Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-19-2015 Agenda Packet City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda, City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo Tuesday, May 19, 2015 4:30 PM SPECIAL MEETING Council Chamber 990 Palm Street CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Jan Marx ROLL CALL: Council Members Dan Carpenter, Carlyn Christianson, Dan Rivoire, Vice Mayor John Ashbaugh, and Mayor Jan Marx PUBLIC HEARING PH1. TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION PLAN - RESOLUTION (CODRON/HILL – 45 MINUTES) Planning Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, and Cultural Heritage Committee Recommendation Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving the Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan, adoption of a Negative Declaration, and addition of Terrace Hill Open Space to the Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources.” ADJOURN TO REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 19, 2015 San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda of May 19, 2015 Page 2 6:00 p.m. REGULAR MEETING Council Chamber 990 Palm Street CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Jan Marx ROLL CALL: Council Members Dan Carpenter, Carlyn Christianson, Dan Rivoire, Vice Mayor John Ashbaugh, and Mayor Jan Marx PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council Member Carpenter INTRODUCTION OF NEW HIRES I1. ANNE SCHNEIDER, CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL (JOHNSON – 5 MINUTES) I2. BEN MARQUART, ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS MANAGER (MATTINGLY – 5 MINUTES) PRESENTATION P1. PROCLAMATION—NATIONAL PUBLIC WORKS WEEK (MARX - 5 MINUTES) Presentation of a Proclamation to Daryl Grigsby, Public Works Director, declaring May 17 – 23, 2015 as “National Public Works Week.” P2. PRESENTATION—CAL POLY MASTER PLAN UPDATE (JOHNSON - 20 MINUTES) Presentation by Linda Dalton, Vice Provost for Institutional Planning, regarding the Cal Poly Master Plan Update. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA (not to exceed 15 minutes total) The Council welcomes your input. You may address the Council by completing a speaker slip and giving it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. At this time, you may address the Council on items that are not on the agenda. Time limit is three minutes. State law does not allow the Council to discuss or take action on issues not on the agenda, except that members of the Council or staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by persons exercising their public testimony rights (Gov. Code Sec. 54954.2). Staff may be asked to follow up on such items. San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda of May 19, 2015 Page 3 CONSENT AGENDA A member of the public may request the Council to pull an item for discussion. Pulled items shall be heard at the close of the Consent Agenda unless a majority of the Council chooses another time. The public may comment on any and all items on the Consent Agenda within the three minute time limit. C1. WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES Recommendation Waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate C2. MINUTES OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2015 AND APRIL 23, 2015 (MEJIA) Recommendation Approve the Minutes of the City Council meetings of April 22, 2015 and April 23, 2015. C3. REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR UPDATES TO THE CITY’S SIGN REGULATIONS (JOHNSON/LEVEILLE) Recommendation 1. Authorize the issuance of a Request for Proposal for consultant services to assist staff in updating the City’s Sign Regulations. 2. Authorize the City Manager to award a consultant services agreement in an amount not-to-exceed $50,000 to assist staff with revisions to the Sign Regulations. C4. INDUSTRIAL USER PERMIT FEES - RESOLUTION (MATTINGLY/HIX/ELKE) Recommendation Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, requiring annual prepayment of Industrial Users Permit Fees for the City Wastewater Collection and Treatment Systems.” San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda of May 19, 2015 Page 4 C5. APPROVAL OF THE FINAL MAP FOR TRACT 2977 UNIT 3, 851 HUMBERT AVENUE (TR 27-06) AND SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT- RESOLUTION (JOHNSON/HANNULA/DOSTALEK) Recommendation 1. Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving the Final Map for Tract 2977 Unit 3 (851 Humbert Avenue, TR 27-06).” 2. Authorize the Mayor to execute a Subdivision Agreement between Moylan Terrace, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company. C6. PRESENTATION OF REFORMATTED GENERAL PLAN INCLUDING UPDATED ELEMENTS (JOHNSON/MURRY) Recommendation Receive and file the reformatted General Plan. C7. REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL AND PERMITTING SERVICES FOR THE WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY PROJECT (MATTINGLY/HIX) Recommendation 1. Authorize the issuance of a Request for Proposal for the environmental and permitting services for the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project. 2. Authorize the City Manager to award a consultant services agreement if the selected proposal is within the estimate of $650,000 and after 2015-17 Financial Plan adoption. C8. ORDINANCE NO. 1616 (SECOND READING) - ADDING CHAPTER 15.10 TO TITLE 15 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH A RENTAL HOUSING INSPECTION PROGRAM (JOHNSON/CORNEJO) Recommendation Adopt Ordinance No. 1616 entitled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending Title 15 of the Municipal Code by adding Chapter 15.10 and establishing a Rental Housing Inspection Program.” (Intro. on 05/05/2015) San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda of May 19, 2015 Page 5 PUBLIC HEARING PH2. REQUEST TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN, ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN (OASP), URBAN RESERVE LINE (URL), ZONING MAP, BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND CONSIDERATION OF TWO NEW RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS (VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NOS. 3063 AND 3066) ADJACENT TO RIGHETTI HILL IN THE OASP AND CONSIDERATION OF AN INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, AS A TIER OF THE OASP FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (2010) - RESOLUTIONS (JOHNSON/WATSON – 90 MINUTES) Planning Commission Recommendation 1. Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, adopting General Plan Amendments, Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Bicycle Transportation Amendments, and Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration for property located within the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (GPA, SPA, ER TR 3063 and TR 3066).” 2. Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving a Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 3063 creating 328 lots for property located at 3987 Orcutt Road (TR/ER 114-14; Tract 3063 Righetti).” 3. Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving a Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 3066 creating 33 lots for property located at 3765 Orcutt Road (TR/ER SBDV 0067-2014; Tract 3066 Jones).” 4. Amend the Bicycle Transportation Plan to change the “C” Street Bike Lane (crossing the creek) from a Class II Bike Lane to a Class I Bike Path, subject to the Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration. San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda of May 19, 2015 Page 6 STUDY SESSION SS1. NEIGHBORHOOD WELLNESS/COMMUNITY CIVILITY WORKING GROUP RECOMMENDATIONS (JOHNSON/STALEY – 90 MINUTES) Recommendation 1. Receive and file the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Working Group report. 2. Provide direction to staff with regards to implementation of recommendations or additional areas to explore to improve Neighborhood Wellness. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS (not to exceed 15 minutes) Council Members report on conferences or other City activities. Time limit—3 minutes. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (not to exceed 15 minutes) At this time, any Council Member or the City Manager may ask a question for clarification, make an announcement, or report briefly on his or her activities. In addition, subject to Council Policies and Procedures, they may provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information, request staff to report back to the Council at a subsequent meeting concerning any matter, or take action to direct staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda. (Gov. Code Sec. 54954.2) ADJOURNMENT Special and Regular City Council Meetings are scheduled for Tuesday, June 2, 2015 at 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., respectively, in the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda of May 19, 2015 Page 7 LISTENING ASSISTIVE DEVICES are available for the hearing impaired--please see City Clerk. The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request to the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7107. City Council regular meetings are televised live on Charter Channel 20. Agenda related writings or documents provided to the City Council are available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, during normal business hours, and on the City’s website www.slocity.org. Persons with questions concerning any agenda item may call the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100. City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Michael Codron, Assistant City Manager Prepared By: Robert A. Hill, Natural Resources Manager SUBJECT: TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION PLAN RECOMMENDATION As recommended by the Planning Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, and Cultural Heritage Committee, approve a resolution (Attachment 1) in order to: 1. Adopt the Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan; 2. Adopt a Negative Declaration of environmental impact for the Project; and 3. Add Terrace Hill Open Space to the City’s Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources. REPORT-IN-BRIEF The City’s Natural Resources Program seeks adoption of the Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan that will guide the management and stewardship of the site over the next ten years. Terrace Hill Open Space (“Terrace Hill”) is a hidden gem located entirely within the City of San Luis Obispo, offering spectacular 360° panoramic views of the City below and the surrounding region beyond, remarkable plant and wildlife diversity, a rich cultural resource legacy, and pleasant hiking and passive recreational opportunities. For these reasons, Terrace Hill is now the subject of a contemporary Conservation Plan process in order for the property to be managed in accordance with the City’s Open Space Regulations and the Conservation and Open Space Element of the City’s General Plan. The preparation of this Conservation Plan implements several policies of the City of San Luis Obispo to ensure that natural resource protection of City-owned open space lands and compatible passive recreation uses, where appropriate, are undertaken in a manner that conforms to the highest standards. This approach was memorialized in 2002 with the adoption by the City Council of Conservation Guidelines for Open Space Lands of the City of San Luis Obispo that sets forth a procedure for staff to follow in order to document and protect the natural resources of a City-owned open space property, and the specific uses that are appropriate on those lands. The Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan introduces the site by describing its history and physical characteristics; inventories its natural resources and plant and animal species; sets forth goals, policies, and land use designations; and, makes recommendations for protective measures, needed improvements, wildfire preparedness, and ongoing monitoring and implementation strategies. Terrace Hill Open Space was also the subject of a recommendation from the Cultural Heritage Committee that the property be added to the City’s Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources due to the locally important persons and events associated with the property in the City’s history. PH1 - 1 Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan Page 2 DISCUSSION The primary objective of the Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan is to ensure protection of Terrace Hill’s natural and cultural resources, while also guiding passive recreation uses, fire safety, and restoration and management activities. The Conservation Plan was developed pursuant to prior Council direction; both existing and new technical information and analysis; and, a public outreach effort that included numerous individual meetings with community members, neighbors, and neighboring homeowner’s associations, a neighborhood public workshop, and two advisory body hearings. In addition to the City’s customary public meeting noticing procedures, a review draft of the Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan was posted on the City’s website. The Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan is the ninth such plan to be developed and brought forward for public review and City Council consideration. Overview of Terrace Hill Open Space Terrace Hill offers a full host of both natural and modified landscape features across a site of 23 acres. The site is fundamentally a conical volcano, one of the prized Morros that define our region. Over the years, however, much of the top of the hill was excavated and removed to provide fill for construction projects elsewhere in town. In addition, terraced roads were cut around the hill in anticipation of the planned development of hundreds of individual lots, while later a small gravel operation extracted the hard dacite, resulting in the fractured bowl feature on the east side of the hill. These actions resulted in the physical land morphology and elevation of 501 feet that we see today. The site was historically grazed, but has not been used as pasture in nearly 30 years, allowing for nascent oak woodland and maritime chaparral to establish in compliment to the annual grassland and rock outcrop features of the site. Terrace Hill Open Space is a single legal parcel, APN 003-686-003, that has been owned by the City since 1986 when it was dedicated as a part of Tract 926. The primary entry and access to the site is from Bishop Street, where a locked gate can be opened to a dirt road that leads to the top of the hill. Terrain ranges from nearly level along the top, to steep side slopes ranging between 15% and 50%. A second trailhead exists along a narrow, paved path beginning at the corner of Rachel Street and Jennifer Street facilitated by a public, pedestrian access easement. A third trailhead has been offered by the developers of 17 new residences along Rachel Court, but this facility has not yet been constructed and accepted by the City as of April, 2015. There are four memorial viewing benches that have been installed by the City along the perimeter of the loop trail at the top of the hill. A drainage basin and facility exists near the Bishop Street entrance, while five-strand barbed wire fence protects the frontage of Terrace Hill along Bishop Street to prevent unauthorized vehicle access and unsanctioned trails. The City’s Utilities Department maintains a large water storage tank at the southeast corner along Bishop Street, but this structure is on a separate parcel and is not considered a part of Terrace Hill Open Space. Management Considerations The Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan provides a framework to address long-term site stewardship of the property: 1. Natural Resources Protection. The plan places priority on maintaining the natural ecosystem, while allowing passive public recreation as appropriate and compatible. Although Terrace Hill is ostensibly an “island” in the ecological sense (meaning it is not connected to larger terrestrial or aquatic wildlife migration corridors due to surrounding urbanization), nevertheless it provides habitat for several avian species of special concern that shall be protected and monitored over the long-term, as well as 85 different plant PH1 - 2 Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan Page 3 species. Protective status is given to native plant communities and habitats that persist or are establishing within the open space area for the functions and values that they provide. 2. Scenic Resources. Terrace Hill is one of the most accessible of all City open space properties and the nearly level top of about 2 acres provides a pleasant walking loop with wonderful off-site views of the railroad district, downtown and surrounding neighborhoods, as well as the South Hills, Irish Hills, Cerro San Luis and Bishop Peak, Cal Poly lands, “High School Hill,” Edna Valley, and the Cuesta Ridge area in the distance. Conversely, Terrace Hill itself is highly visible from the locations mentioned above, and shall be managed as a scenic resource. 3. Cultural Resources. The City’s Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC) reviewed a community member’s nomination for adding Terrace Hill to the City’s Contributing Property List of Historic Resources at its meeting on January 28, 2013. In consideration of the important historic events and people associated with Terrace Hill, the CHC made an affirmative recommendation to the City Council that will be introduced as counterpart to the Council’s consideration of the Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan. Improved trailhead signs and a new kiosk and will provide the opportunity to present an educational panel to the public that details the historic nature of the property. 4. Erosion and Drainage. A Custom Soil Resource Report was prepared for Terrace Hill using the United States Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) website application. The report reveals that Terrace Hill is comprised entirely of heavy clay soils known as the Diablo-Lodo Complex and identified as soil map unit no. 133. This soil is excessively well drained and characterized as having severe erosion potential, especially given the 15-50% slopes. Both the City and contiguous private property owners have experienced drainage issues in the past. Accordingly, ongoing erosion control and water management strategies are necessarily a part of the Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan. 5. Fire Protection. Terrace Hill is entirely surrounded by at-risk residential land uses. Although it is not large enough to represent a significant wildland fire hazard, Terrace Hill does have the right “ingredients” to pose a localized fire hazard that could result in unacceptable safety risk and property loss. This is due to prevailing westerly winds; presence of annual grassland, chaparral, oak woodland, and mixed ornamental trees and vegetation; and the potential for human caused fire ignition associated with illicit smoking, open fire pits, and fireworks. The City has historically mowed the top of the hill and weed whacked a 20 foot strip behind the adjacent residences; this plan introduces the need to also attend to annual grassland areas of the steeper side slopes, preferably through the use of controlled and seasonal grazing with goats, or with mowing if necessary using specialized rubber track equipment to minimize any associated damage. 6. Trails and Passive Recreation. A well-used system of trails provides access to Terrace Hill. Some of these trails have been considered formal through the City’s publication of open space trail maps, while others are informal use trails. Some of the informal trails are incorporated by this conservation plan due to their utility and location, while others will be decommissioned or restored. Terrace Hill does not lend itself well to extensive mountain bike use due to its size and steep slopes, but the flat top does provide a suitable area for youth riders to begin to gain skills and confidence in an off-road setting. This conservation plan considers bicycle use on the main access road from Bishop Street and around the loop on the top to be compatible with the other overarching conservation goals, but will be monitored over time by the City’s Rangers. PH1 - 3 Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan Page 4 Goals The overarching goal for the Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan is to achieve sustainable conservation of habitat, while also allowing for passive recreational elements. The plan will accomplish this goal, and address the management issues described, above, through the following: 1. Conserve, enhance, and restore natural plant and wildlife communities by protecting their habitats in order to maintain viable wildlife populations within balanced ecosystems. 2. Provide the public with an opportunity for greater understanding and appreciation for the cultural and historic resources values associated with the Open Space. 3. Provide the public with a safe, accessible, and pleasing natural environment in which to pursue passive recreational activities, including hiking and biking, while maintaining the integrity of natural resources and minimizing the impacts on the wildlife and habitats present in the Open Space. 4. Actively address sedimentation sources and erosion both within the Open Space, and from the Open Space. 5. Minimize the impacts of harmful activities, such as off-trail hiking and biking use or catastrophic wildfire, while maintaining natural drainage systems as a means of conveying storm water into and within urban areas. 6. Provide signage and interpretive features to enhance user safety, prevent unauthorized entrance at neighboring private property, and for educational purposes. 7. Maintain, protect, and improve aesthetic views as seen from various locations throughout the City of San Luis Obispo. 8. Protect and officially designate the important historic and cultural resources associated with the Open Space. 9. Regularly monitor and patrol the Open Space, establish Levels of Acceptable Change (LAC), and take action to correct areas or problems that exceed LAC. Needs The following needs have been identified in furtherance of the Conservation Plan’s goals: 1. Resource Management and Protection Biological surveys are the basis for natural resource management in Terrace Hill Open Space. After the initial surveys conducted for the creation of this plan, the City will need to monitor and protect the habitat areas and sensitive species identified. 2. Resource Enhancement Enhancement of natural resources will focus on restoration of two denuded areas. 3. Signage Signage for Terrace Hill Open Space is currently outdated compared to the standards used for the City’s other open spaces, and should therefore be upgraded. Signs located at the trailheads would be used to provide directions, apprise users of open space regulations, and identify adjacent private property ownership. A three-panel kiosk at the main Bishop Street trailhead will highlight natural and historic resources with interpretive features, as well as provide a trail map graphic. 4. Trailhead Amenities and New Trails A new entry gate and turn-style at the main trailhead at Bishop Street, as well as a garbage receptacle and “mutt mitt” dispenser are needed. Brief sections of new trail will be constructed from the other two trailheads at the corner Rachel Street and Jennifer Street and at Rachel Court. These trails will be constructed by City staff to contemporary PH1 - 4 Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan Page 5 standards for slope and drainage, and shall be designed to minimize any potential impacts to nearby neighbors. 5. Site Stewardship and “Pride of Ownership” Additional needs at Terrace Hill include the following items: a. Increase ranger and police patrols b. Promptly attend to and abate graffiti c. Remove trash, refuse, broken bottles d. Maintain drainage facilities e. Remove or cut in place derelict drip tubing f. Remove and replace dead trees and shrubs ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW An Initial Study has been prepared that identifies several areas where potential impacts exist are in the areas of Aesthetics; Geology and Soils; and, Hydrology and Water Quality. These potential impacts are characterized as de minimis and are less than significant. Staff recommends that with the findings of the Initial Study, together with incorporation by reference into the Project Description that the property will be managed in accordance with policies found in the City’s Conservation and Open Space Element of its General Plan (2006), the Conservation Guidelines for Management of Open Space Lands of the City of San Luis Obispo (2002), and the City’s Open Space Regulations (Municipal Code 12.22), the issuance of a Negative Declaration is appropriate (Attachment 2). CONCURRENCES, ADVISORY BODY REVIEW, AND PUBLIC COMMENT City of San Luis Obispo Natural Resources Program staff, Parks and Recreation Department staff, Community Development Department staff, and Fire Department staff have reviewed components of the plan pertinent to their programs and departments and have provided their concurrence. The Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan also seeks to accommodate community preferences while addressing the City’s goals in the Conservation and Open Space Element. To that end: A public meeting was held on March 11, 2015 in order to gather neighborhood input prior to staff’s preparation of the Conservation Plan that was attended by sixteen members of the public. The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the plan at its April 1, 2015 meeting and recommend adoption by a unanimous 7-0 vote. Draft minutes are included as Attachment 3. One member of the public provided testimony to the Commission. The Planning Commission reviewed the plan and Negative Declaration at its April 8, 2015 meeting and recommended adoption by unanimous 7-0 vote. Draft minutes are included as Attachment 4. One member of the public provided testimony to the Commission. Throughout the course of the public workshop and advisory body hearings, Natural Resources Program staff received numerous written comments from members of the public that are included in the plan as Appendix D. Written comment were primarily centered around the following concerns: the need for increased Ranger Service and Police Department patrol and PH1 - 5 Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan Page 6 adherence to Open Space Regulations; ongoing fuel reduction for fire protection; protection of Terrace Hill Open Space to prevent structures from being built; protection of scenic views; not allowing bicycles; and, drainage problems being experienced by downhill neighboring properties. These comments are addressed and are reflected in the goals and policies proposed within the Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan itself. Lastly, the recommendation to the City Council from the Cultural Heritage Committee that Terrace Hill Open Space be included on the City’s Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources occurred at their meeting on January 28, 2013. The staff report and minutes from that meeting are included as Attachment 5. FISCAL IMPACT Day-to-day management of Terrace Hill Open Space will continue to be supported through the operating budgets within the Natural Resources Program and Ranger Service. City staff has developed a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) program for major maintenance activities and improvements that is under consideration as part of the 2015-17 Financial Plan’s Open Space Preservation Major City Goal; this work program includes funding for signage, trail maintenance work, and trailhead amenities at Terrace Hill Open Space, among other locations. City staff will also pursue grants and volunteers to augment funding for this plan’s identified projects. Overall, the fiscal impact of the conservation plan and its implementation is considered relatively minor given opportunities to phase projects and leverage modest investments of City funds. ALTERNATIVES The City Council could: 1. Approve the Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan and adopt the Negative Declaration with amendments. 2. Deny the Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan and not adopt the Negative Declaration, although this is not recommended given numerous opportunities for public input and unanimous advisory body recommendations. 3. Continue the item with specific direction if more information or discussion time is required before taking action. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution to adopt the Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan and Negative Declaration, and add Terrace Hill Open Space to the City’s List of Contributing Historic Properties 2. Initial Study and Negative Declaration 3. Minutes from Parks and Recreation Commission meeting of April 1, 2015 (Draft) 4. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting of April 8, 2015 (Draft) 5. Staff Report and Minutes from Cultural Heritage Committee meeting of January 28, 2013 PH1 - 6 Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan Page 7 AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AND ONLINE 1. Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan - Final Review Draft T:\Council Agenda Reports\2015\2015-05-19\Terrace Hill Open Space (Codron-Hill-Otte) PH1 - 7 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK RESOLUTION NO. ________ (2015 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING THE TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION PLAN, ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, AND ADDITION OF TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE TO THE CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES LIST OF HISTORIC RESOURCES WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo has adopted policies for protection, management, and public use of open space lands and cultural resources acquired by the City; and WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo manages twelve open space areas totaling approximately 3,500 acres, including the approximately 23-acre Terrace Hill Open Space; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, and the general public have commented upon the Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan as it has moved through a Council-directed approval process, and staff has considered and incorporated those comments where appropriate; and WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee has recommended that Terrace Hill Open Space be added to the City’s Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources due to its association with locally important historic people and events in San Luis Obispo’s history. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: 1. Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan. The City Council hereby adopts the Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan, an official copy of which shall be kept on record with the City Clerk, based on the following findings: a. The Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan is consistent with General Plan goals and policies relating to the oversight and management of City open space areas, specifically Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 8.5.6 that calls for the development of conservation or master plans for open space properties to protect and enhance them in a way that best benefits the community as a whole; b. Implementation of the Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan will provide protection of identified natural resources and appropriate public access to the site while maintaining a majority of the site for habitat protection and enhancement; and c. Adding Terrace Hill Open Space to the City’s Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources will provide protection of the cultural resource values associated with the site, as identified and recommended by the City’s Cultural Heritage Committee. 2. Environmental Review. The City Council hereby adopts the Negative Declaration for the project, an official copy of which shall be kept on record with the City Clerk, finding that it adequately identifies all of the potential impacts of the project and that those potential impacts identified in the areas of Aesthetics; Geology and Soils; and, Hydrology and Water Quality are de minimis and less than significant. Attachment 1 PH1 - 8 On motion of , seconded by , and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Council Members NOES: Council Members ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this 19th day of May, 2015 at a duly noticed public hearing. _______________________________ Jan Howell Marx, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________ _______________________________ Anthony Mejia, City Clerk J. Christine Dietrick, City Attorney Attachment 1 PH1 - 9 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Application # GENP-1120-2015 1. Project Title: Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Robert Hill, (805) 781 7211 Freddy Otte, (805) 781 7511 4. Project Location: Terrace Hill Open Space is located in the City of San Luis Obispo in the neighborhood bounded by Bishop Street to the southeast, Florence Avenue and Rachel Court to the southwest, Ella Street to the northwest, and Sierra Street to the northeast. 5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo, City Administration Department, Natural Resources Program, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 6. General Plan Land Use Designation: Open Space 7. Zoning: R-1-PD 8. Description of the Project: The Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan (the “Plan”) will guide the management and stewardship of Terrace Hill Open Space over the next ten years. The entire property is approximately 23 acres, The Conservation Plan process will allow for and ensure that the property is managed in accordance with the City’s Open Space Regulations and the Conservation and Open Space Element of the City’s General Plan. The Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan proposes a variety of project opportunities to protect, restore, and enhance the property. In addition to normal management, maintenance, and monitoring of the property, particular emphasis is placed on the following management considerations: Natural Resources Protection; Scenic Resources; Cultural Resources; Erosion and Drainage; Fire Protection; and, Trails and Passive Recreation Uses. Attachment 2 PH1 - 10 INITIAL STUDY TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION PLAN 2 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings: Privately owned residential land uses surround Terrace Hill Open Space on all sides, with only a few individual lots that have remained undeveloped. 10. Project Entitlements Requested: City Council approval 11. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None Attachment 2 PH1 - 11 INITIAL STUDY TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION PLAN 3 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Greenhouse Gas Emissions Population / Housing Agriculture Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Public Services Air Quality Hydrology / Water Quality Recreation Biological Resources Land Use / Planning Transportation / Traffic Cultural Resources Mineral Resources Utilities / Service Systems Geology / Soils Noise Mandatory Findings of Significance FISH AND GAME FEES The Department of Fish and Wildlife has reviewed the CEQA document and written no effect determination request and has determined that the project will not have a potential effect on fish, wildlife, or habitat (see attached determination). The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish and Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Wildlife Code. This initial study has been circulated to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for review and comment. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more State agencies (e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Game, Department of Housing and Community Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines 15073(a)). Attachment 2 PH1 - 12 INITIAL STUDY TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION PLAN 4 DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency): On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made, by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant” impact(s) or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR of NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature Date Printed Name Community Development Director Attachment 2 PH1 - 13 INITIAL STUDY TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION PLAN 5 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project- specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 19, "Earlier Analysis," as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced). 5. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration (Section 15063 (c) (3) (D)). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they addressed site-specific conditions for the project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. The explanation of each issue should identify: a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance Attachment 2 PH1 - 14 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources   ER # GENP-1120-2015   Sources Potentially  Significant  Issues  Less Than  Significant  with  Mitigation  Incorporated  Less Than  Significant  Impact  No  Impact    INITIAL STUDY TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION PLAN 6 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 1 X b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, open space, and historic buildings within a local or state scenic highway? 1 X c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? 1, 9 X d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 1 X Evaluation a) The Plan does not anticipate any new structures that would impede views or have an effect on a scenic vista. b) The project site is not within a local a state scenic highway area, and does not anticipate any improvements that would damage scenic resources or historic buildings. c) The Plan does anticipate brief sections of new trail, as well as using either goats or mowing to keep annual grassland down for fire hazard reduction. These actions could result in minor degradation of visual character; however, the new trail sections will be screened and kept to minimum width, and the grazing will be seasonal and will not have a substantial negative impact. d) Terrace Hill closes at dusk and no new lighting is anticipated or proposed by the Plan. The City has a night-sky ordinance that would apply in the event any new safety lighting is installed on the site. Conclusion Although the Plan does anticipate some ground level improvements that could change the visual character of a portion of the site, these actions are considered less than significant because they are very minor and will be screened or seasonal. 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? 2 X b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? 1 X c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? 1 X Evaluation a), b) and c) The project site does not include any Farmland that is considered prime, unique, or of statewide importance. There are no Williamson Act contracts that apply to the site, and no changes are proposed to the site that could result in conversion of Farmland to a non-agricultural use. Conclusion The project site is public land that is part of an existing open space system and no changes in use are proposed. 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? 3 X b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? 3 X Attachment 2 PH1 - 15 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources   ER # GENP-1120-2015   Sources Potentially  Significant  Issues  Less Than  Significant  with  Mitigation  Incorporated  Less Than  Significant  Impact  No  Impact    INITIAL STUDY TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION PLAN 7 c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? 3 X d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? 3 X e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? 3 X Evaluation a), b), c), d) and e). The Plan does not include any actions that would create air quality impacts or violate any air quality standard. Conclusion The project site is City open space bordered by open land and a residential development, and a park. No changes in land use or the operations of the facility are proposed that would impact air quality in any way. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? 1, 4, 9 X b) Have a substantial adverse effect, on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? 1, 4, 7, 8, 9 X c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? 1, 4, 7, 8, 9 X d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? 1, 4, 7, 8, 9 X e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? 1, 6 X f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 1, 6 X Evaluation a) New trail work and fire hazard reduction work (either goats or mowing) is unlikely to have a substantial adverse effect on sensitive species. A Plant Inventory and Wildlife Survey prepared by Terra Verde Environmental found two sensitive avian species to be present, but they would not be affected by ground activities. There is the possibility that sensitive plant species may exist that were not found in the survey, however, so the Plan calls for ongoing site surveys to occur in order to ensure Attachment 2 PH1 - 16 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources   ER # GENP-1120-2015   Sources Potentially  Significant  Issues  Less Than  Significant  with  Mitigation  Incorporated  Less Than  Significant  Impact  No  Impact    INITIAL STUDY TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION PLAN 8 that impacts are avoided to the greatest extent possible. b) The project site does not contain any riparian areas. c) The project site does not contain any federal wetlands. d), e), f) The Plan does not anticipate any improvements that would be considered a barrier or otherwise interfere with migratory animals. The Plan requires compliance with all local policies and ordinances that protect biological resources in the area, and there are no other conservation plans that apply to the project site. Conclusion The project will not have significant impacts to biological resources because the Plan requires all anticipated projects to be designed in a manner that avoids and minimizes these effects. The Plan requires compliance with all local ordinances and policies established for the purpose of protecting biological resources, such as the City’s Conservation Guidelines and the Conservation and Open Space Element of the General Plan. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource as defined in §15064.5. 1 X b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5) 1 X c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? 1 X d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? 1 X Evaluation a) The project site has been recommended by the City’s Cultural Heritage Committee to the City Council for inclusion on the City’s Contributing List of Historic Resources due to findings of important events and persons associated with Terrace Hill ; however, there are no actions in the Plan that would change the significance of these resources b), c) The Plan does not anticipate any action that would have an adverse change on archaeological or paleontological resources. d) The City of San Luis Obispo maintains a burial sensitivity map that identifies locations of known and likely burials. The project site falls outside of the area known to be used for this purpose. The City has construction guidelines that would apply if any human remains are discovered; however, the Plan does anticipate limited excavation activities and only very limited ground disturbance and no impact to human burials is likely. Conclusion The project site has been modified and disturbed in the past, and proposed activities under the Plan are unlikely to disturb any significant cultural, archeological or paleontological resources. The project site is recommended for inclusion on the City’s Contributing List of Historic Resources due to findings of important events and persons associated with Terrace Hill and the Plan calls for an educational kiosk to help the public understand and interpret this history. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: 5 X I. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of 5 X Attachment 2 PH1 - 17 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources   ER # GENP-1120-2015   Sources Potentially  Significant  Issues  Less Than  Significant  with  Mitigation  Incorporated  Less Than  Significant  Impact  No  Impact    INITIAL STUDY TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION PLAN 9 Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. II. Strong seismic ground shaking? 5 X III. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 5 X IV. Landslides? 5 X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 10 X c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on or off site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? 10 X d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1802.3.2 of the California Building Code (2007), creating substantial risks to life or property? 10 X e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? 10 X Evaluation a) The Plan does not anticipate any new structures or activities that would expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects. There is a fault zone mapped outside but proximate to the project site. b) Maintenance activities have the potential to cause erosion. Any project located in or near a drainage will have permit sediment and erosion control measures in place. The Plan includes policies that direct projects to be designed in a manner that minimizes the potential for soil erosion to the greatest extent possible, and some of the projects anticipated by the Plan are specifically intended to reduce sedimentation. c), d), e) The Plan does not anticipate the construction of new structures that would be subject to geologic impacts. The project site does include expansive soils, but paths and other flatwork will be designed in a manner that takes the soil type into consideration and in no case would involve substantial risks to life or property. The site is served by the City of San Luis Obispo sanitary sewer system and no use of septic tanks or alternative systems is proposed. Conclusion The Plan calls for drainage and erosion control strategies whenever there is any possibility of erosion, although such maintenance activities are consistent with existing activities and are less than significant.. Although the location is an active seismic region and located proximate to a mapped Alquist-Priola fault, the Plan does not introduce people or structures to an area where substantial risk of harm to life or property exists. 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? 1, 11 X b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? 1, 11 X Evaluation a), b) The City of San Luis Obispo has a Climate Action Plan that requires the City to evaluate actions that would lead to increased greenhouse gas emissions. The project is a Plan to conserve an open sapce area within the City limits and day to day operations of the open space will not generate, directly or indirectly, increased greenhouse gas emissions. The Plan calls for removal of dead trees and shrubs (which emit carbon) and replacing them with native materials (which sequester carbon) Conclusion On balance, the long term positive effects of the project for increasing carbon sequestration capacity within the project site Attachment 2 PH1 - 18 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources   ER # GENP-1120-2015   Sources Potentially  Significant  Issues  Less Than  Significant  with  Mitigation  Incorporated  Less Than  Significant  Impact  No  Impact    INITIAL STUDY TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION PLAN 10 are expected to outweigh any temporary impacts that might occur from the use of equipment during maintenance activities. 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? X b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? X c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? X d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? X e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? X f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? X g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 9 X h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 9 X Evaluation a), b), c), d), e), f), g) The Plan and ongoing preservation of the open space area will not expose people or structures to harm from hazardous materials because there are no hazardous materials on site, routinely transported through or adjacent to the site, and no handling of hazardous materials is proposed. The project site is outside of the Airport Land Use Plan area, and there is no private landing strips in the vicinity. The Plan would not impair or interfere with the City’s emergency response plans. h) The project site area contains annual grassland, chaparral, and oak woodland, as well as non-native nuisance vegetation species. A component of the City’s overall conservation planning includes the development of a Wildfire Preparedness Plan chapter. This chapter identifies the areas needing management. The impacts are considered less than significant and are also pre-existing and not effected by the Plan. Conclusion The project site is a City open space. It is adjacent to residential neighborhoods. There are no uses, past or present, that involve hazardous materials. Wildland fire impacts associated with maintaining on-site vegetation are minimal, and potential impacts are addressed through the Plan’s Wildfire Preparedness Plan. 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? X Attachment 2 PH1 - 19 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources   ER # GENP-1120-2015   Sources Potentially  Significant  Issues  Less Than  Significant  with  Mitigation  Incorporated  Less Than  Significant  Impact  No  Impact    INITIAL STUDY TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION PLAN 11 b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g. the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? X c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site? X d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off site? 9 X e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 9 X f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? X h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? X i) X j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X Evaluation a), b), c) The project would not negatively impact water quality standards or discharge requirements, or use groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. The Plan envisions activities to restore and improve natural systems that were impacted by past grading and development activities d), e) and f), Maintenance activities may have the potential to cause erosion. The Plan requires that any project located in or near a drainage system will address sediment and erosion control, and such activities are less than significant. g), h), i), j) There are no projects anticipated that would place new structures within a 100-year flood plain, or impede or redirect stormwater flows. In the event of a significant flood event, the area bordering the lake could be subject to inundation, but the project would not introduce people or structures to this risk. The project could be beneficial by providing additional capacity in Laguna Lake for flood control purposes. Conclusion The project would have a less than significant effect on water quality, with only minor maintenance activities anticipated. 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? 1 X b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of 1, 6 X Attachment 2 PH1 - 20 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources   ER # GENP-1120-2015   Sources Potentially  Significant  Issues  Less Than  Significant  with  Mitigation  Incorporated  Less Than  Significant  Impact  No  Impact    INITIAL STUDY TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION PLAN 12 avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? 1, 6 X Evaluation a), b), c) The project is consistent with the City’s General Plan and Conservation Guidelines and would not physically divide an established community. No land use changes are proposed and there is no habitat conservation plan currently covering the site. Conclusion There are no impacts to land use and planning associated with the project to create a natural reserve conservation plan. 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? 1 X b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? 1 X Evaluation a), b) The project does not involve any physical changes to the site that would impact the availability of mineral resources. Conclusion No impact to mineral resources is anticipated or likely because the project is an open space conservation plan involving minimal physical changes to the project site. 12. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? 9 X b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? 9 X c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 9 X d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 9 X e) For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 9 X 9 X Evaluation a), b), c) and d) The Plan does not anticipate any new uses or facilities that would generate noise, or expose people to unsafe noise or ground vibration levels. Attachment 2 PH1 - 21 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources   ER # GENP-1120-2015   Sources Potentially  Significant  Issues  Less Than  Significant  with  Mitigation  Incorporated  Less Than  Significant  Impact  No  Impact    INITIAL STUDY TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION PLAN 13 e), f) The project site experiences frequent overflight, but is outside of the airport land use plan area, and farther than two miles from of a public airport. Conclusion The Plan would involve no day to day increases in noise that would expose people to unacceptable noise levels. The City’s Noise Ordinance applies to all activities, and ensures that temporary noise impacts are less than significant. 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? X b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X X Evaluation a), b), c) The project site is an open space area and there will be no population growth or displacement associated with adoption of the Plan. Conclusion No impacts to population and housing will occur with the adoption and implementation of the Plan because no housing will be constructed or displaced as part of the project. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? 9 X b) Police protection? X c) Schools? X d) Parks? X e) Other public facilities? X Evaluation a), b), c), d), e) The Plan will not result in any increase in demand for public services because it is an open space conservation plan. Conclusion The implementation of the Plan will not result in any new or altered government facilities, or changes to acceptable service ratios, response times, school enrollment, or park use. 15. RECREATION. a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? X b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? X Evaluation Attachment 2 PH1 - 22 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources   ER # GENP-1120-2015   Sources Potentially  Significant  Issues  Less Than  Significant  with  Mitigation  Incorporated  Less Than  Significant  Impact  No  Impact    INITIAL STUDY TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION PLAN 14 a), b) Plan implementation will enhance the natural environment of the project site and potentially attract new users. The increased usage would be considered less than significant because the City maintains a high ratio of open space parkland per City resident and regular use would no substantially deteriorate the park or adjacent facilities. No new facilities would be constructed that would have an adverse physical effect. Conclusion The Plan is anticipated to support passive recreational uses such as hiking and scenic enjoyment. However, the project will not increase the use of the facility in a way that degrades existing or planned facilities, and no impacts are anticipated from the construction of minor new facilities, such as hiking trails or pathways. 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? X b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? X c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? X d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? X e) Result in inadequate emergency access? X f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? X Evaluation a), b), c), d), e), f) The project is adoption and implementation of a Plan to enhance the natural environment of the project site. There are no new uses proposed that would generate new traffic or trips, conflict with traffic management plans, change air traffic patterns, create hazards due to a design feature, result in inadequate emergency access or conflict with an adopted transportation plan. Conclusion The proposed plan will not increase trips to or from the project site beyond that for which the existing facilities have been designed to accommodate, and overall will have no adverse effect on traffic or transportation. 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? X b) Require or result in the construction or expansion of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant X Attachment 2 PH1 - 23 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources   ER # GENP-1120-2015   Sources Potentially  Significant  Issues  Less Than  Significant  with  Mitigation  Incorporated  Less Than  Significant  Impact  No  Impact    INITIAL STUDY TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION PLAN 15 environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? X d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new and expanded entitlements needed? X e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? X f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? X g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? X a), b), c), d), e), f), g) The project would create no new demands on utilities and service systems that cannot be met with existing supplies. Conclusion The proposed Plan and its implementation will have no adverse effect on utilities or service systems. 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X The project is expected to have an overall beneficial effect on the quality of the environment. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? X There are no cumulative impacts identified or associated with the project. All of the impacts identified are less than significant and temporary in nature. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X The project will not have adverse effects on human being because it is an open space conservation plan for a site that is currently used for passive recreational and open space management purposes. Attachment 2 PH1 - 24 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle INITIAL STUDY TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION PLAN 16 19. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case a discussion should identify the following items: a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions of the project. 20. SOURCE REFERENCES. 1. Conservation and Open Space Element, City of San Luis Obispo General Plan (2006) 2. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program: http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/ciff/ciff.html 3. SLO County APCD List of Current Rules and Clean Air Plan: http://www.arb.ca.gov/drdb/slo/cur.htm 4. Summary and Results of a Plant Inventory and Wildlife Survey at Terrace Hill Open Space, City of San Luis Obispo, California (Terra Verde Environmental, March 2015) 5. Alquist-Priola Special Studies Zones Map: http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/download/quad/SAN_LUIS_OBISPO/maps/SLOBISPO.PDF 6. Conservation Guidelines for Open Space Lands, City of San Luis Obispo (2002) 7. Recovery Plan for the California Red-legged Frog, USFWS (2002) 8. South-Central California Coast Steelhead Recovery Plan, NOAA (2013) 9. Public Review Draft Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan. City of San Luis Obispo (2015) 10. Soil Survey of San Luis Obispo County, Coastal Part, USDA Soils Conservation Service (1984) 11. City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan, City of San Luis Obispo (2012) Attachments: 1. All of the source documents are included by reference and are on file in the offices of the City of San Luis Obispo 2. Site vicinity map with aerial photograph Attachment 2 PH1 - 25 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle INITIAL STUDY TERRACE HILL OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION PLAN 17 Site vicinity map with aerial photograph Attachment 2 PH1 - 26 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle 1 City Council Chambers 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Wednesday, April 1, 2015, 5:30 p.m. CALL TO ORDER: Vice Chair Whitener called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: Vice Chair Jeff Whitener and Commissioners Ryan Baker, Susan Olson, Michael Parolini, Ron Regier, Douglas Single and Susan Updegrove ABSENT: None COUNCIL: None STAFF: Shelly Stanwyck, Melissa Mudgett, Bob Hill, Bridget Fraser, Anthony Mejia, Leif McKay (RRM) Public Comment None 1. OATH OF OFFICE (City Clerk) City Clerk issued Oath of Office to Susan Olson and Douglas Single. 2. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES of Regular Meeting of March 4, 2015 deferred to May 5, 2015. 3. ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR (Committee) MOTION: (Parolini/Updegrove) Election of Parks and Recreation Commission Chair, Jeff Whitener, and Vice Chair, Ron Regier. Approved: 7 yes: 0 no: 0 absent 4. SUBCOMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND APPOINTMENTS FOR 2015-16 (Committee) Director Stanwyck presented new subcommittees focused on areas of interest for the Commission; Jack House, Tree Committee, Bicycle Advisory Committee, Youth Services Association, City Facilities. The five committees will allow for a commissioner to be available for adhoc committees throughout the year. She added that the increased community input effort and regular attendance by Natural Resources staff will hopefully provide a forum for discussion at Commission Meetings. Commissioners recommended adding a subcommittee for Adult & Senior representation.  City Facilities - Parolini  Jack House - Updegrove  Adult & Senior Programming - Baker  Youth Services Association - Single  Bicycle Advisory Committee – Regier  Tree Committee - Olson Meeting Minutes Parks and Recreation Commission Attachment 3 PH1 - 27 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle 2 5. BYLAWS REVIEW AND REVISIONS (Chair) Director Stanwyck reminded the Commission that the last Bylaws revision was to move the meeting time to an earlier time in the day. The Commission discussed the option of removing the Parks and Recreation Commissioner as a voting member of the Tree Committee. The Commission recommends no changes to the Bylaws. 6. TERRACE HILL CONSERVATION AND OPEN SPACE PLAN REVIEW (Bob Hill) Director Stanwyck introduced Natural Resources Manager, Bob Hill, and City Biologist, Freddy Otte, for the presentation. Director Stanwyck recused herself from the discussion for potential conflict of interest. Staff Hill presented the Terrace Hill Conservation and Open Space Plan. There has been no conservation plan to guide open space management of Terrace Hills which include 23 acres of land surrounded by residential neighborhoods. The historical nature of Terrace Hill is due to the advent of the railroad. He noted the most prominent features of Terrace Hill being the outstanding views. Staff Hill shared that conservation guidelines the management of open space properties including policies and wildfire preparedness. Staff Hill reminded the Commission that the Rachel Court trail easement at the base of Terrace Hill was recently accepted by Council. Staff Otte said that a biological inventory was taken of Terrace Hill which identified various plants and animal specifies. A Needs Assessment of Terrace Hill identified improved trailhead enhancements, signage and trail circulation, identified invasive species control, a fire protection program, increased patrols, maintenance of drainage facilities, storm water and soil erosion control, drainage basin maintenance, wildfire preparedness (goats), allowed active uses of this open space (such as bikes), removal of old antiquated irrigation and dead trees/shrubs. The management goals are Terrace Hill are to conserve and enhance habitat, encourage recreational activities, address sedimentation issues, minimize impacts, protect aesthetic views, designate as historical and cultural resources and provide for regular monitoring. Staff reminded the Commission about the emphasis on maintenance as part of the Open Space Major City Goal. Commission Comment Commissioner Updegrove asked about trail maintenance at Bishop Street entrance to the left of the Jennifer Street trail. Staff Hill said this trail area is currently overgrown with chaparral and would be a good location area for goats to provide weed abatement. Staff Hill continued that contract services would be used at Jennifer Street trail to overturn soil, add water bars and reduce future erosion in this area. He added that there will be improved access and trailhead control at Bishop Street to allow for strollers. Vice Chair Regier said he would support bicycle use of Terrace Hill. He also supports exploration of Rachel Court trailhead relocation with developers to minimize impacts to adjacent neighbors. Chair Whitener concurred with Vice Chair Regier. He was complementary of Staff Hill and Otte’s presentations. Attachment 3 PH1 - 28 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle 3 Public Comment Don Wiggan, resident of Paul Lane, said he borders Rachel Court where new trailhead is proposed. His property is not fenced and visually exposed to the new trail placement between their residence and a 12 ft. retaining wall. He asked the Commission consider the trail relocation on the other side near a fenced residence. Staff Hill acknowledged the privacy issues and an impact to the residence. Staff Hill said he would be willing to approach other properties owners to explore a realignment to give some protection to the property owners. Staff Hill continued that he would discuss this potential realignment of Rachel Court trailhead with the developers and to Council on May 16, 2015. MOTION: (Regier/Updegrove) Recommend to City Council adoption of the Terrace Hill Conservation and Open Space. Approved: 7 yes: 0 no: 0 absent 7. REVIEW PLAYGROUND REPLACEMENT LAYOUTS FOR SINSHEIMER PARK (Bridget Fraser, Lief McKay) Director Stanwyck introduced Senior Civil Engineer, Bridget Fraser, and Consultant, Leif McKay (RRM), for the presentation of the revised conceptual design of the Sinsheimer Park Playground Replacement project. Consultant McKay provided the Commission with a brief recap of the process and project goals. In summary, the playground design utilizes existing slopes, provides signature features, improves accessibility and offers a variety of new play experiences. Individual elements were recommended through both student and community feedback. The project schedule is estimated to have a final design in the Spring and construction to begin in the Fall. Completion of the playground is estimated for late 2015/early 2016. Commission Comments Commissioner Single asked about opportunities for disabled access to enjoying the playground park. Consultant McKay responded that the design address the physical disabled access with fully accessible paths, bridge feature, slides and ground level activities. This design provides a variety of elements to accommodate a range of experiences. Commissioners thanked the Consultant RRM for incorporating ADA accessibility and stakeholder feedback into the design. Commissioner Parolini asked about additional project funding should contingencies be needed. Staff Fraser felt confident with current budget estimates. MOTION: (Single/Baker) Recommend to City Council to approve the Sinsheimer Park Playground conceptual design. Approved: 7 yes: 0 no: 0 absent 8. DIRECTOR’S REPORT Director Stanwyck presented a summary of budget items to present to City Council on April 21, 2015 Strategic Budget Direction. Budget requests for Open Space and Maintenance are in support of the Major City Goal. A Golf Course reorganization is within existing resources and focusses on two programming elements of golf course maintenance and operations/programming. Capital Improvement Projects for Public Art Funding, Laguna Lake ADA Accessible Trail and Tennis Court lighting at Sinsheimer Park have also been submitted for Council consideration. Attachment 3 PH1 - 29 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle 4 Director Stanwyck reminded the Commission about upcoming Parks and Recreation events; such as Spring Break Camps, the Pool is currently open for recreational swim, Saturday 4/4/2015 is the annual Egg Hunt at Mitchell park, Pickelball is being played at Meadow Park and Ludwick Community Center. Lastly, the SLO Triathlon registration opens on April 25th. Public Comment Scott Cleare, tennis advocate, urged Commission to continue to support the lighting of public tennis courts for increased play. He added that the Commission consider seeking corporate sponsorship opportunities to assist with funding. 9. SUBCOMMITTEE LIAISON REPORTS  Bicycle Committee: Vice Chair Ron Regier reported on the Major City Goal for Bicycle and Pedestrian facilities. He added that the Committee is considering a project for bike lane extension on California Street towards Monterey Street to the Railroad.  Tree Committee: Commissioner Baker had no report.  Jack House: Commissioner Updegrove said there was no meeting. No report.  School District: Commissioner Parolini said he had no report.  Damon-Garcia: Commissioner Parolini reported he was waiting to hear back from the Utilities Department regarding potable water use. He added that Field A and C are closed for turf maintenance. He noted that the bridge is dark in the evening and that there are transient issues in park.  Golf: Chair Whitener said that golf rounds and revenues were both up 7%. He added that more patrons were using the ADA golf cart. Chair Whitener shared that staff was researching various staffing models for upcoming retirement of the Golf Supervisor, Todd Bunte. Director Stanwyck said she would email Commissioners for their preference on electronic or printed Commission Meeting agendas. 10. COMMUNICATIONS Commissioner Baker said that he will be absent for the May 6, 2015 meeting. Director Stanwyck reminded the Commission that the next meeting community input will focus on Ranger Program and Open Space. Adjourned at 7:50pm to the May 6, 2015 Regular Meeting located in the Council Chambers at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo at 5:30pm. Approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission on __________________. ________________________________________________ Melissa C. Mudgett, Parks and Recreation Department Manager Attachment 3 PH1 - 30 DRAFT SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 8, 2015 CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Chair Larson led the Pledge of Allegiance. OATH OF OFFICE: Swearing in re-appointed Commissioner John Fowler. City Clerk Mejia administered an Oath of Office to Commissioner Fowler. ROLL CALL: Commissioners Hemalata Dandekar, Michael Draze, John Fowler, Ronald Malak, William Riggs, Vice-Chairperson Michael Multari, and Chairperson John Larson Absent: None Staff: Deputy Community Development Directors Doug Davidson and Kim Murry, Assistant City Attorney Jon Ansolabehere, Interim Assistant City Attorney Anne Russell, Supervising Civil Engineer Hal Hannula, Associate Planner Rebecca Gershow, Associate Planner Rachel Cohen, Transportation Operations Manager Jake Hudson, and Recording Secretary Erica Inderlied ELECTION OF OFFICERS: On motion by Vice-Chair Multari, seconded by Commr. Draze, to appoint Chair Larson to continue serving as Chair. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. On motion by Commr. Malak, seconded by Commr. Draze, to appoint Vice-Chair Multari to continue serving as Vice-Chair. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. Attachment 4 PH1 - 31 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 2 ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented. MINUTES: Minutes of March 25, 2015, were approved as amended. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS: There were no comments from the public. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. City-Wide. GENP-1054-2015: General Plan Annual Report for 2014; City of San Luis Obispo—Community Development Department. Rebecca Gershow, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the Commission forward the General Plan Annual Report to the City Council for acceptance, with additional directional items if desired. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Vice-Chair Multari commented on the importance of valuing all General Plan elements and policies equally; stated that recent drought conditions may warrant a reanalysis of report items relating to water supply. In response to Vice-Chair Multari, Deputy Development Director Murry noted that information could be added regarding the Utilities Department’s update of the Water Projection Model. In response to Chair Larson, Deputy Development Directory Murry clarified that the report presented reflects the General Plan as it existed last year and does not reflect recent policy updates. Chair Larson noted desire to have the City focus attention on the following programs: construction of a community center, and the Laguna Lake Park and Sinsheimer Park Master Plans. In response to inquiry from Commr. Fowler, Deputy Community Development Director Murry confirmed that a paragraph could be added to the report addressing the passage of Measure Y and utilization of the funds therefrom. In response to inquiry from Fowler, Deputy Community Development Director Davidson stated that recent software improvements will allow better reporting of Building Division activity in future reports. Attachment 4 PH1 - 32 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 3 Commr. Fowler noted a desire to have the City continue to focus on the development of affordable housing; requested that staff consider the possibility of analyzing the ratio of commercial square-footage constructed to jobs created, similar to the analysis done with residential construction. Commr. Riggs noted a desire to have staff continually evaluate the effectiveness of the City’s new Odor Nuisance Ordinance; continue to focus on non-motorized transportation; work toward creating more sophisticated parking policies. There were no further comments from the Commission. On motion by Vice-Chair Multari, seconded by Commr. Draze, to forward the 2014 General Plan Annual Report to the City Council for acceptance, with additional directional items as noted. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. 2. 3761 & 3987 Orcutt Road. GP/R 95-13 / TR/ER 114-14 / SBDV-0067-2014: Request to amend the General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP), including adjustment of the Urban Reserve Line (URL), rezoning of approximately 0.85 acres of Conservation/Open Space (C/OS) zoning to Single-Family Residential (R-1-SP), reorientation of 2.8 acres of residential and parklands, reorientation of wetlands mitigation sites, rezoning of 0.38 acres of R-1-SP to R-2- SP, addition of text to the OASP to “track” amendments, adjustments and clarification to development standards; review of a new residential subdivision (Tract 3063) adjacent to Righetti Hill with 304 new homes; review of a new residential subdivision (Tract 3066) including 61 new homes and 5 existing homes on 11.56 acres; and consideration of the Initial Study and a Mitigated Negative Declaration, tiering off the OASP Final EIR (2010); R-1-SP zone; Ambient Communities, applicant. (Continued from March 25th Planning Commission meeting.) Assistant City Attorney Ansolabehere announced his recusal due to a professional conduct conflict of interest and left the staff table. Interim Assistant City Attorney Russell assumed his seat at the staff table. David Watson, Consulting Planner, and Jake Hudson, Transportation Operations Manager, presented the staff report, recommending that the Commission adopt resolutions recommending that the Council adopt the project environmental document and approve General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) amendments as outlined; approve the Vesting Tentative Tract Map for the Righetti Property; approve the Vesting Tentative Tract Map for the Jones property, based on findings and subject to Attachment 4 PH1 - 33 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 4 conditions which he outlined. Watson summarized revisions made to the proposal since the last hearing. Deputy Community Development Director Davidson noted public comment received from neighbors, a memorandum from the applicant dated April 8, 2015 requesting further review of particular conditions, and a memorandum from staff dated April 8, 2015 proposing amendments to conditions, findings, and mitigation measures. In response to inquiry from Commr. Riggs, Transportation Operations Manager Hudson clarified the rationale for construction a portion of the bike trail as Class II rather than Class I; clarified that staff is seeking Commission input on dispersal versus clustering of affordable housing units. Chair Larson thanked staff for proposing an alternative realignment for the intersection of E-2 Street and Hansen Lane; noted that the grading required may render it infeasible. Travis Fuentez, Ambient Communities, applicant, requested that the Commission take action and allow staff to work with the applicants on unresolved issues such as phasing of improvements before the request is heard by City Council. Todd Smith, Cannon Corp, project planner, summarized changes made to the proposal in response to Commission comment, gave an overview of a possible 3-phase plan. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Jean Knox, nearby property owner, spoke in support of the project; commented that more affordable units should be constructed; noted concern about mitigation of noise from the train tracks adjacent to the project site. Byron Grant, Arroyo Grande, spoke in support of the project; commented that the Urban Reserve Line was originally intended to be flexible; noted concern that this development is bearing more than its fair share of the burden of constructing and financing the improvements prescribed by the OASP. Ernest Jones, property owner representing the Jones Ranch, spoke in support of the project; urged the Commission act; noted concern that affordability decreases over time. William Vega, San Luis Obispo, noted a desire to see more affordable units proposed; stated that project is a step toward the City better-accommodating young professionals; commented on the importance of project connectivity. Jeanne Helphenstine, property owner representing Righetti Ranch, noted concern that current applicants are being asked to bear an increasingly larger share of the required plan area improvements, in apparent conflict with OASP Chapter 8. There were no further comments from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Attachment 4 PH1 - 34 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 5 In response to Chair Larson, Deputy Community Development Director Davidson and Travis Fuentez confirmed that proposed “homesite” lots are subject to policies included in the adopted OASP, will be served by City utilities and will be subject to the same conditions as other tract map lots. In response to inquiry from Chair Larson, Ernest Jones confirmed that the family has no intent to split the homesite lots; Commr. Draze clarified that the lots could not be split without a tract map amendment in any case. Commr. Draze noted concern about the amount of liberty that could be taken if applicants and staff work together to resolve issues such as utility undergrounding; commented that caution should be exercised when conditioning specific technologies for long-term area plans, as best-available-technologies change from year to year. Draze expressed readiness to recommend approval if language requiring OASP consistency is added to the conditions. Commr. Riggs noted concern about the lack of a complete, commuter-friendly circulation plan, specifically the lack of connectivity between the proposed project’s bike trail and that along Industrial Way, and the inclusion of a section of Class II bike trail; noted concern about the minimal dispersal and integration of affordable units. Vice-Chair Multari expressed readiness to recommend approval to Council; stated that greater dispersal of affordable units would be ideal but perhaps not feasible; requested that language such as “… consistent with the OASP” be added to conditions with potential conflicts. In response to inquiry from Commr. Malak, staff confirmed that use of gray water is required for common area irrigation only, but will be included as a mitigation measure to encourage residential use. Commr. Fowler disclosed direct communication with applicant Travis Fuentez; concurred that affordable unit dispersal presents a dilemma; noted readiness to recommend approval to Council if staff can provide assurance that outstanding issues can be resolved. Chair Larson expressed a comfort level with allowing staff to work with the applicant to determine utilities will be undergrounded. Travis Fuentez stated that the applicants intend to underground overhead lines except along Bullock Lane, which is offsite and presents topographical challenges. Deputy Community Development Director Davidson noted that adding language such as “… or as approved by the Director of [the department]” can allow the Commission to proceed with recommending existing conditions. Vice-Chair Multari expressed readiness to proceed with staff’s recommendation, with the addition of language requiring OASP consistency and approval of Community Development and Public Works Directors in subjective situations. Multari opined that Attachment 4 PH1 - 35 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 6 transit is a Citywide problem and that the proposed development will still make significant connectivity contributions. Commr. Dandekar noted her absence from the previous hearing; opined that the affordable and multi-family units do not appear overtly segregated and may allow creation of workforce housing; spoke in support of recommending approval to Council. There were no further comments from the Commission. Commr. Riggs commented on the importance of construction of continuous Class I bike trail in meeting the City’s multi-modal goals; Commr. Draze expressed concern that consideration of creek impacts may hinder the development of the bridge as a Class I trail. Interim Assistant City Attorney Russell clarified that the increased trail intensity has yet to be analyzed for environmental impacts. On motion by Commr. Riggs, seconded by Vice-Chair Multari, to amend the Orcutt Area Specific Plan to prescribe a continuous Class I bike trail, subject to staff determination of no environmental impact. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Fowler, Malak, Multari, Riggs NOES: Commrs. Larson, Draze RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 5:2 vote. On motion by Commr. Draze, seconded by Vice-Chair Multari, to adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve the proposed General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan amendments, including the Mitigated Negative Declaration therefor, based on findings and subject to conditions contained in the staff report, with the following revisions: 1. Revise the Orcutt Area Specific Plan Appendix A-2 map to show the configuration of homesite lots. 2. Revise findings and mitigation measures as outlined in staff’s memorandum dated April 8, 2015, on file with the Community Development Department. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. Attachment 4 PH1 - 36 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 7 On motion by Vice-Chair Multari, seconded by Commr. Draze, to adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map #3063 for the Righetti property, based on findings and subject to conditions contained in the staff report, with the following revisions: 1. Revise findings, conditions and mitigation measures as outlined in staff’s memorandum dated April 8, 2015, on file with the Community Development Department. 2. Add the language “ …consistent with the Orcutt Area Specific Plan” to Conditions 5, 7 and 8 relating to maintenance responsibilities. 3. Add the language “ […] subject to approval by the Director of [Community Development or Public Works, as appropriate]” to conditions relating to phasing of improvements, underground of utilities, and any other conditions specifying that the applicant work further with staff. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari NOES: Commr. Riggs RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 6:1 vote. On motion by Commr. Malak, seconded by Vice-Chair Multari, to add a condition to Tentative Tract Map #3066 requiring the addition of electric vehicle charging stations to those mixed use portions of the project where no covered parking is proposed, in a manner acceptable to staff following research regarding standards. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Malak, Multari NOES: Commrs. Fowler, Larson, Riggs RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 4:3 vote. On motion by Vice-Chair Multari, seconded by Commr. Fowler, to adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map #3066 for the Jones property, based on findings and subject to conditions contained in the staff report, with the following revisions: 1. Revise findings, conditions and mitigation measures as outlined in staff’s memorandum dated April 8, 2015, on file with the Community Development Department. 2. Add the language “…subject to approval by the Director of [Community Development or Public Works, as appropriate]” to conditions relating to Attachment 4 PH1 - 37 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 8 phasing of improvements, underground of utilities, and any other conditions specifying that the applicant work further with staff. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari NOES: Commr. Riggs RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 6:1 vote. The Commission recessed at 9:15 p.m. and reconvened at 9:25 p.m. with all members present. Assistant City Attorney Ansolabehere resumed his seat at the staff table. 3. 3680 Broad Street. USE-0809-2015: Review of a mixed-use, 100% affordable housing project with 4,400 square feet of commercial space and 46 residential units, including a height exception as an affordable housing incentive, and review of a master use list with a categorical exemption from environmental review; C-S-S zone; For The Future Housing, applicant. Rachel Cohen, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the Commission adopt a resolution allowing approval of the mixed-use project based on findings and subject to conditions, which she outlined. Cohen noted that staff is recommending the addition of a condition restricting extremely-low-, very-low-, and low- income units from conversion for 55 years. Assistant City Attorney Ansolabehere noted that because the proposed project includes 100% affordable units, the Commission may not add any conditions rendering the affordability of the project infeasible. In response to inquiry from Commr., Fowler, Associate Planner Cohen clarified that no elevators are proposed for the site, and that all affordable units are proposed for the ground floor. Jim Rendler, For the Future Housing, applicant, summarized the project; noted that target resident incomes are 30-60% of area median income; requested that the Commission take action due to time constrains upon project financing. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: In response to inquiry from Commr. Malak, Jim Rendler stated that reclaimed water will be used to irrigate the site if a stub exists; clarified that that proposed parking exceeds statutory requirements due to a lack of parking in the vicinity. Attachment 4 PH1 - 38 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 9 Commr. Dandekar spoke in support of the project. In response to Commr. Dandekar, Associate Planner Cohen clarified that street trees will be required at back of sidewalk along anticipated pedestrian routes. In response to inquiry from Commr. Riggs, staff clarified that the South Broad Street Area Plan (BSAP) does not encompass the project site, therefore sidewalk buffering is not necessarily required. Riggs expressed desire to add a condition requiring that staff work with the applicant to implement sidewalk buffering measures consistent with the BSAP; Chair Larson noted concern that the need for sidewalk relocation may be cost- prohibitive. In response to Commr. Riggs, staff clarified that the retail component of the mixed use proposal is required, as residential uses cannot be the primary use in the Service Commercial zone. Commr. Fowler spoke in support of the project; noted concern that the single shared laundry may be a long way to travel for some tenants. There were no further comments from the Commission. On motion by Commr. Riggs, seconded by Commr. Draze, to adopt a resolution allowing approval of the mixed-use project based on findings and subject to conditions contained in the staff report, with the following revision: 1. Add a condition to read as follows: “Applicant shall work with staff to implement sidewalk buffering measures by replicating, as closely as possible, the design sections articulated in the South Broad Street Area Plan, subject to approval by the Public Works Director.” AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. 4. 1300 Bishop Street. GENP-1120-2015: Review of the Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant. Robert Hill, Natural Resources Manager, and Freddy Otte, City Biologist, presented the staff report, recommending that the Commission review the draft Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan and Initial Study, and recommend to the City Council that the Plan and its Negative Declaration be adopted. On motion by Commr. Riggs, seconded by Commr. Malak, to continue the meeting past 11:00 p.m. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs Attachment 4 PH1 - 39 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 10 NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Buzz Kalkowski, Buena Vista HOA President, noted concern about the apparent inconsistency of the site’s R-1 zoning with the General Plan and the impact of drainage from the hillside on the surrounding neighborhoods; commented that the space is being misused by the transient population and others. There were no further comments from the public. In response to public comment, Natural Resources Manager Hill stated that rezoning could be implemented as a Plan action item. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Riggs stressed the importance of enforcement against illicit uses. There were no further comments from the Commission. On motion by Commr. Riggs, seconded by Commr. Draze, to recommend that the City Council adopt the draft Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan and Initial Study/ Negative Declaration, with the following revision: 1. Staff shall add an action item addressing the inconsistency of the site’s zoning with the General Plan. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. Commr. Draze departed the meeting at 11:13 p.m. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 5. Staff a. Agenda Forecast Deputy Community Development Director Davidson gave a summary of Attachment 4 PH1 - 40 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 11 upcoming agenda items. b. Bylaws Community Development Director Davidson presented the staff report, recommending that the Commission review the Bylaws and offer any desired updates to staff to carry forward for Council consideration. There were no comments or suggested revisions from the Commission. 6. Commission There were no comments from the Commission. ADJOURMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 11:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Erica Inderlied Recording Secretary Attachment 4 PH1 - 41 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 42 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 43 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 44 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 45 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 46 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 47 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 48 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 49 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 50 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 51 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 52 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 53 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 54 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 55 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 56 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 57 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 58 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 59 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 60 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 61 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 62 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 63 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 64 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 65 At t a c h m e n t 5 PH 1 - 66 SAN LUIS OBISPO CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE MINUTES January 28, 2013 ROLL CALL: Present: Committee Members Thom Brajkovich, Hemalata Dandekar, Jaime Hill, Buzz Kalkowski, Patti Taylor, and Chairperson Enrica Costello Absent: Vice-Chair Bob Pavlik Staff: Senior Planner Phil Dunsmore, Senior Planner Pam Ricci, Assistant Planner Marcus Carloni, and Recording Secretary Dawn Rudder ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented. MINUTES: Minutes of December 17, 2012, were approved as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS: Dean Miller, San Luis Obispo, requested the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC) to place the following concerns as soon as convenient if not at the next CHC hearing: 1) The Barneberg house at 550 Dana to discuss the removal from the City’s Master List properties. 2) Staff to comment on the findings which determined the modifications at Barneberg house to be “minor” and exempt from review by the CHC and ARC. Joseph Carotenuti, San Luis Obispo, voiced his opinion that the historic resources in the city are being compromised due to unclear guidelines. Mr. Carotenuti agreed with Mr. Miller to place the Barneberg House on the next agenda. Randal Cruikshanks, San Luis Obispo, endorsed the public comments. He encouraged the effort to investigate where the CHC is failing the heritage of the community. Bob Vesselly, San Luis Obispo, endorsed comments made. The change made to the Barneberg house has changed the whole façade of the house. Phil Dunsmore, Senior Planner, welcomed the public and the CHC to be present at the public meeting for the Historic Context Statement to be held at 5:30 p.m. on February 6th at the Senior Center at Mitchell Park. There were no further comments made from the public. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: 1. 75 Higuera Street. ARC 108-12; Review of new storefront windows along the Higuera Frontage of the Pacific Coast Center; C-S-MU zone; SLOP CC, LP, applicant (Pam Ricci) Attachment 5 PH1 - 67 CHC Minutes January 28, 2013 Page 2 Pam Ricci, Senior Planner, introduced Graduate Intern Rachel Cohen, who assisted with the project, and then presented the staff report, recommending adoption of the Draft Resolution which recommends approval of the project to the Architectural Review Commission, based on findings and subject to conditions which she outlined. In a response to a question from Committee Member Taylor, Mr. Dunsmore reiterated that the site is on both the City’s Master List and the National Register. He noted that most of the original structures on site were demolished, but that a few character- defining features of the reconstructed front building were retained. The site is significant because of its ties to the Pacific Coast Railway and new contemporary structures borrow from the architectural character and history of earlier site development. Committee Member Brajkovich questioned why the larger windows were requested. Ms. Ricci indicated that it was to add light to the interior and to add street presence. Rob Rossi, applicant, noted that the larger windows were requested to increase visibility for retail tenants. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments made from the public. COMMITTEE COMMENTS: Committee Member Kalkowski supported the need for the larger windows, noting that he preferred a more open design with the head lowered below the eaves. He suggested a plaque to commemorate the historic significance of the site. Committee Member Taylor concurred with Committee Member Kalkowski regarding the historical plaque and supported staff’s recommendation. Committee Member Brajkovich supported the larger windows with a cross mullion. Committee Member Dandekar supported the staff’s recommendation. She mentioned that the reconstructed building honors the site in a contemporary way and that the ARC should decide on final design details of the windows. Committee Member Hill stated that the height element of the warehouse elevation is affected by the addition of the larger windows and that she did not support the requested changes. She added that a historian should have been consulted regarding the changes since the building is on the National Register. Committee Member Dandekar questioned the basis that the site was on the National Registry list. Chairperson Costello supported reducing the size of the windows to make them in better proportion with the building wall. Attachment 5 PH1 - 68 CHC Minutes January 28, 2013 Page 3 There were no further comments made from the Committee. On motion by Committee Member Brajkovich, seconded by Committee Member Kalkowski, to recommend approval of the proposed windows in the façade of the Higuera Street elevation with the following conditions: 1) The proposed new storefront windows shall be modified to lower the head of the windows so that they are smaller in scale and more proportional to the building wall. The ARC shall determine the appropriate grid detail for windows. 2) The applicant shall add a historical plaque or monument to the property to commemorate that historical significance of the site. AYES: Committee Members Brajkovich, Dandekar, Kalkowski, Taylor and Costello NOES: Committee Member Hill RECUSED: None ABSENT: Vice-Chair Pavlik The motion passed on a 5:1 vote. 2. 