
Materials Inspector which includes:
(1) A preliminary soils report including map and site
history indicating the extent and location of
contamination.
(2) If soil contamination is found, the plan shall
demonstrate how the site will .be restored.
(3) A building permit shall not be .issued for the project
until the site satisfies the requirements of the
Community Development Director and Hazardous
Materials Inspector with respect to the removal of
hazardous materials and restoration of the site.
5. The proposed street yard exceptions along Bushnell Street and
Florence Avenue are appropriate because:
1-17
Resolution No. 4098-89 �
Use Permit U1431
Page 3
a. The project site occupies an entire street block so the
rationale for maintaining the required 20-foot setback for
consistency with other properties within the same block to
maintain a balanced streetscape is diminished.
b. The project site plan is being approved through the use
permit process where building footprints are established
similar to a planned development. Therefore, some
variation in the traditional setback is more acceptable.
C. With the site's proximity to the railroad right-of-way,
allowing smaller street yards helps .to keep development a
greater distance from this major noise source.
d. Lesser street yard setbacks allow fora larger interior
common open space area.
e. All parking spaces and garages will be set back at least
20' from property lines along street frontages. The 20 '
setback allows a vehicle to park in front of a garage in
the driveway without overhanging onto and blocking the
public sidewalk.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that application No. U1431 be
approved subject to the following conditions:,
1. Street yard setbacks are approved as shown on the submitted
site plan with no setback less than 15 feet, except that a
10-foot setback is approved for the entry/mailbox structure
located in the Bushnell street yard.
2. Project construction activity, including grading operations,
shall be limited to the weekday hours from 8: 00 a.m. to 5: 00
p.m. and construction vehicles shall use Bishop Street via
Johnson Avenue to access the project site.
3 . The applicant shall submit submit a dust management plan to
limit dust generation from construction activities on the site
and from construction vehicles transporting soil to and from
the site to the approval of the Community Development Director
and the Chief Building Official.
4 . The applicant shall install signage on Rachel and Bishop
Streets to keep construction vehicles from using Rachel
Street. Wording and precise locations of the signs shall be to
the approval of the City Engineer and the Community Development .
Director.
l-/8
I �
Resolution No. 4098-89
Page 4
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission approved a variance to allow a
zero-foot street yard setback along Bishop Street based on the
following findings and subject to the following condition:
Findings:
1. There are circumstances applying to the site which do not apply
generally to land in the vicinity with the same zoning,
specifically its shape, proximity to the railroad and multiple ,
street frontages.
2. The variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege
-- an entitlement inconsistent with the limitation upon other
properties in the vicinity with the same zoning - because the
_right-of-way for the proposed Bishop Street extension allows
for an effective street yard which is created by a slope bank
area between the on-site southerly project driveway and the
street overpass.
3 . The variance will not adversely affect the health, safety, or
general welfare of persons residing or working on the site or
in the vicinity.
Condition:
1. The applicant shall provide a plant material adequate to soften
the appearance of the retaining wall along the south side of
the southernmost on-site driveway to the approval of the
Architectural Review Commission.
The foregoing resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission
of the City of San Luis Obispo, upon the motion of Commr. Crotser,
seconded by Commr. Kourakis, and upon the following roll. call vote:
AYES: Crotser, Kourakis, Duerk, Karleskint, Hoffman
NOES: Schmidt, Roalman
ABSENT: None
Randall S. Rossi, Secretary
Planning Commission
DATED: October- 11, 1989
i
I
VICINITY MAP U 14 31
1 •� "-. •ff 4. iP T"t�\: i��. r•.Cr fie,• -- � C[`.\
RACHEL COURT
R Ll
R S\
�L}• FLORENCE '�'+t- Np �n "•
_S ., - L v
'' . a. •�")'ate �"�� ^ S�S m �(� �� /�t�` � r �•
•y ..3.',acv.. ,�` St • _ _ � V M•' 4:0 N
—ylV — IS4O>r;•••-5'1'REE�w •.. '... :",...•.�
••fly ^ ••••••N
ii 10
lit u
' —� • /YOl q11 � � I —
; it czf�H -
"«» SAN CARLOS DRIVE
�'•'•` f0rf /0sf /OST /0„l r05T 107-f /01g
or
S-S R -S Rf 1 c�
r I` .FFMi'tilt'
I-C20
r
- J 4
Op •
VA\
�r j
=� INN
Its
�4 b
•
a•
_ r
• w•r•. ♦ Aur ! r • • r w •1'7'd �7I • of _ !o
Y9f7id 7i1N! 'V _ us 7 V
.. WNN r•A,... � � �: a
rtot.t.vs.s Matnaty� - _ _ , 2
--- -- � rr-
_x I
►s .w s
.Y
� si ❑ - is ss O
Mr
\`
,
, e
A i oo I GQ I w
zo
F� !' 17 -
131
_ tf �-
� -
113
MB Id
-T
• lrrrrF{�
g a
( tL
di �/ 3
4 •a — m
� I
-_ ,Z�' \ / ` i - ''+• •" 111 - _ I iwl �
s �
{ re' • � i n I Jr I
.JNWA�
.91
A - I re..acr �s79
1 ?,
all
%11 IN
,�q ®�t2 n q � ti •1 � � �
. o •• =e
a
� iEs
MWASM ao aaasaw ...- i&=o"
i rr�>ti
fT
MO U
. IJ
•`'}^• I It itj ll' �. a
f.'
'-4 �• .• } J l�;ESt`� �, • �� f- t ��11�ii iii .
== 3 a9
e i8 : -• 3
s i.................. t t
r ;
Flu
A O
fill
l' sg I I!1
1
i - g
s' 3
COD
cn
L.. .a
rip
'
t
it J h��l
3 �
\=ww �.�• � A e■ ] N ] 1 ■ l e r ■ ■ �QI :ms's•"=��i�� f V _
F7.0i.LV.LS
7 Y►YAf 7i Mf 'V*11'.L*2'4 �31ms_ ~• y 1
.a wf.\e\le■\.\ ��_
l'IfwY\A\ \fMiMMI
M 3 1 A 11 1 V d
t Y I•�
t
t -~
♦ 1 � ' \ L ♦ � !1f � �l e
Mjma=
1.
♦ ♦ J_ _ R r -?T-1 li!!�.
1 i _
tY.st:L�1�TT•.:�■ �F �.
6-1.219i 1--st
t
0
��� r•
r— I no
'xl
{MM.�� r��� t t•
!Il ' ® 0
�_ ;riff
M.t ..... .
W
.MN .O M.M. i ..a,....��.•.t�1•�..� r r..•
o.a. �r • n O . 7 r 1 . t 1 . N ■ i
974tMd7i71N 7. 'tl'M a. "J '- MOM
rI 0I.LV.L9 M3IAMI VA
5i o 0
O
,a
•� n
P, r
Im
ZO
Eli
u u
Y +
• p Y r^
MM U
- z
_
Eg
i
4 =
= O
I t O
� rtr r •` u
� u
• n
\`.
Nw
• 00'='.' 'o , { tet?.`';ms's
�r ti1/ . ♦ f 1 �'a yy�l'�L
IP
Aw
93
Adm. ww mom mw-
a
I 1 h.` t.c �• f a
rte•-�J� - % �� �,
't►�� �!��%/,� (,�'s_ gam. \-�`�Q'
1
L j � � ++� A • TI �7 �' .r
' ' `'• ' ' ® r Iii '
,+!
i
IIFIF%rm
ts
1 !
w � li a
t :
n i � _-` -
�
is TFF��ill 1 �
it
e ( A 1
w _ _• w
I o i�� y 1 = s ' 1'� d � � � . i ' •
F
L A
= G i
• n — 11
o
r
a
I11
a ,
FAIRVIEW STATION
1
1
2 Cj_ �s?.-{=.=-- � P.F..T.R.A. 6N719F PRIF RR
city o� san lues oBispo
INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
SITE LOCATION 980 FlOrerlee APPLICATION NO. FR
PROJECT DESCRIPTION A6mdanDo�of ai6hn C,±r + _ana nnrLGiTyc- 19-un
r id
APPLICANT PE T R A Enterprises
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
NEGATIVE DECLARATION MITIGATION INCLUDED
EXPANDED INITIAL STUDY REQUIRED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REQUIRED
PREPARED BY ffiai ncni i a+v -Ptan ler DATE J- 1-89
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S ACTION: DATE 4-5-89
Negative Declaration with Mitigiation Included
SUMMARY OF INITIAL STUDY FINDINGS
''..DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
II.POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECTS
A. COMMUNITY PLANS AND GOALS ............................ 1�
......................... 0 n e-
B. POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND GROWTH..................................... ... ... N n n e
C. LAND USE ....._...... ................................................ Nnne
D. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION ....................... Yes................t........ . mi+t•Qafl'nn incluAed
�
E. PUBLIC SERVICES .................................................................. ,Ye m4iL+ion includaA
F. UTILITIES....................................................._.......................
ncJu
G. NOISE LEVELS ............._...................................................... i
H. GEOLOGIC S SEISMIC HAZARDS 8 TOPOGRAPHIC MODIFICATIONS .................... Yes m i fi'na�lnn .inGly�
1. AIR QUALITY AND WIND CONDITIONS.................................................... Nnf1Q
J. SURFACE WATER FLOW AND QUALITY ...._..................... ................._�Orle
KPLANT LIFE-.............................................................................. None
L ANIMALLIFE......................_....._..,....................................... None.
M. ARCHAEOLOGICALIHISTORICAL ................................................... -None
N. AESTHETIC . ......................—.a.............._..... None
O. ENERGY/RESOURCE USE ........................................................... One
P. OTHER .............. N One
ill.STAFF RECOMMENDATION
'SEE ATTACHED REPORT was
/_0
11\
ER 13-89
Page 2 �
I. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The applicant is proposing to construct a 19-unit residential condominium project on the
currently vacant site bordered by Florence and Bushnell Streets. The project has been
designed with a central open space area surrounded by buildings which are located around
the perimeter of the site. Ten individual buildings are proposed. Three buildings
contain a single unit, five buildings contain two units and two buildings include three
units.
Site topography is not uniform, but the majority of it is fairly flat (average cross
slope does not exceed 10%). The site generally slopes from the northeast to the
southwest increasing in steepness nearer the adjacent railroad right-of-way. Site
vegetation includes grasses and a 24" diameter Pepper tree. Elevations at the site have
been raised by an approved grading permit allowing fill materials from the Terrace Hill
Tract to be deposited on the site.
S,
Neighborhood land uses include the railroad tracks and single family houses.
11. POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW
D. Transportation and Circulation
- r ,
1. Traffic Impacts
Using trip generation standards contained in the Institute of Transportation
Engineers (ITE) manual, the proposed project would generate 10.3 trip ends in the
peak afternoon hour on an average weekday. Current traffic volumes heading eastbound
on Bishop Street toward Johnson Avenue are 148 vehicle trips. The additional traffic
generated by the project will not have a significant impact on traffic volumes at the
nearest signalized intersection to the site at Bishop Street and Johnson Avenue.
This intersection is currently operating well below its assigned peak hour capacity
with a volume of traffic as a ratio of capacity of 0.37. Table 4 of the Circulation
Element identifies volume to capacity ratios between 0.00 and 0.60 as Level of
Service A (relatively free-flowing).
Conclusion: The quantity of additional traffic generated by the project in relation
to current street volumes is considered minor and will not adversely affect the
carrying capacity of adjacent streets.
Mitigation Measure: None required.
2. Area Circulation
A dedicated right-of-way for the extension of Bishop Street westerly across the
railroad tracks exists along the south property line of the site. The applicant is
proposing to abandon a portion of this right-of-way for use as landscaping and
driveway areas.
The right-of-way was dedicated to extend Bishop Street over the railroad tracks to
South Street to provide a more direct route between the area east of the railroad
tracks and the city core.
/-30
� J
ER 13-89
Page 3
Construction of this linkage has not yet occurred primarily because of cost.
considerations. However, the city with its review of other recent projects has
retained right-of-way in the proper alignment to allow for the possible future street
extension and connection. Abandonment of a portion of the right-of-way for the
street extension could jeopardize the feasibility of the long-range street connection
project.