736 Higuera Street. ARC 57-12; Review of a remodel to the Master List Carrisa building as part of the SLO Brewing Company relocation project; C-D-H zone; San Luis Downtown Management, applicant (Marcus Carloni) Marcus Carloni, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report, recommending approval of the project to the Architectural Review Commission based on findings of consistency with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standard’s and Historic Preservation Program Guidelines, and subject to the conditions of approval. Mr. Carloni addressed the points made by the Committee which consisted of: 1. Historic background information provided by qualified historian in regard to the wood portions at the rear of building 2. Maintain existing historic building features on the exterior of the building 3. Maintain skylights in existing locations 4. Coordinate front façade features with historic building features Carol Florence, applicant representative, and Brian Ridley, applicant architect, discussed the modifications made to the design based on the Committee’s direction at the October 22, 2012 Conceptual CHC review hearing. Mr. Ridley, in response to CHC question, stated the central post at the Higuera Street elevation is the existing structural support for the upper floor. Mr. Ridley also stated an interior routing of the proposed rear staircase was explored but deemed infeasible due to space constraints and building code requirements. Chairperson Costello asked for clarification of the proposed material below the rooftop patio glass surround. Brian stated it was concrete. Attachment 5 PH1 - 69 CHC Minutes January 28, 2013 Page 4 PUBLIC COMMENTS: David Brodie, San Luis Obispo, made a general comment that decisions made that compromise historical preservation is because ground rules have not been set for the committees. He stated that making changes to the creek area which effect architectural details are important; the history is the entire area. He is not supportive of the proposed staircase at the rear of the building. Sandra Lakeman, San Luis Obispo, commented that each panel should come down to be symmetrical to the columns on the front facade. She is not in favor of the proposed staircase. She stated it is modern and it should be located on the interior. Elizabeth Abrams, San Luis Obispo, stated the original staircase is historical ly significant. She concurred with David Brodie’s comment that the ambiance is the entire area. Allan Cooper, San Luis Obispo, could not say when the wood building features were added and several in the community believe the staircase was original to the building. He stated the proposed stair is contemporary and will compromise the building. Linda Groover, San Luis Obispo, stated the building is on the Master List and putting a modern staircase on the rear of the building is a character-defining feature. Dixie Cliff, San Luis Obispo, does not support the proposed staircase. Joe Abrams, San Luis Obispo, stated that the Committee will need to be scrupulous honoring history and be attentive to all items. David Brodie, San Luis Obispo, stated the Historian can phrase and interpret in different ways, especially when the developer is paying the bill. Committee Member Hill commented that the Historians hired by the applicant will not jeopardize their reputation by going in favor of the applicant for this project. There were no further comments made from the public. COMMITTEE COMMENTS: Committee Member Dandekar questioned the height of the proposed staircase. Mr. Carloni stated the height is labeled at 41 feet and the maximum height of adjacent building can be 50 feet. Committee Member Costello stated that the existing staircase had been reconstructed as of 1986. Chairperson Costello was concerned with the front façade; specifically the second floor entrance doors. She concurred with the public that it should be symmetrical. Mr. Carloni indicated that shifting the second floor entry doors for symmetry was not proposed because the doors are proposed to remain in their existing location. Attachment 5 PH1 - 70 CHC Minutes January 28, 2013 Page 5 Committee Member Brajkovich is in favor of the front façade. He indicated that the rear elevation is what should be discussed. Committee Member Hill is supportive of the proposed building. Committee Member Dandekar is concerned about the staircase being proposed. She stated it will set the tone for any other proposed buildings in the area which will cause a discord to the creek area. She is supportive of the front façade. Committee Member Taylor concurred with Committee Member Dandekar’s concern. There was a general discussion between staff and committee members on whether the staircase is a character-defining feature and if the design of the stair should be left to the Architectural Review Commission. There were no further comments made from the Committee. On motion by Committee Member Dandekar, seconded by Committee Member Hill, to recommend approval of the project, based on findings, and subject to conditions, with an added condition for the ARC to review alternate design possibilities for the rear staircase that will be compatible with the scale of the building and with the transition to the public creek-walk area. The staircase design should consider added symmetry while increasing the visibility of the building’s brick façade. AYES: Committee Members Brajkovich, Dandekar, Hill, Kalkowski, Taylor, and Costello NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: Vice-Chair Pavlik The motion passed on a 6:0 vote. 3. 1300 Bishop Street. CHC 2-13; Review of Terrace Hill for placement on the Contributing List of Historic Resources; R-1-PD zone; Buzz Kalkowski (CHC), applicant. (Phil Dunsmore) Phil Dunsmore, Senior Planner, presented the staff report, recommending the City Council add Terrace Hill to the Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources, based on findings and subject to conditions which he outlined. Buzz Kalkowski, Committee Member of the CHC, highlighted detailed points from presentation as to why Terrace Hill should be placed on the Contributing Properties list. Committee Member Kalkowski recused himself due to a potential conflict of interest because his residence is located on the side of Terrace Hill. Committee Member Brajkovich questioned what the purpose was to bring it into historical context if it’s designated as open space. Mr. Kalkowski stated the property is Attachment 5 PH1 - 71 CHC Minutes January 28, 2013 Page 6 zoned as R-1 and including the property on the Contributing List will allow for further review in the histories of the site. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Karen Randall, San Luis Obispo, questioned Mr. Kalkowski that because he lives in the neighborhood if he will be benefiting in any way. Mr. Kalkowski indicated there is no relation based on where he lives. It’s another 100 feet above his residence. Chairperson Costello stated that placing this property on the Contributing List will not affect neighboring property it will be an additional protection on what can be built on the property. Will Powers, San Luis Obispo, stated that he has continuing objection to the process of the committee because there is no mediator from the City versus public comments. There were no further comments made from the public. COMMITTEE COMMENTS: There were no comments made from the Committee. On motion by Committee Member Brajkovich, seconded by Committee Member Taylor, to recommend that the City Council add Terrace Hill to the City’s Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources, based on findings and subject to conditions. AYES: Committee Members Brajkovich, Dandekar, Hill, Taylor, and Costello NOES: None RECUSED: Committee Member Kalkowski ABSENT: Committee Member Pavlik The motion passed on a 5:0 vote. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 4. Staff a. Phil Dunsmore presented the agenda forecast. 5. Committee Chairperson Costello was confused about the anger from the public at the beginning of the meeting and the item that was discussed. She asked how things can be done at the City level without the committee knowing about it. Phil Dunsmore stated that staff will bring this matter back to the next CHC meeting. There was a general discussion between staff and committee members in regard to the public comments at the beginning of the meeting. Attachment 5 PH1 - 72 CHC Minutes January 28, 2013 Page 7 Committee Member Taylor pointed out the history center is going to have Tuesday talk on February 12th at 11:15 a.m. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:09 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Dawn Rudder Recording Secretary Approved by the Cultural Heritage Committee on February 25, 2013. Ryan Betz Supervising Administrative Assistant Attachment 5 PH1 - 73 Wednesday, April 22, 2015 Special Meeting of the City Council CALL TO ORDER A Special Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on April 22, 2015 at 1:30 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Mayor Marx. ROLL CALL Council Members Present: Council Members Dan Carpenter, Carlyn Christianson, Dan Rivoire, Vice Mayor John Ashbaugh, and Mayor Jan Marx. Council Members Absent: None Staff Present: Monica Irons, Director of Human Resources, Heather Goodwin, Deputy City Clerk, and Mary Egan of Municipal Resource Group, were present at Roll Call. PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION Mayor Marx called for public comment. There was no one present desiring to speak on Closed Session. CLOSED SESSION A. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Pursuant to Government Code § 54957(b)(1) Public Employees: City Manager, City Attorney CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6 Agency Negotiators: Mary Egan, John Shannon, Monica Irons Public Employees: City Manager, City Attorney REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION There was no reportable action to report on Closed Session. C2-1 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of April 22, 2015 Page 2 ADJOURNMENT The City Council adjourned to a Special Meeting to be held on Thursday, April 23, 2015 at 3:00 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, for the purpose of continuing a closed session to evaluate appointed officials. Special and Regular City Council Meetings are scheduled for Tuesday, May 5, 2015 at 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., respectively, in the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. __________________________ Anthony J. Mejia, MMC City Clerk APPROVED BY COUNCIL: xx/xx/2015 C2-2 Thursday, April 23, 2015 Special Meeting of the City Council CALL TO ORDER A Special Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on April 23, 2015 at 3:00 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Mayor Marx. ROLL CALL Council Members Present: Council Members Dan Carpenter, Carlyn Christianson, Dan Rivoire, Vice Mayor John Ashbaugh, and Mayor Jan Marx. Council Members Absent: None Staff Present: Katie Lichtig, City Manager, Christine Dietrick, City Attorney, Monica Irons, Director of Human Resources, Heather Goodwin, Deputy City Clerk, Mary Egan of Municipal Resource Group, and John Shannon of Municipal Resource Group, were present at Roll Call. PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION Deputy City Clerk Goodwin called for public comment. There was no one present desiring to speak on Closed Session. CLOSED SESSION A. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Pursuant to Government Code § 54957(b)(1) Public Employees: City Attorney CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6 Agency Negotiators: Mary Egan, John Shannon, Monica Irons Public Employees: City Attorney B. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Pursuant to Government Code § 54957(b)(1) Public Employees: City Manager CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6 Agency Negotiators: Mary Egan, John Shannon, Monica Irons Public Employees: City Manager C2-3 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of April 23, 2015 Page 2 REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION There was no reportable action to report on Closed Session. ADJOURNMENT The City Council adjourned to Special and Regular City Council Meetings scheduled for Tuesday, May 5, 2015 at 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., respectively, in the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. __________________________ Anthony J. Mejia, MMC City Clerk APPROVED BY COUNCIL: xx/xx/2015 C2-4 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director BY: Brian Leveille, Senior Planner SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR UPDATES TO THE CITY’S SIGN REGULATIONS RECOMMENDATION 1. Authorize the issuance of request for proposals (RFP) for consultant services to assist staff in updating the City’s Sign Regulations; and 2. Authorize the City Manager to award a consultant services agreement in an amount not-to- exceed $50,000 to assist staff with revisions to the Sign Regulations. DISCUSSION Background The City’s Sign Regulations (Municipal Code Chapter 15.40) contain provisions for sign installations in all Zoning Districts in the City. The Sign Regulations are referenced frequently for new installations resulting from changes in tenant space, new businesses, corporate identity updates, and new development. The regulations include requirements for sign types in each Zoning district in the City including allowable sizes, placement, height, illumination, setbacks, quantity, and prohibited sign types. The sign regulations also contain provisions for exceptions, review level, processing procedures, and the abatement of non-conforming signs. Sign installations can have a significant effect on the character of the built and natural environment of the City and the regulations were last updated in 2004. It is important to periodically update the regulations to ensure the sign regulations reflect community values and are effective in promoting the use of signs that enhance the City’s character and preserve natural scenic beauty, while also reviewing the sign regulations for conformity with evolving state and federal First Amendment law in this arena. In addition to aesthetic and neighborhood character considerations, the Sign Regulations would provide more clarity on encouraged sign types while enabling effective means of communication and business identification. If approved, the RFP will be published on the city’s website and distributed to consultants experienced in the preparation of sign regulations. The process to update the City’s Sign Regulations will involve community outreach and review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. Scope of Services City staff is seeking consultant assistance to update the City’s regulations, including the following activities: 05/19/2015 C3 C3-1 Sign Regulations Update - Request for Proposal Page 2 1. Consult with staff on needed updates and deficiencies in the current sign regulations and legal compliance issues, which should be addressed in the update. 2. Conduct outreach to groups such as business owners, sign contractors, developers, and neighborhood groups to obtain feedback on necessary improvements. 3. Review best examples of recently adopted sign regulations in other jurisdictions including any award winning or formally recognized documents as background for working draft. 4. Provide initial recommendations to format, content, graphics, and other updates based on outreach and staff feedback with consideration of relevant case law and legal requirements (i.e. time, place, manner). Initial recommendations should include revisions to standards which enhance the aesthetic quality and compatibility with the City’s built and natural environment. 5. In addition to form and content, the regulations should consider review process and streamlining of the review process for proposed signs which clearly meet the intent and standards of the regulations. The regulations should be clear on the level of review required for any proposed exceptions or sign types which are identified as requiring advisory body review (i.e. Cultural Heritage Committee or Architectural Review Commission). 6. Provide “working” drafts for continued staff and consultant refinement and for continued outreach to interested stakeholders previously identified. 7. Provide a complete draft hearing document with graphics, tables, and final format layout for Planning Commission and City Council review. 8. Create a final document ready for print and web publishing. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW No environmental review is required to request consultant assistance. The actual update of the Sign Regulations is a project under the California Environmental Quality Act and City staff will prepare the appropriate environmental review document as part of the update process. FISCAL IMPACT The total project cost is expected to be $50,000. Funding was identified and prioritized for this effort as part of the City Manager’s review of fiscal year 2013-2014 carryover funds. ALTERNATIVES 1. Provide direction regarding an amended scope of work and continue authorization of the RFP. 2. Continue consideration of the workscope and RFP with direction to staff on necessary changes. C3-2 Sign Regulations Update - Request for Proposal Page 3 ATTACHMENT 1. Request for Proposal for consultant assistance T:\Council Agenda Reports\2015\2015-05-19\Sign Regulations Update RFP (Johnson-Leveille)\Sign Regulations RFP-CAR.docx C3-3 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to including disabled persons in all of our services, programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7410. 990 Palm Street  San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Notice Requesting Proposals for Updates to the City’s Sign Regulations The City of San Luis Obispo is requesting sealed proposals for consultant assistance to prepare updates to the City’s Sign Regulations pursuant to Specification No. _______. All proposals must be received by the Finance Division by _________p.m. on _______,when they will be opened publicly in the City Hall Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401. Proposals received after said time will not be considered. To guard against premature opening, each proposal shall be submitted to the Finance Division in a sealed envelope plainly marked with the proposal title, specification number, proposer name, and time and date of the proposal opening. Proposals shall be submitted using the forms provided in the specification package. Specification packages and additional information may be obtained by contacting Brian Leveille at (805) 781-7166, or via email at bleveille@slocity.org Attachment 1 C3-4 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. Specification No. TABLE OF CONTENTS A. Introduction Project Summary 1 Project Scope 2 Administration 3 Schedule 4 Detailed Work Program 5-7 B. General Terms and Conditions 9-13 Contract Award and Execution 10 Contract Performance 10-13 C. Form of Agreement 14-15 D. Insurance Requirements 16-17 E. Proposal Submittal Forms 18 References 19 Past Contract Disqualifications 20 Attachment 1 C3-5 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. _____ -1- Section A INTRODUCTION 1. PROJECT SUMMARY The City of San Luis Obispo is seeking proposals from qualified consulting firms to guide a comprehensive update to the City’s Sign Regulations. The purpose of the update is to provide regulations which result in sign installations consistent with community expectations; that are compatible with the built environment; and, that eliminate the potential for visual blight from incompatible sign installations. The updated sign regulations also should include clear and concise regulations and graphics which are “user friendly” for business owners, developers, contractors, and City staff. Existing regulation sections to be updated include size, placement, height, number of signs allowed, allowed illumination and materials, sign types, review procedures, and exempt and prohibited sign types. The existing Sign Regulations provide standards for each Zoning District. Options for updated regulations may include amendments to establish regulations based on the character of development or specific requirements that should be applied based on the subject property’s location within a historic district or specific plan. The consultant should provide recommendations for the comprehensive update based on best practices in other communities, compliance with current state and federal constitutional and case law, and in consideration of input from the public and staff. The Regulations should be updated to be responsive to current state and federal regulations and any recent case law. The consultant services are intended to lead the effort with staff support in producing an updated Sign Ordinance. City staff will assist on organizing outreach efforts with community stakeholders such as business owners, sign contractors, developers, business associations (i.e. Chamber and Downtown Association) and local neighborhood groups. The consultant will prepare and present PowerPoint presentations when required for outreach efforts with larger stakeholder groups such as the Chamber of Commerce and Downtown Association. The consultant will produce a web-ready and PDF version of the final document including graphics, figures, and tables to ensure the document is “user friendly”. The Consultant will provide a draft update document for environmental and hearing review and a final “proof” copy ready for final document publishing at the conclusion of the project. Staff will assist with preparation of documents for public hearing review such as staff reports and legislative draft ordinance documents. The Consultant will attend up to 4 hearings for draft document review and adoption, including presentations and availability to answer questions. Please see the project scope discussion and detailed work program sections below for more information. Attachment 1 C3-6 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. -2- 2. PROJECT SCOPE NEED: Comprehensive update of existing sign regulations. Budget = $50,000 ACTIVITIES/TASKS: Work with staff and stakeholders to develop updated sign regulations which are clear and concise, and which reflect community values of architectural compatibility and preservation of the natural setting of San Luis Obispo and character of the human environment by accomplishing the following tasks: The activities/tasks include the following: 1. Consult with staff and the community on needed updates and deficiencies in the current sign regulations which should be addressed in the update. 2. Conduct outreach to stakeholder groups such as business owners, sign contractors, developers, and neighborhood groups to obtain feedback on necessary improvements. 3. Review and recommend best practices and examples of recently adopted sign regulations in other jurisdictions including any award winning or formally recognized documents as background for preparing a working draft. 4. Provide initial recommendations to format, content, graphics, and other updates based on outreach and staff feedback. Initial recommendations should include revisions to standards which enhance the aesthetic quality and compatibility with the City’s built and natural environment. 5. Review and recommend best practices necessary to ensure legal enforceability, with consideration of relevant case law and state and federal constitutional requirements. 6. In addition to form and content, the regulations should consider review process and streamlining of the review process for proposed signs which clearly meet the intent and standards of the regulations. The regulations should be clear on the level of review required for any proposed exceptions or sign types which are identified as requiring advisory body review (i.e. Cultural Heritage Committee or Architectural Review Commission). 7. Provide “working” drafts for continued staff and consultant refinement and for continued outreach to interested stakeholders previously identified. 8. Provide a complete legislative draft hearing document with graphics, tables, and final format layout for City Council review. 9. Create a final document ready for print and web publishing. The selected consultant will be responsible for drafting the revised regulations and should include assumptions made for each activity that may impact cost. SIGN REGULATIONS BACKGROUND Attachment 1 C3-7 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. -3- To view the existing Sign Regulations, please see the city website for more information: http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=4306 To view the existing Sign Regulations in the Municipal Code format, please reference Chapter 15.40, Sign Regulations. http://www.codepublishing.com/ca/sanluisobispo/ DELIVERABLES: The final product is a legislative draft document & final document ready for publishing completed with City staff assistance as discussed above and in the detailed work program. 3. ADMINISTRATION PERSONNEL: Brian Leveille, Senior Planner with the Community Development Department Long Range Planning Division is the project lead and will be assisted by Development Review Division Planning staff. The Sign Regulations comprise Chapter 15 of the City’s Municipal Code. Amendments to the Municipal Code require ordinance introduction and final adoption by the City Council. The City Council consists of 5 elected officials. Attachment 1 C3-8 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. -4- SCHEDULE: Table 1 ACTIVITY CONSULTANT CITY SCHEDULE Planning staff prepares Request for Proposals (RFP) X May 2015 RFP sent to qualified consultants/Legal Ad X May 29, 2015 Responses due X June 26, 2015 City response to consultants regarding whether submittal will be considered through subsequent interview X July 10, 2015 Interview consultants (If needed) X X July 22, 2015 Select consultant and enter into contract X August 5, 2015 Initial kick-off meeting with staff team X X Mid-August, 2015 Public outreach/and consult with staff on needed updates X X late August through October, 2015 Background research, recommended updates (case studies) X late August through October, 2015 Prepare rough draft Sign regulations X November, 2015 Provide internal review to verify subject matter is covered & revise draft as needed. X X December, 2015 Environmental Review Document (CEQA) prepared by staff X December, 2015 Second public outreach effort. meetings, outreach, website X X December, 2015 & January, 2016 Review by advisory bodies (CHC & ARC) X X January & February 2016 Prepare hearing draft X February & Mid-March 2016 Public Hearing, City Council X X May 2016 Create Final products and deliver to City X June 2016 Publish final Document X June 2016 Attachment 1 C3-9 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. _____ -5- Sign Regulations Update Detailed Work Program Consultant to add detailed costs associated with each Task in section F above. High Level Activities/Milestones Responsible Parties Schedule of Deliverables TASK 1. PROGRAM INITIATION Sub-Task A Initiate Program Kick Off Meeting, highlight areas for document update, set goals, establish project schedule in Microsoft Project or Visio City staff and consultants Mid-August, 2015 Phase Deliverables: • Detailed project schedule • Project outline subsequent tasks TASK 2. OUTREACH Sub-Task A Outreach Consult with City staff on needed updates and improvements needed to current regulations. Conduct outreach efforts to stakeholder groups such as business owners, sign contractors, developers, neighborhood groups, etc. Sub-Task B Compile list of feedback and evaluate potential for update in regulations Consultant to lead with City staff support Consultant to lead with City staff support Consultant to lead with City staff support late August-October 2015 Phase Products: • Review markups of the existing regulations with staff comments, and meet with City staff. • Outreach meetings (developers, engineers, surveyors, neighborhood groups) • Compile list of updates to be considered and include in working draft update document for further evaluation. TASK 3. PREPARE DRAFT REGULATIONS Sub-Task A Prepare a set of draft regulations based on staff comments, outreach feedback, examples of recently adopted regulations in other jurisdictions Consultant November, 2015 Phase Products: • Rough Draft of Regulations for further internal review and possible revisions. Attachment 1 C3-10 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. -6- High Level Activities/Milestones Responsible Parties Schedule of Deliverables as identified in tasks 1-5 above. Task 4. CEQA Sub-Task A Prepare Initial Study City Staff December 2015 • Initial Study Document/Negative Declaration Task 5. Second Public Outreach Effort Sub-Task A Conduct follow up meetings based on feedback and draft updates included in rough draft regulations. Review of draft regulations by Cultural Heritage Committee and Architectural Review Commission. Sub-Task B Record and compile feedback and evaluate for potential inclusion in final hearing drafts Consultant to lead with City staff support Consultant to lead with City staff support Consultant to lead with City staff support December 2015 - February 2016 Phase Products: • Outreach meetings with (developers, engineers, surveyors, neighborhood groups). • Staff report, presentation, follow up work after meetings • Compile additional feedback for further internal evaluation and consideration in final hearing drafts. Task 6. Prepare Hearing Draft of Regulations Update Sub-Task A Prepare final legislative draft for staff review (Administrative Draft) Consultant Mid February 2016 & mid-March 2016 • Administrative Draft Attachment 1 C3-11 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. -7- High Level Activities/Milestones Responsible Parties Schedule of Deliverables Task 7. Final Documents and Adoption Sub-Task A Final hearing draft for City Council Sub-Task B City Council hearing document preparation City Council hearing Consultant Consultant lead with City staff support Consultant lead with City staff support April-May 2016 • Final legislative draft in print and electronic versions • Staff Reports with attachments, final resolutions, ordinance, and presentation preparation • Hearing attendance with Powerpoint presentation and availability for questions Task 8. Publish final document Sub-Task A Create final products and deliver to City Sub-Task B Publish final document Consultant City Staff June 2016 • Final print and web ready documents • Final print copies and web publishing Attachment 1 C3-12 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. -8- AVAILABLE RESOURCES City documents include: Document Location General Plan http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-development/planning-zoning/general-plan (Land Use, Circulation, Noise, Safety, Water and Wastewater, Conservation and Open Space, Housing, and Parks and Recreation Elements) New General Plan update: http://www.slo2035.com/ Zoning Regulations http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=5861 Community Design Guidelines http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=2104 City of San Luis Obispo Municipal code http://www.codepublishing.com/ca/sanluisobispo/ Land Use Element Map http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-development/planning-zoning/general-plan Attachment 1 C3-13 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. -9- Section B GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS (the legal stuff) PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS 1. Requirement to Meet All Provisions. Each individual or firm submitting a proposal (proposer) shall meet all of the terms, and conditions of the Request for Proposals (RFP) specifications package. By virtue of its proposal submittal, the proposer acknowledges agreement with and acceptance of all provisions of the RFP specifications. 2. Proposal Submittal. Each proposal must be submitted on the form(s) provided in the specifications and accompanied by any other required submittals or supplemental materials. Proposal documents shall be enclosed in an envelope that shall be sealed and addressed to the Department of Finance, City of San Luis Obispo, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401. In order to guard against premature opening, the proposal should be clearly labeled with the proposal title, specification number, name of proposer, and date and time of proposal opening. No FAX submittals will be accepted. 3. Insurance Certificate. Each proposal must include a certificate of insurance showing: a. The insurance carrier and its A.M. Best rating. b. Scope of coverage and limits. c. Deductibles and self-insured retention. The purpose of this submittal is to generally assess the adequacy of the proposer’s insurance coverage during proposal evaluation; as discussed under paragraph 12 below, endorsements are not required until contract award. The City’s insurance requirements are detailed in Section E. 4. Proposal Quotes and Unit Price Extensions. The extensions of unit prices for the quantities indicated and the lump sum prices quoted by the proposer must be entered in figures in the spaces provided on the Proposal Submittal Form(s). Any lump sum bid shall be stated in figures. The Proposal Submittal Form(s) must be totally completed. If the unit price and the total amount stated by any proposer for any item are not in agreement, the unit price alone will be considered as representing the proposer's intention and the proposal total will be corrected to conform to the specified unit price. 5. Proposal Withdrawal and Opening. A proposer may withdraw its proposal, without prejudice prior to the time specified for the proposal opening, by submitting a written request to the Director of Finance for its withdrawal, in which event the proposal will be returned to the proposer unopened. No proposal received after the time specified or at any place other than that stated in the "Notice Inviting Bids/Requesting Proposals" will be considered. All proposals will be opened and declared publicly. Proposers or their representatives are invited to be present at the opening of the proposals. 6. Submittal of One Proposal Only. No individual or business entity of any kind shall be allowed to make or file, or to be interested in more than one proposal, except an alternative proposal when specifically requested; however, an individual or business entity that has submitted a sub-proposal to a proposer submitting a proposal, or who has Attachment 1 C3-14 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. -10- quoted prices on materials to such proposer, is not thereby disqualified from submitting a sub-proposal or from quoting prices to other proposers submitting proposals. 7. Cooperative Purchasing. During the term of the contract, the successful proposer will extend all terms and conditions to any other local governmental agencies upon their request. These agencies will issue their own purchase orders, will directly receive goods or services at their place of business and will be directly billed by the successful proposer. 8. Communications. All timely requests for information submitted in writing will receive a written response from the City. Telephone communications with City staff are not encouraged, but will be permitted. However, any such oral communication shall not be binding on the City. CONTRACT AWARD AND EXECUTION 9. Proposal Retention and Award. The City reserves the right to retain all proposals for a period of 60 days for examination and comparison. The City also reserves the right to waive non-substantial irregularities in any proposal, to reject any or all proposals, to reject or delete one part of a proposal and accept the other, except to the extent that proposals are qualified by specific limitations. See the "special terms and conditions" in Section C of these specifications for proposal evaluation and contract award criteria. 10. Competency and Responsibility of Proposer. The City reserves full discretion to determine the competence and responsibility, professionally and/or financially, of proposers. Proposers will provide, in a timely manner, all information that the City deems necessary to make such a decision. 11. Contract Requirement. The proposer to whom award is made (Contractor) shall execute a written contract with the City within ten (10) calendar days after notice of the award has been sent by mail to it at the address given in its proposal. The contract shall be made in the form adopted by the City and incorporated in these specifications. 12. Insurance Requirements. The Contractor shall provide proof of insurance in the form, coverages and amounts specified in Section D of these specifications within 10 (ten) calendar days after notice of contract award as a precondition to contract execution. 13. Business License & Tax. The Contractor must have a valid City of San Luis Obispo business license and tax certificate before execution of the contract. Additional information regarding the City's business license and tax program may be obtained by calling (805) 781-7134. CONTRACT PERFORMANCE 14. Ability to Perform. The Contractor warrants that it possesses, or has arranged through subcontracts, all capital and other equipment, labor, materials, and licenses necessary to carry out and complete the work hereunder in compliance with any and all federal, state, county, city, and special district laws, ordinances, and regulations. 15. Laws to be Observed. The Contractor shall keep itself fully informed of and shall observe and comply with all applicable state and federal laws and county and City of Attachment 1 C3-15 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. -11- San Luis Obispo ordinances, regulations and adopted codes during its performance of the work. 16. Payment of Taxes. The contract prices shall include full compensation for all taxes that the Contractor is required to pay. 17. Permits and Licenses. The Contractor shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices necessary. 18. Safety Provisions. The Contractor shall conform to the rules and regulations pertaining to safety established by OSHA and the California Division of Industrial Safety. 19. Public and Employee Safety. Whenever the Contractor's operations create a condition hazardous to the public or City employees, it shall, at its expense and without cost to the City, furnish, erect and maintain such fences, temporary railings, barricades, lights, signs and other devices and take such other protective measures as are necessary to prevent accidents or damage or injury to the public and employees. 20. Preservation of City Property. The Contractor shall provide and install suitable safeguards, approved by the City, to protect City property from injury or damage. If City property is injured or damaged resulting from the Contractor's operations, it shall be replaced or restored at the Contractor's expense. The facilities shall be replaced or restored to a condition as good as when the Contractor began work. 21. Immigration Act of 1986. The Contractor warrants on behalf of itself and all subcontractors engaged for the performance of this work that only persons authorized to work in the United States pursuant to the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 and other applicable laws shall be employed in the performance of the work hereunder. 22. Contractor Non-Discrimination. In the performance of this work, the Contractor agrees that it will not engage in, nor permit such subcontractors as it may employ, to engage in discrimination in employment of persons because of age, race, color, sex, national origin or ancestry, sexual orientation, or religion of such persons. 23. Work Delays. Should the Contractor be obstructed or delayed in the work required to be done hereunder by changes in the work or by any default, act, or omission of the City, or by strikes, fire, earthquake, or any other Act of God, or by the inability to obtain materials, equipment, or labor due to federal government restrictions arising out of defense or war programs, then the time of completion may, at the City's sole option, be extended for such periods as may be agreed upon by the City and the Contractor. In the event that there is insufficient time to grant such extensions prior to the completion date of the contract, the City may, at the time of acceptance of the work, waive liquidated damages that may have accrued for failure to complete on time, due to any of the above, after hearing evidence as to the reasons for such delay, and making a finding as to the causes of same. 24. Payment Terms. The City's payment terms are 30 days from the receipt of an original invoice and acceptance by the City of the materials, supplies, equipment or services provided by the Contractor (Net 30). In accordance with the Grant Guidelines, fifteen percent (15%) of the amounts submitted for reimbursement will be withheld and issued as a final payment upon agreement completion, at the sole discretion of the state. All Attachment 1 C3-16 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. -12- expenditures must be itemized on the invoice form. For each expenditure of $500 or more, copies of supporting documentation (time sheets, payroll stubs, receipts, etc.) must be submitted with the invoice. 25. Inspection. The Contractor shall furnish City with every reasonable opportunity for City to ascertain that the services of the Contractor are being performed in accordance with the requirements and intentions of this contract. All work done and all materials furnished, if any, shall be subject to the City's inspection and approval. The inspection of such work shall not relieve Contractor of any of its obligations to fulfill its contract requirements. 26. Audit. The City shall have the option of inspecting and/or auditing all records and other written materials used by Contractor in preparing its invoices to City as a condition precedent to any payment to Contractor. 27. Interests of Contractor. The Contractor covenants that it presently has no interest, and shall not acquire any interest—direct, indirect or otherwise—that would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the work hereunder. The Contractor further covenants that, in the performance of this work, no subcontractor or person having such an interest shall be employed. The Contractor certifies that no one who has or will have any financial interest in performing this work is an officer or employee of the City. It is hereby expressly agreed that, in the performance of the work hereunder, the Contractor shall at all times be deemed an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the City. 28. Hold Harmless and Indemnification. The Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold the City and its agents, officers and employees harmless from and against any and all claims asserted or liability established for damages or injuries to any person or property, including injury to the Contractor's employees, agents or officers that arise from or are connected with or are caused or claimed to be caused by the acts or omissions of the Contractor, and its agents, officers or employees, in performing the work or services herein, and all expenses of investigating and defending against same; provided, however, that the Contractor's duty to indemnify and hold harmless shall not include any claims or liability arising from the established sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City, its agents, officers or employees. 29. Contract Assignment. The Contractor shall not assign, transfer, convey or otherwise dispose of the contract, or its right, title or interest, or its power to execute such a contract to any individual or business entity of any kind without the previous written consent of the City. 30. Termination. If, during the term of the contract, the City determines that the Contractor is not faithfully abiding by any term or condition contained herein, the City may notify the Contractor in writing of such defect or failure to perform. This notice must give the Contractor a 10 (ten) calendar day notice of time thereafter in which to perform said work or cure the deficiency. If the Contractor has not performed the work or cured the deficiency within the ten days specified in the notice, such shall constitute a breach of the contract and the City may terminate the contract immediately by written notice to the Contractor to said effect. Attachment 1 C3-17 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. -13- Thereafter, neither party shall have any further duties, obligations, responsibilities, or rights under the contract except, however, any and all obligations of the Contractor's surety shall remain in full force and effect, and shall not be extinguished, reduced, or in any manner waived by the termination thereof. In said event, the Contractor shall be entitled to the reasonable value of its services performed from the beginning date in which the breach occurs up to the day it received the City's Notice of Termination, minus any offset from such payment representing the City's damages from such breach. "Reasonable value" includes fees or charges for goods or services as of the last milestone or task satisfactorily delivered or completed by the Contractor as may be set forth in the Agreement payment schedule; compensation for any other work, services or goods performed or provided by the Contractor shall be based solely on the City's assessment of the value of the work-in-progress in completing the overall work scope. The City reserves the right to delay any such payment until completion or confirmed abandonment of the project, as may be determined in the City's sole discretion, so as to permit a full and complete accounting of costs. In no event, however, shall the Contractor be entitled to receive in excess of the compensation quoted in its proposal. The City also may terminate this contract at any time by giving the Contractor written notice of such termination. Immediately upon receipt of notice of termination, Contractor shall discontinue work on the project and incur no further obligations or expenses. Contractor shall be paid the percentage of the total cost that corresponds to the percentage of the document(s) that are satisfactorily completed prior to the Contractor’s receipt of said termination. Attachment 1 C3-18 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. -14- Section C FORM OF AGREEMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on [day, date, year] by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as City, and [CONTRACTOR’S NAME IN CAPITAL LETTERS], hereinafter referred to as Contractor. W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, on [date], City requested proposals for an update to the Sign Regulations and preparation of Environmental Initial Study, per Specification No. _________ (project); and WHEREAS, pursuant to said request, Contractor submitted a proposal that was accepted by City for said project; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations and covenants hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date this Agreement is made and entered, as first written above, until acceptance or completion of said project. 2. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE. City Specification No. ________ and Contractor's proposal dated [date], are hereby incorporated in and made a part of this Agreement. 3. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS. For providing the services as specified in this Agreement, City will pay and Contractor shall receive therefore compensation in a total sum not to exceed [$ .00. 4. CONTRACTOR'S OBLIGATIONS. For and in consideration of the payments and agreements hereinbefore mentioned to be made and performed by City, Contractor agrees with City to do everything required by this Agreement and the said specification as described in Exhibit [ ] attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement and to comply with the terms set forth in Exhibits B, C and E attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement. 5. AMENDMENTS. Any amendment, modification or variation from the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be effective only upon approval by the City Manager of the City. Attachment 1 C3-19 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. -15- 6. COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This written Agreement, including all writings specifically incorporated herein by reference, shall constitute the complete agreement between the parties hereto. No oral agreement, understanding or representation not reduced to writing and specifically incorporated herein shall be of any force or effect, nor shall any such oral agreement, understanding or representation be binding upon the parties hereto. 7. NOTICE. All written notices to the parties hereto shall be sent by United States mail, postage prepaid by registered or certified mail addressed as follows: City City Clerk City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Contractor Name Address 8. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT. Both City and Contractor do covenant that each individual executing this agreement on behalf of each party is a person duly authorized and empowered to execute Agreements for such party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day and year first above written. ATTEST: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ________________________________ By:_____________________________________ City Clerk City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONTRACTOR ________________________________ By: _____________________________________ City Attorney Attachment 1 C3-20 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. -16- Section D INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS: Environmental Contractors and Consultants Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. General Liability, Errors and Omissions should be maintained for a minimum of five (5) years after contract completion. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001 or Claims Made Form CG 0002). 2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto), or code 8, 9 if no owned autos. 3. Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits no less than: 1. General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. 2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 each accident, $1,000,000 policy limit bodily injury by disease, $1,000,000 each employee bodily injury by disease. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the Entity. Other Insurance Provisions. The following insurance provisions shall also apply: 1. The general liability, automobile liability and/or errors & omissions policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: a. The City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor;, or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the Entity, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. Note: Automobile and/or Errors and Omissions insurance carriers may not name the City as Additional Insured. If the City cannot be named as Additional Insured, a letter from the insurance company confirming their position required. b. For any claims related to this project, the Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. Attachment 1 C3-21 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. -17- c. The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. d. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled by either party except after thirty (30) days prior written notice has been given to the City. 2. If General Liability and/or Errors & Omissions coverages are written on a Claims Made Form: a. The "Retro Date" must be shown, and must be before the date of the contract or the beginning of contract work. b. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract or work. c. If the coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims made policy form with a "Retro Date" prior to the contract effective date, the Contractor must purchase "extended reporting" coverage for a minimum of five years after completion of the contract or work. d. A copy of the claims reporting requirements must be submitted to the City for review. 3. The workers compensation policy shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII. Verification of Coverage. Contractor shall furnish the City with certified copies of endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City, unless the insurance company will not use the City's form. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the City's forms, the Contractor's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements affecting the coverage required by these specifications. Subcontractors. Contractor shall include all subcontractors as insured under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein. Attachment 1 C3-22 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. -18- Section E Proposal Submittal Forms: Contractors and Consultants The undersigned declares that she or he has carefully examined Specification No. ______, including the description of the work program which is hereby made a part of this proposal; is thoroughly familiar with its contents; is authorized to represent the proposing firm; and agrees to perform the specified work for the following cost quoted in full: Description 2015-16 Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 Task 5 Task 6 Task 7 Task 8 Other Costs (please specify) TOTAL $  Certificate of insurance attached; insurance company’s A.M. Best rating: __________________. Firm Name and Address Contact Phone Signature of Authorized Representative Date Attachment 1 C3-23 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. -19- REFERENCES Number of years engaged in providing the services included within the scope of the specifications under the present business name: . Describe fully the last three contracts performed by your firm that demonstrate your ability to provide the services included with the scope of the specifications. Attach additional pages if required. The City reserves the right to contact each of the references listed for additional information regarding your firm's qualifications. Reference No. 1 Customer Name Contact Individual Telephone & FAX number Street Address City, State, Zip Code Description of services provided including contract amount, when provided and project outcome Reference No. 2 Customer Name Contact Individual Telephone & FAX number Street Address City, State, Zip Code Description of services provided including contract amount, when provided and project outcome Reference No. 3 Customer Name Contact Individual Telephone & FAX number Street Address City, State, Zip Code Description of services provided including contract amount, when provided and project outcome Attachment 1 C3-24 City of San Luis Obispo Specification No. -20- STATEMENT OF PAST CONTRACT DISQUALIFICATIONS The proposer shall state whether it or any of its officers or employees who have a proprietary interest in it, has ever been disqualified, removed, or otherwise prevented from bidding on, or completing a federal, state, or local government project because of the violation of law, a safety regulation, or for any other reason, including but not limited to financial difficulties, project delays, or disputes regarding work or product quality, and if so to explain the circumstances.  Do you have any disqualification as described in the above paragraph to declare? Yes  No   If yes, explain the circumstances. Executed on at _______________________________________ under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing is true and correct. ______________________________________ Signature of Authorized Proposer Representative Attachment 1 C3-25 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Carrie Mattingly, Utilities Director Prepared By: Dave Hix, Deputy Director Wastewater Division Brigitte Elke, Utilities Business Manager SUBJECT: INDUSTRIAL USER PERMIT FEE RECOMMENDATION Adopt a Resolution changing the billing of the industrial user permit fee. DISCUSSION Background In 1982, the City of San Luis Obispo established a federally mandated pretreatment program for monitoring and control of industrial users discharging waste into the City’s wastewater collection and treatment systems. The Code of Federal Regulations also required the City to have sufficient resources (funding and personnel) to carry out the requirements of the program. In 1991, the City Council approved Resolution 6981 (1991 Series) setting forth the permit fees for the industrial users and pretreatment program. In its deliberation, the City Council approved fees that recover the costs directly attributable to the program. The program involves one to four inspections per year depending on industry class, as follows: • Significant and Federal categorical industries at four inspections per year. • Class 1 Industries such as gas stations at two inspections per year. • Class 2 Industries such as restaurants at one inspection per year. At the same time, the City Council enacted cost recovery for follow-up inspections for noncompliance and/or violations and decided to collect the permit fee through utility billing. Until 2007, the City’s utility bills were sent every other month, dividing the fee into six incremental payments. Current Situation The same industrial user fee categories apply today as adopted in 1991. Roughly 300 industrial users are inspected each year. In 2007, the City began monthly billing of water and sewer services, generating twelve utility bills per year. Industrial users who do not have a water and sewer account are invoiced the permit fee only in twelve monthly increments. Currently, this applies to 95 industrial users (31% of accounts). 5-19-15 C4 C4-1 Industrial User Fees Page 2 Fee Categories and Permit Cost (2014 Fee Schedule) User Category Number of Users Current Permit Cost Monthly Payment S& F Class 4 $1,611 $134.25 Class 1 127 $ 309 $ 25.75 Class 2 170 $ 166 $ 13.83 The fee is increased annually with the applicable consumer price index with the City’s fee schedule. Over the past few years, it has become apparent, that the collection of the fee with the utility bill is problematic. With twelve annual payments, it is difficult to determine when a customer is delinquent and in violation of the permit requirements. Cases surfaced where customers have never paid the fee in totality or at all, yet have been permitted as payment status was not concluded. Coordination of non-compliance is made difficult in addition to the administrative burden produced by the monthly billing of the fee. Additionally, the invoicing through utility billing is problematic in cases such as: - Accounts set up under a property owner with only one shop needing pre-treatment inspection such as shopping malls with one restaurant. - Accounts without water and sewer services. - Tenant changes mid-term that no longer require inspection. Recommendation Staff from Environmental Compliance, Finance and IT, and the Attorney’s Office met to discuss the issues to find a way to better coordinate permitting efforts and fee payments. Based on these deliberations, staff recommends invoicing the Industrial User fee at the same time as business license and fire permits in order to streamline enforcement and collection of the fees. Invoicing the permit once a year instead of 12 monthly installments will allow for a clear date when the fee is due, subsequently delinquent, and then when follow-up inspection and enforcement are warranted. Staff will notify Industrial Users of the recommended change in billing. To ensure the fees recover the costs identified in the 1991 resolution for providing this mandatory service, staff will return during the Sewer Fund review with appropriate recommendations regarding the applicable fees for each industry class to achieve the cost recovery objective. CONCURRENCES The Finance and IT Department has been an integral part of the review of the program and concurs with the recommendation in this report. C4-2 Industrial User Fees Page 3 FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this change. The change will generate administrative savings as only one invoice will be produced annually. There might be a slight increase in penalty and non-compliance fees, as non-payment can be monitored and enforced more readily. ALTERNATIVES The Council could decide to leave the program as is and continue the current invoice practices. This is not recommended as violators are difficult to track and are often times permitted without paying the appropriate permit fees. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 6981 (1991 Series) 2. Staff report – May 21, 1991 3. Amended Resolution T:\Council Agenda Reports\2015\2015-05-19\Industrial User Permit Fees\Council Agenda Report.docx C4-3 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ATTACHMENT 1 C4-4 ATTACHMENT 1 C4-5 ATTACHMENT 2 C4-6 ATTACHMENT 2 C4-7 ATTACHMENT 2 C4-8 ATTACHMENT 2 C4-9 ATTACHMENT 2 C4-10 ATTACHMENT 2 C4-11 ATTACHMENT 2 C4-12 ATTACHMENT 2 C4-13 ATTACHMENT 2 C4-14 ATTACHMENT 2 C4-15 R ______ RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2015 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO REQUIRING ANNUAL PREPAYMENT OF INDUSTRIAL USERS PERMIT FEES FOR THE CITY WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND TREATMENT SYSTEMS WHEREAS, in 1982, the City established a wastewater pretreatment program compliant with State and Federal requirements as defined in Part 403 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR); and WHEREAS, Resolution 6981 (1991 Series) established the permit fees for each class of industrial users and the collection of said fees; and WHEREAS, the City previously prorated the permit fees and included the amount in the bimonthly utility bills; and WHEREAS, the change in Utility Billing practices to monthly billing has made the industrial user fee collection costly, administratively cumbersome and the permit process difficult to enforce; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that changing to an annual billing for the industrial user permit fee would be more efficient and improve the permit process. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that the annual industrial user permit fees as established by Resolution No. 6981 (1991 Series) shall be due and payable on July 1st of each year and shall be billed on an annual basis. Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2015. ____________________________________ Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: ____________________________________ ATTACHMENT 3 C4-16 Resolution No. _____ (2015 Series) Attachment 3 Page 2 Anthony Mejia City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney C4-17 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director Prepared By: Hal Hannula, Supervising Civil Engineer Diane Dostalek, Engineering Consultant SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF THE FINAL MAP FOR TRACT 2977 UNIT 3, 851 HUMBERT AVENUE (TR 27-06) RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution approving the Final Map for Tract 2977 Unit 3, 851 Humbert Avenue, and authorize the Mayor to execute a Subdivision Agreement. DISCUSSION Background Tract 2977 (TR 27-06) is located at 851 Humbert Avenue (Attachment 1). A vesting tentative map for Tract 2977 was approved by the City Council on March 17, 2009, by Resolution No. 10066 (Series 2009) (Attachment 2). The vesting tentative map (Attachment 3) approved an 84-lot subdivision, including 83 lots created for development purposes and one lot for a common area. The subdivision, commonly known as the Moylan Terrace project, is an affordable housing project by the Housing Authority of the City of San Luis Obispo (HASLO). The City contributed approximately $600,000 of Affordable Housing funds to the Moylan Terrace project. Pursuant to Section 66456.1 of the Subdivision Map Act, HASLO informed the City of San Luis Obispo of its intention to file multiple final maps on the one Tract 2977 tentative map. The number and configuration of the proposed multiple final maps was not defined with the tentative map. The first final map, Unit 1, was approved by Council on March 19, 2013. The subdivision improvements associated with the Unit 1 map are shown as “Phase 1” on the approved Public Improvement Plans (PIP’s) and include construction of Lawrence Drive and Victoria Avenue. The second final map, Unit 2, was approved by Council on November 19, 2013. The subdivision improvements associated with the Unit 2 map consist of “Phases 2 & 3” as shown on the approved PIP’s and include construction of the Humbert Avenue cul-de-sac. The Unit 3 final map consists of 24 residential lots, one lot for common area, and one remainder lot to be subdivided in future phases. The subdivision improvements associated with the Unit 3 map consist of “Phases 4 & 5” as shown on the approved PIP’s and include on-site improvements only. Approving the Final Map The tentative map has an initial two-year life per Municipal Code Section 16.10.150. With the automatic extensions granted by the State Legislature per Sections 66452.22, 66452.23, and 66452.24 of the Subdivision Map Act, this vesting tentative map now has an expiration date of March 7, 2017. Filing of multiple final maps does not extend the life of the tentative map unless off-site improvements of a certain value are constructed in accordance with Section 66452.6 of May 19, 2015 C5 C5-1 APPROVAL OF THE FINAL MAP FOR TRACT 2977 UNIT 3, 851 HUMBERT (TR 27-06) Page 2 the Subdivision Map Act. There are no off-site improvements required with Tract 2977. The subdivider is allowed up to three additional years of time extensions per Municipal Code Section 16.10.155. Barring any further extensions granted by the State Legislature, and assuming the subdivider applies for and is granted the three years of time extensions allowed by the City, the tentative map has an ultimate expiration date of March 7, 2020. All phases of the final map must be filed by that time; otherwise a new tentative map will need to be processed by the subdivider. Since the number and configuration of the multiple final maps was not defined with the tentative map, the City has the authority to impose additional reasonable conditions related to the phasing of the map. No additional conditions are recommended with Unit 3 of the map, but the City has the right to impose reasonable conditions upon filing of the future phases of the map. The tentative map approved one lot for a common area. The phasing of the final map has created a situation where the common lot will be created in phases instead of the one single lot originally approved. Since each phase of the map is creating a new common lot, this results in more common lots than what was originally approved with the tentative map. Language has been added to the Unit 2 and Unit 3 maps, and will also be added to the future phases of the map, indicating that these common lots are all considered a single unit and cannot be conveyed separately. The multiple common lots will then function as a single lot, so as not to exceed the total number of lots approved with the tentative map. The final map for Unit 3 is ready to be approved and recorded. Pursuant to Section 16.14.080 of the Municipal Code, the Public Works Director has determined that the final map is in substantial compliance with the tentative map and approved modifications thereof. Section 66474.1 of the Subdivision Map Act states that “a Legislative body shall not deny approval of a final or parcel map if it has previously approved a tentative map for the proposed subdivision and if it finds that the final or parcel map is in substantial compliance with the previously approved tentative map.” The approval of a final map is considered a ministerial action. Appropriate securities have been submitted to guarantee completion of the required subdivision improvements as shown in the Subdivision Agreement (Attachment 4). The resolution approving the final map (Attachment 5) also authorizes the Mayor to sign the Subdivision Agreement requiring the Subdivider to complete the subdivision improvements. CONCURRENCES The Public Works and City Attorney Departments concur with the recommended action. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Approval of the final map is statutorily exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15268(b)(3) Ministerial Projects (approval of final subdivision maps) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (State CEQA Guidelines). Therefore, no further environmental review is required. C5-2 APPROVAL OF THE FINAL MAP FOR TRACT 2977 UNIT 3, 851 HUMBERT (TR 27-06) Page 3 FISCAL IMPACT There is no significant financial impact to the City associated with approving the final map for Tract 2977 Unit 3. The public improvements that will be constructed with this phase will result in juust a minimal increase in maintenance costs for water services upon acceptance of the improvements by the City. ALTERNATIVES Deny approval of the final map. Denying approval of the final map can apply if findings are made that the requirements or conditions of the tentative map have not been met or performed (Section 66473 of the Subdivision Map Act) or if findings are made that the final map is not in substantial compliance with the previously approved tentative map (Section 66474.1 of the Subdivision Map Act). Because the final map is in substantial compliance with the tentative map and all of the conditions of the map will be met or securities deposited prior to map recordation, Sections 66474.1 and 66473 of the Subdivision Map Act require that City Council approve the map. Therefore, denying approval of the final map is not a recommended alternative unless the required findings are made. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Resolution No. 10066 (Series 2009) 3. Vesting Tentative Map 4. Subdivision Agreement 5. Draft Resolution Approving the Final Map T:\Council Agenda Reports\2015\2015-05-19\Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 3 (Johnson-Hannula)\Council Agenda Report.docx C5-3 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK TRACT 2977 C5-4 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C5-5 C5-6 C5-7 C5-8 C5-9 C5-10 C5-11 C5-12 C5-13 C5-14 C5-15 C5-16 C5-17 C5-18 C5-19 C5-20 ATTACHMENT 4 1 SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is dated this ______ day of ___________201___ by and between MOYLAN TERRACE, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, herein referred to as "Subdivider," and the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, herein referred to as the "City." RECITALS REFERENCE IS HEREBY MADE to that certain proposed subdivision of real property in the City of San Luis Obispo, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, a description of which is shown on the Final Map of Tract No. 2977 Unit 3, City of San Luis Obispo, California, as approved by the City Council on the ____ day of ___________, 201___. The Subdivider desires that said Tract No. 2977 Unit 3 be accepted and approved as a Final Map pursuant to the Subdivision Regulations of the City of San Luis Obispo (Title 16 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code), and It is a condition of said regulations that the Subdivider agree to install the improvements as set forth on the plans therefore. TERMS AND CONDITIONS: In consideration of the foregoing, the Subdivider does hereby agree to construct and install the following subdivision improvements in accordance with said subdivision regulations, and in accordance with approved plans and specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer, City of San Luis Obispo, to wit: 1. CURB, GUTTERS AND SIDEWALKS 2. STREET BASE AND SURFACING C5-21 ATTACHMENT 4 2 3. WATER MAINS and SEWER MAINS, including sewer laterals to the property line and water services to the curb stop. 4. LANDSCAPING 5. DRAINAGE STRUCTURES 6. STREET LIGHTS 7. ELECTRIC, GAS, TELEPHONE AND CABLE TELEVISION: In addition to the inspection and approval of such facilities by the City, each public utility shall be required to file a letter stating that the developer has properly installed all facilities to be provided by him, and that the said utility is prepared to provide service to residents upon request. 8. ANY &ALL OTHER IMPROVEMENTS shown on plans or required by project approvals. All of the above facilities shall be installed in the locations designated and to the plans and specifications on file and approved by said City. The lines and grades for all of said improvements shall be established by the Subdivider in accordance with said approved plans and specifications. The Subdivider agrees that the work of installing the above improvements shall begin within thirty (30) days from the date of recording of the final map, and that the work shall be completed within twelve (12) months of said recording date, unless an extension has been granted by the City, provided that if completion of said work is delayed by acts of God or labor disputes resulting in strike action, the Subdivider shall have an additional period of time equivalent to such period of delay in which to complete such work. Any extension of time hereunder shall not operate to release the surety on the Improvement Security filed pursuant to this agreement. In this connection, the surety waives the provisions of Section 2819 of the Civil Code of the State of California. C5-22 ATTACHMENT 4 3 No building permits will be issued nor occupancy granted after the expiration date of the agreement until completion and acceptance of all public improvements unless specifically approved by the City. The Subdivider does also agree to comply with the conditions established by the Planning Commission and/or the City Council and has paid the necessary fees as indicated on the attached Exhibits 1 and 2. The restoration of lost section corners and retracement of section lines within the Subdivision shall be in accordance with Article 5, paragraph 8771 et seq., of the Professional Land Surveyors Act, Chapter 15 of the Business and Professions Code of the State of California. The Subdivider attaches hereto, as an integral part hereof, securities for the performance of this agreement, instruments of credit or bond approved by and in favor of the City of San Luis Obispo, and conditional upon the faithful performance of this agreement. Said instruments of credit or bond are in the amount of $2,346,002 for Phase 4 and $2,396,908 for Phase 5, which exceed the estimated cost of said improvements because the Subdivider required its contractor to provide a surety to Subdivider in that amount, and the City was named a dual obligee on said surety. The estimated costs of said improvements for Phase 4 are $58,000 and $263,000 for Phase 5. Subdivider agrees to remedy any defects in the improvements arising from faulty workmanship or materials or defective construction of said improvements occurring within twelve (12) months after acceptance thereof. In accordance with Sections 66499.7 and 66499.9 of the Government Code of the State of California, upon final completion and acceptance of the work, City will release all but 10% of the improvement security, that C5-23 ATTACHMENT 4 4 amount being deemed sufficient to guarantee faithful performance by the Subdivider of his obligation to remedy any defects in the improvements arising within a period of one year following the completion and acceptance thereof. Completion of the work shall be deemed to have occurred on the date which the City Council shall, by resolution duly passed and adopted, accept said improvements according to said plans and specifications, and any approved modifications thereto. Neither periodic nor progress inspections or approvals shall bind the City to accept said improvements or waive any defects in the same or any breach of this agreement. “AS-BUILT” record drawings are to be submitted within four weeks of completion of construction and prior to City acceptance of the public improvements. If the Subdivider fails to complete the work within the prescribed time, the Subdivider agrees that City may, at its option, declare the instrument of credit or bond which has been posted by Subdivider to guarantee faithful performance, forfeited and utilize the proceeds to complete said improvements, or city may complete said improvements and recover the full cost and expense thereof from the Subdivider or his surety. The Subdivider has deposited with the City labor and materials securities in the amount of $2,346,002 for Phase 4 and $2,396,908 for Phase 5, which exceeds the 50% to 100% range required by the City’s Municipal Code for the estimated cost of said improvements because the Subdivider required its contractor to provide a surety to Subdivider in that amount, and the City was named a dual obligee on said surety. C5-24 ATTACHMENT 4 5 Said Subdivider shall pay an inspection fee for City to inspect the installation of said subdivision improvements, and to verify that they have been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications. Title 16 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled "Subdivision," all plans and specifications on file with said City as a part of said Subdivision Map, and all other documents filed with the City by the Subdivider and approved by the City are hereby referred to for further particulars in interpreting and defining the obligations of the Subdivider under this agreement. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this subdivision, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review (“Indemnified Claims”). The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any Indemnified Claim upon being presented with the Indemnified Claim and City shall fully cooperate in the defense against an Indemnified Claim. It is understood and agreed by and between the Subdivider and the City hereto that this agreement shall bind the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the respective Parties to this agreement. It is agreed that the Subdivider will furnish copies of the successful bidder's contract unit prices and total bid prices for all of the improvements herein referred to. C5-25 ATTACHMENT 4 6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this agreement has been executed by: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO _______________________________ MAYOR Jan Marx SUBDIVIDER Moylan Terrace, LLC, a California limited liability company By: Housing Authority of the City of San Luis Obispo, a public agency corporate and politic, Manager ________________________________ By: David Booker, Chairman of the Board ATTEST: _______________________________ CITY CLERK Anthony Mejia APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________________ CITY ATTORNEY Christine Dietrick C5-26 ATTACHMENT 4 7 EXHIBIT 1 TRACT 2977 UNIT 3 SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT 1. The Subdivider has deposited a monumentation guarantee in the amount of $1,000 to cover the installation of survey monuments in accordance with the approved map and payment for same. Said guarantee will be released to the Subdivider upon receipt by the City of a letter from the Engineer indicating that they have completed the work and have been paid. 2. Park-in-lieu fees have been paid, as listed in the attached EXHIBIT 2. 3. Water and sewer impact fees shall be paid at time of building permits through the Community Development Department per the fee schedule in effect at that time. 4. Transportation impact fees shall be paid at time of building permits through the Community Development Department per the fee schedule in effect at that time. 5. The subdivider shall comply with all requirements of Council Resolution No. 10066 (2009 Series) approving the tentative map. C5-27 ATTACHMENT 4 8 EXHIBIT 2 TRACT 2977 UNIT 3 - FEE AND BOND LIST Amount Form Date Received Bonds and Guarantees: Faithful Performance for Phase 4 $2,346,002 Dual Obligee Rider on bond 3/19/15 Labor & Materials for Phase 4 $2,346,002 Dual Obligee Rider on bond 3/19/15 Faithful Performance for Phase 5 2,396,908 Dual Obligee Rider on bond 3/19/15 Labor & Materials for Phase 5 2,396,908 Dual Obligee Rider on bond 3/19/15 Monument Guarantee for Phases 4 and 5 $1,000 CD xxxx Fees: Map Check Fee $11,553 Check 3/20/15 Improvement Plan Check Fee Paid with Unit 1 Public Works Inspection Fee Paid with Unit 1 Fair Share Traffic Mitigation Amount $11,769 Check 3/20/15 Park In-Lieu Fee1 $62,916 Check 3/20/15 Water Impact Fee 1 To be collected with building permit Wastewater Impact Fee1 To be collected with building permit Transportation Impact Fee1 To be collected with building permit 1 All Impact Fees are adjusted annually (July 1) based on CPI. Credit given for demolished units and affordable housing units that exceed requirements. C5-28 R _____ RESOLUTION NO. (2015 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING THE FINAL MAP FOR TRACT 2977 UNIT 3 (851 HUMBERT AVENUE, TR 27-06) WHEREAS, the City Council made certain findings concerning the vesting tentative map for Tract No. 2977, as prescribed in Resolution No. 10066 (2009 Series); and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all required subdivision improvements or will submit appropriate securities to guarantee installation of the required subdivision improvements as shown on the approved plans prior to map recordation, and all fees have been received or will be received prior to map recordation, as prescribed in the Subdivision Agreement; and WHEREAS, all conditions required per said Resolution No. 10066 (2009 Series) applicable to Tract No. 2977 Unit 3 have been met prior to final recordation of the map; and WHEREAS, approval of a final map is statutorily exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15268(b)(3) Ministerial Projects (approval of final subdivision maps) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (State CEQA Guidelines). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. The final map for Tract No. 2977 Unit 3 as shown on the attached Exhibit A is found to be in substantial compliance with the tentative map. SECTION 2. The Subdivision Agreement for Tract No. 2977 Unit 3 is hereby approved. SECTION 3. Approval of the final map for Tract No. 2977 Unit 3 is hereby granted. SECTION 4. The Mayor and City staff are authorized to take action necessary to carry out the intent of this resolution. Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by ________________________, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTACHMENT 5 C5-29 Resolution No. (2015 Series) Page 2 ATTACHMENT 5 The foregoing resolution was adopted this ______ day of _______________ 2015. ________________________________ Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: ______________________________ Anthony Mejia City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney C5-30 Exhibit A C5-31 At t a c h m e n t 5 Exhibit A C5-32 At t a c h m e n t 5 Exhibit A C5-33 At t a c h m e n t 5 Exhibit A C5-34 At t a c h m e n t 5 Exhibit A C5-35 At t a c h m e n t 5 Exhibit A C5-36 At t a c h m e n t 5 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director Prepared By: Kim Murry, Deputy Community Development Director, Long Range Planning SUBJECT: PRESENTATION OF REFORMATTED GENERAL PLAN INCLUDING UPDATED ELEMENTS RECOMMENDATION Receive and file the reformatted General Plan. DISCUSSION Background On December 9, 2014, the City Council took action to approve changes to the Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE) of the General Plan. As part of the LUCE action, minor changes were also made to the Conservation and Open Space, Safety, and Noise Elements in order to ensure internal consistency between elements and to implement mitigation measures associated with the LUCE FEIR. On January 20, 2015, the Council adopted updates to the Housing Element and subsequently received certification of the element from the State Housing and Community Development Department indicating the document meets state requirements. Since six of the eight elements had some level of edits made to the documents, staff took the opportunity to reformat all of the elements of the General Plan into a uniform format. The reformatted document is being distributed to the Council, posted on the City’s web site, and copies are being made available for public review. The reformatting effort included no substantive changes. Edits to the Land Use and Circulation Elements include the changes authorized by the City Council Resolution # 10586 (2014 series) as well as minor typographical and reference corrections within the documents. Distribution of the updated General Plan marks the final step in the LUCE update process prior to implementation. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Reformatting the General plan is not a project under CEQA as defined by 15378b(5) because it involves an “administrative activity of government” which will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. Therefore, no environmental review is required. Action on the LUCE update, including changes to the Land Use, Circulation, Conservation and Open Space, Noise, and Safety Elements was informed by the Final Environmental Impact Report certified by the City Council on September 16, 2014. Action on the Housing Element was supported by a Negative Declaration of Environmental Effect adopted by the City Council on January 20, 2015. The remaining elements, Water and Wastewater, and Parks and Recreation, 5-19-2015 C C6-1 Presentation of Reformatted General Plan Page 2 have no changes to language and have been reformatted solely for consistency as part of a single document: the General Plan. ALTERNATIVES 1. Provide direction to staff regarding the reformatting General Plan and continue to a future meeting. 2. Reject the reformatting General Plan. This is not recommended: updates to elements being changed were approved through public hearing processes and only format changes have been made to the elements that were not part of a larger update. ATTACHMENTS General Plan of the City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Web Page Link AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE Each Council member will be provided a print copy of the General Plan. T:\Council Agenda Reports\2015\2015-05-19\LUCE\GP_CAR.docx C6-2 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Carrie Mattingly, Utilities Director Prepared By: David Hix, Deputy Director Utilities – Wastewater SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) FOR ENVIRONMENTAL AND PERMITTING SERVICES FOR THE WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY (WRRF) PROJECT RECOMMENDATION 1. Authorize the issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the environmental and permitting services for the WRRF project, and; 2. Authorize the City Manager to award a consultant services agreement if the selected proposal is within the estimate of $650,000 and after 2015-17 Financial Plan adoption. DISCUSSION Background The recent adoption of the revised National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for the City’s Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) has resulted in the need to upgrade wastewater treatment processes. Replacing the aged infrastructure and addressing future growth as outlined in the City’s 2035 General Plan is also required. To prepare for the project, the City’s WRRF Project Program Manager, Water Systems Consulting and their sub-consultant HDR Engineering, prepared a Draft Facilities Plan that details a preliminary scope and project description. In addition, they prepared a technical memorandum that identifies an environmental and permitting strategy for the WRRF Project (provided as an attachment to the RFP). The proposed improvements and upgrades at the WRRF require compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Satisfying the environmental review requirements is a key aspect of the WRRF project and is also necessary to move forward with securing financing. Staff has identified the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) Program as the most favorable financing for the WRRF Project. Staff met with CWSRF staff last July to discuss the project and has submitted an initial application. In order to move forward with the application process, the City must comply with the CWSRF environmental requirements, which includes “CEQA-Plus” as described below. Initiating the environmental review process is critical to maintaining the project schedule. Request for Proposal Staff is requesting authorization to solicit an RFP for environmental and permitting services for the WRRF Project. The scope of work to be performed by the environmental consultant includes May 19, 2015 C7 C7-1 RFP for EIR Prep WRRF Project Page 2 preparation of environmental documentation to comply with CEQA and the CWSRF Program. The CWSRF Program is partially funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and as such, is subject to Federal environmental regulations as well as additional “CEQA-Plus” environmental documentation and review. All applicants seeking CWSRF financing must comply with both CEQA and Federal cross-cutting regulations, including the Clean Air Act (CAA), Endangered Species Act (ESA), and the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). In addition to preparation of an environmental impact report (EIR), the consultant’s scope of work will include environmental permitting and consultations and preparation of the CWSRF Environmental Package, as outlined in the RFP. Staff plans to pursue other State and Federal grant programs in addition to the CWSRF Program to fund the WRRF Project. Depending on the funding sources, compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) may be required. The scope of this RFP includes an optional task to meet NEPA requirements if required. Once the funding sources are finalized, staff can choose to authorize this task if required. Section A of the attached RFP describes the full scope of work requested by the City.Staff will evaluate proposals according to the evaluation and consultant selection process described in the RFP. Staff anticipates executing a contract with the selected consultant this summer. FISCAL IMPACT A total of $650,000 has been identified in the 2015-17 Financial Plan, Capital Improvement Plan, Water Resource Recovery Facility Upgrade Project. This funding is expected to be adequate to support the proposed preparation of an EIR and other associated documents for the WRRF project. Funding for this request has not been approved and award of an agreement will not be authorized until Council approval of the CIP request and final adoption of the 2015-17 Financial Plan ATTACHMENT 1. Request for Proposal for Environmental and Permitting Services for the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project T:\Council Agenda Reports\2015\2015-05-19\WRRF Project EIR C7-2 City of San Luis Obispo, Community Development, 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401‐3218, 805.781.7170, slocity.org        Notice Requesting Proposals for Environmental and Permitting Services  for the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project  Specification No. 91359      The City of San Luis Obispo is requesting sealed proposals to provide professional environmental  and permitting services for the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) Project. The WRRF Project  represents a significant community investment and will help the City implement its long‐term  strategy for resource management.    The proposed improvements and upgrades at the WRRF require compliance with the California  Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).  The City plans to utilize the Clean Water State Revolving Fund  (CWSRF) Program to finance the proposed improvements and upgrades to the WRRF.  The CWSRF  Program is partially funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and as such, is  subject to Federal environmental regulations as well as additional “CEQA‐Plus” environmental  documentation and review.  Therefore, the City is soliciting proposals for environmental  documentation in compliance with CEQA‐Plus as well as the associated environmental permitting  requirements required for the WRRF Project. All proposals must be received by the Department of  Finance at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 by 3:00 p.m. on Friday, June 19, 2015, when  they will be opened publicly in the Main Conference Room at 919 Palm Street.     Proposals received after said time will not be considered.  To guard against premature opening,  each proposal shall be submitted to the Department of Finance, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,  CA 93401, in a sealed envelope plainly marked with the proposal title, specification number,  proposer name, and time and date of the proposal opening.  Proposals shall be submitted using the  forms provided in the specification package.    A pre‐proposal conference will be held in the Main Conference Room at 919 Palm Street on June 5  from 10 a.m. to 11:30 am to answer any questions that the prospective bidders may have regarding  the City's request for proposals. A site visit will convene at the WRRF, located at 35 Prado Road, at  1:30 pm, June 5.    Obtaining a Specification Package  Download from the City’s Web site www.slocity.org  ‐ Bids & Proposals link    Questions  Deputy Director – Wastewater, Dave Hix at (805) 781‐7039 or dhix@slocity.org with any questions  regarding this Request for Proposals.         Attachment 1 C7-3 2  Specification No. 91359  TABLE OF CONTENTS        Table of Contents    DESCRIPTION OF WORK………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……. 3  GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 10  PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS…………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 10  CONTRACT AWARD AND EXECUTION…………………………………………………………………………………………… 11  PROPOSAL CONTENT AND SELECTION PROCESS……………………………………………………………………...…. 12  PROPOSAL CONTENT……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….….. 12  PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND CONSULTANT SELECTION………………………………………………………...….. 13  FORM OF AGREEMENT………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…….. 16  PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL FORMS……………………………………………………………………………………………….…… 24  INSURANCE CERTIFICATE…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 24  STATEMENT OF PAST CONTRACT DISQUALIFICATIONS……………………………………………………………….. 25  REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 25  INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS:  Consultant Services……………………………………………………………………… 27       Attachment 1 C7-4 3  Section A  DESCRIPTION OF WORK      Project Description  The City owns and operates the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) located off Prado Road in  the southern portion of the City. Highway 101 is located immediately west of the southern portion  of the WRRF. The Bob Jones Trail and San Luis Obispo Creek run along the east side of the WRRF.   The WRRF treats municipal wastewater collected from the City, California Polytechnic State  University (Cal Poly), and the San Luis Obispo County Airport under Waste Discharge Requirements  (WDR) R3‐2014‐0033 and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) No. CA0049224.  The WRRF is currently rated for 5.1 million gallons per day (mgd) for average dry weather flow  (ADWF) conditions and currently treats an average of approximately 3.1 mgd under ADWF  conditions. After being treated, the water is either discharged to San Luis Obispo Creek or recycled.  The plant was originally constructed in 1923 and upgraded or expanded in 1962, 1994, and 2006.     The WRRF Project includes the following upgrades:  1. Lining of the existing flow equalization pond.   2. Improvements at the headworks, including new influent flow monitoring and odor control.  3. Rehabilitation of the existing primary clarifiers, including new weirs, new sweeps and arms,  new sludge and scum pumps, a new primary sludge pump pit, and odor control.  4. Retrofits of the primary effluent diversion box.  5. Demolition of the existing trickling filter and decommissioning of the existing secondary  clarifier.  6. Addition of two aeration basins, as well as new blowers and blower building, diffusers,  mixed liquor pumps and mixers, and chemical feed.   7. Addition of two new final clarifiers and new RAS and WAS pumps.  8. Expansion of the existing filter tower complex, including four new monomedia filters, new  backwash pumps and air scour blowers.  9. Addition of new cooling towers, effluent chillers, and pumps.  10. Demolition of the existing chlorine contact basins.  11. Addition of UV disinfection.  12. Solids treatment upgrades, including new thickening and conversion of the DAFT to a blend  tank, a new screw press, odor control, and a new anaerobic digester.   13. Sidestream treatment facilities, including a new tank and mixers.  14. Onsite stormwater management improvements, including low impact development  features.  15. Flood proofing of existing facilities.  16. Demolition of the old chlorine contact basins at the south end of the plant.  17. Addition of a new operations center and lab, and new maintenance building.  18. Retrofit of the existing administration building.  19. Addition of solar photovoltaic systems.    20. General site work, including grading and paving.     The draft site plan, illustrating new facilities, is included for reference. Additional information is  provided in the Facilities Plan.   Attachment 1 C7-5 4  The City has procured a Program Manager to facilitate the execution of the WRRF Project, including  providing oversight and management of the associated professional services contracts, including  the environmental consultant. It is expected that the selected environmental consultant will work  the City and the Program Management Team to execute the scope of services.       Background and Reference Documents    As indicated previously, the City plans to utilize the CWSRF Program to finance the proposed  improvements and upgrades to the WRRF.  The CWSRF Program is partially funded by the USEPA,  and as such, is subject to Federal environmental regulations as well as additional “CEQA‐Plus”  environmental documentation and review.  The City would be the CEQA lead agency for the WRRF  Project.  However, since the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Financial  Assistance, administers the CWSRF Program, the SWRCB is a Responsible Agency under CEQA.  Therefore, the SWRCB will have to make findings on the Project and will have to complete  environmental review of the Project before it can be funded. The SWRCB has developed and  published literature that outlines the CEQA‐Plus documentation and environmental review process  through the CWSRF Program.     An Environmental and Permitting Strategy Technical Memorandum was prepared for the WRRF  Project (included as an attachment to this RFP). The Technical Memorandum identifies potential  impacts of the WRRF Project and evaluates the appropriate level of CEQA‐Plus documentation for  the Project. The Technical Memorandum reviewed existing available data including the City’s  Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City’s Land Use and Circulation Elements  Update (LUCE). The LUCE EIR states that an upgrade of the WRRF is planned in response to stricter  discharge limits required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), to increase  capacity to serve the City’s population at General Plan build‐out, and to replace existing aged  facilities at the end of their service life.  The LUCE EIR was certified in September 2014 and is  available on the www.slo2035.com website.     As stated in the LUCE EIR, preliminary planning efforts for the WRRF expansion indicate that the  WRRF’s treatment capacity can be increased to adequately treat wastewater flows resulting from  build‐out of the proposed Land Use Element. Thus, the proposed WRRF expansion would provide  sufficient treatment capacity to accommodate the anticipated Land Use Element build‐out  conditions.    Based on the current understanding of the project and the project area, review of the City’s LUCE  EIR and the proposed site plan, the potential presence of sensitive receptors, biological resources,  and cultural resources the proposed improvements may result in potential temporary  (construction) and/or permanent (operational) impacts that could require the preparation of an  EIR.  In addition, the uncertainty of feasible mitigation to offset project impacts, the public  perception of the project and the environmental process, and the City’s need to have some  flexibility due to the continued development and refinement of the WRRF Project, it is expected  that an EIR will be prepared for the Project.    Attachments  The following attachments are available for review and pertain to this RFP and the Scope of Work  included below:  Attachment 1 C7-6 5   Draft WRRF Project Site Plan (Attachment 1)   Draft Environmental and Permitting Schedule (Attachment 2)   Environmental and Permitting Strategy Technical Memorandum (Attachment 3)   LUCE EIR can be obtained at the following website:  http://www.slo2035.com/library/documents‐reports/43‐public‐draft‐documents‐ published‐june‐13‐2014.html    Scope of Work  The following section describes the tasks that are anticipated for the preparation of the EIR.  Task 1. Kickoff Meeting and Review of Available Studies and Documentation This task shall include:    Review available studies completed for the WRRF Project, including the Facilities Plan and  the LUCE EIR.    Have a kickoff meeting with City staff and Program Management Team within 10 days of  notice to proceed. A project schedule and communication plan should be presented during  the kickoff meeting.  Task 2. Prepare Project Description Consultant shall prepare a detailed Project Description to initiate the environmental analyses and  documentation for the proposed project.  The Final Facilities Plan shall serve as the basis for the  Project Description. The project description shall include the following elements:   The location and boundaries of the proposed project.   A statement of objectives sought by the proposed project, including the underlying purpose  of the project.   A comprehensive project description and scope.   A discussion of the benefits of the project.   A statement briefly describing the intended uses of the EIR, including a list of the agencies  that are expected to use the EIR in their decision making; a list of permits and other  approvals required to implement the project; and a list of related environmental review  and consultation requirements required by federal, state, or local laws, regulations, or  policies.   The Consultant shall work closely with the Program Management Team in development of the  Project Description. Proposer shall assume 2 review / comment revisions from the City.   