Conclusion: May be significant.
Mitieation Measure: The applicant shall provide for the future alignment of Bishop
Street to the west by the dedication of additional right-of-way south of the existing
dedication with the proposed abandonment.
If Bishop Street is ultimately extended to the west, an overpass will need to be
constructed to span the railroad tracks. The finish grade of the overpass will be
significantly higher than the level of Bushnell Street.
Conclusion: May be significant.
Mitirzation Measure: The applicant shall dedicate a portion of the southeast corner
of the property to allow for the development of an offset. cul-de-sac for Bushnell
Street if the Bishop Street overpass is constructed. the cul-de-sac would-be
necessary to terminate Bushnell if the overpass is constructed because of the grade
differential between the finish grades of Bushnell and the overpass.
All buildings and improvements need to be appropriately set back from the cul-de-sac
right-of-way.
E. Public Services:
Portions of proposed buildings are more than 150' from a water supply. In such
circumstances, an on-site fire hydrant needs to be provided.
Conclusion: May be significant.
Mitigation Measure:, The applicant shall install one on-site fire hydrant adjacent to
the driveway in the southwest corner of the project to the approval of the Fire
Department.
F. Utilities:
Water
Under current conditions, development of the project would reduce the level of water
service for city customers. City water use in fall 1988 (8,042 acre-feet per year)
exceeded safe annual yield (7,357) by about nine.percent. Safe annual yield is the
amount of water which can be withdrawn from reservoirs year after year, without
running out of water during a drought like that which has been experienced since the
reservoirs have been in use. As water use increases above safe yield, cutbacks from
usual water use will be needed more often and they will have to be more substantial
�_- to avoid running out of water. In response to two-years of below-average rainfall,
the city is aiming for a 25-percent reduction in water use during 1988-89. More
substantial reductions may be needed in following years.
ER 13-89
Page 4
While the city is pursuing conservation and several supplemental sources of water,
new supplies may not keep pace with added demand due to development. Therefore, the
City Council has adopted development controls (the Water Allocation Regulations) to
help correct the current imbalance between water use and supply. The controls could
delay or prevent issuance of building permits.
The proposed development would use about 5.00 acre-feet per year. This project would
use less than .06 percent of current safe annual yield.
Conclusion: The applicant has not proposed any special water-saving features, but
will need to conform with requirements of the water allocation regulations, landscape
design guidelines, and all other city ordinances which relate to water use.
Therefore, no additional mitigation is necessary.
G. Noise Levels:
The Noise Element of the General Plan establishes standards for diurnal (average
day/night) noise levels for all zoning districts in the City. For the site's land
use designation, the average maximum exterior day/night noise level is 60 decibels.
The Noise Element map indicates that noise levels at this site resulting from
proximity to the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way are between 60 and 70
decibels, expressed as a day/night average. This estimate indicates the site is
within a sensitive area so far as noise reception and exposure are concerned. For
this reason the site has had the "S", Special Considerations, overlay added to its
R-2 zoning and staff directed the applicant to submit a noise study evaluating noise
impacts (Donald O. Asquith, The Morro Group, March 1989) which is incorporated herein
by reference.
The noise study indicates that existing noise levels at the-site based on current
railroad operations and freight traffic are approximately 59 decibels and within
accepted standards. The report provides for the worst case scenario in terms of
noise impacts by analyzing noise levels at the site with a three-fold increase in
freight traffic. The conclusion is that with worst-case conditions, maximum allowed
exterior noise levels will be exceeded in the westernmost parking area and maximum
interior noise levels exceeded in westernmost buildings with windows open.
In terms of exterior noise, areas specifically designed for outdoor uses such as
common recreation areas need to meet noise standards. It would be acceptable for
noise levels in the westernmost parking lot to be exceeded since areas planned for
common open space use are provided in the center of the project where noise is
attenuated by buildings to acceptable levels and residents will only be subjected to
excessive noise levels in the parking lot sporadically. However, interior noise
levels in the units contained in the westernmost buildings needs to be mitigated.
Conclusion: May be significant.
i
f-3�
j
� 1 i
� ER 13-89
Page 5
Mitieation Measure:
The applicant shall incorporate building techniques such as use of fixed windows with
double glazing in appropriate locations to provide interior noise levels that conform
with the 45 decibel interior standard in those units contained in buildings located
along the westerly side of the site.
H. Geolottic & Seismic Hazards & T000¢raohic Modifications:
A grading permit was issued for the project site to allow fill materials from the
nearby Terrace Hill tract to be deposited there. Soils reports done at that time
indicated the presence of a petroleum sump at the site. It is not known whether
hazardous materials were removed prior to fill operations or the extent of possible
soils and groundwater contamination.
Conclusion: May Be significant.
Mitieation Measures:
L A hazardous materials abatement plan shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department and Hazardous Materials Inspector which includes:
a. A preliminary soils report including map and site history indicating the
extent and location of contamination.
b.. If soil contamination is found, the plan shall demonstrate how the site
will be restored.
2 A building permit shall not be issued for the project until' the site satisfies
the requirentents of the Community Development Director and Hazardous Materials
Inspector with respect to the removal of hazardous materials and restoration of
the site:
III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The staff recommends that a negative declaration incorporating the mitigation measures be
prepared for the project.
pr#6:er13=89
�-3 3
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWER 13-89
SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
In conformance with AB 3180, the following mitigation measures will be monitored by
reviewing the plans during building permit plan check:
1. The applicant shall provide for the future alignment of Bishop Street to the west by
the dedication of additional right-of-way south of the existing dedication with the
proposed abandonment.
2. The applicant shall dedicate a portion of the southeast corner of the property to
allow for the development of an offset cul-de-sac for Bushnell Street if the Bishop
Street overpass is constructed. The cul-de-sac would be necessary to terminate
Bushnell if the overpass is constructed because of the grade differential between the
grades of Bushnell and the overpass.
All buildings and improvements need to be appropriately set back from the cul-de-sac
right-of-way.
The following mitigation measures will be monitored during building permit plan check and
by field inspection prior to occupancy:
3. The applicant shall install one on-site fire hydrant adjacent to the driveway in the
southwest corner of the project to the approval of the Fire Department.
4. The applicant shall incorporate building techniques such as use of fixed windows with
double glazing at appropriate locations to provide interior noise levels that conform
with the 45 decibel interior standard in those units contained in buildings located
along the westerly side of the site.
5. A hazardous materials abatement plan shall be submitted to the Community Development
Department and Hazardous Materials Inspector which includes:
a. A preliminary soils report including map and site history indicating the extent
and location of contamination.
b. If soil contamination is found, the plan shall demonstrate how the site will be
restored.
A building permit shall not be issued for the project until the site satisfies the
requirements of the Community Development Director and Hazardous Materials Inspector with
respect to the removal of hazardous materials and restoration of the site.
pr#6:er 13-89
i
�-3�
HE----MO�RRO-G^*O: � p� .�=:::::::::.._
March 9, 1989
RPM Design Group
3026 S.. Higuera St.
San Luis Obispo,CA 93401
ATTN: Mr. Eric Justsen
SUBJECT: Noise Investigation, Fairview Station, Florence and Bushnell,
City of San Luis Obispo
Dear Mr.Justsen:
At your request we have conducted an investigation of noise levels at the site of the proposed
project. The property is located adjacent to the railroad yard of the Southern Pacific Transportation
Company,and railroad noise has been identified as the primary concern. Freight operations on the
coast route were substantially reduced about two years ago, but have since resumed but at a lesser
frequency. The most recent information obtained by the County Office of the Environmental
Coordinator in early January indicated that freight traffic averages about three operations a day.
Our analysis of noise conditions relies on this existing rate of freight operations, but also considers
the effects of increased operations.
SUMMARY
Measurable noise levels at the site are relatively low (i.e., in the range of approximately 53 dBA,
Ldn), and noise from Amtrack operations are insignificant. These trains have a relatively low
noise level, and both pass the site in the daytime.
Southern Pacific previously eliminated through freight traffic on the coast route which substantially
reduced freight traffic through San Luis Obispo. However, in recent months, freight traffc has
resumed,and the potential for increased rail traffic is conjectural.
Assuming two daytime freights and one nighttime freight per day, the noise levels at the westerly
boundary of the site would be approximately 59 dBA (Ldn). This noise level is within
the objective for residential areas of 60 dBA (Ldn).
However, future noise levels could increase significantly if Southern Pacific resumes significant
freight traffic on the coastal route. The analysis assumes a three-fold increase over existing levels
(6 daytime operations and 2 nighttime operations). Potential impacts under these worst-case
conditions can be mitigated by providing air conditioning in the units located within the 60 dBA
(Ldn) noise contour as shown on Figure 1.
Fnvironmental Services Planning Design P.O. itox 6297, Los Osos, CA 93312 805/528-2187
�- 3S
ANALYSIS OF NOISE LEVELS
Existing Conditions
Existinz Sources of Noise
Measurements of existing noise levels were previously conducted at the front of property located
diagonally across Bushnell Street on the afternoon of December 30, 1987, and were timed to
include the arrival of the northbound (uphill)Amtrack at approximately 3:00 pm.. Sources of noise
other than individual trains were measured for a period of approximately 30 minutes prior to the
arrival of the Amtrack. These sources included noise from construction of a home on Bishop
Street approximately 200 feet away,an occasional vehicle on Bushnell Street, aircraft traffic taking
off from San Luis Obispo Airport, and a general background of noise from the area along South
Broad Street to the west. No noise from activities in the Southern Pacific yard could be heard
during the noise measurements.
The results of these measurements are summarized as follows (see Attachment A for an
explanation of instrumentation and discussion of noise descriptors):.
Parameter Noise Level (dB A)
Average noise level (30-minute Leq) 52.9
Maximum (one-sec.average) 79.5
Minimum (one-sec. average) 36.3
The maximum noise level resulted from one automobile traveling north on Bushnell Street, and the
average ambient noise level (i.e.,the level without any identifiable single source) was estimated at
approximately 42 dBA.
The pass-by of the northbound Amtrack was measured as a single event beginning at the time the
noise from this train first significantly exceeded the background level and ending at the time it
became essentially inaudible. The period of this event was approximately 55 seconds, and
measurements are summarized as follows:
Parameter Noise Level (dBA)
Sound exposure level (SEL) 81.1
Average noise level (55-second Leq) 63.8
Maximum (one-sec. average) 70.8
Minimum (one-sec. average) 44.8
These noise levels are very low for an isolated event, and were,in pan,reduced by the presence of
two rows of refrigerator cars parked on sidings between the main tracks and the site. However,
the stacks of the engines were visible during the pass-by, and engine noise is the major component
of total train noise. In addition, it should be noted that the project site is relatively close to the
depot, and the trains are traveling at relatively low speed approaching or departing from the depot.
Ambient noise levels at the presently proposed project site were measured on the morning of March
8, 1989. Levels ranged generally between 40 and 30 dBA, with average levels at about 45 dBA.
This level is significantly below that of the previous measurements which suggests a relatively high
level of variability depending on local conditions in the vicinity of the site. The higher level of
ambient noise is, therefore, used in estimating total noise levels below.
2
1 ,
�. Existing Ldn
The City's standards for compatibility of residential development with noise conditions are based
on a maximum of 60 dBA (Ldn). The day-night weighted scale(Ldn) takes into account that levels
of noise during the nighttime (10:00 pm to 7:00 am) are more objectionable than the same levels
during the daytime, and nighttime levels are weighted by a factor of 10 (i.e., +10 dB). Estimating
Ldn requires assigning noise levels for a full 24-hour period, and assuming future freight train
operations.