Task 3. Prepare Initial Study and Notice of Preparation This task shall include:   Consultant shall prepare a Notice of Preparation and Initial Study. The Draft IS shall be  prepared based on the finalized Project Description and per “CEQA‐Plus” guidelines.     Proposer shall assume 2 review/comment revisions.   Attachment 1 C7-7 6   Consultant shall be responsible for publishing the NOP in the local paper with the largest  circulation.    Consultant shall be responsible for sending copy of NOP to State Clearinghouse and  stakeholders.    Attend and participate in a public meeting regarding the NOP. Assume 1 evening meeting.   Review response letters / comments and incorporate into development of the EIR.    Prepare executive summary of comment review with recommendations for inclusion into  the EIR.   Task 4. Prepare Project Alternatives  This task shall include:   Collaborate with the City and Program Management Team to identify and develop a range  of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project that conform to CEQA criteria.    Alternatives will be analyzed in the EIR to a lesser but sufficient level of detail than that of  the project.   Task 5. Prepare Technical Reports  Detailed technical reports may be required for specific resource areas that are shown in the Initial  Study to need supporting documentation to substantiate impact levels.     The proposer shall assume that resource areas will include Biological Resources and Cultural  Resources, which will also require preparation of a Biological Resources Evaluation and a Cultural  Resources Survey Report.  Preparation of the technical reports shall include consultation with  applicable Federal and state agencies with jurisdiction over resources in the project area and in  compliance with “CEQA‐Plus”.    Task 6. Prepare Administrative Draft EIR  This task shall include the preparation of the Administrative Draft EIR for review by City and  Program Management Team. This shall include completion of a table of contents, preparers and  reference chapters.  Proposer shall assume 2 review / comment revisions.   Task 7. Prepare Public Review Draft EIR This task shall include:   Revise the Administrative Draft EIR per comments.   Consultant shall be responsible for posting of all notices, including posting notices of  availability with the County Clerk, and any other notices as required.    Deliver proper amount of copies of the Draft EIR, Executive Summary and Notice of  Completion to the State Clearinghouse.    Coordinate with the City to prepare a list of recipients of the Notice of Availability (NOA)  and prepare the NOA.    Proposer shall provide 10 printed copies of the Draft EIR, 10 electronic copies on CD, and an  electronic version suitable for posting on the City’s website.    Proposer shall prepare for and attend two public hearings. The public hearings shall include  a presentation of environmental components of the EIR and a response to technical  questions that arise during the public hearing.     Following the public hearings, meeting notes shall be prepared, and written and oral  comments shall be collected and summarized for submittal to the City for review.  Attachment 1 C7-8 7   Consultant shall be responsible for publishing the NOA in the local paper with the largest  circulation.    Review of proposed mitigations with appropriate advisory body for input.   Task 8. Prepare Final EIR This task shall include:   Response to comments received during the public comment period. Proposer shall assume  responding to 20 comments.    Prepare Final Administrative EIR. Proposer shall assume 2 review / comment revisions.    Proposer will prepare the Final EIR and shall submit 10 printed copies, 10 electronic copies  on CD, and an electronic version suitable for posting on the City’s website.    Proposer shall prepare for and attend a public hearing during a City Council Meeting.  Task 9. Prepare Findings, Notice of Determination (NOD), and Mitigation Monitoring and  Reporting Program (MMRP) This task shall include:   Prepare draft findings of fact describing the disposition of each significant impact identified  in the EIR.   Prepare a statement of overriding consideration discussing the benefits that outweigh the  project’s significant and unavoidable impacts.  If necessary, the City will provide support to  the Consultant in preparation of this statement.   Provide draft findings and statement for review.   Attend City Council meeting for approval of the project.   Prepare draft NOD. Proposer shall assume 1 review / comment of draft.    Post the notices with the County Clerk and State Clearinghouse.    Collaborate with the City and Program Management Team to finalize the MMRP, which  shall include an introduction explaining its purpose and use. The MMRP shall also specify  the project impacts to be mitigated, initiation/timing of mitigation, monitoring frequency,  responsibility for verification of compliance, performance criteria, the date compliance is  completed, and other specifications as necessary   Submit the draft MMRP for review. Proposer shall assume 2 review / comments of the draft  MMRP.     Task 10. Prepare Environmental Package for CWSRF Financial Assistance Package  The Consultant shall also be responsible for completing the Environmental Package portion of the  CWSRF Financial Assistance Package and be responsible for gaining final approval/acceptance of  the environmental package by the State Board. Proposer shall assume 1 review / comment of the  draft Environmental Package.     The Consultant shall also assist the City in responding to informal SWRCB staff questions and  information requests.  Task 11. Environmental Permitting, Approvals, and Consultations  In addition to CEQA‐Plus compliance (and NEPA, if applicable – see below), several Federal, state  and local permits and/or authorizations are anticipated for the proposed improvements and  upgrades at the WRRF Project.  The proposer shall assume the following permits and approvals will  Attachment 1 C7-9 8  be required (list will be refined through development of the project design and preparation of  detailed project description):     Clean Water Act (CWA), Section 404.  Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers  (USACE) for discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including  wetlands.   CWA, Section 401. Water Quality Certification from RWQCB.   California Department of Fish and Game Code 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement.  Administered by CDFW.   Federal ESA. Consultation with USFWS and NMFS for potential impacts to federally listed  species, and take authorization as applicable. The BA discussed under Task 3 would be  utilized in consultation with USFWS and NMFS for federally listed special status species.     California ESA.  Consultation with CDFW for potential impacts to state listed species, and  take authorization as applicable. The BRE discussed under Task 3 would be utilized in  consultation with CDFW for state listed special status species.     National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106. Consultation with the SHPO for affects to  historic properties and resources.    California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). Consultation and coordination  with the NAHC.  The Consultant shall prepare the draft and final permit applications for City review and approval  prior to submittal to the appropriate agencies. The Consultant will be responsible for all printing  and mailing of permit applications to the agencies.     As directed by the City, Consultant support would be provided during permit negotiations. This  support may take the form of strategizing with the City, attending meetings to answer questions  and/or give short presentations, and preparing handouts, displays, and/or other supplemental  materials. If requested by the City, meeting notes to document meeting discussions and outcomes  would also be prepared by the Consultant. Proposer shall make a clear assumption regarding the  level of effort necessary for this support.  Optional Task 12. NEPA Compliance  At this time, there is no federal nexus (partner or funding source) to initiate the preparation of a  joint CEQA/NEPA document. However, the City may pursue federal grant funding.  If successful, the  project would be financed, or approved in whole or in part by a Federal agency, then a NEPA  document would need to be prepared and a joint CEQA/NEPA document could be utilized.     Given the potential project impacts it is anticipated that the level of documentation required for a  joint CEQA/NEPA document would be an EIR/Environmental Assessment (EA). The CEQA‐Plus  documentation and review process encompasses many of the analyses that are required for NEPA  documentation and federal environmental regulation compliance. Therefore, if federal funding is  Attachment 1 C7-10 9  obtained after the EIR is initiated; the Consultant would be required to convert the CEQA‐Plus EIR  into an EIR/EA. It is anticipated that an EIR/EA could be completed within the timeframe shown in  the draft schedule included in Attachment 2 for the EIR. This would be dependent on the timing of  receipt of federal funding and nexus (assumed receipt prior to Public Review Draft EIR).     The proposer shall provide the optional scope of work required to convert the CEQA‐Plus EIR to an  EIR/EA, including the addition of a socio economics analysis and section. Additional reformatting  would be required to convert the CEQA‐Plus EIR to an EIR/EA. Assistance with NEPA required  noticing in the Federal Register would also be tasked to the Consultant under this optional task.   Attachment 1 C7-11 10  Section B  GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS    PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS    1. Requirement to Meet All Provisions.  Each individual or firm submitting a proposal  (Consultant) shall meet all of the terms, and conditions of the proposal specifications package.   By virtue of its proposal submittal, the Consultant acknowledges agreement with and  acceptance of all provisions of the proposal specifications.     2. Proposal Submittal.  Each proposal must be submitted on the form(s) provided in the  specifications and accompanied by any other required submittals or supplemental materials.   Proposal documents shall be enclosed in an envelope that shall be sealed and addressed to the  Finance Department, City of San Luis Obispo, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401. Each  proposal submittal shall include one electronic copy of the proposal, submitted in Adobe  Acrobat format on CD or flash drive. In order to guard against premature opening, the proposal  should be clearly labeled with the proposal title, specification number, name of Consultant, and  date and time of proposal opening.  No FAX submittals will be accepted.    3. Insurance Certificate.  Each proposal must include a certificate of insurance showing:    a. The insurance carrier and its A.M. Best rating.  b. Scope of coverage and limits.  c. Deductibles and self‐insured retention.    The purpose of this submittal is to generally assess the adequacy of the Consultant’s insurance  coverage during proposal evaluation; as discussed under paragraph 12 below, endorsements  are not required until contract award.  The City’s insurance requirements are detailed in  Section F.     4. Submittal of References.  Each proposer shall submit a statement of qualifications and  references on the form provided in the specifications package.    5. Statement of Contract Disqualifications.  Each proposer shall submit a statement regarding any  past government disqualifications on the form provided in the specifications package.    6. Proposal Withdrawal and Opening.  A Consultant may withdraw its proposal, without  prejudice prior to the time specified for the proposal opening, by submitting a written request  to the City for its withdrawal, in which event the proposal will be returned to the Consultant  unopened.  No proposal received after the time specified or at any place other than that stated  in the "Notice Requesting Proposals" will be considered.  All qualification proposals will be  opened and declared publicly.  Consultants or their representatives are invited to be present at  the opening of the proposals.    7. Submittal of One Proposal Only.  No individual or business entity of any kind shall be allowed  to make or file, or to be interested in more than one proposal, except an alternative proposal  when specifically requested; however, an individual or business entity that has submitted a  sub‐proposal to a Consultant submitting a proposal, or who has quoted prices on materials to  Attachment 1 C7-12 11  such Consultant, is not thereby disqualified from submitting a sub‐proposal or from quoting  prices to other Consultants submitting qualification proposals.    8. Communications.  All timely requests for information submitted in writing will receive a written  response from the City.  Telephone communications with City staff are not encouraged, but will  be permitted.  However, any such oral communication shall not be binding on the City.    9. Alternative Proposals.  When specifically requested, the proposer may submit an alternative  qualification proposal (or proposals) that it believes will also meet the City's project objectives  but in a different way.  In this case, the proposer must provide an analysis of the advantages  and disadvantages of each of the alternatives, and discuss under what circumstances the City  would prefer one alternative to the other(s).  If an alternative proposal is submitted, the  maximum length of the proposal may be expanded proportionately by the number of  alternatives submitted.    CONTRACT AWARD AND EXECUTION    10. Proposal Retention and Award.  The City reserves the right to retain all proposals for a period  of 60 days for examination and comparison.  The City also reserves the right to waive non‐ substantial irregularities in any proposal, to reject any or all proposals, to reject or delete one  part of a proposal and accept the other, except to the extent that proposals are qualified by  specific limitations.  See the "Special Terms and Conditions" in Section C of these specifications  for proposal evaluation and contract award criteria.   The City may choose to interview any  number of qualified consultants as the basis for making a final selection.     11. Competency and Responsibility of Consultant.  The City reserves full discretion to determine  the competence and responsibility, professionally and/or financially, of Consultants.   Consultants will provide, in a timely manner, all information that the City deems necessary to  make such a decision.    12. Contract Requirement.  The Consultant to whom award is made (Consultant) shall execute a  written contract with the City within ten (10) calendar days after notice of the award has been  sent by mail to it at the address given in its proposal.  The contract shall be made in the form  adopted by the City and incorporated in these specifications.      13. Insurance Requirements.  The Consultant shall provide proof of insurance in the form,  coverages and amounts specified in Section F of these specifications within 10 (ten) calendar  days after notice of contract award as a precondition to contract execution.    14. Business License & Tax.  The Consultant must have a valid City of San Luis Obispo business  license and tax certificate before execution of the contract.  Additional information regarding  the City's business license and tax program may be obtained by calling (805) 781‐7134.    15. Failure to Accept Contract.  The following will occur if the Consultant to whom the award is  made (Consultant) fails to enter into the contract:  the award will be annulled and an award  may be made to the next highest ranked Consultant with whom a responsible compensation is  negotiated, who shall fulfill every stipulation as if it were the party to whom the first award was  made.  Attachment 1 C7-13 12  Section C  PROPOSAL CONTENT AND SELECTION PROCESS     PROPOSAL CONTENT     Submittal Forms    o Acknowledgement  o Certificate of Insurance  o References  o Statement of Past Disqualifications     Qualifications    o Experience of your firm in performing similar services.   o Resumes of the individuals who would be assigned to this project, including any  sub‐consultants, demonstrating their experience with performing similar services.   o An organizational and staffing chart to show the names of all key personnel  assigned to the project and their primary area of responsibility and office location  should also be included.  o Standard hourly billing rates for the assigned staff, including any sub‐consultants.  o Statement and explanation of any instances where your firm has been removed  from a project or disqualified from proposing on a project.     Work Program    o Description of your approach to completing the work which expands on, the  Scope of Work contained in Section A of this RFP. The work program shall itemize  major tasks and work products and identify responsible staff, special information or  studies required, and special methods or equipment, if any, you anticipate using.   Procedures should be included showing how the Consultant plans to coordinate  with City staff and the Program Management Team.       The work program should identify all elements of the EIR that are needed  to assure CEQA compliance. The work program should also identify the  elements that are needed to assure NEPA compliance if Federal funding is  utilized. All of the specific elements required for CEQA and NEPA (if  necessary) compliance may not be listed in the Scope of Work; however,  the work program should explain how these elements will be  accomplished.  The Consultant, in consultation with the Program  Management Team, shall be responsible for the preparation of the  required Notice of Preparation, Notice of Completion & Environmental  Transmittal, Notice of Availability, and Notice of Determination for the EIR.   The Consultant will also be responsible for mailing these notices and copies  of the Draft EIR to relevant agencies and interested parties.  The costs for  these tasks and mailing costs should be factored into the total EIR budget.    Similarly, the work program should identify all environmental permits,  Attachment 1 C7-14 13  approvals, and consultations that are needed to assure compliance with  Federal and State regulations. The Consultant’s work program should  provide a complete summary of these permits, approvals, and  consultations, the materials/costs for preparing related permit packages,  the costs for obtaining these permits and approvals, and the costs  associated with negotiating permits, approvals, and carrying out  consultations. The Program Management Team will assist with review of  required permit packages and will attend meetings with resource agencies  for permit negotiations and/or to carry out consultation. However, the  Consultant will take the lead on obtaining all environmental permits and  approvals for the Project.    o Draft schedule by phase and task for completing the work. A Draft Schedule is  included in Attachment 2. The Consultant should review this Draft Schedule and  provide an equal level of detail schedule in their work program.     o Proposed fee.  Proposed fee shall include an itemized summary of personnel, labor  hours, labor rates, and expenses by task, including all sub‐consultants.    o Services or data to be provided by the City that are not already identified in the  Scope of Work.    o Any other information that would assist the City in making this contract award  decision.     Proposal Length and Copies    o Your firm’s proposal should be the minimum length to provide the required  information.  Charts and other short form approaches to conveying information are  encouraged.  o 10 copies of the proposal (printed double sided) must be submitted.  o 1 pdf format electronic copy must be submitted on flash drive.    PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND CONSULTANT SELECTION      Timely completion and circulation of the Draft EIR is essential to expeditious processing of the  project consistent with CEQA, and for obtaining required funding and financing.  Therefore, project  schedule will be considered in evaluating consultant proposals.  Proposals that emphasize timely,  cost‐effective and concise environmental documents that fulfil the regulatory requirements will be  evaluated favorably, as well as a focus on effective coordination and collaboration with the City and  Program Manager.      Proposals will be evaluated by a review committee. The City may select a consultant following the  written proposal phase.      Written Proposal Review/Finalist Candidate Selection     Written proposals will be evaluated based on the following criteria:      Attachment 1 C7-15 14    a. Understanding of the work required by the City  b. Quality, clarity and responsiveness of the proposal  c. Demonstrated competence and professional qualifications necessary for  successfully performing the work required by the City  d. Recent experience in successfully performing similar services  e. Proposed approach in completing the work  f. Proposed schedule  g. References  h. Background and experience of the specific individuals to be assigned to this project.  i. Proposed fee     Oral Presentations/Interviews and Consultant Selection      The City may elect to conduct interviews with a group of finalist candidates (generally the  top 3 to 5 proposers), in which case finalist candidates will make an oral presentation to the  review committee and answer questions about their proposal.  The purpose of this second  phase would be two‐fold: to clarify and resolve any outstanding questions or issues about  the proposal; and to evaluate the proposer’s ability to clearly and concisely present  information orally.  After evaluating the proposals and discussing them further with the  finalists or the tentatively selected Consultant, the City reserves the right to further  negotiate the proposed workscope and/or method and amount of compensation.     Contract award will be based on a combination of factors that represent the best overall  value for completing the workscope as determined by the City, including: the written  proposal criteria described above; results of background and reference checks; results from  the interviews and presentations phase (if conducted); and proposed compensation.     Proposal Review and Consultant Selection Schedule    The following is an outline of the anticipated schedule for proposal review and consultant selection:    Issue RFP     May 26, 2015  Conduct pre‐proposal conference  June 5, 2015    Receive proposals    June 19, 2015   Complete proposal evaluation   June 24, 2015  Conduct finalist interviews (if required)  July 9, 2015  Finalize staff recommendation   July 16, 2015  Award contract     August 18, 2015  Execute contract/Start work   September 1, 2015     If you have any questions about this RFP, schedule, or attachments, please calls Dave Hix at (805)  781‐7039.       Attachment 1 C7-16 15  PRE‐PROPOSAL CONFERENCE  A pre‐proposal conference will be held at the following location, date, and time to answer any  questions that prospective bidders may have regarding this RFP:    Friday, June 5, 2015 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.   Conference Room No. 1, 919 Palm Street  San Luis Obispo, CA 93401     A site visit will of the WRRF will follow:     Friday, June 5, 2015 from 1:30 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.   35 Prado Road  San Luis Obispo, CA 93401             Attachment 1 C7-17 16  Section D  FORM OF AGREEMENT        AGREEMENT     THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on [day, date,  year] by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred  to as City, and [CONSULTANT’S NAME IN CAPITAL LETTERS], hereinafter referred to as Consultant.    W I T N E S S E T H    WHEREAS, on [date], requested qualifications for Environmental and Permitting Services  for the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project per Specification No. 91359.     WHEREAS, pursuant to said request, Consultant submitted a proposal that was accepted by  City for said services.     NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations and covenants  hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:     1. Term.  The term of this Agreement shall be from the date this Agreement is made and entered,  as first written above, until acceptance or completion of said services.    2. Start and Completion of Work.  Individual projects shall be completed in accordance with  approved project schedules.    3. Contract Term.  The services identified in this specification will be contracted for by the City  based on a mutually agreed scope of work, cost and schedule to be negotiated between the  City and EIR consultant following consultant selection.       4. Contract Modification. The scope, cost, and schedule of the agreed‐upon contract may not be  change except either by City approval of a prior written request by the consultant to respond to  changing project conditions outside the consultant’s control, or as otherwise directed by the  City.      5. Work Delays.  Should the Consultant be obstructed or delayed in the work required to be done  hereunder by changes in the work or by any default, act, or omission of the City, or by strikes,  fire, earthquake, or any other Act of God, or by the inability to obtain materials, equipment, or  labor due to federal government restrictions arising out of defense or war programs, then the  time of completion may, at the City's sole option, be extended for such periods as may be  agreed upon by the City and the Consultant.  In the event that there is insufficient time to grant  such extensions prior to the completion date of the contract, the City may, at the time of  acceptance of the work, waive liquidated damages that may have accrued for failure to  complete on time, due to any of the above, after hearing evidence as to the reasons for such  delay, and making a finding as to the causes of same.    Attachment 1 C7-18 17  6. Termination.  If, during the term of the contract, the City determines that the Consultant is not  faithfully abiding by any term or condition contained herein, the City may notify the Consultant  in writing of such defect or failure to perform.  This notice must give the Consultant a 10 (ten)  calendar day notice of time thereafter in which to perform said work or cure the deficiency.      If the Consultant has not performed the work or cured the deficiency within the ten days  specified in the notice, such shall constitute a breach of the contract and the City may  terminate the contract immediately by written notice to the Consultant to said effect.   Thereafter, neither party shall have any further duties, obligations, responsibilities, or rights  under the contract except, however, any and all obligations of the Consultant's surety shall  remain in full force and effect, and shall not be extinguished, reduced, or in any manner waived  by the termination thereof.    In said event, the Consultant shall be entitled to the reasonable value of its services performed  from the beginning date in which the breach occurs up to the day it received the City's Notice  of Termination, minus any offset from such payment representing the City's damages from  such breach.  "Reasonable value" includes fees or charges for goods or services as of the last  milestone or task satisfactorily delivered or completed by the Consultant as may be set forth in  the Agreement payment schedule; compensation for any other work, services or goods  performed or provided by the Consultant shall be based solely on the City's assessment of the  value of the work‐in‐progress in completing the overall work scope.    The City reserves the right to delay any such payment until completion or confirmed  abandonment of the project, as may be determined in the City's sole discretion, so as to permit  a full and complete accounting of costs.  In no event, however, shall the Consultant be entitled  to receive in excess of the compensation quoted in its proposal.    If, at any time during the term of the contract, the City determines that the project is not  feasible due to funding shortages or unforeseen circumstances, the City reserves the right to  terminate the contract. Consultant will be paid compensation due and payable to the date of  termination.    7. Ability to Perform.  The Consultant warrants that it possesses, or has arranged through  subcontracts, all capital and other equipment, labor, materials, and licenses necessary to carry  out and complete the work hereunder in compliance with any and all applicable federal, state,  county, city, and special district laws, ordinances, and regulations.    8. Sub‐contract Provisions.  No portion of the work pertinent to this contract shall be  subcontracted without written authorization by the City, except that which is expressly  identified in the Consultant’s proposal.  Any substitution of sub‐consultants must be approved  in writing by the City.  For any sub‐contract for services in excess of $25,000, the subcontract  shall contain all provisions of this agreement.    9. Contract Assignment.  The Consultant shall not assign, transfer, convey or otherwise dispose of  the contract, or its right, title or interest, or its power to execute such a contract to any  individual or business entity of any kind without the previous written consent of the City.    Attachment 1 C7-19 18  10. Inspection.  The Consultant shall furnish City with every reasonable opportunity for City to  ascertain that the services of the Consultant are being performed in accordance with the  requirements and intentions of this contract.  All work done and all materials furnished, if any,  shall be subject to the City's inspection and approval.  The inspection of such work shall not  relieve Consultant of any of its obligations to fulfill its contract requirements.    11. Record Retention and Audit.  For the purpose of determining compliance with various laws  and regulations as well as performance of the contract, the Consultant and sub‐consultants  shall maintain all books, documents, papers, accounting records and other evidence pertaining  to the performance of the contract, including but not limited to the cost of administering the  contract.  Materials shall be made available at their respective offices at all reasonable times  during the contract period and for four years from the date of final payment under the  contract.   Authorized representatives of the City shall have the option of inspecting and/or  auditing all records.  For Federally funded projects, access to records shall also include  authorized representatives of the State and Federal government.  Copies shall be furnished if  requested.    12. Conflict of Interest.  The Consultant shall disclose any financial, business, or other relationship  with the City that may have an impact upon the outcome of this contract, or any ensuing City  construction project.  The Consultant shall also list current clients who may have a financial  interest in the outcome of this contract, or any ensuing City construction project which will  follow.      The Consultant covenants that it presently has no interest, and shall not acquire any interest— direct, indirect or otherwise—that would conflict in any manner or degree with the  performance of the work hereunder.  The Consultant further covenants that, in the  performance of this work, no sub‐consultant or person having such an interest shall be  employed.  The Consultant certifies that no one who has or will have any financial interest in  performing this work is an officer or employee of the City.  It is hereby expressly agreed that, in  the performance of the work hereunder, the Consultant shall at all times be deemed an  independent Consultant and not an agent or employee of the City.    13. Rebates, Kickbacks or Other Unlawful Consideration.  The Consultant warrants that this  contract was not obtained or secured through rebates, kickbacks or other unlawful  consideration, either promised or paid to any City employee.  For breach or violation of the  warranty, the City shall have the right in its discretion; to terminate the contract without  liability; to pay only for the value of the work actually performed; to deduct from the contract  price; or otherwise recover the full amount of such rebate, kickback or other unlawful  consideration.    14. Covenant Against Contingent Fees.  The Consultant warrants by execution of this contract that  no person or selling agency has been employed, or retained, to solicit or secure this contract  upon an agreement or understanding, for a commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingent  fee, excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established commercial or selling agencies  maintained by the Consultant for the purpose of securing business.  For breach or violation of  this warranty, the City has the right to annul this contract without liability; pay only for the  value of the work actually performed, or in its discretion, to deduct from the contract price or  Attachment 1 C7-20 19  consideration, or otherwise recover the full amount of such commission, percentage,  brokerage, or contingent fee.    15. Compliance with Laws and Wage Rates.  The Consultant shall keep itself fully informed of and  shall observe and comply with all applicable state and federal laws and county and City of San  Luis Obispo ordinances, regulations and adopted codes during its performance of the work.   This includes compliance with prevailing wage rates and their payment in accordance with  California Labor Code.  For purposed of this paragraph, “construction” includes work performed  during the design and preconstruction phases of construction, including but not limited to,  inspection and land surveying work.    16. Payment of Taxes.  The contract prices shall include full compensation for all taxes that the  Consultant is required to pay.    17. Permits, Licenses and Filing Fees.  The Consultant shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all  charges and fees, and file all notices as they pertain to the completion of the Consultant’s work.   The City will pay all application fees for permits required for the completion of the project  including building and regulatory permit application fees.  Consultant will provide a 10 day  notice for the City to issue a check.    18. Safety Provisions.  The Consultant shall conform to the rules and regulations pertaining to  safety established by OSHA and the California Division of Industrial Safety.    19. Public and Employee Safety.  Whenever the Consultant's operations create a condition  hazardous to the public or City employees, it shall, at its expense and without cost to the City,  furnish, erect and maintain such fences, temporary railings, barricades, lights, signs and other  devices and take such other protective measures as are necessary to prevent accidents or  damage or injury to the public and employees.    20. Preservation of City Property.  The Consultant shall provide and install suitable safeguards,  approved by the City, to protect City property from injury or damage.  If City property is injured  or damaged resulting from the Consultant's operations, it shall be replaced or restored at the  Consultant's expense.  The facilities shall be replaced or restored to a condition as good as  when the Consultant began work.    21. Immigration Act of 1986.  The Consultant warrants on behalf of itself and all sub‐consultants  engaged for the performance of this work that only persons authorized to work in the United  States pursuant to the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 and other applicable laws  shall be employed in the performance of the work hereunder.    22. Consultant Non‐Discrimination.  In the award of subcontracts or in performance of this work,  the Consultant agrees that it will not engage in, nor permit such sub‐consultants as it may  employ, to engage in discrimination in employment of persons on any basis prohibited by State  or Federal law.       23. Accuracy of Specifications.  The specifications for this project are believed by the City to be  accurate and to contain no affirmative misrepresentation or any concealment of fact.   Consultants are cautioned to undertake an independent analysis of any test results in the  Attachment 1 C7-21 20  specifications, as City does not guaranty the accuracy of its interpretation of test results  contained in the specifications package.  In preparing its proposal, the Consultant and all sub‐ consultants named in its proposal shall bear sole responsibility for proposal preparation errors  resulting from any misstatements or omissions in the specifications that could easily have been  ascertained by examining either the project site or accurate test data in the City's possession.   Although the effect of ambiguities or defects in the specifications will be as determined by law,  any patent ambiguity or defect shall give rise to a duty of Consultant to inquire prior to  proposal submittal.  Failure to so inquire shall cause any such ambiguity or defect to be  construed against the Consultant.  An ambiguity or defect shall be considered patent if it is of  such a nature that the Consultant, assuming reasonable skill, ability and diligence on its part,  knew or should have known of the existence of the ambiguity or defect.  Furthermore, failure  of the Consultant or sub‐consultants to notify City in writing of specification defects or  ambiguities prior to proposal submittal shall waive any right to assert said defects or  ambiguities subsequent to submittal of the proposal.    To the extent that these specifications constitute performance specifications, the City shall not  be liable for costs incurred by the successful Consultant to achieve the project’s objective or  standard beyond the amounts provided therefor in the proposal.     In the event that, after awarding the contract, any dispute arises as a result of any actual or  alleged ambiguity or defect in the specifications, or any other matter whatsoever, Consultant  shall immediately notify the City in writing, and the Consultant and all sub‐consultants shall  continue to perform, irrespective of whether or not the ambiguity or defect is major, material,  minor or trivial, and irrespective of whether or not a change order, time extension, or  additional compensation has been granted by City.  Failure to provide the hereinbefore  described written notice within one (1) working day of Consultant's becoming aware of the  facts giving rise to the dispute shall constitute a waiver of the right to assert the causative role  of the defect or ambiguity in the plans or specifications concerning the dispute.    24. Indemnification for Professional Liability.  To the fullest extent permitted by law, the  Consultant shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless the City and any and all of its  officials, employees and agents (“Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all losses,  liabilities, damages, costs and expenses, including attorney’s fees and cost which arise out of,  pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Consultant.    25. Non‐Exclusive Contract.  The City reserves the right to contract for the services listed in this  proposal from other consultants during the contract term.    26. Standards.  Documents shall conform to City Standards and City furnished templates shall be  used.    27. Consultant Endorsement.  Technical reports, plans and specifications shall be stamped and  signed by the Consultant where required.    28. Required Deliverable Products and Revisions.  The Consultant will be required to provide  documents addressing all elements of the RFP work scope, and consultant’s proposal as  mutually agreed upon under a contract to be negotiated between the Consultant and City  following consultant selection.  Attachment 1 C7-22 21    29. Ownership of Materials.  Upon completion of all work under this contract, or termination of  the contract, ownership and title to all reports, documents, plans, specifications, and estimates  produced as part of this contract will automatically be vested in the city and no further  agreement will be necessary to transfer ownership to the City.  The Consultant shall furnish the  City all necessary copies of data needed to complete the review and approval process.    The Consultant is not liable for claims, liabilities, or losses arising out of, or connected with the  modification, or misuse by the City of the machine‐readable information and data provided by  the Consultant under this agreement.  Further, the Consultant is not liable for claims, liabilities,  or losses arising out of, or connected with any use by City of the project documentation on  other projects, except such use as may be authorized in writing by the Consultant.     30. Release of Reports and Information.  Any reports, information, data, or other material given  to, prepared by or assembled by the Consultant as part of the work or services under these  specifications shall be the property of City and shall not be made available to any individual or  organization by the Consultant without the prior written approval of the City.    The Consultant shall not issue any news release or public relations item of any nature,  whatsoever, regarding work performed or to be performed under this contract without prior  review of the contents thereof by the City and receipt of the City’s written permission.    31. Copies of Reports and Information.  If the City requests additional copies of reports, drawings,  specifications, or any other material in addition to what the Consultant is required to furnish in  limited quantities as part of the work or services under these specifications, the Consultant  shall provide such additional copies as are requested, and City shall compensate the Consultant  for the costs of duplicating of such copies at the Consultant's direct expense.     32. Attendance at Meetings And Hearings.  Consultant shall attend as many "working" meetings  with staff as necessary to accomplish the work scope tasks.   Consultant shall attend workshops  with the public, and City commission, committee or Council meetings as identified in the  approved work scope.    33. Permit and Filing Fees.  The Consultant shall procure all permits, and licenses, pay all charges  and fees and file all notices necessary as they pertain to the completion of the Consultant’s  work. The City will pay all application fees for permits required for the completion of the  project work.  The City requires a 10‐day notice to issue a check.    34. Project Proposal Submittal.  Upon City request, the Consultant shall submit a proposed work  scope, compensation and schedule within 10 working days.  The cost proposal shall include all  costs including miscellaneous direct cost items.    35. Consultant Invoices.  The Consultant shall deliver a monthly invoice to the City, itemized by  project work phase or, in the case of on‐call contracts, by project title.  Invoice must include a  breakdown of hours billed and miscellaneous charges and any sub‐consultant invoices, similarly  broken down, as supporting detail.    Attachment 1 C7-23 22  36. Payment.  For providing services as specified in this Agreement, City will pay and Consultant  shall receive therefore compensation in a total sum not to exceed the agreed upon project fee.   Should the Consultant’s work products contain errors or deficiencies, the Consultant shall be  required to correct them at no increase in cost to the City.    The Consultant shall be reimbursed for hours worked at agreed‐upon hourly rates.  Hourly rates  include direct salary costs, employee benefits, overhead and fee.  In addition, the Consultant  shall be reimbursed for direct costs other than salary and vehicle cost that have been identified  and are attached to this agreement.  The Consultant’s personnel shall be reimbursed for per  diem expenses at a rate not to exceed that currently authorized for State employees under  State Department of Personnel Administration rules.    37. Payment Terms.  The City's payment terms are 30 days from the receipt and approval of an  original invoice and acceptance by the City of the materials, supplies, equipment or services  provided by the Consultant (Net 30).    38. Resolution of Disputes.  Any dispute, other than audit, concerning a question of fact arising  under this contract that is not disposed of by agreement shall be decided by a committee  consisting of the City’s Project Manager and the City Director of Public Works, who may  consider written or verbal information submitted by the Consultant.  Not later than thirty days  after completion of all deliverables necessary to complete the plans, specifications and  estimate, the Consultant may request review by the City Council of unresolved claims or  disputes, other than audit, in accordance with Chapter 1.20 Appeals Procedure of the Municipal  Code.      Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under an audit of this contract that is not  disposed of by agreement, shall be reviewed by the City’s Chief Fiscal Officer.  Not later than 30  days after issuance of the final audit report, the Consultant may request a review by the City’s  Chief Fiscal Officer of unresolved audit issues.  The request for review must be submitted in  writing.    Neither the pendency of a dispute, nor its consideration by the City will excuse the consultant  from full and timely performance in accordance with the terms of this contract.    39. Agreement Parties.    City: Carrie Mattingly  Utilities Director  City of San Luis Obispo  879 Morro St  San Luis Obispo, CA  93401   Consultant:     All written notices to the parties hereto shall be sent by United States mail, postage prepaid by  registered or certified mail addressed as shown above.    40. Incorporation by Reference.  The City Request for Proposal Specification No. 91359 and  Consultant's proposal are hereby incorporated in and made a part of this Agreement.    Attachment 1 C7-24 23  41. Amendments.  Any amendment, modification or variation from the terms of this Agreement  shall be in writing and shall be effective only upon approval by the Community Development  Director.     42. Working Out of Scope. If, at any time during the project, the consultant is directed to do work  by persons other than the City Project Manager and the Consultant believes that the work is  outside of the scope of the original contract, the Consultant shall inform the Project Manager  immediately. If the Project Manager and Consultant both agree that the work is outside of the  project scope and is necessary to the successful completion of the project, then a fee will be  established for such work based on Consultant's hourly billing rates or a lump sum price agreed  upon between the City and the Consultant.  Any extra work performed by Consultant without  prior written approval from the City Project Manager shall be at Consultant's own expense.    43. Complete Agreement.  This written agreement, including all writings specifically incorporated  herein by reference, shall constitute the complete agreement between the parties hereto.  No  oral agreement, understanding or representation not reduced to writing and specifically  incorporated herein shall be of any force or effect, nor shall any such oral agreement,  understanding or representation be binding upon the parties hereto.  For and in consideration  of the payments and agreements hereinbefore mentioned to be made and performed by City,  Consultant agrees with City to do everything required by this Agreement, the said specification  and incorporated documents.    44. Authority to Execute Agreement.  Both City and Consultant do covenant that each individual  executing this agreement on behalf of each party is a person duly authorized and empowered  to execute Agreements for such party.    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day and  year first above written.      CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO:  CONSULTANT:           Katie Lichtig, City Manager  By:      APPROVED AS TO FORM:             Christine Dietrick, City Attorney           Attachment 1 C7-25 24  Section E  PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL FORMS          ACKNOWLEDGEMENT    The undersigned declares that she or he:   Has carefully examined the Proposal Specification    Is thoroughly familiar with its content   Is authorized to represent the proposing firm; and    Agrees to perform the work as set forth in the specification and this proposal.      Firm Name and Address:            Contact Name:    Email:    Fax: Phone:      Signature of Authorized Representative:      Date:    INSURANCE CERTIFICATE     Insurance Company’s A.M. Best Rating      Certificate of insurance attached                              Attachment 1 C7-26 25  STATEMENT OF PAST CONTRACT DISQUALIFICATIONS    The Consultant shall state whether it or any of its officers or employees who have a proprietary  interest in it, has ever been disqualified, removed, or otherwise prevenviolation of law, a safety  regulation, or for any other reason, including but not limited to financial difficulties, project delays,  or disputes regarding work or product quality, and if so to explain the circumstances.    Do you have any disqualification as described in the above paragraph to  declare?   Yes   No  If yes, explain the circumstances.              Executed on ______________________at _______________________________________ under  penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing is true and correct.    ______________________________________    Signature of Authorized Consultant Representative    REFERENCES    Number of years engaged in providing the services included within the scope of the specifications  under the present business name:  _________    Describe fully the last three contracts performed by your firm that demonstrate your ability to  provide the services included with the scope of the specifications.  Attach additional pages if  required.  The City reserves the right to contact each of the references listed for additional  information regarding your firm's qualifications.    Reference No. 1  Customer Name   Contact Individual   Telephone & Email   Street Address   City, State, Zip Code   Date of Services   Contract Amount   Description of Services      Project Outcome        Attachment 1 C7-27 26  Reference No. 2  Customer Name   Contact Individual   Telephone & Email   Street Address   City, State, Zip Code   Date of Services   Contract Amount   Description of Services      Project Outcome          Reference No. 3  Customer Name   Contact Individual   Telephone & Email   Street Address   City, State, Zip Code   Date of Services   Contract Amount   Description of Services      Project Outcome                   Attachment 1 C7-28 27  Section F  INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS:  Consultant Services      The Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims  for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the  performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, employees or  sub‐consultants.    Minimum Scope of Insurance.  Coverage shall be at least as broad as:  1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 20 10  Prior to 1993 or CG 20 10 07 04 with CG 20 37 10 01 or the exact equivalent as determined by  the City).  2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1  (any auto).  3. Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability  Insurance.  4. Errors and Omissions Liability insurance as appropriate to the consultant's profession.    Minimum Limits of Insurance.  Consultant shall maintain limits no less than:  1. General Liability:  $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property  damage.  If Commercial General Liability or other form with a general aggregate limit is used,  either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general  aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.  2. Automobile Liability:  $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.  3. Employer's Liability:  $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.  4. Errors and Omissions Liability:  $1,000,000 per occurrence.    Deductibles and Self‐Insured Retentions.  Any deductibles or self‐insured retentions must be  declared to and approved by the City.  At the option of the City, either:  the insurer shall reduce or  eliminate such deductibles or self‐insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials,  employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses  and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses.    Other Insurance Provisions.  The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or  be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:    1. The City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as insureds  as respects:  liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant;  products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by  the Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant.  The  coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its  officers, official, employees, agents or volunteers.    2. For any claims related to this project, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary  insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers.  Any  insurance or self‐insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents or  volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it.  Attachment 1 C7-29 28    3. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made  or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.    4. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not  be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after  thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given  to the City.  The Consultant agrees to notify the City in the event that the policy is suspended,  voided or reduced in coverage or limits.  A minimum of 30 days prior written notice by certified  mail, return receipt requested, will be provided.    Acceptability of Insurers.  Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating  of no less than A:VII.    Verification of Coverage.  Consultant shall furnish the City with a certificate of insurance showing  maintenance of the required insurance coverage.  Original endorsements effecting general liability  and automobile liability coverage required by this clause must also be provided.  The endorsements  are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf.  All  endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences.         Attachment 1 C7-30 At t a c h m e n t 1 C7 - 3 1 ID T a s k  Na m e D u r a t i o n S t a r t F i n i s h 1 En v i r o n m e n t a l  Co n s u l t a n t  Pr o c u r e m e n t  Pr o c e s s 86  da y s Mo n  4/ 2 0 / 1 5 Tu e  8/ 1 8 / 1 5 16 En v i r o n m e n t a l  Im p a c t  Re p o r t 28 1  da y s Tu e  9/ 1 / 1 5 Tu e  9/ 2 7 / 1 6 17 Pr o j e c t  De s c r i p t i o n 50  da y s Tu e  9/ 1 / 1 5 Mo n  11 / 9 / 1 5 18 Pr e p a r e  Dr a f t  Pr o j e c t  De s c r i p t i o n 30  da y s Tu e  9/ 1 / 1 5 Mo n  10 / 1 2 / 1 5 19 Ci t y  Re v i e w  of  Dr a f t  Pr o j e c t  De s c r i p t i o n 10  da y s Tu e  10 / 1 3 / 1 5 Mo n  10 / 2 6 / 1 5 20 Fi n a l i z e  Pr o j e c t  De s c r i p t i o n 10  da y s Tu e  10 / 2 7 / 1 5 Mo n  11 / 9 / 1 5 21 In i t i a l  St u d y  Ch e c k l i s t  an d  NO P 57  da y s Tu e  11 / 1 0 / 1 5 We d  1/ 2 7 / 1 6 22 Pr e p a r e  IS  Ch e c k l i s t  an d  NO P 15  da y s Tu e  11 / 1 0 / 1 5 Mo n  11 / 3 0 / 1 5 23 Ci t y  Re v i e w  of  IS  Ch e c k l i s t  an d  NO P 10  da y s Tu e  12 / 1 / 1 5 Mo n  12 / 1 4 / 1 5 24 Fi n a l i z e  IS  Ch e c k l i s t  an d  NO P 10  da y s Tu e  12 / 1 5 / 1 5 Mo n  12 / 2 8 / 1 5 25 Pu b l i s h  NO P 0 da y s Mo n  12 / 2 8 / 1 5 Mo n  12 / 2 8 / 1 5 26 Pu b l i c  re v i e w  pe r i o d  fo r  NO P 30  ed a y s Mo n  12 / 2 8 / 1 5 We d  1/ 2 7 / 1 6 27 Sc o p i n g  Me e t i n g 0 da y s We d  1/ 1 3 / 1 6 We d  1/ 1 3 / 1 6 28 Dr a f t  EI R 15 3  da y s Tu e  12 / 2 9 / 1 5 Th u  7/ 2 8 / 1 6 29 Pr e p a r e  Ad m i n .  Dr a f t  EI R 45  da y s Tu e  12 / 2 9 / 1 5 Mo n  2/ 2 9 / 1 6 30 Ci t y  Re v i e w  of  Ad m i n .  Dr a f t  EI R 15  da y s Tu e  3/ 1 / 1 6 Mo n  3/ 2 1 / 1 6 31 Pr e p a r e  Sc r e e n  ch e c k  EI R 15  da y s Tu e  3/ 2 2 / 1 6 Mo n  4/ 1 1 / 1 6 32 Ci t y  Re v i e w  of  Sc r e e n  ch e c k  Dr a f t  EI R 10  da y s Tu e  4/ 1 2 / 1 6 Mo n  4/ 2 5 / 1 6 33 Pr e p a r e  Pu b l i c  Re v i e w  Dr a f t  EI R 5 da y s Tu e  4/ 2 6 / 1 6 Mo n  5/ 2 / 1 6 34 Pu b l i s h  Dr a f t  EI R 0 da y s Mo n  5/ 2 / 1 6 Mo n  5/ 2 / 1 6 35 Pu b l i c  Re v i e w  Pe r i o d  fo r  Dr a f t  EI R 45  ed a y s Mo n  5/ 2 / 1 6 Th u  6/ 1 6 / 1 6 36 Pu b l i c  He a r i n g  fo r  EI R 0 da y s We d  5/ 1 8 / 1 6 We d  5/ 1 8 / 1 6 37 Pr e p a r e  Dr a f t  Co m m e n t ‐Re s p o n s e  Su m m a r y 15  da y s Fr i  6/ 1 7 / 1 6 Th u  7/ 7 / 1 6 38 Ci t y  Re v i e w  of  Dr a f t  Co m m e n t ‐Re s p o n s e  Su m m a r y 10  da y s Fr i  7/ 8 / 1 6 Th u  7/ 2 1 / 1 6 39 Pr e p a r e  Fi n a l  Co m m e n t ‐Re s p o n s e  Su m m a r y 5 da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  7/ 2 8 / 1 6 40 Fi n a l  EI R   46  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Fr i  9/ 2 3 / 1 6 41 Pr e p a r e  Ad m i n .  Fi n a l  EI R 10  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  8/ 4 / 1 6 42 Ci t y  Re v i e w  of  Ad m i n .  Fi n a l  EI R 10  da y s Fr i  8/ 5 / 1 6 Th u  8/ 1 8 / 1 6 43 Pr e p a r e  Fi n a l  EI R 10  da y s Fr i  8/ 1 9 / 1 6 Th u  9/ 1 / 1 6 44 Pr e p a r e  Dr a f t  MM R P 10  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  8/ 4 / 1 6 45 Ci t y  Re v i e w  of  Dr a f t  MM R P 10  da y s Fr i  8/ 5 / 1 6 Th u  8/ 1 8 / 1 6 46 Pr e p a r e  Fi n a l  MM R P 5 da y s Fr i  8/ 1 9 / 1 6 Th u  8/ 2 5 / 1 6 47 Pr e p a r e  Dr a f t  Fi n d i n g s ,  St a t e m e n t  of  Ov e r r i d i n g   Co n s i d e r a t i o n s  an d  No t i c e  of  De t e r m i n a t i o n  (N O D ) 10  da y s Fr i  8/ 1 9 / 1 6 Th u  9/ 1 / 1 6 48 Ci t y  Re v i e w  of  Dr a f t  Fi n d i n g s ,  St a t e m e n t  of   Ov e r r i d i n g  Co n s i d e r a t i o n s  an d  NO D 10  da y s Fr i  9/ 2 / 1 6 Th u  9/ 1 5 / 1 6 49 Pr e p a r e  Fi n a l  Fi n d i n g s ,  St a t e m e n t  of  Ov e r r i d i n g   Co n s i d e r a t i o n s  an d  NO D 5 da y s Fr i  9/ 1 6 / 1 6 Th u  9/ 2 2 / 1 6 50 Co u n c i l  ad o p t i o n  an d  ap p r o v a l  of  th e  EI R ,  Fi n d i n g s ,   an d  St a t e m e n t  of  Ov e r r i d i n g  Co n s i d e r a t i o n s 0 da y s Th u  9/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  9/ 2 2 / 1 6 51 Fi l e  NO D  wi t h  SC H  an d  Co u n t y  Cl e r k 1 da y Fr i  9/ 2 3 / 1 6 Fr i  9/ 2 3 / 1 6 52 Pe r m i t t i n g 22 0  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  5/ 2 5 / 1 7 53 US A C E  Se c t i o n  40 4  Pe r m i t 22 0  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  5/ 2 5 / 1 7 54 Pr e p a r e  US A C E  40 4  pe r m i t  pa c k a g e 75  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 3 / 1 6 55 Ci t y  Re v i e w 15  da y s Fr i  11 / 4 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 2 4 / 1 6 56 Fi n a l i z e  US A C E  40 4  pe r m i t  pa c k a g e 10  da y s Fr i  11 / 2 5 / 1 6 Th u  12 / 8 / 1 6 57 Su b m i t  40 4  pe r m i t  pa c k a g e  to  US A C E 0 da y s Th u  12 / 8 / 1 6 Th u  12 / 8 / 1 6 58 US A C E  Re v i e w  an d  Ne g o t i a t i o n  of  40 4  pe r m i t 6 mo n s Fr i  12 / 9 / 1 6 Th u  5/ 2 5 / 1 7 59 CD F W  Se c t i o n  16 0 2 ,  St r e a m b e d  Al t e r a t i o n 16 5  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  3/ 9 / 1 7 60 Pr e p a r e  CD F W  SA A  pe r m i t  pa c k a g e 60  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  10 / 1 3 / 1 6 61 Ci t y  Re v i e w   15  da y s Fr i  10 / 1 4 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 3 / 1 6 62 Fi n a l i z e  CD F W  SA A  pe r m i t  pa c k a g e 10  da y s Fr i  11 / 4 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 1 7 / 1 6 63 Su b m i t  SA A  pe r m i t  pa c k a g e  to  CD F W 0 da y s Th u  11 / 1 7 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 1 7 / 1 6 64 CD F W  Re v i e w  an d  Ne g o t i a t i o n  of  SA A  pe r m i t 4 mo n s Fr i  11 / 1 8 / 1 6 Th u  3/ 9 / 1 7 65 CD F W  Co n s u l t a t i o n  an d  In c i d e n t a l  Ta k e  Pe r m i t 22 0  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  5/ 2 5 / 1 7 66 Pr e p a r e  CD F W  20 8 1  IT P  Pa c k a g e 75  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 3 / 1 6 67 Ci t y  Re v i e w   15  da y s Fr i  11 / 4 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 2 4 / 1 6 68 Fi n a l i z e  CD F W  20 8 1  IT P  Pa c k a g e 10  da y s Fr i  11 / 2 5 / 1 6 Th u  12 / 8 / 1 6 69 Su b m i t  20 8 1  IT P  Pa c k a g e  to  CD F W 0 da y s Th u  12 / 8 / 1 6 Th u  12 / 8 / 1 6 70 CD F W  Re v i e w  an d  Ne g o t i a t i o n  of  IT P 6 mo n s Fr i  12 / 9 / 1 6 Th u  5/ 2 5 / 1 7 71 RW Q C B  40 1  Wa t e r  Qu a l i t y  Ce r t i f i c a t i o n 20 5  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  5/ 4 / 1 7 72 Pr e p a r e  RW Q C B  40 1  WQ C  pa c k a g e 60  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  10 / 1 3 / 1 6 73 Ci t y  Re v i e w 15  da y s Fr i  10 / 1 4 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 3 / 1 6 74 Fi n a l i z e  RW Q C B  40 1  WQ C  pa c k a g e 10  da y s Fr i  11 / 4 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 1 7 / 1 6 75 Su b m i t  40 1  WQ C  pa c k a g e  to  RW Q C B 0 da y s Th u  11 / 1 7 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 1 7 / 1 6 76 RW Q C B  Re v i e w  an d  Ne g o t i a t i o n  of  40 1  WQ C   6 mo n s Fr i  11 / 1 8 / 1 6 Th u  5/ 4 / 1 7 12 / 2 8 1/ 1 3 5/ 2 5/ 1 8 9/22 12/8 11/17 12/8 11/17 Ma y Ju n Ju l Au g Se p Oc t No v De c Ja n Fe b Ma r Ap r Ma y JunJulAugSepOctNovDecJanFebMarAprMay 20 1 6 2017 Ta s k Sp l i t Mi l e s t o n e Su m m a r y Pr o j e c t  Su m m a r y Ex t e r n a l  Ta s k s Ex t e r n a l  Mi l e s t o n e In a c t i v e  Ta s k In a c t i v e  Mi l e s t o n e In a c t i v e  Su m m a r y Ma n u a l  Ta s k Du r a t i o n ‐on l y Manual Summary Rollup Manual SummaryStart‐only Finish‐onlyDeadlineProgress Pa g e  1 Pr o j e c t :  De t a i l e d  EI R  & Pe r m i t t i n g Da t e :  Fr i  4/ 2 4 / 1 5 Attachment 1 C7-32 Page 1 of 9 Date: 4/21/2014 Prepared by: Jeanette Price and Linda Fisher Reviewed by: Holly Kennedy, PE; Jeff Szytel, PE Project: WRRF Project SUBJECT: TM NO. 11 – ENVIRONMENTAL AND PERMITTING STRATEGY (DRAFT) Introduction The City of San Luis Obispo (City) is undertaking a series of upgrades to the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) located on Prado Road in San Luis Obispo, CA. These upgrades, collectively referred to as the WRRF Project, represent a significant community investment and will help the City implement its long-term strategy for resource management. The purpose of this technical memorandum is to present a summary of the environmental and permitting requirements for the WRRF Project, and to present a recommended CEQA strategy and permitting plan. Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 Background ................................................................................................................................. 2 CEQA Compliance ...................................................................................................................... 2 Consideration of Recycled Water Expansion ........................................................................................... 5 NEPA Compliance ....................................................................................................................... 5 Permitting Considerations ......................................................................................................... 6 Attachment A: Sample Scopes of Work ................................................................................. 10 IS/MND Tasks ......................................................................................................................................... 10 Prepare Project Description ............................................................................................................... 10 Prepare IS Checklist ........................................................................................................................... 10 Prepare Technical Reports and Administrative Draft IS/MND ........................................................... 10 Prepare Public Review Draft IS/MND ................................................................................................. 11 Prepare Administrative Final and Final IS/MND ................................................................................. 12 Prepare the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program ............................................................... 12 EIR Tasks ............................................................................................................................................... 13 Prepare Notice of Preparation ............................................................................................................ 13 Prepare Technical Reports and Administrative Draft EIR .................................................................. 13 Prepare Public Review Draft EIR ....................................................................................................... 14 Prepare Notice of Availability (NOA) of Public Draft EIR ................................................................... 14 Prepare for and Attend Public Hearing .............................................................................................. 15 Respond to Comments Received on the Public Draft EIR ................................................................. 15 Prepare Administrative Final and Final EIR ....................................................................................... 15 Prepare the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program ............................................................... 15 Prepare Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and NOD .............................................. 15 Appendix B: Schedule .............................................................................................................. 16 Attachment C: Program EIR Guidelines ................................................................................. 20 Attachment 1 C7-33 WRRF Project TM No. 11 – Environmental and Permitting Strategy (Draft) Page 2 of 21 Background As described in the City’s Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City’s Land Use and Circulation Elements Update (LUCE), an upgrade of the WRRF is planned in response to stricter discharge limits required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), to increase capacity to serve the City’s population at General Plan buildout, and to replace existing aged facilities at the end of their service life. The EIR for the LUCE was finalized in September 2014 and adopted in December 2014. As stated in the LUCE EIR, preliminary planning efforts for the WRRF expansion indicate that the WRRF’s treatment capacity can be increased to adequately treat wastewater flows resulting from buildout of the proposed Land Use Element. Thus, the proposed WRRF expansion would provide sufficient treatment capacity to accommodate the anticipated Land Use Element buildout conditions. CEQA Compliance The proposed improvements and upgrades at the WRRF require compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City plans to utilize the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) Program to finance the proposed improvements and upgrades to the WRRF. The CWSRF Program is partially funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and as such, is subject to federal environmental regulations as well as additional “CEQA-Plus” environmental documentation and review. All applicants seeking CWSRF financing must comply with both CEQA and federal cross-cutting regulations, including the Clean Air Act (CAA), Endangered Species Act (ESA), and the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). Based on the current understanding of the project and the project area, review of the City’s LUCE EIR and the proposed site plan, and the potential presence of sensitive receptors, biological resources, and cultural resources, the proposed improvements may result in potential temporary (construction) and/or permanent (operational) impacts that could require the preparation of an EIR. Potential environmental impacts, include, but are not limited to, the impacts outlined in Table 1. Table 1: Potential Environmental Impacts Impact Temporary (Construction) Permanent (Operation) Aesthetics Disrupt visual quality due the presence of construction vehicles and equipment. Change visual quality due to new structures. Based on the nature of the individual changes to the visual quality of the various features at the WRRF, aesthetic impacts may be beneficial. For example, the upgrades include a public interpretive center as well as a garden/public green space that would include aesthetic features. Air Quality Increase in emissions and/or odors from construction vehicles and equipment. Increase in emissions as a result of new process units. Expected decrease in odors due to new odor control facilities and new operational parameters (i.e., no diurnal equalization). Also, potential increases in emissions as a result of additional traffic coming to and from the facility for deliveries, visiting, etc. Biological Potential disturbance during construction to special-status plant or wildlife species or habitats, and/or migratory birds; disruption of migration corridors. Potential direct and/or indirect effects to special-status plant or wildlife species or habitats. The project area and vicinity, specifically San Luis Obispo Creek, potentially provides habitat for Central Coast Attachment 1 C7-34 WRRF Project TM No. 11 – Environmental and Permitting Strategy (Draft) Page 3 of 21 Impact Temporary (Construction) Permanent (Operation) Steelhead, California red legged frog, California tiger salamander, and yellow billed cuckoo. Potential new restoration and/or habitat enhancement areas may be created/constructed as part of the upgrades at the site. Cultural Potential disturbance to previously unidentified historic or archaeological resources. Potential removal of previously unidentified historic or archaeological resources. Given the age of the facility there is the potential for structures to meet SHPO eligibility criteria for evaluation. Growth N/A The WRRF upgrades would accommodate growth projections that are substantiated in the LUCE EIR. The LUCE EIR utilized a threshold of an average growth rate of one percent per year per Land Use Element Policy 1.10.2. Per Land Use Element Policy 1.9.3, the upgrades to the WRRF would not result in the average growth rate of one percent to be exceeded. Hydrology and Water Quality Potential discharge of contaminants during construction to storm drains and San Luis Obispo Creek. Increase in runoff as a result of new structures/operations and impervious surfaces. Low impact development (LID) features and stormwater bio-retention facilities would be constructed on site to retain the 95th percentile flows on-site or within the watershed. On-site improvements would be constructed to provide protection for the 100-year flood event and would involve raising structures and any electrical that could be affected during the 100-year storm event. On-site improvements would not redirect flood flows. Noise Noise from construction activities may be detectable at residences located within ¼ mile of the site. Increase in noise output from WRRF as a result of new facilities/operations. Traffic Construction vehicles utilizing and entering/exiting local roadways. Additional traffic coming to and from the facility for deliveries, visiting, etc. resulting in potential disruption to local circulation. In order to initiate the CEQA compliance process, an Initial Study (IS) Checklist should be prepared for the WRRF improvements project, per the “CEQA-Plus” guidelines. The IS Checklist will assist the City in determining if the proposed project may have a significant impact on the environment and to what extent. If no significant impacts are identified, then the IS will support the preparation and adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). If potentially significant impacts are identified in the IS, then an EIR will need to be prepared; however, the IS Checklist will help to focus the analysis to be provided in the Draft EIR. Figures 1 and 2 illustrate flowcharts for an IS/MND and an EIR, respectively. As shown, the components involved in preparing both an IS/MND and an EIR overlap in several aspects. Both documents start with the preparation of a Project Description and an Initial Study Checklist to define impacts and identify the resource areas requiring further analysis. Technical studies are prepared to support both documents. Also since the project will likely result in potentially significant impacts that require mitigation, a Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program would be prepared under either scenario. The required permits and approvals for the project will also remain the same under either scenario. However, the complexity of the required permit applications and length of time related to Attachment 1 C7-35 WRRF Project TM No. 11 – Environmental and Permitting Strategy (Draft) Page 4 of 21 securing the required permits and approvals for the project will likely vary between the IS/MND and EIR approaches given the level of impacts allowed within each document. Figure 1: IS/MND Flowchart Figure 2: EIR Flowchart Based on the information presented above, the uncertainty of feasible mitigation to offset project impacts, the public perception of the project and the environmental process, and the City’s need to have some flexibility due to the continued development and refinement of the project and potential funding sources, it is recommended that an EIR be prepared for the project. Attachment 1 C7-36 WRRF Project TM No. 11 – Environmental and Permitting Strategy (Draft) Page 5 of 21 An EIR provides coverage for the City if it is determined further in the process that the project may result in a significant and unavoidable impact, whereas an IS/MND does not afford that same coverage. Sample scopes of work for both an IS/MND and an EIR are included in Attachment A. Attachment B includes a draft EIR schedule for the project that include anticipated durations of tasks, linkages between tasks, and responsible parties. The draft schedule also includes permitting tasks and review times for the agencies. Consideration of Recycled Water Expansion There is some uncertainty with respect to the scope of the WRRF Project due to the ongoing discussions regarding identifying and developing appropriate beneficial uses of the recycled water produced by the WRRF currently and in the future. These beneficial uses also include opportunities to deliver recycled water to new customers, including irrigators in the Edna Valley. As a result, the City considered the option of preparing a Program EIR (PEIR), which would allow for a more comprehensive and programmatic approach to the consideration of effects than would be practical in separate EIRs for individual actions. The City considered the PEIR process as a practical method to cover the components of the recycled water expansion (e.g., transmission, storage, etc.) that are not yet well defined, but which are closely tied to the WRRF Project. A Program EIR is intended to provide a general analysis, followed by tiered analyses as more information about the specific projects within the program becomes available. As described in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15168, a PEIR may be prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project and are related to individual activities to be carried out under the same authority and with similar environmental effects. The CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 description for a Program EIR is provided in Attachment C. The City is pursuing a grant to conduct a recycled water feasibility study, and if successful, that study would run in parallel with the engineering for the WRRF Upgrade. Thus, there won’t be sufficient information available within the timeframe necessary to prepare a PEIR. Therefore, it is recommended that the City prepare an EIR for the proposed upgrades at the WRRF and, at a later date, prepare a separate EIR for the recycled water component. NEPA Compliance In addition to CEQA compliance, the proposed improvements and upgrades at the WRRF could be subject to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Sections 15220 to 15229 of the CEQA Guidelines discuss CEQA projects that are also subject to NEPA, which applies to projects that are carried out, financed, or approved in whole or in part by federal agencies. CEQA Guidelines state that when a project will require compliance with both CEQA and NEPA, and the Lead Agency finds that an EIS or Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for a project would not be prepared by the federal agency by the time when the Lead Agency will need to consider an EIR or Negative Declaration, the Lead Agency should try to prepare a combined EIR-EIS or Negative Declaration-FONSI. To avoid the need for the federal agency to prepare a separate document for the same project, the Lead Agency must involve the federal agency in the preparation of the joint document. At this time, there is no federal nexus (partner or funding source) to initiate the preparation of a joint CEQA/NEPA document. However, if the project would be financed, or approved in whole or in part Attachment 1 C7-37 WRRF Project TM No. 11 – Environmental and Permitting Strategy (Draft) Page 6 of 21 by a federal agency, then a NEPA document would need to be prepared and a joint CEQA/NEPA document could be utilized. Given the potential project impacts (Table 1) it is anticipated that the level of documentation required for a joint CEQA/NEPA document would be an EIR/Environmental Assessment (EA). The CEQA Plus documentation and review process already encompasses many of the analyses that are required for NEPA documentation and federal environmental regulation compliance. Therefore, it would not be a substantial effort to take the CEQA Plus EIR and convert it into an EIR/EA if federal funding is obtained after the EIR is initiated. Furthermore, an EIR/EA could be completed within the timeframe shown in the draft schedule included in Attachment B for the EIR. Permitting Considerations In addition to CEQA (and NEPA, if applicable) compliance, several federal, state and local permits and/or authorizations are anticipated for the proposed improvements and upgrades at the WRRF project. A list of anticipated permitting requirements for the WRRF Project is provided below. Table 2 further summarizes the permitting requirements. The regulations and ordinances listed below represent a preliminary assessment of permitting requirements, which should be refined through project design and preparation of a detailed project description.  Clean Water Act (CWA), Section 404. Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands.  California ESA. Consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and take authorization as applicable.  California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). Consultation and coordination with the NAHC.  CWA, Section 401. Water Quality Certification from RWQCB.  CWA, Section 402. NPDES General Permit from the RWQCB for general construction activities and General Permit for Discharges with Low Threat to Water Quality.  San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD). Authority to Construct and Permit to Operate.  PG&E. Approval for new power infrastructure to the site.  City Building, Grading, and Encroachment permits, as appropriate.  Caltrans Encroachment Permit  FEMA CLOMR/LOMR for flood control improvements Attachment 1 C7-38 WR R F P r o j e c t TM N o . 1 1 – E n v i r o n m e n t a l a n d P e r m i t t i n g S t r a t e g y ( D r a f t ) Pa g e 7 o f 2 1 Ta b l e 2 . D e s c r i p t i o n o f P o t e n t i a l P e r m i t s a n d A p p r o v a l s R e q u i r e d Ag e n c y Ty p e o f P e r m i t o r Ap p r o v a l Re g u l a t e d A c t i v i t y Pe r m i t T i m e l i n e * Agency Contact Fe d e r a l US A C E CW A S e c t i o n 4 0 4 P e r m i t Se c t i o n 4 0 4 p e r m i t f o r di s c h a r g e s o f d r e d g e d o r f i l l ma t e r i a l i n t o w a t e r s o f t h e U n i t e d St a t e s , i n c l u d i n g w e t l a n d s Ap p l i c a n t s c a n t y p i c a l l y e x p e c t a Se c t i o n 4 0 4 p e r m i t t o b e i s s u e d b y US A C E w i t h i n 6 m o n t h s t o 1 . 5 y e a r s af t e r U S A C E a c k n o w l e d g e s r e c e i p t of a c o m p l e t e p e r m i t a p p l i c a t i o n . U. S . A r m y C o r p s o f E n g i n e e r s , Lo s A n g e l e s D i s t r i c t 91 5 W i l s h i r e B l v d . Lo s A n g e l e s , C A 9 0 0 1 7 Ph o n e ( 2 1 3 ) 4 5 2 - 3 3 3 3 St a t e H i s t o r i c Pr e s e r v a t i o n O f f i c e (S H P O ) NH P A , Se c t i o n 1 0 6 C o n s u l t a t i o n (i n i t i a t e d t h r o u g h 4 0 4 Pe r m i t p r o c e s s ) Co n s u l t a t i o n a n d c o o r d i n a t i o n re g a r d i n g p o t e n t i a l e f f e c t s o n pr o p e r t i e s l i s t e d i n , o r e l i g i b l e f o r li s t i n g i n t h e N a t i o n a l R e g i s t e r o f Hi s t o r i c P l a c e s Up o n r e c e i p t o f a s u b m i t t a l , t h e Of f i c e o f H i s t o r i c P r e s e r v a t i o n ( O H P ) re v i e w e r s l o o k f o r t h e i n f o r m a t i o n su g g e s t e d i n t h e s u b m i t t a l c h e c k l i s t an d w i l l r e s p o n d w i t h i n 3 0 d a y s . Of f i c e o f H i s t o r i c P r e s e r v a t i o n 17 2 5 2 3 r d S t r e e t , S u i t e 1 0 0 Sa c r a m e n t o , C A 9 5 8 1 6 Ph o n e ( 9 1 6 ) 4 4 5 - 7 0 0 0 U. S . F i s h a n d W i l d l i f e Se r v i c e ( U S F W S ) , Na t i o n a l M a r i n e F i s h e r i e s Se r v i c e s ( N M F S ) ES A , Se c t i o n 7 C o n s u l t a t i o n (i n i t i a t e d t h r o u g h 4 0 4 Pe r m i t p r o c e s s ) Se c t i o n 7 c o n s u l t a t i o n r e g a r d i n g ef f e c t s o n s p e c i a l s t a t u s s p e c i e s Se c t i o n 7 ( a ) ( 2 ) o f t h e E S A s t a t e s t h a t US F W S h a s 9 0 d a y s t o c o n c l u d e co n s u l t a t i o n w i t h U S A C E a n d a n ad d i t i o n a l 4 5 d a y s t o i s s u e a Bi o l o g i c a l O p i n i o n a n d , i f n e e d e d , a n in c i d e n t a l t a k e p e r m i t . US F W S , V e n t u r a O f f i c e 24 9 3 P o r t o l a R o a d , S u i t e B Ve n t u r a , C A 9 3 0 0 3 - 7 7 2 6 Ph o n e ( 8 0 5 ) 6 4 4 - 1 7 6 6 NO A A F i s h e r i e s Lo n g B e a c h O f f i c e 50 1 W e s t O c e a n B o u l e v a r d , Su i t e 4 2 0 0 Lo n g B e a c h , C A 9 0 8 0 2 Ph o n e ( 5 6 2 ) 9 8 0 - 4 0 0 0 Attachment 1 C7-39 WR R F P r o j e c t TM N o . 1 1 – E n v i r o n m e n t a l a n d P e r m i t t i n g S t r a t e g y ( D r a f t ) Pa g e 8 o f 2 1 Ag e n c y Ty p e o f P e r m i t o r Ap p r o v a l Re g u l a t e d A c t i v i t y Pe r m i t T i m e l i n e * Agency Contact St a t e CD F W Ca l i f o r n i a E S A , C a l i f o r n i a Fi s h a n d G a m e C o d e , Se c t i o n 2 0 8 1 Co n s u l t a t i o n Co n s u l t a t i o n a n d t a k e au t h o r i z a t i o n Ty p i c a l l y , a r e q u e s t f o r C o n s i s t e n c y De t e r m i n a t i o n c a n b e c o n c l u d e d wi t h i n 3 0 d a y s o f C D F W ’ s r e c e i p t o f th e U S F W S / N M F S B i o l o g i c a l Op i n i o n a n d r e q u e s t f o r C o n s i s t e n c y De t e r m i n a t i o n . Fo r c o n s u l t a t i o n l e a d i n g t o a s t a t e in c i d e n t a l t a k e p e r m i t , t h i s p r o c e s s ca n t a k e u p t o 1 2 0 d a y s . CD F W C e n t r a l R e g i o n ( R e g i o n 4) 12 3 4 E . S h a w A v e n u e F r e s n o , CA 9 3 7 1 0 Ph o n e ( 5 5 9 ) 2 4 3 - 4 0 0 5 CD F W Ca l i f o r n i a F i s h a n d G a m e Co d e , S e c t i o n 1 6 0 2 St r e a m b e d A l t e r a t i o n A g r e e m e n t A S t r e a m b e d A l t e r a t i o n A g r e e m e n t ca n t y p i c a l l y b e e x p e c t e d w i t h i n 9 0 - 12 0 d a y s o f s u b m i t t a l o f t h e ap p l i c a t i o n . Ca l i f o r n i a N A H C N A H C C o n s u l t a t i o n Co n s u l t a t i o n a n d c o o r d i n a t i o n re g a r d i n g p o t e n t i a l e f f e c t s o n Na t i v e A m e r i c a n b u r i a l s o r ar t i f a c t s Th e l e a d a g e n c y m u s t c o n s u l t w i t h a tr i b e w i t h i n t h e g e o g r a p h i c a l a r e a o f th e p r o j e c t i f t h e t r i b e ( 1 ) r e q u e s t e d th e l e a d a g e n c y t o i n f o r m i t o f pr o p o s e d p r o j e c t s w i t h i n i t s a r e a , a n d (2 ) t h e t r i b e r e s p o n d s w i t h i n 3 0 d a y s of r e c e i v i n g n o t i f i c a t i o n a n d r e q u e s t s co n s u l t a t i o n . Ca l i f o r n i a N A H C 15 5 0 H a r b o r B l v d , S u i t e 1 0 0 We s t S a c r a m e n t o , C A 9 5 6 9 1 Ph o n e ( 9 1 6 ) 3 7 3 - 3 7 1 0 Attachment 1 C7-40 WR R F P r o j e c t TM N o . 1 1 – E n v i r o n m e n t a l a n d P e r m i t t i n g S t r a t e g y ( D r a f t ) Pa g e 9 o f 2 1 *T h e s e t i m e l i n e s a r e e s t i m a t e s , a n d c a n v a r y . M a n y f a c t o r s a f f e ct t h e p e r m i t o r c o n s u l t a t i o n t i m e l i n e , s u c h a s w h e n t h e a p p l i c at i o n i s d e e m e d c o m p l e t e , wh e t h e r o r n o t a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n i s r e q u e s t e d b y th e a g e n c y , a n d t h e s t a t u s o f a s s o c i a t e d p e r m i t a p p r o v a l s . Ag e n c y Ty p e o f P e r m i t o r Ap p r o v a l Re g u l a t e d A c t i v i t y Pe r m i t T i m e l i n e * Agency Contact Re g i o n a l Ce n t r a l C o a s t R e g i o n a l Wa t e r Q u a l i t y C o n t r o l Bo a r d ( C C R W Q C B ) CW A , S e c t i o n 4 0 2 Se c t i o n 4 0 2 N a t i o n a l P o l l u t a n t Di s c h a r g e E l i m i n a t i o n S y s t e m (N P D E S ) G e n e r a l P e r m i t f o r St o r m w a t e r D i s c h a r g e s As s o c i a t e d w i t h C o n s t r u c t i o n a n d La n d D i s t u r b a n c e A c t i v i t i e s , Wa s t e D i s c h a r g e R e q u i r e m e n t s fo r D e w a t e r i n g a n d O t h e r L o w Th r e a t D i s c h a r g e s t o S u r f a c e Wa t e r s On c e t h e r e q u i r e d d o c u m e n t s a n d fe e s h a v e b e e n s u b m i t t e d t o t h e ap p r o p r i a t e R W Q C B , t h e p r o j e c t c a n be c o n s i d e r e d a s a u t h o r i z e d b y t h e Ge n e r a l P e r m i t , s o l o n g a s t h e pr o j e c t a c t i v i t i e s a r e i n c o m p l i a n c e wi t h t h e t e r m s a n d c o n d i t i o n s o f t h e pe r m i t . CC R W Q C B 89 5 A e r o v i s t a P l a c e , Su i t e 1 0 1 Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A . 9 3 4 0 1 - 79 0 6 Ph o n e ( 8 0 5 ) 5 4 9 3 1 4 7 CC R W Q C B CW A , S e c t i o n 4 0 1 Se c t i o n 4 0 1 W a t e r Q u a l i t y Ce r t i f i c a t i o n f o r d i s c h a r g e o f dr e d g e d o r f i l l m a t e r i a l i n t o wa t e r s o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s a n d St a t e . Wa t e r Q u a l i t y C e r t i f i c a t i o n s c a n ty p i c a l l y b e e x p e c t e d w i t h i n 9 0 d a y s of s u b m i t t a l o f t h e a p p l i c a t i o n . SL O A P C D Au t h o r i t y t o C o n s t r u c t / Pe r m i t t o O p e r a t e Ce r t i f i c a t i o n t h a t c o n s t r u c t i o n em i s s i o n s w i l l m e e t a l l a p p l i c a b l e re q u i r e m e n t s a n d w i l l n o t in t e r f e r e w i t h a i r q u a l i t y st a n d a r d s Ce r t i f i c a t i o n t h a t e q u i p m e n t co m p l i e s w i t h a p p l i c a b l e r u l e s an d r e g u l a t i o n s A c o m p l e t e d p e r m i t a p p l i c a t i o n m u s t be s u b m i t t e d t o t h e A P C D a l o n g w i t h a d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e b u s i n e s s op e r a t i o n a n d t h e e q u i p m e n t / ma t e r i a l s t o b e u s e d . T h e A u t h o r i t y to C o n s t r u c t i s r e q u i r e d b e f o r e co n s t r u c t i o n b e g i n s , s o b u s i n e s s e s sh o u l d s u b m i t t h e a p p l i c a t i o n w e l l i n ad v a n c e o f t h e p l a n n e d s t a r t d a t e . SL O A P C D 34 3 3 R o b e r t o C o u r t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A 9 3 4 0 1 Ph o n e ( 8 0 5 ) 7 8 1 - 5 9 1 2 Attachment 1 C7-41 WRRF Project TM No. 11 – Environmental and Permitting Strategy (Draft) Page 10 of 21 Attachment A: Sample Scopes of Work IS/MND Tasks The following subsections describe the tasks that would be included for the preparation of an IS/MND. Prepare Project Description A detailed Project Description would be prepared to initiate the environmental analyses and documentation for the proposed project. The Final Facilities Plan would serve as the basis for the Project Description. Additional information may be required to provide details not included in the Facilities Plan. Section 15071 of the CEQA Guidelines describes the contents of an ND, which include a brief description of the project, including a commonly used name for the project, if any; the location of the project, preferably shown on a map; and the name of the project proponent. The Project Description would also include background information about the need for the project; project objectives; details about construction, including the construction equipment needed to construct the project, construction hauling and access routes, construction sequencing/phasing, construction timing and work schedule, etc.; and anticipated permits and approvals. The draft Project Description would be submitted to City staff for review and would then be revised per City comments and resubmitted for review and approval by the City. Upon approval, the Project Description would be finalized and would be used in the environmental analyses and documentation for the proposed project. Prepare IS Checklist A Draft IS Checklist would be prepared based on the finalized Project Description and per “CEQA- Plus” guidelines. The Draft IS Checklist would be submitted to City staff for review. The Draft IS would then be revised per City comments and resubmitted for review and approval by the City. The conclusions provided in the completed IS Checklist would assist the City in determining if the proposed project may have a significant impact on the environment and to what extent. If no significant impacts are identified, then the IS would support the preparation and adoption of an MND. If potentially significant impacts are identified in the IS, then an EIR would need to be prepared, which would result in a modified scope (see the following section regarding scope of work for an EIR). Prepare Technical Reports and Administrative Draft IS/MND An Administrative Draft IS/MND would be prepared per CEQA Guidelines. The Administrative Draft IS/MND would include a description of the environmental setting; identify direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the proposed project; and recommend mitigation measures to avoid, reduce, or mitigate for those impacts. Additionally, under this task detailed technical reports would be prepared for specific resource areas that are shown in the IS checklist to need supporting documentation to substantiate impact levels. These resource areas may include Biological Resources and Cultural Resources, which in turn would require preparation of a Biological Resources Survey Report or Biological Assessment (BA) and a Cultural Resources Survey Report, as outlined in further detail below. The technical reports would discuss the potential construction related effects of the proposed project on the affected resource area(s). Attachment 1 C7-42 WRRF Project TM No. 11 – Environmental and Permitting Strategy (Draft) Page 11 of 21  Biological Assessment. Section 7 of the federal ESA prohibits “take” (including harm or harassment) of species listed as threatened or endangered without authorization. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has jurisdiction under the ESA for federally listed plants and wildlife species, and certain species of fish. The National Marine Fisheries (NMFS) has jurisdiction under the ESA for marine mammals and listed anadromous fish. A review of USFWS, NMFS, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) species lists, as well as the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) would be conducted for records of special-status species in the project area and vicinity. A field reconnaissance survey would be conducted to determine the potential presence of protected-species and/or habitats in the project area. A habitat map would be prepared based on the results of the field survey. A Draft BA would be prepared for submittal to the City for review and comment. The Draft BA would be revised based on comments from the City. The BA would address the potential for the project to result in “take” of listed species or adverse modification of their habitat. Once complete and approved by the City, the BA would be submitted for agency review. The findings of the BA would also be incorporated into the IS/MND.  Cultural Resources Survey Report: A records search would be conducted at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) located at Sonoma State University. This record search would consult California’s database of previous studies and previously recorded sites within the project area and within a ½-mile radius. A cultural resources field survey would then be conducted for the project area. The results would be provided in the Cultural Resources Survey Report. In addition, any forms documenting cultural or archaeological resources or historic properties in the project’s Area of Potential Effect (APE) would be included with the Technical Report. The findings of the technical report would also be incorporated into the IS/MND. Preparation of the technical reports and Administrative Draft IS/MND would include consultation with applicable Federal and state agencies with jurisdiction over resources in the project area and in compliance with “CEQA-Plus”. For example, preparation of the BA would include consultation with the CDFW and the USFWS for potential impacts to special-status plant and animal species and/or habitats; and preparation of the Cultural Resources Survey Report would include consultation with the California SHPO for potential impacts to historic and archaeological resources. Table 2 includes a list of the agency offices that would be contacted for each potential permit and/or approval. The draft technical reports and the Administrative Draft IS/MND would be submitted to City staff for review. The draft technical reports and the Administrative Draft IS/MND would then be revised per City comments and resubmitted for review and approval by the City. Prepare Public Review Draft IS/MND Upon approval, all comments on the Administrative Draft IS/MND would be addressed and/or incorporated as appropriate, and the Public Review Draft IS/MND would be prepared. A Draft Notice of Intent (NOI) to Adopt an MND would also be prepared for City review and approval. Upon approval, the NOI would be finalized and published in the local newspaper or posted on or off the site. The Public Review Draft IS/MND would be submitted to the City, and to the State Clearinghouse for compliance with CEQA. A Notice of Completion (NOC) would also be prepared and would accompany the Public Review Draft IS/MND for submission to the State Clearinghouse. Attachment 1 C7-43 WRRF Project TM No. 11 – Environmental and Permitting Strategy (Draft) Page 12 of 21 Prepare Administrative Final and Final IS/MND An Administrative Final IS/MND would be prepared and would include response to the public comments received on the Public Review Draft IS/MND. All comments received on the Draft IS/MND would be reviewed and draft responses to public comments would be prepared. A responses to Public Comments Appendix would be included in the Final IS/MND. The Administrative Final IS/MND would also include necessary minor corrections, changes, or revisions to the IS/MND as appropriate. The Administrative Final IS/MND would be submitted to the City for review. Upon receipt of the City’s comments, the Administrative Final IS/MND would be revised and resubmitted for review and approval by the City. Upon approval, the Final IS/MND would be prepared and submitted to the City for adoption. Per CEQA Guidelines, a Draft NOD would be prepared describing the City’s decision to approve the project. The NOD would be submitted to the State Clearinghouse and the San Luis Obispo County Clerk along with copies of the Final IS/MND. Prepare the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program A Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) would be prepared for the proposed project in accordance with CEQA. The MMRP would specify the project impacts to be mitigated, initiation/timing of mitigation, monitoring frequency, responsibility for verification of compliance, performance criteria, the date compliance is completed, and other specifications as necessary. Attachment 1 C7-44 WRRF Project TM No. 11 – Environmental and Permitting Strategy (Draft) Page 13 of 21 EIR Tasks If after the preparation of the IS Checklist, it is determined that an EIR is needed, the following tasks would be needed. Similar to the IS/MND, a project description and IS Checklist would be prepared. Section 15120 to 15132 of the CEQA Guidelines describes the contents of an EIR. The project description would include the following elements:  The precise location and boundaries of the proposed project shall be shown on a detailed map, preferably topographic. The location of the project shall also appear on a regional map.  A statement of objectives sought by the proposed project. A clearly written statement of objectives will help the lead agency develop a reasonable range of alternatives to evaluate in the EIR and will aid the decision makers in preparing findings or a statement of overriding considerations, if necessary. The statement of objectives should include the underlying purpose of the project.  A general description of the project’s technical, economic, and environmental characteristics, considering the principal engineering proposals if any and supporting public service facilities.  A statement briefly describing the intended uses of the EIR, including a list of the agencies that are expected to use the EIR in their decision making; a list of permits and other approvals required to implement the project; and a list of related environmental review and consultation requirements required by federal, state, or local laws, regulations, or policies. If a public agency must make more than one decision on a project, this statement would also include a list of all its decisions subject to CEQA, preferably in the order in which they will occur. The Project Description would also include background information about the need for the project; and details about construction, including the construction equipment needed to construct the project, construction hauling and access routes, construction sequencing/phasing, construction timing and work schedule, etc. Prepare Notice of Preparation If potentially significant impacts are identified in the IS Checklist, then an EIR would be prepared. A Draft Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the EIR would be prepared per the CEQA Guidelines. The Draft NOP would be submitted to the City for review and comment. Based on comments and guidance received from the City, the Final NOP would be prepared. The IS Checklist would accompany the NOP for submittal to the State Clearinghouse. Prepare Technical Reports and Administrative Draft EIR An Administrative Draft EIR would be prepared per CEQA Guidelines. Similar to an IS/MND, the Administrative Draft EIR would include a description of the environmental setting; identify direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the proposed project; and recommend mitigation measures to avoid, reduce, or mitigate for those impacts. Additionally, under this task detailed technical reports would be prepared for specific resource areas that are shown in the IS checklist to need supporting documentation to substantiate impact levels. These resource areas may include Biological Resources and Cultural Resources, which in turn would require preparation of a Biological Resources Survey Report or BA and a Cultural Resources Survey Report, as outlined in further detail below. The technical reports would discuss the potential construction related effects of the proposed project on the affected resource area(s). Attachment 1 C7-45 WRRF Project TM No. 11 – Environmental and Permitting Strategy (Draft) Page 14 of 21  Biological Assessment. Section 7 of the federal ESA prohibits “take” (including harm or harassment) of species listed as threatened or endangered without authorization. The USFWS has jurisdiction under the ESA for federally listed plants and wildlife species, and certain species of fish. The NMFS has jurisdiction under the ESA for marine mammals and listed anadromous fish. A review of USFWS, NMFS, and CDFW species lists, as well as the CNDDB would be conducted for records of special-status species in the project area and vicinity. A field reconnaissance survey would be conducted to determine the potential presence of protected-species and/or habitats in the project area. A habitat map would be prepared based on the results of the field survey. A Draft BA would be prepared for submittal to the City for review and comment. The Draft BA would be revised based on comments from the City. The BA would address the potential for the project to result in “take” of listed species or adverse modification of their habitat. Once complete and approved by the City, the BA would be submitted for agency review. The findings of the BA would also be incorporated into the EIR.  Cultural Resources Survey Report: A records search would be conducted at the Northwest Information Center of the CHRIS located at Sonoma State University. This record search would consult California’s database of previous studies and previously recorded sites within the project area and within a ½-mile radius. A cultural resources field survey would then be conducted for the project area. The results would be provided in the Cultural Resources Survey Report. In addition, any forms documenting cultural or archaeological resources or historic properties in the project’s APE would be included with the Technical Report. The findings of the technical report would also be incorporated into the EIR. Preparation of the technical reports and Administrative Draft EIR would include consultation with applicable Federal and state agencies with jurisdiction over resources in the project area and in compliance with “CEQA-Plus”. For example, preparation of the Biological Resources Report would include consultation with the CDFW and the USFWS for potential impacts to special-status plant and animal species and/or habitats; and preparation of the Cultural Resources Survey Report would include consultation with the California SHPO for potential impacts to historic and archaeological resources. The draft technical reports and the Administrative Draft EIR would be submitted to City staff for review. The draft technical reports and the Administrative Draft EIR would then be revised per City comments and resubmitted for review and approval by the City. Prepare Public Review Draft EIR Upon approval, all comments on the Administrative Draft EIR would be addressed and/or incorporated as appropriate, and the Public Review Draft EIR would be prepared. The Public Review Draft EIR would be submitted to the City, and to the State Clearinghouse for compliance with CEQA. A Notice of Completion (NOC) would also be prepared and would accompany the Public Review Draft EIR for submission to the State Clearinghouse. Prepare Notice of Availability (NOA) of Public Draft EIR A Draft NOA would be prepared for the City’s review and approval. Upon approval, the NOA would be finalized for release by the City. Attachment 1 C7-46 WRRF Project TM No. 11 – Environmental and Permitting Strategy (Draft) Page 15 of 21 Prepare for and Attend Public Hearing A public hearing for the proposed project would be held after the Draft EIR has been released for public review. The public hearing would include a presentation of environmental components of the EIR and a response to technical questions that arise during the public hearing. Following the public hearing, meeting notes would be prepared, and written and oral comments would be collected and summarized for submittal to the City for review. Respond to Comments Received on the Public Draft EIR Per CEQA Guidelines, and upon completion of the 45-day public review period for the Draft EIR, all comments received on the Draft EIR would be reviewed and a Draft Comment-Response Summary would be prepared. The Draft Comment-Response Summary would be submitted to City staff for review. The Draft Comment-Response Summary would then be revised per City comments and resubmitted for review and approval by the City. Upon approval, the Comment-Response Summary would be finalized for inclusion in the Final EIR. Prepare Administrative Final and Final EIR An Administrative Final EIR would be prepared and would include response to the public comments received on the Public Review Draft EIR. The Administrative Final EIR would also include necessary minor corrections, changes, or revisions to the EIR as appropriate. The Administrative Final EIR would be submitted to the City for review. Upon receipt of the City’s comments, the Administrative Final EIR would be revised and resubmitted for review and approval by the City. Upon approval, the Final EIR would be prepared and submitted to the City for adoption. Prepare the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program A Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) would be prepared for the proposed project in accordance with CEQA. The MMRP would specify the project impacts to be mitigated, initiation/timing of mitigation, monitoring frequency, responsibility for verification of compliance, performance criteria, the date compliance is completed, and other specifications as necessary. Prepare Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and NOD Per CEQA Guidelines, Draft Findings would be prepared for rationale of each significant impact identified in the EIR; a Draft Statement of Overriding Considerations, if applicable, would be prepared to support the City’s action for approval of the proposed project; and a Draft Notice of Determine (NOD) would be prepared describing the City’s decision to approve the project. Based on comments and guidance received from the City, the revised Final Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and NOD would be prepared and submitted to the City. The NOD would be submitted to the State Clearinghouse and the San Luis Obispo County Clerk along with copies of the Final EIR. Attachment 1 C7-47 WRRF Project TM No. 11 – Environmental and Permitting Strategy (Draft) Page 16 of 21 Appendix B: Draft EIR Schedule Attachment 1 C7-48 ID T a s k  Na m e D u r a t i o n S t a r t F i n i s h 1 En v i r o n m e n t a l  Co n s u l t a n t  Pr o c u r e m e n t  Pr o c e s s 86  da y s Mo n  4/ 2 0 / 1 5 Tu e  8/ 1 8 / 1 5 2 De v e l o p  RF P 3 da y s Mo n  4/ 2 0 / 1 5 We d  4/ 2 2 / 1 5 3 Ci t y  Re v i e w  of  RF P 2 da y s Th u  4/ 2 3 / 1 5 Fr i  4/ 2 4 / 1 5 4 In c l u d e  RF P  in  Ci t y  Co u n c i l  Ag e n d a  Pa c k e t 3 da y s Mo n  4/ 2 7 / 1 5 We d  4/ 2 9 / 1 5 5 Ci t y  Co u n c i l  ap p r o v a l  of  RF P 0 da y s Th u  5/ 2 1 / 1 5 Th u  5/ 2 1 / 1 5 6 Pr i n t  an d  Re l e a s e  RF P 5 da y s Th u  5/ 2 1 / 1 5 We d  5/ 2 7 / 1 5 7 RF P  so l i c i t a t i o n  pe r i o d 15  da y s Th u  5/ 2 8 / 1 5 We d  6/ 1 7 / 1 5 8 Ci t y  Re v i e w  of  Pr o p o s a l s 5 da y s Th u  6/ 1 8 / 1 5 We d  6/ 2 4 / 1 5 9 Co n d u c t  In t e r v i e w s 2 da y s Th u  6/ 2 5 / 1 5 Fr i  6/ 2 6 / 1 5 10 Se l e c t  Co n s u l t a n t 5 da y s Mo n  6/ 2 9 / 1 5 Fr i  7/ 3 / 1 5 11 No t i f y  Se l e c t e d  Co n s u l t a n t 0 da y s Fr i  7/ 3 / 1 5 Fr i  7/ 3 / 1 5 12 Ne g o t i a t e  Co n s u l t a n t  Sc o p e  an d  Fe e 15  da y s Mo n  7/ 6 / 1 5 Fr i  7/ 2 4 / 1 5 13 In c l u d e  Co n s u l t a n t  Co n t r a c t  in  Ci t y  Ag e n d a  Pa c k e t 5 da y s Mo n  7/ 2 7 / 1 5 Fr i  7/ 3 1 / 1 5 14 Ci t y  Co u n c i l  Ap p r o v a l  of  Co n s u l t a n t  Sc o p e  an d  Fe e 0 da y s Tu e  8/ 1 8 / 1 5 Tu e  8/ 1 8 / 1 5 15 En v i r o n m e n t a l  Im p a c t  Re p o r t 28 1  da y s Tu e  9/ 1 / 1 5 Tu e  9/ 2 7 / 1 6 16 Pr o j e c t  De s c r i p t i o n 50  da y s Tu e  9/ 1 / 1 5 Mo n  11 / 9 / 1 5 17 Pr e p a r e  Dr a f t  Pr o j e c t  De s c r i p t i o n 30  da y s Tu e  9/ 1 / 1 5 Mo n  10 / 1 2 / 1 5 18 Ci t y  Re v i e w  of  Dr a f t  Pr o j e c t  De s c r i p t i o n 10  da y s Tu e  10 / 1 3 / 1 5 Mo n  10 / 2 6 / 1 5 19 Fi n a l i z e  Pr o j e c t  De s c r i p t i o n 10  da y s Tu e  10 / 2 7 / 1 5 Mo n  11 / 9 / 1 5 20 In i t i a l  St u d y  Ch e c k l i s t  an d  NO P 57  da y s Tu e  11 / 1 0 / 1 5 We d  1/ 2 7 / 1 6 21 Pr e p a r e  IS  Ch e c k l i s t  an d  NO P 15  da y s Tu e  11 / 1 0 / 1 5 Mo n  11 / 3 0 / 1 5 22 Ci t y  Re v i e w  of  IS  Ch e c k l i s t  an d  NO P 10  da y s Tu e  12 / 1 / 1 5 Mo n  12 / 1 4 / 1 5 23 Fi n a l i z e  IS  Ch e c k l i s t  an d  NO P 10  da y s Tu e  12 / 1 5 / 1 5 Mo n  12 / 2 8 / 1 5 24 Pu b l i s h  NO P 0 da y s Mo n  12 / 2 8 / 1 5 Mo n  12 / 2 8 / 1 5 25 Pu b l i c  re v i e w  pe r i o d  fo r  NO P 30  ed a y s Mo n  12 / 2 8 / 1 5 We d  1/ 2 7 / 1 6 26 Dr a f t  EI R 15 3  da y s Tu e  12 / 2 9 / 1 5 Th u  7/ 2 8 / 1 6 27 Pr e p a r e  Ad m i n .  Dr a f t  EI R 45  da y s Tu e  12 / 2 9 / 1 5 Mo n  2/ 2 9 / 1 6 28 Ci t y  Re v i e w  of  Ad m i n .  Dr a f t  EI R 15  da y s Tu e  3/ 1 / 1 6 Mo n  3/ 2 1 / 1 6 29 Pr e p a r e  Sc r e e n c h e c k  EI R 15  da y s Tu e  3/ 2 2 / 1 6 Mo n  4/ 1 1 / 1 6 30 Ci t y  Re v i e w  of  Sc r e e n c h e c k  Dr a f t  EI R 10  da y s Tu e  4/ 1 2 / 1 6 Mo n  4/ 2 5 / 1 6 31 Pr e p a r e  Pu b l i c  Re v i e w  Dr a f t  EI R 5 da y s Tu e  4/ 2 6 / 1 6 Mo n  5/ 2 / 1 6 32 Pu b l i s h  Dr a f t  EI R 0 da y s Mo n  5/ 2 / 1 6 Mo n  5/ 2 / 1 6 33 Pu b l i c  Re v i e w  Pe r i o d  fo r  Dr a f t  EI R 45  ed a y s Mo n  5/ 2 / 1 6 Th u  6/ 1 6 / 1 6 34 Pu b l i c  He a r i n g  fo r  EI R 0 da y s We d  5/ 1 8 / 1 6 We d  5/ 1 8 / 1 6 35 Pr e p a r e  Dr a f t  Co m m e n t ‐Re s p o n s e  Su m m a r y 15  da y s Fr i  6/ 1 7 / 1 6 Th u  7/ 7 / 1 6 36 Ci t y  Re v i e w  of  Dr a f t  Co m m e n t ‐Re s p o n s e  Su m m a r y 10  da y s Fr i  7/ 8 / 1 6 Th u  7/ 2 1 / 1 6 37 Pr e p a r e  Fi n a l  Co m m e n t ‐Re s p o n s e  Su m m a r y 5 da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  7/ 2 8 / 1 6 38 Fi n a l  EI R   46  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Fr i  9/ 2 3 / 1 6 39 Pr e p a r e  Ad m i n .  Fi n a l  EI R 10  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  8/ 4 / 1 6 5/ 2 1 7/ 3 8/ 1 8 12 / 2 8 5/2 5/18 M A M J J A S O N D J F M A MJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJ 20 1 6 20172018 Ta s k Sp l i t Mi l e s t o n e Su m m a r y Pr o j e c t  Su m m a r y Ex t e r n a l  Ta s k s Ex t e r n a l  Mi l e s t o n e In a c t i v e  Ta s k In a c t i v e  Mi l e s t o n e In a c t i v e  Su m m a r y Ma n u a l  Ta s k Du r a t i o n ‐on l y Ma n u a l  Summary Rollup Ma n u a l  Summary St a r t ‐on l y Fi n i s h ‐on l y Deadline Progress Pa g e  1 Pr o j e c t :  De t a i l e d  EI R  & Pe r m i t t i n g Da t e :  Tu e  4/ 2 1 / 1 5 Attachment 1 C7-49 ID T a s k  Na m e D u r a t i o n S t a r t F i n i s h 40 Ci t y  Re v i e w  of  Ad m i n .  Fi n a l  EI R 10  da y s Fr i  8/ 5 / 1 6 Th u  8/ 1 8 / 1 6 41 Pr e p a r e  Fi n a l  EI R 10  da y s Fr i  8/ 1 9 / 1 6 Th u  9/ 1 / 1 6 42 Pr e p a r e  Dr a f t  MM R P 10  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  8/ 4 / 1 6 43 Ci t y  Re v i e w  of  Dr a f t  MM R P 10  da y s Fr i  8/ 5 / 1 6 Th u  8/ 1 8 / 1 6 44 Pr e p a r e  Fi n a l  MM R P 5 da y s Fr i  8/ 1 9 / 1 6 Th u  8/ 2 5 / 1 6 45 Pr e p a r e  Dr a f t  Fi n d i n g s ,  St a t e m e n t  of  Ov e r r i d i n g   Co n s i d e r a t i o n s  an d  No t i c e  of  De t e r m i n a t i o n  (N O D ) 10  da y s Fr i  8/ 1 9 / 1 6 Th u  9/ 1 / 1 6 46 Ci t y  Re v i e w  of  Dr a f t  Fi n d i n g s ,  St a t e m e n t  of   Ov e r r i d i n g  Co n s i d e r a t i o n s  an d  NO D 10  da y s Fr i  9/ 2 / 1 6 Th u  9/ 1 5 / 1 6 47 Pr e p a r e  Fi n a l  Fi n d i n g s ,  St a t e m e n t  of  Ov e r r i d i n g   Co n s i d e r a t i o n s  an d  NO D 5 da y s Fr i  9/ 1 6 / 1 6 Th u  9/ 2 2 / 1 6 48 Co u n c i l  ad o p t i o n  an d  ap p r o v a l  of  th e  EI R ,  Fi n d i n g s ,   an d  St a t e m e n t  of  Ov e r r i d i n g  Co n s i d e r a t i o n s 0 da y s Th u  9/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  9/ 2 2 / 1 6 49 Fi l e  NO D  wi t h  SC H  an d  Co u n t y  Cl e r k 1 da y Fr i  9/ 2 3 / 1 6 Fr i  9/ 2 3 / 1 6 50 Pe r m i t t i n g 10 8 6  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Fr i  9/ 1 8 / 2 0 51 US A C E  Se c t i o n  40 4  Pe r m i t 22 0  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  5/ 2 5 / 1 7 52 Pr e p a r e  US A C E  40 4  pe r m i t  pa c k a g e 75  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 3 / 1 6 53 Ci t y  Re v i e w 15  da y s Fr i  11 / 4 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 2 4 / 1 6 54 Fi n a l i z e  US A C E  40 4  pe r m i t  pa c k a g e 10  da y s Fr i  11 / 2 5 / 1 6 Th u  12 / 8 / 1 6 55 Su b m i t  40 4  pe r m i t  pa c k a g e  to  US A C E 0 da y s Th u  12 / 8 / 1 6 Th u  12 / 8 / 1 6 56 US A C E  Re v i e w  an d  Ne g o t i a t i o n  of  40 4  pe r m i t 6 mo n s Fr i  12 / 9 / 1 6 Th u  5/ 2 5 / 1 7 57 CD F W  Se c t i o n  16 0 2 ,  St r e a m b e d  Al t e r a t i o n 16 5  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  3/ 9 / 1 7 58 Pr e p a r e  CD F W  SA A  pe r m i t  pa c k a g e 60  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  10 / 1 3 / 1 6 59 Ci t y  Re v i e w   15  da y s Fr i  10 / 1 4 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 3 / 1 6 60 Fi n a l i z e  CD F W  SA A  pe r m i t  pa c k a g e 10  da y s Fr i  11 / 4 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 1 7 / 1 6 61 Su b m i t  SA A  pe r m i t  pa c k a g e  to  CD F W 0 da y s Th u  11 / 1 7 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 1 7 / 1 6 62 CD F W  Re v i e w  an d  Ne g o t i a t i o n  of  SA A  pe r m i t 4 mo n s Fr i  11 / 1 8 / 1 6 Th u  3/ 9 / 1 7 63 CD F W  Co n s u l t a t i o n  an d  In c i d e n t a l  Ta k e  Pe r m i t 22 0  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  5/ 2 5 / 1 7 64 Pr e p a r e  CD F W  20 8 1  IT P  Pa c k a g e 75  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 3 / 1 6 65 Ci t y  Re v i e w   15  da y s Fr i  11 / 4 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 2 4 / 1 6 66 Fi n a l i z e  CD F W  20 8 1  IT P  Pa c k a g e 10  da y s Fr i  11 / 2 5 / 1 6 Th u  12 / 8 / 1 6 67 Su b m i t  20 8 1  IT P  Pa c k a g e  to  CD F W 0 da y s Th u  12 / 8 / 1 6 Th u  12 / 8 / 1 6 68 CD F W  Re v i e w  an d  Ne g o t i a t i o n  of  IT P 6 mo n s Fr i  12 / 9 / 1 6 Th u  5/ 2 5 / 1 7 69 RW Q C B  40 1  Wa t e r  Qu a l i t y  Ce r t i f i c a t i o n 20 5  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  5/ 4 / 1 7 70 Pr e p a r e  RW Q C B  40 1  WQ C  pa c k a g e 60  da y s Fr i  7/ 2 2 / 1 6 Th u  10 / 1 3 / 1 6 71 Ci t y  Re v i e w 15  da y s Fr i  10 / 1 4 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 3 / 1 6 72 Fi n a l i z e  RW Q C B  40 1  WQ C  pa c k a g e 10  da y s Fr i  11 / 4 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 1 7 / 1 6 73 Su b m i t  40 1  WQ C  pa c k a g e  to  RW Q C B 0 da y s Th u  11 / 1 7 / 1 6 Th u  11 / 1 7 / 1 6 74 RW Q C B  Re v i e w  an d  Ne g o t i a t i o n  of  40 1  WQ C   6 mo n s Fr i  11 / 1 8 / 1 6 Th u  5/ 4 / 1 7 75 RW Q C B  40 2  NP D E S  Ge n e r a l  Pe r m i t 15 5  da y s We d  3/ 1 / 1 7 Tu e  10 / 3 / 1 7 9/22 12/8 11/17 12/8 11/17 M A M J J A S O N D J F M A MJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJ 20 1 6 20172018 Ta s k Sp l i t Mi l e s t o n e Su m m a r y Pr o j e c t  Su m m a r y Ex t e r n a l  Ta s k s Ex t e r n a l  Mi l e s t o n e In a c t i v e  Ta s k In a c t i v e  Mi l e s t o n e In a c t i v e  Su m m a r y Ma n u a l  Ta s k Du r a t i o n ‐on l y Ma n u a l  Summary Rollup Ma n u a l  Summary St a r t ‐on l y Fi n i s h ‐on l y Deadline Progress Pa g e  2 Pr o j e c t :  De t a i l e d  EI R  & Pe r m i t t i n g Da t e :  Tu e  4/ 2 1 / 1 5 Attachment 1 C7-50 ID T a s k  Na m e D u r a t i o n S t a r t F i n i s h 76 Pr e p a r e  SW P P P  an d  NP D E S  pe r m i t  pa c k a g e 50  da y s We d  3/ 1 / 1 7 Tu e  5/ 9 / 1 7 77 Ci t y  Re v i e w 15  da y s We d  5/ 1 0 / 1 7 Tu e  5/ 3 0 / 1 7 78 Fi n a l i z e  SW P P P  an d  NP D E S  pe r m i t  pa c k a g e 10  da y s We d  5/ 3 1 / 1 7 Tu e  6/ 1 3 / 1 7 79 Su b m i t  SW P P P  an d  NP D E S  pe r m i t  pa c k a g e  to  RW Q C B 0 da y s Tu e  6/ 1 3 / 1 7 Tu e  6/ 1 3 / 1 7 80 RW Q C B  Re v i e w  an d  Ne g o t i a t i o n  of  NP D E S  pe r m i t 4 mo n s We d  6/ 1 4 / 1 7 Tu e  10 / 3 / 1 7 81 SL O A P C D  Ai r  Pe r m i t s 84 3  da y s We d  3/ 1 / 1 7 Fr i  5/ 2 2 / 2 0 82 Pr e p a r e  SL O A P C D  Au t h o r i t y  to  Co n s t r u c t  Pe r m i t 50  da y s We d  3/ 1 / 1 7 Tu e  5/ 9 / 1 7 83 Ci t y  Re v i e w 15  da y s We d  5/ 1 0 / 1 7 Tu e  5/ 3 0 / 1 7 84 Fi n a l i z e  SL O A P C D  Au t h o r i t y  to  Co n s t r u c t  Pe r m i t 10  da y s We d  5/ 3 1 / 1 7 Tu e  6/ 1 3 / 1 7 85 Su b m i t  Au t h o r i t y  to  Co n s t r u c t  Pe r m i t  to  SL O A P C D 0 da y s Tu e  6/ 1 3 / 1 7 Tu e  6/ 1 3 / 1 7 86 SL O A P C D  Re v i e w  of  Au t h o r i t y  to  Co n s t r u c t  Pe r m i t 3 mo n s We d  6/ 1 4 / 1 7 Tu e  9/ 5 / 1 7 87 Re q u e s t  SL O A P C D  Pe r m i t  to  Op e r a t e  (p o s t   co n s t r u c t i o n ) 5 da y s Mo n  3/ 2 / 2 0 Fr i  3/ 6 / 2 0 88 Re c e i p t  of  Pe r m i t  to  Op e r a t e 10  da y s Mo n  5/ 1 1 / 2 0 Fr i  5/ 2 2 / 2 0 89 Co o r d i n a t e  wi t h  PG & E  (3 0 %  de s i g n  le v e l ) 12  mo n s Th u  9/ 1 / 1 6 We d  8/ 2 / 1 7 90 Ci t y  Bu i l d i n g ,  Gr a d i n g ,  En c r o a c h m e n t  Pe r m i t s  (6 0 %   de s i g n  le v e l ) 6 mo n s We d  3/ 1 / 1 7 Tu e  8/ 1 5 / 1 7 91 Ca l t r a n s  En c r o a c h m e n t  Pe r m i t 6 mo n s We d  3/ 1 / 1 7 Tu e  8/ 1 5 / 1 7 92 FE M A  CL O M R / L O M R 92 8  da y s We d  3/ 1 / 1 7 Fr i  9/ 1 8 / 2 0 93 Pr e p a r e  CL O M R  ap p l i c a t i o n  pa c k a g e  (6 0 %  de s i g n   le v e l ) 30  da y s We d  3/ 1 / 1 7 Tu e  4/ 1 1 / 1 7 94 Ci t y  re v i e w  of  CL O M R  ap p l i c a t i o n  pa c k a g e 10  da y s We d  4/ 1 2 / 1 7 Tu e  4/ 2 5 / 1 7 95 Re v i s e  CL O M R  ap p l i c a t i o n  pa c k a g e  pe r  Ci t y   co m m e n t s 10  da y s We d  4/ 2 6 / 1 7 Tu e  5/ 9 / 1 7 96 Su b m i t  CL O M R  ap p l i c a t i o n  pa c k a g e  to  FE M A 0 da y s Tu e  5/ 9 / 1 7 Tu e  5/ 9 / 1 7 97 FE M A  in i t i a l  re v i e w  of  CL O M R  ap p l i c a t i o n  pa c k a g e 30  da y s We d  5/ 1 0 / 1 7 Tu e  6/ 2 0 / 1 7 98 Re c e i p t  of  CL O M R  ce r t i f i c a t e 60  da y s We d  6/ 2 1 / 1 7 Tu e  9/ 1 2 / 1 7 99 Pr e p a r e  LO M R  ap p l i c a t i o n  pa c k a g e   (p o s t ‐co n s t r u c t i o n ) 30  da y s Mo n  3/ 2 / 2 0 Fr i  4/ 1 0 / 2 0 10 0 Ci t y  re v i e w  of  LO M R  ap p l i c a t i o n  pa c k a g e 15  da y s Mo n  4/ 1 3 / 2 0 Fr i  5/ 1 / 2 0 10 1 Re v i s e  LO M R  ap p l i c a t i o n  pa c k a g e  pe r  Ci t y  co m m e n t s 10  da y s Mo n  5/ 4 / 2 0 Fr i  5/ 1 5 / 2 0 10 2 Su b m i t  to  LO M R  ap p l i c a t i o n  pa c k a g e  to  FE M A 0 da y s Fr i  5/ 1 5 / 2 0 Fr i  5/ 1 5 / 2 0 10 3 FE M A  re v i e w  of  LO M R  ap p l i c a t i o n  pa c k a g e 30  da y s Mo n  5/ 1 8 / 2 0 Fr i  6/ 2 6 / 2 0 10 4 Re c e i p t  of  LO M R  ap p r o v a l 60  da y s Mo n  6/ 2 9 / 2 0 Fr i  9/ 1 8 / 2 0 6/13 6/13 5/9 M A M J J A S O N D J F M A MJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJ 20 1 6 20172018 Ta s k Sp l i t Mi l e s t o n e Su m m a r y Pr o j e c t  Su m m a r y Ex t e r n a l  Ta s k s Ex t e r n a l  Mi l e s t o n e In a c t i v e  Ta s k In a c t i v e  Mi l e s t o n e In a c t i v e  Su m m a r y Ma n u a l  Ta s k Du r a t i o n ‐on l y Ma n u a l  Summary Rollup Ma n u a l  Summary St a r t ‐on l y Fi n i s h ‐on l y Deadline Progress Pa g e  3 Pr o j e c t :  De t a i l e d  EI R  & Pe r m i t t i n g Da t e :  Tu e  4/ 2 1 / 1 5 Attachment 1 C7-51 WRRF Project TM No. 11 – Environmental and Permitting Strategy (Draft) Page 20 of 21 Attachment C: Program EIR Guidelines CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 describes a Program EIR as follows: (a) General. A Program EIR is an EIR which may be prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project and are related either: (1) Geographically, (2) As logical parts in the chain of contemplated actions, (3) In connection with issuance of rules, regulations, plans, or other general criteria to govern the conduct of a continuing program, or (4) As individual activities carried out under the same authorizing statutory or regulatory authority and having generally similar environmental effects which can be mitigated in similar ways. (b) Advantages. Use of a Program EIR can provide the following advantages. The Program EIR can: (1) Provide an occasion for a more exhaustive consideration of effects and alternatives than would be practical in an EIR on an individual action, (2) Ensure consideration of cumulative impacts that might be slighted in a case-by-case analysis, (3) Avoid duplicative reconsideration of basic policy considerations, (4) Allow the lead agency to consider broad policy alternatives and program-wide mitigation measures at an early time when the agency has greater flexibility to deal with basic problems or cumulative impacts, (5) Allow reduction in paperwork. (c) Use With Later Activities. Subsequent activities in the program must be examined in the light of the Program EIR to determine whether an additional environmental document must be prepared. (1) If a later activity would have effects that were not examined in the Program EIR, a new initial study would need to be prepared leading to either an EIR or a negative declaration. (2) If the agency finds that pursuant to Section 15162, no new effects could occur or no new mitigation measures would be required, the agency can approve the activity as being within the scope of the project covered by the Program EIR, and no new environmental document would be required. (3) An agency shall incorporate feasible mitigation measures and alternatives developed in the Program EIR into subsequent actions in the program. (4) Where the subsequent activities involve site specific operations, the agency should use a written checklist or similar device to document the evaluation of the site and the activity to determine whether the environmental effects of the operation were covered in the Program EIR. (5) A Program EIR will be most helpful in dealing with subsequent activities if it deals with the effects of the program as specifically and comprehensively as possible. With a good and detailed analysis of the program, many subsequent activities could be found to be within the scope of the project described in the Program EIR, and no further environmental documents would be required. (d) Use With Subsequent EIRS and Negative Declarations. A Program EIR can be used to simplify the task of preparing environmental documents on later parts of the program. The program EIR can: (1) Provide the basis in an initial study for determining whether the later activity may have any significant effects. Attachment 1 C7-52 WRRF Project TM No. 11 – Environmental and Permitting Strategy (Draft) Page 21 of 21 (2) Be incorporated by reference to deal with regional influences, secondary effects, cumulative impacts, broad alternatives, and other factors that apply to the program as a whole. (3) Focus an EIR on a subsequent project to permit discussion solely of new effects which had not been considered before. Attachment 1 C7-53 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director Prepared By: Rafael E. Cornejo, Building & Safety Supervisor SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE BY ADDING CHAPTER 15.10 TO TITLE 15 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH A RENTAL HOUSING INSPECTION PROGRAM, RECOMMENDATION Adopt Ordinance No. 1616 (2015 Series) enacting amendments to Titles 15 of the Municipal Code by adding Chapter 15.10 establishing a Rental Housing Inspection Program and determining that the project program is exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15061 (b)(3), 15308, 15309 and 15321. DISCUSSION On May 5, 2015, the council introduced Ordinance 1616 for the establishment of a Rental Housing Inspection Program. Minor changes have been made to the Ordinance as directed by the City Council. The ordinance is now ready for adoption. The amendment will become effective 30 days after final passage of the Ordinance. ALTERNATIVES 1. The council could reject adoption of the proposed Municipal Code Amendments. This is not recommended as a Rental Housing Inspection Program will be part of the Neighborhood Wellness which is one of the Major City goals. ATTACHMENTS 1. Ordinance No. 1616 (2015 Series) t:\council agenda reports\2015\2015-05-19\rental housing inspection program\council agenda report.docx 05/19/2015 C8 C8-1 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Attachment 1 Page 1 ORDINANCE NO. 1616 (2015 Series) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AMENDING TITLE 15 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING CHAPTER 15.10 AND ESTABLISHING A RENTAL HOUSING INSPECTION PROGRAM WHEREAS, California Health and Safety Code sections 17910-17998.3 establish minimum standards for the maintenance of housing units, authorizes local enforcement of state housing laws and adopted building codes, and specifically authorizes the adoption of proactive programs for housing inspections; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo has expressed its desire and intent to ensure the preservation of the city’s neighborhoods as embodied in its adoption of the Major City Goal of Neighborhood Wellness; and WHEREAS, the proportion of the housing stock within the City of San Luis Obispo (“City”) that is comprised of rental dwelling units has grown significantly over the past 30 years and is well above the statewide average; and WHEREAS, over the past several years, the City has experienced an increased level of complaints regarding the existence of substandard rental housing within the R-1 and R-2 zones; and WHEREAS, City Code Enforcement records indicate that a majority of health and safety related violations within the City are attributable to single family and duplex rental dwelling units. Specifically, in 2013, 79% of all code enforcement violations within residential zones were attributable to rental units, 80% of which involve substandard, overcrowded and unsanitary conditions of single family and duplex units in the R1 and R2 zone districts; and WHEREAS, the City Council acknowledges that certain transient uses (hotels, motels and bed and breakfast establishments) and multifamily units in the R-3 and R-4 zone districts are currently subject to annual inspections by the City Fire Marshall, which, among other things, contributes to better awareness and maintenance of such units; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that rental dwelling units within the R1 and R2 zone districts often lack proactive property management and other similar devices typically found in multi-family developments within the R-3 and R-4 zones such as CC&Rs, common areas or homeowners associations which help maintain property maintenance standards and mitigate the potential for substandard housing; and WHEREAS, deficient and substandard housing has many detrimental effects on the stability of the city’s neighborhoods, is environmentally undesirable, creates unsafe living conditions for tenants and neighbors, contributes to blight, negatively affects property values, C8-2 Attachment 1 Page 2 and is otherwise detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the community and its citizens; and WHEREAS, based on previous code enforcement activities and extensive community outreach, the City Council finds that tenants within the City are reluctant to report Building Code violations or other dangerous conditions to the City in fear of retaliation by their landlord despite state laws that make it unlawful for any retaliation to occur; and WHEREAS, the City’s code enforcement program typically only inspects the interior of dwelling units upon the request of tenants and or complaints by neighbors that provide adequate information to initiate a complaint or to obtain an inspection warrant pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Sections 1822.50 through 1822.57; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that there is a need for a proactive and systematic program to inspect rental housing units within the R1 and R2 zone districts in order to better identify, address and correct substandard living conditions within this part of the City’s rental community; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo desires to provide for safe, livable and attractive neighborhoods and finds that the adoption and implementation of a rental housing inspection program will promote public health and safety of the community by the elimination of substandard housing conditions, and will promote community standards for the maintenance of properties and will otherwise further the City’s goal of Neighborhood Wellness. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein by this reference as the findings of the City Council. SECTION 2. Environmental Determination. The proposed ordinance is exempt from environmental review per California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because the ordinance strengthens current provisions of the Municipal Code relating to code enforcement and housing and it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity may have a significant effect on the environment. The ordinance consists of the inspection of existing residential dwelling units, including single-family dwellings, duplexes, and second dwelling units, which are rented or leased and used for residential purposes. The ordinance does not involve any physical modifications to the environment. Additionally, the proposed ordinance is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15308 (Protection of the Environment), 15309 (Inspections) as the proposed rental inspection program consists of regulatory action by the city authorized under state and local ordinance to assure that the maintenance of rental properties which are rented or leased and used for rental residential purposes are in compliance with local and state laws. Lastly, the program is exempt pursuant to 15321 of the CEQA guidelines as it consists of enforcement and C8-3 Attachment 1 Page 3 inspection actions by the City of San Luis Obispo to enforce building and zoning codes and standards and other applicable housing codes (Enforcement Actions). The project involves updates and revisions to existing regulations. The proposed code amendments are consistent with California law, specifically the California Health & Safety Code Sections 17920 -17998. The proposed ordinance consist of regulatory enforcement actions and inspections that are intended to protect the health and safety of neighborhoods and it can be seen with certainty that the proposed ordinance will have no significant effect on the environment. SECTION 3. Action. Chapter 15.10 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code establishing a rental housing inspection program is hereby added to read as follows: Chapter 15.10 - RENTAL HOUSING INSPECTION 15.10.010 - Purpose and intent. The purpose and intent of this chapter is to safeguard the public and preserve the city’s neighborhoods and housing stock by insuring that rental housing units are maintained in a safe and sanitary condition in accordance with the State Housing Law, State Building Standards, and local property maintenance and zoning provisions. The further purpose and intent of this chapter is to proactively identify substandard and unsafe residential rental units and to ensure their rehabilitation or elimination. This chapter is further intended to enhance the quality of life for all residents of the city, whether living in rental or owner-occupied dwelling units. 15.10.020 - Definitions. As used in this chapter: “Building, housing, and sanitation codes or ordinances” shall refer to: the current adopted codes specified in Title 15 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, as modified. The phrase “building, housing and sanitation codes or ordinances” shall also refer to the City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Ordinance as codified in Title 17 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, City of San Luis Obispo Subdivision Ordinance as codified in Title 16 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, and all provisions of California statutory law and the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code pertaining to property-related sanitation, maintenance, health, safety and nuisance, as well as regulations promulgated pursuant to California statute, for which the city has enforcement authority. “Building Official” means the person designated as the Chief Building Official by the City Manager, or his or her designee. “Community Development Department” means the San Luis Obispo Community Development Department. “Director” means the Community Development Director. “Inspection Fee” means the amount charged for the inspection of each unit and includes an initial inspection and one subsequent inspection if required. C8-4 Attachment 1 Page 4 “Nuisance” shall have the same meaning as set forth in California Civil Code Section 3479, or any condition as defined in chapter 8.24 et seq. of this Code, or any condition declared and deemed by the City Council to constitute a nuisance, or any violation of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. “Owner” or “Owners” means the person, persons or entity identified and listed as having title to one or more Residential Rental Dwelling Unit(s) by the latest property tax assessment roll maintained by the San Luis Obispo County Tax Assessor. “Person” means an individual, corporation, partnership, association or other legal entity. “Registration Delinquency Fee” means a fee established by resolution of the City Council and imposed to Owners who fail to register each Residential Rental Dwelling Unit with the city and submit a completed Rental Registration Form and Rental Registration Fee pursuant to the requirements of this chapter. The Registration Delinquency Fee shall be in addition to the Rental Registration Fee(s) computed from the first date when the person engaged in the residential rental business in the city after the effective date of this chapter. The Registration Delinquency Fee shall add a penalty of twenty (20) percent of the Rental Registration Fee on the first day of the month following the due date and ten (10) percent for each month thereafter while the fee remains unpaid, provided that the amount of the penalty shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of the amount of the fee due. “Re-inspection Fee” means a fee established by resolution of the City Council and, except as provided in this chapter, is imposed on Owners who (1) fail to pass an initial inspection and one follow-up inspection for a Residential Rental Dwelling Unit, (2) fail to provide access for any scheduled inspection, or (3) re-inspection cannot be made to a Residential Rental Dwelling Unit by the Inspector due to a failure to provide access. “Rental Registration Fee” means the annual fee established by resolution of the City Council charged to the Owner(s) of each Residential Rental Dwelling Unit within the scope of this chapter, and intended to cover a portion the administrative costs of the rental inspection program. This fee is payable each and every year. “Residential Rental Dwelling Unit” means single-family dwellings, duplexes, and second dwelling units, which are rented, leased, or held out for rent or lease, or otherwise used for residential rental purposes, including any curtilage, structures or buildings on the property on which the Residential Rental Dwelling Unit is located within the San Luis Obispo City limits, except as otherwise exempted in this chapter. This definition excludes multifamily dwellings having three or more dwelling units within a structure and transient type occupancies (hotels, motels and bed-and-breakfasts). “Self-Certification Checklist” means a list developed by the Building Official to be used by an Owner enrolled in the self-certification program to evaluate a Residential Rental Dwelling Unit for compliance with applicable local and state laws. “Self-Certification Fee” means the fee established by resolution of the City Council an Owner shall pay if he or she wishes to apply for the self-certification program. This fee is payable upon application into the self-certification program once for each three (3) year cycle and is a flat fee for each Property with a Residential Rental Dwelling Unit. “Substandard Dwelling” means a Residential Rental Dwelling Unit that is in violation of any building, housing, and sanitation codes or ordinances or any condition which is defined as C8-5 Attachment 1 Page 5 constituting a substandard building or dwelling as defined by California Health and Safety Code Section 17920.3. 15.10.030 – Scope and Applicability. A. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all Residential Rental Dwelling Units and any curtilage, structures or buildings on the property on which the Residential Rental Dwelling Unit is located within the San Luis Obispo City limits, except as otherwise exempted in this chapter. B. Provisions of this chapter shall be supplementary and complementary to all of the provisions of this code, State law, and any law cognizable at common law or equity, and nothing herein shall be construed, read, or interpreted in any manner so as to limit any existing right or power of the city to abate and prosecute any and all nuisances or to enforce any other conditions in violation of State or local codes, including, but not limited to, any building, housing, property maintenance and public nuisance violations. 15.10.040 - Inspections; Compliance with Applicable Codes and Standards. A. Inspections. The Building Official, or his or her designee, hereinafter referred to as the “Inspector,” is authorized to periodically inspect all Residential Rental Dwelling Units to determine whether such Residential Rental Dwelling Units comply with applicable provisions of all building, housing and sanitation codes or ordinances. B. Compliance with Codes and Standards. When inspections are made under this chapter, Residential Rental Dwelling Units shall be required to be constructed in accordance with the code standard that was in effect at the time the Residential Rental Dwelling Unit was constructed, altered, remodeled, erected or converted pursuant to a validly issued permit. Unpermitted construction, additions and/or alterations must comply with current all building, housing and sanitation codes or ordinances adopted by the City, unless otherwise provided by law. C. If an inspection is scheduled and entry is thereafter refused or cannot be obtained, the inspector shall have recourse to every remedy provided by law to secure lawful entry and inspect the premises, including, but not limited to, securing an inspection warrant pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Sections 1822.50 through 1822.57. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the Inspector has reasonable cause to believe that the Residential Rental Dwelling Unit is so hazardous, unsafe or dangerous as to require immediate inspection to safeguard the public health or safety, the Inspector shall have the right to immediately enter and inspect the premises and may use any reasonable means required to effect the entry and make an inspection. 15.10.050 - Registration, Application and Implementation. A. Beginning on January 1, 2016, it shall be the responsibility of the Owner of each Residential Rental Dwelling Unit within the city to register each unit with the Community Development Department on a form provided by the Community Development Department and pay the Rental Registration Fee. For Residential Rental Dwelling Units acquired, constructed or converted into residential rental property on or after January 1, 2016, registration shall take C8-6 Attachment 1 Page 6 place within sixty (60) days of the date the Residential Rental Dwelling Unit is acquired, constructed or converted into residential rental property; or within thirty (30) days of the date on which written notification is mailed to the Owner of Residential Rental Dwelling Units by the Community Development Department, whichever event occurs first. All registrations shall be subject to verification by the Inspector. All information on said registrations shall be submitted under penalty of perjury. Any person who makes a false statement in the registration or submits false information in connection with a registration shall be in violation of this chapter. B. If the Owner of a Residential Rental Dwelling Unit fails to register or reregister such units in compliance with this chapter, the Owner shall be subject to a Registration Delinquency Fee and the Building Official may register or reregister said units in the name of the Owner and set a date and time for initial inspection of said units, and shall send written notification to the Owner that the property has been so registered and advising of the date and time set for inspection. C. Initial implementation of inspections may be completed over a four (4) year period and priority shall be given to the inspection of Residential Rental Dwelling Units which have been found in violation of the any building, housing and sanitation codes or ordinances in the last five (5) years. Priority shall also be given to Owners that request an inspection. Following the initial inspection of a Residential Rental Dwelling Unit, it may be re- inspected upon proper notice if a complaint is received or if the Inspector has reasonable cause to believe that unit is in violation of any Building, housing and sanitation codes or ordinances. D. Thereafter, the inspection of each Residential Rental Dwelling Unit shall be scheduled on a three year cycle, unless a unit has been accepted into the self-certification program. 15.10.060 - Notification of Inspection and Inspection Procedures. A. The Building Official shall mail a notice of a scheduled inspection to the Owner of each Residential Rental Dwelling Unit to the address provided on the registration form. The Owner, or any authorized agent or legal representative thereof, shall permit an inspection of each Residential Rental Dwelling Unit by the Inspector upon thirty (30) calendar days’s notice of the time and date of the scheduled inspection. An extension to a scheduled inspection may be granted by the Inspector. B. It shall be the responsibility of the Owner to provide actual notice to the individual tenants of the Residential Rental Dwelling Unit and to facilitate access to the units to be inspected. C. If an inspection is rescheduled by the Inspector, a notice shall be mailed to the Owner and tenant at least three (3) business days prior to the scheduled inspection date. D. An inspection may be rescheduled one time by the Owner without penalty or Re-inspection Fee upon written request three (3) business days prior to the date of inspection. Within ten (10) business days of the initial inspection date the Owner shall schedule a new inspection. E. An Owner shall be charged a Re-inspection Fee for failure to provide access to a Residential Rental Dwelling Unit for inspection. F. The Owner or an authorized agent or legal representative of the Owner shall be present during the inspection. C8-7 Attachment 1 Page 7 G. The Owner shall not be in violation of this section if the tenant or occupant refuses to allow the inspection by the City. The Owner shall provide proof, under penalty of perjury, that a request to inspect the Residential Rental Dwelling Unit was served by the Owner and inspection was not permitted by the tenant. 15.10.070 - Annual Rental Registration Fee. The Owner shall pay an annual non-refundable Rental Registration and Administration Fee. The fee is intended to cover a portion of the cost of administration of the rental housing inspection program for a fiscal year, exclusive of the costs covered by the Inspection, Re- inspection or Self-Certification Fees, and shall be billed and payable annually with the Business License Fee. Payment of a Business License Fee without payment of a Rental Registration Fee shall be deemed a violation of this chapter. 15.10.080 – Inspection and Re-inspection Fee. A. Upon notice to the Owner of a scheduled inspection, an Inspection Fee for the initial inspection shall be due prior to the date of that inspection. The Inspection Fee shall be established by resolution of the City Council and if not paid by the day of inspection shall be delinquent and shall add a penalty of twenty (20) percent of the Inspection Fee on the first day of the month following the due date and ten (10) percent for each month thereafter while the fee remains unpaid, provided that the amount of the penalty shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of the amount of the fee due. B. The Inspection Fee includes the cost of the inspection and one compliance re-inspection, if necessary. If the Owner fails to correct any violations by the first compliance re-inspection, the Owner shall pay a Re-inspection Fee for the second and subsequent compliance re- inspections. 15.10.090 - Exemptions. The following are specifically exempted from the provisions of this chapter: A. Mobile home units within mobile home parks regulated by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. B. HUD Section 8 Housing Units or equivalent housing units C. Dwelling units owned or managed by a government agency. D. Residential Rental Dwelling Units that are occupied by the registered Owner or Owners as recorded with the County of San Luis Obispo’s Clerk-Recorder’s Office. Additional information may be required by the Community Development Department to determine that the property is occupied by the registered Owner or Owners. 15.10.100 - Self-Certification Program. A. Residential Rental Dwelling Units found to be in compliance with all applicable building, housing, and sanitation codes or ordinances, pass an initial inspection, do not have a record of other code violations within the past three (3) years, and have no outstanding unpaid code violation fines or pending code enforcement actions, are eligible for the self-certification C8-8 Attachment 1 Page 8 program during the next three (3) year inspection cycle. Upon receipt of the request to participate in the self-certification program, the Director shall determine if the Residential Rental Dwelling Unit(s) qualifies for the self-certification program and shall notify the Owner of such determination in writing. If the Residential Rental Dwelling Unit(s) qualifies for the self-certification program the Owner shall pay the Self-Certification Fee. If the Director determines that a Residential Rental Dwelling Unit does not qualify, the Owner will be assessed the Inspection Fee and the Residential Rental Dwelling Unit will be inspected. B. If eligible, the Building Official shall mail the Self-Certification Checklist to the Owner sixty (60) days prior to a due date. The Owner shall perform a physical inspection of the interior and exterior of the Residential Rental Dwelling Unit, any accessory buildings or structures, complete the checklist, certify that it is complete and accurate, and return it and to the Community Development Department within forty-five (45) days of receipt of a request by the city to complete a Self-certification checklist. The failure of an Owner to submit a Self-Certification Checklist within forty five (45) days shall be a violation of this chapter and shall be grounds for the removal of the Residential Dwelling Unit from the self- certification program. The Owner shall correct any violations of any building, housing, and sanitation codes or ordinances and obtain any planning and building permits if required that are identified on the Self-Certification Checklist within thirty (30) days of the inspection or make a request in writing to the Inspector for additional time to make corrections if needed. The Owner shall correct any and all deficiencies by the due date determined by the Inspector. A final checklist shall be submitted by the Owner within ten (10) days of correcting any such violations. C. The Building Official may cause up to ten (10) percent of Residential Rental Dwelling Units that are enrolled in the self-certification program to be randomly inspected in a given year. The Owner shall not be charged an Inspection Fee for the inspection if violations of any building, housing, and sanitation codes or ordinances are not discovered as a result of the inspection, however, an Inspection Fee shall be charged if violations are discovered as a result of the inspection. D. Any Residential Rental Dwelling Unit that participates in the self-certification program may be removed from the program for a period of three (3) years, if at any time the Residential Rental Dwelling Unit is determined to be in violation of any applicable building, housing, and sanitation codes or ordinances. If a Residential Rental Dwelling Unit is removed from the self-certification program, the difference between the Self-Certification Fee and the Inspection Fee shall be immediately due and payable. E. The Self-Certification Checklist shall be submitted under penalty of perjury. Any person who makes a false statement in the Self-Certification Checklist or submits false information in connection with a Self-Certification Checklist shall be in violation of this chapter. F. The Owner shall not be in violation of this section if the tenant or occupant refuses to allow the Self-Certification inspection by the Owner. The Owner shall provide proof, under penalty of perjury, that a request to inspect the Residential Rental Dwelling Unit was served by the Owner and inspection was not permitted by the tenant. 15.10.110 - Violations. C8-9 Attachment 1 Page 9 A. Any violation of the provisions of this chapter by any person is a misdemeanor and is punishable as provided in Chapter 1.12, of this code. Any violation of the provisions of this chapter by any person is also subject to administrative fines as provided in Chapter 1.24 of this code, which may be appealed pursuant to the procedures in that Chapter 1.24.. B. Violations of this chapter are hereby declared to be public nuisances. C. In addition to other remedies provided by this chapter or by other law, any violation of this chapter may be remedied by a civil action brought by the city attorney, including but not limited to administrative or judicial nuisance abatement proceedings, civil or criminal code enforcement proceedings, and suits for injunctive relief. The remedies provided by this chapter are cumulative and in addition to any other remedies available at law or in equity. SECTION 4. Review by City Council. After the implementation of this chapter has been in effect for (1) year, the Director shall provide a report to the City Council regarding the administration and efficacy of the program. Thereafter, the Director shall provide annual reports to the City Council for the next four (4) years. Fees shall be reviewed one (1) year after implementation and periodically thereafter and adjusted to insure compliance with California Government Code section 66014 and to insure that the program is self-supporting and revenue neutral. SECTION 5. Severability. If any subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforcement of the remaining portions of this ordinance, or any other provisions of the city’s rules and regulations. It is the city’s express intent that each remaining portion would have been adopted irrespective of the fact that any one or more subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid or unenforceable. SECTION 6. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in The Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this city. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage. A copy of the full text of this ordinance shall be on file in the Office of the City Clerk on and after the date following introduction and passage to print and shall be available to any member of the public. SECTION 7. Effective Dates. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in The Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage. INTRODUCED on the _____ day of _____________ 2015, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the _____ day of ____________ 2015, on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: C8-10 Attachment 1 Page 10 ABSENT: Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: Anthony J. Mejia City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney C8-11 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director Prepared By: David Watson, Project Planner SUBJECT: REQUEST TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN, ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN (OASP), URBAN RESERVE LINE (URL), ZONING MAP, BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND CONSIDERATION OF TWO NEW RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS (VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS) ADJACENT TO RIGHETTI HILL IN THE OASP AND CONSIDERATION OF AN INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, AS A TIER OF THE OASP FINAL EIR (2010) RECOMMENDATION As recommended by the Planning Commission: 1. Approve the Proposed Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-MND) and amend the General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Attachment 1-A), including: a. Modifications to the URL along Righetti Hill; b. Reconfiguration of open space, parks and residential zoning within VTM#3063; c. Reorientation of wetlands mitigation sites within VTM#3063; d. Rezoning of 0.38 acres of R-1-SP to R-2-SP within VTM#3066; e. Amend the OASP Circulation Plan to change the “C” Street Bike Lane (crossing the creek) from a Class II bike lane to a Class I bike path; and, f. Addition of Section 9.10 to the OASP to “track” amendments, adjustments and clarifications to the Specific Plan. 2. Approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map #3063 for the Righetti property (TR-114-14) (Attachment 1-B). 3. Approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map #3066 for the Jones property (SBDV-0067-2014) (Attachment 1-C). 4. Amend the Bicycle Transportation Plan (Maps 1 and 8) and Appendix A to change the “C” Street Bike Lane (crossing the creek) from a Class II bike lane to a Class I bike path, subject to the IS-MND referenced above. REPORT-IN-BRIEF The applicant, Ambient Communities, has submitted applications for two (2) tract maps within the Orcutt Area Specific Plan. These include the Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 with 304 residential lots and the Jones Ranch VTM#3066 with 66 residential lots/units and a small retail parcel. These applications also include a series of proposals for amendments to the General Plan (GP) and Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) to permit modifications to the placement of the Righetti Hill Urban Reserve Line (URL), reconfigure residential, parklands and wetlands mitigation areas within the Righetti tract, and to rezone 0.38 acres from R-1 to R-2 within the Jones tract. PH2-1 Orcutt Area GPA, SPA, ER, VTM 3063 (Righetti), VTM 3066 (Jones) Page 2 The proposed subdivisions include the following key land use features: Cumulative Projects Gross Acreage Cumulative Commercial Cumulative Residential Cumulative Parks & Open S Righetti Ranch 143.83 acres none proposed 272 single family units 32 multi-family units 304 total residential 14.26 acres Parks 75.42 acres Open Space 89.68 acres (62.4%) Jones Ranch 11.56 acres 15,070 sq ft 1.32 acres (mixed-use) 14 single family units 52 multi-family units 66 total residential 2.03 acres Open Space 2.03 acres (17.6%) Totals 155.39 acres 15,070 sq ft 1.32 acres (mixed-use) 286 single family units 84 multi-family units 370 total residential 14.26 acres Parks 77.45 acres Open Space 91.71 acres (59.0%) CEQA review involved use of the 2010 Final EIR certified by Council for the OASP. Although primarily a “program level” EIR, this document included several “project-related” mitigation measures that are being applied to these projects as reflected in Attachment 3. “Tiering” off that FEIR, staff conducted a 2015 IS-MND for those project features not considered under the FEIR; most notable among those tract-specific features were possible impacts from modifications to the Righetti Hill URL, and transportation and utility system services. Attachment 4 is the complete IS-MND for the GPA-OASP and tract applications. Both Attachments 3 (2010 FEIR) and 4 (2015 IS-MND) are proposed to be adopted as the consolidated environmental determinations for the applications. A complete review of the CEQA analysis is included as Attachment 5. Adoption of the Resolution presented as Attachment 1-A would accomplish this. DISCUSSION Planning Commission Review and Action Planning Commission review occurred on March 25 and April 8, 2015. The Commission recommended approval of the amendments and both tract maps with some corrections and direction to work through some potential phasing issues with the applicant as the tract develops. The applicable resolutions and Planning Commission staff report has been included in the Council Reading File. In brief, significant discussion items included: 1. Modification of the URL. The final adjustment detailed in the IS-MND and Visual Analysis (Attachment 6) results in a “net” 0.85 acres of open space being converted to R- 1 single family use. As consideration for this adjustment, a series of building-specific special height and design considerations are recommended to ensure that the massing of resulting homes will not impact views in and around Righetti Hill. 2. Transportation Issues. The IS-MND and tract conditions address a series of traffic calming, road, pedestrian and bicycle circulation measures that ensure that the complexity of these projects fully address transportation impacts, improvements, and timing for completion of these measures. One of these measures includes changing the “C” Street Class II bike path to a Class I in the OASP and Bicycle Transportation Plan. PH2-2 Orcutt Area GPA, SPA, ER, VTM 3063 (Righetti), VTM 3066 (Jones) Page 3 3. Development standards for “homesite” parcels were clarified that the underlying R-1-SP (single family) zoning would be applicable to any future proposals for improvements to the original parcels, identified in the OASP, Appendix A-2; 4. Considerations for aligning OASP “E-2” Street with Hansen Lane and OASP “B” Street with Tiburon Way were extensively reviewed, with the Planning Commission determining that these alignments, as preferred under the OASP, should be implemented by the applicants. In the case of the “B” St.-Tiburon alignment, the Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) would be permitted to benefit from a 5th home-site parcel; 5. Internal View Corridors and Bicycle-Pedestrian “connectivity” both within the OASP area and connecting to outside existing and future city facilities, led to the implementation of tract design changes on Righetti that added pedestrian paths to the lot design, opening up additional internal access opportunities and improving visual access to the open space and parklands planned for the property; 6. Traffic calming techniques and their specific applicability in and around the OASP were discussed, with specific improvements identified for the intersection of “D” Street and Tank Farm Road (roundabout), raised intersections at D/D-4 and C/C-3 Streets, speed reduction curves at A/B intersection, and off-site connectivity to Sponza Drive (Taylor-Wingate); 7. Special development and height restrictions, specifically establishing sensitive parcels where one-story height limits are appropriate to address possible visual impact issues for lots closest to Orcutt Road (Righetti “E” Street neighborhood) and Righetti Lots 35-50 (abutting the modified URL) ; 8. Infrastructure phasing and needed “flexibility in refining conditions” to meet the demands of tract phasing desired by the applicant presents a series of unique challenges that staff and the Commission wrestled with, coming down on the side of establishing specific thresholds for completion of key infrastructure, while allowing specific flexibility for the Community Development and Public Works Directors to permit variation in timing of improvements with final maps and public improvement plans that the City Council will review, as well as affording the applicant the opportunity to make a case for financing and possible reimbursement or fee credit considerations as noted below (Righetti COA#116 and Jones COA#95); and, 9. Financing and “fair share” contributions in the context of project implementation were presented by the applicants, most directly focused on the requirement to complete public improvements earlier than their proposed phasing program. Their request is to identify specific improvements that should not be the sole responsibility of either the Righetti or Jones projects, and in some instances, defer their implementation to points that they believe are more in line with their project demands. After much discussion, the conditions establishing some PH2-3 Orcutt Area GPA, SPA, ER, VTM 3063 (Righetti), VTM 3066 (Jones) Page 4 “flexibility in refining conditions” related to phasing and infrastructure (Righetti COA#117 and Jones COA#96) were developed and recommended for approval by the Commission. In summary, the Commission made minor modifications to the conditions, most importantly the two conditions for each tract noted above to provide some flexibility in phasing and infrastructure conditions in review of the public improvement plans and Final Map. The words “as consistent with the Specific Plan” were added to the Open Space conditions relating to ownership and maintenance. An Errata sheet clarifying several conditions was presented and approved by the Commission on April 8, 2015. The Amendment to the OASP and Bicycle and Transportation Plan regarding the nature of the bike path was the final change. The minutes from the two Commission meetings are included in Attachment 12. With these exceptions, the Resolutions are identical to the Council Resolutions contained in Attachment 1. A full copy of the Planning Commission staff reports and Resolutions, as well as full size copies of the plans are available in the Council Reading file. Detailed Project Descriptions This Report has been drafted to consolidate the presentation, analysis and recommended actions on all three (3) “projects” before the Council this evening. Each of these potential actions are summarized below. For reference, Attachment 2 includes the Applicant’s “Project Description” narratives. General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments The application encompasses amendments to the General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan to include: 1. Modification the placement of the Urban Reserve Line (URL) along Righetti Hill, resulting in a 0.85 acre “net” reduction in open space above the current URL placement 2. Relocation of 2.8 acres of residential and parks land uses within the Righetti Ranch property; no “net” change in residential or parks acreages results from this reorientation of land use designations 3. Changing 0.38 acres within the Jones Ranch property from R-1-SP (low density) to R-2-SP (medium density) residential land use, to allow a transition of smaller, clustered R-2 uses on a small, irregularly shaped peninsula of land with runoff channels and setbacks on 3 sides 4. Reorientation of wetland mitigation sites within the Righetti Ranch property to meet EIR requirements 5. Amendments to the OASP Circulation Plan to change the “C” Street Bike Lane (crossing the creek) from a Class II bike lane to a Class I bike path PH2-4 Orcutt Area GPA, SPA, ER, VTM 3063 (Righetti), VTM 3066 (Jones) Page 5 6. f. Adding Section 9.10 to the Specific Plan (Attachment 14) to track amendments, adjustments and clarifications to development standards within the Specific Plan, including specifically the following adjustments, and clarifications unique to VTM#3063 and VTM#3066: a) Land Use and URL (graphic) modifications to OASP Figure 1.3 will supersede any other adopted OASP figures that are inconsistent with the revised land use, URL, parks, open space and wetlands area descriptions included with the GP-SPA Amendments described in a.-e., above. b) Variations in maximum building height limits within VTM#3063 as follows: i) “Sensitive Parcels” abutting Orcutt Road (Lots 1-2, 7-9, 11-16) shall be limited to 25’and one-story within the a 50’ setback from Orcutt Road right- of-way (11 lots) ii) R-1 lots > 5,000 sq ft shall not exceed 25’ (81 lots) iii) R-1 lots of 5,000 sq ft or less shall not exceed 30’ (52 lots) iv) “C”, “D” and “E” Street neighborhoods shall not exceed 28’ (43 lots) v) R-2 and R-3 lots shall not exceed 35’ (117 lots/units) c) Sizing of storm water detention facilities vary from OASP, due to more precise Hydrology analysis conducted for these applicationsupdated Regional Water Quality Control Board BMP practices since adoption of the 2010 OASP . Future variations in individual project applications will continue to adapt to drainage standards and criteria in effect at City and State levels. Urban Reserve Line Amendments The adjustments to the location of the URL proposed by the applicant occur on the western and northern flanks of Righetti Hill. As described in Figure 1, these adjustments include both uphill and downhill movement of the URL on the western flank, as well as reductions in the URL areas on the northern flank. The areas of Figure 3 highlighted in green reflect the areas to be converted from Open Space (URL) to R1 designations. The areas highlighted in yellow reflect off-setting additions to the URL proposed by the applicant. PH2-5 Orcutt Area GPA, SPA, ER, VTM 3063 (Righetti), VTM 3066 (Jones) Page 6 During initiation of the URL amendment in 2014, extensive discussion occurred regarding the extent of the proposed adjustments and the effect of any modifications on aesthetic and visual impacts to the Orcutt Planning area. The Council’s ultimate direction allowed some flexibility in the URL location, but not at the expense of scenic and natural resources. The 2010 URL varies between the 260’ to 320’ contours on Righetti Hill. The URL considered under the 2014 initiation process was shown to be raised to between the 300’ and 320’ contours. In some instances, moving development 40’-60’ higher on Righetti Hill presented a potential significant adverse impact to visual and aesthetic resources. To address these concerns, the applicant modified the proposed adjustments by significantly reducing the areas proposed to be included within the Urban Reserve. The applicant also proposed expanding the URL in other areas as a partial “off-setting” measure. The 2014 URL proposal included an overall reduction of Open Space within the URL by 3.6 acres. The 2015 URL amendment presented for consideration includes a reduction in Open Space lands by 2.06 acres, with a corresponding addition to the URL of 1.21 acres, resulting in a “net” change to the Righetti URL of 0.85 acres. Figure 1. Areas of proposed rezoning from C-OS to R-1 (Source: Cannon, 7-24-14) PH2-6 Orcutt Area GPA, SPA, ER, VTM 3063 (Righetti), VTM 3066 (Jones) Page 7 Reorientation of 2.8 acres of Residential and Parklands Designations (specific to Righetti) Amendments to parks and residential zoning districts are proposed in the northeastern corner of the Righetti Ranch property as described in Figure 2. These changes to the residential and parks lands in the vicinity of the Neighborhood Park serve to add variety in housing types in this area, including higher densities in the R-3 category. This change also allows more concentrated density closer to the neighborhood commercial areas to the north of the park, which reduces vehicle trips and encourages more walking and bicycle riding to these retail and recreational services. The “net” effect of this reconfiguration of land uses does not result in the reduction of any park lands, and provides for a better configuration and transition of residential uses in this portion of the Righetti Ranch. The Parks & Recreation Commission reviewed the proposed amendments at their meeting of March 4, 2015 and supported the changes to the parkland location as requested. Amendment of 0.38 Acres of R-1 to R-2 Residential Use (specific to Jones) Within the Jones Ranch site there are 0.38 acres of land within proposed Lot 23. This site is in the far northeastern edge of the Jones Ranch, and is separated from the remaining ownership by two small drainage channels that result in an irregularly shaped parcel. The proposed adjustment of this site from R-1 to R-2 land use as shown in figure 3, will allow a more creative use of this site for two residential units, rather than a large isolated SFR site. The proposed change remains within the allocated densities of the OASP for the Jones site. OASP Figure 1.3 Proposed Figure 2. Proposed relocation of R-3 zone & R-1 zoning and reconfigured Neighborhood Park area. Proposed added Parklands Proposed relocated R-3 & R-1 zoning Adopted OASP R-1 above park and R-3 south of “D” street. PH2-7 Orcutt Area GPA, SPA, ER, VTM 3063 (Righetti), VTM 3066 (Jones) Page 8 Reorientation of Open Space and Wetlands Mitigation Areas (specific to Righetti) A modest reconfiguration of wetlands mitigation areas is proposed to reflect the planning and environmental analysis submitted by the applicant prepared by Rincon Consultants (IS-MND Sources 17 & 18; VTM#3063 Sheet C-37). Figure 1.3 as proposed with the other referenced GPA-SPA changes includes these reconfigurations to meet the biological objectives of the certified OASP FEIR. No reductions in wetlands mitigation areas are proposed with these amendments. Amendment of OASP “C” Street Bike Lane from Class II to Class I Bike Path At its April 8th hearing, the Planning Commission discussed the configuration of the “C” Street bike trail paralleling the UPRR tracks on the western boundary of the Planning Area and the Righetti Ranch project. At that meeting, the Planning Commission noted that the OASP calls for a Class II (shared bike lane with roadway) section on “C” street as goes over the bridge. The Planning Commission recommends that in order to maintain this pathway as an entirely Class I facility, that a modification to the OASP be considered by Council to include this Class 1 section over the planned creek crossing at “C” Street. Amendments to maps and appendices of the Bicycle Transportation Plan are included to incorporate this recommendation. Figure 3. Areas of proposed rezoning from R-1 to R-2 (Source: Cannon, 10-16-14) Jones Ranch 0.38 acre rezoning proposal PH2-8 Orcutt Area GPA, SPA, ER, VTM 3063 (Righetti), VTM 3066 (Jones) Page 9 OASP Adjustments and Clarifications The proposed amendments to the OASP also include some text amendments. These amendments include clarifying (1) how land use amendments on Figure 1.3 will govern any graphic inconsistencies in future OASP analysis efforts, (2) a series of specific building height and design adjustments, subject to ARC referral, and (3) the sizing of detention basins and other storm drainage-related improvements will evolve over time with better understandings of BMP practices, and evolving and changing State and City storm water management regulations. Staff recommends that a section should be added to the OASP (Section 9.10; Attachment 5) that tracks amendments, adjustments, and clarifications that are granted, in order to maintain a clear set of standards for current and future OASP applications. Tracking these actions will create an accessible record of changes so that amendments, adjustments, or clarifications for future use can be quickly identified. Attachment 5 of the GPA-SPA package details the changes made to the OASP since its adoption. Proposed VTM#3063 (Righetti Ranch) Tract 3063 (Righetti Ranch) creates 304 residential lots/homes, retains one homesite in accordance with OASP Appendix A-2-1 and creates 22 open space and parklands lots on 143.83 acres (figure 4). Tract 3063 would construct on-site trails and connect to nearby public trails, provide on-site and regional storm water management features, construct roadways and utilities to support internal uses, and also tie into the City’s regional networks of roadways, water, wastewater and recycled water facilities. The project includes pedestrian ways, bicycle paths, and traffic calming features to promote the pedestrian friendly environment envisioned by the OASP and the subject community. Proposed VTM#3066 (Jones Ranch) Tract 3066 (Jones Ranch) creates 61 residential lots/homes and retains up to five homesites, for a total of 66 homes on 11.56 acres (figure 5). Of the 66 homes, 57 are unique to the Jones Ranch, with another nine affordable units proposed to be received from the Righetti Ranch project (Tract 3063). Including the proposed nine units from Righetti, a total of 17 affordable units would be built on the Jones site. The two existing residential units on the property are the Jones family “homesite” residences. As a part of proposed Tract 3066, up to three additional Jones homesite residences could be created, bringing the Jones residences up to five of the total units. Mixed-use/Neighborhood Commercial is proposed at approximately 15,000 sq. ft. located on the southern edge of the Jones Ranch, and generally in the center of the overall Orcutt Planning Area, on a 1.32 acre parcel. The project includes pedestrian ways, bicycle paths, and traffic calming features to promote the pedestrian friendly environment envisioned by the OASP and the subject community. An PH2-9 Orcutt Area GPA, SPA, ER, VTM 3063 (Righetti), VTM 3066 (Jones) Page 10 approximately 9,500 sq. ft. central common area open space park (proposed Lot 30), located across from the mixed-use development and within a central corridor of the R-2 multi-family community achieves a courtyard effect with picnic seating areas, paths and plaza space for community events, thereby providing largely passive recreation amenities for the future residents of the subdivision and the overall community as a whole. Figure 4 – Righetti Ranch VTM 3063 Site Plan PH2-10 Orcutt Area GPA, SPA, ER, VTM 3063 (Righetti), VTM 3066 (Jones) Page 11 Figure 5 – Jones Ranch VTM 3066 Site Plan Tract 3066 would also connect to public trails, storm water management features, roadways and utilities to support internal uses, and also to tie into the City’s regional networks of roadways, water, wastewater and recycled water utilities. CONCURRENCES The Public Works Transportation Division, Utilities, Fire, and Natural Resources Departments have worked with planning staff and the applicant team in developing project mitigation measures, conditions and code requirements that are designed to accommodate the proposed subdivisions. The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the project at their regular hearing on March 4th, 2015 and concurred with the proposed parkland amendments. The Specific Plan Amendments were referred to the Airport Land Use Commission in December, 2014 and deemed complete in early February, 2015. The OASP Amendments were reviewed by the Airport Land Use Commission agenda at their meeting of April 15, 2015. The 60-day review period expired before the April 15th meeting and the Amendments were thus deemed consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP). County staff made a brief presentation at the April 15th meeting and indicated that the changes were consistent with the ALUP. No action was taken. PH2-11 Orcutt Area GPA, SPA, ER, VTM 3063 (Righetti), VTM 3066 (Jones) Page 12 FISCAL IMPACT The Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) anticipates subdivision and development of these properties in a fashion similar to this development proposal. The OASP established a detailed financing plan that is designed to accommodate public infrastructure and parks for the Orcutt Area. As proposed and conditioned, the Righetti and Jones subdivision maps will implement OASP goals and policies by constructing necessary infrastructure and parks consistent with the General Financing Policies and the OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan. ALTERNATIVES 1. Deny the GPA-SPA, VTM#3063 and/or VTM#3066. Findings of the City Council concerning such a recommendation will need to be developed if this Alternative is selected. This is not recommended because the proposed tract maps are consistent with the OASP and the environmental impacts of the developments have been adequately addressed in the OASP EIR and IS-MND. 2. Continue the item. An action to continue the item should include a detailed list of additional information or analysis required. FIGURES 1. Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Site Plan 2. Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Site Plan 3. Proposed URL Adjustments specific to Righetti Hill 4. Reconfiguration of Residential and Parklands specific to Righetti Ranch 5. Amend Single Family (R-1) to Multi-Family (R-2) land use specific to Jones Ranch ATTACHMENTS 1. a) City Council Resolution for GPA-SPA-Environmental Determinations b) City Council Resolution for TR114-14, VTM#3063 (Righetti Ranch) c) City Council Resolution for SBDV-0067-2014, VTM#3066 (Jones Ranch) 2. Applicant’s “Project Descriptions” for VTM#3063 and VTM#3066 (Project Tract Plans are being distributed separately with the Council packets) 3. 2010 OASP FEIR Summary of Applicable Impacts and Mitigation Measures 4. 2015 IS-MND for Righetti and Jones Ranch proposals 5. Expanded Project Descriptions – Staff Analysis – CEQA Review 6. 2014 RRM Visual Analysis for Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 7. Proposed 2015-Amended OASP Figure 1.3 (Specific Plan) 8. Proposed 2015-Amended General Plan Land Use Map 9. Righetti Ranch Roadway Improvements Phasing Exhibits 10. Jones Homestead Lots – 5th lot option with off-site “B” Street alignment to Tiburon Way 11. “Homesite Parcels “ (Individual Properties) Special Considerations OASP Appendix A-2 12. Planning Commission meeting minutes from 3-25-15 and 4-8-15 13. Errata clarifying conditions as approved by Planning Commission on April 8th 14. Proposed OASP Section 9.10 PH2-12 Orcutt Area GPA, SPA, ER, VTM 3063 (Righetti), VTM 3066 (Jones) Page 13 AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE Planning Commission Staff reports and Resolutions Tentative Tract Map Plans \\chstore7\team\council agenda reports\2015\2015-05-19\righetti-jones parcel maps\council agenda report righetti-jones draft 4-22-15.docx PH2-13 1 Attachment 1-A RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ADOPTING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS, ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENTS, BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION AMENDMENTS, and AN INITIAL STUDY-MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PL AN (GPA, SPA, ER #TR3063 and #TR3066) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted public hearings on March 25, 2015 and April 8, 2015, and considered a series of requests for amendments to the General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) that address revisions to the Urban Reserve Line located on Righetti Hill, reconfiguration of open space and parklands, modifications to residential land use and zoning, reorientation of wetlands mitigation sites, modifications to bike paths/trails and addition of Section 9.10 to the OASP to “track” amendments, adjustments and clarifications within the OASP; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered an Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-MND) analyzing the proposed GPA-SPA amendments, along with applicable mitigations from the 2010 Final EIR certified for the OASP; and WHEREAS, the April 8, 2015 public hearing was for the purpose of formulating and forwarding recommendations to the City Council regarding the proposed amendments and projects, recommending actions to the Council on the various amendments and track map applications; and WHEREAS, notices of the City Council public hearing for May 19, 2015, were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by the Planning Commission and staff, presented at said hearing. BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: Section 1. CEQA Findings, Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring Program. Based upon all the evidence, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the following CEQA findings in support of the General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments 1. The proposed amendments and projects, as conditioned herein, are consistent with the requirements of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) certified and adopted by the City Council on March 2, 2010, and this action incorporates those FEIR mitigation measures as detailed herein. 2. A supplemental initial study has been prepared for the amendments and project proposals addressing potential environmental impacts which were not identified or detailed in the FEIR for the Orcutt Area Specific Plan. The Community Development Director has recommended PH2-14 2 Attachment 1-A that the results of that additional analysis be incorporated into a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) of environmental impacts, and recommends adoption of additional mitigation measures to those imposed by the FEIR, all of which are incorporated below. 3. All potentially significant effects were analyzed adequately in the referenced FEIR and IS- MND, and reduced to a level of insignificance, provided the following mitigation measures are incorporated into the GPA-SPA and development project Resolutions and the mitigation monitoring programs: AESTHETICS MITIGATION AES-3 Special Building Height Limits, Scale and Massing Design Standards for Western Flank of Righetti Hill (Righetti Ranch VTM#3063). Added building design restrictions shall be required for residential lots and units (Lots 35-50) adjoining the Righetti Hill URL on the western flank of the hillside. These standards are intended to reduce the massing of residential units abutting the URL. These standards will include use of the following building techniques, and considered during ARC and/or staff review of any project applications for residential units in this location: 1. Residential Building Heights shall not exceed 25’ as measured above finished grade; 2. Grading for lots abutting the URL will be encouraged to be split-pads, to reduce the scale of the building mass by stepping down the hillside; 3. The upper pad shall be limited to one-story (a maximum of 15’) in height; 4. First floor massing and footprint shall be encouraged to be built into the topography (recessed) into the hillside; 5. Second floor square footage shall be set back from the first floor elevation, creating a stepped appearance to the buildings; 6. Maximum lot coverage shall not exceed 50%; and, 7. Roof lines on the upper pad will align front-to-back to narrow the high point of the roof when viewed from the street. • AES-3 Monitoring Program: Compliance will be reviewed and implemented at two (2) stages. First, any final map recorded for subdivision of lots abutting URL along the western flank of the Righetti Hill shall include a special deed restriction incorporating this mitigation and special development criteria on such lots. This requirement will be verified by the City Engineer’s office prior to recordation of such a final map. Second, Community Development Department staff will insure ARC and staff level application of these standards during review of any des ign review and building permit submittals. PH2-15 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 3 Attachment 1-A AIR QUALITY MITIGATION Operational Phase Mitigation AQ-1(a) Energy Efficiency. The building energy efficiency rating shall be 10% above what is required by Title 24 requirements for all buildings within the Specific Plan Area. The following energy-conserving techniques shall be incorporated unless the applicant demonstrates their infeasibility to the satisfaction of City Planning and Building Department staff: increase walls and attic insulation beyond Title 24 requirements; orient buildings to maximize natural heating and cooling; plant shade trees along southern exposures of buildings to reduce summer cooling needs; use roof material with a solar reflectance value meeting the Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Energy Star rating; build in energy efficient appliances; use low energy street lighting and traffic signals; use energy efficient interior lighting; use solar water heaters; use double-paned windows; solar panel plumbing; grey water recycling; tank-less water heaters; dedicated hot water line loops. AQ-1(b) Transit. Bus turnouts and shelter improvements with direct pedestrian access shall be installed at all bus stops. AQ-1(c) Shade Trees. All parking lots shall include shade trees within the parking area. There shall be at least one shade tree for every six vehicle parking spaces. AQ-1(d) Telecommuting. All new homes within the Specific Plan area shall be constructed with internal wiring/cabling that allows telecommuting, teleconferencing, and tele- learning to occur simultaneously in at least three locations in each home. AQ-1(e) Pathways. Where feasible, all cul-de-sacs and dead-end streets shall be links by pathways to encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel. • AQ-1 Monitoring Program: Compliance with operational phase mitigation measures will be reviewed with the subdivision plans and accompanying architectural review plans and ultimately shown on improvement plans and construction drawings. Construction Phase Mitigation AQ-3(a) Application of CBACT (Best Available Control Technology for construction related equipment). The following measures shall be implemented to reduce combustion emissions from construction equipment where a project will have an area of disturbance greater than 1 acre. • Specific Plan applicants shall submit for review by the Community Development Department and Air Pollution Control District (APCD) staff a grading plan showing the area to be disturbed and a description of construction equipment that will be used and pollution reduction measures that will be implemented. Upon confirmation by the Community Development Department and APCD, PH2-16 4 Attachment 1-A appropriate CBACT features shall be applied. The application of these features shall occur prior to Specific Plan construction. • Specific Plan applicants shall be required to ensure that all construction equipment and portable engines are properly maintained and tuned according to manufacturer's specifications. • Specific Plan applicants shall be required to ensure that off-road and portable diesel powered equipment, including but not limited to bulldozers, graders, cranes, loaders, scrapers, backhoes, generator sets, compressors, auxiliary power units, shall be fueled exclusively with CARB motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed off-road diesel is acceptable). • Specific Plan applicants shall be required to install a diesel oxidation catalyst on each of the two pieces of equipment projected to generate the greatest emissions. Installations must be prepared according to manufacturer's specifications. AQ-3(b) Dust Control. The following measures shall be implemented to reduce PM10 emissions during all Specific Plan construction: • Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible. • Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Water shall be applied as soon as possible whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour. Reclaimed (nonpotable) water should be used whenever possible. • All dirt-stock-pile areas shall be sprayed daily as needed. • Permanent dust control measures shall be identified in the approved Specific Plan revegetation and landscape plans and implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities. • Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast-germinating native grass seed and watered until vegetation is established. • All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD. • All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc., to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. • Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site. • All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil or other loose materials shall be covered or shall maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114. • Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. • Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water shall be used where feasible. PH2-17 5 Attachment 1-A AQ-3(c) Cover Stockpiled Soils. If importation, exportation, or stockpiling of fill material is involved, soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. Trucks transporting material shall be tarped from the point of origin. AQ-3(d) Dust Control Monitor. On all projects with an area of disturbance greater than 1 acre, the contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering as necessary to prevent transport of dust off-site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. • AQ-3 Monitoring Program: These conditions shall be noted on all project grading and building plans. The applicant will also be required to secure necessary permits from the Air Pollution Control Board (APCD) before the onset of grading or demolition activities including, but not limited to additional dust control measures, evaluation for Naturally Occurring Asbestos. The applicant shall present evidence of a plan for complying with these requirements prior to issuance of a grading or building permit from the City. The applicant shall provide the City with the name and telephone number of the person responsible for ensuring compliance with these requirements. The Building Inspector and Public Works Inspectors shall conduct field monitoring. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION B-3(a) Construction Requirements. Development under the Specific Plan shall abide by the requirements of the City Arborist for construction. Requirements shall include but not be limited to: the protection of trees with construction setbacks from trees; construction fencing around trees; grading limits around the base of trees as required; and a replacement plan for trees removed including replacement at a minimum 1:1 ratio. B-4(c) Riparian/ Wetland Mitigation. If riparian and/or wetland habitat are proposed for removal pursuant to development under the Specific Plan, such development shall apply for all applicable permits and submit a Mitigation Plan for areas of disturbance to wetlands and/or riparian habitat. The plan shall be prepared by a biologist familiar with restoration and mitigation techniques. Compensatory mitigation shall occur on- site using regionally collected native plant material at a minimum ratio of 2:1 (habitat created to habitat impacted) in areas shown on figure 4.4-2 as directed by a biologist. The resource agencies may require a higher mitigation ratio. If the Orcutt Regional Basin is necessary as a mitigation site for waters of the U.S. and State it shall be designed as directed by a biologist taking into consideration hydrology, soils, and erosion control and using the final mitigation guidelines and monitoring requirements (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2004). As noted above, the trail shall be setback out of the buffer area for riparian and wetland habitat. PH2-18 6 Attachment 1-A B-5(a) Bird Pre-Construction Survey. To avoid impacts to nesting special-status bird species and raptors including the ground-nesting burrowing owl, all initial ground- disturbing activities and tree removal shall be limited to the time period between September 15 and February 1. If initial site disturbance, grading, and tree removal cannot be conducted during this time period, a pre-construction survey for active nests within the limits of grading shall be conducted by a qualified biologist at the site two weeks prior to any construction activities (for ground-nesting burrowing owl survey see below). If active nests are located, all construction work must be conducted outside a buffer zone of 200 feet to 500 feet from the nests as determined in consultation with the CDFG. No direct disturbance to nests shall occur until the adults and young are no longer reliant on the nest site. A qualified biologist shall confirm that breeding/nesting is completed and young have fledged the nest prior to the start of construction. B-5(b) Burrowing Owl Survey. When an applicant requests entitlements from the City under the Specific Plan a qualified biologist shall conduct surveys for burrowing owls during both the wintering and nesting seasons (unless the species is detected on the first survey) in potentially suitable habitats prior to construction in accordance with the guidelines described in the CDFG Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (1995). Winter surveys shall be conducted on the entire project site between December 1 and February 1, and the nesting season survey shall be conducted between April 15 and July 15. If burrowing owls are detected within the proposed disturbance area, CDFG shall be contacted immediately to develop and implement a mitigation plan to protect owls and their nest sites. B-5(c) Monarch Pre-Construction Survey. If initial ground-breaking is to occur between the months of October and March a pre-construction survey for active monarch roost sites within the limits of grading shall be conducted by a qualified biologist at the site two weeks prior to any construction activities. If active roost sites are located no ground-disturbing activities shall occur within 50 feet of the perimeter of the habitat. Construction shall not resume within the setback until a qualified biologist has determined that the monarch butterfly has vacated the site. B-5(d) VPFS Sampling Surveys. Prior to development in areas shown as potential VPFS habitat on Figure 4.4-2, current USFWS protocol level sampling surveys shall be conducted in all such areas. A report consistent with current Federal, State, and local reporting guidelines shall be prepared to document the methods and results of surveys. If VPFS are found, the report shall include a map that identifies the VPFS locations. Should the presence of additional special-status wildlife species be determined including California linderiella, a map identifying locations in which these species were found shall be prepared and included in the report. B-5(e) FESA Consultation and Mitigation Regarding VPFS. If any VPFS individuals are located onsite pursuant to Mitigation Measure B-5(d), substantial setbacks from their identified habitat shall be implemented to avoid take of a Federally listed species. If complete avoidance is not economically or technically feasible, then Section 10 of the PH2-19 7 Attachment 1-A Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) shall be used to authorize incidental take when no other Federal agency such as the Corps is involved. This process includes development of a Habitat Conservation Plan for protecting and enhancing the Federally listed species at a specific location in perpetuity. Species take can also be authorized under Section 7 of the FESA if a Federal agency is involved in the project (e.g., Corps Section 404 permitting for impacts to waters of the U.S. and/or Federal funding) and agrees to be the lead agency requesting Section 7 consultation. This consultation process takes at a minimum 135 days from the official request by the Federal lead agency. The compensatory mitigation ratio shall be determined by the appropriate resource agencies. Suitable replacement habitat shall be constructed either within the site boundaries or offsite. [OASP FEIR] Figure 4.4-2 identifies areas that could be appropriate for onsite VPFS mitigation. Figure 4.4-2 is not intended to preclude development but shall be used as a starting point for incorporating VPFS mitigation sites into the development plan. While the Orcutt Regional Basin included in the potential VPFS mitigation sites may need regular maintenance and may be seasonally flooded, depressions could be created on the upper edges of the terrace in such a manner that they are protected from flooding. VPFS mitigation areas shall be approved by a biologist familiar with VPFS habitat “creation” techniques. Enhancement of the onsite seasonal freshwater wetland habitat that is undisturbed by project activities may also be a part of the mitigation program. Alternatively, fairy shrimp cysts could be collected during the dry season from the existing habitat and placed into storage. Topsoil could also be removed and stored in conditions suitable to retain cysts. Wetland habitat could be enhanced/created in the areas shown on Figure 4.4-2 by grading depressions in the landscape and “top dressing” the depressions with the preserved topsoil. Preserved cysts would be added to the recreated wetlands in December or January, after sufficient ponding has occurred. It is important to note that VPFS habitat mitigation is still considered experimental. VPFS habitat mitigation is ambitious as it is costly, labor intensive, and difficult to ensure success. Habitat may be “created” only in an existing vernal pool landscape that provides suitable soils and a number of other specific ecological factors (USFWS, 2004). An alternative to onsite mitigation is the purchase of mitigation bank credits. Credits can be purchase by the acre as suitable mitigation for VPFS. There is currently no known mitigation bank with VPFS habitat occurring within San Luis Obispo County, however, mitigation banks may be available in the future. • B-3a, B-4c, B-5 Monitoring Program: Monitoring will include Natural Resources Department staff consultation and implementation at time of review and prior to approval of grading plan(s) and during tract construction (B-3a, B-4c, B-5). PH2-20 8 Attachment 1-A B-6(c) Educational Pet Brochure. Any development pursuant to the Specific Plan shall prepare a brochure that informs prospective homebuyers and Home Owners Association (HOA) members about the impacts associated with non- native animals, especially cats and dogs, to the project site; simi larly, the brochure must inform potential homebuyers and all HOA members of the potential for coyotes to prey on domestic animals. B-6(c) Landscaping Plan Review. To ensure that project landscaping does not introduce invasive non-native plant and tree species to the region of the site, the final landscaping plan shall be reviewed and approved by a qualified biologist. The California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC) maintains several lists of the most important invasive plants to avoid. The lists shall be used when creating a plant palette for landscaping to ensure that plants on the lists are not used. The following plants shall not be allowed as part of potential landscaping plans pursuant to development under the Specific Plan: • African sumac (Rhus lancea) • Australian saltbush (Atriplex semibaccata) • Black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) • California pepper (Schinus molle) and Brazilian pepper (S. terebinthifolius) • Cape weed (Arctotheca calendula) • Cotoneaster (Cotoneaster pannosus), (C. lacteus) • Edible fig (Ficus carica) • Fountain grass (Pennisetum setaceum) • French broom (Genista monspessulana) • Ice plant, sea fig (Carpobrotus edulis) • Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) • Myoporum (Myoporum spp.) • Olive (Olea europaea) • Pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana), and Andean pampas grass (C. jubata) • Russian olive (Elaeagnus angusticifolia) • Scotch broom (Cyt isus scoparius) and striated broom (C. striatus) • Spanish broom (Spartium junceum) • Tamarix, salt cedar (Tamarix chinensis), (T. gallica), (T. parviflora), (T. ramosissima) • Blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) • Athel tamarisk (Tamarix aphylla) • B-6c Monitoring Program: Compliance with mitigation measures will be reviewed with landscaping plans as part of the architectural review submittal and ultimately shown on improvement plans and construction drawings. PH2-21 9 Attachment 1-A CULTURAL RESOURCES MITIGATION CR-1(d) Archaeological Resource Construction Monitoring. At the commencement of project construction, an orientation meeting shall be conducted by an archaeologist for construction workers associated with earth disturbing procedures. The orientation meeting shall describe the possibility of exposing unexpected archaeological resources and directions as to what steps are to be taken if such a find is encountered. An archaeologist shall monitor construction grading within 50 meters (164 feet) of the two isolated finds. In the event that prehistoric or historic archaeological resources are exposed during project construction, all earth disturbing work within 50 meters (164 feet) of the find must be temporarily suspended or redirected until an archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find. After the find has been appropriately mitigated (e.g., curation, preservation in pl ace, etc.), work in the area may resume. The City should consider retaining a Chumash representative to monitor any field work associated with Native American cultural material. If human remains are exposed, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. • CR-1d Monitoring Program: Requirements for cultural resource mitigation shall be clearly noted on all plans for project grading and construction. DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY MITIGATION D-2(a) Vegetative and Biotechnical Approaches to Bank Stabilization. Vegetative or biotechnical (also referred to as soil bioengineering) approaches to bank stabilization are preferred over structural approaches. Bank stabilization design must be consistent with the SLO Creek Stream Management and Maintenance Program Section 6. Streambank stabilization usually involves one or a combination of the following activities: • Regrading and revegetating the streambanks to eliminate overhanging banks and create a more stable slope; • Deflecting erosional water flow away from vulnerable sites; • Reducing the steepness of the channel bed through installation of grade stabilization structures; • Altering the geometry of the channel to influence flow velocities and sediment deposition; • Diverting a portion of the higher flow into a secondary or by-pass channel; • Armoring or protecting the bank to control erosion, particularly at the toe of slopes. PH2-22 10 Attachment 1-A The bank stabilization design will: • Be stable over the long term; • Be the least environmentally damaging and the “softest” approach possible; • Not create upstream or downstream flooding or induce other local stream instabilities; • Minimize impacts to aquatic and riparian habitat. D-2(c) Riparian Zone Planting. The OASP proposes riparian enhancement of creek corridors. Section 11 guidelines of the SLO Creek Drainage Design Manual shall be followed for riparian areas that are modified, created and/or managed for flood damage reduction, stream enhancement, and bank repair. Linear park terrace vegetation, streambank repair and channel maintenance projects may require stream channel modifications that include shaping, widening, deepening, straightening, and armoring. Many channel management projects also require building access roads for maintenance vehicles and other equipment. These construction activities can cause a variety of impacts to existing sensitive riparian and aquatic habitat that, depending on the selected design alternative, range from slight disturbances to complete removal of desirable woody vegetation and faunal communities. In urban areas within the SLO creek watershed, riparian vegetation often provides the only remaining natural habitat available for wildlife populations. D-5(a) Biofilters. The applicant shall submit to the Director of Community Development for review and approval a plan that incorporates grassed swales (biofilters) into the project drainage system where feasible for runoff conveyance and filtering of pollutants. D-5(c) Pervious Paving Material. Consistent with Land Use Element Policy 6.4.7, the applicant shall be encouraged to use pervious paving material to facilitate rainwater percolation. Parking lots and paved outdoor storage areas shall, where feasible, use pervious paving to reduce surface water runoff and aid in groundwater recharge. • D-2a, D-2c, D-5a, D-5c Monitoring Program: Monitoring will include Natural Resources Department staff consultation and implementation at time of landscaping construction plan review and Engineering-Public Works staff at the time of tract construction. NOISE MITIGATION N-1(a) Compliance with City Noise Ordinance. Construction hours and noise levels shall be compliant with the City Noise Ordinance [Municipal Code Chapter 9.12, Section 9.12.050(6)]. Methods to reduce construction noise can include, but are not limited to, the following: PH2-23 11 Attachment 1-A • Equipment Shielding. Stationary construction equipment that generates noise can be shielded with a barrier. • Diesel Equipment. All diesel equipment can be operated with closed engine doors and equipped with factory-recommended mufflers. • Electrical Power. Whenever feasible, electrical power can be used to run air compressors and similar power tools. • Sound Blankets. The use of sound blankets on noise generating equipment. • N-1a Monitoring Program: Requirements for construction noise mitigation shall be clearly noted on all plans for project grading and construction. PUBLIC SERVICES MITIGATION PS-4 Wastewater Main System Extensions. Prior to recordation of a final map for Jones Ranch (TR 3066), the improvement plans for the tract shall include connections to future improvements planned by Tract 3063 (Righetti Ranch) to convey sanitary sewer service to the existing connection points on Tank Farm Road. Prior to recordation of Tract 3066, (a) the needed improvements through Tract 3063 shall be completed and available to tie-in Tract 3066, or (b) Tract 3066 shall provide easements and financial guarantees that guarantee Tract 3066 can proceed with construction of Tract 3063 improvements to serve the Jones Ranch. • PS-4 Monitoring Program: Compliance will be reviewed and implemented by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and accompanying final map prior to recordation of the final map. PUBLIC SAFETY MITIGATION S-2(b) Disclosure. Prior to recordation of final map, the applicant shall develop Covenants, Codes, and Restrictions (CC&R’s) that disclose to potential buyers or leasers that aircraft over-flights occur, and that such flights may result in safety hazard impacts should an aircraft accident occur. In addition, prior to recordation of final map, avigation easements shall be recorded over the entire project site for the benefit of the SLO County Regional Airport. • S-2b Monitoring Program: Monitoring will include Community Development, City Attorney and Engineering staff approvals of the Disclosure(s) prior to recordation of a final tract map. PH2-24 12 Attachment 1-A TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION T-1(a) Orcutt Road/Tank Farm Road Intersection Improvements. Applicant shall install a 200’ right-turn lane on the southbound Orcutt Road approach to Tank Farm Road shall be installed with Phase 1 Tract 3063 improvements. • T-1(a) Monitoring Program: Compliance and implementation will be reviewed by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and shall be completed prior to issuance of building permits for Phase 1 of Tract 3063. T-2(d) Orcutt Road/Tank Farm Road Intersection Signalization. Applicant shall provide right-of-way as necessary as a part of Phase 1 Tract 3063 improvements, and pay “fair share” TIF contributions. • T-2(d) Monitoring Program: Compliance will be addressed by (1) dedication of right-of-way as needed for signalization at the time of final map recordation and (2) payment of TIF fees at time of issuance of building permits for Tract 3063. T-3 Street E-2 & Hanson Lane Alignment. Applicant shall align centerlines of E-2 Street & Hanson Lane with side street stop control and install Two Way Left Turn Lanes • T-3 Monitoring Program: Compliance and implementation shall be reviewed by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and shall be completed prior to issuance of any building permits for Phase 1 of Tract 3063. T-4 Street B & Tiburon Way Alignment. Applicant shall align Street B with the existing alignment of Tiburon Way and design the roadway curvature to maintain appropriate residential speeds. • T-4 Monitoring Program: Compliance and implementation shall be reviewed by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and shall be completed prior to issuance of any building permits for Phase 1 of Tract 3066. T-5 Tank Farm & Orcutt Frontage Improvements. Applicant shall design and install frontage improvements along Tank Farm Road & Orcutt Road, providing pedestrian access along both street frontages and the connecting gap. PH2-25 13 Attachment 1-A • T-5 Monitoring Program: Compliance and implementation shall be reviewed by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and shall be completed prior to issuance of any building permits for Phase 1 of Tract 3063. T-6 Traffic Calming & Safety Measures. Applicant shall provide raised intersections at D& D4 Streets and C&C3 Streets. Provide single lane urban compact roundabout control at intersection D & Tank Farm with speed reduction curves and at intersection A & B. Provide side street stop control at Street E & Orcutt Road Intersection. • T-6 Monitoring Program: Compliance and implementation shall be reviewed by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and shall be completed prior to issuance of any building permits for Phase 1 of Tract 3063. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS MITIGATION USS-1 Off-site Water Main Line Extensions to the OASP To Meet Fire Flow and Storage Standards. Concurrent with applications for Final Map(s), the applicant shall submit a water supply plan to meet adequate fire flow standards for all lots within each Final Map. Implementation of such a water line extension plan shall be included as a part of public improvement plans for the subdivision, and approved by Utilities, Public Works and the City Engineer. This implementation plan may include a financing plan, including reimbursement provisions, approved by the City Council at the time of considering any Final Map. Required water main line extension(s) to the subdivision shall be completed and operational to the satisfaction of the Utilities Director, prior to issuance of any building permits for any of the residential and/or commercial uses. • USS-1 Monitoring Program Compliance will be reviewed and implemented by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and shall be completed prior to issuance of any building permits for Tract 3063 and 3066. Section 2. General Plan, Bicycle Transportation Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments. The City Council hereby approves the following General Plan PH2-26 14 Attachment 1-A Amendments, Bicycle Transportation Plan Amendments, and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, based on the findings noted above: General Plan Amendments: 1. Modify the placement of the Urban Reserve Line (URL) along Righetti Hill, affecting the Land Use map as described in Attachment 8. 2. Relocate 2.8 acres of residential and parks land uses within the Righetti Ranch propert y, affecting the Land Use map as described in Attachment 8. 3. Change 0.38 acres within the Jones Ranch property from R-1-SP (low density) to R- 2-SP (medium density) residential land use, affecting the Land Use map as described in Attachment 8. Bicycle Transportation Plan Amendment: 1. Amend the Plan (Maps 1 and 8) and Appendix A to change the “C” Street Bike Lane (crossing the creek) from a Class II bike lane to a Class I bike path. Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments: 1. Modify the placement of the Urban Reserve Line (URL) along Righetti Hill, affecting the Orcutt Area Specific Plan Figure 1.3 as described in Attachment 7. 2. Relocate 2.8 acres of residential and parks land uses within the Righetti Ranch propert y, affecting the Orcutt Area Specific Plan Figure 1.3 as described in Attachment 7. 3. Change 0.38 acres within the Jones Ranch property from R-1-SP (low density) to R-2-SP (medium densit y) residential land use, affecting the Orcutt Area Specific Plan Figure 1.3 as described in Attachment 7. 4. Reorient wetlands mitigation sites within the Righetti Ranch property to meet EIR requirements as reflected in Orcutt Area Specific Plan Figure 1.3, Attachment 7. 5. Change the creek crossing “C” Street bike land to a Class I bike path. 6. Add a Section 9.10 to the Specific Plan to track amendments, adjustments and clarifications to development standards within the Specific Plan, as reflected in Attachment 5. PH2-27 15 Attachment 1-A Upon motion of , seconded by , and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: REFRAIN: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 2015. Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: Anthony Mejia City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney PH2-28 ATTACHMENT 1-B RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING A VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 3063 CREATING 328 LOTS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3987 ORCUTT ROAD (TR/ER 114-14; TRACT #3063 RIGHETTI) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted public hearings on March 25, 2015 and April 8, 2015 in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, for the purpose of considering TR/ER 114-14, a Vesting Tentative Tract Map subdividing an approximately 144-acre site into 328 lots, and recommended the City Council approve the Vesting Tentative Tract Map; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission Hearings were for the purpose of formulating and forwarding recommendations to the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo regarding the project; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the initial study of environmental impact as prepared by staff; and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: Section 1. CEQA Findings, Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring Program. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the following CEQA findings in support of the Vesting Tentative Map 114-14 (Tract No. 3063): 1. The proposed project is consistent with the requirements of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) certified and adopted by the City Council on March 2, 2010, and this approval incorporates those FEIR mitigation measures as applicable to VTM#3063, as detailed herein. 2. A supplemental initial study has been prepared for VTM#3063 addressing potential environmental impacts which were not identified or detailed in the FEIR for the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP). The Community Development Director has recommended that the results of that additional analysis be incorporated into a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) of environmental impacts, and recommends adoption of additional mitigation measures to those imposed by the FEIR, all of which are incorporated below. 3. All potentially significant effects were analyzed adequately in the referenced FEIR and IS- MND, and reduced to a level of insignificance, provided the following mitigation measures PH2-29 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 2 TR/ER #114-14 are incorporated into the development project and the mitigation monitoring program: AESTHETIC MITIGATION AES-3 Special Building Height Limits, Scale and Massing Design Standards for Western Flank of Righetti Hill (Righetti Ranch VTM#3063). Added building design restrictions shall be required for residential lots and units (Lots 35-50) adjoining the Righetti Hill URL on the western flank of the hillside. These standards are intended to reduce the massing of residential units abutting the URL. These standards will include use of the following building techniques, and considered during ARC and/or staff review of any project applications for residential units in this location: 1. Residential Building Heights shall not exceed 25’ as measured above finished grade; 2. Grading for lots abutting the URL will be encouraged to be split-pads, to reduce the scale of the building mass by stepping down the hillside; 3. The upper pad shall be limited to one-story (a maximum of 15’) in height; 4. First floor massing and footprint shall be encouraged to be built into the topography (recessed) into the hillside; 5. Second floor square footage shall be set back from the first floor elevation, creating a stepped appearance to the buildings; 6. Maximum lot coverage shall not exceed 50%; and, 7. Roof lines on the upper pad will align front-to-back to narrow the high point of the roof when viewed from the street. • AES-3 Monitoring Program: Compliance will be reviewed and implemented at two (2) stages. First, any final map recorded for subdivision of lots abutting URL along the western flank of the Righetti Hill shall include a special deed restriction incorporating this mitigation and special development criteria on such lots. This requirement will be verified by the City Engineer’s office prior to recordation of such a final map. Second, Community Development Department staff will insure ARC and staff level application of these standards during review of any design review and building permit submittals. AIR QUALITY MITIGATION Operational Phase Mitigation AQ-1(a) Energy Efficiency. The building energy efficiency rating shall be 10% above what is required by Title 24 requirements for all buildings within the Specific Plan Area. The following energy-conserving techniques shall be incorporated unless the applicant demonstrates their infeasibility to the satisfaction of City Planning and Building Department staff: increase walls and attic insulation beyond Title 24 requirements; orient buildings to maximize natural heating and cooling; plant shade trees along southern exposures of buildings to reduce summer cooling needs; use roof material with a solar reflectance value meeting the Environmental Protection PH2-30 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 3 TR/ER #114-14 Agency/Department of Energy Star rating; build in energy efficient appliances; use low energy street lighting and traffic signals; use energy efficient interior lighting; use solar water heaters; use double-paned windows; solar panel plumbing; grey water recycling; tank-less water heaters; dedicated hot water line loops. AQ-1(b) Transit. Bus turnouts and shelter improvements with direct pedestrian access shall be installed at all bus stops. AQ-1(c) Shade Trees. All parking lots shall include shade trees within the parking area. There shall be at least one shade tree for every six vehicle parking spaces. AQ-1(d) Telecommuting. All new homes within the Specific Plan area shall be constructed with internal wiring/cabling that allows telecommuting, teleconferencing, and tele- learning to occur simultaneously in at least three locations in each home. AQ-1(e) Pathways. Where feasible, all cul-de-sacs and dead-end streets shall be links by pathways to encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel. • AQ-1 Monitoring Program: Compliance with operational phase mitigation measures will be reviewed with the subdivision plans and accompanying architectural review plans and ultimately shown on improvement plans and construction drawings. Construction Phase Mitigation AQ-3(a) Application of CBACT (Best Available Control Technology for construction related equipment). The following measures shall be implemented to reduce combustion emissions from construction equipment where a project will have an area of disturbance greater than 1 acre. • Specific Plan applicants shall submit for review by the Community Development Department and Air Pollution Control District (APCD) staff a grading plan showing the area to be disturbed and a description of construction equipment that will be used and pollution reduction measures that will be implemented. Upon confirmation by the Community Development Department and APCD, appropriate CBACT features shall be applied. The application of these features shall occur prior to Specific Plan construction. • Specific Plan applicants shall be required to ensure that all construction equipment and portable engines are properly maintained and tuned according to manufacturer's specifications. • Specific Plan applicants shall be required to ensure that off-road and portable diesel powered equipment, including but not limited to bulldozers, graders, cranes, loaders, scrapers, backhoes, generator sets, compressors, auxiliary power units, shall be fueled exclusively with CARB motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed off-road diesel is acceptable). • Specific Plan applicants shall be required to install a diesel oxidation catalyst on each of the two pieces of equipment projected to generate the greatest emissions. PH2-31 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 4 TR/ER #114-14 AQ-3(b) Dust Control. The following measures shall be implemented to reduce PM10 emissions during all Specific Plan construction: • Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible. • Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Water shall be applied as soon as possible whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour. Reclaimed (nonpotable) water should be used whenever possible. • All dirt-stock-pile areas shall be sprayed daily as needed. • Permanent dust control measures shall be identified in the approved Specific Plan revegetation and landscape plans and implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities. • Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast-germinating native grass seed and watered until vegetation is established. • All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD. • All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc., to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. • Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site. • All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil or other loose materials shall be covered or shall maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114. • Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. • Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water shall be used where feasible. AQ-3(c) Cover Stockpiled Soils. If importation, exportation, or stockpiling of fill material is involved, soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. Trucks transporting material shall be tarped from the point of origin. AQ-3(d) Dust Control Monitor. On all projects with an area of disturbance greater than 1 acre, the contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering as necessary to prevent transport of dust off-site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. PH2-32 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 5 TR/ER #114-14 • AQ-3 Monitoring Program: These conditions shall be noted on all project grading and building plans. The applicant will also be required to secure necessary permits from the Air Pollution Control Board (APCD) before the onset of grading or demolition activities including, but not limited to additional dust control measures, evaluation for Naturally Occurring Asbestos. The applicant shall present evidence of a plan for complying with these requirements prior to issuance of a grading or building permit from the City. The applicant shall provide the City with the name and telephone number of the person responsible for ensuring compliance with these requirements. The Building Inspector and Public Works Inspectors shall conduct field monitoring. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION B-3(a) Construction Requirements. Development under the Specific Plan shall abide by the requirements of the City Arborist for construction. Requirements shall include but not be limited to: the protection of trees with construction setbacks from trees; construction fencing around trees; grading limits around the base of trees as required; and a replacement plan for trees removed including replacement at a minimum 1:1 ratio. B-4(c) Riparian/ Wetland Mitigation. If riparian and/or wetland habitat are proposed for removal pursuant to development under the Specific Plan, such development shall apply for all applicable permits and submit a Mitigation Plan for areas of disturbance to wetlands and/or riparian habitat. The plan shall be prepared by a biologist familiar with restoration and mitigation techniques. Compensatory mitigation shall occur on- site using regionally collected native plant material at a minimum ratio of 2:1 (habitat created to habitat impacted) in areas shown on figure 4.4-2 as directed by a biologist. The resource agencies may require a higher mitigation ratio. If the Orcutt Regional Basin is necessary as a mitigation site for waters of the U.S. and State it shall be designed as directed by a biologist taking into consideration hydrology, soils, and erosion control and using the final mitigation guidelines and monitoring requirements (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2004). As noted above, the trail shall be setback out of the buffer area for riparian and wetland habitat. B-5(a) Bird Pre-Construction Survey. To avoid impacts to nesting special-status bird species and raptors including the ground-nesting burrowing owl, all initial ground- disturbing activities and tree removal shall be limited to the time period between September 15 and February 1. If initial site disturbance, grading, and tree removal cannot be conducted during this time period, a pre-construction survey for active nests within the limits of grading shall be conducted by a qualified biologist at the site two weeks prior to any construction activities (for ground-nesting burrowing owl survey see below). If active nests are located, all construction work must be conducted outside a buffer zone of 200 feet to 500 feet from the nests as determined in consultation with the CDFG. No direct disturbance to nests shall occur until the adults and young are no longer reliant on the nest site. A qualified biologist shall confirm that breeding/nesting is completed and young have fledged the nest prior to the start of construction. PH2-33 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 6 TR/ER #114-14 B-5(b) Burrowing Owl Survey. When an applicant requests entitlements from the City under the Specific Plan a qualified biologist shall conduct surveys for burrowing owls during both the wintering and nesting seasons (unless the species is detected on the first survey) in potentially suitable habitats prior to construction in accordance with the guidelines described in the CDFG Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (1995). Winter surveys shall be conducted on the entire project site between December 1 and February 1, and the nesting season survey shall be conducted between April 15 and July 15. If burrowing owls are detected within the proposed disturbance area, CDFG shall be contacted immediately to develop and implement a mitigation plan to protect owls and their nest sites. B-5(c) Monarch Pre-Construction Survey. If initial ground-breaking is to occur between the months of October and March a pre-construction survey for active monarch roost sites within the limits of grading shall be conducted by a qualified biologist at the site two weeks prior to any construction activities. If active roost sites are located no ground-disturbing activities shall occur within 50 feet of the perimeter of the habitat. Construction shall not resume within the setback until a qualified biologist has determined that the monarch butterfly has vacated the site. B-5(d) VPFS Sampling Surveys. Prior to development in areas shown as potential VPFS habitat on Figure 4.4-2, current USFWS protocol level sampling surveys shall be conducted in all such areas. A report consistent with current Federal, State, and local reporting guidelines shall be prepared to document the methods and results of surveys. If VPFS are found, the report shall include a map that identifies the VPFS locations. Should the presence of additional special-status wildlife species be determined including California linderiella, a map identifying locations in which these species were found shall be prepared and included in the report. B-5(e) FESA Consultation and Mitigation Regarding VPFS. If any VPFS individuals are located onsite pursuant to Mitigation Measure B-5(d), substantial setbacks from their identified habitat shall be implemented to avoid take of a Federally listed species. If complete avoidance is not economically or technically feasible, then Section 10 of the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) shall be used to authorize incidental take when no other Federal agency su ch as the Corps is involved. This process include development of a Habitat Conservation Plan for protecting and enhancing the Federally listed species at a specific location in perpetuity. Species take can also be authorized under Section 7 of the FESA if a Federal agency is involved in the project (e.g., Corps Section 404 permitting for impacts to waters of the U.S. and/or Federal funding) and agrees to be the lead agency requesting Section 7 consultation. This consultation process takes at a minimum 135 days from the official request by the Federal lead agency. The compensatory mitigation ratio shall be determined by the appropriate resource agencies. Suitable replacement habitat shall be constructed either within the site boundaries or offsite. [OASP FEIR] Figure 4.4-2 identifies areas that could be appropriate for onsite VPFS mitigation. Figure 4.4-2 is not intended to preclude development but shall be used as a starting point for incorporating VPFS mitigation PH2-34 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 7 TR/ER #114-14 sites into the development plan. While the Orcutt Regional Basin included in the potential VPFS mitigation sites may need regular maintenance and may be seasonally flooded, depressions could be created on the upper edges of the terrace in such a manner that they are protected from flooding. VPFS mitigation areas shall be approved by a biologist familiar with VPFS habitat “creation” techniques. Enhancement of the onsite seasonal freshwater wetland habitat that is undisturbed by project activities may also be a part of the mitigation program. Alternatively, fai ry shrimp cysts could be collected during the dry s eason from the existing habitat and placed into storage. Topsoil could also be removed and stored in conditions suitable to retain cysts. Wetland habitat could be enhanced/created in the areas shown on Figure 4.4-2 by grading depressions in the landscape and “top dressing” the depressions with the preserved topsoil. Preserved cysts would be added to the recreated wetlands in December or January, after sufficient ponding has occurred. It is important to note that VPFS habitat mitigation is still considered experimental. VPFS habitat mitigation is ambitious as it is costly, labor intensive, and difficult to ensure success. Habitat may be “created” only in an existing vernal pool landscape that provides suitable soils and a number of other specific ecological factors (USFWS, 2004). An alternative to onsite mitigation is the purchase of mitigation bank credits. Credits can be purchase by the acre as suitable mitigation for VPFS. There is currently no known mitigation bank with VPFS habitat occurring within San Luis Obispo County, however, mitigation banks may be available in the future. • B-3a, B-4c, B-5 Monitoring Program: Monitoring will include Natural Resources Department staff consultation and implementation at time of review and prior to approval of grading plan(s) and during tract construction (B-3a, B-4c, B-5). B-6(c) Educational Pet Brochure. Any development pursuant to the Specific Plan shall prepare a brochure that informs prospective homebuyers and Home Owners Association (HOA) members about the impacts associated with non- native animals, especially cats and dogs, to the project site; similarly, the brochure must inform potential homebuye rs and all HOA members of the potential for coyotes to prey on domestic animals. B-6(c) Landscaping Plan Review. To ensure that project landscaping does not introduce invasive non-native plant and tree species to the region of the site, the final landscaping plan shall be reviewed and approved by a qualified biologist. The California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC) maintains several lists of the most important invasive plants to avoid. The lists shall be used when creating a plant palette for landscaping to ensure that plants on the lists are not used. The following plants shall not be allowed as part of potential landscaping plans pursuant to development under the Specific Plan: PH2-35 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 8 TR/ER #114-14 • African sumac (Rhus lancea) • Australian saltbush (Atriplex semibaccata) • Black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) • California pepper (Schinus molle) and Brazilian pepper (S. terebinthifolius) • Cape weed (Arctotheca calendula) • Cotoneaster (Cotoneaster pannosus), (C. lacteus) • Edible fig (Ficus carica) • Fountain grass (Pennisetum setaceum) • French broom (Genista monspessulana) • Ice plant, sea fig (Carpobrotus edulis) • Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) • Myoporum (Myoporum spp.) • Olive (Olea europaea) • Pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana), and Andean pampas grass (C. jubata) • Russian olive (Elaeagnus angusticifolia) • Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius) and striated broom (C. striatus) • Spanish broom (Spartium junceum) • Tamarix, salt cedar (Tamarix chinensis), (T. gallica), (T. parviflora), (T. ramosissima) • Blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) • Athel tamarisk (Tamarix aphylla) • B-6c Monitoring Program: Compliance with mitigation measures will be reviewed with landscaping plans as part of the architectural review submittal and ultimately shown on improvement plans and construction drawings. CULTURAL RESOURCES MITIGATION CR-1(d) Archaeological Resource Construction Monitoring. At the commencement of project construction, an orientation meeting shall be conducted by an archaeologist for construction workers associated with earth disturbing procedures. The orientation meeting shall describe the possibility of exposing unexpected archaeological resources and directions as to what steps are to be taken if such a find is encountered. An archaeologist shall monitor construction grading within 50 meters (164 feet) of the two isolated finds. In the event that prehistoric or historic a rchaeological resources are exposed during project construction, all earth disturbing work within 50 meters (164 feet) of the find must be temporarily suspended or redirected until an archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find. After the find has been appropriately mitigated (e.g., curation, preservation in place, etc.), work in the area may resume. The City should consider retaining a Chumash representative to monitor any field work associated with Native American cultural material. If human remains are exposed, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. PH2-36 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 9 TR/ER #114-14 • CR-1d Monitoring Program: Requirements for cultural resource mitigation shall be clearly noted on all plans for project grading and construction. DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY MITIGATION D-2(a) Vegetative and Biotechnical Approaches to Bank Stabilization. Vegetative or biotechnical (also referred to as soil bioengineering) approaches to bank stabilization are preferred over structural approaches. Bank stabilization design must be consistent with the SLO Creek Stream Management and Maintenance Program Section 6. Streambank stabilization usually involves one or a combination of the following activities: • Regrading and revegetating the streambanks to eliminate overhanging banks and create a more stable slope; • Deflecting erosional water flow away from vulnerable sites; • Reducing the steepness of the channel bed through installation of grade stabilization structures; • Altering the geometry of the channel to influence flow velocities and sediment deposition; • Diverting a portion of the higher flow into a secondary or by-pass channel; • Armoring or protecting the bank to control erosion, particularly at the toe of slopes. The bank stabilization design will: • Be stable over the long term; • Be the least environmentally damaging and the “softest” approach possible; • Not create upstream or downstream flooding or induce other local stream instabilities; • Minimize impacts to aquatic and riparian habitat. D-2(c) Riparian Zone Planting. The OASP proposes riparian enhancement of creek corridors. Section 11 guidelines of the SLO Creek Drainage Design Manual shall be followed for riparian areas that are modified, created and/or managed for flood damage reduction, stream enhancement, and bank repair. Linear park terrace vegetation, streambank repair and channel maintenance projects may require stream channel modifications that include shaping, widening, deepening, straightening, and armoring. Many channel management projects also require building access roads for maintenance vehicles and other equipment. These construction activities can cause a variety of impacts to existing sensitive riparian and aquatic habitat that, depending on the selected design alternative, range from slight disturbances to complete removal of desirable woody vegetation and faunal communities. In urban areas within the SLO creek watershed, riparian vegetation often provides the only remaining natural habitat available for wildlife populations. PH2-37 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 10 TR/ER #114-14 D-5(a) Biofilters. The applicant shall submit to the Director of Community Development for review and approval a plan that incorporates grassed swales (biofilters) into the project drainage system where feasible for runoff conveyance and filtering of pollutants. D-5(c) Pervious Paving Material. Consistent with Land Use Element Policy 6.4.7, the applicant shall be encouraged to use pervious paving material to facilitate rainwater percolation. Parking lots and paved outdoor storage areas shall, where feasible, use pervious paving to reduce surface water runoff and aid in groundwater recharge. • D-2a, D-2c, D-5a, D-5c Monitoring Program: Monitoring will include Natural Resources Department staff consultation and implementation at time of landscaping construction plan review and Engineering-Public Works staff at the time of tract construction. NOISE MITIGATION N-1(a) Compliance with City Noise Ordinance. Construction hours and noise levels shall be compliant with the City Noise Ordinance [Municipal Code Chapter 9.12, Section 9.12.050(6)]. Methods to reduce construction noise can include, but are not limited to, the following: • Equipment Shielding. Stationary construction equipment that generates noise can be shielded with a barrier. • Diesel Equipment. All diesel equipment can be operated with closed engine doors and equipped with factory-recommended mufflers. • Electrical Power. Whenever feasible, electrical power can be used to run air compressors and similar power tools. • Sound Blankets. The use of sound blankets on noise generating equipment. • N-1a Monitoring Program: Requirements for construction noise mitigation shall be clearly noted on all plans for project grading and construction. PUBLIC SERVICES MITIGATION PS-4 Wastewater Main System Extensions. Prior to recordation of a final map for Righetti Ranch (TR 3063), the improvement plans for the tract shall include connections to future improvements planned by Tract 3066 (Jones Ranch) to convey sanitary sewer service to the existing connection points on Tank Farm Road. • PS-4 Monitoring Program: Compliance will be reviewed and implemented by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and accompanying final map prior to recordation of the final map. PH2-38 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 11 TR/ER #114-14 PUBLIC SAFETY MITIGATION S-2(b) Disclosure. Prior to recordation of final map, the applicant shall develop Covenants, Codes, and Restrictions (CC&R’s) that disclose to potential buyers or leasers that aircraft over-flights occur, and that such flights may result in safety hazard impacts should an aircraft accident occur. In addition, prior to recordation of final map, avigation easements shall be recorded over the entire project site for the benefit of the SLO County Regional Airport. • S-2b Monitoring Program: Monitoring will include Community Development, City Attorney and Engineering staff approvals of the Disclosure(s) prior to recordation of a final tract map. TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION T-1(a) Orcutt Road/Tank Farm Road Intersection Improvements. Applicant shall install a 200’ right-turn lane on the southbound Orcutt Road approach to Tank Farm Road shall be installed with Phase 1 Tract 3063 improvements. • T-1(a) Monitoring Program: Compliance and implementation shall be reviewed by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and shall be completed prior to issuance of any building permits for Phase 1 of Tract 3063. T-2(d) Orcutt Road/Tank Farm Road Intersection Signalization. Applicant shall provide right-of-way as necessary as a part of Phase 1 Tract 3063 improvements, and pay “fair share” OASP Impact Fee contributions. • T-2(d) Monitoring Program: Compliance will be addressed by (1) dedication of right-of-way as needed for signalization at the time of final map recordation and (2) payment of OASP Impact Fees at time of issuance of building permits for Tract 3063. T-3 Street E-2 & Hanson Lane Alignment. Applicant shall align centerlines of E-2 Street & Hanson Lane with side street stop control and a Two Way Left Turn Lane • T-3 Monitoring Program: Compliance and implementation shall be reviewed by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and shall be completed prior to issuance of any building permits for Phase 1 of Tract 3063. PH2-39 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 12 TR/ER #114-14 T-5 Tank Farm & Orcutt Frontage Improvements. Applicant shall design and install frontage improvements along Tank Farm Road & Orcutt Road, providing pedestrian access along both street frontages and the connecting gap. • T-5 Monitoring Program: Compliance and implementation shall be reviewed by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and shall be completed prior to issuance of any building permits for Phase 1 of Tract 3063. T-6 Traffic Calming & Safety Measures. Applicant shall provide raised intersections at D& D4 Streets and C & C3 Streets. Provide single lane urban compact roundabout control at intersection D & Tank Farm with speed reduction curves and at intersection A & B. Provide side street stop control at Street E & Orcutt Road Intersection. • T-6 Monitoring Program: Compliance and implementation shall be reviewed by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and shall be completed prior to issuance of any building permits for Phase 1 of Tract 3063. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS MITIGATION USS-1 Off-site Water Main Line Extensions to the OASP To Meet Fire Flow and Storage Standards. Concurrent with applications for Final Map(s), the applicant shall submit a water supply p lan to meet adequate fire flow standards for all lots within each Final Map. Implementation of such a water line extension plan shall be included as a part of public improvement plans for the subdivision, and approved by Utilities, Public Works and the City Engineer. This implementation plan may include a financing plan, including reimbursement provisions, approved by the City Council at the time of considering any Final Map. Required water main line extension(s) to the subdivision shall be completed and operational to the satisfaction of the Utilities Director, prior to occupancy of any of the residential and/or commercial uses. PH2-40 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 13 TR/ER #114-14 • USS-1 Monitoring Program Compliance will be reviewed and implemented by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and shall be completed prior to issuance of any occupancy permits for Tract 3063. Section 2. Vesting Tract Map Approval with Findings & Conditions. The City Council does hereby approve application TR/ER 114-14 (VTM#3063, “Righetti Ranch”), a tentative tract map to create up to 328 residential, detention basin, parklands, and open space lots, based on the following findings, and subject to the following conditions being incorporated into the project: Findings: 1. As conditioned, the design of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the General Plan because the proposed subdivision respects existing site constraints, will incrementally add to the City’s residential housing inventory, results in parcels that meet minimum density standards, and will be consistent with the density, lot sizes and project amenities established by the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP). 2. The site is physically suited for the type and density of development allowed in the C/OS-SP, P-F-SP, R-1-SP, R-2-SP and R-3-SP zoning districts. 3. The design of the vesting tentative tract map 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, since further development or redevelopment of the proposed parcels will occur consistent with VTM 3063 and the required architectural review process, which will allow for detailed review of development plans to assure compliance with City plans, policies, and standards. 4. As conditioned, the design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements for access through (or use of property within) the proposed subdivision, and the project is consistent with the pattern of development prescribed in the Orcutt Area Specific Plan. 5. The proposed project will provide affordable housing consistent with the intent of California Government Code §65915, and in compliance with City policies and the Housing Element. 6. The tentative map, as conditioned, will comply with all environmental mitigation measures prescribed herein, and therefore is consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act, the OASP Final EIR, and the Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-MND). 7. The design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities. PH2-41 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 14 TR/ER #114-14 Conditions: Dedications and Easements 1. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private utilities, access, grading, drainage, slope banks, construction, public and private streets, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, common driveways, and maintenance of the same shall be shown on the final map and/or shall be recorded separately prior to or concurrent with the first phase of the map, unless a deferral is requested by the subdivider and granted by the City. Said easements may be p rovided for in part or in total as blanket easements. 2. The final map and improvement plans shall show the extent of all on-site and off-site offers of dedication. Subdivision improvement plans and or preliminary designs may be required for any deferred improvements so that dedication limits can be established. These improvements may include but are not limited to road construction and widening, grading and drainage improvements, utility easements, bridges, bike bridges, transit stops, bikeways, pedestrian paths, signalized intersections, traffic circles, and roundabouts. 3. Access rights shall be dedicated to the City along Orcutt Road, Tank Farm Road and along the Union Pacific Railroad right of way except at approved driveway locations and intersections as shown on the tentative map or as otherwise approved by the city. 4. The subdivider shall dedicate a 10’ wide street tree easement and 6’ public utility easement (P.U.E.) across the frontage of each lot. Said easements shall be adjacent to and contiguous with all public right-of-way lines bordering each lot. A 10’ wide street tree easement and 6’ P.U.E. shall be provided along the frontage for all private streets. A 10’ street tree easement and 15’ P.U.E. shall be provided along the Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road frontages (tract boundary). 5. The subdivider shall dedicate Righetti Hill, all public Open Space and all public Park Land in fee to the City, consistent with the OASP, in conjunction with or prior to the Phase 1 map recordation. The land shall be granted free and clear of all encumbrances to the satisfaction of the City. Unless otherwise amended by the City, the public lots include Lot 307, 311, 312, 316, 319, 320, 321, 324, 325, 326, and 328. 6. The subdivider shall include a separate offer of dedication for all sections of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) Streets B, C, and D located outside the phase boundary, but within the tract boundary in accordance with the tentative map street alignments and map conditions in conjunction with or prior to the Phase 1 map recordation. The developer shall include the offers of dedication for the Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road widening improvements in conjunction with or prior to the Phase 1 map recordation. The developer shall include any other out-of-phase offers of dedication related to the need for public utility extensions related to orderly development of the OASP where not otherwise located within a public street. 7. All private improvements shall be owned and maintained by the individual property PH2-42 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 15 TR/ER #114-14 owners or the Homeowner’s Association (HOA) as applicable. Private improvements include but are not limited to streets, sidewalks, private pedestrian/bike paths, sewer mains, drainage systems, detention basin(s), street lighting, landscape, landscape irrigation, common areas, pocket parks, and linear park improvements. 8. The private open space, pocket park, and detention basin Lots 308, 309, 310, 313, 314, 315, 317, 318, 322, 323 and 327, along with the proposed improvements, including but not limited to trails, bikeways, and landscaping shall be owned and maintained by the HOA. Open Space and bikeway easements along with any public utility easements shall be offered to the City and shown and noted on the final map. An easement agreement shall be provided for specific open space areas, bikeways, and utility corridors in a format approved by the City. 9. The final location of the boundary between HOA open space Lot 322 and City open space Lot 321 shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City Natural Resources Manager depending upon the final trail head location off Street D-2 and the area of the private/public maintenance interface. 10. A wildland fuel management/reduction zone along with any required easements and/or zone limits shall be shown and noted on the final map and improvement plans for reference. The limits of the zone shall be in accordance with the adopted Fire Code and approved to the satisfaction of the City Fire Chief and City Natural Resources Manager. The HOA shall be responsible for wildland fuel management and weed abatement within the established fuel reduction zone and private open space areas. 11. Unless otherwise waived or deferred by the City, the subdivider shall improve all neighborhood trail extensions to the limits of open space Righetti Hill Lot 328 to the satisfaction of the Natural Resources Manager. 12. A notice of requirements or other agreement acceptable to the City of San Luis Obispo may need to be recorded in conjunction with the Final Map for Phase 1 and subsequent map phases to clarify development restrictions, conditions of development, and references to any pertinent conditions of approval related to future map phasing. 13. Off-site easements and/or dedications may be required to facilitate through street access and public water and sewer main extensions beyond the tract boundary and in accordance with the OASP. Looped water mains may be required in accordance with the tentative map, development phasing, and the City wat er model to provide adequate service and compliance with adopted codes and standards. 14. Off-site dedication/acquisition of property for this public right-of-way purpose is necessary to facilitate orderly development and the anticipated OASP improvements. The subdivider shall work with the City and the land owner(s) to acquire the necessary rights-of-way. In the event the subdivider is unable to acquire said rights-of-way, the City Council may consider lending the subdivider its powers of condemnation to acquire the off-site right-of-way dedication, including any necessary slope and drainage easements. If condemnation is required, the subdivider shall agree to pay all costs associated with the off-site right-of-way acquisition (including attorney fees and court costs). PH2-43 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 16 TR/ER #114-14 15. With respect to all off-site improvements, prior to filing of the Final Map, the subdivider shall either: a. Clearly demonstrate their right to construct the improvements by showing title or interest in the property in a form acceptable to the City Engineer; or, b. Demonstrate, in writing, that the subdivider has exhausted all reasonable efforts to acquire interest to the subject property and request that the City assist in acquiring the property required for the construction of such improvements and exercise its power of eminent domain in accordance with Government Code Section 66462 .5 to do so, if necessary. Subdivider shall also enter into an agreement with the City to pay all costs of such acquisition including, but not limited to, all costs associated with condemnation. Said agreement shall be in a form acceptable to the City Engineer and the City Attorney. If condemnation proceedings are required, the subdivider shall submit, in a form acceptable to the City Engineer, the following documents regarding the property to be acquired: i. Property legal description and sketch stamped and signed by a Licensed Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer authorized to practice land surveying in the State of California; ii. Preliminary title report including chain of title and litigation guarantee; iii. Appraisal of the property by a City approved appraiser. In the course of obtaining such appraisal, the property owner(s) must be given an opportunity to accompany the appraiser during any inspection of the property or acknowledge in writing that they knowingly waived the right to do so; iv. Copies of all written correspondence with off-site property owners including purchase summary of formal offers and counter offers to purchase at the appraised price. v. Prior to submittal of the aforementioned documents for City Engineer approval, the Subdivider shall deposit with the City all or a portion of the anticipated costs, as determined by the City Attorney, of the condemnation proceedings. The City does not and cannot guarantee that the necessary propert y rights can be acquired or will, in fact, be acquired. All necessary procedures of law would appl y and would have to be followed. Transportation 16. Secondary access is required from all portions and/or phases of the subdivision where more than 30 dwelling units are proposed. The location and development of the proposed secondary access shall be presented to the City for review and approval prior to the preparation of the related improvement plans or final map approval. PH2-44 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 17 TR/ER #114-14 17. Secondary access from the E Street neighborhood shall be aligned with Hansen Lane unless a suitable alternate secondary access point can be approved to the satisfaction of the Community Deve lopment and Public Works Directors. 18. The proposed westerly Phase 1 of Jones Ranch shall require access to Orcutt Road in conjunction with development of Phase 1. Secondary access will be provided to Tank Farm Road through Tract 3063. This requires completion the B Street Bridge as part of Phase 1 development. Regardless of access, the required water supply to this phase may require a looped water main with indications that the B Street bridge may need to be constructed in support of the required water main extension to serve Righetti VTM#3063 prior to commencing with combustible construction. 19. Fire Department access shall be provided for each construction phase to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief. Phased street construction shall consider and provide suitable Fire Department hydrant access, circulation routes, passing lanes, and turn-around areas in accordance with current codes and standards. 20. All public streets shall conform to City Engineering Standards and OASP including curb, gutter, and sidewalk, driveway approaches, and curb ramps as approved by the City Engineer. Where conflicts occur between the City Engineering Standards and concepts identified in the OASP, final determination of shall design shall be provided by the City Engineer. Traffic calming improvements may be required at select locations within in the subdivision. Improvements may include bulb-outs, elevated sidewalks/speed tables, or alternate paving materials to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department and Fire Department. 21. The developer shall record a Notice of Requirements with each map phase regarding the designed and installed traffic calming devices and that the subdivisions are not eligible for future Residential Parking District or Neighborhood Traffic Management program processing. 22. Horizontal curvature along Street “C” does not meet current City Uniform Design Criteria regarding geometrics; “All streets shall intersect other streets at right angles, and shall have at least 50 feet of centerline tangent, as measured from the prolongation of the cross- street property line to the angle point or beginning of curve”. The applicant shall revise subject segments to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 23. The improvement plans shall include all final line-of-sight analys is at applicable intersections to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. Fence heights and plantings in the areas of control shall be reviewed in conjunction with the analysis. A separate recorded agreement or Notice of Requirements for private property owner or HOA maintenance of sight lines shall be required where necessary. 24. The final map and improvement plans shall include the required right-of-way, transit stop easements, and all details of the required bus turnouts to accommodate all proposed and future bus stops per City Engineering Standards, the OASP and current Short Range Transit plan. The final location of all North-South and East-West route stops shall be PH2-45 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 18 TR/ER #114-14 approved to the satisfaction of the City Transit Manager and Public Works Director. 25. The public improvement plans shall include full frontage improvements on Orcutt Road from B Street to Tank Farm Road and along the Tract 3066 (Jones) frontage, including the Imel and Garay properties. The plans shall show, at a minimum, all improvements including concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk per City Engineering Standards on the west side of Orcutt; 6’ bike lanes, 12’ travel lanes, and a 12’ two-way left turn lane in accordance with the tentative map, OASP, City Engineering Standards, and the Cal Trans Highway Design Manual; undergrounding of the overhead utilities on the west side; and complete details for the Orcutt Road points of access. 26. The east side of Orcutt Road where widening is proposed or required may terminate in an AC berm to match the existing adjoining road sections per City Engineering Standards or the appropriate County rural road standards where approved by the City Engineer. The Orcutt Road plans shall include all phases of construction including road widening, stormdrain improvements, culvert extensions, grading/walls, and any water quality BMP’s. Some off-site dedication of property for public right-of-way purposes may be required to facilitate the Orcutt Road improvements and transitions between the OASP full build-out road section and adjoining road segments beyond the tract boundaries. 27. The Orcutt Road improvements from B Street to Tank Farm Road and along the Tract 3066 (Jones) frontage shall be constructed with Phase 1 of the map, unless a deferral is requested by the subdvider and granted by the City. Prior to approval of any deferrals, the subdivider shall demonstrate that the construction of the required improvements is impractical. 28. Prior to occupancy of Phase 1 the Tank Farm/Orcutt intersection shall be modified to provide a southbound right-turn lane on Orcutt Road and to eliminate the skew, as required in the OASP. All overhead utilities conflicting with this improvement shall be undergrounded. 29. The public improvement plans shall include full frontage improvements on Tank Farm Road from the railroad tracks to Orcutt Road. The plans shall show, at a minimum, all improvements including concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk per City Engineering Standards on the north side of Tank Farm; and left-turn pockets at Brookpine and Wavertree subject to approval of the City Engineer. The Tank Farm Road plans shall include all phases of construction including road widening, stormdrain improvements, and any water quality BMP’s. Some off-site dedication of property for public right-of- way purposes may be required to facilitate the Tank Farm Road improvements and transitions between the OASP full build-out road section and adjoining road segments beyond the tract boundaries. 30. The Tank Farm Road improvements from the railroad tracks to Orcutt Road shall be constructed with Phase 1 of the map, unless a deferral is requested by the subdvider and granted by the City. Prior to approval of any deferrals, the subdivider shall demonstrate that the construction of the required improvements is impractical. 31. All bikeways shall be constructed per City Engineering Standards and the Highway PH2-46 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 19 TR/ER #114-14 Design Manual. Final details of the bikeway connections to the adjoining streets shall be approved by the City. The proposed path located between Street D-3 and the UPRR shall be revised to connect to Street C and Tank Farm Road in accordance with the OASP. 32. Rough grading of the park lot and completion of bicycle and pedestrian paths connecting Tract 3063, Tract 3066, and adjoining OASP neighborhoods with the existing park facilities at Islay Park s hall be required with Phase 1 of the map. 33. The applicant shall obtain consult with the City and obtain an encroachment permit prior to establishing form of temporary access point at near the intersections of “D” Street & Tank Farm Road and E-2 Street & Hansen Lane. 34. The applicant shall conduct neighborhood speed surveys one year after occupancy of each phase at locations approved by the Director of Public Works. If 85th percentile speeds exceed current City NTM thresholds additional traffic calming measures shall be installed. The applicant shall bond for these potential additional traffic calming measures. 35. All mitigation measures (MM) specific to Transportation requirements shall be provided as detailed under CEQA section 1, above, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 36. The subdivider may present financing and reimbursement programs for transportation improvements to be considered with approval and recordation of the initial final map for VTM#3063. Any such program(s) will be subject to approval by the City Council. 37. The subdivider shall be responsible for securing the off-site right-of-way needs for VTM#3063, and dedicating that right-of-way to the city as a condition of final map approval. 38. The final map and improvement plans shall include the required right-of-way and all construction details of the required improvements per City Engineering Standards and the OASP. 39. Access rights shall be dedicated to the City along Orcutt and Tank Farm Roads except at approved driveway locations as shown on the tentative map. 40. The subdivider shall install public street lighting and all associated facilities including but not limited to conduits, sidewalk vaults, fusing, wiring, and lumenaires along all public streets including Orcutt Road per City Engineering Standards. 41. Private street lighting shall be provided along the private streets per City Engineering Standards and/or as approved in conjunction with the final ARC approvals. 42. Final street sections shall be approved in conjunction with the review and approval of the final project drainage report. The final design shall consider drainage, transitions, and accessibility. 43. All future public streets shall conform to City Engineering Standards including curb, gutter, and sidewalk, driveway approaches, and curb ramps. Traffic calming PH2-47 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 20 TR/ER #114-14 improvements may be required at select locations within in the subdivision. Improvements may include bulb-outs, elevated sidewalks/speed tables, or alternate paving materials to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department and Fire Department. 44. Street trees are required as a condition of development. Street trees shall generally be planted at the rate of one 15-gallon street tree for each 35 lineal feet of property frontage. Landscape plans may include grouping of trees to vary this standard, to achieve visual variety within the subdivision. Improvement Plans 45. Improvement plans for the entire subdivision, including any off-site improvements shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Utilities Department, and Fire Department prior to map recordation. Off-site improvements may include but are not limited to roadways, sewer mains, water mains, and stormdrain improvements. Off-site improvements shall include off-site access roadways, the water main extensions provided by MM USS-1, and Tiburon Way, Tank Farm Road and Orcutt Road improvements. 46. A separate demolition permit will be required from the Building Division for the removal of any existing structures and related infrastructure. Building removals are subject to the Building Demolition Regulations including the additional notification and timing requirements for any structure over 50-years old. 47. The improvement plans shall clearly show all existing structures, site improvements, utilities, water wells, septic tanks, leach fields, gas and wire services, etc. The plan shall include any pertinent off-site water well and private waste disposal systems that are located within regulated distances to the proposed drainage and utility improvements. The plan shall include the proposed disposition of the improvements and any proposed phasing of the removal and demolition. All structures and utilities affected by the proposed lot lines shall be removed and receive final inspection approvals prior to map recordation. 48. If construction phasing of the new street pavement is proposed, the phasing shall provide for the ultimate structural street section and pavement life (per the City's Pavement Management Plan) prior to acceptance by the City. The engineer of record shall detail this requirement in the public improvement plans, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. 49. The improvement plan submittal shall include a complete construction phasing plan in accordance with the conditions of approval and map phasing. A truck circulation plan and construction management and staging plan shall be included with the improvement plan submittal. General truck routes shall be submitted for review and acceptance by the City. The engineer of record shall provide a summary of the extent of cut and fill with estimates on the yards of import and export material. The summary shall include rough grading, utility trench construction, road construction, AC paving, concrete delivery, and vertical construction loading estimates on the existing public roadways. The developer shall either; 1) complete roadway deflection testing before and after construction to the PH2-48 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 21 TR/ER #114-14 satisfaction of the City Engineer and shall complete repairs to the pre-construction condition, or 2) shall pay a roadway maintenance fee in accordance with City Engineering Standards and guidelines, or 3) shall propose a pavement repair/replacement program to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to acceptance of the subdivision improvements. 50. Retaining wall and/or retaining wall/fence combinations along property lines shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Planning Division and shall conform with the zoning regulations for allowed combined heights or shall be approved through the ARC or separate Fence Height exception process. 51. The ARC plans and public improvement plans shall show the location of the proposed mail receptacles or mail box units (MBU’s) to the satisfaction of the Post Master and the City Engineer. Provide a mailbox unit or multiple units to serve all dwelling units and lease spaces within this development as required by the Post Master. MBU’s shall not be located within the public right-of-way or public sidewalk area unless specifically approved by the City Engineer. Contact the Post Master at 543-2605 to establish any recommendations regarding the number, size, location, and placement for any MBU’s. 52. Separate plans shall be submitted for the public park improvements and for any deferred private site development. Parking lot designs shall comply wi th the parking and driveway st andards and Engineering Standard 2010. All parking spaces must be designed so that vehicles can enter in one maneuver. Furthermore, all spaces shall be designed so that vehicles can exit to the adjoining street in a forward direction in not more than two maneuvers. 53. Street trees are required as a condition of development. Tree species and planting requirements shall be in accordance with City Engineering Standards. Street trees shall generally be planted at the rate of one 15-gallon street tree for each 35 lineal feet of property frontage. Street trees shall be planted along private streets as required for public streets. The subdivision improvement plans/landscape plans shall include street tree plantings along the Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road frontages of Lot 327. Utilities 54. Separate utilities, including water, sewer, gas, electricity, telephone, and cable TV shall be served to each lot to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department and serving utility companies. All public and private sewer mains shall be shown on the public improvement plans and shall be constructed per City Engineering Standards unless a waiver or alternate standard is otherwise approved by the City. The plans shall clearly delineate and distinguish the difference between public and private improvements. 55. Specialized street pavement in the area of public water and/or sewer mains may create maintenance/replacement concerns and additional costs. The final pavement sections shall be reviewed and approved in conjunction with ARC approvals and public improvement plan review. A separate agreement and/or CC&R provision shall be required to clarify that the Righetti Ranch Master HOA will have final street maintenance responsibility in areas of specialized pavement where said pavement is damaged or PH2-49 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 22 TR/ER #114-14 removed in conjunction with public improvements or maintenance of said public water and/or sewer mains. 56. Recycled water mains shall be installed in public streets in order to serve recycled water to the city park, HOA maintained landscaped areas, temporary irrigation for mitigation areas, and detention basins. The applicant shall work with the Water Division of the City’s Utilities Department to determine the appropriate size of all proposed recycled water mains. 57. City recycled water or another non-potable water source, shall be used for construction water (dust control, soil compaction, etc.). An annual Construction Water Permit is available from the City’s Utilities Department. Recycled water is readily available near the intersection of Tank Farm Road and Orcutt Road. 58. Final grades and alignments of all public and/or private water, sewer and storm drains shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and Utilities Department. The final location, configuration, and sizing of service laterals and meters shall be approved in conjunction with the review of the building plans, fire sprinkler plans, and/or public improvement plans. 59. The improvement plans shall show the location of all domestic and landscape water meters. The plan shall include service lateral sizes and meter sizes. Sizing calculations may be required to justify service and meter sizing. Water impact fees related to the irrigation water meter(s) shall be paid prior to approval of the subdivision improvement plans for each pertinent map and/or construction phase. 60. Off-site utility improvements shall include the water main upgrade/replacement and extension from the High Pressure/Bishop pressure zone at the intersection of Tanglewood/Johnson Avenue to serve the subdivision. Pipe sizing is contingent upon the modeling for the proposed development phases and looping of the main. Improvement plans may be required to clarify the design for main extensions outside the Phase 1 improvements. Pressure regulating valves, control valves, or other appurtenances may be required by the Utilities Department as a part of the required water system improvements to be certain that the new area interacts properly with the existing water sys tem. 61. Relocation of the existing pressure regulating valve (the Industrial Way PRV), including the City’s SCADA system, as well as the abandonment of the existing 12” water main, shall be coordinated with the Water Division of the City’s Utilities Department. 62. A reimbursement request, if proposed for the off-site water main upgrade, shall include all pertinent details and analysis in accordance with City and State codes and ordinances and shall be presented separately to the City Council. 63. The sewer main and storm drain improvements within the E Street neighborhood shall be constructed per City En gineering Standards but shall be privately maintained by the HOA along with the other private street and private utility improvements. Public easements will be required for the water main, services, meters, fire hydrants, public utilities, and any appurtenances. Private easements for access and drainage will be required. A limited PH2-50 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 23 TR/ER #114-14 public sewer easement may be required for a terminal end manhole in the private street where the private sewer transitions to the public sewer. 64. The City will not be responsible for replacement of any specialty street pavement within private streets. City trench repairs within private streets will be backfilled and finished per City Engineering Standards. 65. A final sewer report and supporting documentation for the OASP public sewer main design shall be approved by the Utilities Department prior to approval of the public improvement plans. The final sewer report shall discuss and present additional information and assumptions on the system elevations and grades that will allow other OASP parcels to utilize the proposed public sewer main in accordance with the OASP Wastewater Plan. The applicant shall submit an analysis of a backbone system that shows the elevations and grades that serve the adjacent parcels described in the study. The City will have the final discretion on the extent and limits of the study if additional properties could reasonably benefit from the proposed alignment. 66. The depth of the off-site and on-site sewer mains shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Utilities Director. The depth analysis shall consider the balance between the possible extent of the gravity sewer basin needed to serve the other OASP properties and the long- term public maintenance requirements related to sewer depth. 67. The analysis of sewer depth shall be considered at the intersection of Street A and Street B, at Street A and Sponza in Tract 3044, and at Street A and the northerly limits of Tract 3044. The analysis shall include the additional extension to the terminal end manhole as presented in the OASP. The analysis shall further consider the sewer depth at the Street B and C intersection and the potential for a future northerly projection to serve the Pratt, Anderson, Evans, and Pratt parcels in accordance with the OASP. The study shall evaluate the controlling invert at the Tank Farm Road connection to although for the main location within D and C Streets with the goal of avoiding the sewer easement between Lot 209 and Lot 210. 68. The sewer report shall further evaluate the potential sewer options for future service to the adjoining Garay parcel. The subdivider shall provide a minimum 15’ sewer easement from the southerly corner of the Garary property to the nearest available public sewer located in Street C-1. Some shifting or merging of lots may be required to provide access between Lots 182 and 183. The report and plans shall consider the potential development limits on the Garay parcel and the most appropriate area for the future creek crossing to the satisfaction of the Utilities Department and Natural Resources Manager. The public improvement plans shall include the pertinent grading, retaining walls, and main extensions needed to support orderly OASP development. 69. The public improvement plan submittal shall show all existing and proposed overhead wire utilities. Any existing overhead wiring within the tract boundary and adjoining Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road frontages shall be undergrounded in conjunction with the subdivision improvements. Areas of road widening along Bullock Lane shall include undergrounding where applicable unless otherwise deferred or waived by the Public Works and Community Development Directors. Unless otherwise specifically approved, PH2-51 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 24 TR/ER #114-14 pole relocation in lieu of undergrounding is not supported. 70. Terminal end utility poles shall be located off-site unless otherwise approved by the City. 71. Preliminary undergrounding plans for the entire subdivision shall be processed through PGE and any respective wire utility companies in conjunction with Phase 1 of the Map. The undergrounding improvements shall be completed with each subsequent phase unless otherwise required earlier for orderly development or deferred to the satisfaction of the City. 72. The subdivider shall install public street lighting and all associated facilities including but not limited to conduits, sidewalk vaults, fusing, wiring, and lumenaires along all public streets including Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road per City Engineering Standards. 73. Private street lighting shall be provided along the private streets per OASP lighting requirements, City Engineering Standard and/or as approved in conjunction with the final ARC approvals. 74. Lighting fixtures, including public streetlights shall not exceed 16’ in height in accordance with the OASP unless otherwise required for traffic safety. The developer shall submit a streetlight proposal for approval by the City Engineer for any public streetlights. Street lights associated with the Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road improvements, signalized intersections, or round-a-bouts shall comply with the Highway Design Manual and City Engineering Standards. Grading, Drainage & Stormwater 75. Any permit approvals required from the Army Corp of Engineers, Californian Fish and Wildlife, or the Regional Water Control Board shall be secured and presented to the City prior to the approval of any subdivision grading and/or improvements related to the proposed phase of construction. The engineer of record shall review the permit approvals and any specific permit conditions for compliance with the plans, subdivision improvement designs, drainage system design/report, and soils report. The engineer of record shall forward the permits to the City with a notation that the permits have been reviewed and are in general conformance with the design of the improvements. 76. The public improvement plans submittal shall clarify how the several wetlands, creek corridors, and riparian habitat areas will be preserved to the satisfaction of the Natural Resources Manager. Include any specific details for the proposed creek crossings in accordance with any preservation strategies, mitigation measures, and higher governmental authority agency permits. Sensitive areas shall be staked, fenced, or otherwise delineated and protected prior to commencing with construction, grading, or grubbing. 77. Expansion index testing or other soils analysis may be required on a lot-by-lot basis for all graded pads and for in-situ soils on natural lots in accordance with the current Building Codes or where deemed necessary by the City Engineer or Building Official. PH2-52 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 25 TR/ER #114-14 78. Final pad certifications shall include the certification of pad construction and elevations. The soils engineer shall certify all grading prior to acceptance of the public improvements and/or prior to building permit issuance. The certification shall indicate that the graded pads are suitable for their intended use. 79. Cut and fill slopes shall be protected as recommended by the soils engineer. Brow ditches, drainage collection devices, and drainage piping may be required. The public improvement plans and final map shall reflect any additional improvements and private easements necessary for slope protection and maintenance. Unless otherwise approved for public maintenance by the City Engineer, brow ditches and drainage collection devices upslope of building sites shall be maintained by the HOA. 80. The subdivision improvement plans shall include a complete grading plan to show site accessibility in accordance with State and Federal regulations for all public and/or private roads, transit stops, trails, paths, walks, bikeways, parks, and bridges where applicable. The submittal shall provide additional analysis if site accessibility will not be provided and for any feature or element where accessibility is purportedly not required. The accessibility regulations or guidelines in effect at the time of subdivision improvement construction will be applied. 81. Unless updated by subsequent regulations or guidelines, the sidewalks within the private streets E neighborhood shall be widened to 5’ or shall provide a 4’ clear width with 5’ passing lanes in accordance with the current ADA regulations. 82. The subdivision improvement plans, grading plans, drainage plans, and drainage reports shall show and note compliance with City Codes, Standards and Ordinances, Floodplain Management Regulations, OASP stormwater provisions, Waterways Management Plan Drainage Design Manual, and the Post Construction Stormwater Regulations as promulgated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, whichever pertinent sections are more restrictive. 83. The improvement plan submittal shall include a complete grading, drainage, and erosion control plan. The proposed grading shall consider the proposed construction phasing. Historic off-site and upslope watersheds tributary to the area of phased construction shall be considered. Run-on from adjoining developed or undeveloped parcels shall be considered. 84. The calculated 100-year flood limits shall be shown and noted on the improvement plans and an additional final map sheet for reference. The drainage report and final plans shall clarify the 100-year flood elevations, clearances, and freeboard at all new vehicle bridge, pedestrian bridge, and pipe bridge crossings of the creek corridors. 85. The engineer of record shall provide a digital copy of the final HEC-RAS modeling to the City in accordance with Section 4.0 of the Waterways Management Plan Drainage Design Manual. 86. The developer shall prepare an Operations and Maintenance Manual for review and approval by the City in conjunction with the development of any stormwater BMP’s that PH2-53 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 26 TR/ER #114-14 will be maintained by the HOA or by the respective private property owner. The existing Islay Hill basin shall be included in the overall maintenance program or the existing basin conditions of approval and agreement shall be updated to conform with the current permit requirements. A Private Stormwater Conveyance Agreement shall be recorded in a format provided by the City prior to final inspection approvals and acceptance of subdivision improvements. 87. The subdivider/developer shall provide notification to private property owners regarding any individual maintenance responsibility of backyard stormwater BMP’s in accordance with Section E.2 of the RQWCB Resolution R3-2013-0032. The notification may be by Notice of Requirements or other method acceptable to the City. 88. The stormwater improvements other than City Standard public stormdrain infrastructure shall be maintained by the HOA. A separate encroachment/hold harmless agreement may be required in conjunction with certain improvements proposed for location within the public rights-of-way. 89. The final details for the proposed bioretention facilities located within the public right-of- way shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The project soils engineer shall review and provide recommendations on the proposed site constructed and/or proprietary retention systems. Analysis of impacts to the public improvements, protection of utilities, and methods to minimize piping and protection of private properties shall be addressed in the final analysis. 90. The proposed detention basin and any pre-basin shall be designed in accordance with the OASP requirements and the Waterways Management Plan Drainage Design Manual. The proposed surface runoff and drainage from the detention basin(s) shall include a non- erosive outlet to an approved point of disposal. The outlet(s) design and location should replicate the historic drainage where feasible. Any off-site detention basin, temporary basin, or other drainage improvements shall be approved by the City. Any required or proposed off-site grading or drainage improvements shall be completed within recorded easements or under an appropriate license or other private agreement. 91. The subdivider shall submit CC&R's with the Final Map that establishes a Homeowner's Association (HOA). The HOA shall provide for the optional automatic annexation of all other tracts in the OASP as it relates to the shared regional detention basin. The subsequent tracts may, at their sole discretion, annex to the HOA, or demonstrate to the city's satisfaction how they will provide storm drainage mitigation through their own subdivision design and HOA. The HOA shall provide for maintenance of all private common area drainage channels, on-site and/or sub-regional drainage basins, water quality treatment and conveyance improvements. The CC&R's shall be approved by the City and shall be recorded prior to or concurrent with recordation of the Final Map. A Notice of Annexation or other appropriate mechanism to annex other subdivisions into the HOA, including but not limited to the shared regional detention basin, shall be recorded concurrently with the map. 92. The naming of the local creeks and drainages shall comply with the appropriate and pertinent creek naming standards and justifications. The inclusion of the naming on the PH2-54 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 27 TR/ER #114-14 final map and/or improvement plans shall be approved by the City prior to map and/or plan approval as applicable. 93. All bridging, culverting and modifications to the existing creek channels along with any necessary clearing of existing creek and drainage channels, including tree pruning or removals, and any necessary erosion repairs shall be in compliance with the OASP, city standards and policies, the Waterways Management Plan and shall be approved by the Natural Resources Manager, Public Works Department, Army Corp of Engineers, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and California Fish & Wildlife. 94. Any existing areas of swale, creek and/or channel erosion shall be stabilized to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, Natural Resources Manager, and other permitting agencies. The existing creek crossing and roadside swale located along the frontage of Lot 327 shall be relocated away from the existing and proposed edge of roadway and shall be stabilized to the satisfaction of the City and permitting agencies. 95. The existing upslope drainage along and from the quarry access road on Righetti Hill shall be evaluated in detail. Any re-grading of the road to correct or revise existing areas of concentrated drainage shall be reviewed and approved by the Natural Resources Manager. The final road grading and drainage management should consider passive conveyance strategies that will minimize erosion and on-going maintenance on behalf of the City and HOA. 96. The public improvement plans shall show and note the existing and/or proposed improvements to the existing off-site Islay Hill basin. The plan shall show any changes to the basin including but not limited to access, outlet/metering alterations, low-flow channel development, silt/trash catchment, plantings, irrigation, and security fencing. 97. The project soils engineer shall review the final grading and drainage plans and Low Impact Development (LID) improvements. The soils report shall include specific recommendations related to public improvements, site development, utility, and building pad/foundation construction related to the proposed LID improvements. The project soils engineering report shall be referenced on the final map in accordance with the Subdivision Regulations and City Engineering Standards. 98. The final plans and drainage report shall show and note compliance with City Engineering Standard 1010.B for spring or perched groundwater management and for water quality treatment of run-off from impervious streets, drive aisles, parking areas, and trash enclosures. 99. A SWPPP is required in accordance with State and local regulations. A hard copy of the SWPPP shall be provided to the City in conjunction with the Public Improvement Plan submittal and subsequent building plan submittals. The WDID number shall be included by reference on all construction plans sets. An erosion control plan shall be included with the improvement plans and all building plan submittals for demolitions, grading, and new construction. 100. The project development and grading shall comply with all air quality standards and PH2-55 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 28 TR/ER #114-14 mitigation measures. The developer shall provide written notification from the County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) regarding compliance with all local, state, and federal regulations including but not limited to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) regulations related to Naturally Occuring Asbestos (NOA). Fire 101. The project shall provide a minimum of two points of access to the subdivision from an existing public way wherever there are more than 30 housing units. Emergency Vehicle Access points will NOT be accepted in lieu of full access. 102. All streets that are less than 28 feet in width shall be posted “No Parking – Fire Lane” on both sides. Streets less than 36 feet in width shall be posted on one side only. 103. The project shall provide water mains and city-standard fire hydrants to provide a minimum needed fire flow of 1500 GPM for 2 hours to within 300 feet of the exterior walls of all proposed structures. Fire hydrant spacing shall not exceed 500 feet. Homeowners’ Association 104. 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 that establishes a “Master Homeowner’s Association” (Master HOA). To the extent desired by the subdivider, individual phases of the project may include sub- associations as described in the applicant’s “Master Declaration of CC&R’s for Righetti Ranch”, dated 6/6/14. CC&R's shall minimally contain the following provisions that pertain to all lots: i. The initial set of CC&R’s provided for the VTM#3063 final map shall provide for automatic annexation of subsequent phases to the Master HOA, including the potential to incorporate the adjoining Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) within the Master HOA. A graphic or other exhibit describing all properties to be annexed to the Righetti Ranch Master HOA shall be included with any CC&R’s for VTM#3063. ii. All private improvements shall be owned and maintained by the individual property owners, sub-associations or the Master Homeowner’s Association as applicable. Private improvements include but are not limited to streets, sidewalks, pedestrian and bike paths, sewer mains, drainage systems, detention basin(s), street lighting, landscape, landscape irrigation, and common area improvements iii. Grant to the city the right to maintain common areas if the HOA fails to perform, and to assess the HOA for expenses incurred, and the right of the city to inspect the site at mutually agreed times to assure conditions of CC&R's and final map are being met. iv. No parking except in approved, designated spaces. v. No outdoor storage of boats, campers, motorhomes, or trailers nor long-term storage of inoperable vehicles. vi. No outdoor storage by individual units except in designated storage areas. vii. The responsibility for the placement of the trash and recycling containers at the PH2-56 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 29 TR/ER #114-14 street on collection days will be the responsibility of the property owner’s association. The property owner’s association shall coordinate with San Luis Garbage Company regarding the collection time and preferred location for the placement of trash and recycling containers to minimize the obstruction of project streets viii. No changes in city-required provisions of the CC&R's will be considered valid and in effect without prior City Council approval. ix. Provision for all of the maintenance responsibilities outlined in various conditions. Planning Requirements 105. At the time of submittal of a request for a final map, the subdivider shall provide a written report detailing the methods and techniques employed for complying with all required environmental mitigation measures as adopted herein. 106. In order to be consistent with the requirements of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan and County Airport Land Use Plan, the property owner shall grant an avigation easement for the benefit and protection of the City of San Luis Obispo, the County of San Luis Obispo and the San Luis Obispo County Airport via an avigation easement document prior to the recordation of the final map. 107. All owners, potential purchasers, occupants (whether as owners or renters), and potential occupants (whether as owners or renters) shall receive full and accurate disclosure concerning the noise, safety, or overflight impacts associated with airport operations prior to entering any contractual obligation to purchase, lease, rent, or otherwise occupy any propert y or properties within the airport area. 108. Provisions for trash, recycle, and green waste containment, screening, and collection shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City and San Luis Obispo Garbage Company. Proposed refuse storage area(s) and on-site conveyance shall consider convenience, aesthetics, safety, and functionality. Ownership boundaries and/or easements shall be considered in the final design. Any common storage areas shall be maintained by the HOA and shall be included in the CCR’s or other property maintenance agreement accordingly. The solid waste solutions shall be shown and noted on the submittal(s) for Architectural Review Commission (ARC) approvals. 109. Prior to the issuance of building permits for residential units, the Architectural Review Commission shall review the residential building program, including building and landscape improvements, and provide comments and recommendations to the Community Development Director. Final architectural design approval authority shall be vested in the Community Development Director. Director decisions may be appealed pursuant to standard city policies. 110. Prior to the recording of any phase of the final map, the applicant shall enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement with the City Council that details the timing of construction of affordable units on-site, proposed “transfers” of affordable units to another site, contains guarantees for failure to complete any or all of the affordable housing units (such as PH2-57 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 30 TR/ER #114-14 collecting affordable housing in-lieu fees, cash guarantees for the completion of the affordable units, providing a letter of credit, bond or other financial guarantee to assure compliance). 111. The subdivider shall dedicate all public lands, including the neighborhood park (Lot 312), with the initial final map. This neighborhood park will be designed under the direction of the City’s Parks & Recreation Commission with a recommendation to the Architectural Review Commission and City Council, who will be responsible for the final design approval of the park. 112. A construction phasing plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Director prior to the issuance of the first building permit. 113. The subdivider shall develop a Construction Management Plan for review and approval by the Public Works and Community Development Directors. The plan shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a building permit for proposed project buildings and/or a phase of buildings. In addition, the contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the Construction Management Plan components and provide their contact names and phone numbers. The Construction Management Plan shall include at least the following items and requirements: a. A set of comprehensive traffic control measures, including scheduling of major truck trips and deliveries to avoid peak traffic and pedestrian hours, detour signs if required, directional signs for construction vehicles, and designated construction access routes. b. Notification procedures for adjacent property owners and public safety personnel regarding when major deliveries and more intensive site work may be occurring, c. Location of construction staging areas which shall be located on the project site, for materials, equipment, and vehicles. d. Identification of haul routes for movement of construction vehicles that would minimize impacts on vehicular and pedestrian traffic, circulation and safety, and noise impacts to surrounding neighbors. e. The applicant shall ensure that the construction contractor employs the following noise reducing measures: i. Standard construction activities shall be limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. ii. All equipment shall have sound-control devices no less effective than those provided by the manufacturer. No equipment shall have un-muffled exhaust pipes; and iii. Stationary noise sources shall be located as far from sensitive receptors as possible, and they shall be muffled and enclosed within temporary sheds, or insulation barriers or other measures shall be incorporated to the extent possible. f. Temporary construction fences to contain debris and material and to secure the site. g. Provisions for removal of trash generated by project construction activity. h. A process for responding to, and tracking, complaints pertaining to construction PH2-58 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 31 TR/ER #114-14 activity. i. Provisions for monitoring surface streets used for truck routes so that any damage and debris attributable to the trucks can be identified and corrected. j. Designated location(s) for construction worker parking. 114. Pursuant to Government Code §66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this subdivision, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review. 115. Access corridors of 15’ between lots 200-201 and 50’ along lots 58 and 84 will be added to the Final Map. 116. Conditions relating to phasing and timing of infrastructure are approved as contained herein, or as approved by the Community Development and Public Works Directors during review of public improvement plans and final maps. 117. Financing and “fair share” contribution plans may be submitted for City Council review with any final map application. The City Council will have sole discretion as to any reimbursement and/or fee credit programs implemented with said final maps. PH2-59 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 14 TR/ER #114-14 Upon motion of , seconded by , and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: REFRAIN: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 2015. Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: Anthony Mejia City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney PH2-60 ATTACHMENT 1-B Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Page 15 TR/ER #114-14 PH2-61 ATTACHMENT 1-C RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING A VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 3066 CREATING 33 LOTS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3765 ORCUTT ROAD (TR/ER SBDV-0067-2014; TRACT #3066 JONES) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing on March 25 and April 8th, 2015 in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, for the purpose of considering SBDV-0067-2014, a vesting tentative tract map subdividing an approximately 11.56-acre site into 33 lots; and recommended the City Council approve the Vesting Tentative Tract Map; and WHEREAS, the April 8, 2015 Planning Commission hearing was for the purpose of formulating and forwarding recommendations to the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo regarding the project; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the initial study of environmental impact as prepared by staff; and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: Section 1. CEQA Findings, Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring Program. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the following CEQA findings in support of the Vesting Tentative Map SBDV-0067-2014 (Tract No. 3066): 1. The proposed project is consistent with the requirements of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) certified and adopted by the City Council on March 2, 2010, and this approval incorporates those FEIR mitigation measures as applicable to VTM#3066, as detailed herein. 2. A supplemental initial study has been prepared for VTM#3066 addressing potential environmental impacts which were not identified or detailed in the FEIR for the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP). The Community Development Director has recommended that the results of that additional analysis be incorporated into a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) of environmental impacts, and recommends adoption of additional mitigation measures to those imposed by the FEIR, all of which are incorporated below. 3. All potentially significant effects were analyzed adequately in the referenced FEIR and IS- MND, and reduced to a level of insignificance, provided the following mitigation measures are PH2-62 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 2 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 incorporated into the development project and the mitigation monitoring program: AIR QUALITY MITIGATION Operational Phase Mitigation AQ-1(a) Energy Efficiency. The building energy efficiency rating shall be 10% above what is required by Title 24 requirements for all buildings within the Specific Plan Area. The following energy-conserving techniques shall be incorporated unless the applicant demonstrates their infeasibility to the satisfaction of City Planning and Building Department staff: increase walls and attic insulation beyond Title 24 requirements; orient buildings to maximize natural heating and cooling; plant shade trees along southern exposures of buildings to reduce summer cooling needs; use roof material with a solar reflectance value meeting the Environmental Protection Agency/Department of Energy Star rating; build in energy efficient appliances; use low energy street lighting and traffic signals; use energy efficient interior lighting; use solar water heaters; use double-paned windows; solar panel plumbing; grey water recycling; tank-less water heaters; dedicated hot water line loops. AQ-1(b) Transit. Bus turnouts and shelter improvements with direct pedestrian access shall be installed at all bus stops. AQ-1(c) Shade Trees. All parking lots shall include shade trees within the parking area. There shall be at least one shade tree for every six vehicle parking spaces. AQ-1(d) Telecommuting. All new homes within the Specific Plan area shall be constructed with internal wiring/cabling that allows telecommuting, teleconferencing, and tele- learning to occur simultaneously in at least three locations in each home. AQ-1(e) Pathways. Where feasible, all cul-de-sacs and dead-end streets shall be links by pathways to encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel. • AQ-1 Monitoring Program: Compliance with operational phase mitigation measures will be reviewed with the subdivision plans and accompanying architectural review plans and ultimately shown on improvement plans and construction drawings. Construction Phase Mitigation AQ-3(a) Application of CBACT (Best Available Control Technology for construction related equipment). The following measures shall be implemented to reduce combustion emissions from construction equipment where a project will have an area of disturbance greater than 1 acre. • Specific Plan applicants shall submit for review by the Community Development Department and Air Pollution Control District (APCD) staff a grading plan showing the area to be disturbed and a description of construction equipment that PH2-63 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 3 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 will be used and pollution reduction measures that will be implemented. Upon confirmation by the Community Development Department and APCD, appropriate CBACT features shall be applied. The application of these features shall occur prior to Specific Plan construction. • Specific Plan applicants shall be required to ensure that all construction equipment and portable engines are properly maintained and tuned according to manufacturer's specifications. • Specific Plan applicants shall be required to ensure that off-road and portable diesel powered equipment, including but not limited to bulldozers, graders , cranes, loaders, scrapers, backhoes, generator sets, compressors, auxiliary power units, shall be fueled exclusively with CARB motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed off-road diesel is acceptable). • Specific Plan applicants shall be required to install a diesel oxidation catalyst on each of the two pieces of equipment projected to generate the greatest emissions. Installations must be prepared according to manufacturer's specifications. AQ-3(b) Dust Control. The following measures shall be implemented to reduce PM10 emissions during all Specific Plan construction: • Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible. • Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Water shall be applied as soon as possible whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour. Reclaimed (nonpotable) water should be used whenever possible. • All dirt-stock-pile areas shall be sprayed daily as needed. • Permanent dust control measures shall be identified in the approved Specific Plan revegetation and landscape plans and implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities. • Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast-germinating native grass seed and watered until vegetation is established. • All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD. • All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc., to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. • Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site. • All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil or other loose materials shall be covered or shall maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114. • Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. • Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water shall be used where feasible. PH2-64 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 4 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 AQ-3(c) Cover Stockpiled Soils. If importation, exportation, or stockpiling of fill material is involved, soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. Trucks transporting material shall be tarped from the point of origin. AQ-3(d) Dust Control Monitor. On all projects with an area of disturbance greater than 1 acre, the contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering as necessary to prevent transport of dust off-site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. • AQ-3 Monitoring Program: These conditions shall be noted on all project grading and building plans. The applicant will also be required to secure necessary permits from the Air Pollution Control Board (APCD) before the onset of grading or demolition activities including, but not limited to additional dust control measures, evaluation for Naturally Occurring Asbestos. The applicant shall present evidence of a plan for complying with these requirements prior to issuance of a grading or building permit from the City. The applicant shall provide the City with the name and telephone number of the person responsible for ensuring compliance with these requirements. The Building Inspector and Public Works Inspectors shall conduct field monitoring. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION B-3(a) Construction Requirements. Development under the Specific Plan shall abide by the requirements of the City Arborist for construction. Requirements shall include but not be limited to: the protection of trees with construction setbacks from trees; construction fencing around trees; grading limits around the base of trees as required; and a replacement plan for trees removed including replacement at a minimum 1:1 ratio. B-4(c) Riparian/ Wetland Mitigation. If riparian and/or wetland habitat are proposed for removal pursuant to development under the Specific Plan, such development shall apply for all applicable permits and submit a Mitigation Plan for areas of disturbance to wetlands and/or riparian habitat. The plan shall be prepared by a biologist familiar with restoration and mitigation techniques. Compensatory mitigation shall occur on- site using regionally collected native plant material at a minimum ratio of 2:1 (habitat created to habitat impacted) in areas shown on figure 4.4-2 as directed by a biologist. The resource agencies may require a higher mitigation ratio. If the Orcutt Regional Basin is necessary as a mitigation site for waters of the U.S. and State it shall be designed as directed by a biologist taking into consideration hydrology, soils, and erosion control and using the final mitigation guidelines and monitoring requirements (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2004). As noted above, the trail shall be setback out of the buffer area for riparian and wetland habitat. B-5(a) Bird Pre-Construction Survey. To avoid impacts to nesting special-status bird species and raptors including the ground-nesting burrowing owl, all initial ground- disturbing activities and tree removal shall be limited to the time period between PH2-65 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 5 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 September 15 and February 1. If initial site disturbance, grading, and tree removal cannot be conducted during this time period, a pre-construction survey for active nests within the limits of grading shall be conducted by a qualified biologist at the site two weeks prior to any construction activities (for ground-nesting burrowing owl survey see below). If active nests are located, all construction work must be conducted outside a buffer zone of 200 feet to 500 feet from the nests as determined in consultation with the CDFG. No direct disturbance to nests shall occur until the adults and young are no longer reliant on the nest site. A qualified biologist shall confirm that breeding/nesting is completed and young have fledged the nest prior to the start of construction. B-5(b) Burrowing Owl Survey. When an applicant requests entitlements from the City under the Specific Plan a qualified biologist shall conduct surveys for burrowing owls during both the wintering and nesting seasons (unless the species is detected on the first survey) in potentially suitable habitats prior to construction in accordance with the guidelines described in the CDFG Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (1995). Winter surveys shall be conducted on the entire project site between December 1 and February 1, and the nesting season survey shall be conducted between April 15 and July 15. If burrowing owls are detected within the proposed disturbance area, CDFG shall be contacted immediately to develop and implement a mitigation plan to protect owls and their nest sites. B-5(c) Monarch Pre-Construction Survey. If initial ground-breaking is to occur between the months of October and March a pre-construction survey for active monarch roost sites within the limits of grading shall be conducted by a qualified biologist at the site two weeks prior to any construction activities. If active roost sites are located no ground-disturbing activities shall occur within 50 feet of the perimeter of the habitat. Construction shall not resume within the setback until a qualified biologist has determined that the monarch butterfly has vacated the site. B-5(d) VPFS Sampling Surveys. Prior to development in areas shown as potential VPFS habitat on Figure 4.4-2, current USFWS protocol level sampling surveys shall be conducted in all such areas. A report consistent with current Federal, State, and local reporting guidelines shall be prepared to document the methods and results of surveys. If VPFS are found, the report shall include a map that identifies the VPFS locations. Should the presence of additional special-status wildlife species be determined including California linderiella, a map identifying locations in which these species were found shall be prepared and included in the report. B-5(e) FESA Consultation and Mitigation Regarding VPFS. If any VPFS individuals are located onsite pursuant to Mitigation Measure B-5(d), substantial setbacks from their identified habitat shall be implemented to avoid take of a Federally listed species. If complete avoidance is not economically or technically feasible, then Section 10 of the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) shall be used to authorize incidental take when no other Federal agency such as the Corps is involved. This process includes development of a Habitat Conservation Plan for protecting and enhancing the Federally listed species at a specific location in perpetuity. Species take can also be PH2-66 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 6 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 authorized under Section 7 of the FESA if a Federal agency is involved in the project (e.g., Corps Section 404 permitting for impacts to waters of the U.S. and/or Federal funding) and agrees to be the lead agency requesting Section 7 consultation. This consultation process takes at a minimum 135 days from the official request by the Federal lead agency. The compensatory mitigation ratio shall be determined by the appropriate resource agencies. Suitable replacement habitat shall be constructed either within the site boundaries or offsite. [OASP FEIR] Figure 4.4-2 identifies areas that could be appropriate for onsite VPFS mitigation. Figure 4.4-2 is not intended to preclude development but shall be used as a starting point for incorporating VPFS mitigation sites into the development plan. While the Orcutt Regional Basin included in the potential VPFS mitigation sites may need regular maintenance and may be seasonally flooded, depressions could be created on the upper edges of the terrace in such a manner that they are protected from flooding. VPFS mitigation areas shall be approved by a biologist familiar with VPFS habitat “creation” techniques. Enhancement of the onsite seasonal freshwater wetland habitat that is undisturbed by project activities may also be a part of the mitigation program. Alternatively, fairy shrimp cysts could be collected during the dry s eason from the existing habitat and placed into storage. Topsoil could also be removed and stored in conditions suitable to retain cysts. Wetland habitat could be enhanced/created in the areas shown on Figure 4.4-2 by grading depressions in the landscape and “top dressing” the depressions with the preserved topsoil. Preserved cysts would be added to the recreated wetlands in December or January, after sufficient ponding has occurred. It is important to note that VPFS habitat mitigation is still considered experimental. VPFS habitat mitigation is ambitious as it is costly, labor intensive, and difficult to ensure success. Habitat may be “created” only in an existing vernal pool landscape that provides suitable soils and a number of other specific ecological factors (USFWS, 2004). An alternative to onsite mitigation is the purchase of mitigation bank credits. Credits can be purchase by the acre as suitable mitigation for VPFS. There is currently no known mitigation bank with VPFS habitat occurring within San Luis Obispo County, however, mitigation banks may be available in the future. • B-3a, B-4c, B-5 Monitoring Program: Monitoring will include Natural Resources Department staff consultation and implementation at time of review and prior to approval of grading plan(s) and during tract construction (B-3a, B-4c, B-5). B-6(c) Educational Pet Brochure. Any development pursuant to the Specific Plan shall prepare a brochure that informs prospective homebuyers and Home Owners Association (HOA) members about the impacts associated with non- native animals, especially cats and dogs, to the project site; simi larly, the brochure must inform potential homebuyers and all HOA members of the potential for coyotes to prey on domestic animals. PH2-67 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 7 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 B-6(c) Landscaping Plan Review. To ensure that project landscaping does not introduce invasive non-native plant and tree species to the region of the site, the final landscaping plan shall be reviewed and approved by a qualified biologist. The California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC) maintains several lists of the most important invasive plants to avoid. The lists shall be used when creating a plant palette for landscaping to ensure that plants on the lists are not used. The following plants shall not be allowed as part of potential landscaping plans pursuant to development under the Specific Plan: • African sumac (Rhus lancea) • Australian saltbush (Atriplex semibaccata) • Black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) • California pepper (Schinus molle) and Brazilian pepper (S. terebinthifolius) • Cape weed (Arctotheca calendula) • Cotoneaster (Cotoneaster pannosus), (C. lacteus) • Edible fig (Ficus carica) • Fountain grass (Pennisetum setaceum) • French broom (Genista monspessulana) • Ice plant, sea fig (Carpobrotus edulis) • Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) • Myoporum (Myoporum spp.) • Olive (Olea europaea) • Pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana), and Andean pampas grass (C. jubata) • Russian olive (Elaeagnus angusticifolia) • Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius) and striated broom (C. striatus) • Spanish broom (Spartium junceum) • Tamarix, salt cedar (Tamarix chinensis), (T. gallica), (T. parviflora), (T. ramosissima) • Blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) • Athel tamarisk (Tamarix aphylla) • B-6c Monitoring Program: Compliance with mitigation measures will be reviewed with landscaping plans as part of the architectural review submittal and ultimately shown on improvement plans and construction drawings. CULTURAL RESOURCES MITIGATION CR-1(d) Archaeological Resource Construction Monitoring. At the commencement of project construction, an orientation meeting shall be conducted by an archaeologist for construction workers associated with earth disturbing procedures. The orientation meeting shall describe the possibility of exposing unexpected archaeological resources and directions as to what steps are to be taken if such a find is encountered. An archaeologist shall monitor construction grading within 50 meters (164 feet) of PH2-68 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 8 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 the two isolated finds. In the event that prehistoric or historic archaeological resources are exposed during project construction, all earth disturbing work within 50 meters (164 feet) of the find must be temporarily suspended or redirected until an archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find. After the find has been appropriately mitigated (e.g., curation, preservation in place, etc.), work in the area may resume. The City should consider retaining a Chumash representative to monitor any field work associated with Native American cultural material. If human remains are exposed, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. • CR-1d Monitoring Program: Requirements for cultural resource mitigation shall be clearly noted on all plans for project grading and construction. DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY MITIGATION D-2(a) Vegetative and Biotechnical Approaches to Bank Stabilization. Vegetative or biotechnical (also referred to as soil bioengineering) approaches to bank stabilization are preferred over structural approaches. Bank stabilization design must be consistent with the SLO Creek Stream Management and Maintenance Program Section 6. Streambank stabilization usually involves one or a combination of the following activities: • Regrading and revegetating the streambanks to eliminate overhanging banks and create a more stable slope; • Deflecting erosional water flow away from vulnerable sites; • Reducing the steepness of the channel bed through installation of grade stabilization structures; • Altering the geometry of the channel to influence flow velocities and sediment deposition; • Diverting a portion of the higher flow into a secondary or by-pass channel; • Armoring or protecting the bank to control erosion, particularly at the toe of slopes. The bank stabilization design will: • Be stable over the long term; • Be the least environmentally damaging and the “softest” approach possible; • Not create upstream or downstream flooding or induce other local stream instabilities; • Minimize impacts to aquatic and riparian habitat. D-2(c) Riparian Zone Planting. The OASP proposes riparian enhancement of creek PH2-69 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 9 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 corridors. Section 11 guidelines of the SLO Creek Drainage Design Manual shall be followed for riparian areas that are modified, created and/or managed for flood damage reduction, stream enhancement, and bank repair. Linear park terrace vegetation, streambank repair and channel maintenance projects may require stream channel modifications that include shaping, widening, deepening, straightening, and armoring. Many channel management projects also require building access roads for maintenance vehicles and other equipment. These construction activities can cause a variety of impacts to existing sensitive riparian and aquatic habitat that, depending on the selected design alternative, range from slight disturbances to complete removal of desirable woody vegetation and faunal communities. In urban areas within the SLO creek watershed, riparian vegetation often provides the only remaining natural habitat available for wildlife populations. D-5(a) Biofilters. The applicant shall submit to the Director of Community Development for review and approval a plan that incorporates grassed swales (biofilters) into the project drainage system where feasible for runoff conveyance and filtering of pollutants. D-5(c) Pervious Paving Material. Consistent with Land Use Element Policy 6.4.7, the applicant shall be encouraged to use pervious paving material to facilitate rainwater percolation. Parking lots and paved outdoor storage areas shall, where feasible, use pervious paving to reduce surface water runoff and aid in groundwater recharge. • D-2a, D-2c, D-5a, D-5c Monitoring Program: Monitoring will include Natural Resources Department staff consultation and implementation at time of landscaping construction plan review and Engineering-Public Works staff at the time of tract construction. NOISE MITIGATION N-1(a) Compliance with City Noise Ordinance. Construction hours and noise levels shall be compliant with the City Noise Ordinance [Municipal Code Chapter 9.12, Section 9.12.050(6)]. Methods to reduce construction noise can include, but are not limited to, the following: • Equipment Shielding. Stationary construction equipment that generates noise can be shielded with a barrier. • Diesel Equipment. All diesel equipment can be operated with closed engine doors and equipped with factory-recommended mufflers. • Electrical Power. Whenever feasible, electrical power can be used to run air compressors and similar power tools. • Sound Blankets. The use of sound blankets on noise generating equipment. • N-1a Monitoring Program: Requirements for construction noise mitigation shall be clearly noted on all plans for project grading and construction. PH2-70 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 10 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 PUBLIC SERVICES MITIGATION PS-4 Wastewater Main System Extensions. Prior to recordation of a final map for Jones Ranch (TR 3066), the improvement plans for the tract shall include connections to future improvements planned by Tract 3063 (Righetti Ranch) to convey sanitary sewer service to the existing connection points on Tank Farm Road. Prior to recordation of Tract 3066, (a) the needed improvements through Tract 3063 shall be completed and available to tie-in Tract 3066, or (b) Tract 3066 shall provide easements and financial guarantees that guarantee Tract 3066 can proceed with construction of Tract 3063 improvements to serve the Jones Ranch. • PS-4 Monitoring Program: Compliance will be reviewed and implemented by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and accompanying final map prior to recordation of the final map. PUBLIC SAFETY MITIGATION S-2(b) Disclosure. Prior to recordation of final map, the applicant shall develop Covenants, Codes, and Restrictions (CC&R’s) that disclose to potential buyers or leasers that aircraft over-flights occur, and that such flights may result in safety hazard impacts should an aircraft accident occur. In addition, prior to recordation of final map, avigation easements shall be recorded over the entire project site for the benefit of the SLO County Regional Airport. • S-2b Monitoring Program: Monitoring will include Community Development, City Attorney and Engineering staff approvals of the Disclosure(s) prior to recordation of a final tract map. S-4(d) 55-Gallon Drums. Prior to development on the property where 55-Gallon drums were identified on FEIR Figure 4.9-1, soils samples shall be taken in the vicinity of the drums and analyzed for total extractable petroleum hydrocarbons (TEPH) by EPA method 8015, heavy metals by CCR Title 22 metals, and solvents by EPA method 8260B. If levels of contaminants are found to exist in concentrations that exceed regulatory thresholds, further sampling may be needed to determine the extent of contamination. If contamination is delineated, an appropriate remediation method shall be implemented according to the size of the area contaminated and the contaminant involved. • S-4d Monitoring Program: Monitoring will include Engineering staff review of soils sampling and implementation of appropriate remediation measures, if required, prior to tract construction in the vicinity of any such positive sample(s). PH2-71 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 11 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION T-4 Street B & Tiburon Way Alignment. Applicant shall align Street B with the existing alignment of Tiburon Way and design the roadway curvature to maintain appropriate residential speeds. • T-4 Monitoring Program: Compliance and implementation shall be reviewed by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and shall be completed prior to issuance of any building permits for Phase 1. T-6 Traffic Calming & Safety. Intersection of Streets A & B shall be controlled by a single lane urban compact intersection. Eliminate Mid-block crosswalk on Street A. Align curb, gutter, and sidewalk with Sponza Drive of the Taylor Wingate Project. • T-6 Monitoring Program: Compliance and implementation shall be reviewed by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and accompanying final map prior to recordation of the final map. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS MITIGATION USS-1 Off-site Water Main Line Extensions to the OASP To Meet Fire Flow and Storage Standards. Concurrent with applications for Final Map(s), the applicant shall submit a water supply p lan to meet adequate fire flow standards for all lots within each Final Map. Implementation of such a water line extension plan shall be included as a part of public improvement plans for the subdivision, and approved by Utilities, Public Works and the City Engineer. This implementation plan may include a financing plan, including reimbursement provisions, approved by the City Council at the time of considering any Final Map. Required water main line extension(s) to the subdivision shall be completed and operational to the satisfaction of the Utilities Director, prior to construction of any of the residential and/or commercial uses. • USS-1 Monitoring Program Compliance will be reviewed and implemented by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and shall be completed prior to issuance of any occupancy permits for Tract 3066. Section 2. Vesting Tract Map Approval with Findings & Conditions. The City Council does hereby approve application SBDV-0067-2014 TR/ER (VTM#3066, “Jones Ranch”), a tentative tract map to create up to 33 residential, commercial and open space lots, based on the following findings, and subject to the following conditions being incorporated into the project: Findings: PH2-72 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 12 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 1. As conditioned, the design of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the General Plan because the proposed subdivision respects existing site constraints, will incrementally add to the City’s residential housing inventory, results in parcels that meet minimum density standards, and will be consistent with the density, lot sizes and project amenities established by the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP). 2. The site is physically suited for the type and density of development allowed in the C/OS-SP, P-F-SP, R-1-SP, R-2-SP, R-3-SP, R-4-SP, and CC-MU zoning districts. 3. The design of the vesting tentative tract map 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, since further development or redevelopment of the proposed parcels will occur consistent with VTM 3066 and the required architectural review process, which will allow for detailed review of development plans to assure compliance with City plans, policies, and standards. 4. As conditioned, the design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements for access through (or use of property within) the proposed subdivision, and the project is consistent with the pattern of development prescribed in the Orcutt Area Specific Plan. 5. The proposed project will provide affordable housing consistent with the intent of California Government Code §65915, and in compliance with City policies and the Housing Element. 6. The tentative map, as conditioned, will comply with all environmental mitigation measures prescribed herein, and therefore is consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act, the OASP Final EIR, and the Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-MND). 7. The design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities. Conditions: Dedications and Easements 1. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private utilities, access, grading, drainage, slope banks, construction, public and private streets, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, common driveways, and maintenance of the same shall be shown on the final map and/or shall be recorded separately prior to or concurrent with the recordation of the map, unless a deferral is requested by the subdvider and granted by the City. Said easements may be provided for in part or in total as blanket easements. 2. The final map and improvement plans shall show the extent of all on-site and off-site offers of dedication. Subdivision improvement plans and or preliminary designs may be required for any deferred improvements so that dedication limits can be established. These improvements may include but are not limited to road construction and widening, PH2-73 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 13 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 grading and drainage improvements, utility easements, bridges, bike bridges, transit stops, bikeways, pedestrian paths, and intersection improvements. 3. The map and improvement plans shall provide for all minimum street improvements and utility placements within the improved or partially i mproved streets adjoining the subdivision as needed for orderly development to the satisfaction of the City. In some cases, “dry” pipes may be required to be constructed under improved street sections for the benefit of others. 4. Access rights shall be dedicated to the City along Orcutt Road except at approved driveway locations and intersections as shown on the tentative map or as otherwise approved by the city. 5. The subdivider shall dedicate a 10’ wide street tree easement and 6’ public utility easement (P.U.E.) across the frontage of each lot. Said easements shall be adjacent to and contiguous with all public right-of-way lines bordering each lot. A 10’ wide street tree easement and 6’ P.U.E. shall be provided along the frontage for all private streets. A 10’ street tree easement and 15’ P.U.E. shall be provided along the frontages of the Mixed Use Commercial Lots 24 – 26. The easements may be removed or reduced under the footprint of proposed buildings. 6. The subdivider shall dedicate all public Open Space in fee to the City, consistent with the OASP, in conjunction with or prior to the Phase 1 map recordation unless otherwise deferred or a reimbursement agreement is processed. Deferral shall be approved by the City and may require that all appropriate OASP fees are paid as a condition of development. The land shall be granted free and clear of all encumbrances to the satisfaction of the City. 7. All private improvements shall be owned and maintained by the individual property owners or the Homeowner’s Association (HOA) as applicable. Private improvements include but are not limited to streets, sidewalks, private pedestrian/bike paths, sewer mains, drainage systems, detention basin(s), street lighting, landscape, landscape irrigation, common areas, pocket parks, and linear park improvements. 8. The private open space C/OS Lot 31 along with the proposed improvements, including but not limited to trails, bikeways, and landscaping shall be owned and maintained by the HOA. Open Space and bikeway easements along with any public utility easements shall be offered to the City and shown and noted on the final map. An easement agreement may be required for specific open space areas, creek corridors, bikeways, and utility corridors in a format approved by the City. 9. A wildland fuel management/reduction zone along with any required easements and/or zone limits shall be provided for Lot 31 to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief. If required, the limits shall be shown and noted on the final map and improvement plans for reference. The limits of the zone shall be in accordance with the adopted Fire Code and approved to the satisfaction of the City Fire Chief and City Natural Resources Manager. The HOA shall be responsible for wildland fuel management, weed abatement, and creek maintenance within the established fuel reduction zone and private open space areas. PH2-74 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 14 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 10. A notice of requirements or other agreement acceptable to the City of San Luis Obispo may need to be recorded in conjunction with the Final Map to clarify development restrictions, conditions of development, and references to any pertinent conditions related to the OASP and City codes and ordinances. 11. Off-site easements and/or dedications may be required to facilitate secondary points of access, through street access, and public water and sewer main extensions beyond the tract boundary and in accordance with the OASP. Looped water mains may be required in accordance with the tentative map, development phasing, and the City water model to provide adequate service and compliance with adopted codes and standards. 12. Off-site dedication/acquisition of property for this public right-of-way purpose is necessary to facilitate orderly development and the anticipated OASP improvements. The subdivider shall work with the City and the land owner(s) to acquire the necessary rights-of-way. In the event the subdivider is unable to acquire said rights-of-way, the City Council may consider lending the subdivider its powers of condemnation to acquire the off-site right-of-way dedication, including any necessary slope and drainage easements. If condemnation is required, the subdivider shall agree to pay all costs associated with the off-site right-of-way acquisition (including attorney fees and court costs). 13. With respect to all off-site improvements, prior to filing of the Final Map, the subdivider shall either: a. Clearly demonstrate their right to construct the improvements by showing title or interest in the property in a form acceptable to the City Engineer; or, b. Demonstrate, in writing, that the subdivider has exhausted all reasonable efforts to acquire interest to the subject property and request that the City assist in acquiring the property required for the construction of such improvements and exercise its power of eminent domain in accordance with Government Code Section 66462 .5 to do so, if necessary. subdivider shall also enter into an agreement with the City to pay all costs of such acquisition including, but not limited to, all costs associated with condemnation. Said agreement shall be in a form acceptable to the City Engineer and the City Attorney. If condemnation proceedings are required, the subdivider shall submit, in a form acceptable to the City Engineer, the following documents regarding the property to be acquired: i. Property legal description and sketch stamped and signed by a Licensed Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer authorized to practice land surveying in the State of California; ii. Preliminary title report including chain of title and litigation guarantee; iii. Appraisal of the property by a City approved appraiser. In the course of obtaining such appraisal, the property owner(s) must be given an opportunity to accompany the appraiser during any inspection of the property or acknowledge in writing that they knowingly waived the right to do so; PH2-75 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 15 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 iv. Copies of all written correspondence with off-site property owners including purchase summary of formal offers and counter offers to purchase at the appraised price. v. Prior to submittal of the aforementioned documents for City Engineer approval, the Subdivider shall deposit with the City all or a portion of the anticipated costs, as determined by the City Attorney, of the condemnation proceedings. The City does not and cannot guarantee that the necessary property rights can be acquired or will, in fact, be acquired. All necessary procedures of law would apply and would have to be followed. Transportation 14. Secondary access is required from all portions and/or phases of the subdivision where more than 30 dwelling units are proposed. The location and development of the proposed secondary access shall be presented to the City for review and approval prior to the preparation of the related improvement plans. 15. Unless an alternate access and egress plan is approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and the Fire Chief, the westerly Phase 1 of Jones Ranch shall be provided with a secondary access to Orcutt Road in conjunction with an access to Tank Farm Road. The completion of development may need to be deferred to Phase 2 or the B Street bridge would need to be construction in conjunction with Phase 1. Regardless of access, the required water supply to this phase may require a looped water main with indications that the B Street bridge may need to be constructed in support of the required water main extension prior to commencing with combustible construction. 16. Fire Department access shall be provided for each construction phase to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief. Phased street construction shall consider and provide suitable Fire Department hydrant access, circulation routes, passing lanes, and turn-around areas in accordance with current codes and standards. 17. All public streets shall conform to City Engineering Standards and OASP including curb, gutter, and sidewalk, driveway approaches, and curb ramps as approved by the City Engineer. Where conflicts occur between the City Engineering Standards and concepts identified in the OASP, final determination of shall design shall be provided by the City Engineer. Traffic calming improvements may be required at select locations within in the subdivision. Improvements may include bulb-outs, elevated sidewalks/speed tables, or alternate paving materials to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department and Fire Department. 18. The developer shall record a Notice of Requirements with each map phase regarding the designed and installed traffic calming devices and that the subdivisions are not eligible for future Residential Parking District or Neighborhood Traffic Management program processing. 19. The improvement plans shall include all final line-of-sight analysis at certain intersections to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. Fence heights and plantings in the areas of control shall be reviewed in conjunction with the analysis. A separate recorded agreement or Notice of Requirements for private property owner or HOA maintenance of sight lines may be required. 20. The final map and improvement plans shall include the required right-of-way, transit stop easements, and all details of the required bus turnouts to accommodate all proposed and future bus stops per City Engineering Standards, the OASP and current Short Range Transit plan. The final location of all North- PH2-76 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 16 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 South and East-West route stops shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City Transit Manager and Public Works Director. 21. The public improvement plans may need to include full frontage improvements on Orcutt Road from north of B Street to Tank Farm Road, including the Imel and Garay properties. The northerly transition may require improvements across the Fiala frontage. The plans shall show all improvements including concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk per City Engineering Standards on the west side of Orcutt; 6’ bike lanes, 12’ travel lanes, and a 12’ two-way left turn lane in accordance with the tentative map, OASP, City Engineering Standards, and the Cal Trans Highway Design Manual; undergrounding of the overhead utilities on the west side; and complete details for the Orcutt Road points of access. 22. The east side of Orcutt Road where widening is proposed or required may terminate in an AC berm to match the existing adjoining road sections per City Engineering Standards or the appropriate County rural road standards where approved by the City Engineer. The Orcutt Road plans shall include all phases of construction including road widening, stormdrain improvements, culvert extensions, grading/walls, and any water quality BMP’s. Some off-site dedication of property for public right-of-way purposes may be required to facilitate the Orcutt Road improvements and transitions between the OASP full build-out road section and adjoining road segments beyond the tract boundaries. 23. The Orcutt Road improvements shall be constructed as a condition of the map, unless a deferral is requested by the subdvider and granted by the City. Prior to approval of any deferrals, the subdivider shall demonstrate that the construction of the required improvements is not feasible. 24. Prior to occupancy of Phase 1 he Tank Farm/Orcutt intersection shall be modified to provide a southbound right-turn lane on Orcutt Road and to eliminate the skew, as required in the OASP. All overhead utilities conflicting with this improvement shall be undergrounded. 25. The applicant shall conduct neighborhood speed surveys one year after occupancy of each phase at locations approved by the Director of Public Works. If 85th percentile speeds exceed current City NTM thresholds additional traffic calming measures shall be installed. The applicant shall bond for these potential additional traffic calming measures. 26. All mitigation measures (MM) specific to Transporation requirements shall be provided as detailed under CEQA section 1, above, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 27. The subdivider may present financing and reimbursement programs for transportation improvements to be considered with approval and recordation of the initial final map for VTM#3066. Any such program(s) will be subject to approval by the City Council. 28. The subdivider shall be responsible for securing the off-site right-of-way needs for VTM#3066, and dedicating that right-of-way to the city as a condition of final map approval. On and Off-Site Improvements 29. Improvement plans for the entire subdivision, including any off-site improvements shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Utilities Department, and Fire Department prior PH2-77 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 17 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 to map recordation. 30. Off-site improvements may include but are not limited to roadways, sewer mains, water mains, stormdrain improvements, off-site access roadways, the water main extensions provided by MM USS- 1, and the “B” Street to Tiburon Way alignment improvements. 31. A separate demolition permit will be required from the Building Division for the removal of any existing structures and related infrastructure. Building removals are subject to the Building Demolition Regulations including the additional notification and timing requirements for any structure over 50-yea rs old. 32. The improvement plans shall clearly show all existing structures, site improvements, utilities, water wells, septic tanks, leach fields, gas and wire services, etc. The plan shall include any pertinent off-site water well and private waste disposal sys tems that are located within regulated distances to the proposed drainage and utility improvements. The plan shall include the proposed disposition of the improvements and any proposed phasing of the removal and demolition. All structures and utilities affected by the proposed lot lines shall be removed and receive final inspection approvals prior to map recordation. 33. The subdivider shall provide additional documentation on the easement agreement related to the existing well and appurtenances located on the Jones parcel and serving the Fiala property. Some existing non- conformance was generally recognized per Appendix Section A-2 of the OASP. Additional detail and clarifications may be required on the final map and improvement plans to acknowledge any legal non- conforming utility installations between the parcels/lots in question. 34. If construction phasing of the new street pavement is proposed, the phasing shall provide for the ultimate structural street section and pavement life (per the City's Pavement Management Plan) prior to acceptance by the City. The engineer of record shall detail this requirement in the public improvement plans, to the satisfaction of the Public Works. 35. The improvement plan submittal shall include a complete construction phasing plan in accordance with the conditions of approval and map phasing. A truck circulation plan and construction management and staging plan shall be included with the improvement plan submittal. General truck routes shall be submitted for review and acceptance by the City. The engineer of record shall provide a summary of the extent of cut and fill with estimates on the yards of import and export material. The summary shall include rough grading, utility trench construction, road construction, AC paving, concrete delivery, and vertical construction loading estimates on the existing public roadways. The developer shall either; 1) complete roadway deflection testing before and after construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and shall complete repairs to the pre-construction condition, or 2) shall pay a roadway maintenance fee in accordance with City Engineering Standards and guidelines, or 3) shall propose a pavement repair/replacement program to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to acceptance of the subdivision improvements. 36. Retaining wall and/or retaining wall/fence combinations along property lines shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Planning Division and shall conform with the zoning regulations for allowed combined heights or shall be approved through the ARC or separate Fence Height exception process. 37. The ARC plans and public improvement plans shall show the location of the proposed mail receptacles PH2-78 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 18 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 or mail box units (MBU’s) to the satisfaction of the Post Master and the City Engineer. Provide a mailbox unit or multiple units to serve all dwelling units and lease spaces within this development as required by the Post Master. MBU’s shall not be located within the public right-of-way or public sidewalk area unless specifically approved by the City Engineer. Contact the Post Master at 543-2605 to establish any recommendations regarding the number, size, location, and placement for any MBU’s. 38. Street trees are required as a condition of development. Tree species and planting requirements shall be in accordance with City Engineering Standards. Street trees shall generally be planted at the rate of one 15-gallon street tree for each 35 lineal feet of property frontage. Street trees shall be planted along private streets as required for public streets. The subdivision improvement plans/landscape plans shall include street tree plantings along the Orcutt Road frontage. Utilities 39. Specialized street pavement in the area of public water and/or sewer mains may create maintenance/replacement concerns and additional costs. The final pavement sections shall be reviewed and approved in conjunction with ARC approvals and public improvement plan review. A separate agreement and/or CC&R provision shall be required to clarify that the Jones Ranch Homeowners Association will have final street maintenance responsibility in areas of specialized pavement where said pavement is damaged or removed in conjunction with public improvements or maintenance of said public water and/or sewer mains. 40. The City will not be responsible for replacement of any specialty street pavement within private streets. City trench repairs within private streets will be backfilled and finished per City Engineering Standards. 41. Separate utilities, including water, sewer, gas, electricity, telephone, and cable TV shall be served to each lot to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department and serving utility companies. All public and private sewer mains shall be shown on the public improvement plans and shall be constructed per City Engineering Standards unless a waiver or alternate standard is otherwise approved by the City. The plans shall clearly delineate and distinguish the difference between public and private improvements. 42. Recycled water mains shall be extended along A Street, B Street, and/or Sponza to serve the landscape irrigation of the project’s R2 lots and commercial lots. Applicant shall work with the Water Division of the City’s Utilities Department to determine the appropriate size of all proposed recycled water mains. 43. City recycled water or another non-potable water source, shall be used for construction water (dust control, soil compaction, etc.). An annual Construction Water Permit is available from the City’s Utilities Department. Recycled water is readily available near the intersection of Tank Farm Road and Orcutt Road. 44. Final grades and alignments of all public and/or private water, sewer and storm drains shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and Utilities Department. The final location, configuration, and sizing of service laterals and meters shall be approved in conjunction with the review of the building plans, fire sprinkler plans, and/or public improvement plans. 45. The improvement plans shall show the location of all domestic and landscape water meters. The plan PH2-79 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 19 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 shall include service lateral sizes and meter sizes. Sizing calculations may be required to justify service and meter sizing. Water impact fees related to the irrigation water meter(s) shall be paid prior to approval of the subdivision improvement plans for each pertinent map and/or construction phase. 46. Off-site utility improvements shall include the water main upgrade/replacement and extension from the High Pressure/Bishop pressure zone at the intersection of Tanglewood/Johnson Avenue to serve the subdivision. Pipe sizing is contingent upon the modeling for the proposed development phases and looping of the main. Improvement plans may be required to clarify the design for main extensions outside the Phase 1 improvements. Pressure regulating valves, control valves, or other appurtenances may be required by the Utilities Department as a part of the required water system improvements to be certain that the new area interacts properly with the existing water system. 47. A reimbursement request, if proposed for the off-site water main upgrade, shall include all pertinent details and analysis in accordance with City and State codes and ordinances and shall be presented separately to the City Council. 48. The subdivider shall provide a plan for meeting off-site wastewater main line extensions as needed (pursuant to MM PS-4) through adjoining VTM#3063. Said plan shall be approved by the Utilities Director before approval and recordation of any final map. 49. A final sewer report and supporting documentation for the OASP public sewer main design shall be approved by the Utilities Department prior to approval of the public improvement plans. 50. The final sewer report shall discuss and present additional information and assumptions on the system elevations and grades that will allow other OASP parcels to utilize the proposed public sewer main in accordance with the OASP Wastewater Plan. The applicant shall submit an analysis of a backbone system that shows the elevations and grades that serve the adjacent parcels described in the study. The City will have the final discretion on the extent and limits of the study if additional properties could reasonably benefit from the proposed alignment. 51. The depth of the off-site and on-site sewer mains shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Utilities Director. The depth analysis shall consider the balance between the possible extent of the gravity sewer basin needed to serve the other OASP properties and the long- term public maintenance requirements related to sewer depth. The analysis of sewer depth shall be considered at the intersection of Street A and Street B, at Street A and Sponza in Tract 3044, and at Street A and the northerly limits of Tract 3044. 52. The public improvement plan submittal shall show all existing and proposed overhead wire utilities. Any existing overhead wiring within the tract boundary and adjoining Orcutt Road shall be undergrounded in conjunction with the subdivision improvements. Areas of road widening along Bullock Lane, if required for a secondary access, shall include undergrounding where applicable unless otherwise deferred or waived by the Public Works and Community Development Directors. Unless otherwise specifically approved, pole relocation in lieu of undergrounding is not supported. 53. Terminal end utility poles shall be located off-site unless otherwise approved by the City. 54. Preliminary undergrounding plans for the entire subdivision shall be processed through PGE and any respective wire utility companies in conjunction with the map recordation. PH2-80 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 20 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 55. The subdivider shall install public street lighting and all associated facilities including but not limited to conduits, sidewalk vaults, fusing, wiring, and lumenaires along all adjoining public streets as applicable per City En gineering Standards. 56. Private street lighting shall be provided along the private streets per OASP lighting requirements, City Engineering Standard and/or as approved in conjunction with the final ARC approvals. 57. Lighting fixtures, including public streetlights shall not exceed 16’ in height in accordance with the OASP unless otherwise required for traffic safety. The developer shall submit a streetlight proposal for approval by the City Engineer for any public streetlights. Street lights associated with the Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road improvements, signalized intersections, or round-a-bouts shall comply with the Highway Design Manual and City Engineering Standards. Grading, Drainage and Stormwater 58. Any permit approvals required from the Army Corp of Engineers, California Fish and Wildlife, or the Regional Water Control Board shall be secured and presented to the City prior to the approval of any subdivision grading and/or improvements related to the proposed phase of construction. The engineer of record shall review the permit approvals and any specific permit conditions for compliance with the plans, subdivision improvement designs, drainage system design/report, and soils report. The engineer of record shall forward the permits to the City with a notation that the permits have been reviewed and are in general conformance with the design of the improvements. 59. The public improvement plans submittal shall clarify how the several wetlands, creek corridors, and riparian habitat areas will be preserved to the satisfaction of the Natural Resources Manager. Include any specific details for the proposed creek crossings in accordance with any preservation strategies, mitigation measures, and higher governmental authority agency permits. Sensitive areas shall be staked, fenced, or otherwise delineated and protected prior to commencing with construction, grading, or grubbing. 60. Expansion index testing or other soils analysis may be required on a lot-by-lot basis for all graded pads and for in-situ soils on natural lots in accordance with the current Building Codes or where deemed necessary by the City Engineer or Building Official. 61. Final pad certifications shall include the certification of pad construction and elevations. The soils engineer shall certify all grading prior to acceptance of the public improvements and/or prior to building permit issuance. The certification shall indicate that the graded pads are suitable for their intended use. 62. The subdivision improvement plans shall include a complete grading plan to show site accessibility in accordance with State and Federal regulations for all public and/or private roads, transit stops, trails, paths, walks, bikeways, parks, and bridges where applicable. The submittal shall provide additional analysis if site accessibility wi ll not be provided and for any feature or element where accessibility is purportedly not required. The accessibility regulations or guidelines in effect at the time of subdivision improvement construction will be applied. 64. The improvement plan submittal shall include a complete grading, drainage, and erosion control plan. PH2-81 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 21 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 The proposed grading shall consider the proposed construction phasing. Historic off-site and upslope watersheds tributary to the area of phased construction shall be considered. Run-on from adjoining developed or undeveloped parcels shall be considered. 65. The calculated 100-year flood limits shall be shown and noted on the improvement plans and an additional final map sheet for reference. The drainage report and final plans shall clarify the 100-year flood elevations, clearances, and freeboard at all new vehicle bridge, pedestrian bridge, and pipe bridge crossings of the creek corridors. 66. The engineer of record shall provide a digital copy of the final HEC-RAS modeling to the City in accordance with Section 4.0 of the Waterways Management Plan Drainage Design Manual. 67. The developer shall prepare an Operations and Maintenance Manual for review and approval by the City in conjunction with the development of any stormwater BMP’s that will be maintained by the HOA or by the respective private property owner. A Private Stormwater Conveyance Agreement shall be recorded in a format provided by the City prior to final inspection approvals and acceptance of subdivision improvements. 68. The subdivider/developer shall provide notification to private property owners regarding any individual maintenance responsibility of backyard stormwater BMP’s in accordance with Section E.2 of the RQWCB Resolution R3-2013-0032. The notification may be by Notice of Requirements or other method acceptable to the City. 69. The stormwater improvements other than City Standard public stormdrain infrastructure shall be maintained by the HOA. A separate encroachment/hold harmless agreement may be required in conjunction with certain improvements proposed for location within the public rights-of-way. 70. The final details for the proposed bioretention facilities located within the public right-of- way shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The project soils engineer shall review and provide recommendations on the proposed site constructed and/or proprietary retention systems. Analysis of impacts to the public improvements, protection of utilities, and methods to minimize piping and protection of private properties shall be addressed in the final analysis. 71. The developer shall show legal entitlement to access or annex into the regional detention basin or shall provide an alternate drainage solution and strategy to the satisfaction of the City. 72. The proposed detention basin and any pre-basin shall be designed in accordance with the OASP requirements and the Waterways Management Plan Drainage Design Manual. The proposed surface runoff and drainage from the detention basin(s) shall include a non- erosive outlet to an approved point of disposal. The outlet(s) design and location should replicate the historic drainage where feasible. Any off-site detention basin, temporary basin, or other drainage improvements shall be approved by the City. Any req uired or proposed off-site grading or drainage improvements shall be completed within recorded easements or under an appropriate license or other private agreement. 73. The naming of the local creeks and drainages shall comply with the appropriate and pertinent creek naming standards and justifications. The inclusion of the naming on the final map and/or improvement PH2-82 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 22 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 plans shall be approved by the City p rior to map and/or plan approval as applicable. 74. All bridging, culverting and modifications to the existing creek channels along with any necessary clearing of existing creek and drainage channels, including tree pruning or removals, and any necessary erosion repairs shall be in compliance with the OASP, city st andards and policies, the Waterways Management Plan and shall be approved by the Natural Resources Manager, Public Works Department, Army Corp of Engineers, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and California Fish & Wildlife. 75. Any existing areas of swale, creek and/or channel erosion shall be stabilized to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, Natural Resources Manager, and other permitting agencies. 76. The project soils engineer shall review the final grading and drainage plans and Low Impact Development (LID) improvements. The soils report shall include specific recommendations related to public improvements, site development, utility, and building pad/foundation construction related to the proposed LID improvements. The project soils engineering report shall be referenced on the final map in accordance with the Subdivision Regulations and City Engineering Standards. 77. The final plans and drainage report shall show and note compliance with City Engineering Standard 1010.B for spring or perched groundwater management and for water quality treatment of run-off from impervious streets, drive aisles, parking areas, and trash enclosures. 78. A SWPPP is required in accordance with State and local regulations. A hard copy of the SWPPP shall be provided to the City in conjunction with the Public Improvement Plan submittal and subsequent building plan submittals. The WDID number shall be included by reference on all construction plans sets. An erosion control plan shall be included with the improvement plans and all building plan submittals for demolitions, grading, and new construction. 79. The project development and grading shall comply wi th all air quality standards and mitigation measures. The developer shall provide written notification from the County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) regarding compliance with all local, state, and federal regulations including but not limited to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) regulations related to Naturally Occuring Asbestos (NOA). Fire 80. The project shall provide a minimum of two points of access to the subdivision from an existing public way wherever there are 30 or more housing units. Emergency Vehicle Access points will NOT be accepted in lieu of full access. 81. All streets that are less than 28 feet in width shall be posted “No Parking – Fire Lane” on both sides. Streets less than 36 feet in width shall be posted on one side only. 82. The project shall provide water mains and city-standard fire hydrants to provide a minimum needed fire flow of 1500 GPM for 2 hours to within 300 feet of the exterior walls of all proposed structures. Fire hydrant spacing shall not exceed 500 feet. Homeowners’ Association PH2-83 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 23 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 83. 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. VTM#3066 shall have the option of establishing their own HOA, or be incorporated into the “Master Homeowner’s Association” (Master HOA) established under VTM#3063 (Righetti Ranch). To the extent desired by the subdivider, individual phases of the project may include sub-associations (such as for the affordable housing and/or townhome products) as described in the applicant’s “Master Declaration of CC&R’s for Righetti Ranch”, dated 6/6/14. CC&R's shall minimally contain the following provisions that pertain to all lots: a. The initial set of CC&R’s provided for the VTM#3066 final map shall define either an independent HOA for Jones Ranch, or will be automatically incorporated into the Righetti Ranch Master HOA through annexation provisions of the Master HOA. A graphic or other exhibit describing all properties to be annexed to the Righetti Ranch Master HOA shall be included with any CC&R’s for VTM#3066. b. All private improvements shall be owned and maintained by the individual property owners, sub- associations or the Master HOA as applicable. Private improvements include but are not limited to streets, sidewalks, pedestrian and bike paths, sewer mains, drainage systems, detention basin(s), street lighting, landscape, landscape irrigation, and common area improvements. c. Grant to the city the right to maintain common areas if the HOA fails to perform, and to assess the HOA for expenses incurred, and the right of the city to inspect the site at mutually agreed times to assure conditions of CC&R's and final map are being met. d. No parking except in approved, designated spaces. e. No outdoor storage of boats, campers, motorhomes, or trailers nor long-term storage of inoperable vehicles. f. No outdoor storage by individual units except in designated storage areas. g. The responsibility for the placement of the trash and recycling containers at the street on collection days will be the responsibility of the property owner’s association. The property owner’s association shall coordinate with San Luis Garbage Company regarding the collection time and preferred location for the placement of trash and recycling containers to minimize the obstruction of project streets. h. No changes in city-required provisions of the CC&R's will be considered valid and in effect without prior City Council approval. i. Provision for all of the maintenance responsibilities outlined in various conditions. Planning Requirements 84. At the time of submittal of a request for a final map, the subdivider shall provide a written report detailing the methods and techniques employed for complying with all required environmental mitigation measures as adopted herein. 85. In order to be consistent with the requirements of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan and County Airport Land Use Plan, the property owner shall grant an avigation easement for the benefit and protection of the City of San Luis Obispo, the County of San Luis Obispo and the San Luis Obispo County Airport via an avigation easement document prior to the recordation of the final map. 86. All owners, potential purchasers, occupants (whether as owners or renters), and potential occupants (whether as owners or renters) shall receive full and accurate disclosure concerning the noise, safety, or PH2-84 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 24 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 overflight impacts associated with airport operations prior to entering any contractual obligation to purchase, lease, rent, or otherwise occupy any property or properties within the airport area. 87. Provisions for trash, recycle, and green waste containment, screening, and collection shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City and San Luis Obispo Garbage Company. Proposed refuse storage area(s) and on-site conveyance shall consider convenience, aesthetics, safety, and functionality. Ownership boundaries and/or easements shall be considered in the final design. Any common storage areas shall be maintained by the HOA and shall be included in the CCR’s or other property maintenance agreement accordingly. The solid waste solutions shall be shown and noted on the submittal(s) for Architectural Review Commission (ARC) approvals. 88. Prior to the issuance of building permits for residential units, the Architectural Review Commission shall review the residential building program, including building and landscape improvements, and provide comments and recommendations to the Community development Director. Final architectural design approval authority shall be vested in the Community Development Director. Director decisions may be appealed pursuant to standard city policies. 89. Prior to the recording of any phase of the final map, the applicant shall enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement with the City Council that details the timing of construction of affordable units on-site, proposed “transfers” of affordable units to another site, , and contains guarantees for failure to complete any or all of the affordable housing units (such as collecting affordable housing in-lieu fees, cash guarantees for the completion of the affordable units, providing a letter of credit, bond or other financial guarantee to assure compliance). 90. The tentative tract map as presented includes an option to create a fifth (5th) homestead parcel for Jones Ranch in the event that the “B” Street to (existing) Tiburon Way “preferred road alignment” is completed. This alignment (off-site through the Imel property), is described in Attachment 10 which identifies how the 5th parcel would be described and accessed with utilities and vehicles. 91. A construction phasing plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Director prior to the issuance of the first building permit. 92. The subdivider shall develop a Construction Management Plan for review and approval by the Public Works and Community Development Directors. The plan shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a building permit for proposed project buildings and/or a phase of buildings. In addition, the contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the Construction Management Plan components and provide their contact names and phone numbers. The Construction Management Plan shall include at least the following items and requirements: a. A set of comprehensive traffic control measures, including scheduling of major truck trips and deliveries to avoid peak traffic and pedestrian hours, detour signs if required, directional signs for construction vehicles, and designated construction access routes. b. Notification procedures for adjacent property owners and public safety personnel regarding when major deliveries and more intensive site work may be occurring, c. Location of construction staging areas which shall be located on the project site, for materials, equipment, and vehicles. d. Identification of haul routes for movement of construction vehicles that would minimize impacts on vehicular and pedestrian traffic, circulation and safety, and noise impacts to surrounding neighbors. PH2-85 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 25 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 e. The applicant shall ensure that the construction contractor employs the following noise reducing measures: i. Standard construction activities shall be limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. ii. All equipment shall have sound-control devices no less effective than those provided by the manufacturer. No equipment shall have un-muffled exhaust pipes; and iii. Stationary noise sources shall be located as far from sensitive receptors as possible, and they shall be muffled and enclosed within temporary sheds, or insulation barriers or other measures shall be incorporated to the extent possible. f. Temporary construction fences to contain debris and material and to secure the site. g. Provisions for removal of trash generated by project construction activity. h. A process for responding to, and tracking, complaints pertaining to construction activity. i. Provisions for monitoring surface streets used for truck routes so that any damage and debris attributable to the trucks can be identified and corrected. j. Designated location(s) for construction worker parking. 93. Pursuant to Government Code §66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this subdivision, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review. 94. Conditions relating to phasing and timing of infrastructure are approved as contained herein, or as approved by the Community Development and Public Works Directors during review of public improvement plans and final maps. 95. Financing and “fair share” contribution plans may be submitted for City Council review with any final map application. The City Council will have sole discretion as to any reimbursement and/or fee credit programs implemented with said final maps. Upon motion of , seconded by , and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: REFRAIN: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 2015. Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: Anthony Mejia City Clerk PH2-86 ATTACHMENT 1-C Resolution No. ______ (2015 Series) Jones Ranch VTM#3066 Page 26 TR/ER #SBDV-0067-2014 APPROVED AS TO FORM: J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney PH2-87 Righetti Ranch Vesting Tentative Tract Map Application Project Description and Statements I. Project Description Ambient Communities is requesting the review and approval of a Vesting Tentative Tract Map for the Righetti Ranch property within the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP). The property and specific plan area were recently annexed into the City of San L uis Obispo1. The OASP was approved on March 2, 20102. These actions allocated up to 313 residential homes on the Righetti Ranch property3. In addition, land was designated for a community park, retention basin, open space areas, a conservation easement and dedicated open space for the upper portion of Righetti Hill. On July 25, 2013 an early version of the Righetti Ranch project was discussed in a pre-application meeting with the City of San Luis Obispo Development Review staff. Because our proposed project would require adjusting the URL and moving zoning designations from one area of the site to another, the planning staff recommended we proceed by processing the project through an Initiation submittal so that these major decisions could be vetted by the Planning Commission and the City Council. On October 10, 2013, an updated version of the project was submitted for initiation review and was 1 Orcutt Area annexed November 16,2011 2 Resolution No.10154 (2010 Series) 3 See Table A-2 of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan Ambient Communities Central Coast Page 1 Attachment 2 PH2-88 Righetti Ranch Vesting Tentative Tract Map Application presented to the Planning Commission on January 22, 2014 where the requested specific plan and general plan amendments were approved with a 5-2 vote. The project was then heard at the March 4, 2014 City Council meeting where the Council voted 4-1 to approve initiation of the project4. Based upon feedback from the Planning Commission and City Council, the site plan has been further refined by prioritizing the following goals: •Enhance the view corridors that run through the project leading up to the hilltop open space. •Preserve the hilltop open space and minimize adjustment to the existing URL. •Physically and visually tie the upper streets and walking trails to the hilltop open space. To achieve these goals, we have widened and increased the number of view corridors running through the project. In addition, to enhance the visual connection between the corridors and the hilltop, these corridors are designed to progressively widen as they extend higher up the hillside. An example of these corridors is shown in figures 1 and 2. To preserve the hilltop open space and minimize adjustment to the existing URL, we commissioned a sound study of the area near the railroad tracks running along the western edge of the project. Based upon the results of that study, we have been able to shift the project closer to these tracks and thus further down the hillside. Through this shifting of the development and reducing some of the lot sizes, we are able to propose a URL adjustment along the western slopes of the hill that mitigates its impact by minimizing the amount of open space modified and offering an equal exchange of R-1 land and open space. This is shown in figure 3. Additionally, the Righetti Ranch project, with the proposed URL location, will provide more overall open space and park land than the OASP requires. Also, to connect the hilltop open space to the upper streets and walking trails we have reduced the number of homes that back up to the hilltop open space and widened the gaps between the homes at the view corridors. These widened corridors now allow for meandering walking paths to connect the upper streets to the open space (figures 1 and 2) The plan being proposed is to build 272 market rate single-family detached homes in the R-1 and R-2 zones, and 32 attached inclusionary townhomes on the relocated R-3 zoned area. Righetti must provide 41 inclusionary units, but is proposing to add nine inclusionary units to the requirement of the Jones property (see section VI below). Righetti Ranch will create a community that successfully accomplishes the goals and objectives of the OASP. It will provide a new community that brings needed housing to the Citywhile creating a community that is diverse and balanced with the natural setting. The natural beauty will be maintained and protected alongside the new home sites. Righetti Ranch will provide a "balanced mix of housing types including single-family and multi-family" and inclusionary housing5. 4 Resolution 10503 (2014 Series) "Authorizing initiation of specific plan amendments to the OASP for Righetti Ranch Project including evaluation and further consideration of adjustment of the Urban Reserve Line." 5 See Orcutt Area Specific Plan Section 1.6,page 1-5 Ambient Communities Central Coast Page 2 Attachment 2 PH2-89 Righetti Ranch Vesting Tentative Tract Map Application Figure 1, Photo simulation of the central view corridor from the lower "D-1" Street Figure 2, Photo simulation of the central view corridor from the upper "D-2" Street Righetti Hill remains the main natural feature of the project and is emphasized by the view corridors provided (as seen in the photos above). Development is proposed on the lower and less steep portions of the hill6 so that the views of the hill are protected. The community will feature walking trails and bicycle paths, a variety of parks and open space for the enjoyment of its residents. The community protects and emphasizes creeks and riparian areas, wetlands and sensitive environmental features. By 6 Hillside development lots will not exceed an average slope of 30% and are consistent with the OASP and Zoning Regulations Ambient Communities Central Coast Page 3 Attachment 2 PH2-90 Righetti Ranch Vesting Tentative Tract Map Application focusing the design on balancing and meeting all of the goals and objectives of the OASP, the Righetti Ranch project will provide a livable, walkable, desirable community with a unique sense of place for all to enjoy7. Figure 3: Equal exchange of open space and R-1 of Righetti Ranch Project adjusted URL II.Specific Plan Amendment The OASP provides detailed guidance to the development of the properties within its boundaries. As with many specific plans, it is approved largely with a macro view as it does not have detailed engineering information at the time it is approved. Therefore as more detail is revealed, it can be found that some changes are helpful or even necessary to fully realize the overall goals and intent of the plan. Ambient Communities is requesting that the OASP be amended for two main changes.First,the Righetti Ranch project proposes to slightly modify the location of the URL in a manner that is consistent with the intent of the OASP and the protection and conservation of the upper portion of Righetti Hill.Second,the project -is proposing to modify the location of some zoning to improve land use compatibility. •The measure of the consistency of the Righetti Ranch project and the proposed amendments are how it meets the overall goals of the OASP.The overall goals of the OASP are:Develop a new residential neighborhood to meet the City's housing need; 7 See OASP Section 1.6 Ambient Communities Central Coast Page 4 Attachment 2 PH2-91 Righetti Ranch Vesting Tentative Tract Map Application • Provide a variety of housing types and costs to meet the needs of renters and buyers with a variety of income levels, including affordable housing for residents with low and very low income levels; • Protect and enhance Righetti Hill, creek and wetland habitats, and visual resources in open space areas; •Provide a variety of park and recreational facilities for residents of the Orcutt Area; • Phase the proposed development so that public facilities for residents are developed concurrently with each new phase in a rational and cost effective fashion; • Encourage the use of bicycles and walking within the plan area by incorporating bicycle/pedestrian paths and lanes along the roads and through the park and open space areas; • Protect the new residents from railroad noise by including a buffer between the railroad and the new residential areas. The buffer will include a regional detention system consisting of floodable terraces and will provide and will provide recreational opportunities with a landscaped bicycle/pedestrian path system and to • Identify a visual and noise setback for new residents on Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road by incorporating a landscape buffer with a pedestrian path along these road frontages; •Provide goals and mitigation and related Environmental Impact Studies; The Righetti Ranch project as proposed accomplishes all of the overall goals and intent of the OASP. The proposed specific plan amendment helps to achieve these stated overall goals. Adjusting the URL allows for better placement of R-1 lots and for the lots to fit the hillside contours and minimizing the grading. It also allows for R-1 lot variety and differentiation. The greatest challenge in the goals of the OASP is the balance of providing an urban compact residential neighborhood with a diversity and variety of lots and housing for all income levels. The hillside lots are a key component of providing that variety and diversity, and those lots are accomplished with maintaining consistency with all policies of the OASP. This allows the proposed project to best provide "varied lot sizes" and "avoid "repetitious design" while still incorporating R-1 lots that the OASP allows to a reduced minimum of 4,500 square feet8. The OASP is clear that the highest limit of development is the 320-foot elevation on Righetti Hill while "most lots will range from 260 to 310 feet in elevation"9. Clearly modification of the URL as proposed meets the overall intent of the OASP and all of the goals and policies. It is also consistent with the approved initiation determination. In addition, a specific plan amendment is necessary to accommodate the proposed rearranging of zoning (see Section III). The overall zoning will remain the same, but the R-3 zone is proposed to be located next to the community park and where other high density housing and commercial space is located on abutting OASP properties. This presents superior land use compatibility and is consistent with the goals and objectives of the specific plan. 8 OASP Policy 3.2.5 9 See Low Density Residential (R-1-SP) description on page 3-2 of the OASP; also Policy 2.2.9and Section 3.2.3 on page 3-2 Ambient Communities Central Coast Page 5 Attachment 2 PH2-92 Righetti Ranch Vesting Tentative Tract Map Application The proposed specific plan amendment is consistent with the OASP. The OASP is "designed to meet the goals established by the City's General Plan" and the OASP "is consistent with and serves as an extension of the City's General Plan10. The OASP will take precedence over the more general policies and standards during the review of public and private development projects within the Specific Plan Area11. Therefore the requested amendment is consistent with the City's General Plan if it is consistent with the OASP. III.Statement of Existing and Proposed Land Use The Righetti property is a mix of residential zoning and open space established by the approval of the OASP and annexation of the property into the City of San Luis Obispo. The currently established zoning includes the open space zone covering Righett i Hill, the public facility zone where a regional park and retention basin were planned, then a mix of R-1 and R-2 Residential in the northwest part of the property. Currently located near the railroad tracks and Tank Farm Road is a portion of the property zoned R- 3. The proposed Ambient Communities Vesting Tentative Tract Map will maintain the same mix of zoning as allocated in the OASP. However it is proposed that the R-3 zone be relocated to the north, next to the regional park area and the existing R-2 area there be "swapped" to the area presently zoned R-3. This will better allow the large pad required of the R-3 multi-family units be located where topography is more level. It will also place the R-3 zone near the park, other higher-density and commercial development which creates better overall compatibility and is a more appropriate land use pattern. The land use patterns, densities and allocations will remain largely the same as existing. There will be a slight reorganizat ion of land uses that we feel present better overall compatibility and better balance the overall goals and objectives of the OASP. IV.Statement of Proposed Landscape Improvements The project is designed to meet the intent of the OASP and City standards. The project includes ample open space and an extensive public trail system. The project contains a wide range of housing opportunities, along with multiple public parks. The character of the project is intended to mimic the natural ranch setting as well as the architectural style, utilize native and drought- tolerant vegetation, and reduce impacts to the surrounding environment where possible. A.RESIDENTIAL LOTS Low Density Residential (R-1) Front yard landscaping will primarily consist of drought-tolerant trees and shrubs, with a maximum of 10% of the lot containing turf. 10 Orcutt Area Specific Plan Section 1.2,page 1-1 11 Ibid Ambient Communities Central Coast Page 6 Attachment 2 PH2-93 Righetti Ranch Vesting Tentative Tract Map Application Medium Density Residential (R-2) Front yard landscaping will primarily consist of drought-tolerant trees and shrubs, with a maximum of 10% of the lot containing turf. Medium-High Density Residential (R-3) Landscaping will primarily consist of drought-tolerant trees and shrubs, with small consolidated turf areas provided for residents to use. B.OPEN SPACE i.Neighborhood Park The neighborhood park is located east of "B"Street and is approximately 10.2 acres in size.The park will include off-street parking,and also parking along "B"Street.Lighting is only proposed within the neighborhood park at the parking lot and restroom building.The neighborhood park consists of both passive and active areas for recreation and play,and as proposed includes the following amenities: • Soccer (U8): Three fields are proposed, and it is envisioned that these grass fields could be used for other activities when not scheduled for soccer. Two of the fields are located adjacent to each other and can be combined into one large field if needed. • Soccer (Junior High): One field is proposed, and it is envisioned that this grass field could be used for other activities when not scheduled for soccer. Berms are proposed on north and south sides of the field for seating. •Volleyball:Two sand courts are proposed. •Tennis:Four hard surface courts are proposed. •Basketball (High School):Three hard courts are proposed. • Playground: Two playgrounds are proposed. Each playground will include resilient surfacing, benches and picnic areas. • Group Picnic Areas: Two group picnic areas are proposed. Amenities will likely include barbeques, picnic tables, trash and recycling receptacles, and a shade structure. • Individual Picnic Areas: Approximately eight individual picnic areas are proposed. Each will include picnic tables, trash and recycling receptacles. • Public Restrooms: One centrally located restroom building will be provided. The restroom will provide drinking fountain(s), trash and recycling receptacles, and decorative paving. The restroom building will also include park maintenance storage and security lighting. Ambient Communities Central Coast Page 7 Attachment 2 PH2-94 Righetti Ranch Vesting Tentative Tract Map Application • Trails: A Class I bike trail will be provided within the Neighborhood Park. The trail will also include interpretive and directional signage, and bike parking areas. Additionally pedestrian pathways will be provided, and they will be 5 feet wide and constructed of either concrete or decomposed granite. Benches will be provided in strategic locations along the trails, and four bridges are proposed within the park. • Trailhead: The trailhead proposed at the park will consist of directional kiosk, benches, trash and recycling receptacles, bike parking and decorative paving. Low seat walls are proposed around the trailhead to allow for additional flexible seating. • Parking Lot: Parking lot will be constructed of either asphalt or decomposed granite paving, and it will contain lighting f or security. • Entry from "A"Street: An entry area is proposed from "A"Street and it will consist of an overhead pergola, fountain and/or public art, decorative paving, accent landscaping, and park signage. The entry area is proposed to bulb out into "B" Street to maximize the visibility of the entry, and create a focal point. Landscaping will primarily consist of drought-tolerant trees and shrubs, with field turf areas provided for recreational uses. Landscaping along riparian buffer areas will consist of native riparian and drought-tolerant plants. ii. Pocket Parks Approximately five pocket parks are proposed within the project, and they range from approximately 0.2 to 1.8 acres in size. The pocket parks will include pedestrian trails and individual picnic areas. Some of the pocket parks will contain Class I trail connections. Lighting is not proposed within the pocket parks. •Class I Trail:Class I bike trails will be cross through several of the Pocket Parks. • Pedestrian Paths: Pedestrian pathways will be provided, and they will be 5 feet wide and will likely be constructed of decomposed granite or concrete. Benches will be provided in strategic locations. • Individual Picnic Areas: Picnic areas will be provided where feasible, and most parks will contain one location. Picnic areas will include accessible paving, picnic table(s), and trash and recycling receptacles. Landscaping will primarily consist of drought-tolerant trees and shrubs, and include centrally located turf areas for passive use. Landscaping along riparian buffer areas will consist of native riparian and drought-tolerant plants. Ambient Communities Central Coast Page 8 Attachment 2 PH2-95 Righetti Ranch Vesting Tentative Tract Map Application iii.Linear Park/Central Detention Basin The linear park is located west of "C" Street, and is approximately 3.4 acres in size. The park will contain the central detention basin along the western portion of the park, and a Class I trail on the east. The linear park is adjacent to a Pocket Park which will allow for a seamless integration of additional amenities. Lighting is not proposed within the linear park. • Class I Trail: The Class I bike trail route will continue through the linear park. The trail will include strategically placed interpretive and directional signage as deemed appropriate. The Class I trail is proposed to connect over the railroad with a bridge connector to link the project with other surrounding neighborhoods. Landscaping will primarily consist of drought-tolerant trees and shrubs. Landscape within the basin will likely be installed by means of a combination of hydroseed and containerized plant material. Landscaping along riparian buffer areas will consist of native riparian and drought-tolerant plants. iv.Scenic Buffer The Scenic Buffer is located east of "D" Street at the project entry off Tank Farm Road, and it is approximately 2.1 acres in size. The scenic buffer will not include any amenities other than landscaping. Landscaping will primarily consist of drought-tolerant trees and shrubs, and tall vegetation will be carefully located to not impede views. C. ROADWAYS i.Arterial Roads Orcutt Road improvements will be located within a 20-foot setback, and will include a 5-foot-wide meandering concrete sidewalk with landscaping and Class II bike lanes. Landscaping will primarily consist of drought-tolerant trees and shrubs. Landscaping at the existing culvert/ creek crossing will minimize impacts to wetland areas and consist of existing and proposed native riparian and drought-tolerant plants. Tank Farm Road improvements will be located within a 20-foot setback, and will include a 5-foot-wide meandering concrete sidewalk with landscaping and Class II bike lanes. Landscaping will primarily consist of drought-tolerant trees and shrubs. A bus stop is proposed on Tank Farm Road near the project entrance. ii.Collector Streets Collector streets "B", "C", and "D" will generally include drought-tolerant landscaping throughout. Street trees will be selected based on their performance in street settings and cross referenced with City's approved list and the OASP. It is anticipated that the project will utilize reclaimed water for irrigating collector streets, and that parkways will include bio- filtration areas to treat storm water. Ambient Communities Central Coast Page 9 Attachment 2 PH2-96 Righetti Ranch Vesting Tentative Tract Map Application • "B" street improvements will include a detached sidewalk with landscaping, and decorative crosswalks with textured paving connecting the park to "A" Street. A portion of "B" Street will include Class II Bike lanes that converge into a Class I trail at the neighborhood park. "B" Street also includes angled off-street parking, street trees, and an entry feature with accent planting at the neighborhood park. • "C" street improvements will include detached sidewalks and landscaped parkways. A bus stop is proposed along "C" street and a Class I trail and park will be located adjacent to south side of the roadway. •"D"street improvements will include detached sidewalks,landscaped parkways and medians.Class II bike lanes are proposed on the roadway and they will connect to Class I trail system at adjacent parks and proposed bike lanes on Tank Farm Road. iii.Local Residential Streets Local Streets "C-1" to "C-3", "D-1" to "D-4", "E" and "E-1" to "E-2" improvements will include bulb-out planters that include bio- filtration areas to treat storm water. "E" and "E-1" to "E-2" will include detached sidewalks with landscaped parkways on one side of the street. Street trees will also be provided on private and open space lots to create a consistent tree planting pattern along the local street system. Street trees will be selected based on their performance in street settings and cross referenced with City's approved list and the OASP. Class II bike lanes are proposed on "E" street that tie into the Class I trail system and connect to proposed bike lanes on Orcutt Road. V. Exceptions from Design Standards A. BUILDING HEIGHT 25 FEET IN R-1 ZONE: The code allows discretion to the director to exceed the 25-foot building height in the R-1 zone. The code also defines "existing topography" to be design grade in a subdivision. This application is requesting an adjustment for reduced minimum R-1 lots that the OASP encourages, meeting the typical R-2 lot size (up to 5,000 s.f.) to apply the R-2 development standards including building height and lot coverage (see next request) which is established predicated upon lot size rather than zoning. There are several mechanisms to support applying R-2 design standards to R-1 lots of 5,000 s.f. or less and for or supporting a height exception. i. Zoning Regulations -Low Density Regulations (R-1) Zone -17.24.020 -Maximum Height: 25 Feet; Up to 35 feet if the Director approves an administrative use permit. ii.17.16.040 Height -Height measurements shall be based on existing topography of the site. iii. 17.100 E Definitions -Existing Topography: "Existing topography" means the natural unaltered topography or the topography resulting from grading activity legally permitted in conjunction Ambient Communities Central Coast Page 10 Attachment 2 PH2-97 Righetti Ranch Vesting Tentative Tract Map Application with subdivision improvements, right-of-way improvements, or previous on-site building improvements. B. LOT COVERAGE: R-1 zoned lots have a maximum 40% lot coverage12. R-2 zoned lots are allowed 50% lot coverage13. This application is requesting an adjustment to allow R-2 lot coverage (development standards) for R-1 lots of 5,000 s.f. or less. i.Lot Size (Area): The OASP limits R-2 lots to a maximum of 5,000 s.f.14 This application is requesting that some R-2 lots in the Righetti Ranch project which will slightly exceed 5,000 s.f. due to irregular or pie shapes driven by physical design constraints and location on corners or cul-de-sacs remain designated as R-2. These lots will remain otherwise consistent with R-2 design and will feature homes consistent with the other R-2 lots in the Righetti Ranch tract. ii.Street Sections: Changes have been made to OASP street widths, street parking has been modified from the OASP in some locations, and the tentative map will propose some private streets. All of these changes are encouraged by OASP Policy 5.6.15 In addition, the Water Quality Control Board Post-Construction Requirements notes, "construct streets, sidewalks, or parking lot aisles to the minimum widths necessary, provided that public safety or mobility are not compromised." VI.Low Impact Development As a residential tentative subdivision map with five (5) or more units, the project is classified as a Tier 3 Low Impact Development project. This requires at least two (2) LID measures that retain or reduce runoff. The following LID measures will be implemented: •Bio-filtration systems (bio-retention with underdrains due to underlying impervious rock) •Down-spout disconnect • Reduce roadway surface -lane and sidewalk widths minimized, parking lanes removed in places, sidewalks removed in some private streets • Storm water ponds (vegetated detention ponds) 12 OASP Table 3.1:residential Development Standards 13 Ibid 14 Ibid 15 Please see OASP Policy 5.6 on page 5-16 which encourages varied street widths for increased density and design flexibility Ambient Communities Central Coast Page 11 Attachment 2 PH2-98 Righetti Ranch Vesting Tentative Tract Map Application VII.Inclusionary Housing The Righetti Ranch vesting tentative tract map proposes 272 market rate homes. The OASP Policy 3.3.2 stipulates that 15% of the market rate units must be affordable -5% low income and 10% moderate income rated homes. As a part of this Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Ambient Communities is proposing 41 affordable homes which equate to 15% of the 272 market rate homes. It is therefore proposed that this project will provide 14 low-income homes. Additionally, there will be 27 moderate-income level homes 16. It is proposed that nine of the 14 low-income units be coordinated with the Jones property as allowed by OASP Policy 3.3.317 Thus, nine units will be located on the Jones property. The other five low-income rated dwelling units will be on the Righetti Ranch map in the R-3 zoned area which will also locate the 27 moderate-income units for a total of 32 affordable R-3 zoned units on the Righetti Ranch property. Please see the included Affordable Housing Exhibits. VIII.Architecture Review This application does not include an application or request for architecture review. City subdivision regulations indicate that a Vesting Tentative Tract Map within a specific plan is exempt from the requirement for architecture review18. The intention of this application is to comply with the OASP design guidelines. IX.Consistent with Current Zoning This request for a Vesting Tentative Tract Map includes an application for a Specific Plan amendment and General Plan amendment for the purpose of a zone change described in section II. The zone change request is more of a reconfiguration of existing zoning for better land use compatibility and placement than a rezone from one zone to a an entirely different zone. General conformance with the existing zoning of the OASP remains with the proposed map application. X.Status of Approvals from other Agencies Applications to the Army Corps of Engineers and the Department of Fish and Wildlife have been submitted. We can provide those at your request if needed prior to the CEQA review process. 