Existing noise levels at the westerly boundary of the site approximately 135 feet from the centerline
of the main tracks are estimated as follows:
Noise Level Sound Pressure Duration Tune-Weighted
Source (dBA.Lea) Lx 106) urs Sound Pressure (x 106)
Day, ambient 52.9 0.20 15 10
Amtrack,north 65.5 3.55 0.015 0.053•
Amtrack,south 65.5 3.55 0.015 0.053
Daytime freights (2) 72.7 18.6. 0.10 1.86
Total daytime (15 hrs.) 4.97
Night, ambient 42.0 0.06 9 0.54
Nighttime freight 72.7 18.6 0.05 0,993
Total nighttime (9 hrs.) 1.47
Weighted for nighttime (x10) 14.7
Total (daytime and nighttime) 19.7
Total (adjusted for 24-hr period) 0.82
Resulting noise level. (Ldn) 59.1 dBA
In the computations above,it should be noted that:
• The decibel scale is logarithmic. The addition of various sources of noise requires
conversion to a linear scale,and re-conversion to the decibel scale to describe the total
noise level.
• The component of Amtrack noise constitutes less than I% of daytime noise levels and
is insignificant.
• The assumption of two daytime freight trains constitutes approximately 9% of total
weighted noise(Ldn),and is also insignificant.
• The primary component of the weighted noise level (Ldn) is the one freight train per
night which is about half of the total weighted noise level.
i
3
J
Future Noise Levels
Future noise levels at the site will increase moderately due to increasing development in the area.
These levels will be primarily associated with sources that are normal to residential neighborhoods
and are insignificant. Significant increases could occur if Southern Pacific were to increase
through freight traffic on the coastal route, particularly nighttime operations. The assumption for
existing conditions of one freight per night is reasonably conservative. However, should nighttime
operations increase to 2 to 3 trains with an equivalent increase in daytime operations (4 to 6 trains),
then noise levels(Ldn) at the westerly site boundary would increase to approximately 61.1 to 62.6
dBA, respectively.
Effects on the Project
Outside Noise Levels
Noise contours at the site for potential worst-case conditions assuming freight operations atht ree
times existing rates.(6 daytime freights and 3 nighttime freights) are shown on Figure 1: The
contours are dotted through structures as these will substantially reduce noise levels in outside
areas where the structures are between these outside areas and the tracks. Noise reductions
resulting from surrounding structures in the central outside-area of the complex are estimated at
approximately 6 dB with future worst-case levels (Ldn) being approximately 50-55 dBA, and
noise levels in close proximity to(i.e.,beside) structures will be reduced by up to 3 dB. Based on
these relationships, future worst-case noise levels will exceed the City standard of 60 dBA (Ldn)
only in the parlQng area on the westerly side of the complex.
Inside Noise Levels
Noise reductions from outside to inside a structure with the windows closed are about 22 dB for
minimal construction (i.e., mobilehomes and older construction without insulation), and about 25
dB for modern construction with insulation in all outside walls. Therefore, assuming construction
to existing codes,noise levels inside the westerly line of structures with the windows closed would
be approximately 35 dBA, well below the 45 dBA inside standard.
Noise reductions with windows open are normally about 15 dB,and the westerly line of structures
(i.e., those inside the 60 dBA contour) may experience noise levels slightly above 45 dBA (Ldn)
during hot summer nights when, it may be appropriate to leave the windows open, and if freight
operations expand by a factor of three (worst-case conditions). _
Mitigation Measures
Potentially adverse effects of future worst-case conditions with a three-fold expansion of freight
operations by Southern Pacific can be mitigated by providing air conditioning in the structures
located within the 60 dBA (Ldn)contour. This will allow the occupants to close the windows on
hot summer nights which is the only condition under which noise levels may exceed City standards
for future worst-case conditions.
Sincerely,/
Donald O. Asquith
4
z
2
..........
to
CD
cm 0
Cl) LU
2 cc
Iz
LL
oi
"I- • AWK
ip
ATTACHMENT A
INSTRUMENTATION AND TERMINOLOGY FOR NOISE INVESTIGATIONS
INSTRUMENTATION
The subject noise investigation has been conducted using a Bruel and Kjacr (B & K) Model 2230 precision
integrating sound level meter calibrated externally at the beginning and end of each period of measurement using a B
& K Model 4230 acoustic calibrator. In combination,these instruments yield sound level measurements accurate to
within 0.1 decibel(dB). The Model 2230 fulfills standards of relevant sections of IEC(International Electrotechnical
Commission)651 and ANSI(American National Standard)S IA.1971 for Type 1 (precision)integrating sound level
meters.
The microprocessor of the Model 2230 computes and stores/displays the following measurements.
The sound pressure level(SPL)is updated once each second on the digital display at a resolution of 0.1 "..and 64
times per second on the analog display at a resolution of 2 dB. The mechanism of averaging levels during the
display interval may be"fast"or"slow. The setting is normally"fast",as this is required for Leq and SEL discussed
below.
The sound equivalent level (Laq)is the average sound pressure level for the period of measurement based on equal
energy. The meter internally computes a new Leq from the SPL(RMS)and updates the digital display once each
second. The measurement period is limited only by battery life which is approximately 8 hours This parameter is
used primarily to describe environmental noise.
The sound exposure level (SEL) is the constant level which if maintained for one second would have the same
acoustic energy as the total noise for the period of measurement. This parameter is used primarily is determining the
noise exposure in unusually noisy working environments or for pleasuring specific events such as an individual
aircraft flyover or a train passage.
The maximum(Max.)and minimum Mn.)sound pressure levels during the period of measurement are updated once
each second from the RMS average sound pressure level. For periods of measurement in the range of 1 to 10
minutes,these values are reasonable approximations of the sound pressure level exceeded I%of the time and 99%of
the time,respectively.
All of the above can be measured using frequency weightings of the"A"or"C"scales in accordance with IEC 651,
or a "linear' (20 Hz to 20 kHz) or 'all pass"(10 Hz to 50 kHz) filter setting. The "A" scale is weighted to most
closely approximate the response of an average human ear,and is the setting most used in conducting measurements
of environmental noise.
TERMINOLOGY
Noise,as used herein,is defined as unwanted sound. However,because the instruments that detect the small changes
in atmospheric pressure that are perceived as sound cannot distinguish between that which is wanted (e.g., birds
singing, waves on a beach, etc.) and that which is not (e.g., traffic noise), measurements of "noise" are more
accurately described as measurements of sound pressure.
Changes in sound pressure normally experienced in the human environment extend across a very large range. The
sound pressures in an average room art in the range 1,000 times the sound pressure at the threshold of hearing,and
the sound pressure of a large truck is about 100.000 times that threshold. Because of this large range, it is
convenient to describe sound in terms of its energy level with respect to that of the threshold of hearing. This
method of description is called the decibel scale (dB). In mathematical terms, the sound pressure level, SPL = 10
6
��0�O
�. Log(p/po)2 dB,where po is the sound pressure at the threshold of hearing (20 microPascals). In practical terms, it
is adequate to note that the decibel scale is logarithmic(like the Richter scale for earthquakes),that it conveniently
compresses the numbers involved from a range of 20-200,000,000 to a range of 0-130,and that it is oriented to
human response in that an increase of about 10 dB is normally perceived as a doubling of the sound level.
In recent years,various methods and"scales"have been devised to describe noise in the human environment. These
methods have had two basic objectives: 1)to represent a physical condition that is constantly changing over a wide
range of values by a single numerical descriptor, and 2), to adjust that descriptor in a way that most reasonably
reflects the degree of annoyance of the varying noise levels.
1. Statistical Descriptors
Statistical descriptors most often used to describe variations in noise level include:
L90 The level exceeded 90%of the time during a specified period,usually I hour.24 hours,or during
the day or the nighL In some instances,this value may be considered the background level.
L50 The level exceeded 50% of the time during a specified period as noted above. This value has
sometimes been considered the average or median noise level.
L10 The level exceeded 10%of the time during a specified period as noted above. For traffic noise,this
value has been considered the peak period level.
�. LI The level exceeded 1%of the time during a specified period as noted above. This value may be
considered the peak noise level.
The most significant drawback to the use of these descriptors,particularly L50 as representing an average, is that
they do not take into account the logarithmic nature of the decibel scale and the relatively higher energy content of
higher decibel levels. That is,the average energy content of 50 dB and-60 dB for equal periods of time is not 55 dB,
but rather 57.4 dB(i.e.,the log of the average of the andlogs).
A parameter that more acurately describes average noise is the Equivalent Continuous Sound Level (Leq), which is
the continuous sound level having the same energy content as the varying level for the period of measurement. Prior
to the availablity of microprocessors at reasonable cost, the hand-computation of Leq from a series of individual
measurements was a tedious task. However,meters are now available that internally compute Leq,continuously as
with the Model 2230 discussed above,or for a specified period usually one minute. Because of this technical
advance, measurements of Leq for various periods of time have become the basic parameter in evaluating
environmental noise.
2. Weighted Noise Levels
Because the same level of noise is more annoying to people if it occurs at night, scales have been devised that
weight nighttime noise at a higher level than daytime noise. The scales most commonly in use arc:
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level weights evening noise (7 p.m. to 10 p.m.) by a factor of 5,
and nighttime levels (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) by a factor of 10. Mathematically, evening levels are
increased by 5 dB,and nightime levels are increased by 10 dB in computing a 24-hour geometric
average.
C
7
1
Ldn Day-Night Equivalent Level is similar to CNEL but it does not include a weighting factor for
evening noise levels.
Of the above, CNEL came into use first, and is the standard in regulating noise levels in the vicinity of airports.
Ldn is a simplification of CNEL, and is more commonly used in regulating land use where traffic noise is a
potential problem. 'These levels apply for a minimum period of 24 hours,but may be applied for periods as long as
one year. The difference may be significant where noise levels are near regulatory limits, and where there are
seasonal or weekly variations in a noise source of concern.
x
LI
i
' R R 1. R ll L P
October 5, 1989
HAND_DELWERED
Ms. Pam Ricci
Planning Department
City of San Luis Obispo
P. O. Box 8100
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
Re: Fairview Station
Resubmittal for Use Permit
Dear Pam:
This is an update on the.Fairview Station Use Permit application. A few items have
either been further detailed or have been clarified during our many recent meetings
with staff..
I will refer to the letter of August 14, 1989 which we submitted to you in anticipation
of making the September 13th Planning Commission hearing. The items covered in
that letter remain the same except where noted in the following update outline.
1. Grading Information
As mentioned in the previous letter, a stockpiling permit was issued by the
Council on August 1st. To date, there has been approximately 4,000 to 5;000
cubic yards of soil stockpiled with an additional 1,000 cubic yards to be deposited
as construction and excavation continues on the Leyland Terrace project.
This would bring the total stockpiling to approximately 6,000-cubic yards. The
preliminary grading studies performed by RPM indicate that the net quantity of
fill earth required to construct the project will be approximately 6,000 cubic
yards. The earth needed for this fill will be taken from the adjacent stockpile
site eliminating import and export procedures.
l
�-r
Ms. Pam Ricci
Page 2
October 5, 1989
In addition to the soil necessary to construct the project, there.will be a quantity
of soil needed to replace that soil which is contaminated and requires removal
from the site. Earth Systems Environmental, Inc. has completed an expanded
environmental assessment report, #ES-0109-PG2 which focuses on the evidence
of contaminated soils on the site. Based upon their findings, they have estimated
that approximately 400 cubic yards of soils containing in excess of 1,000 mg/kg
TPH exists on the site. An additional amount of less severely contaminated soils
containing at least 100 mg/kg TPH is estimated at approximately 1,500 cubic
yards. Thus, it is estimated that a total of 1,900 cubic yards of soil will be
removed from the site. This 1,900 cubic yards will need to be replaced to
complete the excavation procedure and will need to be imported to the site from
an undetermined location.
Please refer to the remedial action plan submitted to the city by Robert
Kitamura for further information on the clean-up procedure.
2. Contaminated Soils
We have submitted to the city an expanded environmental assessment prepared
by Earth Systems Environmental, Inc. This report discusses in detail the field
investigations, testing procedures, and results from their investigations of
contaminated soils. Please refer to this report.
We have also submitted to the city a remedial action plan designed to outline the
steps which will be taken to remove the contaminated soils from the site to an
approved and licensed toxic soils disposal site. This plan has been reviewed and
approved by the city hazardous waste inspector. Please refer to this document
dated September 21, 1989 for further information.