16 City of San Luis Obispo Affordable Housing Standards 2013 17 Policy 3.3.3: To promote reasonable efficiency a project developer may coordinate with another Orcutt Area property owner or developer to provide the required affordable dwelling units when the units proposed are less than 10. 18 Subdivision Regulations Section 16.12.020(B)(1);Page 32 of City of SLO Subdivision Regulations Ambient Communities Central Coast Page 12 Attachment 2 PH2-99 Project Description and Statements Jones Parcel DEDICATION"ASREQUIRED NEIGHBORHOOD PARK v-ETU-.-MIHGATIQN AREA4.2.4 uoaiiE Orcutt Area Specific Plan I. Project Description Ambient Communities is requesting the review and approval of a Vesting Tentative Tract Map for the development of the "Jones Ranch" property within the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP). The property and specific plan area were recently annexed into the City of San Luis Obispo.1 The OASP was approved on March 2, 2010.2 These actions allocated an estimated 56 residential homes on the Jones Ranch property (10 -11 R-1 units and 44 -45 R-2 units)3 , although this estimate does not include the mixed use residential units allocated to the property. The Jones Ranch property is 11.56 acres of gently sloping land bisected by Barrandca Creek. The proposed plan is to build nine (9) market rate single-family detached homes (Jones Family has 2 existing residences, lots 1 and 2, and will build two more, lots 3 and 4 to be retained as homestead lots) on the R-1 zoned portion of the property. In the R-2 zoned area of the property, which will include the "R-1 Island" presently shown on OASP maps (as R1) that is a part of a zone change requested in the Righetti Ranch General Plan Amendment/Specific Plan amendment application, Jones Ranch proposes 43 medium density residences in an attached home configuration. Jones Ranch will provide its required inclusionary housing units, and is proposing to provide an additional nine inclusionary units to meet the requirement of the Righetti Ranch property 1 Orcutt Area annexed November 16,2011 2 Resolution No.10154 (2010 Series) 3 See Table A-2 of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan Attachment 2 PH2-100 (see section VI below) to fulfill a shared arrangement for affordable units with Righetti Ranch. In all, the Jones Ranch project proposes 13 R-1 lots, 9 to be for sale market rate homes and 4 homestead lots, 43 attached homes in the R- 2 area, and 9 mixed use apartments/condominiums on top of approximately 15,000 square feet of commercial space. This amounts to 65 total units, 61 total for sale units of which there are 44 market rate units and 17 affordable units. The Jones Ranch property will be constructed in a single phase with phase 1 of the Righetti Ranch project where utilities, access and necessary infrastructure will be coordinated with the Righetti Ranch as if the developments are a single project. Righetti Ranch and Jones Ranch will share the same CC&R's and master HOA. The HOA will maintain the project stormwater features and common space among other things as detailed in the CC&R's. Jones Ranch as designed has four separate land use designations. There are 2.96 acres zoned R-1, 3.66 acres zoned R-2 and 1.33 acres zoned CCMU (community commercial mixed use). There are 2.03 acres zoned conservation open space. the R-1 area will have a density of 4.4 units per acre which is well within the limits for R-1. The R-2 area density is calculated as 11.7 units per acre where 12 units per acre is the maximum.4 The Jones Ranch property main natural feature is Barrandca Creek which traverses the property and has a fork on the north side creating two creek areas that run across the property and merge into one creek.These areas are maintained as open space and are protected and valued property features.Appropriate creek setbacks and open space treatment is provided in the site design.5 The R-1 portion of the property is uniquely designed in a courtyard arrangement of two groupings of single family homes. One grouping is a cluster of 5 homes around a shared access courtyard and the other a cluster of 4 homes around a shared access courtyard. Each cluster will be accessed from "B" Street. This design differentiation provides a different and unique product that is an efficient use of the limited R-1 space and is encouraged by the OASP.6 Attached housing product like duplexes and triplexes are highly encouraged in the R-2 zone by the OASP.7 The Jones Ranch project will make extensive use of this design in the R-2 zoned portion of the property and make efficient use of limited space. The project as proposed will provide 43 attached units in a mix of eight (8) duplex and nine (9) triplex buildings. The duplex buildings will provide two three-bedroom units, each two stories. The triplex buildings will provide two three-bedroom units, each two stories, with the additional two bedroom unit designed as a single level second floor unit above the garages. Each two-bedroom unit has an associated one car garage and each three-bedroom unit has an associated two car garage. The Garages will provide a combined 74 parking spaces. Additionally there are 38 additional surface parking spaces proposed in the R-2 area. The mixed use area will add 58 4 City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations 17.16.010(2)(a)and Table 3.1 5 See OASP Figure 2.1 and policy 2.2.1 and policy 2.2.2 and program 2.2.2C et al 6 See OASP Goal 3.1a and policy 3.2.5 et al. 7 OASP Policy 3.2.9 Attachment 2 PH2-101 parking spaces including 4 disabled access spaces. The mixed use area incorporates a mixed use parking reduction of 25%.8 Each unit of the attached product will have 250 square feet of private open space as required by the City's subdivision standards. Additionally, the R-2 zone will provide a central common open space area as well as a pocket park area which will provide well over 6,450 square feet of common area open space or a minimum of 150 square feet of common open space per unit.9 The last portion of the Jones Ranch property is the approximately 1.3 acre strip of land zoned Community Commercial Mixed Use. Jones Ranch is proposing to add approximately 15,000 square feet of commercial space to provide a mix of retail, personal service and office space uses.10 The commercial center provides a plaza area along A street and at the intersection of A and B Streets and will provide affordable residential above the ground floor commercial space.11 Jones Ranch will create a community that successfully accomplishes the goals and objectives of the OASP. It will provide a new community that brings needed housing to the City while creating a community that is diverse and balanced with the natural setting. The natural beauty will be maintained and protected alongside the new home sites. Jones Ranch will provide a "balanced mix of housing types including single-family and multi-family" and inclusionary housing12. The community will feature walking trails and bicycle paths, a variety of park-like space and open space for the enjoyment of its residents. The community protects and emphasizes creeks and riparian areas, wetlands and sensitive environmental features. By focusing the design on balancing and meeting all of the goals and objectives of the OASP, the Jones Ranch project will provide a livable, walkable, desirable community with a unique sense of place for all to enjoy13. II. Statement of Existing and Proposed Land Use The Jones property is a mix of residential zoning, mixed use zoning and open space established by the approval of the OASP and annexation of the property into the City of San Luis Obispo. The zoning currently established includes the open space zone covering riparian areas including creek setbacks, R-1 low density zoning on the eastern half of the property, R-2 medium density zoning on the central portion of the property and mixed use/community commercial zoning on the western eighth of the property. The proposed Ambient Communities Vesting Tentative Tract Map for Jones Ranch will maintain largely the same zoning as indicated in the OASP with one small modification. There is an area on the northeast 8 City of San Luis Obispo Zoning regulations 17.16.060(C) 9 City of San Luis Obispo Subdivision Regulations 16.17.030(B) 10 OASP section 3.2.2 11 OASP Policy 3.2.16a,b and c 12 See Orcutt Area Specific Plan Section 1.6,page 1-5 13 See OASP Section 1.6 Attachment 2 PH2-102 portion of the Jones Ranch property within the fork of the creek that is zoned R-1 in the OASP. This 14,800 square foot area situated between the open space creek areas presents significant constraints that make R-1 development there a challenge. Therefore it is proposed in a previous (Righetti Ranch) application that this R-1 "island" be rezoned to R-2 which is a more suitable zone that will lessen the development impacts and create better land use compatibility with the neighboring Taylor property to the north. This map proposal assumes that zone change for design purposes. III. Statement of Proposed Landscape Improvements The project is designed to meet the intent of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan and City of San Luis Obispo standards. The project includes ample open space and a public trail system. The project contains a range of housing and commercial opportunities, along with a central common open space. The character of the project is intended to mimic the natural ranch and adjacent creek setting, utilize native and drought -tolerant vegetation, and reduce impacts to the surrounding environment where possible. RESIDENTIAL & COMMERICAL AREAS A schematic Planting Plan has been developed to demonstrate a recommended landscape palette and design intent, but is not intended to be an inclusive plant list. Landscaping will primarily consist of drought -tolerant trees and shrubs, with riparian species used along the existing creek corridor and within bio-infiltration areas. Turf will be only used in the common open space area for recreational purposes. The design principles for the Jones Property landscaping includes the following: Shrubs • Planting will be located with low groundcover and shrubs in the foreground and layered with higher plants behind. Blank walls will utilize taller vegetation to soften expanses, and low planting will be placed along entries, walkways and driveways. Shrubs will be located to maintain views out of windows. • Sun and shade preferences will be considered for planting under trees and along building foundations. • Plants will be placed based on their ultimate width at maturity, and shrubs planted under tree canopies will not grow more that 0.75% of the canopy height. • Bio-infiltration areas are proposed between the commercial buildings and parking lot. These areas will treat storm water, and shrubs will consist of riparian species that can tolerate periodic flows and standing water. • Shrub areas adjacent to riparian corridors will transition into each other, and not have abrupt edges designating the zones. Attachment 2 PH2-103 Trees • Trees with low root damage potential will be used when planted within 5' of hardscape elements. • Trees will be placed so that canopies do not extend into buildings or other trees to alleviate the need for future pruning. •Trees should be utilized to provide shading of buildings and parking areas whenever feasible. • Bio-infiltration areas are proposed between the commercial buildings and parking lot. These areas will treat storm water, and trees will consist of riparian species that can tolerate periodic flows and standing water. OPEN SPACE & TRAILS A centrally located common open space is proposed within the project, and it is approximately 0.25 acres in size. The open space will include pedestrian trails and individual picnic areas. Lighting will be limited to primary pedestrian walkways and parking areas as needed for security. Please see Righetti Ranch "Trails and Public Access" sheet L-4. • Pedestrian Paths: Pedestrian pathways will be provided, and they will be 5 feet wide and will likely be constructed of decomposed granite or concrete. Gazebos with benches will be provided along the path system in strategic locations to provide viewing of open space areas. • Bicycle Paths: 8-foot bike path with 2-foot shoulders along creek will provide a bicycle staging area and provide connectivity to other bike paths and streets and the community park. • Individual Picnic Areas: Two picnic areas will be provided within the central common open space and they will include accessible paving, picnic table, and trash and recycling receptacles. IV.Exceptions from Design Standards The presence of Barrandca Creek and the fork of the creek and the associated creek setbacks and open space requirements create difficulty in the design and configuration of lots and the subdivision of the land. The creek meanders and the setbacks are therefore highly irregular and meandering. This presents many challenges and limitations for lot design and site planning. This is a primary design constraint that requires a variety of exceptions and adjustment requests. A. BUILDING HEIGHT 25 FEET IN R-1 ZONE: Building heights in the R-1 zone on the Jones Ranch tract map will exceed 25 feet from existing grade. City ordinance requires height to be measured from the "existing topography" of the site14. The City 14 City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Ordinance Section 17.16.040 Attachment 2 PH2-104 Zoning Ordinance defines "existing topography" to be "the topography resulting from grading activity legally permitted in conjunction with subdivision improvements..." which is design grade in a subdivision 15. Additionally, the code allows discretion to the director to allow a house in the R-1 zone to exceed the 25-foot building height limit16. The building heights in the R-1 will exceed 25 feet so this application will request an adjustment for Houses in the R-1 zone that exceed the 25-feet height limit. The structures will be less than 30 feet in height. B. LOT COVERAGE: R-1 zoned lots have a maximum 40% lot coverage17. R-2 zoned lots are allowed 50% lot coverage18. This application is requesting an adjustment to allow R-2 (development standards) for R-1 lots of 5,000 s.f. or less. i. Lot Size (Area): There are 4 R-1 lots being retained by the Jones family as homestead lots. The OASP table 3.1 limits R-1 lots to a maximum of 15,000 square feet. The four Jones homestead lots will exceed the maximum OASP lot size and remain more consistent with lots that predate the OASP. C. STREET SECTION: One of the ways we are able to respond to the new requirements for storm water and low impact development is to reduce impervious surfaces. Travel lanes for local streets (Sponza Drive) have been reduced to 10' width, the minimum needed for fire access. Parking provided meets the minimum requirements only. Sidewalks have been eliminated wherever possible along private streets, while still providing access. Bulb outs are provided to reduce impervious surface of streets and provide stormwater treatment. All of these changes are encouraged by OASP Policy 5.6.[7]In addition, the Water Quality Control Board Post-Construction Requirements notes, "construct streets, sidewalks, or parking lot aisles to the minimum widths necessary, provided that public safety or mobility are not compromised." "B" Street Section: Figure 5.1, Program 5.2.3.a, and Figure 5.7 -The OASP provides conflicting information regarding the B Street section from the neighborhood park to Orcutt Road. The text calls for separated sidewalk and 15 City of san Luis Obispo Zoning Ordinance Section 17.100(E)Definitions -"Existing Topography" 16 City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Ordinance Section 17.24.020(C) 17 OASP Table 3.1:residential Development Standards 18 Ibid 171 Please see OASP Policy 5.6 on page 5-16 which encourages varied street widths for increased density and design flexibility Attachment 2 PH2-105 street parking adding up to a 68' right-of-way section, while the maps and current City zoning GIS indicates a narrowing of the right-of-way beyond the neighborhood park to a width of 44'. The project proposes a 48' section between the Neighborhood Park and Orcutt Road which does not include parking, but does include bike lanes and attached sidewalks. D.SETBACKS: Lot 7 in the R-1 courtyard residences is up against the creek setback. In order to accommodate the lot and the setback, the rear yard of lot 7 is reduced to 14 feet at the closest point to the creek setback. Therefore an exception for rear yard setback of less than 20 feet is requested. See attached lot 7 exception exhibit. The "island" area between the fork in Barrandca Creek is constrained by the two creek areas and associated 20 feet setbacks. This creates physical constraints not typically experienced with other lots of the same zone, topography or size. While we are able to fit the buildings, a very short bend in the driveway access on lot 28 and lot 23 encroaches into the 20 foot creek setback. No part of the structure encroaches, only a small portion of the driveway. Therefore it is requested that an exception be granted to allow an approximate four (4) feet encroachment into the creek setback for the very short portion of the driveway to properly access the residence (see Lot 23 and Lot 28 exhibit included). The OASP attempts to accommodate the challenges the creeks can present in constraining development, for example, by allowing R-1 lots to be enlarged where creeks are present19 and also allowing measures such as zero lot lines20 and duplexes to help in more confined spaces and for more compact development. While not specific, the intent of these policies is for the OASP to acknowledge some of the physical constraints and provide some flexibility to work around them. We request some flexibility for this conflict. Side yard setbacks for the two duplex units on lot 23 are reduced from 5 feet to 3 -4 feet for each unit (see Lot 23 and Lot 28 exhibit included). This is needed due to the site constraints of the creek fork and required creek setbacks which confine the space. Additionally the OASP does encourage zero lot lines and duplex units21 which should allow for side yard setback reduction. E.Homestead Existing Conditions and Open Space The Lot 1 homestead includes and existing home within ten (10) feet of the creek setback and several miscellaneous structures within the creek setback and CDFW jurisdiction. These structures predate the approval of the OASP. It is requested that the existing conditions present on Lot 1 remain as "grandfathered" uses. An easement or other mechanism can be executed in order to restrict any future improvements within open space or other restricted areas noted in the OASP. 19 OASP 3.2.5 "where creeks or other natural features constrain lot configurations there may be some larger R -1 lots" 20 OASP 3.2.8 21 OASP Policy 3.2.8 and Policy 3.2.9 Attachment 2 PH2-106 F. DRIVEWAY LENGTH Due to the constraints of the creek, and limited R-1 space, we have used a courtyard style of lot layout for the R-1 residences. This design is an efficient use of space and is encouraged by the OASP22. However it does restrict driveway length as the driveway is shared by all 4 or 5 homes in the cluster. Therefore the lengths of the individual driveways are shortened. We request that an exception be granted to accommodate this design and the shortened, varying lengths of the driveways in the R-1 lots listed in table 4.1. TABLE 4.1 LOT EXCEPTIONS Lot Height Lot Coverage Lot Size Exception Setback Exception Driveway Number Exception Requeste d Exception Requested Length Exception Lot 1 30 Feet No Yes over 15K sf allowed by OASP Section 3.2.5 Yes existing structures Within the creek setback No Lot 2 30 Feet No Yes over 15K sf (OASP 3.2.5) No Lot 3 30 Feet No Yes over 15K sf (OASP 3.2.5) No Lot 4 30 Feet No Yes over 15K sf (OASP 3.2.5) No Lot 5 30 Feet No No Yes Lot 6 30 Feet No No Yes Lot 7 30 Feet Yes: Only R1 Less than 5,000sf No Rear Yard Exception to 14 feet (from 20) Yes Lot 8 30 Feet No No Yes Lot 9 30 Feet No No Yes Lot 10 30 feet No No Yes Lot 11 30 feet No No Yes Lot 12 30 Feet No No Yes Lot 13 30 Feet No No Yes Lot 23 No No No Driveway encroaches into creek setback. Building Side Yard Setback Encroachment No Lot 28 No No No Driveway encroaches into creek setback No 22 See OASP DG 2.2 on page 4-2 Attachment 2 PH2-107 V .Low Impact Development As a residential tentative subdivision map with five (5) or more units, the project is classified as a Tier 3 Low Impact Development project. This requires at least two (2) LID measures that retain or reduce runoff. The following LID measures will be implemented: •Bio-filtration systems (bio-retention with underdrains due to underlying impervious rock) •Down-spout disconnect •Storm water ponds (stormwater directed to off-site vegetated regional detention pond) VI.Inclusionary Housing The Jones Ranch vesting tentative tract map proposes 61 for sale units plus two existing homestead units and two future homestead units the Jones family reserved for its use and enjoyment. Of those 61 units, 9 are low income affordable units provided to complete the Righetti affordable requirement as positioned according to the implementation of policy 3.3.3 which allows the cooperation of properties to share the affordable housing responsibility. The 9 low income units will be located in the mixed use area above the commercial use on the property. The Jones parcel affordable responsibility is 8 units, 5 moderate and 3 low income units, which is 15% of 53 units. The Jones Ranch project will provide 44 market rate units, not 53. We have added the 9 affordable units from Righetti Ranch to the 44, making it 53, to properly account for the sharing of affordable responsibility between Righetti Ranch and Jones Ranch. For the Jones calculation, we count the 9 units from Righetti as market rate units for calculation purposes on Jones, though those units are sold at affordable rates in Jones Ranch. This will bring the total affordable housing unit sales by Jones Ranch to 17 (9 from Righetti and 8 from Jones). Righetti Ranch is selling 32 of its 41 affordable units, the remaining 9 being added to the Jones Ranch project. The 8 units Jones Ranch is responsible to provide as affordable will be located in the R-2 units as two bedroom homes there. The affordable units will be built alongside market rate three bedroom units. The construction and treatment of the affordable units will be the same as the market rate units in the R-2 attached housing product. VII .Architecture Review City subdivision regulations indicate that a Vesting Tentative Tract Map within a specific plan is exempt from the requirement for architecture review23. The intention of this application is to comply with the OASP design guidelines. However at the direction of the City Community Development Department, Ambient Communities is including a Minor Architecture Review Application with the vesting tentative map application and is thus in process. 23 Subdivision Regulations Section 16.12.020(B)(1); Page 32 of City of SLO Subdivision Regulations Attachment 2 PH2-108 VIII. Consistent with Current Zoning This request for a Vesting Tentative Tract Map is in general conformance with the existing zoning of the OASP remains with the proposed map application. There is no zone change request with this application (although there is with the Righetti Ranch application which will affect the R-1 "island" on the Jones parcel). This request is consistent with current and expected zoning of R-1, R-2 and Community Commercial Mixed Use. IX. Status of Approvals from other Agencies Applications to the Army Corps of Engineers and the Department of Fish and Wildlife have been submitted. We can provide those at your request if needed prior to the CEQA review process. Attachment 2 PH2-109 Source: Orcutt Area Specific Plan Final EIR (2010) Attachment 3 Excerpts Applicable to Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063) and Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) ER# 3063 / ER#3066 March, 2015 OASP FEIR - 1 City of San Luis Obispo City of San Luis Obispo SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES from ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR For ER #3063 (Righetti Ranch) and ER#3066 (Jones Ranch) SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES The following adaptation of Table ES-1 from the original FEIR includes a brief reference to the environmental issues and impacts applicable to the proposed Righetti Ranch and Jones Ranch projects, identifies the 2010 adopted mitigation measures that are specifically applicable to the proposed projects, identifies the monitoring responsibilities, and explains the resulting impacts to occur after the mitigation measures are implemented. The purpose of this summary is to point out those specific mitigation measures from the FEIR that need to be applied to the proposed subdivision. Table ES-1. Summary of Environmental Impacts, Mitigation Measures, Monitoring and Residual Impacts Specifically Applicable to Jones Ranch and Righetti Ranch AIR QUALITY – CLASS II: SIGNIFICANT BUT MITIGATABLE IMPACTS Impact AQ-1. Vehicular operations associated with development under the Specific Plan would result in the emission of levels of air pollutants that would exceed recommended significance thresholds and are therefore considered to have a Class II, significant but mitigable, impact. Mitigation Measures. AQ-1(a) Energy Efficiency. The building energy efficiency rating shall be 10% above what is required by Title 24 requirements for all buildings within the Specific Plan Area. The following energy-conserving techniques shall be incorporated unless the applicant demonstrates their infeasibility to the satisfaction of City Planning and Building Department staff: increase walls and attic insulation beyond Title 24 requirements; orient buildings to maximize natural heating and cooling; plant shade trees along southern exposures of buildings to reduce summer cooling needs; use roof material with a solar reflectance value meeting the EPA/DOE Energy Star rating; build in energy efficient appliances; use low energy street lighting and traffic signals; use energy efficient interior lighting; use solar water heaters; and use double-paned windows. AQ-1(b) Transit. Bus turnouts and shelter improvements with direct pedestrian access shall be installed at all bus stops. AQ-1(c) Shade Trees. All parking lots shall include shade trees within the parking area. There shall be at least one shade tree for every six vehicle parking spaces. AQ-1(d) Telecommuting. All new homes within the Specific Plan area shall be constructed with internal wiring/cabling that allows telecommuting, teleconferencing, and tele-learning to occur simultaneously in at least three locations in each home. AQ-1(e) Pathways. Where feasible, all cul-de-sacs and dead-end streets shall be links by pathways to encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel. Monitoring. Monitoring will include Building staff implementation at time of building construction (AQ-1a and AQ-1d) and Engineering-Public Works staff at the time of tract improvement plans (AQ-1b, AQ-1c and AQ-1e). Significance After Mitigation. With proposed mitigation, impacts would be less than significant. PH2-110 Source: Orcutt Area Specific Plan Final EIR (2010) Attachment 3 Excerpts Applicable to Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063) and Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) ER# 3063 / ER#3066 March, 2015 OASP FEIR - 2 City of San Luis Obispo AIR QUALITY – CLASS II: SIGNIFICANT BUT MITIGATABLE IMPACTS Impact AQ-3. Development under the proposed Specific Plan has the potential to generate construction related emissions as the site develops. Development under the Specific Plan would contribute to this condition. Therefore, construction related emissions are considered to be Class II, significant but mitigable. Mitigation Measures. AQ-3(a) Application of CBACT. The following measures shall be implemented to reduce combustion emissions from construction equipment where a project will have an area of disturbance greater than 1 acre.  Specific Plan applicants shall submit for review by the Community Development Department and APCD staff a grading plan showing the area to be disturbed and a description of construction equipment that will be used and pollution reduction measures that will be implemented. Upon confirmation by the Community Development Department and APCD, appropriate CBACT features shall be applied. The application of these features shall occur prior to Specific Plan construction.  Specific Plan applicants shall be required to ensure that all construction equipment and portable engines are properly maintained and tuned according to manufacturer's specifications.  Specific Plan applicants shall be required to ensure that off-road and portable diesel powered equipment, including but not limited to bulldozers, graders, cranes, loaders, scrapers, backhoes, generator sets, compressors, auxiliary power units, shall be fueled exclusively with CARB motor vehicle diesel fuel (non- taxed off-road diesel is acceptable).  Specific Plan applicants shall be required to install a diesel oxidation catalyst on each of the two pieces of equipment projected to generate the greatest emissions. Installations must be prepared according to manufacturer's specifications. AQ-3(b) Dust Control. The following measures shall be implemented to reduce PM10 emissions during all Specific Plan construction:  Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible.  Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Water shall be applied as soon as possible whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour. Reclaimed (nonpotable) water should be used whenever possible.  All dirt-stock-pile areas shall be sprayed daily as needed.  Permanent dust control measures shall be identified in the approved Specific Plan revegetation and landscape plans and implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities.  Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast-germinating native grass seed and watered until vegetation is established.  All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD.  All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc., to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.  Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site.  All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil or other loose materials shall be covered or shall maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114.  Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site.  Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water shall be used where feasible. AQ-3(c) Cover Stockpiled Soils. If importation, exportation, or stockpiling of fill material is involved, soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. Trucks transporting material shall be tarped from the point of origin. AQ-3(d) Dust Control Monitor. On all projects with an area of disturbance greater than 1 acre, the contractor or 8builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering as necessary to prevent transport of dust off-site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. PH2-111 Source: Orcutt Area Specific Plan Final EIR (2010) Attachment 3 Excerpts Applicable to Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063) and Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) ER# 3063 / ER#3066 March, 2015 OASP FEIR - 3 City of San Luis Obispo Monitoring. Monitoring will include Community Development Department staff consultation and implementation at time of grading plan review at the tentative map stage (AQ-3a) and Engineering-Public Works staff at the time of tract improvement plans review (AQ-3a, AQ-3b, AQ-3c and AQ-3d). Significance After Mitigation. With proposed mitigation, impacts would be less than significant. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES – CLASS II: SIGNIFICANT BUT MITIGATABLE IMPACTS Impact B-4. Development under the proposed Specific Plan would affect riparian woodland and wetland habitat. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. Mitigation Measures. B-4(c) Riparian/ Wetland Mitigation. If riparian and/or wetland habitat are proposed for removal pursuant to development under the Specific Plan, such development shall apply for all applicable permits and submit a Mitigation Plan for areas of disturbance to wetlands and/or riparian habitat. The plan shall be prepared by a biologist familiar with restoration and mitigation techniques. Compensatory mitigation shall occur on -site using regionally collected native plant material at a minimum ratio of 2:1 (habitat created to habitat impacted) in areas shown on figure 4.4-2 as directed by a biologist. The resource agencies may require a higher mitigation ratio. If the Orcutt Regional Basin is necessary as a mitigation site for waters of the U.S. and State it shall be designed as directed by a biologist taking into consideration hydrology, soils, and erosion control and using the final mitigation guidelines and monitoring requirements (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2004). As noted above, the trail shall be setback out of the buffer area for riparian and wetland habitat. Monitoring. Monitoring will include Natural Resources Department staff consultation and implementation at time of review and prior to approval of grading plan(s) and during tract construction (B-4c). Significance After Mitigation. With proposed mitigation, impacts would be less than significant. Impact B-5. Development under the proposed Specific Plan could potentially impact special-status wildlife species and their habitats within the Plan Area. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. Mitigation Measures. B-5(a) Bird Pre-Construction Survey. To avoid impacts to nesting special-status bird species and raptors including the ground-nesting burrowing owl, all initial ground-disturbing activities and tree removal shall be limited to the time period between September 15 and February 1. If initial site disturbance, grading, and tree removal cannot be conducted during this time period, a pre-construction survey for active nests within the limits of grading shall be conducted by a qualified biologist at the site two weeks prior to any construction activities (for ground- nesting burrowing owl survey see below). If active nests are located, all construction work must be conducted outside a buffer zone of 200 feet to 500 feet from the nests as determined in consultation with the CDFG. No direct disturbance to nests shall occur until the adults and young are no longer reliant on the nest site. A qualified biologist shall confirm that breeding/nesting is completed and young have fledged the nest prior to the start of construction. B-5(b) Burrowing Owl Survey. When an applicant requests entitlements from the City under the Specific Plan a qualified biologist shall conduct surveys for burrowing owls during both the wintering and nesting seasons (unless the species is detected on the first survey) in potentially suitable habitats prior to construction in accordance with the guidelines described in the CDFG Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (1995). Winter surveys shall be conducted on the entire project site between December 1 and February 1, and the nesting season survey shall be conducted between April 15 and July 15. If burrowing owls are detected within the proposed disturbance area, CDFG shall be contacted immediately to develop and implement a mitigation plan to protect owls and their nest sites. B-5(c) Monarch Pre-Construction Survey. If initial ground-breaking is to occur between the months of October and March a pre-construction survey for active monarch roost sites within the limits of grading shall be conducted by a qualified biologist at the site two weeks prior to any construction activities. If active roost sites are located no ground-disturbing activities shall occur within 50 feet of the perimeter of the habitat. Construction shall not resume within the setback until a qualified biologist has determined that the monarch butterfly has vacated the site. PH2-112 Source: Orcutt Area Specific Plan Final EIR (2010) Attachment 3 Excerpts Applicable to Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063) and Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) ER# 3063 / ER#3066 March, 2015 OASP FEIR - 4 City of San Luis Obispo B-5(d) VPFS Sampling Surveys. Prior to development in areas shown as potential VPFS habitat on Figure 4.4-2, current USFWS protocol level sampling surveys shall be conducted in all such areas. A report consistent with current Federal, State, and local reporting guidelines shall be prepared to document the methods and results of surveys. If VPFS are found, the report shall include a map that identifies the VPFS locations. Should the presence of additional special-status wildlife species be determined including California linderiella, a map identifying locations in which these species were found shall be prepared and included in the report. B-5(e) FESA Consultation and Mitigation Regarding VPFS. If any VPFS individuals are located onsite pursuant to Mitigation Measure B-5(d), substantial setbacks from their identified habitat shall be implemented to avoid take of a Federally listed species. If complete avoidance is not economically or technically feasible, then Section 10 of the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) shall be used to authorize incidental take when no other Federal agency such as the Corps is involved. This process includes development of a Habitat Conservation Plan for protecting and enhancing the Federally listed species at a specific location in perpetuity. Species take can also be authorized under Section 7 of the FESA if a Federal agency is involved in the project (e.g., Corps Section 404 permitting for impacts to waters of the U.S. and/or Federal funding) and agrees to be the lead agency requesting Section 7 consultation. This consultation process takes at a minimum 135 days from the official request by the Federal lead agency. The compensatory mitigation ratio shall be determined by the appropriate resource agencies. Suitable replacement habitat shall be constructed either within the site boundaries or offsite. [OASP FEIR] Figure 4.4-2 identifies areas that could be appropriate for onsite VPFS mitigation. Figure 4.4-2 is not intended to preclude development but shall be used as a starting point for incorporating VPFS mitigation sites into the development plan. While the Orcutt Regional Basin included in the potential VPFS mitigation sites may need regular maintenance and may be seasonally flooded, depressions could be created on the upper edges of the terrace in such a manner that they are protected from flooding. VPFS mitigation areas shall be approved by a biologist familiar with VPFS habitat “creation” techniques. Enhancement of the onsite seasonal freshwater wetland habitat that is undisturbed by project activities may also be a part of the mitigation program. Alternatively, fairy shrimp cysts could be collected during the dry season from the existing habitat and placed into storage. Topsoil could also be removed and stored in conditions suitable to retain cysts. Wetland habitat could be enhanced/created in the areas shown on Figure 4.4-2 by grading depressions in the landscape and “top dressing” the depressions with the preserved topsoil. Preserved cysts would be added to the recreated wetlands in December or January, after sufficient ponding has occurred. It is important to note that VPFS habitat mitigation is still considered experimental. VPFS habitat mitigation is ambitious as it is costly, labor intensive, and difficult to ensure success. Habitat may be “created” only in an existing vernal pool landscape that provides suitable soils and a number of other specific ecological factors (USFWS, 2004). An alternative to onsite mitigation is the purchase of mitigation bank credits. Credits can be purchase by the acre as suitable mitigation for VPFS. There is currently no known mitigation bank with VPFS habitat occurring within San Luis Obispo County, however, mitigation banks may be available in the future. Monitoring. Monitoring will include Natural Resources Department staff consultation and implementation at time of review and prior to approval of grading plan(s) and during tract construction (B-5a, B-5b, B-5c, B-5d and B-5e). Significance After Mitigation. With proposed mitigation, impacts would be less than significant. DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY – CLASS II: SIGNIFICANT BUT MITIGATABLE IMPACTS Impact D-2. Increased runoff on-site could deteriorate on-site streambank conditions, leading to long-term erosion on- site. Impacts are considered Class II, significant but mitigable. Mitigation Measures. D-2(a) Vegetative and Biotechnical Approaches to Bank Stabilization. Vegetative or biotechnical (also referred to as soil bioengineering) approaches to bank stabilization are preferred over structural approaches. Bank stabilization design must be consistent with the SLO Creek Stream Management and Maintenance Program Section 6. Streambank stabilization usually involves one or a combination of the following activities: PH2-113 Source: Orcutt Area Specific Plan Final EIR (2010) Attachment 3 Excerpts Applicable to Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063) and Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) ER# 3063 / ER#3066 March, 2015 OASP FEIR - 5 City of San Luis Obispo  Regrading and revegetating the streambanks to eliminate overhanging banks and create a more stable slope;  Deflecting erosional water flow away from vulnerable sites;  Reducing the steepness of the channel bed through installation of grade stabilization structures;  Altering the geometry of the channel to influence flow velocities and sediment deposition;  Diverting a portion of the higher flow into a secondary or by-pass channel;  Armoring or protecting the bank to control erosion, particularly at the toe of slopes. The bank stabilization design will:  Be stable over the long term;  Be the least environmentally damaging and the “softest” approach possible;  Not create upstream or downstream flooding or induce other local stream instabilities;  Minimize impacts to aquatic and riparian habitat. D-2(c) Riparian Zone Planting. The OASP proposes riparian enhancement of creek corridors. Section 11 guidelines of the SLO Creek Drainage Design Manual shall be followed for riparian areas that are modified, created and/or managed for flood damage reduction, stream enhancement, and bank repair. Linear park terrace vegetation, streambank repair and channel maintenance projects may require stream channel modifications that include shaping, widening, deepening, straightening, and armoring. Many channel management projects also require building access roads for maintenance vehicles and other equipment. These construction activities can cause a variety of impacts to existing sensitive riparian and aquatic habitat that, depending on the selected design alternative, range from slight disturbances to complete removal of desirable woody vegetation and faunal communities. In urban areas within the SLO creek watershed, riparian vegetation often provides the only remaining natural habitat available for wildlife populations. Impact D-5 During long-term operation of the proposed project, runoff from the site could affect the water quality in creeks within the Specific Plan Area. Project development could result in an increase in non-point source (NPS) pollutants to receiving waters. Impacts are considered Class II, significant but mitigable. D-5(a) Biofilters. The applicant shall submit to the Director of Community Development for review and approval a plan that incorporates grassed swales (biofilters) into the project drainage system where feasible for runoff conveyance and filtering of pollutants. D-5(c) Pervious Paving Material. Consistent with Land Use Element Policy 6.4.7, the applicant shall be encouraged to use pervious paving material to facilitate rainwater percolation. Parking lots and paved outdoor storage areas shall, where feasible, use pervious paving to reduce surface water runoff and aid in groundwater recharge. Monitoring. Monitoring will include Natural Resources Department staff consultation and implementation at time of landscaping construction plan review and Engineering-Public Works staff at the time of tract construction (D-2a, D-2c, D-5a and D-5c). Significance After Mitigation. With proposed mitigation, impacts would be less than significant. NOISE – CLASS II: SIGNIFICANT BUT MITIGATABLE IMPACTS Impact N-1. Construction under the Specific Plan would temporarily generate high noise levels on-site. Because noise could exceed thresholds in the City General Plan Noise Element, impacts are considered Class II, significant but mitigable. Mitigation Measures. N-1(a) Compliance with City Noise Ordinance. Construction hours and noise levels shall be compliant with the City Noise Ordinance [Municipal Code Chapter 9.12, Section 9.12.050(6)]. Methods to reduce construction noise can include, but are not limited to, the following:  Equipment Shielding. Stationary construction equipment that generates noise can be shielded with a barrier. PH2-114 Source: Orcutt Area Specific Plan Final EIR (2010) Attachment 3 Excerpts Applicable to Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063) and Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) ER# 3063 / ER#3066 March, 2015 OASP FEIR - 6 City of San Luis Obispo  Diesel Equipment. All diesel equipment can be operated with closed engine doors and equipped with factory-recommended mufflers.  Electrical Power. Whenever feasible, electrical power can be used to run air compressors and similar power tools. Sound Blankets. The use of sound blankets on noise generating equipment. Monitoring. Monitoring will include Engineering-Public Works staff implementation prior to approval of tract improvement plans, and at the time of tract construction (N-1a). Significance After Mitigation. With proposed mitigation, impacts would be less than significant. PUBLIC SAFETY – CLASS II: SIGNIFICANT BUT MITIGATABLE IMPACTS Impact S-2. Development under the Orcutt Area Specific Plan would increase activity levels in the vicinity of the San Luis Obispo Airport Planning Area. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. Mitigation Measures. S-2(b) Disclosure. Prior to recordation of final map, the applicant shall develop Covenants, Codes, and Restrictions (CC&R’s) that disclose to potential buyers or leasers that aircraft over-flights occur, and that such flights may result in safety hazard impacts should an aircraft accident occur. In addition, prior to recordation of final map, avigation easements shall be recorded over the entire project site for the benefit of the SLO County Regional Airport. Monitoring. Monitoring will include Community Development, City Attorney and Engineering staff prior to recordation of a final tract map (S-2b). Significance After Mitigation. With proposed mitigation, impacts would be less than significant. Impact S-4. Suspect recognized environmental conditions that may pose a risk to human health and safety have been observed on portions of the Orcutt Area. This is considered a Class II, significant but mitigable impact. Mitigation Measures. S-4(d) 55-Gallon Drums. Prior to development on the property where 55-Gallon drums were identified as shown in Figure 4.9-1 soils samples shall be taken in the vicinity of the drums and analyzed for total extractable petroleum hydrocarbons (TEPH) by EPA method 8015, heavy metals by CCR Title 22 metals, and solvents by EPA method 8260B. If levels of contaminants are found to exist in concentrations that exceed regulatory thresholds, further sampling may be needed to determine the extent of contamination. Once the extent of contamination is delineated, an appropriate remediation method should be implemented according to the size of the area contaminated and the contaminant involved. Monitoring. Monitoring will include review of soils sampling by Engineering staff prior to tract construction, with appropriate remediation measures implemented. Significance After Mitigation. With proposed mitigation, impacts would be less than significant. PH2-115 GPA-SPA-ER-TR#3063/TR#3066 Attachment 4 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 1 City of San Luis Obispo INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM For ER # TR3063 (Righetti Ranch), TR3066 (Jones Ranch) 1. Project Title: General Plan Amendments specific to the Orcutt Planning Area (GPA #TR3063, TR3066) Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) Amendments (SPA # TR3063, TR3066) Righetti Ranch residential development plans including Vesting Tentative Map #3063 Application #TR114-14 APNs # 004-706-001, 004-706-004, 004-706-005, 004-707-001, 004-707-002 Jones Ranch residential development plans including Vesting Tentative Map #3066 Application # SBDV-0067-2014 (TR) APN 076-481-011 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 3. Contact Persons and Phone Numbers: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director Community Development Department 805-781-7177 Phil Dunsmore, Senior Planner 805-781-7522 David Watson, Project Planner 805-704-8728 4. Project Location: Orcutt Area Specific Plan area; located at Orcutt and Tank Farm Roads 5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Ambient Communities c/o Cannon Engineers 1050 Southwood Drive San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 PH2-116 GPA-SPA-ER-TR#3063/TR#3066 Attachment 4 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 2 6. General Plan Designations: Righetti Ranch (Tract 3063): Low, Medium & Medium-High Density Residential Open Space Parks Jones Ranch (Tract 3066): Low, Medium, Medium-High & High Density Residential Community Commercial-Mixed Use Open Space Parks 7. Zoning – Orcutt Area Specific Plan Designations: Righetti Ranch (Tract 3063): Low (R-1-SP), Medium (R-2-SP) & Medium-High (R-3-SP) Residential Open Space (C/OS-SP) Parks (P-F-SP) Jones Ranch (Tract 3066): Low (R-1-SP), Medium (R-2-SP), Medium-High (R-3-SP) & High Density (R-4-SP) Residential Community Commercial-Mixed Use (CC-MU) Open Space (C/OS-SP) Parks (P-F-SP) 8. Description of the Project: The “project” under consideration includes three (3) distinctive components that are being addressed under this Initial Study. These components are: 1. Proposed amendments to the General Plan, the Orcutt Area Specific Plan for the Orcutt Planning Area, and the Bicycle Transportation Plan reflecting various land use, “C” Street bicycle path and Urban Reserve Line (URL) modifications; 2. Proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map #3063 for the Righetti Ranch property; and, 3. Proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map #3066 for the Jones Ranch property. Each component requires separate entitlements, however for the purposes of CEQA review, the “cumulative project” is being described and analyzed herein to provide for coordinated anal ysis of the proposed actions and related environmental consequences of the various actions taken as a whole. Each component is summarized below. PH2-117 GPA-SPA-ER-TR#3063/TR#3066 Attachment 4 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 3 1. Proposed Amendments to the General Plan, Bicycle Transportation Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan: The application encompasses amendments to the General Plan, Bicycle Transportation Plan and corresponding Orcutt Area Specific Plan to include: a. Modify the placement of the Urban Reserve Line (URL) along Righetti Hill, resulting in a 0.85 acre “net” reduction in open space above the current URL placement b. Relocate 2.8 acres of residential and parks land uses within the Righetti Ranch property; no “net” change in residential or parks acreages results from this reorientation of land use designations c. Change 0.38 acres within the Jones Ranch property from R-1-SP (low density) to R-2-SP (medium density) residential land use, to allow a transition of smaller, clustered R-2 uses on a small, irregularly shaped peninsula of land with runoff channels and setbacks on 3 sides d. Reorient wetlands mitigation sites within the Righetti Ranch property to meet EIR requirements e. Amend the OASP and Bicycle Transportation Plan to change the “C” Street Bike Lane (crossing the creek) from a Class II bike lane to a Class I bike path f. Add a Section 9.10 to the Specific Plan to track amendments, adjustments and clarifications to development standards within the Specific Plan 2. Proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map #3063 (Righetti Ranch) Tract 3063 (Righetti Ranch) proposes to construct up to 304 residential homes and retain one home-site on 143.83 acres. Tract 3063 would construct on-site trails and connect to nearby public trails, provide on-site and regional storm water management features, construct roadways and utilities to support internal uses, and also tie into the City’s regional networks of roadways, water, wastewater and recycled water utilities. PH2-118 GPA-SPA-ER-TR#3063/TR#3066 Attachment 4 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 4 A statistical summary of the proposed Righetti Ranch Tract 3063 project includes: Proposed Project Gross Acreage Commercial Land Uses Residential Land Uses Proposed Parks & Open Space Righetti Ranch 143.83 acres none proposed 272 single family units 32 multi-family units 304 total residential 14.26 acres Parks 75.42 acres Open Space 89.68 acres (62.4%) The project proposes a variety of residential housing product types including, single family detached, duplex units, triplex units and condominium units. 15% of the allowable density in the project is proposed as units affordable to persons and families of low and moderate incomes (272 market units x 15% = 41 required affordable units). Of the 304 new homes, 272 homes would be market-rate units for sale, and an additional 32 units would be affordable housing. Tract 3063 is required to provide a total of 41 affordable units, with the difference of 9 affordable units proposed to be “transferred” from the Righetti Ranch project (Tract 3063) to the nearby and adjoining Jones Ranch project (Tract 3066). The applicant for Righetti Ranch, Ambient Communities, is also the developer for Jones Ranch, so sharing of these affordable units can be considered under the respective permits. The affordable units are located in the R-3 area of Tract 3063. The existing residential unit on the property (to be retained) is the Righetti Family homestead. Figure 1 - Tract 3066 Lots and Land Use/Zoning Configurations PH2-119 GPA-SPA-ER-TR#3063/TR#3066 Attachment 4 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 5 The project includes pedestrian ways, bicycle paths, and traffic calming features to promote the pedestrian friendly environment envisioned by the OASP and the subject community. 3. Proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map #3066 (Jones Ranch) For the purposes of CEQA review, the applicants for the Righetti Ranch have also submitted, and are similarly processing, a proposed subdivision on the adjoining Jones Ranch Tract 3066 site. The plans for the Jones and Righetti Ranch projects are being carefully coordinated to meet the standards for development under the OASP. Tract 3066 (Jones Ranch) proposes to construct up to 61 residential homes and retain up to 5 home-sites, for a total of 66 homes on 11.56 acres. Of the 66 homes, 56 are unique to the Jones Ranch, with another 9 affordable units proposed to be received from the Righetti Ranch project (Tract 3063). Including the proposed 9 units from Righetti, a total of 17 affordable units would be built on Jones site. Tract 3066 would also connect to public trails, storm water management features, roadways and utilities to support internal uses, and also to tie into the City’s regional networks of roadways, water, wastewater and recycled water utilities. Tract 3066 includes a 15,070 sq ft neighborhood mixed-use property on 1.32 acres. PH2-120 GPA-SPA-ER-TR#3063/TR#3066 Attachment 4 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 6 A statistical summary of the proposed Jones Ranch Tract 3066 project includes: Jones Project Gross Acreage Proposed Commercial Proposed Residential Proposed Parks & Open Space Jones Ranch Vesting Tentative Tract Map #3063 11.56 acres 15,070 sq ft 1.32 acres (mixed-use) 11 single family units 43 multi-family units 9 mixed-use residential 63 new residential 2 existing residential 65 total residential 2.03 acres Open Space 2.03 acres (17.6%) The project proposes a variety of residential housing product types including, single family detached, duplex units, triplex units and mixed-use apartments located above the commercial center. 15% of the allowable density in the project (up to 53 units – or a Jones Ranch requirement for 8 such affordable units) is proposed as units affordable to persons and families of low and moderate incomes. The Jones parcel will provide these 8 units within the R-2 (two- bedroom) multi-family area. Additionally, Tract 3066 is proposed to “receive” 9 affordable units from the Righetti Ranch Tract 3063 tentative tract map application. Flexibility in considering these “transfers” of affordable units between properties compr ising the Orcutt Area Specific Plan is permitted. The 9 Righetti Ranch affordable units are proposed within the Jones Tract to be located as affordable apartments over the mixed-use commercial area of the tract. The Jones Ranch affordable units are distributed throughout the development in a non- distinguishable manner and include affordable units in all residential product types proposed within the project. As noted above, affordable units will include for sale homes for low and moderate-income households, as well as rental units. Figure 2 - Tract 3066 Lots and Land Use/Zoning Configurations PH2-121 GPA-SPA-ER-TR#3063/TR#3066 Attachment 4 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 7 The two (2) existing residential units on the property are the Jones Family home-site residences. As a part of proposed Tract 3066, up to three (3) additional Jones home-site residences would be created, bringing the Jones residences to five (5) of the total units. Mixed-use commercial component is proposed at approximately 15,000 sq. ft. located on the southern edge of the Jones Ranch, and generally in the center of the overall Orcutt Planning Area. The project includes pedestrian ways, bicycle paths, and traffic calming features to promote the pedestrian friendly environment envisioned by the OASP and the subject community. The approximately 9,500 sq. ft. central common area open space park (proposed Lot 30), located across from the mixed-use development and within a central corridor of the R-2 multi-family community, achieves a courtyard effect with picnic seating areas, paths and plaza space for community events, thereby providing largely passive recreation amenities for the future residents of the subdivision and the overall community as a whole. 4. Cumulative Projects Proposals In order to provide a cumulative disclosure of the entirety of the applicant’s proposals, the following statistical summary adds the Jones and Righetti Ranch projects together to understand the larger, cumulative proposals being considered. Cumulative Projects Gross Acreage Cumulative Commercial Cumulative Residential Cumulative Parks & Open Space Righetti Ranch 143.83 acres none proposed 272 single family units 32 multi-family units 304 total residential 14.26 acres Parks 75.42 acres Open Space 89.68 acres (62.4%) Jones Ranch 11.56 acres 15,070 sq ft 1.32 acres (mixed-use) 13 single family units 52 multi-family units 65 total residential 2.03 acres Open Space 2.03 acres (17.6%) Totals 155.39 acres 15,070 sq ft 1.32 acres (mixed-use) 285 single family units 84 multi-family units 369 total residential 14.26 acres Parks 77.45 acres Open Space 91.71 acres (59.0%) 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings: The Orcutt Specific Plan Area (OASP) is located in the southeastern portion of the City, bounded by Orcutt and Tank Farm Roads, and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks near Bullock Lane. The OASP planning area is 230.85 acres in size, generally divided into thirteen (13) differing ownerships (and 21 separate parcels) ranging in size from less than 1 acre to the largest holding being just over 143 acres. PH2-122 GPA-SPA-ER-TR#3063/TR#3066 Attachment 4 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 8 Surrounding land uses include City residential developments to the north and south of the OASP, as well as rural residential uses located in the County to the immediate east of the planning area. To the west (and over the UPRR tracks) are the Industrial Way and Sacramento Road industrial and business areas. The lands within the OASP are largely undeveloped, with the exception of a handful of homestead residential sites developed under County control prior to annexation and planning of the OASP by the City. The Orcutt area is characterized by flat to rolling grasslands which rise to a steep, rocky hill in the southeastern corner of the planning area, known as “Righetti Hill”. This area at the base of the Santa Lucia foothills to the east and north including Righetti Hill is designated as a natural landmark in the City’s General Plan as one of the defining Morros running between San Luis Obispo and Morro Bay. The Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) describes a series of natural features in the Orcutt area including creeks, wetlands, plant communities and wildlife located within and surrounding portions of the planning area. The Righetti Ranch project site consists of 143.83 acres of grassland that has historically been used for grazing and suburban residential uses. Within Righetti Ranch VTM 3063, there is one detached single-family residence (Righetti Homestead) with access to Orcutt Road via a private roadway. The existing home on the site was constructed in 1910, and is serviced by septic and Figure 3 - Orcutt Area Specific Plan Figure 1.3 – “Specific Plan” Land Use Plan) PH2-123 GPA-SPA-ER-TR#3063/TR#3066 Attachment 4 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 9 well systems, however it is proposed to be converted over to City wastewater as a part of development of Righetti Ranch. The residence was recently evaluated by a qualified historic resource consultant (Chattel 2014) and was determined to be eligible for placement on the City’s Contributing List of Historic Resources. Immediately to the north-northwest of Righetti Ranch is the Jones Ranch property (approx. 11.56 acres in size, that includes two single-family residences, and is designated for R-1-SP low, R-2-SP medium, R-3-SP medium-high, and R-4-SP high density residential, and CC-MU community commercial mixed-use development) and the Pratt property (approx. 5.41 acres in size, that is designated for R-3-SP medium-high density residential development, and CC-MU community commercial mixed-use development). These sites are currently used for suburban residential and intermittent grazing purposes. Within the Jones Ranch VTM 3066, there are two detached single-family residences with access to Orcutt Road via a private roadway. The existing homes on the site, which are serviced by septic and well systems, are proposed to be converted over to City wastewater as a part of development of the Jones Ranch. Immediately to the west of Jones Ranch are the Fiala property (approx. 1 acre in size, that includes a single-family residence, and is designated for R-1-SP low density residential development) and the Muick property (approx. 12 acres in size, that includes a single-family residence, and is designated for R-2-SP medium density residential development) that are predominantly used for suburban residential and intermittent grazing purposes. To the north of the Jones Ranch is the unincorporated San Luis Obispo County area north of Orcutt Road. To the east are the Righetti and Imel properties. Imel is about 6.5 acres in size, is designated R-1- SP (low density residential) and includes a single existing residence. South of the Jones Ranch are the largely undeveloped Evans and Sandpiper properties comprising about 11 acres, and designated for additional mixed-use commercial, and R-3-SP high density residential units. OASP proposed “B” Street runs along the common boundaries of the Righetti and Jones -Pratt ownerships. To the east are the Garay and Imel properties. Imel is about 6.5 acres in size, is designated R-1-SP (low density residential) and includes a single existing residence. The Garay property is about 13.7 acres in area and is designated R-1-SP (low density residential). Further to the east of Righetti Ranch is the unincorporated San Luis Obispo County area along of Orcutt Road. South of Righetti Ranch is Tank Farm Road and the developed Wavertree and Brookpine residential neighborhoods. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.): No other public agencies are required to “approve” the proposed General and Specific Plan amendments described herein. PH2-124 GPA-SPA-ER-TR#3063/TR#3066 Attachment 4 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 10 However, California Planning laws require the following consultation processes before considering the proposed General Plan and Specific Plan amendments:  San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Commission (SLO ALUC). The City is required to refer any GPA or SPA approvals to the ALUC for comments concerning the consistency with their Airport Master Plan. This referral is on file at the Community Development Department. On April 15, 2015, the ALUC met to review the referral, and confirmed that the amendments as proposed are deemed consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan.  Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Referrals. The City is required to submit the adoption and amendment of any General or Specific Plan to the State NAHC office, and in turn, direct referrals for consultation to tribes with traditional lands or cultural places located within the City’s jurisdiction. Complete copies of the NAHC submittal and responses, along with direct requests to identified tribes, are on file at the Community Development Department. Background for both consultations are incorporated into the appropriate sections of this IS, and documentation to/from each agency/responding entity are attached as Source 10 (ALUC) and Source 11 (NAHC Referral and Consultation process). For the purposes of the VTM applications, the following referrals and/or agency permit requirements concerning the construction projects include: Air Pollution Control District – grading permit(s) referral Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board - NPDES general construction activity storm water permit(s) Army Corps of Engineers – Section 404 permit(s) CA Fish and Wildlife – Streambed Alteration Permit(s) PH2-125 GPA-SPA-ER-TR#3063/TR#3066 Attachment 4 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 11 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. --X-- Aesthetics Greenhouse Gas Emissions Population / Housing Agriculture Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Public Services --X-- Air Quality Hydrology / Water Quality Recreation --X-- Biological Resources Land Use / Planning --X-- Transportation / Traffic --X-- Cultural Resources Mineral Resources --X-- Utilities / Service Systems Geology / Soils Noise Mandatory Findings of Significance FISH AND GAME FEES The Department of Fish and Wildlife has reviewed the CEQA document and written no effect determination request and has determined that the project will not have a potential effect on fish, wildlife, or habitat (see attached determination). --X-- The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish and Game fees pursuant to Sect ion 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code. This initial study has been circulated to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for review and comment. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE --X-- This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more State agencies (e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Department of Housing and Community Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines 15073(a)). PH2-126 GPA-SPA-ER-TR#3063/TR#3066 Attachment 4 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 12 DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency): On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, based on the analysis and mitigation requirements of the 2010 Orcutt Area Specific Plan Final EIR, and the specific analysis incorporated herein for the proposed General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions (aesthetic mitigation measures) in the project have been made . A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. --X-- I find that the proposed project MAY have a si gnificant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant” impact(s) or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an ear lier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR of NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing f urther is required. May 19, 2015 David Watson, AICP, Project Planner Date For: Derek Johnson Doug Davidson, AICP, Deputy Director Community Development Director PH2-127 GPA-SPA-ER-TR#3063/TR#3066 Attachment 4 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 13 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 19, "Earlier Analysis," as described in (5) below, may be cross- referenced). 5. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration (Section 15063 (c) (3) (D)). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they addressed site-specific conditions for the project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance PH2-128 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 14 Attachment 4 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 1, 4, 12 --X-- b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, open space, and historic buildings within a local or state scenic highway? 1, 12 --X-- c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? 1, 12 --X-- d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 1, 2 --X-- Evaluation a) The primary scenic value from within and surrounding the Orcutt planning area are views to the east and south including Righetti Hill. The highest elevations of the existing location of the Urban Reserve Line (URL) on Righetti Hill varies generally between the +260’ msl to +320’ msl elevations. The proposed realignment of the Urban Reserve Line (URL) on Righetti Hill has the potential to decrease open space on the Hill by a “net” 0.85 acres, and to increase the elevation up the hill that residential development may occur in two (2) isolated areas on the western flank of the hill (Righetti Ranch Tract 3063 proposed Lots 35-40 and 48-50). See Exhibit 1 “Open Space Adjustment” for Tract 3063, attached, for the specifics of the proposed changes. All proposed changes to the URL location are located below (and therefore consistent with) the 2012 Righetti Hill Open Space Easement created at the time of annexation of the Orcutt Area into San Luis Obispo (this 2012 easement is shown on Exhibit 1 for reference and comparative purposes). Aesthetic impacts were not associated with the reorientation of permitted land uses within the Specific Plan area (such as reorienting wetlands mitigation sites, relocating parks and open space to residential use and vice-versa). The addition of Section 9.10 to the OASP to “track” amendments, adjustments and clarifications do not have any visual impacts on the area. For these reasons, the Aesthetics analysis focuse s on the proposed amendments to the Righetti Hill URL. In order to evaluate the potential for visual impacts, a series of photog raphic simulations were developed to carefully analyze the locations of homes based on the modified placement of the URL. These photos were taken from seven (7) locations as detailed in Exhibit 2 to this Initial Study (“2014 Righetti Ranch Visual Simulation”; Reference Source #4). These photographic simulations outline the existing permissible locations for homes on Righetti Hill (specific to proposed VTM#3063), and their respective height limits and potential building envelope volumes (structure massing) under present OASP standards, and include comparisons of the proposed URL amendments, and the modified home locations based on the proposed changes. Proposed homes are simulated via superimposed images on the existing URL building envelopes. Generally, homes would be limited to 25’ in height , and with variations in unit type and unit placements on the proposed lots, the resulting homes would occur for the most part at or below the otherwise allowable existing URL limits, with the exception of nine (9) lots noted above. In the case of these nine (9) lots proposed for the Righetti Ranch site, Visual Simulation View #5 of the Visual Analysis (IS source document #4) best describes the potential impact of these altered home sites further up the hill. View #5 describes the potential visibility of homes on proposed Lots 35-40, as viewed from French Park. The amount of view obstruction as demonstrated in the View #5 simulation appears relatively minor, and in the larger context of the OASP, an isolated impact a t best when viewed from limited vantage points in the area. Nevertheless, as “aesthetics” were considered a Class I impact under the OASP FEIR, it is appropriate to consider possible mitigation measure(s) that could be included with an adjustment to the URL so that this Class I impact is not exacerbated with a GPA and SPA amendment. To ensure that the URL adjustment does not result in significant visual impact to the western flank of Righetti Hill, a mitigation measure is recommended that limits the scale, building height and massing of single family homes that may be proposed and approved on the Righetti Ranch site within the limited areas where the URL as amended would move further up the hillside. This mitigation measure would reduce any potentially significant visual impacts to a level of insignificance, and PH2-129 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 15 Attachment 4 consistent with the OASP FEIR standards. Mitigation measures established for the URL amendments require that residential units abutting the modified URL along the western flank of Righetti Hill (VT M#3063 Lots 35-50) include additional building limitations to adequately protect these visual resources while allowing some flexibility in large subdivision and grading des ign. Mitigation Measure AE-1 is included to reflect this requirement, and results in a less than significant impact with Tract 3063. As noted in the Final EIR, t he existing visual character or quality of the site will change from semi-rural to an urbanized area pursuant to and consistent wit h the objectives of the OASP. Development of the planning area is otherwise required to be consistent with the distribution of land uses and design standards stated in the OASP to ensure that the appearance of the development is acceptable and that no new buildings block scenic views. Careful analysis of the change in the URL has confirmed that no additional significant adverse effects are anticipated with the modifications and amendments proposed. In some instances, the additional offsetting open space as noted on the attached exhibits will significantly improve visual qualities, particularly along Orcutt and Tank Farm Roads. b) It is part of the main objective of the OASP Final EIR (FEIR) to protect natural habitats, including creeks, hills, wetlan ds, and corridors between these habitats. The subject sites are currently used for low density residential uses and in the past have accommodated animal grazing. The sites are mostly sloping grassland and do not contain any unique scenic resources that will be compromised or lost with development. The natural creek environments along Hansen and Barrandca Creeks will be maintained as proposed with Tracts 3063 and 3066. Therefore, the impact is less than significant for these projects. c) The existing visual character or quality of the sites will change from semi-rural to an urbanized area pursuant to and consistent with the objectives of the OASP. The subdivision projects are required to be consistent with the distribution of land uses and design standards stated in the OASP to ensure that the appearance of the development is acceptable and that no new buildings block scenic views. Therefore, the projects as proposed are consistent with the OASP and in this regard are self- mitigating. Through conditions of approval the projects will be further required to comply with City codes and standards some of which impact aesthetics. Ultimately the design will require the review and approval of the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) to ensure consistency with the City’s Community Design Guidelines as well as the OASP. Regardless, the proposed development would contribute to the project wide effect on the aesthetic character of the site vicinity through alteration of view-sheds from Orcutt and Tank Farm Roads. The OASP FEIR considered this a cumulative significant and unavoidable impact, and considered and approved overriding considerations. d) The prior OASP FEIR acknowledges that future development pursuant to the OASP will introduce new sources of light, glare and nighttime illumination, as is typical with residential and commercial development. However, the OASP FEIR determined that such light and glare impacts can be mitigated to less than significant at the site specific project stage thr ough compliance with lighting design standards set forth in the OASP and with other adopted standards as may be applicable by other City regulations. The new light source subject to mitigation will not adversely affect day or nighttime views in the urbanized area. Therefore impacts from new sources of light or glare w ill be less than significant with mitigation AES-3(a) as specified in the OASP FEIR to be implemented through compliance with the OASP Community Design standard of Section 4 - 16-Lighting and accompanying conditions of approval. Building and parking lot lighting for the project will also be reviewed and approved by the ARC in compliance with the aforementioned standards of the OASP and Chapter 17.23 of the City’s Zoning Regulations (Night Sky Preservation Ordinance). REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS AESTHETIC MITIGATION associated with Amendment of the Righetti Hill URL AES-3 Special Building Height Limits, Scale and Massing Design Standards for Western Flank of Righetti Hill (Righetti Ranch VTM#3063). Added building design restrictions shall be required for residential lots and units (Lots 35-50) adjoining the Righetti Hill URL on the western flank of the hillside. These standards are intended to reduce the massing of residential units abutting the URL. These standards will include use of the f ollowing building techniques, and considered during ARC PH2-130 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 16 Attachment 4 and/or staff review of any project applications for residential units in this location: 1. Residential Building Heights shall not exceed 25’ as measured above finished grade; 2. Grading for lots abutting the URL will be encouraged to be split-pads, to reduce the scale of the building mass by stepping down the hillside; 3. The upper pad shall be limited to one-story (a maximum of 15’) in height; 4. First floor massing and footprint shall be encouraged to be built into the topography (recessed) into the hillside; 5. Second floor square footage shall be set back from the first floor elevation, creating a stepped appearance to the buildings; 6. Maximum lot coverage shall not exceed 50%; and, 7. Roof lines on the upper pad will align front-to-back to narrow the high point of the roof when viewed from the street.  AES-3 Monitoring Program: Compliance will be reviewed and implemented at two (2) stages. First, any final map recorded for subdivision of lots abutting URL along the western flank of the Righetti Hill shall include a special deed restriction incorporating this mitigation and special development criteria on such lots. This requirement will be verified by the City Engineer’s office prior to recordation of such a final map. Second, Community Development Department staff will insure ARC and staff level application of these standards during review of any design review and building permit submittals. 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? 1 --X-- b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? 1 --X-- c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? 1 --X-- Evaluation a) The proposed VTM’s, General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan amendments do not have any effect on prime agriculture lands located within the Orcutt Planning Area. Agricultural land resources, as measured by the LESA Model certified in the Final EIR, is not considered significant. Therefore there is no impact. b) There is no agricultural zoning or Williamson Act Contract in effect on the subject sites. c) The proposed VTM’s, General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan amendments do not result in any conversion or cha nges to farmlands within the Planning Area. Therefore there is no impact. 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make th e following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air 1 --X-- PH2-131 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 17 Attachment 4 quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? 1 --X-- c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? 1 --X-- d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? 1 --X-- e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? 1 --X-- Evaluation a-e) The proposed General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan amendments focus on (a) modification of the Righetti Hill URL placement, (b) reorientation of various land uses with no significant increase in residential densities or loss of open space , parks and wetlands mitigation areas, and (c) addition of administrative “tracking” details for the OASP’s user reference. The proposed VTM’s #3063 and #3066 include residential and commercial development consistent with the OASP and FEIR, including all mitigation measures associated therewith. REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS AIR QUALITY MITIGATION Operational Phase Mitigation AQ-1(a) Energy Efficiency. The building energy efficiency rating shall be 10% above what is required by Title 24 requirements for all buildings within the Specific Plan Area. The following energy-conserving techniques shall be incorporated unless the applicant demonstrates their infeasibility to the satisfaction of City Planning and Building Department staff: increase walls and attic insulation beyond Title 24 requirements; orient buildings to maximize natural heating and cooling; plant shade trees along southern exposures of buildings to reduce summer cooling needs; use roof material with a solar reflectance value meeting the Environmental Protection Agency/Department of Energy - Energy Star rating; build in energy efficient appliances; use low energy street lighting and traffic signals; use energy efficient interior lighting; use solar water heaters; use double-paned windows, solar panel plumbing, grey water recycling, tank-less water heaters, dedicated hot water line loops. AQ-1(b) Transit. Bus turnouts and shelter improvements with direct pedestrian access shall b e installed at all bus stops. AQ-1(c) Shade Trees. All parking lots shall include shade trees within the parking area. There shall be at least one shade tree for every six vehicle parking spaces. AQ-1(d) Telecommuting. All new homes within the Specific Plan area shall be constructed with internal wiring/cabling that allows telecommuting, teleconferencing, and tele-learning to occur simultaneously in at least three locations in each home. AQ-1(e) Pathways. Where feasible, all cul-de-sacs and dead-end streets shall be links by pathways to encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel. PH2-132 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 18 Attachment 4  AQ-1 Monitoring Program: Compliance with operational phase mitigation measures will be reviewed with the subdivision plans and accompanying architectural review plans and ultimately shown on improvement plans and construction drawings. Construction Phase Mitigation AQ-3(a) Application of CBACT (Best Available Control Technology for construction related equipment). The following measures shall be implemented to reduce combustion emissions from construction equipment where a project will have an area of disturbance greater than 1 acre.  Specific Plan applicants shall submit for review by the Community Development Department and Air Pollution Control District (APCD) staff a grading plan showing the area to be disturbed and a description of construction equipment that will be used and pollution reduction measures that will be implemented. Upon confirmation by the Community Development Department and APCD, appropriate CBACT features shall be applied. The application of these features shall occur prior to Specific Plan construction.  Specific Plan applicants shall be required to ensure that all construction equipment and portable engines are properly maintained and tuned according to manufacturer's specifications.  Specific Plan applicants shall be required to ensure that off-road and portable diesel powered equipment, including but not limited to bulldozers, graders, cranes, loaders, scrapers, backhoes, generator sets, compressors, auxiliary power units, shall be fueled exclusively with CARB motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed off-road diesel is acceptable).  Specific Plan applicants shall be required to install a diesel oxidation catalyst on each of the two pieces of equipment projected to generate the greatest emissions. Installations must be prepared according to manufacturer's specifications. AQ-3(b) Dust Contro l. The following measures shall be implemented to reduce PM10 emissions during all Specific Plan construction:  Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible.  Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Water shall be applied as soon as possible whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour. Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible.  All dirt-stock-pile areas shall be sprayed daily as needed.  Permanent dust control measures shall b e identified in the approved Specific Plan re-vegetation and landscape plans and implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities.  Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast-germinating native grass seed and watered until vegetation is established.  All disturbed soil areas not subject to re-vegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD.  All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc., to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. PH2-133 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 19 Attachment 4  Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site.  All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil or other loose materials shall be covered or shall maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114.  Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site.  Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water shall be used where feasible. AQ-3(c) Cover Stockpiled Soils. If importation, exportation, or stockpiling of fill material is involved, soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. Trucks transporting material shall be tarped from the point of origin. AQ-3(d) Dust Contro l Monitor. On all projects with an area of disturbance greater than 1 acre, the contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering as necessary to prevent transport of dust off-site. These duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. • AQ-3 Monitoring Program: These conditions shall be noted on all project grading and building plans. The applicant will also be required to secure necessary permits from the Air Pollution Control Board (APCD) before the onset of grading or demolition activities including, but not limited to additional dust control measures, evaluation for Naturally Occurring Asbestos. The applicant shall present evidence of a p lan for complying with these requirements prior to issuance of a grading or building permit from the City. The applicant shall provide the City with the name and telephone number of the person responsible for ensuring compliance with these requirements. The Building Inspector and Public Works Inspectors shall conduct field monitoring. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidat e, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? 1, 17, 18 --X-- b) Have a substantial adverse effect, on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)? 1, 17, 18 --X-- c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? 1 --X-- d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? 1 --X-- PH2-134 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 20 Attachment 4 e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? 1, 2, 17, 18 --X-- f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 3 --X-- Evaluation a-f) The proposed General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan amendments focus on (a) modification of the Righetti Hill URL placement, (b) reorientation of various land uses with no significant increase in residential densities or loss of open space, parks and wetlands mitigation areas, and (c) addition of administrative “tracking” details for the OASP’s user reference. These amendments do not have any physical effect on the Biological resou rces of the Planning Area. a-e) The EIR prepared for the OASP conducted biological resource impact analyses and did not identify adverse impacts to riparian habitat, wetlands or sensitive habitats as a result of development consistent with the OASP. Within the Righetti and Jones project sites, the FEIR generally recognized California Native Plant Society (CNPS) rare plants listed by both the CDFW and the Conservation and Open Space Element, as potentially occurring within the OASP area . Mitigation Measures included with the FEIR and OASP require applicants to conduct habitat and wetlands assessment studies specific to each property to refine the analysis, and to focus on any specific findings and recommendations from these more precise inventorie s. In July, 2013, Rincon consultants conducted spring surveys of the properties and submitted those reports as a part of the tract applications. (Reference Source Documents 17-20). In the case of the Righetti property, the OASP FEIR considered this site suitable for up to 22 different special status plant species. Based on the 2013 investigations, only 3 plant species were observed. These are Cambria morning-glory, SLO owls clover and mouse gray dudleya. Similarly, the OASP FEIR recognized the potential for up to 15 special status animal species on the sites. The 2013 Rincon surveys yielded 2 species on the sites: monarch butterfly and golden eagle. In the case of special status plants, the Rincon analysis concluded that of the 3 species, proposed Tract 3 063 could result in impacts potentially significant to the SLO owl’s-clover located in two areas of the Righetti property (reference Figure 5 of Rincon 2013 assessment). One of these two areas is located within proposed open space Lot 322, and therefore c an be adequately mitigated by avoidance and monitoring techniques included with MM B-3a. The other area is located within the regional park improvements of Lot 312. In this case, the subdivision provides a generalized concept plan for the development of this lot, but improvements to this public park would be overseen by the City. To that extent, future city plans for improvements to this site will require additional analysis and design-level mitigation measures to match the final park plans with appropriate special plant status conditions. In the case of the special status animal species, the monarch butterflies occur primarily in the small stand of eucalyptus tr ees along the northern edge of the property (at proposed “B” Street). The tract map applications suggests “pruning and/or removal as needed” for utility and road improvements. To adequately mitigate for this potential impact, MM B-3a is proposed to require a pre-construction survey to confirm the presence or absence of the species, with suggested restrictions on pruning or removal during the typical nesting season – between October to March. To avoid impacts to nesting bird and raptor species, all initial ground-disturbing activities and tree removal shall be limited to the period between Sept ember 15 to February 1. There are no significant specimen or heritage trees identified on VTM#3063 or VTM#3066. *Note Re: c) The Orcutt Area Specific Plan project site included various locations for wetlands mitigations to be incorporated as an enhancement for the biological values on the site. The Final EIR and the OASP address in detail how these areas are to be developed, and the proposed amendments to the OASP will allow some greater flexibility in how and where those wetlands areas are located, consistent with the OASP and FEIR. Thus there is no significant adverse impact from these General and Specific Plan amendments, or the proposed subdivisions. PH2-135 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 21 Attachment 4 *Note Re: d) The project site contains intermittent waterways (Hansen and Barrandca Creeks), but was not found under the FEIR to sustain any significant habitat species; therefore, there would not be any effect on fish species. Due to the relatively poor soils, simple vegetation type (non-native grassland), and general lack of vegetative diversit y, the subject site does not have high habitat value for wildlife species. Therefore, it is not expected that the development would interfere substantially with the movement of any native wildlife species. REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION B-3(a) Construction Requirements. Development under the Specific Plan shall abide by the requirements of the City Arborist for construction. Requirements shall include but not be limited to: the protection of trees with construction setbacks from trees; construction fencing around trees; grading limits around the base of trees as required; and a replacement plan for trees removed including replacement at a minimum 1:1 ratio. Special Plant communities (San Luis Obispo owl’s-clover) located near Tank Farm Road within Lot 322 shall be protected during site construction through biological monitoring and protective fencing with a 50’ buffer perimeter. This program shall be approved prior to site grading and overseen by the Natural Resources Manager. Eucalyptus tree removal and/or pruning shall be limited to April to September of each year, or pre -construction surveys with specific recommendations shall be provided for any construction proposed between October to March. Tree removal and initial ground-disturbing activities shall be limited to the period of September 15 to February 1. B-6(c) Educational Pet Brochure. Any development pursuant to the Specific Plan shall prepare a brochure that informs prospective homebuyers and Home Owners Association (HOA) members about the impacts associated with non- native animals, especially cats and dogs, to the project site; similarly, the brochure must inform potential homebuyers and all HOA members of the potential for coyotes to prey on domestic animals. B-6(c) Landscaping Plan Review. To ensure that project landscaping does not introduce invasive non-native plant and tree species to the region of the site, the final landscaping plan shall be reviewed and approved by a qualified biologist. The California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC) maintains several lists of the most important invasive plants to avoid. The lists shall be used when creating a plant palette for landscaping to ensure that plants on the lists are not used. The following plants shall not be allowed as part of potential landscaping plans pursuant to development under the Specific Plan: • African sumac (Rhus lancea) • Australian saltbush (Atriplex semibaccata) • Black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) • California pepper (Schinus molle) and Brazilian pepper (S. terebinthifolius) • Cape weed (Arctotheca calendula) • Cotoneaster (Cotoneaster pannosus), (C. lacteus) • Edible fig (Ficus carica) • Fountain grass (Pennisetum setaceum) • French broom (Genista monspessulana) • Ice plant, sea fig (Carpobrotus edulis) • Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) PH2-136 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 22 Attachment 4 • Myoporum (Myoporum spp.) • Olive (Olea europaea) • Pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana), and Andean pampas grass (C. jubata) • Russian olive (Elaeagnus angusticifolia) • Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius) and striated broom (C. striatus) • Spanish broom (Spartium junceum) • Tamarix, salt cedar (Tamarix chinensis), (T. gallica), (T. parviflora), (T. ramosissima) • Blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) • Athel tamarisk (Tamarix aphylla)  B -3, B-6 Monitoring Program: Compliance with mitigation measures will be reviewed with landscaping plans as part of the architectural review submittal and ultimately shown on improvement plans and construction drawings. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource as defined in §15064.5. 1 --X-- b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5) 1 --X-- c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? 1 --X-- d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? 