3. Closure of Rachel Street
On August 15, 1989, the City Council reviewed the circulation conditions in the
area of Rachel Street and Florence Drive adjacent to the proposed project. It
was the council's determination that a temporary closure of Rachel Street would
be appropriate during construction of the Fairview Station project only. This
would be facilitated by installation of temporary barriers and signage at points
prior to the barricade to notify drivers of a closed road ahead. Permanent
1
Ms. Pam Ricci
Page 3
October 5, 1989
closure of Rachel Street was not supported by the fire marshall or staff, however,
should there be sufficient reason to further consider_ this action, the council
determined it would be best addressed in the forthcoming circulation element update.
4. Site Plan Revisions
In an effort to minimize the problems and concerns with the design of this
project before our resubmittal,we had a series of review meetings with city staff.
The result of these meetings has led to a few minor changes to the project which
act to increase its functionality.
A. Removal of a 3-bedroom unit #7 at the south end of the courtyard. In
doing this, we were able to generate more space on site and create a
._ larger interior courtyard area. The density of the project remains the
same as we added to the number of 3-bedroom units and omitted 1-
bedroom units. See project summary on Sheet.ARC-1 for unit statistics.
B. Created additional free standing 3-bedroom units by separating units #11
and 12.
C. Straighten units #2 and 3 so they are now'perpendicular to Bushnell
Street with 90' driveway approaches. This. unit and all other units meet
the 15-foot minimum street yard setback.
D. Addition of two more 2-car attached garages, one at unit #2 and one at
unit #17. This gives unit #1 and 18 one enclosed garage space each and
are assigned surface parking plan in the parking area. See ARC-2 for
assigned parking locations.
E. Provided for 46 parking spaces exceeding the required parking of both the
zoning ordinance, 44 spaces, and the condominium policy, 2.5 spaces/unit
= 45. We have provided for 2.6 spaces/unit. Please refer to Sheet ARC-
1.
i
Ms. Pam Ricci
Page 4
October 5, 1989
F. Responded to concerns about the amount of open space provided by this
project by identifying the amount and location of private open space
allocated to each unit. Please refer to Exhibit A, Sheet ARC-1.
G. Indicated on the plans, the distance between the property line and the
primary railroad line, 147 feet. Refer to Sheet ARC-1.
H. Indicated on the plans, the approximate location of solar collectors and
their efficiency relative to true north/south. Refer to Sheet ARC-1.
L We have included all of the necessary drawings and data required for final
ARC submittal in order to provide you with as much detailed information
as possible for your review. This includes landscape development. plan,
building sections, site furniture, lighting, etc. Pleaserefer to Sheet ARC-
6 and ARC4.
Please let me know if we can be of further assistance in collecting the latest data for
this project.
Sincerely,
RR", ESIGN GROUP
En stesen
S 'or Tanner
Planning Division
cc: Mr. Bob Kitamura, P.E.T.R.A.
Mr. T. Keith Gurnee, RRM
V/FJ-RICCI.F'RV
144
j Kt(;tlUt:i.
AUG 15 1989
Gry at San kms OOs
August 14, 1989
Ms. Pam Ricci
Community Development Department
City of San Luis Obispo
P.O. Box 8100
San Luis Obispo, Ca 93403-8100
RE: FAIRVIEW STATION RE-SUBMITTAL FOR PLANNING COMMISSION
REVIEW
Dear Pam:
It is our most serious hope that both the use permit and tentative map be placed on
the same Planning Commission Agenda as soon Ias, possible (Sept. 13). We have
embarked on a "crunch" schedule to prepare a tentative map in order to meet a
submittal date this Friday, August 11, to provide you and.your departments as much
time as possible to review the tentative map. We hope that this will not be an
imposition to your busy schedule; however, this project has been reviewed several
times within the last few months and. should be fairly familiar to you.
The following information represents our responses to the last Planning Commission
Hearing on June 14, 1989 regarding the use permit. I hope you will find that in
redesigning and addressing concerns which. the City has with the Fairview Station
project, we have produced a project which we all can find satisfaction with.
1. Grading Information
At the last Planning Commission Hearing there was much concern regarding the
exact quantity of earth work which would be necessary to construct this project.
It would appear that the misunderstanding regarding this quantity resulted from
an inaccurate number representing "average" depth of cut and fill. The actual
totals of cuts and fill have been verified by RRM engineering, which you will find
attached. The "average depth" of cuts and fills have been corrected to read:
Average depth of cut ± 3'
Average depth of fill ± 5'
�i
Ms. Pam Ricci
Page 2
August 14, 1989
These numbers now correspond to the earth work totals at this preliminary stage
of project development.
Since the last Planning Commission Hearing, Petra Enterprises has been
interested in stock piling excess earth generated from a nearby project in order
to reduce the amount of traffic associated with soil import and export operations.
This preliminary soil stock piling and early grading permit was granted by the
City Council on August 1, 1989 and stock piling has begun. This soil will be used
as fill material for the excavations necessary to remove contaminated soils as well
as for site grading purposes. The total amount of excavated materials is
estimated by Pacific Geoscience to be approximately 1,500 c.y.s. However,
depending on the method of disposal preferred by the City this figure could vary.
It is the intent of Petra Enterprises that grading operations be kept to a
minimum with regard to soil import and export for the benefit of the entire.
neighborhood. _
2. Contaminated Soils
As requested by the City Fire Department, P.E.T.R.A. has contracted with Pacific
Geoscience to perform further soils investigations in order to determine the
extent and exact chemical composition of the contaminated soils. These results
and recommended procedures for clean up are contained in the expanded
environmental site assessment report prepared by Pacific Geoscience. This
report will be forwarded to you shortly. Briefly, the areas of contamination have
been determined, the ievels of total petroleum hydrocarbons have been
determined, alternative methods of clean up have been presented, and a draft
work plan is underway for review by City Staff to illustrate what steps will be
taken to remove contaminated soils. For further information, please see the
expanded environmental site assessment.
3. Temporary or Permanent Closure of Rachel Street
Due to concerns about traffic presented to os by the neighbors of the Rachel
Street area, we prepared a preliminary circulation exhibit indicating the
installation of a cul de sac and creation of an emergency access only connection
from Florence Drive to Rachel Street. We forwarded this plan to the council
and the City Public Works and Fire Marshal's office. As requested by the
/r�V
Ms. Pam Ricci
Page 3
August 14, 1989
Planning Commission, the issue has been placed on the City Council Agenda for
consideration on August 15. At that time the Council will determine what action
should be taken regarding street closure, temporary or permanent.
4. Site Plan Revisions
In response to the commissioners concerns about.site planning issues, we offer
the following:
A. Removal of Unit #7 at the south end of the courtyard. This frees up the
site for increased courtyard area and greater privacy between units.
B. Straighten Unit #'s 1 and 2 so they are-now at a 90° angle to Bushnell
Street and corrected driveway alignment.
C. Addition of two more two-car garages, 1 at Unit #2 and 1 at Unit #17.
D. Addition of two more surface parking spaces adjacent to Unit #2, giving
Unit #'2 1 and 18 one enclosed garage space and one surface parking_
space.
E. Assigned parking for each unit. See sheet ARC-2.
F. Exceeded the required parking of 45 spaces (2..5 spaces per unit) by
providing 48 total spaces (2.66 spaces per unit) plus motorcycle and bike
parking.
G. Respond to noise concerns by identifying windows which are to be triple
glazed and fixed. This will occur in Units 7,8 , 9, & 10 where noise
disturbance from the railroad may exceed 60 dbs in worst case conditions.
See note on ARC package. -
Pam, I hope we have addressed all of the issues which are confronting this project.
We really have tried to make the changes requested by the Planning Commission and
yet retain the quality of the site plan which are fundamental to this program.
Ms. Pam Ricci
Page 4
August 14, 1989
If you need any other information, please let me know. I will get you the reduced
transparencies as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
`DESIGN G O
Eri stesen
Senior Planner
Planning Division
cc: Mr. Ken Bruce
Mr. T. Keith Gurnee, RRM
Mr. Bruce Houseman
Enclosure
i
f
Minutes
April 26 , 1989
Page 2 .
He did not agree with retaining th elipad , but felt a designated
helicopter use area could be accom ated on the property . He also
discussed the exterior spaces and S .
Richard Steele , 1239 Iris , support the revised project and encouraged
pedestrian access .
Chairperson Kourakis closed the pu c hearing .
Commr . Crotser moved to recommend t t council concur with the negative
declaration and approve the General la amendment , subject to findings and
conditions , including revisions to nditions 3 , 41 5 , and 1 $ as suggested
by staff; amending finding 6 and ad ng 6A-6K to condition 15 . He also
added a condition regarding interna noise level regulation . He wanted
condition 4 amended to have R-2 par 1 revert to the original 1987 plan.
He added conditions regarding plann g commission and council review of the
precise plan and helipad area desig tion .
Chairperson Kourakis seconded the m on .
0-ommr. Schmidt requested amending c ition 3 to prohibit use of space for
ysicians , primary outpatient offi
Commr . Roalman did not feel any res ntial zoning should be lost.
Chairperson Kourakis felt the resid ial development would have a traffic
impact and was concerned that the p el would be used for non-hospital -
affiliated uses .
VOTING : AYES - Commrs . Crotser , K akis , Duerk , Hoffman , and Karleskint .
NOES - Commrs . Roalman an chmidt.
ABSENT - None.
s .
Item 2 . Public Hearing : Actions Relating to Property at 980 Florence
Avenue . Request to develop a 1 . 79 acre site wiLh19 rest ential
coinium units and abandon a portion of Bishop Street ; R-2-S
zone; P .E .T. R.A. , Ent . ( Bruce Houseman & Gary Smee ) , applicant .
A. Street Abandonment. Request to abandon a portion of Bishop
treet between Bushnell Street and the Southern Pacific
Railroad.
B. Use Permit 01431 . Request to allow a 19-unit residential
con omini-um on a sensitive site.
---------------------------------------------------
Pam Ricci presented the staff report , recommending approval of the use
permit , subject to findings and conditions .
—S/
P . C . Minutes
April 26 , 1989
Page 3 .
She also recommended the commission recommend council approve the
affordable housing proposal and street abandonment with conditions .
Chairperson Kourakis opened the public hearing.
Erik Justesen , 3026 S. Higuera , applicant ' s representative , discussed the
project and condominium regulations , setbacks , noise levels , and
contamination issues . He also discussed the affordable housing concept and
street abandonment. He did not feel any more parking could be added . He
discussed the 25% minimum of affordable units .
Staff clarified that the proposal could not have subsidy unless rental
screening was open and handled by the Housing Authority .
Bruce Houseman, 1152 Fletcher , stated that the affordability and screening
issues discussed , as well as the legal parameters , was just learned by him
tonight and he was not prepared to respond .
Pete Evans , 2040 Rachel , appreciated the project in general , but was
concerned with traffic impacts on Rachel Street. He also did not feel the
units were particularly affordable . He understood that noise levels would
be mitigated by building shieldings , but felt noise estimates were
inadequate . He preferred a barrier installed.
Dave Fosse , 2056 Rachel , did not feel this was affordable housing and
questioned why the developer could not delete one unit to access parking .
He was concerned with traffic impacts on Rachel Street and favored a
barrier situation .
Mark Keane , 2030 Rachel , was concerned about traffic and favored a barrier
installed .
Wayne Masten , 1041 Bishop , stated noise was an issue , as was traffic . He
did feel the project itself was positive .
Helen Milsap , 1273 Ella , wanted clarification on the proposed abandonmen
section , as she owned part of it . Chairperson Kourakis responded that the
overlap piece of her land would be paid for .
Anchor Wolber , 2022 Rachel , asked for clarification of the arterial
streets . Staff responded that an east/west sector spanned across the city .
Mr . Wolber felt there should be a barrier/cul -de- sac section on Rachel .
Mr . Justesen request a continuance to allow time to explore the circulation
and neighborhood issues raised .
Chairperson Kourakis closed the public hearing .
Commr . Duerk moved to continue the item to the next available meeting .
Chairperson Kourakis seconded the motion .
/ —�v�
A
Minutes
April 26 , 1989
Page 4 .
VOTING : AYES - Commrs . Duerk , Kourakis , Crotser , Hoffman , Karleskint ,
Roalman a.nd Schmidt .
NOES - None .
ABSENT - None.
The motion passes .
em
center at an existTg c u ��Foothill Boulevard ; R-1 zone ;.
Foothill Baptist Church ( liam Davenport ) , applicant.
Pam Ricci presented the staff repor and recommended approval of the use
permit , subject to findings and con tions .
Chairperson Kourakis opened the pub c hearing .
William. Davenport, pastor , discusse the need for daycare and the
`irameters of the proposed program. He discussed the outside play area .
�. airperson Kourakis closed the pub c hearing .
Chairperson Kourakis moved to appro the use permit-, subject to findings
and condition , amending condition '5
Commr . Roalman seconded the -motion .
VOTING: AYES - Commrs . Kourakis , alman , Crotser , Duerk , Hoffman ,
Karleskint, and hmidt .
NOES -. None.
ABSENT - None.
The motion passes..
Item 4 . Public Hearing: Planned D 0opment Rezoning PD 1435 .
ons eration of amending existing development p7an allowing
for large office uses to aw government offices ; 265-285 South
Street.; C-S-PD zone ; JohnIm
huck French , applicants .
Staff reported that the applicantsrequested a continuance .
airperson Kourakis determined thewas no one to speak to this item .
Commr . Duerk moved to continue the to the next available meeting .
/-5 3
1
MINUTES - CITY PLANNING COMMISSION .�
City of San Luis Obispo , California
June 14 , 1989 Regular Meeting
PRESENT : Commrs . Charles Crotser , Gilbert Hoffman , Barry Karle.skint ,
Janet Kourakis , William Roalman , Richard Schmidt , and
Chairperson Donna Duerk .
OTHERS
PRESENT : Pam Ricci and Judith Lautner , Associate Planners ; Terry
Sanville , Principal Planner ; Erwin Willis ; Fire Dept . , and
Lisa Woske, Recording Secretary.
The minutes of the April 26 , 1989 regular meeting were approved as amended
and the minutes of the special meeting of May 18 , 1989 were approved as
submitted .
There were no changes to the agenda or public comments .
------------------------------------------------------ ----------------------
Item 1 . Public. Hearing : Actions Relatin2 to Property at 980 Florence
Avenue. Request to develop9 acre site w Lha resi ential
condominium units and abandon a portion of Bishop Street ; R-2-S
zone ; P .E .T. R.A . Ent . ( Bruce Houseman and Gary Smee) , applicants . ',..."
A. Street Abandonment. Request to abandon a portion of
Bi— s�Tiop Street betWeen Bushnell Street and the Southern
Pacific Railroad .
B . Use Permit U1431 . Request to allow a 19-unit residential
condomom n um on a sensitive site.
Pam Ricci presented the staff report and noted some corrections to the
report text . She recommended approval of the use permit, subject to find-
ings and conditions , including concurrence with the negative declaration
and to recommend that council approve the street abandonment with condi -
tions .
Commr . Roalman asked for clarification of the TIRE index. Staff explained
that the index is used to evaluate how changes in traffic level affect
residents along residential streets .
Commr . Schmidt clarified that Rachel Street was considered a local street ,
not a collector , and discussed how that conflicted with the Circulation
Element. He was also concerned about the relocation of contaminated soil
from the site. Erwin Willis responded with discussion of the removal
methods , including Class 1 hauling.
Commr. Kourakis noted she discussed hazardous materials with Mike Smith and _
iscussed removal plan and state and county health codes .
Chairperson Duerk opened the public hearing.
"'..C . Minutes
.I.. une 14 , 1989
Page 2 .
Keith Gurnee , 108 Broad , applicant ' s representative , discussed the request
for a conditional use permit., street abandonment , and variance . He noted
the subdivision map to allow development of the site as a condominium would
be submitted at a later date . He agreed that openable windows should be
allowed . He discussed the parking plan and requirements . He discussed
conditions of the Bishop Street abandonment and suggested condition C-2 be
deleted if the city did not intend to build the overpass . He felt the
contamination could be easily cleaned up and stated that the grading plan
did not account for site clean-up quantities . He felt traffic impacts
associated with the project were minimal and stated that he met with the
Rachel Street neighborhood representatives. He distributed a copy of a
circulation plan to mitigate traffic concerns on Rachel Street . Without
the abandonment , he stated the driveway would be relocated and there wou.ld
be a 1 unit reduction .
Commr . Hoffman was c-Oncerned about units 1 and 19 ' s lack of covered parking
and the inconvenience of available off-street parking . Mr . Gurnee
responded that he was not in favor of adding a garage for these units .
Commr . Hoffman discussed the possibility of providing a garage for units 1
and 19 with the reconfiguration of Units 2 and 3 . Mr . Gurnee was concerned
with how this change would impact the "village" feel of the project .
' '•ommr. Schmidt was concerned with the angle of Building B containing Units
and 3 . Staff agreed they were concerned with the angled approach of the
driveway and discussed possible modifications .
Pete Evans , 2040 Rachel , was concerned with increases in traffic on Rachel
Street and related safety impacts attributable to the project . He wanted
this area to be considered as a separate neighborhood and favored the cul -
de-sac alternative suggested by Mr. Gurnee . He felt t e breakaway barrier
system was feasible for emergency access and felt Rachel Street traffic
should be addressed regardless of whether this project goes through .
Mark Kanen , 2030 Rachel , was concerned with traffic dangers and felt the
cul -de-sac option was viable and requested Council approval of that.
Mr . Willis discussed the cul -de-sac option and stated there would be no
direct emergency access impacts. He did not feel a precedent should be set
to arbirtrarily close off streets , but agreed Rachel Street should be
included in the overall general circulation study .
John French , 3942 Hollyhock , discussed the Bishop Street abandonment and
overpass . He felt the overpass issue should be deleted and was infeasible ,
as it was too expensive and the concept of its initiation was inhibiting
proposed projects . He wanted the issue resolved in study of the
Circulation Study Phase. II . He stated that Phase II construction of his
Tract 1034 would provide fill . in excess of that required by this project .
He also noted that the condition requiring an 8 :00 a . m . start time for
r ,ubcontractors was hard to enforce , as most workers were used to beginning
�,at 7 :00 a .m.
�-ss
P . C . Minutes -
June 14 , 1989
Page 3 .
Chairperson Duerk closed the public hearing .
Staff noted that the dedicated right-of-way was city-owned .
Commr . Kourakis favored a compensatory amount of right-of-way be dedicated
by the developer with the proposed abandonment and was concerned with area
open space.
Commr. Roalman was concerned with the applicant ' s calculations on the
amounts of cut and fill , the potential traffic impacts on Bishop and Rachel
Streets created by the grading operation , and the need for dust mitigation .
He suggested continuing the item to allow time to address these issues . He
suggested closing Rachel Street during construction .
Commr . Crotser agreed with Commr . Kourakis ' comments regarding the
abandonment and felt condition 2 was reasonable. He felt the conceptual
emergency access suggested by the applicant' s representative was a good
idea and favored the project.
Commr . Karleskint agreed with Commrs . Crotser ' s and Kourakis ' comments . He
agreed with staff recommendation for the right-of-way and wanted the Bishop
Street overpass issue settled. He felt openable windows were acceptable.
Commr . Hoffman was concerned with the parking issue on units 1 and 19 and
reorienting units 2 and 3 . He agreed with the cul -de-sac proposal as part
of the overall circulation plan . He felt cross-ventilation was important .
He wanted compact parking spaces on the east side to be expanded to regula-
tion length .
Staff stated all units in the back had side windows for ventilation and
added that the city was developing a new standard for a parking stall with
dimensions between the current compact and standard space dimension .
Commr . Schmidt felt the existing concrete retaining wall illustrated how
close buildings are located to the tracks and did not feel that this
provided a good living environment . He felt a project could be designed to
eliminate health/safety/welfare concerns .
Commr . Roalman was concerned with accepting the negative declaration
without knowing the amount of soil to be excavated , grading mitigation
measures , and whether the council would act on the Rachel Street
neighborhood concerns.
Commr . Kourakis was concerned with removal of contamination and how it
would affect the neighborhood . Mr . Willis stated he could not speculate
on how much Soil would need to be removed from the site to accommodate .
clean-up .
Commr . Crotser moved to approve the negative declaration and use permit
request , subject to finding and conditions , amending Finding 4F , 4E2 , and ' 1
51) , deleting 5F , amending condition 2 regarding generic parking space size '
l�S�O
P .C . Minutes
lune 14 , 1989
rage 4 .
standards and adding condition 4 regarding a dust management plan .
Chairperson Duerk seconded the motion .
Commr. Hoffman stated he favored a continuance regarding questions on
grading and dust management and unit 19 ' s parking Problems .
Commr. Karleskint agreed with Commr . Hoffman' s comments .
VOTING : AYES - Commrs .. Crotser and Duerk .
NOES - Commrs. Kourakis , Hoffman , Karleskint , Roalman and
Schmidt.
ABSENT - None.
The motion fails.
Commr. Roalman moved to con.tinu.e the item until the soil excavation/fill
adequacy are determined and have council respond to the temporary closure
of Rachel Street.
Commr. Kourakis seconded the motion .
,---VOTING : AYES - Commrs . Roalman , Kourakis , Hoffman„ and Karleski.nt .
NOES - Commrs. Crotser, Sc..midt , and Duerk .
-- ABSENT - None.
The motion passes.
There was much commission discussion on the timeline involved in this
project.
Bruce Houseman , .applicant , 1352 Fletcher , stated the Pacific Geoscience was
working on a plan to determine contamination ..
Chairperson Duerk moved to rescind the previous motion with design changes
returning to the commission as soon as possible and deferring the hazardous
materials and Rachel Street closure issues until review of the tract map .
Commr . Crotser seconded the motion .
VOTING: AYES - Commrs . Duerk , Crotser , and Karleskint.
NOES - Commrs . Hoffman , Kourakis , Roalman , and Schmidt.
ABSENT - None.
The motion fails .
Commr . Roalman directed staff to explore the timeline specifics of this
project and commission requests .
city of sAn luis oaspo
>�
"' _ s
990 Palm StreetlPost Office Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 8100
June 19, 1989
PETRA Enterprises
1319 Marsh Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Subject: Actions Relating to Property at 980 Florence Avenue
Street Abandonment
Use Permit U14.31
The Planning Commission, at its meeting of June 14 , 1989, continued
consideration of your request to develop a 1.79 acre site with 19
residential condominium units and to abandon a portion of Bishop
Street with direction to provide:
1. More information on the project's grading operation, including
more accurate cut and .fill calculations and. the impacts of
cleanup of soils contamination on grading;
2 . Feedback from the City Council on the feasibility of the
temporary and/or permanent closure of Rachel Street; and
3 ._ A revised site plan incorporating three additional vehicle
spaces with parking for Units 1 and 19 and reorientation of
Units 2 and 3 to conform with city setback and parking and
driveway standards.
If you have any questions, please contact Pamela Ricci at 54.9-7168 .
Sincerely,
J
J
Terry S ville
Princi Planner
cc: RRM Design Group
i-s8
i
MINUTES - CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
City of San Luis Obispo, California
October .11 , 1989 Regular Meeting
PRESENT : Commr"s . Charles Crotser, Gilbert Hoffman,, Barry Karleskint,
Janet Kourakis , William Roalman, Richard Schmidt , and
Chairperson Donna Duerk .
OTHERS
PRESENT: Pam Ricci , Associate Planner; Randy Rossi , Interim Community
Development Director; Erwin Willis, Fire Dept. , and Lisa Woske ,
Recording Secretary.
The minutes of the August 9 regular meeting and special meetings of
September 7 and October 4, 1989 were approved as submitted. Chairperson
Duerk asked for an amendment to the minutes of the July 12 regular meet.i.ng
to reflect that the commission agreed to her chairing the Arts Council item
and di not see her outside involvement with Art in Public Places as a
conflict of interest .
There were no changes to the agenda or public comments.
---------------------------------------------- ----------------------------
,,,-- Ttem 1 . Public Hearing: Actions Relatinq to Property at 2175 Florence
Avenue. Request to develop a 1.79 acre site with 18 residential
condominium units and abandon a portion of Bishop Street ; R-2-S
zone; P.E. T .R .A. Ent. , applicant. (Continued from June 14 and
September 13 , 1989 )
A . Street Abandonment . Request to abandon a portion of Bishop
Street between Bushnell Street and Southern Pacific
Railroad..
B. Use Permit U1431. Request to allo►i a 18-unit residential
condominium' on a sensitive site.
C. Tract No. 1827. Consideration of tentative tract map creating
an 18-unit planned development residential condominium.
Pam Ricci presented the staff report and recommended concurrence with the
negative declaration and approval of the use permit , subject to findings
and conditions . She also recommended the commission recommend to council
that they approve the vesting tentative map, subject to findings and
conditions , and approve the street abandonment.
Commr . Roalman stated he was concerned with approving new residential
projects because of the severe water shortage.
Erwin Willis discussed the proposed clean-up program for contaminated soil
in relation to city and state requirements.
"ommr . Schmidt was concerned with concentration of benzene and other site
Toxins, and proposed removal of the pepper tree , and. enforcement of
restricting construction traffic on Rachel Street.
/-S 9
P .C. Minutes
October 11 , 1989
Page 2.
Commrs . Roalman, Crotser, -Karleskint, and Kourakis stated they had each met
with the applicant and/or his representatives.
Chairperson Duerk opened the public hearing.
Erik Justesen, 3026 S. Higuera, applicant ' s representative, discussed the
project history. He discussed the grading and recalculation of cut and
fill yards. He stated the fill would be stored and stock-piled on an
adjacent site, limiting the amount of additional fill that would need to be
transported to the site and reducing the number of trucks required to haul
soil through the neighborhood. He discussed the processing and hauling of
the contaminated soil and the closure of Rachel Street. He discussed the
removal of Unit 7; Units 2 & 3 being perpendicular to Bishop Street with
proper driveway configurations and setbacks, and the garage arrangements
for Units 1 and 18 . He stated 46 parking spaces would be provided. He
discussed the private open space areas and the efficiency of the solar
panels, as well as the double-glazed windows. He agreed to having openable
windows in those units facing the railroad tracks.
Bob Kitamura, 3030 Johnson , applicant ' s representative, discussed the soil
contamination detection and removal procedure and his concern for community
safety. He stated that proposed units were designed for families . He
discussed the possibility of reorienting roofs to optimize solar access or
using alternative panel types.
Tim Conro , 178 Granada, applicant ' s representative, discussed in detail
the contamination levels in the soil , the location of toxic pockets,
and the removal process with safety requirements.
Vera Philbin, 1190 San Carlos, was concerned about soil contamination and
discussed past pools of oil on the site which had endangered animal life .
She wanted strict monitoring and careful , permanent removal_ of the
contaminated soil .
Mr. Moleer, 2022 Rachel , was concerned about construction traffic and the
impact of future residents on traffic levels on Rachel Street.
Robert LeVine, 2371 Florence, was concerned that students would end up
living in these: units because other residents would not tolerate the train
noise. He was concerned that student residents would cause traffic and
parking problems.
Dean Moore, 2259 Florence, stated the railroad noise did not bother his
household and felt traffic would divert to Bishop Street instead of Rachel
Street .
Chairperson Duerk closed the public hearing..
Randy Rossi discussed Rachel Street signage to restrict construction
traffic and traffic management. He discussed a performance bond approach
to guarantee compliance.
/4f0 Q
1
P .C. Minutes
j October 11, 1989
` - Page 3.
Commr . Crotser moved to: concur with the negative declaration and approve.
the use permit , subject to findings and amended conditions; approve the
variance with amendment of condition 1; and recommend to the council
approval of the vesting tentative tract map and street abandonment .
Commr . Kourakis seconded the motion , Resolution No. 4098-89 .
Commr. Schmidt felt closure of Rachel Street should again be recommended to
Council; solar panels needed to be within 30 degrees of south , and units
needed to be realigned to preserve the pepper tree.. He did not feel the
site was appropriate for high density due to problems of soil contamination
and train noise.
Commr. Hoffman felt windows should be openable and solar panels should be
within 30 degrees of south.
Commr . Roalman reiterated that he could not support project approval
because of the water shortage.
VOTING: AYES - Commrs. Crotser, Kourakis, Karleskint , Hoff-man,
and Duerk.
NOES - Commrs. Roalman and Schmidt.
ABSENT - None.
�IThe motion passes.
----------------------------------- ---------------------------------------
Item 2. Public Hearing: Tract No. 1764. Consideration of a tentative
tract map creating a 7-unit planned development. residential
condominium; 1250 Iris Street; R.--2-S zone; Mike Rei.tk.irk and Burt
Caldwell, subdividers.
Pam Ricci presented the staff report and recommended continuance with
direction to modify the site plan to address concerns with parking and c•pen
space.
There was commission discussion for clarification of site plan, density ,
and open space issues.
Chairperson Duerk opened the public hearing.
Steve Pults, applicant ' s representative, discussed slope calculations and
the difficulty in developing the site, maintaining setbacks , cluster
development , and density. He discussed the location of parking and stated
that he wanted to keep guest parking separated. He agreed that he could
,---_ reconfigure Unit 7 and the parking lot. He discussed open space areas and
including the walls for privacy. He agreed to a public access easement
path along the creek and discussed common space.
Draft Council Minutes - Page 2 Tuesday, August 1 . 1989 - 7:00 p.m.
C-4 ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS - STONERIDGE I (File No. 410)
Moved by Pinard/Rappa (5-0) Resolution No. 6656 adopted accepting public
improvements for Tract 1150, a 40-lot residential subdivision (Stoneridge
I ) located at 2877 Broad Street, as recommended.
C-5 COPIER SERVICES AGREEMENT (File No. 161 )
Consideration of approving Request for Proposals for a copying services
agreement and authorizing staff to advertise for bids.
Moved by Settle/Pinard (5-0) approving Request for Proposals and staff
authorized to advertise for bids with an amendment to include an alternate
bid for using recycled paper.
C-6 REQUEST TO SUBSTITUTE SUBCONTRACTORS
Consideration of an action taken by the City Council at its meeting of
Wednesday, July 12. 1989, to adopt Resolution No. 6645 consenting to the
substitution of Regional Steel for Ember Steel on the Marsh Street Parking
Structure. "City Plan No. M-411)".
Information received and filed.
C-7. EARLY GRADING PERMIT (File No. 402)
Moved by Settle/Pinard (5-0) Resolution No. 6660 adopted authorizing
I
of a grading permit to allow stockpiling at 2353 Bushnell Street --
(Fairview Station) as recommended; PETRA Enterprises, applicant.
C-8 RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION
Moved by Settle/Pinard (5-0) Resolution No. 666I , a Resolution of
Appreciation, adopted for Bill Harris for 27+ years of service as
recommended.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. WEED ABATEMENT (File No. 723)
Council held a public hearing to consider confirming costs to property
owners (26 properties) for the removal of weeds in various areas of the
city ($13,229.77) .
Erwin Willis, Fire Marshall, reviewed the agenda report with the
recommendation that council adopt the resolution confirming liens upon
real property parcels for weed and/or debris abatement costs using the
amended updated list as of this evening.
Mayor Dunin declared the public hearing open.
Richard Ballasteros, 2211 Broad Street, stated that he had previously
removed the weeds and that he did not feel the charge was warranted. j
Mayor Dunin declared the public hearing closed.
zt-/t
� l
Draft Council Minutes - Page 5 Tuesday, August 15;-19'89 -, 7:00 p.m.
5. PARKING USER FEES (File No. 554)
Council held a publc hearing to consider establishing parking user fees
for Railroad Square property owners and businesses at a rate of $12 per
space per month.
At the request of staff and upon general Council consensus, this item was
continued to date certain Tuesday, September 5, 1989 (5-0) .
6. TREE REGULATIONS (File No. 505)
Council considered an ordinance to amend the Municipal Code regarding tree
regulations for addressing problems with planting, maintaining and
preservation of trees in the city.
Due to the lateness of the hour, upon general Council consensus, this item
was continued to the next available meeting (tentatively set for
09/05/89) .
7. HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION (File No. 1042)
Council considered amending the Human Relations Commission's enabling
ordinance and bylaws to be consistent with the recently adopted Advisory
Body Handbook.
Mayor Dunin asked for public comment, none was forthcoming.
Moved by Rappa/Pinard Ordinance No. 1150 was introduced to print to amend
the functions of the Human Relations Commission as recommended (3-1-1
Councilman Settle voting No, Councilman Reiss absent) .
Moved by Rappa/Pinard Resolution No. 6669 was adopted (3-1-1, Councilman
Settle voting No, Councilman Reiss absent) to approve the bylaws as
amended.
STREET CLOSURE (File No. 535)
Council considered a request by residents of Rachel Street for temporary
or permanent closure of through circulation for .Rachel Street in
conjunction with the Fairview Station residential condominium project
proposed at the southwestern corner of Florence Avenue and Bushnell
Street.
Randy Rossi, Interim Community Development Director, briefly reviewed the
agenda report with the recommendation that Council. provide direction to
the Planning Commission regarding the temporary and/or permanent closure
of Rachel Street to through traffic. Staff was recommending that due to
the anticipated increase of traffic levels on Rachel Street, that it would
not warrant a temporary or permanent closure and that negative impacts
including the creation of two long dead end street systems and constraints
to emergency services would outweigh any benefit to neighborhood and
residents and therefore recommended that neither a temporary or a
i
permanent street closure would be appropriate.
/4.S
Draft Council Minutes - Page 6 Tuesday, August 15, 1989 - 7:00 p.m.
Mayor Dunin asked for public comment. None was forthcoming.
Upon general consensus, Council supported staff's Alternative No. 2 to
direct the-Planning Commission that a trial or temporary closure may be
rL
appropriate but not a permant one.
11:30 p.m. , there being no further business to come before the City
Council, Mayor Dunin adjourned the meeting to Monday, August 21, 1989 at
9:00 a.m.
APPROVED BY COUNCIL:
PV:nlo Pam Voges, City Clerk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1
PETRA ENTERPRISES
P.O.- Box ?602
San Luis Obispo , CA 9340
( 80 5) 544-49ei i
m e m o r a n d m
Date: September 18, 1989
To: The City of San Luis Obispo Fire Dept.
c/o Mike Smith
From: Bob Kitamura
Re: Fairview Station
The following is a schedule of removal of contaminated and non-
contaminated soils at the Fairview. Station site as outlined by
Earth Systems Environmental (ESE) . All references to page numbers
come from ESE' s Expanded Environmental Site Assessment Report No.
ES=4149-P(32.
PHASE ONE
Removal of soils beneath the site with TPH concentrations
greater than 1 ,444 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg ) will
take approximately four days. ESE has estimated the
amount of soils to be removed at 4O4 cubic yards (Pg .7) .
Five trucks witha capacity of 20 cubic yards will be
making a oneway run to McK:ittrick ,• CA. each day. The
loading of the trucks will take place in the morning
hours while testing of the soils by ESE in the on-site
State-approved mobile laboratory will be conducted in the
afternoons. This testing will accurately determine the
extent of the soils contamination area as well as
reevaluate the TPH concentrations. Upon approval by the
City of S.L.O. Fire Department that the remainder of the
soils, as outlined in ESE' s report, is within the
prescribed safe limits, we will proceed to Phase 2 of the
operation.. The on-site testing operation will continue
until the extent of area covered by the soils in the 144
to 1 .444 mg/kg TPH concentrations .is determined .
PHASE TWO
The next step will be to take those soils containing TPH
concentrations between 144 and 1 ,000 mg/kg and taking
them to an approved land-fill site. Since those soi.ls are
- below the safe concentration limits for contaminant, they
may be deposited at a standard fill site. The amount of
soil in this category is approximately 1 , 500 cubic yards �
(Pg .7 ) . This will take about 7.5 days at 1C) trips per a
day with 5 trucks to remove the soil .
During this phase of the operation we will be using the
clean stockpiled soil from Mrs. Milsap ' s property to fill
most of our site to the elevations on our Preliminary
Grading Plan . There is currently 6,000 cubic yards stored
on her site. We will need approximately 60JOC) cubic
yards of fill on our site. There should be minimal need
for any additional soils for use as fill on our site.
We trust this operation as outlined will both reduce. the
environmental risk to the neighborhood as well as reduce the
necessary travel of large construction vehicles through the
neighborhood and our city.
If there are any other clarifications or questions please contact
me as soon as possible. Thank you for your cooperation in this
matter.
copies: Pam Ricci
Tim Conroy
fairvw.m3
Earth Systems Environmental , Inc. -
A bl MW of ire Eann Systems Gmuo
170-A Granada Drive • San Luis Obispo. CA 93401 (805)541-5983 • FAX (805) 544-0531
rmwAugust 31, 1.989 Job No. ES-0109-PG2
Doc No. 8908-E035.LTR
PETRA Enterprises
P. 0. Box 3602
San Luis Obispo, California 93403
Attention: Mr. Bruce Houseman
Subject: Proposed Remedial Action Plan
Fairview Station Project
Southwest Cotner of Florence Avenue and Bushnell Street
San Luis Obispo, California
Gentlemen:
Pursuant to the August 14 meeting between PETRA representatives,
Earth Systems Environmental (ESE) personnel and Mr. Michael Smith of the
San Luis Obispo City Fire Department, this letter outlines the topics reviewed
during that meeting and lists the steps planned to render the site suitable for
its proposed development. This letter has been requested by PETRA to present
to the City Planning Department as a documentation of the proposed cleanup
plan. Final documentation of the site remediation will be submitted to the San
Luis Obispo Fire Department (SLOFD) upon completion of cleanup work, as well
as interim reports, if required.
As, identified during previous investigations and discussed in our recent
meeting, the primary contaminant at the site is a heavy fuel oil associated with
past railroad use of the site. Thorough analytical testing indicates that the
primary contaminant is petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), and that the toxicity
and overall "hazardousness" of this product is low, as defined in Sections 66305
and 66693-66708 of Title 22, California Code of Regulations. Hazardous
concentrations of oil contamination (those requiring manifesting for offsite
disposal) are limited to a 3- to 4-foot thick zone in the central portion of the
property. Concentrations of toxic components (heavy metals, benzene, toluene
and xylene) are below action levels applied to soil contamination cases by City,
County and State regulatory agencies. Based on these findings, it is proposed to
remove the worst of the contaminated soils (those with TPH concentrations
above 1,000 mg/kg) from the site. Lesser-contaminated soils are proposed to be
PETRA Enterprises 2 August 31, 1989
treated by bioremediation and/or utilization as road subgrade on or adjacent to
the site. Phases of the cleanup plan are described in more detail below.
Excavation and Disposal of Contaminated Soils
Soils beneath the site with TPH concentrations greater than. 1,000
milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) are planned to be excavated and disposed of
offsite at a licensed facility. The specific disposal site has yet to be identified,
but will probably be the Petroleum Waste, Inc, facility in McKittrick,
California. After obtaining a Generator's ID Number from the US
Environmental Protection Agency, and a Hazardous Waste Tax ID Number from
the State Board of Equalization, soils will be excavated under the "supervision of
ESE field personnel. Soils will be transported by a licensed hazardous waste
hauler to the selected disposal facility.and manifested in accordance with State
and Federal regulations.
Excavation will be accomplished using conventional earth-moving
equipment, under the supervision of ESE field personnel. As excavation
progresses, analytical testing will be conducted onsite, using a State-certified
mobile laboratory, to verify that contaminants are below SLOFD action levels.
Once test results indicate that these levels have been attained, the areas will be
backfilled with clean soil and compacted as an engineered fill.
Onsite Use of Less-Contaminated Soils
As discussed in the meeting, pending approval from the SLOFD, soils
containing TPH at concentrations between 100 and . 1,000 mg/kg could be used
for subgrade beneath interior driveways and parking areas on the property.
In addition, with approval from the City Engineering Department, it may be
possible to use some of these soils beneath the street right-of way in Florence
Avenue, which will be widened and raised in conjunction with the Fairview
Station project. . The thickness of soils to be placed beneath. these areas would
depend upon the volume excavated from the site, but is not anticipated to
exceed 12 inches in thickness.
Bioremediation on Adjacent Parcel
Bioremediation of soils is generally preferable to offsite disposal,
because the process eliminates the contaminant from the soil, rather than
simply moving the contaminant from one location to another. If the volume
� I
/-Z8
PETRA Enterprises 3 August 31, 1989
of soil containing between 100 and 1,000 m&g TPH is more than can be
spread beneath interior or exterior driveways, then a bioremediation program
will be implemented, with regulatory approval. The project could be
conducted on the adjacent PETRA Enterprises parcel on the north side of
Florence Avenue, thus permitting construction to continue on the Fairview
Station project.
Projects of this type consist of spreading the soil and adding nutrients "to
promote bacterial growth in the soil. If concentrations of indigenous bacteria
are lacking, cultures can be purchased to add to the pile. The bacteria then
break down and digest contaminants in the soil, degrading the oil into non=
hazardous byproducts. Bacterial conditions and. contaminant concentrations
are monitored until a target concentration is attained; at which point the soil
may be used for general construction purposes. The area will be enclosed with
chain link fence equipped with privacy slats, and potential problems with
nuisance odors can be avoided by covering the remediation pile with plastic
sheeting.
Cost estimates. for the above scope of work are currently being prepared
and will be forwarded to you upon completion. In the interim, should you
have any questions or comments regarding. this letter, or the project in
general, please contact. this office at your convenience.
Sincerely,
EARTH SYSTEMS ENVIRONMENTAL,INC.
Tim ConroyRobert Mohle, CEG 1409
Staff Geologist Vice President
cc: Mr. Mike Smith, SLO Fire Department
Ms. Pam Ricci, SLO Planning Department
i"
►►�������;����►Illllllll�lllll��°''��� I� city of san tuts oBi
sly
IN59d FIRE DEPARTMENT J
748 Pismo Street•San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 •8051549.7380
September 26, 1989
Petra Enterprises
Mr. Bob Kitamura
P. O. Box 3602
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403
RE: Fairview Station
Dear Mr. Kitamura:.
I have reviewed Earth Systems Environmental's work plan, as well as your memorandum dated
September 18, 1989. It appears that there has been a change in procedures. As I understand, all
soils experiencing TPH concentrations above 100 ppm will be removed and disposed of properly.
Monitoring methods include an on-site mobile laboratory.
Your work plan is approved, however, an appointment must be scheduled with this office prior
to initiating any activities.
If you have any questions regarding this matter please call me at 549-7380.
Sincerel
MICHAEL SMITH
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INSPECTOR
cc: 'fa-m Ricci, Planning
Tim Conroy, ESE, Inc.
• 3�V 30N3d07� � i
V19 I _
Q 0
z
-
IS 773NHSl78
Q.
r
Oc I O
0
°o
1S 73H,?V6(
I
i
' I
IS A UN3
i
Q
W
Q
2 O1
p y �
dada
50
jAV Vdb9dv9 VIN
AO
,'q kRN,
IS
oi
ma
Nil
Z S,
2.
1 V.
UD a
�►^ ;�-?;;''iiia.
t�
rd
of w:•::.:
O
p ? �.i;+� .' 's`•�•%�:t":�.�i, -- Right of Way
•:J��• F{.;i'., Fri�ifr?•},'J:4
''F�1'jY:: ,• •vhf`��
cD p
lY yah' r. ✓,lFlfF.:
.
OQ
\ cs W
V �r rf�+•
---
y �
�d 0
t� CD
Go
a#s.}...,..
OY}�v4w
0
i
v:.f}
:$}y{XrA�iy .Y.:il+,2�,{}t}}:G:•ii'r•�Yi.?' �
�pv
i.zs::;�; {r <F :: -_ Right of Way
ID
rfvF
�,v,::r'-,'r�.'?;:is�:;{�'>�'i';+�:•��:;:iYr:}w`}� f.•.
x{r:' r:$�' 4}i?}:.}:}:Si ..':'r',rv:.ww i•:.{`iS{}H
,}:.titin�3 �ii$ :$fes•+�Tiy:H.H•{i
VI V KO
' H. Y;::••nv:• r rYvtifl: {•+'j{:
!� M :;`•. :.v �3:'•iir}{{:�,+' - rF r{5'r>i
CD
OQ(•�. � {{nrr .,:r:nl::Iv.•�'?::lf'•.�N:V}J.•:� rH:•
�+ ¢• ,fix`s ::: ;•y?;x'<k.<"
''• Centerline
„ ST.
ocn - -
•� �
it
� Ca] _
n
,t.
ca I
\\�\
`%�\t e'�i-i; RACHEL COURT `, .+�"�..os.�e.ee� ��atilt
t�\\``fit - �]� � �C�� C •
rD
FLORENCE
1
�
� i
d m _
t�\ ♦ `r U � Czr1 ❑�
CD
BISHOP ST. I
1”=100'-0•'SCALE
RACHEL STREET CIRCULATION ALTS. 4
RRM DESIGN GROUP N
MAY 22. 1989
NEIG ORHOOD CON 7, 7
RACHEL STREET CLOSURE
to ` 0 :,
_ D El
1.4
Lam.`\. ♦ \ �� LL.M �� O __
�
' - O
a ��IVl4lll 0.4\�� ,•1�•• �\
b \ J
7 ,V 1 �,O ^•o \ oo�
r ,20
T1
SM
O`� v
O 5 I
-Y.I V �`^�/G •I ,0110
♦.111♦ —L .. '\ L✓1�,���
/� 76
RACHEL/BISHOP STREET TRAFFIC IMPACTS
Traffic counts were conducted at two locations to establish a baseline for existing
traffic levels on Rachel and Bishop.Streets. Counters were set up on Rachel Street just
beyond the Florence Street bend and on Bishop Street just east of Florence Street.
Counts were taken over a five.day period beginning on Wednesday and ending on Monday.
Baseline traffic levels for the two streets were established by using the worst-case
traffic count for a 24-hour period which turned out to be Thursday, May 11, 1989.
Traffic levels on the weekend were approximately 60% of weekday levels.
Attached is an excerpt from the City Circulation Study, Phase I Report, prepared by DKS
Associates, which discusses traffic criteria for neighborhood streets. This.section of
the report provides two techniques to attempt to evaluate how traffic volume changes
affect residents' perceptions of traffic conditions.
The first technique described is the Urban Land Institute's "Expected (Typical) Traffic
Volumes by Street Classification" table which identifies ranges of traffic volumes for
various classifications of streets. Comparing existing street volumes with expected
future street volumes gives "some insight into likely public perceptions of traffic
conditions".
Using this table, existing traffic volumes on Rachel Street are consistent with typical
volumes for a local street. Added traffic contributed by the project keeps traffic
volumes within the local classification range. It is not until projected traffic from
complete buildout of all vacant lots in the neighborhood is added that traffic volumes
exceed expected traffic volumes for a local street.
Comparison of the cumulative traffic volume for Rachel Street (ADT of 431) with the ADTs
of other similar residential streets that traffic counts are available for indicate that
the street's volume is relatively light. Some examples of ADTs on other streets are 299
for Cerro Romauldo west of Ferrini, 582 for Diablo Drive west of Mirada, 750 for Flora
Street south of Sydney, 1065 for Fredericks west of Kentucky and 2046 for Meinecke east
of Benton. These ADTs show the variety of traffic volumes on residential streets
throughout the city.
Bishop Street has been planned as a collector street. Current traffic volumes on the
street are below the range for a collector on the chart. Even with complete neighborhood
buildout, anticipated volumes for Bishop Street are well within the acceptable range for
a collector street.
The second technique discussed which evaluates the impacts of traffic volume changes on
residents' perceptions is the Traffic Infusion on Residential Environment (TIRE)
index. The index values range from 0.0 to 5.0 (the higher the value the more traffic
volume and the greater the impacts from traffic). Changes in street volumes."would cause
a greater impact. on a residential environment with a low pre-existing traffic volume than
would a change on a street with a high pre-existing volume." Increases in traffic
volumes resulting in index changes of 0.1 or more is considered significant to street
residents.
ggrr . .
k
TRAFFIC CRITERIA FOR NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS
Traffic volumes or changes in traffic volumes probably represent the best predictor of
residential satisfaction with traffic conditions since most other evaluation factors are a
functional by-product of traffic frequency or are measured relative to traffic rates. The basic
question for residents to address is at what level of traffic volumes does their tolerance of
the situation become unacceptable? This is a subjective judgement. The relative values of
changes in safety, noise levels, visual intrusions, etc. as they relate to traffic flow are non-
quantifiable and may change with community or neighborhood values.
Expected Traffic Levels
Table 3-2
While no traffic acceptability index has been Expected (Typical) Traffic Volumes by
developed that commands widespread Street Classification
acceptance, the Urban Land Institute has
identified typical or expected average daily Volume
traffic (ADT) volumes associated with Classification (ADT)
various street classifications, as shown in coral 0 - 350
Table 3-2. Subcollector 200 -1,000
Collector 800 -3,000
The comparison of expected volumes with Arterial Over 3.000
existing traffic volumes by street
classification provides some insight into soutcc Urban Land Institute
likely public perceptions of traffic
conditions.
Traffic Impacts on the Residential Environment (TIRE) Index
Traffic volume differences between alternatives can be evaluated using a Traffic Infusion on
Residential Environment(TIRE) index. The TIRE index numerically represents a resident's
perception of the effects of street traffic on activities such as walking,cycling and playing,
and on daily tasks, such as maneuvering an. auto out of a residential driveway.
A table comparing TIRE index values and corresponding traffic volume ranges is provided
in Table 3-3. TIRE index values range from 0.0 to 5.0 representing least affected and most
affected impacts, respectively. A given change in street traffic volumes would cause a
greater impact on a residential environment with a low pre-existing traffic volume than
would a change on a street with a high pre-existing volume. Accordingly, TIRE is expressed
as a logarithmic association between traffic volumes changes and residential perception
levels. Any traffic change that would cause an index change of 0.1 or more is considered
noticeable to street residents(
III-17
1
Table 3-3
TIRE Index Values
Vehicles per Day Tire Vehicles per Day Tire I
(Range) Index (Range) Index
6 . . . . 7 0.8 711 ... . 890 2.9
7 . . . . . 8 0.9 891 . . 1,100 3.0
9 . . . . 10 T.0 1,101 . . 1,400 3.1
11 . . . . 14 1.1 1,401 1,800 . 3.2
15 . . . . 17 1.2 1,801 . . 2,200 3.3
18 . . . . 22 1.3 2,201 . . 2,800 3.4
23 . . . . 28 1.4 2,801 . . 3,500 3-5
29 . . . . 35 1.5 3;501 . . 4,500 3.6 O
36 . . . . 44 1.6 4,501 . . 5,600 3.7
45 . . . . 56 1.7 5,601 7,100 3.8
57 . . . . 70 1.8 7,101 . . 8,900 3.9
71 . . . . 89 1.9 8,901 . 11,000 4.0
90 . . . 112 20 11,001 14,000 4.1
113 . . . 140 2.1 14,001 . 18,000 4.2
141 . . . 180 2,2 18,001 . 22,000 4.3
181 . . . 220 2.3 22,001 . 28,000 4.4
221 . . . 280 2.4 28,001 . 35,000 4S
281 . ... 350 2.5 35,001 . 45,000. 4.6
351 . . . 450 2.6 45,001 . 56,000 4.7
451 . . . 560 2.7 56,001 . 71,000 4.8
561 . . . 710 2.8 71,001 . 89,000 4.9
Sourcc Goodrich Traffic Group
Streets above-a mid-range TIRE index 'level of 3.0 (1,100 ADT) 'are considered traffic
dominated, while those with index levels below 3.0 are better suited for residential activities.
This means that most collector streets and all arterial streets are considered traffic-
dominated.
MURRAYBROAD STREET NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS
Traffic conditions in the Murray/Broad Street neighborhood have been an issue for some '
time. The history of the Murray/Broad neighborhood suggests it has seen much change over
the years as long time residents indicate Chorro to be formerly the main highway connector
through town. Since Chorro and Broad are logical access routes to downtown and to U.S.
101, traffic has increased on these routes as the city has grown. Moreover, commercial
�-' III-18
i
_ 791
Traffic Study
Page 2
Attached is a table which contains a traffic impact summary for Rachel and Bishop
Streets. The TIRE indexes are given for existing traffic volumes and each incremental
step with area buildout. For Rachel Street, the index increases 0.1 with project
buildout, stays the same with occupancy of the condominiums under construction and
increases again by 0.1 with buildout of all vacant parcels. So while traffic volume
increases are not high enough to adversely impact the carrying capacity of the street,
they are significant enough that residents along the street will notice changes in the
number of cars driving by and the increased volume of traffic may affect some day-to-day
activities.
The index has similar results on Bishop Street, but since indexes and traffic volumes
along this street start out higher, the theory behind the index follows that changes
would not create as significant impacts as they would on Rachel Street. In addition,
Bishop Street has been designed as a collector street and many of the newer home sites
are not permitted access to the street to further minimize impacts from increases in
traf f ic.
Several of the Rachel Street neighbors indicated support for somehow barricading off the
street before it intersects with Florence Avenue to minimize traffic impacts. The public
Works Department was asked to comment on the idea of this street closure. Their reaction
was that the projected amounts of traffic were not high enough to warrant closing off the
street and that any decisions regarding the closure should be postponed until the issue
is evaluated as part of the Circulation Element update.
As a means of analyzing the impacts to Bishop Street traffic volumes with closure of
Rachel Street, staff added the expected traffic volumes from the subject project, the
approved Terrace Hill condominiums and potential development projects all to Bishop
Street traffic volumes and looked at the revised TIRE indexes. Changes were not
significant. The biggest jump in the index occurred (0.2) with development of the.
Terrace Hill, but stayed the same with full neighborhood buildout.
Conclusions:
1. Ultimate project traffic volumes on both Rachel and Bishop Streets are within the
anticipated carrying capacity of both streets.
2. Quantative analysis of traffic volume increases on Rachel Street suggest that they
are not unusual or excessive when compared with other residential streets elsewhere
in the city, but they will be perceptible to residents living along the street.
3. If the commission feels further analysis of potential traffic impacts on Rachel
Street is warranted, then the issue could be referred to DKS Associates for inclusion
in the Phase 2 circulation study.
/ -80
RACHEL/BISHOP STREET
TRAFFIC IMPACT SUMMARY
Rachel Street TIRE Index Bishoo Street TIRE Index
Existing Traffic (a) 237 2.4 694 2.8
Project Traffic Impacts (b) 57 133
Subtotal 294 2.5 $27 2.9
Approved Project Impacts (c) 48 192
Subtotal ! 2.5 1.019 3.0
i
Potential Development.Impacts(d) 89 160
TOTAL 2:6 1,L72 3.1
(a) Traffic counts for 24-hour period Thursday, May 11, 1989.
(b) Assume 70% of project traffic use Bishop and 30% use Rachel. Assume trip generation
rate of 10 trips/dwelling.
(c) Includes 24 condos on Terrace Hill. Assume trip generation rate of 10 trips/dwelling
with 80% using Bishop and 20% using Rachel.
(d) Assume an additional 25 dwellings built in area with similar traffic dispersion and
generation characteristics.
i
dsmisc./racheltraf
June 27, 1989
MEMORANDUM
TO: Pam Ricci
FROM: Jerry Kenn
SUBJECT: TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE FLORENCE AVENUE AND RACHEL STREET
IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE "FAIRWvA* STATION" AT 2175 FLORENCE ST.
mw
The Public Works Dept. would have the authority to allow temporary closure
of Florence Avenue and Rachel Street in conjuction with a construction
related excavation or other work affecting the health, safety or welfare
of the public, but for a limited period of time. If the intent of the
Planning Commission desires to have the streets blocked/closed for a
longer period of time, specifically to preclude circulation through the
neighborhood, our opinion is that the Council would have to authorize it.
Even though emergency traffic would need to be accommodated, the blocking
of other traffic would need to be considered with regard to signing,,
advertising, etc.
The sketch submitted by the developer dated May 22. 1989 is subject to
several considerations, including R/W acquisition, lot combinations or
subdivisions to eliminate land-locked parcels, and possible physical
limitations, to name a few. Another consideration is when, and if, Bishop
Street is extended across the SPRR, the Rachel Street neighborhood would
be cut off from that access to Broad Street, thus impacting other
neighborhoods. One additional important item is that this closure would
create a very long dead end street system. We've been criticized recently
for this by the Council in conjunction with the development of the Foster.
and Noyes tracts at the end of Royal Way. Also, this removes the
opportunity for a transit system- which should penetrate this area
sometime and reasonable access to parks and schools.
It is doubtful that construction traffic would even use Ella Street and
Rachel Street as an access, making this issue moot. I doubt current
construction traffic is impacting the Rachel Street neighborhood due to
French' s Terrace Hill development.
c: HB/MB - file
T Gingg
� L
f' 0
j �-A _
MEMORANDUM
U To: Pam Ricci, Planning Department
From: Erwin L. Willis, Fire Marshal e7�11V
Subject: Cul-de-sacs on Rachel and Florence, Streets
Date: July 11, 1989
At the 6-14-89 Planning Commission Meeting it was Proposed by the developer of
Fairview Station to Cul-de-sac both Rachel and Florence Streets to reduce the traffic
impacts the development will have on Rachel Street. At the meeting, I stated that
closing any one street would have minimal impact on Fire Department response times,
but that I thought that this or any clos°O should be studied as part of an overall
traffic study of the entire area. I did not see the actual proposed plans on. the
street closure until after the meeting. My comments at the meeting have been mis-
construed to mean that the Fire Department has no problem with the proposed plan.
The plan would Cul-de-sac both Rachel and Florence Streets and then provide a 30'
wide fire and police access with bollards between the two Cul-de-sacs.
This plan has several problems. First, the emergency response access way between the
two cul-de-sacs will be subject to blockage by a single illegally-parked car at either
cul-de-sac. We currently are experiencing problems with maintaining fire lanes in the
City. In this area, which is remote from the normal parking enforcement area, illegal
parking will be a constant problem. Each time a new fire lane is put in it creates a
maintenance problem. This one will be remote and difficult to maintain. Second, by
closing Rachel Street to through traffic an area with approximately 300 to 400 homes
will be placed on an essentially very long cul-de-sac, with only one way in and one
way out. The City Council has already complained about this same type of arrangement
on Royal Way. The same condition will exist in the area of Florence Street where all
residences will have to exit via Bishop Street If a hazardous materials spill were
to occur in the rail yard affecting one of these areas this could become a critical
item. Lastly, closing these streets will set a precedence that any neighborhood with
an increase in traffic can close their street to through traffic. There are many
neighborhoods .that are already complaining of increased traffic and would request the
same arrangement to be done in their area. This would increase traffic on adjoining
streets and 'increase Fire Department's response times.
Based on these concerns I would recommend against the permanent closure of any City
through streets. In the case of Rachel Street construction traffic should be routed
over Bishop Street. Rachel Street could be posted forbidding construction trucks.
Additionally, on side of Rachel Street, which is very narrow, there could be posted
"No Parking" signs to provide additional width.
Please call me if you have questions.
I
��Ii;0! 'P q��II�IIIIj ilil,ici�iq ipllj�l�`II(�i ` ++
vlii;��!II�!lll ��j��i''1I!Ij'lii' .IIjII�Ilfll
j city of san lues oB,spo
POLICE DEPARTMENT
�s Post Office Box 1328 — San Luis Obispo, CA 934061328— 805/549-7310
TO: Pam Ricci. Community Development
FROM: Captain Bart Topham. Police
DATE: August 3, 1989
SUBJECT: FAIRVIEW STATION PROJECT
After review, the Police Department concurs with the observations and
recommendations of both Public Works and the Fire Department. We would
advise against the approval of the proposed street closures.
There seems to be little evidence that the proposed street closures
would have a significant impact with regard to reducing traffic
circulation from "out-of-the-area" vehicles. On the other hand, it
would reduce emergency response times in this area. The proposed
closures and street design would likely increase parking problems,
access difficulties, and further isolate residents in the immediate area
with regard to emergency service protection. The proposed cul-de-sacs
would significantly reduce our response options in this area.
_07