1 --X-- Evaluation The proposed General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan amendments focus on (a) modification of the Righetti Hill URL placement, (b) reorientation of various land uses with no significant increase in residential densities or loss of open space , parks and wetlands mitigation areas, and (c) addition of administrative “tracking” details for the OASP’s user reference. These amendments do not have any physical effect on the Cultural Resources of the Planning Area. a-b) The OASP EIR included an on-site survey of the Righetti and Jones Ranch project area and no historic or archeological resources were identified in 2010. A more recent survey was conducted that suggests the Righetti Ranch homestead is eligible to be placed on the City’s Historic Resources List. This site is outside the proposed Tract 3063 development areas. In particular, the adjustment of the URL and reorientation of the parks, open space and residential land uses do not impact identified cultural sites or resources. Development of the site will be subject to course of development and construction mitigation monitoring requirements contained in the OASP and OASP EIR to address any unknown subsurface resources which may be discovered during grading operation of the site. Therefore there is no impact. c-d) The VTM#3063 and VTM#3066 project sites are located in an area that does not contain any unique geological feature and possesses no known unique paleontological resources. The project area has been part of two general cultural resource field surveys. As a result of these field surveys, there are no known historical or archaeological resources that are associated with the project site. Therefore there is no impact. REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS CULTURAL RESOURCES MITIGATION CR-1(d) Archaeological Resource Construction Monitoring. At the co mmencement of project construction, PH2-137 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 23 Attachment 4 an orientation meeting shall be conducted by an archaeologist for construction workers associated with earth disturbing procedures. The orientation meeting shall describe the possibility of exposing unexpected archaeological resources and directions as to what steps are to be taken if such a find is encountered. An archaeologist shall monitor construction vegetation removal and initial rough grading. In the event that prehistoric or historic archaeological resources are exposed during this early phase of project construction, all earth disturbing work must be temporarily suspended or redirected until an archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find. After the find has been appropriately mitigated (e.g., curation, preservation in place, etc.), work in the area may resume. The City should consider retaining a Chumash representative to monitor any field work associated with Native American cultural material. If human remains are exposed, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. In the event that vegetation removal and initial rough grading yield no findings of cultural resource materials, further monitoring shall not be required pursuant to FEIR Mitigation Measure CR -1(c). A monitoring report shall be provided to the City at the conclusion of this work task.  CR-1 Monitoring Program: Requirements for cultural resource mitigation shall be clearly noted on all plans for project grading and construction. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: 1 --X-- I. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. 1 --X-- II. Strong seismic ground shaking? 1 --X-- III. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 1 --X-- IV. Landslides? 1 --X-- b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 1 --X-- c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on or off site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? 1 --X-- d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1802.3.2 of the California Building Code (2007), creating substantial risks to life or property? 1 --X-- e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? 1 --X-- PH2-138 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 24 Attachment 4 Evaluation a-e) The OASP Final EIR found that all the above-stated possible effects from implementation of the OASP would be less than significant and therefore the OASP FEIR conducted no further evaluations. The proposed General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan amendments focus on (a) modification of the Righetti Hill URL placement, (b) reorientation of various land uses with no significant increase in residential densities or loss of open space, parks and wetlands mitigation areas, and (c) addition of administrative “tracking” details for the OASP’s user reference. These amendments will have no adverse effect on geologic and soils resources, and therefore no impact. The preliminary grading plan for Righetti Ranch proposes a modest level of export (approximately 11,000 cubic yards) largely resulting from the import of non-expansive fill materials for utilities. The preliminary grading plan for Jones Ranch proposes a modest level of export (approximately 10,000 cubic yards) also resulting from the import of non -expansive fill materials for utilities. The export quantities will be subject to refinement as the final grading plans are developed for Tract 3063 and 3066. The preliminary grading design also minimizes the need for tall retaining walls, and generally respects site contours. The final grading plan of the proposed subdivision will be in accordance with the Geotechnical Engineer’s recommendations and the California Building Code adopted by the City and modified by City regulations. Thus, the project impacts are less than significant. 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? 1 --X-- b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? 1, 5 --X-- Evaluation a-b) In addition to the analysis regarding Air Quality impacts, the OASP EIR also included a discussion of strategies for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and provided a project -specific emissions inventory. The City does not have specific adopted project thresholds for GHGs, but did recently adopt a Climate Action Plan (CAP), which like the aforementioned OASP EIR section on GHGs, provides guidance on project design and other sustainable practices to reduce emissions. The proposed General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan amendments focus on (a) modification of the Righetti Hill URL placement, (b) reorientation of various land uses with no significant increase in residential densities or loss of o pen space, parks and wetlands mitigation areas, and (c) addition of administrative “tracking” details for the OASP’s user reference. These amendments will not generate greenhouse gases, and therefore no impact. The applicant completed a Climate Action Plan compliance checklist (See Source 14) for each subdivision which outlines the many design features of the project that constitute a qualified GHG reduction strategy. The project is consistent with FEIR guidance on reducing GHGs as well as the CAP; therefore, the impact is less than significant. 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? 1 --X-- b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? 1 --X-- c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter 1 --X-- PH2-139 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 25 Attachment 4 mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it creat e a significant hazard to the public or the environment? 1 --X-- e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 6 --X-- f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 6 --X-- g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 1, 2 --X-- h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of lose loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 1, 2 --X-- Evaluation The proposed General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan amendments focus on (a) modification of the Righetti Hill URL placement, (b) reorientation of various land uses with no significant increase in residential densities or loss of open space, parks and wetlands mitigation areas, and (c) addition of administrative “tracking” details for the OASP’s user reference. These amendments will not result in development in or around hazards or hazardous conditions, and therefore no impact. a), b), d): The OASP FEIR determined no hazardous materials, substances or waste exist on the subject site. Thus there is no impact. c) The Righetti and Jones project sites are not located within a one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. Thus there is no impact. Note: The OASP provides for the possibility of a school site being located in the Planning Area, but to date San Luis Coastal USD has not indicated the need for, or a desire to locate, a school in the Orcutt Planning Area. e) The project sites are not located on properties which are included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuan t to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Thus, there is no impact. f) The project sites are located in the vicinity of the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport, and subject to the County Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP). In its adoption of the OASP, the City Council found the OASP to be consistent with the ALUP, and ultimately received the endorsement of the Airport Land Use Commission. The OASP includes performance standards for avigation easements for tracts (3.5.2g) and real estate disclosures to potential owners and renters. The tract map permit conditions include these requirements as conditions of approval. Therefore, because VTM#3063 and VTM#3066 and proposed uses and densities are compliant with the OASP, and the project will be conditioned per the OASP performance standards; there is not a significant impact. g) The Righetti and Jones Ranch projects and their proposed circulation and land use plans have been reviewed by the Fire Marshal who has recommended conditions of approval which will assure compliance with adopted fire/emergency-related codes. The projects as designed will not impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, the adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plans of the City. Thus there is no impact. h) The project site is not in an area identified as subject to wildland fire hazards. Thus there is no impact. PH2-140 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 26 Attachment 4 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? 1 --X-- b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g. the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? 1 --X-- c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through t he alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site? 1 --X-- d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off site? 7 --X-- e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 7 --X-- f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 1 --X-- g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? 8 --X-- h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? 8 --X-- i) Expose people or structures to significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? 8 --X-- j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 3 --X-- Evaluation The proposed General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan amendments focus on (a) modification of the Righetti Hill URL placement, (b) reorientation of various land uses with no significant increase in residential densities or loss of open space , parks and wetlands mitigation areas, and (c) addition of administrative “tracking” details for the OASP’s user reference. These amendments will not result in development that will violate any water quality or hydrology standards already established by t he OASP and various referenced city regulations. Thus there is no impact. a), f) VTM’s #3063 and #3066 will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. According to the certified OASP FEIR, development associated with the project will require issuance of an NPDES general construction activity storm water permit by the Central Coast RWQCB. Completion of these projects would ensure that construction- related discharges are limited or adequately accommodated by properly engineered infrastructure design. Thus, the impact is considered less than significant. Because ongoing use of the project area for residential and commercial uses would also increase the potential for discharge of chemicals, oils and fuels, and waste into projected waterways; the requirement for the implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) must be established to greatly reduce the potential for unwanted runoff. Therefore, implementation of the BMPs on the project will reduce the impact to a less than significant level. PH2-141 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 27 Attachment 4 b) The Righetti and Jones Ranch projects will be served by the City’s sewer and water systems and will not use or deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. Thus, there is no impact. c), d), e) According to the FEIR, construction of the proposed projects as part of the OASP would result in an increase of impervious surfaces that would cause the timing and amount of surface water runoff to increase. However, the projects are subject to the City’s Storm Drain Master Plan/Waterway Management Plan that discusses the necessary improvements that would ensure adequate transmission and detention of storm water flow created by any new development and thus potential impacts resulting from increased development–related run-off was determined by the OASP FEIR to be less than significant, and no mitigation required. To ensure that runoff levels will be equal to or less than existing levels, all storm water runo ff will be contained in detention facilities and basins within the subdivision and drained at a rate not to exceed the 2-year undeveloped flow rate. The design, location, and maintenance of the detention facilities and basins will be subject to the approval of th e City Engineer. Thus, the impact of the subdivision projects are less than significant. g-j) The projects do not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) or other flo od hazard delineation map or may impede or redirect water flows that will cause a flood hazard to surrounding areas. The subject sites are not in a location where it would be susceptible to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Thus there is no impac t. 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? 1 --X-- b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? 3 --X-- c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? 3 --X-- Evaluation a-c) The proposed General and Specific Plan amendments will facilitate a variety of new residential units in accordance with the OASP, and consistent with appropriate land planning techniques. The amendments improve the provisio n of this housing consistent with the OASP, and is therefore is a logical and orderly extension of the planned land uses per the OASP and is compatible with established development within the surrounding area. No HCP’s or NCCP’s are applicable to the Planning Area. Thus there is no impact. a) The Righetti and Jones Ranch projects will create a variety of new residential units consistent with the OASP. Therefore, the projects will not physically divide an established community because it is a logical and orderly extension of the planned land uses per the OASP and is compatible with established development within the surrounding area. There is no impact. b) The projects are planned and designed consistent with OASP land use designations for Low, Medium and Medium-High Density Residential (for Righetti Ranch; VTM#3063) and Low, Medium, Medium-High and High-Density Residential and Mixed Use Community Commercial (for Jones Ranch; VTM#3066). The distribution of units across the sites and the lot designs proposed with the subdivisions are consistent with the applicable land use designations. Thus, there is no impact. c) The project sites are not located within a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Thus, there is no impact. (See related discussion above under Part 4. Biological Resources.) PH2-142 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 28 Attachment 4 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? 1, 5 --X-- b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? 1 --X-- Evaluation The proposed General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan amendments focus on (a) modification of the Righetti Hill URL placement, (b) reorientation of various land uses with no significant increase in residential densities or loss of open space , parks and wetlands mitigation areas, and (c) addition of administrative “tracking” details for the OASP’s user reference. These amendments will not result in development that will violate any water quality or hydrology standards already established by t he OASP and various referenced city regulations. Future development of the site must comply with the policies contained in the General Plan Energy Element, and these amendments will not have any effect on minerals of statewide significance. Thus there is no impact. a-b) The subdivision projects will not conflict with adopted energy conservation plans nor will it promote the use of non- renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner. The development of the sites must comply with the policies contained in the General Plan Energy Element that states: “New development will be encouraged to minimize the use of conventional energy for space heating and cooling, water heating, and illumination by means of proper design and orientation, including the provision and protection of solar exposure.” The projects will also be subject to Architectural Review that will ensure consistency with City energy conservation goals, policies, and regulations. This impact is less than significant. c) There are no known mineral resources on the project sites that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State. Thus, there is no impact. 12. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? 1, 3 --X-- b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? 1 --X-- c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 1 --X-- d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 1 --X-- e) For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 1, 6 --X-- 1, 6 --X-- Evaluation a-f) The proposed General and Specific Plan amendments will not change any noise standards or noise mitigation measures as required under the OASP, FEIR and Airport Land Use Plan. Thus, there is no impact. *Note Re: a-f) … pertaining to the Righetti Ranch, VTM#3063 proposal According to the OASP FEIR, the proposed project is located in an area zoned for residential land uses that are predicted to PH2-143 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 29 Attachment 4 be exposed to traffic noise levels that exceed the Noise Element standard of 60 decibels (dB). This is particularly true fo r lots adjacent to the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, as well as Orcutt and Tank Farm Roads, each of which carries large volumes of traffic. Consequently, to reduce the effects of such traffic related noise to sensitive residential receptors, th e OASP established goals, policies and programs to reduce noise exposure of new sensitive receptors within the Orcutt Area to meet City Standards. The Specific Plan includes a specific program to contribute to mitigating cumulative impacts. Implementation of the program must occur prior to home occupancy for development pursuant to the Specific Plan. Regardless, noise impacts were determined significant and unavoidable impact in the OASP FEIR and corresponding Overriding Considerations were considered and approved. In the specific case of the UPRR tracks on the western boundary of Tract 3063, the FEIR and OASP noted that residential lots fronting these tracks should be set back sufficient distances to achieve 60 dB’s or less in outdoor activity areas. There ar e two (2) areas within Tract 3063 that adjoin the UPRR tracks. OASP Program 4.5.1(a) establishes a 160’ minimu m setback (measured from the center line of the UPRR right -of-way) for lots proposed in the “C” Street area of Tract 3063, and a 208’ setback for lots fronting “D-3” Street. In the case of “C” Street, a minimum 220’ setback is proposed, complying with Program 4.5.1(a). In the case of “D-3” Street, a 120’ setback is proposed, which is less that required by the OASP and FEIR. To address this, the applicant completed a Sound Level Assessment (Reference Source 10) that updated train traffic and noise level projections, and determined that exterior noise levels along the property line of proposed Lots 157 -167 would not exceed the 60dB threshold. Therefore, as proposed, Tract 3063 complies with the OASP FEIR, and therefore there is no impact. b) The Righetti and Jones Ranch projects will not expose people to the generation of excessive ground -borne noise levels or vibrations. Thus, there is no impact. c) Site development for VTM#3063 and VTM#3066 will result in increases in ambient noise levels, but not to significant levels, since by operation of mitigation requirements set forth in a) above, noise increases that would affect ambient levels are to be reduced to thresholds determined to be acceptable in residential areas. Therefore, impacts to permanent ambient noise levels are less than significant. d) Project construction or other temporary or periodic noise generation may result in temporary increases (spikes) in ambient noise levels. Since there is no way to predict the origin or duration of these t ypes of noise sources for these developments, it can only be regulated if found to be a nuisance by the City’s Noise Ordinance. The projects by reference acknowledge that each will comply with Mitigation Measure N-1 (a) which references the City’s Noise Ordinance in terms of construction hours and techniques to reduce noise levels. Thus, the impact is less than significant. e) The projects are located in the vicinity of the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport, and are subject to the County Airport Land Use Plan. According to the prior OASP FEIR, the project is not within dBA-CNEL contour lines caused by the Regional Airport. The OASP FEIR and Plan finds the impact is adverse, but less than significant. REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS NOISE MITIGATION N-1(a) Compliance with City Noise Ordinance. Construction hours and noise levels shall be compliant with the City Noise Ordinance [Municipal Code Chapter 9.12, Section 9.12.050(6)]. Methods to reduce construction noise can include, but are not limited to, the following:  Equipment Shielding. Stationary construction equipment that generates noise can be shielded with a barrier.  Diesel Equipment. All diesel equipment can be operated with closed engine doors and equipped with factory-reco mmended mufflers.  Electrical Power. Whenever feasible, electrical power can be used to run air compressors and PH2-144 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 30 Attachment 4 similar power tools.  Sound Blankets. The use of sound blankets on noise generating equipment.  N-1 Monitoring Program: Requirements for construction noise mitigation shall be clearly noted on all plans for project grading and construction. 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? 1 --X-- b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 1 --X— 1 --X-- Evaluation: The proposed General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan amendments focus on (a) modification of the Righetti Hill URL placement, (b) reorientation of various land uses with no significant increase in residential densities or loss of open space, parks and wetlands mitigation areas, and (c) of administrative “tracking” details for the OASP’s user reference. a) The added population growth projected for the Orcutt Planning Area is within the General Plan’s projection and will not result in population exceeding local and regional growth projections. Therefore, the impact of inducing substantial population growth to the planning area would be less than significant. b-c) No displacement of residents will result from the proposed amendments. The project site is substantially undeveloped, with only the three existing homestead units (two on Jones; one on Righetti). These homestead sites will be retained by the owners, so no displacement will occur. Thus, there is no impact. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the con struction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? 1 --X-- b) Police protection? 1 --X-- c) Schools? 9 --X-- d) Parks? 1 --X-- e) Other public facilities? 1 --X-- Evaluation a), b), d), e) The OASP EIR determined that implementation and build out of the OASP will not result in any significant impacts related to any of the above-listed services due to the ability to offset service needs through the City’s Development Impact Fee program established via the City General Plan and augmented by the development fee program in the OASP; therefore, the conclusion was that no further mitigation was necessary. Because the proposed GP and SP amendments will not alter the provision of fire, police, parks and other public facilities, there is no impact. c) The OASP includes reference to a possible school site on the Righetti site. It is incumbent on San Luis Coastal USD to identify the need for a new site, and to initiate discussions with property owners, and failing that avenue, instead opting to PH2-145 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 31 Attachment 4 collect school impact fees for the District. State authority to collect fees at the time of building permits to offset the costs to finance school site acquisition and school construction, and said fees, when collected by local school districts, are deemed by State law to provide adequate mitigation for school facility requirements. Section 65955 of the Gover nment Code prohibits the City from denying a subdivision or collecting any fees beyond those required by the school district to mitigate effects associated with inadequate school facilities. Any increases in demand on school facilities caused by future development projects in the Orcutt Area are considered to be mitigated by the District’s collection of adopted fees at the time of building permit issuance for each residence and commercial building. Thus, there is no impact. REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS PUBLIC SERVICES MITIGATION (SPECIFIC TO JONES RANCH; VTM#3066) PS-4 Wastewater Main System Extensions. Prior to recordation of a final map for Jones Ranch (TR 3066), the improvement plans for the tract shall include connections to future imp rovements planned by Tract 3063 (Righetti Ranch) to convey sanitary sewer service to the existing connection points on Tank Farm Road. Prior to recordation of Tract 3066, (a) the needed improvements through Tract 3063 shall be completed and available to tie-in Tract 3066, or (b) Tract 3066 shall provide easements and financial guarantees that guarantee Tract 3066 can proceed with construction of Tract 3063 improvements to serve the Jones Ranch.  PS-4 Monitoring Program: Compliance will be reviewed and implemented by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and accompanying final map prior to recordation of the final map. 15. RECREATION. a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? 1 --X-- b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 1 --X-- Evaluation: a-b) The proposed GP and SP amendments would have the effect of reorienting parks and open space within the Planning Area by realigning the parks in areas that were previously identified as residential development. No net loss of park lands or open space would result from the land use changes proposed. The timing and nature of public parklands would not be altered by these amendments. Thus, no impact to recreation facilities would occur. The build-out of the Righetti and Jones projects will add to the demand for parks and other recreational facilities. The OASP has anticipated this demand by designating certain sites within the Plan area for a “Neighborhood Park” for active recreation al use and other areas for “Open Space” for more passive recreation/aesthetic amenities (e.g. walking or bicycling paths and trails) intended more for use by adjacent or nearby residents. The following graphics from the Vesting Tract Map application package describe these parks, recreation and trails improvements in more detail. PH2-146 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 32 Attachment 4 Righetti Ranch VTM#3063: Tract 3063 provides such community park amenities totaling 14.24 acres. Tract 3063 complies with Figure 2.4 in the OASP, which shows the overall Open Space and Parks Plan. The subdivision additionally proposes internal pedestrian and bicycle paths. These features were incorporated to provide subdivision residents pedestrian oriented access to parkland and paths during build-out of the overall specific plan. With these on-site amenities, future residents are not dependent on build-out of other parcels for providing nearby park facilities. The OASP FEIR determined that while build -out of the OASP will generate increased demand for recreational facilities, the impact is less than significant with the development of additional parks and open space per the OASP. Thus, the construction of the project will have a positive impact on parks or other recreational facilities. Jones Ranch VTM#3066: Figure 2.4 in the OASP shows the overall Open Space and Parks Plan. This plan designates the option for local parkland dedication on the project site to compliment the project’s participation in Specific Plan area -wide park improvements, to meet the needs of the project. OASP Policy 2.3.4 states: “Provide property owners within the Orcutt Area that want to provide parkland on their properties an opportunity to do so through the subdivision review process.” Consistent with the aforementioned plan and policy, the applicant is proposing an approximately one-acre park in the western portion of the project site. The subdivision additionally proposes internal pedestrian and bicycle paths. These features were incorporated to provide subdivision residents pedestrian oriented access to parkland and paths during build-out of the overall specific plan. With these on-site amenities, future residents are not dependent on build-out of other parcels for providing nearby park facilities. The OASP FEIR determined that while build-out of the OASP will generate increased demand for recreational facilities, the impact is less than significant with the development of additional parks and open space per the OASP. Thus, the construction of the project will have a less than significant impact on parks or other recreational facilities. PH2-147 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 33 Attachment 4 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? 1 --X-- b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? 1 --X-- c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? 1 --X-- d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? 1 --X-- e) Result in inadequate emergency access? 1 --X-- f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? 1 --X-- Evaluation a-f) The proposed General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan amendments focus on (a) modification of the Righetti Hill URL placement, (b) reorientation of various land uses with no significant increase in residential densities or loss of open space, parks and wetlands mitigation areas, and (c) addition of administrative “tracking” details for the OASP’s user reference. The proposed changes in land use patterns will cause alterations to both internal roadway alignments, access points to the existing surrounding street network, and to the class I bike path system. No changes in allowable Specific Plan residential and commercial densities are proposed that would necessitate updates or revisions to the transportation analysis included with the 2010 OASP FEIR. However mitigation measure T-3a of the OASP does require additional study to be conducted to determine the appropriate location and type of traffic calming measures and control devices, these studies have been completed and the appropriate mitigation is established below. Righetti Ranch VTM#3063: Tract 3063 will generate 2,675 Average Daily Trips (ADT’s) at buildout, as projected by the OASP FEIR. 304 residentia l units would generate 365 Peak Hour Trips (PHT’s) in and out of the Orcutt Planning Area. These projections are consistent with the Traffic Study included with the OASP FEIR. However the following mitigation items shall be incorporated to address potential safety hazards and conflicts with adopted policies and plans: The FEIR established a series of mitigation measures that were project -specific, as well as Traffic Improvement Fee (TIF) programs to collect “fair share” impact fees from new development t hat would be combined and used by the City to fund area traffic improvements. Incorporating those impact mitigation requirements into conditions of approval for Tract 3063 will resolve any possible impacts to OASP and regional traffic conditions, thereby resulting in a finding of ‘no impact’. Notable mitigation measures to be implemented as part of Righetti Ranch/Tract 3063 (as called for under the OASP and FEIR) include road widening and signalization of Orcutt Road as it intersects with Tank Farm Road, participation in area-wide and city-wide traffic improvement fee programs, as well as construction of internal arterial and collector roads to tie into OASP Circulati on Plan requirements. The Circulation Plan of the OASP (as well as the Circulation Element of the City General Plan) identifies the essential primary road system that will be needed to accommodate development within the plan area and surrounding PH2-148 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 34 Attachment 4 growth areas of the City. The OASP FEIR determined that the roadway plans of these planning docume nts are for the most part self-mitigating in that 1) Roadway alignments, road extensions, and new intersections are designed and will be built in response to traffic projected at build-out; and, 2) Development projects in the OASP areas will also contribut e their fair share either through adopted Traffic Impact Fees, OASP development impact fees, assessments or dedications to specified roadway improvements. The FEIR called for additional traffic analysis of access points to determine appropriate design and control, this additional analysis was completed in august of 2014 identifying potential impacts with neighborhood traffic and safety at various intersections. This analysis however identified traffic calming measures, alignments and control types that wo uld reduce these potential impacts to less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Those measures are as follows. 1. Either align centerlines of E-2 Street & Hanson Lane & provide side street stop control with TWLT lanes on Orcutt or design an alternative connection at a distance from Hanson Lane that does not create a functional area overlap between the two intersections. 2. Align Street B with the existing alignment of Tiburon Way and design the roadway curvature to maintain appropriate residential speeds. 3. Provide required frontage improvements along Tank Farm Road & Orcutt Road. 4. Provide raised intersections at D&D-4 Streets and C&C-3 Streets. 5. Provide single lane urban compact roundabout control at intersection D & Tank Farm with speed reduction curves and at intersection A & B. 6. Provide side street stop control at E & Orcutt Intersection. The OASP has already been found to not conflict with the San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP). Therefore, as the subject project complies with the pertinent requirements of the OASP regarding allowed land uses and development densities and standards, the project is not in conflict with the ALUP. Thus, there is no impact from this projec t. c), d) The Orcutt Area Specific Plan requires that the project pr ovide roadways that are designed and developed in accordance with adopted City standards thereby assuring predetermined standards necessary to limit safety hazards and provide adequate emergency access. The VTM #3063 includes resolution of these issues, and conditions of approval to implement use of these mitigation and design standards. Thus, there is a less than significant impact as a result of the project with incorporation of the mitigation measures identified above. e) The project is subject to the City’s subdivision design guidelines and fire access requirements, as well as the various circulation improvements outlined in the OASP for each land use and ownership. The project build -out is required to fulfill all necessary circulation system requirements, thus there is no impact. f) The project provides improvements to implement the City adopted policies to encourage alternative means of transportation. The project includes pedestrian paths and bicycle paths, and will be served by mass transit in the area. Additional improvements to permit a continuous Class I bike path on “C” Street leading to Tank Farm Road will resolve potential conflicts with transitions from Class II to Class I facilities on the creek crossing. These provisions meet or exceed the requirements called for in the OASP. Thus, there is no impact. Jones Ranch VTM#3066: Tract 3066 will generate 973 Average Daily Trips (ADT’s) at buildout, as projected by the OASP FEIR. 65 residential units would generate 116 Peak Hour Trips (PHT’s) in and out of the Orcutt Planning Area. These projections are consistent with the Traffic Study included with the OASP FEIR. The FEIR established a series of mitigation measures that were project - specific, as well as Traffic Improvement Fee (TIF) programs to collect “fair share” impact fees from new development that would be combined and used by the City to fund area traffic improvements. Incorporating those impact mitigation requirements into conditions of approval for Tract 3066 and incorporating the mitigation measures identified above will PH2-149 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 35 Attachment 4 resolve any possible impacts to OASP and regional traffic conditions, thereby resulting in a finding of ‘less than significant impact with mitigation incorporate’. The OASP has already been found to not conflict with the San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP). Therefore, as the subject project complies with the pertinent requirements of the OASP regarding allowed land uses and development densities and standards, the project is not in conflict with the ALUP. The FEIR also called for additional traffic analysis of access points to determine appropriate design and control, this addit ional analysis was completed in august of 2014 identifying potential impacts with neighborhood traffic and safety at various intersections. This analysis however identified traffic calming measures, alignments and control types that would reduce thes e potential impacts to less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Those measures are as follows. 1. Class I bike paths shall be redesigned to be consistent with OASP Figure 5.1 & 2013 Bicycle Transportation Plan. These Class I bike paths shall be aligned and connected with the bike paths design as part of the Taylor/Wingate project. 2. Provide single lane urban roundabout control at the intersection of A & B Streets. 3. Implement measure 2 above. 4. Eliminate mid-block crosswalk on Street A 5. Align curb, gutter and sidewalk with Sponza Drive of the Taylor/Wingate project. The Circulation Plan of the OASP (as well as the Circulatio n Element of the City General Plan) identifies the essential primary road system that will be needed to accommodate development within the plan area and surrounding growth areas of the City. The OASP FEIR determined that the roadway plans of these planning documents are for the most part self-mitigating in that 1) Roadway alignments, road extensions, and new intersections are designed and will be built in response to traffic projected at build-out; and, 2) Development projects in the OASP areas will also contribute their fair share either through adopted Traffic Impact Fees, OASP development impact fees, assessments or dedications to specified roadway improvements. c), d) The Orcutt Area Specific Plan requires that the project provide roadways that are de signed and developed in accordance with adopted City standards thereby assuring predetermined standards necessary to limit safety hazards and provide adequate emergency access. e) The project is subject to the City’s parking requirements as it is outlined in the OASP for each land use. The project build- out is required to fulfill all necessary parking requirements, which includes a 25% “shared use” parking reduction for the mixed-use commercial area, recognizing economies in parking servicing more than 1 commercial business. The shared use proposal for parking reduction is consistent with City zoning standards and the OASP. Thus, there is no impact. g) The project provides improvements to implement the City adopted policies to encourage alternative means of transportation. The project includes pedestrian paths and bicycle paths, and will be served by mass transit in the area. These provisions meet or exceed the requirements called for in the OASP. Thus, there is no impact. REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION (SPECIFIC TO RIGHETTI RANCH; VTM#3063) T-1(a) Orcutt Road/Tank Farm Road Intersection Improvements. A 200’ right-turn lane on the southbound Orcutt Road approach to Tank Farm Road shall be installed with Phase 1 Tract 3063 improvements.  T-1(a) Monitoring Program: Compliance will be reviewed and implemented by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and shall be completed prior to issuance of any building permits for Phase 1 of Tract 3063. PH2-150 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 36 Attachment 4 T-2(d) Orcutt Road/Tank Farm Road Intersection Signalization. Applicant shall provide right-of-way as necessary as a part of Phase 1 Tract 3063 improvements, and pay “fair share” TIF contributions.  T-2(d) Monitoring Program: Compliance will be addressed by (1) dedication of right-of-way as needed for signalization at the time of final map recordation and (2) payment of TIF fees at time of issuance of building permits for Tract 3063. T-3 Street E-2 & Hanson Lane Alignment. Either align centerlines of E-2 Street & Hanson Lane with side street stop control and a Two Way Left Turn Lane or redesign with an alternative connection at a distance from Hanson Lane that does not create a functional area overlap between the two intersections.  T-3 Monitoring Program: Compliance will be reviewed and implemented by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and shall be completed prior to issuance of any building permits for Phase 1 of Tract 3063. T-4 mitigation measure moved to Jones Ranch VTM#30 66 T-5 Tank Farm & Orcutt Frontage Improvements . Design and install frontage improvements along Tank Farm Road & Orcutt Road, providing pedestrian access along both street frontages and the connecting gap.  T-5 Monitoring Program: Compliance will be reviewed and implemented by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and shall be completed prior to issuance of any building permits for Phase 1 of Tract 3063. T-6 Traffic Calming & Safety Measures. Provide raised intersections at D& D4 Streets and C&C3 Streets. Provide single lane urban compact roundabout control at intersection D & Tank Farm with speed reduction curves and at intersection A & B. Provide side street stop control at Street E & Orcutt Road Intersection.  T-6 Monitoring Program: Compliance will be reviewed and implemented by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and shall be completed prior to issuance of any building permits for Phase 1 of Tract 3063. TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION (SPECIFIC TO JONES RANCH; VTM#3066) T-1 Street B & Tiburon Way Alignment. Align Street B with the existing alignment of Tiburon Way and design the roadway curvature to maintain appropriate residential speeds.  T-1 Monitoring Program: PH2-151 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 37 Attachment 4 Compliance will be reviewed and implemented by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and accompanying final map prior to recordation of the final map. T-2 Class I Bike Paths. Class I bike paths shall be redesigned to be consistent with OASP Figure 5.1 & 2013 Bicycle Transportation Plan. These Class I path shall be aligned and connected with the bike paths designed as part of the Taylor/Wingate project.  T-2 Monitoring Program: Compliance will be reviewed and implemented by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and accompanying final map prior to recordation of the final map. T-3 Traffic Calming & Safety. Intersection of Streets A & B shall be controlled by a single lane urban compact intersection. Eliminate Mid-block crosswalk on Street A. Align curb, gutter, and sidewalk with Sponza Drive of the Taylor Wingate Project.  T-3 Monitoring Program: Compliance will be reviewed and implemented by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and accompanying final map prior to recordation of the final map. T-4 Street B & Tiburon Way Alignment. Align Street B with the existing alignment of Tiburon Way and design the roadway curvature to maintain appropriate residential speeds.  T-4 Monitoring Program: Compliance will be reviewed and implemented by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and shall be completed prior to issuance of any building permits for Phase 1 of Tract 3066. 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? 1 --X-- b) Require or result in the construction or expansion of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 1, 21 --X-- c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 1 --X-- d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new and expanded entitlements needed? 1 --X-- e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? 1 --X-- PH2-152 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 38 Attachment 4 f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? 1 --X-- g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? 1 --X-- Evaluation The proposed GP and OASP amendments will not generate any changes in utility services. Thus, there is no impact. a-c) The OASP FEIR determined that implementation and build-out of the OASP will not result in any significant impacts related to delivery of domestic water, wastewater collection or treatment, or storm water drainage/retention and concluded that such impacts related to build-out of the OASP were less than significant and no mitigation was deemed necessary. Build- out under the OASP will be similar to that anticipated and projected in the City General Plan. The Righetti and Jones projec ts propose to provide all water, sewer, and storm drain facilities necessary to adequately serve the subject projects, including distribution, collection and other infrastructure capacity as required by the OASP facility master plan and the City’s Storm Drain Master Plan/Waterway Management Plan. There is no new evidence that the subject projects, as delineated by the OASP, will result in any adverse impacts to these service systems nor exceed RWQCB wastewater treatment requirements , with the potential exception of meeting minimum fire flow and storage capacity for the residential and commercial uses. Related to delivery of domestic water to the subject projects, new information developed after the FEIR was certified and after the Orcutt Area Specific Plan was adopted (in 2010) is now available from the City’s 2015 Water Master Plan and hydraulic model related to the provision of water service to the Orcutt Specific Plan Area. To serve the area with adequate fire flow (1,500 gpm for residential areas, 2,500 gpm for commercial areas), and average daily storage requirements, a 12-inch water main needs to be extended from the Bishop pressure zone at the intersection of Johnson and Southwood Drive in a south/southeast direction to the intersection of Orcutt Road and B Street. A 12-inch water main will also need to be extended west to Orcutt and A Street. Under City fire and safety standards, these improvements will be required prior to occupancy of any new residential or commercial uses. Adequate fire flow and storage, based on the extension into the subject projects, is available in Bishop Tank for the development of the Orcutt Specific Plan area. Mitigation Measure USS-1 is included to address the timing of these offsite improvements in conjunction with the Tract 3063 and 3066 development projects. In addition to the on-site utility service infrastructure required with the developments, the subdivision projects are subject to City and OASP established Development Impact Fees that are charged in conjunction with approval of development projects to offset costs associated wit h water supply, water treatment, and wastewater treatment . Thus, regarding water and wastewater treatment, there is no impact. To fully resolve fire flow and storage limitations, proposed mitigation measure USS-1 will result in less than significant impacts. d) Provisions in the City General Plan, specifically the Water and Wastewater Management Element, and OASP insure that increased water use by new development will not cause inadequate water service to existing and future customers. These projects are also subject to water impact fees which were adopted to ensure that new development pays its share of constructing additional infrastructure needed to support additional facilities. More specifically, the projects are subject to the citywide water impact fees. Thus, compliance with the City and State standards and requirements will assure that impacts related to water supplies are less than significant. e) The City wastewater treatment plant and existing and proposed sewer lines in the vicinity and within the Jones and Righetti project sites have sufficient capacity to serve the project site. The developer(s) will be required to construct on -site sewer facilities according to City and Uniform Plumbing Code standards. The project proposals includes int ernal collection lines and extension of main line wastewater lines generally to the south and west of the site, to connect the Planning Area to existing main line facilities at Tank Farm Road. From Tank Farm Road, wastewater generated by Tract 3063 will follow existing conveyance facilities to the City’s Water Resource Recovery Facility. Tract 3066 will necessarily require connection to infrastructure provided by Tract 3063. To this extent, Mitigation Measure PS -1 is included to tie construction of Tract 3066 to the availability of infrastructure through Tract 3063 (Righetti Ranch) to serve this Jones Ranch project. PH2-153 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 39 Attachment 4 Following submittals of detailed sewer analysis and numerous meetings and consultations with City Utilities Department staff, submitted proposals to provide sewer service for the project, relying on future connections for other nearby property owners was supported. Impact fees are also collected when building permits are issued to pay for capacity at the City’s Water Reclamation Facility. The fees are set to offset potential impacts associated with increases in demand and use by each new residential or commercial unit in the Jones and Righetti projects. Thus, there is no impact. f) Solid waste collection within the City will be provided by a private operator under a City franchise and disposal is expected to continue at Cold Canyon Landfill until 2018. The project must be consistent with the City’s Source Reduction and Recycling Element which requires that recycling facilities be accommo dated on the project site and a solid waste reduction plan for recycling discarded construction materials must be submitted with the building permit application. The projects are also required by the ordinance to include facilities for recycling to reduce the waste stream generated by each project. Thus, there is no impact. g) The projects will fully comply with existing federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. T hus, there is no impact. REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS MITIGATION USS-1 Off-site Water Main Line Extensions to the OASP To Meet Fire Flow and Storage Standards . Concurrent with applications for Final Map(s), the applicant shall submit a water supply plan to meet adequate fire flow standards for all lots within each Final Map. Implementation of such a water line extension plan shall be included as a part of public improvement plans for the subdivision, and approved by Utilities, Public Works and the City Engineer. This implementation plan may include a financing plan, including reimbursement provisions, approved by the City Council at the time of considering any Final Map. Required water main line extension(s) to the subdivision shall be completed and operational to the satisfaction of the Utilities Director, prior to occupancy of any of the residential and/or commercial uses.  USS-1 Monitoring Program: Compliance will be reviewed and implemented by the City Engineer’s office with the subdivision plans and shall be completed prior to issuance of any building permits for Tracts 3063 and/or 3066. 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? --X-- b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? --X-- PH2-154 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ER # TR3063, TR3066 (General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps) Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2015 40 Attachment 4 c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? --X-- Evaluation The proposed General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan amendments focus on (a) modification of the Righetti Hill URL placement, (b) reorientation of various land uses with no significant increase in residential densities or loss of open space, parks and wetlands mitigation areas, and (c) addition of administrative “tracking” details for the OASP’s user reference. These amendments do not generate any adverse physical effects on the environment, and as such, have no impact on the environment. a-c) As detailed herein, the various Final EIR and Orcutt Area Specific Plan requirements put in place in 2010 have been applied to the proposed residential and commercial developments associated with VTM #3063 (Righetti) and VTM#3066 (Jones). To the extent that subdivision designs that comply with these OASP design and FEIR mitigation standards, these projects can be found to be “self-mitigating”. Based on the evidence and materials submitted, the General Plan and Specific Plan amendments, VTM#3063 and VTM#3066 do not raise any CEQA issues requiring “mandatory” findings of significance. PH2-155 Attachment 4 GPA-SPA-ER-TR#3063/TR#3066 41 19. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case a discussion should identify the following items: a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. In 2010 the City of San Luis Obispo certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP). The proposed General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan amendments focus on (a) modification of the Righetti Hill URL placement, (b) reorientation of various land uses with no significant increase in residential densities or loss of open s pace, parks and wetlands mitigation areas, (c) deleting reference to a possible scho ol site, and (d) addition of administrative “tracking” details for the OASP’s user reference. Therefore, this prior OASP EIR evaluation considered impacts and mitigation related generally to potential development of the subject site and others pursuant to the OASP. The prior OASP EIR, certified by the City Council along with the adoption of the OASP on March 2, 2010, by Resolution No. 10154 (2010 Series), contained a variety of mitigation measures to be incorporated as discrete components of the OASP or a s policies or development standards to be implemented through site-specific development proposals. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) allows Lead Agencies (the City) to use the analysis of general matters contained in a broader EIR, such as for a general or specific plan, with later environmental documents incorporating by reference the general discussions from the broader EIR, and concentrating the initial study discussion solely on the issues specific to the later project. The environmental assessment approach is referred to as “tiering”. The environmental analyses above takes into account the environmental conclusions of the prior EIR as they are applicable to the proposed GP and SP amendments. The Orcutt Area Specific Plan and Final Program EIR is available for review at the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department, 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 and is also on the City’s website. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions of the project. 20. SOURCE REFERENCES. 1. Orcutt Area Specific Plan (March 2010), and Final FEIR (December 2009) 2. City of SLO Zoning Regulations (August 2012) 3. City of SLO Unified General Plan 4. 2014 “Righetti Ranch Visual Simulation”, RRM Design Group 5. City of SLO Climate Action Plan (August 2012) 6. Airport Land Use Plan amended May 2005 7. City Storm Drain Master Plan/Waterway Management Plan 8. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) 9. Section 65955 of the Government Code (State school fees) 10. 45db.com, David Lord Acoustics Consulting (May 2014) 11. Soils Engineering Report prepared by GeoSolutions (April 2013 – VTM#3063; May 2014 – VTM#3066) 12. Cannon Preliminary Drainage Report (May and August 2014) 13. Sewerage Calculations dated 14. Climate Action Plan compliance checklist for project 15. SLO County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) Referral Materials PH2-156 Attachment 4 GPA-SPA-ER-TR#3063/TR#3066 42 16. Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Tribal Consultation Referral Materials 17. Rincon “Biological Resources Assessment” for Righetti Ranch Tract 3063, July 2013 18. Rincon “Delineation of Jurisdictional Wetlands” for Righetti Ranch Tract 3063, June 2013 19. Rincon “Biological Resources Assessment” for Jones Ranch and Imel Property, August, 2014 20. Rincon ”Delineation of Jurisdictional Wetlands” for Jones Ranch and Imel Property, August, 2014 21. San Luis Obispo Water Master Plan (2015) PH2-157 GPA-OASP Amendments ATTACHMENT 5 Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063), Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) Page 1 Expanded Project Descriptions – Staff Analysis - CEQA Review Expanded Project Descriptions – Staff Analysis – CEQA Review Vesting Tract Map #3063 (Righetti) Proposed VTM#3063 includes a mix of low, medium and high density residential uses, parklands, open space and a regional storm water detention basin as required by the OASP. Proposed Project Gross Acreage Commercial Land Uses Residential Land Uses Proposed Parks & Open Space Righetti Ranch 143.83 acres none proposed 272 single family units 32 multi-family units 304 total residential 14.26 acres Parks 75.42 acres Open Space 89.68 acres (62.4%) Density assigned to the Righetti Ranch property under the OASP called for between 288-313 residential units. At 304 units, VTM#3063 is consistent with projected residential unit densities. VTM#3063 proposes to meet their affordable housing requirements by providing 32 of their required 41 affordable units on-site, with the remaining 9 units transferred to adjoining Jones VTM#3066. The OASP and Housing Element allow off-site affordable housing so long as it is timed to meet the needs of the underlying project creating the demand. Righetti proposes to meet these on-site requirements as a part of their Phase 2 project construction. While staff supports this physical location and timing, it is equally important to take note of OASP and Housing Element policies that encourage this housing to be developed early on in projects, and if possible in step with the main market-rate housing units. For example, it is appropriate to time affordable housing with the sequence of market-rate housing construction, recognizing that initial subdivision grading, infrastructure and other improvements need to be completed to begin the production of any housing at the site. In the context of Righetti Ranch, staff is recommending that financial guarantees be presented at the outset of the tract construction that would allow the affordable units to be deferred to the desired Phase 2 timing of the applicant. The form of these guarantees would be approved by the City Attorney and Community Development Director at the outset of the project. In the case of VTM#3063, Condition #110 is included to require the preparation and approval of an “Affordable Housing Agreement” by the City Council, to document the timing, guarantees and related details of the Righetti affordable housing program, to be required as a part of presentation of the initial Final Map for recordation. Righetti Conservation, Open Space and Recreation Staff Analysis: OASP Policies concerning Conservation, Open Space and Recreation are focused on protection of Righetti Hill, creeks, wetlands habitats and visual resources, while introducing a variety of parks and recreational uses for the residents of the Orcutt area. The various land use and development standards contained in the OASP result in about 1/3 rd of the planning area remaining in open space (80 acres). The Righetti Ranch proposal represents approximately 75.42 acres or over 94% of the total open space areas planned for the Specific Plan PH2-158 GPA-OASP Amendments ATTACHMENT 5 Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063), Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) Page 2 Expanded Project Descriptions – Staff Analysis - CEQA Review area. Similarly, the 14.26 acres of parklands included on the Righetti site represent 87% of the total parklands (16.30 acres) required by the OASP. Policies 2.2.1, 2.2.2 and 2.2.3 designate specific areas for creeks, wetlands, mitigation areas and riparian open space as a part of the overall OASP Planning Area. In the case of the Righetti Ranch proposal, 75.42 acres of open space are set aside as prescribed by the OASP to meet these goals within the property. These areas occur within Lots 327 (Righetti Homestead) and 328 (Righetti Hill) totaling 52.45 acres, and another 23 acres included as Lots 318-326, and the detention basin (Lot 317). Creeks and riparian corridors, including Barrandca Creek, occur in roughly the center of the site, extending through the site roughly between Orcutt and Tank Farm Roads. These open space lots and the creek corridor ties into the proposed Jones Ranch project to the north and the future Imel and Garay properties. Based on the presentation of VTM#3063, staff has analyzed the various configurations of open space and parkland improvements in order to provide recommendations on which properties should be dedicated in-fee to the city, and as a consequence of that dedication the city would take on permanent maintenance obligations for those lands. The following lots are recommended for in-fee dedication: Recreation parcels Open Space parcels Lot 312 (neighborhood park) Lot 328 (Righetti Hill) Lot 307 (trailhead junction park) Lot 319 (below Righetti Hill) Lot 316 (linear park) Lot 320 (below Righetti Hill) Lot 311 (pocket park) Lot 321 (below Righetti Hill) Lot 324 (creek channel) Lot 325 (creek channel) Lot 326 (creek channel) The Righetti Hill parcels will include a wildland fuel management component (within 100’ of the subdivision) that will be implemented annually by the Master HOA, to comply with fire requirements as noted on VTM#3063 sheet C-36. Additionally, under state/federal habitat permits the applicant will be required to improve and maintain the wetlands and riparian mitigation areas of the property, likely for the initial seven (7) years of establishment. Beyond this private maintenance, staff believes it appropriate to consider the larger intact nature of these open space parcels as an integrated biological micro-environment that will benefit from deliberate management practices overseen by the city, into the foreseeable future. Additional policies require free-span bridges for major creek crossings, as proposed in the Righetti subdivision for D Street, at Lots 168 and 315. Creek setback standards as described on VTM#3063 Sheet C-3, and various other VTM sheets, are consistent with OASP policies regulating development along these corridors. PH2-159 GPA-OASP Amendments ATTACHMENT 5 Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063), Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) Page 3 Expanded Project Descriptions – Staff Analysis - CEQA Review Regarding parkland features, the OASP establishes several public park areas on the property. In fact, the primary neighborhood park (Lot 312), pocket park (Lot 311), Righetti Hill trailhead park (Lot 307) and Lot 316 (linear park) improvements are proposed to be dedicated and constructed to satisfy the majority of recreational needs for all properties in the Orcutt Planning Area. The OASP policies also provide for extensive Class 1 bike paths and trails on the Righetti Ranch property. Paths and trails meeting the OASP policies are described in detail in the VTM#3063 sheet L-4. Timing of dedication of parklands and completion of improvements is generally described in the OASP, and to that extent staff has been engaged with the applicants, and initially with the Parks and Recreation Commission. Because the applicant’s will be dedicating the majority of the required neighborhood park (11.6 of the 12 acres required) they will be meeting their Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) obligations for land acquisition under the OASP, and in fact will be due back a proportionate reimbursement from future subdivisions for the land acquisition component of the PFFP fee. As a condition of VTM#3063 approval, Righetti Ranch will be required to comply with OASP parkland improvement policies by completing a phased construction program for park and trail improvements throughout the subdivision. At this early stage, it is possible to estimate the improvements to approximate $1.825MM (based on 304 units x’s ~$6,000/unit for park and bike improvements). At this point, such a program is preliminary for the purposes of the VTM processing, and a final program is recommended to be developed with input from the Parks and Recreation Commission, and approval by the City Council, concurrent with the initial final map recordation within Tract 3063. Righetti Lot Configuration and Layout Staff Analysis: VTM#3063 includes a street layout that is consistent with the OASP. Generally, with the reconfigurations of land uses proposed for the GPA-SPA, smaller lots and higher densities move from areas near and adjoining the UPRR tracks in an easterly direction, to larger lots abutting the upper reaches of development along Righetti Hill and near Orcutt Road. These transitions towards the east are more consistent with adjoining county lands and lower densities found in those adjacent areas. Proposed lots are configured around and between various pedestrian and bicycle path links within the subdivision that promote alternates to vehicle use. The natural stream/runoff channels on the property have been maintained in their natural conditions, with trails providing accessibility and use, but limiting vehicular crossings as envisioned in the OASP. Concentrations of higher-density residential uses (including affordable housing) as suggested are closer to neighborhood-serving commercial retail uses and services planned on nearby properties, again, consistent with the land planning guidelines of the OASP. PH2-160 GPA-OASP Amendments ATTACHMENT 5 Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063), Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) Page 4 Expanded Project Descriptions – Staff Analysis - CEQA Review Righetti Subdivision Phasing Staff Analysis: Proposed VTM#3063 includes 3 identified phases.  Phase 1 = 151 lots/units  Phase 2 = 119 lots/units  Phase 3 = 34 lots/units Phased improvements with a project of this scale are appropriate, and the timing of various infrastructure, affordable housing, parklands, recreational facilities, and open space dedications are all addressed under the relevant sections of this Report. Righetti Residential Products Staff Analysis: Proposed VTM#3063 includes a mix of single-family and attached multi-family residential units. The applicant’s “Project Description” (Attachment 5) includes a statement that all residential construction will comply with the OASP Design Guidelines at the time of future construction. Concept floor and site plans have been presented for the multi-family attached units. These units are proposed as “townhomes”, designed to include fee ownership of t he underlying parcel, while permitting attached buildings in a series of attached or clustered configurations. These units vary between 2- and 3-bedrooms, with garages on the ground floor of the two (2) bedroom units, and two (2) living levels above for a total of three (3) stories. Another plan calls for a three (3) bedroom concept on two (2) stories with parking on the ground floor. These concepts allow some variation to the height and scale of the buildings, and will be a more lower-cost and affordable housing product. These plans are general, and serve to confirm that the housing types described by the applicants do in fact work on the proposed higher-density lots of the tract. Architectural plans or studies for VTM#3063 have not been presented for the single-family housing products. The applicant has indicated that they will process design applications at a future date. The applicant has also proposed that the provisions of th e City’s Subdivision Regulations, and by extension the OASP, permit the Community Development Director to approve residential development pursuant to a “minor architectural review permit”. Staff’s view is that projects of the scale of Jones and Righetti should be subject to a more public architectural review process, allowing for heightened levels of public review and comment on proposed building plans. Staff is also sensitive to the need to assist applicants in moving projects along the review process. In response to the applicant’s request, staff is recommendi ng a process under Condition #109 that would allow ARC review/comment on a series of “model unit” buildings and landscaping designs, and to provide for public comment and input to the Director to make final determinations on building design. Director’s decisions in this manner would be appealable under established city policies. Righetti Utility Systems Staff Analysis: Utility systems for VTM#3063 include water distribution lines, wastewater collection and conveyance lines, storm drainage lines and detention basin, and dry utility lines are proposed to serve the project, and to integrate into adjoining developments within the OASP, as well as off-site along Orcutt and Tank Farm Roads. Generally, private sewer lines and laterals PH2-161 GPA-OASP Amendments ATTACHMENT 5 Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063), Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) Page 5 Expanded Project Descriptions – Staff Analysis - CEQA Review serving individual lots and located within private roads/public utility easements shall remain privately owned and maintained. All water main lines and storm drainage systems will be dedicated to public ownership and maintenance as a part of the final tract map(s). As noted in the IS-MND for the combined GPA-SPA and VTM’s, off -site water utility and service system concerns have been raised based on the City’s newly updated 2015 Water Master Plan. In particular, after adoption of the 2010 OASP and FEIR, it has been determined that in order to adequately serve the Righetti and Jones projects with fire flows and adequate daily storage needs, a water main needs to be extended from the Bishop pressure zone (at Tanglewood and/or Southwood Drives) to the Orcutt Road & B Street intersection. A main line would also be needed to extended west on Orcutt Road to A Street. To the extent that these improvements are sized beyond the needs of just the Righetti and Jones tracts, MM USS-1 allows the applicant to propose a financing and reimbursement program option for consideration. Also noted under the IS-MND were wastewater main line extensions needed from the Tank Farm Road area through VTM#3063 (Righetti) to serve VTM#3066 (Jones) that would be addressed by requiring either Jones follow Righetti from a construction phasing perspective, or easements and improvement guarantees be provided by Jones should it precede Righetti. MMPS-4 is included to address this requirement. Righetti Transportation Systems Staff Analysis: IS-MND requirements detailing the timing of various roadway improvements are proposed to be included with any approval for VTM#3063. Regarding the proposed phasing of VTM#3063, Phase 1 (“D” Street neighborhoods) would be isolated with a single access in and out from Tank Farm Road if the Phase 2 (“C” Street neighborhoods) were delayed or not developed for any reason. As suggested by the Utility Phasing plans of the VTM, Phase 1 will include the installation of water and wastewater lines in future “C” and “B” Streets. To accomplish this, the applicant is expected to grade these roadways so that placement of the underground utilities will be designed to meet both horizontal and vertical future roadway alignments. In doing this, staff believes that access on “B” and “C” Streets must be provided in concert with Ph ase 1 development. Condition 101 establishes the requirement that this secondary access be in place prior to issuance of building permits for the 30th unit in Phase 1, in an interim or permanent configuration satisfactory to public safety and public works staff, prior to more formal paving and roadway improvements planned with Final Map Phase 2. Righetti Open Space Dedication Staff Analysis: Open space dedications as proposed with VTM#3063 are in substantial compliance with OASP requirements. In summary, public dedication of open space conservation easements for lots 318 (25,505 sf on Orcutt Road), 319-321 (36,643 sf – 73,205 sf – 176,499 sf adjoining the revised Righetti Hill URL), 324-326 (74,735 sf - 134,667 sf - 167,371 sf Hansen-Barrandca Creek segments) and 328 (37.9 ac Righetti Hill) are included with the VTM. The requirement to set these areas aside are consistent with the OASP policies and direction. These areas (totaling 53.71 acres) would be publically maintained by the city. PH2-162 GPA-OASP Amendments ATTACHMENT 5 Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063), Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) Page 6 Expanded Project Descriptions – Staff Analysis - CEQA Review Some six (6) acres of open space lands (Lots 308-310, 313-315, 317, 322-323) are also proposed to be set aside and maintained privately by the Master HOA for Righetti Ranch. Righetti Parklands Dedication and Improvements Staff Analysis: Proposed VTM#3063 includes 304 proposed dwellings, which translates into approximately 763 new city residents (R-1/R-2 at a ratio of 2.58 persons/unit = 702 persons + R- 3 at a ratio of 1.92 persons/unit = 61 persons). The same calculation for the Jones Ranch VTM#3066 (also being processed by the applicant), yields 145 new city residents (R-1/R-2 at 2.58 persons/unit = 72 persons + R-3 at a ratio of 1.92 persons/unit = 73 persons). Based on these combined populations, Righetti and Jones would be required to develop at least 9.08 acres of public parklands at a ratio of 10 acres per 1,000 city residents (OASP Policy 2.3.1). To achieve these parklands dedications and improvements, the OASP included a financing program to spread the costs of parklands across all properties, whether they dedicate and/or improve parklands or not. Under the OASP, Public Facilities Financing fees due on a project-by-project basis are calculated under two (2) factors. The first factor is a land value component, which is used to credit back land acquisition costs to properties where public parklands are dedicated. This was developed as a “fairness” consideration to those properties where more parklands were to be dedicated, as well as a means to collect a fair share contribution from those properties where no parklands were to be dedicated. Spreading out the value of lands, and collecting a fee that is used to “credit back” to dedicating landowners is a common practice in master planned communities. The second factor, park improvements, is similarly treated under the OASP Public Facilities Financing Program. As applied to the Righetti project, most of the OASP public parklands are to be dedicated with VTM#3063. To meet the OASP and General Plan requirements for parklands dedication and improvement, staff is recommending conditions to impose both dedication and improvement requirements to the Jones and Righetti projects to meet these standards over a phased program of development of each subdivision. Condition No. 111 has been proposed to require the Righetti and Jones subdivisions to submit a Parklands Improvement Plan meeting the following general objectives to complete the following dedications and improvements following the sequence of their respective Phasing Plans: Parkland Dedication Park Improvements Phase 1 VTM#3063 Phase 1 = 5.27 acres 15.33 acres Phase 2 = 3.00 acres Phase 3 = 0.81 acres Minimum 9.08 acres improved lands Lot 312 – Neighborhood Park (11.6 ac) Lot 316 – Linear Park (1.3 ac) Lot 307 – Trail Junction (2.23 ac) Lot 311 – Pocket Park (0.2) PH2-163 GPA-OASP Amendments ATTACHMENT 5 Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063), Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) Page 7 Expanded Project Descriptions – Staff Analysis - CEQA Review To the extent that Righetti Ranch is due reimbursements for parkland dedication fee credits, or they expend parkland improvement costs beyond the “fair share” contributions outlined by City fee regulations at the time of filing a final map, a “Fee Credit and Reimbursement Agreement” or other satisfactory mechanism may be considered by the City Council under Condition No. 117. Righetti Uniform CC&R’s Staff Analysis: Pursuant to the OASP, a homeowners association (HOA) is to be created to address ownership, maintenance, repair and replacement of common areas and private streets not otherwise incorporated into public ownership. Righetti Ranch includes limited private areas that would be subject to an HOA within the boundaries of VTM#3063. VTM#3063 has been proposed by the applicant to be incorporated into a “Master HOA” created for Righetti Ranch, but also envisioned to incorporate the adjoining Jones Ranch property (VTM#3066). To the extent that Righetti precedes Jones, this option is reasonable. In the event that Jones precedes Righetti, it will be necessary to create an HOA for VTM#3066. This can be done with the future option of VTM#3066 being automatically “annexed” or incorporated within the Righetti Master HOA, or as a sub-association within the Master HOA. This decision will be for the subdivider to make at the time of final map application, and therefore Condition 104 is presented to permit any of these options to be proposed, consistent with the OASP. Vesting Tract Map #3066 (Jones) The Jones Ranch project site comprises 11.56 acres of the overall 231-acre Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP). The applicant has submitted a “Project Description” narrative (Attachment 1) and VTM sheets (Attachment 3) which describe their proposal in detail. Jones Conservation, Open Space and Recreation Staff Analysis: In the case of the Jones Ranch proposal, 2.03 acres of open space are set aside as prescribed by the OASP to meet these goals within the Jones property. These areas occur within Lots 31 and 32 along the Barrandca Creek corridor in roughly the center of the site. These open space lots and the creek corridor ties into the proposed Righetti Ranch project to the south and the future Fiala property to the north. Additional policies permit culverts for minor creek crossings, as proposed in the Jones subdivision at Lots 31-32. Creek setback standards as described on VTM#3066 Sheet C-3 are consistent with OASP policies regulating development along these corridors. Regarding parklands features, the OASP does not establish any public park areas on the property. Instead, Jones Ranch will contribute to the Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) required by the PH2-164 GPA-OASP Amendments ATTACHMENT 5 Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063), Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) Page 8 Expanded Project Descriptions – Staff Analysis - CEQA Review OASP, in the form of fee payments to contribute their fair share to improvements constructed on other properties in the Orcutt Planning Area. The OASP does provide for a continuation of Class 1 bike paths on the Jones Ranch property, connecting Righetti to the south and Wingate to the north. This occurs with a class one path beginning at B Street adjoining the future Neighborhood Park on the Righetti site, northerly to Sponza Drive, terminating at a Bike Staging Area on the Jones property. Jones Land Use and Development Standards Staff Analysis: Proposed VTM#3066 includes a mix of low, medium density residential uses and open space as required by the OASP. Proposed Project Gross Acreage Commercial Land Uses Residential Land Uses Proposed Parks & Open Space Jones Ranch 11.56 acres 15,070 sq ft 1.32 acres (mixed-use) 14 single family units 52 multi-family units 66 total residential 2.03 acres Open Space 2.03 acres (17.6%) Density assigned to the Jones Ranch property under the OASP called for between 54-56 residential units. At 57 units unique to the Jones Ranch, VTM#3066 is substantially consistent with projected residential unit densities. The added affordable units “received” from the Righetti Ranch proposal remain consistent with the density ranges established for the overall OASP. VTM#3066 proposes to meet their affordable housing requirements (Policy 3.3.2 requires 5% low income and 10% moderate income units) by providing their required 8 affordable units on-site. These affordable units would be dispersed within the R-2 components of the proposed tract. While staff supports the on-site concept for Jones, including the transfer of units from the Righetti proposal, it is equally important to take note of OASP and Housing Element policies that encourage this housing to be developed early on in projects, and if possible in step with the main market-rate housing units. For example, it is appropriate to time affordable housing with the sequence of market-rate housing construction, recognizing that initial subdivision grading, infrastructure and other improvements need to be completed to begin the production of any housing at the site. In the context of Jones Ranch, staff is recommending that financial guarantees be presented at the outset of the tract construction that would allow the affordable units to be deferred to the desired Phase 2 timing of the applicant. The form of these guarantees would be approved by the City Attorney and Community Development Director at the outset of the project. In the case of both the Jones and the Righetti VTM#3063 proposal, conditions would be included to require the preparation and approval of an “Affordable Housing Agreement” by the City Council, to document the timing, guarantees and related details of the combined Jones-Righetti affordable housing program, to be required as a part of presentation of the initial Final Map for recordation on either property. VTM#3066 has been proposed to be recorded in a single phase. During discussions with the applicant, it has been suggested that Jones Ranch would parallel the Phase 1 timing of the nearby PH2-165 GPA-OASP Amendments ATTACHMENT 5 Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063), Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) Page 9 Expanded Project Descriptions – Staff Analysis - CEQA Review Righetti Ranch subdivision. This makes sense from several perspectives, including the need to advance affordable housing “received” on Jones from Righetti, critical circulation and infrastructure needs can be more readily achieved under a joint-development concept, and all parklands needed for the Jones Ranch property occur within the Righetti site. However, Jones Ranch is a standalone project, and to that extent the project is being treated as a single phase project. Phased improvements with a project of this relatively small scale are not appropriate. It is also possible for a variety of reasons that Jones may lag behind Righetti. For this reason the Jones project may need to be independently capable of meeting development standards without reliance on nearby development project(s). Jones Community Design Staff Analysis: As noted under the Righetti analysis, Chapter 4 Policies concerning community design express a desire for a compatible mix of architectural designs. Roadway and lot configurations consistent with the OASP are designed to encourage pedestrian connections and accessibility within the Orcutt neighborhoods as an alternate to vehicle use. The Jones project meets these objectives for both internal circulation, and provide for Specific-Plan-regional linkages for the overall Plan area. Lot design policies call for use of shared driveways, alleys, side and rear lot garage access and parking courts to limit the appearance of garages from street elevations. This is particularly important within the OASP when smaller lots are being used to advance affordable-by-design community goals. The Jones Ranch proposal includes use of all these suggested features, within its multi-family housing products and also the detached single-family unit and lot designs. Policies calling for street scape design meeting pedestrian-friendly environments, building design orientation to major streets, and defined and inviting corridors between buildings are achieved as illustrated by the site plan and buildings configurations shown in the applicants plan sets. One feature of proposed VTM#3066 calls for approval for residential building plans to be vested with the Community Development Director, rather than the ARC, citing subdivision regulations that allow CDD approvals for projects proposed under an adopted Specific Plan. PH2-166 GPA-OASP Amendments ATTACHMENT 5 Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063), Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) Page 10 Expanded Project Descriptions – Staff Analysis - CEQA Review Jones Circulation Staff Analysis: The 2010 FEIR environmental analysis, and subsequent Circulation Program 5.2.3 direction in the adopted OASP, makes it clear that alignment of “B” Street to match the Tiburon Way intersection through the Imel property is to be developed either as part of the Imel development, or through negotiations between the Jones applicant and Imel to secure the needed off-site right-of-way as part of the Jones development. In this case, the applicant has been working to secure this right-of-way, and would implement that option with recordation of the Final Map for Tract #3066. B Street-to-Tiburon Way Alignments Analyzed in 2010 OASP FEIR It should also be noted that the OASP identified an alternative “B” Street connection to Orcutt Road that would allow a 250’ offset northerly from Tiburon, entirely within the Jones property. Program 5.2.3(f) of the OASP affords the Jones subdivider with the option of an alternative “B” Street connection to Orcutt Road that would allow this 250’ intersection “offset” northerly from Tiburon, entirely within the Jones property. This “offset” configuration is problematic from several perspectives, including (1) this alignment would eliminate virtually all the useable areas of the Jones homestead lots proposed in VTM#3066, (2) the “offset” has not been subject to updated CEQA analysis, and (3) the proposed VTM#3066 does not include a design for this alternative, and the resulting changes to the proposed circulation and lot patterns. For these reasons, staff has dismissed this alternative at this time. Following extensive discussion with the Jones applicant, staff is recommending conditions requiring the subdivider to provide this alignment through Imel to Tiburon Way. This condition leads to the opportunity to implement a 5th homestead lot at Jones described in Attachment 10. Jones Public Utilities and Services Staff Analysis: The preliminary on-site infrastructure plans proposed for VTM#3066 have been reviewed by engineering, public works and utilities staff and are adequate for serving the proposed project. JONES “Offset Alignment ” IMEL JONES “Offset Alignment” “County Alignment” “Preferred Alignment ” PH2-167 GPA-OASP Amendments ATTACHMENT 5 Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063), Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) Page 11 Expanded Project Descriptions – Staff Analysis - CEQA Review Specific attention has been given to off-site utility improvements needed to adequately serve VTM#3066. Off-site wastewater main line extensions from Tank Farm Road (through adjoining Righetti, VTM#3063) and the extension of off-site water mains to supply needed fire flows and storage have been addressed in the 2015 IS-MND, and under conditions to be considered for project approval. Policies directed at meeting fire codes, law enforcement, health, maintenance, transportation and recycling will be applied to any project approvals, consistent with City codes and regulations as outlined in the OASP. CEQA Environmental Review In developing the CEQA analysis, staff expanded or “tiered” the analysis beginning with the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) certified for the OASP in 2010. The following presentations review the previously certified impact and mitigation measures developed with the FE IR, and identifies those OASP FEIR standards that are applicable to the Righetti and Jones Ranch proposals (ref. Attachment 3; “Summary of Mitigations OASP FEIR”). Additionally, the 2015 CEQA analysis conducted more recently for the Vesting Tract Map applications (ref. Attachment 4; “Initial Study”) adds an additional “tier” or level of review and analysis for the applicant’s proposed GPA-SPA and VTM applications. Analysis of CEQA, SPA-GPA, Bicycle Transportation Plan and Vesting Tract Map Applications CEQA Analysis “Tiering” Off 2010 OASP FEIR For the most part, the OASP FEIR was a “program level” EIR that identified various potential impacts and recommended several mitigation measures that were ultimately incorporated into the development standards of the final, adopted Specific Plan for the Orcutt Planning Area. To the extent that the proposed projects are consistent with the OASP, they reflect the mitigations measures as a part of their design. There were, however, several mitigation measures that could be characterized as “project-related” that would need to be incorporated into future subdivision applications and conditions of approval. These “project-related” mitigations are listed in Attachment 3 (2010 FEIR). These impacts and mitigation measures include:  Air Quality  Biological Resources  Drainage and Water Quality  Noise  Public Safety The OASP FEIR impacts and mitigation measures identified as directly applicable to each of the proposed Righetti and Jones Ranch VTM’s are summarized in the following analysis. PH2-168 GPA-OASP Amendments ATTACHMENT 5 Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063), Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) Page 12 Expanded Project Descriptions – Staff Analysis - CEQA Review Air Quality impacts were anticipated from both long-term vehicle emissions over the life of the project, and short-term impacts associated with temporary or limited-duration construction vehicles and operations. Mitigation measures are included in Attachment 3 that address both of these potential impact areas, and also introduce the need to coordinate project submittals and processing with the Air Pollution Control District, to insure adequate state-of-the-art mitigations are being properly implemented with development of Righetti Ranch. Biological Resource impacts were focused on the changes that would occur in a variety of distinctive habitat communities on the subject properties. The subdivision designs include various land and street configurations reflective of the development envelopes anticipated under the OASP. Additionally, numerous habitat-specific surveys are required, timed to meet the unique habitat conditions and needs during construction of each subdivision. These surveys and their attendant recommendations will be coordinated with, and overseen by, the Natural Resources Manager. Drainage and Water Quality considerations were focused on those portions of the Planning Area in which stream bank conditions could be impacted by increased storm water runoff. Stream bank stabilization, riparian zone planting, bio-filters and impervious paving requirements are included with the mitigation measures from the FEIR, noted in Attachment 3. Noise mitigation is tied to the City’s Noise Ordinance. Additiona lly, site specific analysis noted under the IS-MND discussion, below, rounds out the specific design and mitigation measures specifically for Righetti Ranch. Public Safety considerations under the FEIR called for disclosures to property purchasers and residents regarding the SLO County Regional Airport, as provided for under the Airport Land Use Plan. Additional testing and appropriate removal of 55-gallon drums generally referenced on the existing property(ies) are also required under the FEIR. 2015 CEQA Analysis Following the submittal of applications for Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063), and City Council’s authorization in 2014 to proceed with review of the series of proposed amendments to the GP and OASP, staff prepared an Initial Study of potential environmental impacts resulting from the various proposals presented by the applicant. In this case, because this applicant is also pursuing an adjoining subdivision (Jones Ranch, VTM#3066) and similar GPA-SPA actions on the Jones property, for the purposes of comprehensive CEQA review, this Initial Study addresses the combined properties, both as they relate to the GPA-SPA actions, and as they relate to the development projects proposed with each tract. Attachment 4 (Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration or IS-MND) has been generated to analyze the project specific issues not addressed under the 2010 OASP FEIR. The 2015 IS-MND identifies the following potential impacts, and recommended mitigation/monitoring measures, associated with the detailed VTM proposals:  Aesthetics associated with modification of the Righetti Hill URL PH2-169 GPA-OASP Amendments ATTACHMENT 5 Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063), Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) Page 13 Expanded Project Descriptions – Staff Analysis - CEQA Review  Air Quality  Biological Resources  Cultural Resources  Noise  Public Services  Transportation  Utilities and Service Systems URL Adjustment Modification of the Urban Reserve Line (URL) along Righetti Hill raises potential concerns regarding further encroachment of development up the hill, as well as the overall quality of views from various vantage points outside the Orcutt Planning Area. At the time of processing the “GPA - SPA authorization” at public hearings in 2014, extensive discussion by Planning Commission and City Council led to a decision to consider possible adjustments to the URL, tempered by careful analysis of the visual and aesthetic effects such URL modifications may create. For these reasons, the VTM#3063 proposals submitted later in 2014 reduced encroachments up the hill, broke up the number of adjacent homes paralleling the proposed URL location, created a series of split-pad lots on these upper lots to reduce the massing and scale of permitted structures, and in some instances actually moved the modified URL location lower on the hillside to emphasize more significant views. This is particularly true along the Tank Farm Road frontage of Righetti Ranch. Following this submittal, a careful visual analysis was conducted to evaluate the proposed project and modified URL from both on-site and off-site locations. This analysis was focused to evaluate the proposals against the visual prominence and regional setting of Righetti Hill. The visual analysis includes seven (7) specific locations where photo simulations were generated that describe the present URL location and building envelopes permitted along the existing URL. These analyses also describe the modified location of the URL as proposed by the applicant, and how their proposed building masses could occur within the new URL alignment. This visual analysis, included as Attachment 6 of this Report and as Source 4 of the IS-MND, demonstrates that the combination of special mitigation measures included in recommended MM AES-3 will serve to keep new home sites proposed with Tract #3063 at or below the earlier upper limits of development along the original URL for Righetti Hill. These mitigations fully resolve concerns over adjusting the Righetti Hill URL. Air Quality Air Quality tract design and construction considerations have been addressed, pending any further suggestions from APCD staff, by utilizing the 2010 FEIR Air Quality measures originally adopted with the OASP, and repeated herein with the 2015 IS-MND. Biological Resources Biological considerations have been addressed by the 2013 and 2014 site-specific analyses provided by Rincon consultants working for the applicants. These surveys and analysis narrowed the likely plants and animal communities on the Ranches to 3 plant and 2 animal species. The IS- PH2-170 GPA-OASP Amendments ATTACHMENT 5 Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063), Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) Page 14 Expanded Project Descriptions – Staff Analysis - CEQA Review MND describes a series of mitigations “tiering” off the FEIR, and providing supplemental site surveys at the time of initiating construction to add any unique or additional requirements needed to address actual site conditions at the time of construction. Cultural Resources Concerns were originally raised based on the potential for modifications of the URL higher on Righetti Hill, as that reorientation may impact Cultural Resources not otherwise analyzed. With the modifications to the final URL adjustments described earlier, these concerns can be adequately addressed through on-site monitoring during ground disturbing activities. MM CR-1(d) is included to implement this requirement. Noise The FEIR provided that specified setbacks from the UPRR tracks for Righetti Ranch (Tract #3063) should be required to adequately resolve potential Noise impacts to residential units (both interior and exterior noise levels). The applicants have submitted the more precise analysis of their proposed subdivision (Lord Consulting, 2014; IS-MND Source 10) demonstrating that the residential lots closest to the tracks (VTM#3053 - Lots 157-167) will not be situated so as to exceed the FEIR’s standards of 60dB exterior noise levels. Public Services Potential impacts to Public Services, most notably wastewater main line extensions needed from the Tank Farm Road area through VTM#3063 (Righetti) to serve VTM#3066 (Jones) were raised that can be addressed by requiring either Jones follow Righetti from a construction phasing perspective, or easements and improvement guarantees would be provided by Jones should it precede Righetti. MMPS-4 in recommended to address this requirement. Transportation Transportation issues were raised during the IS-MND review, suggesting a series of specific mitigation measures, some of which were recognized by the FEIR and noted in Attachment 3. Other tract-specific mitigations would be appropriate to adequately resolve Transportation impacts from the Righetti and Jones projects. These mitigations, T-1 through T-6, address the need to provide the following improvements:  200’ right-turn lane on SB Orcutt Rd to Tank Farm Rd  Right-of-way dedication and TIF fees for a future signalized intersection at Orcutt and Tank Farm Road  Hansen Lane and E-2 Street alignment options  Tiburon Way and B Street alignment options  Tank Farm and Orcutt Roads frontage improvements  Raised intersection traffic calming with roundabout at Tank Farm Road Conditions of approval for each of these mitigation measures are included to further articulate timing and responsible parties should these projects progress. PH2-171 GPA-OASP Amendments ATTACHMENT 5 Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063), Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) Page 15 Expanded Project Descriptions – Staff Analysis - CEQA Review Utility and Service Systems Utility and Service System concerns have been raised based o n the City’s newly updated 2015 Water Master Plan. In particular, after adoption of the 2010 OASP and FEIR, it has been determined that in order to adequately serve the Righetti and Jones projects with fire flows and adequate daily storage needs, a water main needs to be extended from the Bishop pressure zone (at Tanglewood and/or Southwood Drives) to the Orcutt Road & B Street intersection. A main line would also be needed to extended west on Orcutt Road to A Street. To the extent that these improvements are sized beyond the needs of just the Righetti and Jones tracts, MM USS-1 allows the applicant to propose a financing and reimbursement program option for consideration. Both Attachments 3 (2010 FEIR) and 4 (2015 IS-MND) are proposed to be adopted as a part of consideration of these projects. These documents would constitute the complete environmental determinations for the proposals. PH2-172 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-1 Co v e r S h e e t 1. 0 V i s u a l A n a l y s i s M e t h o d o l o g y Th i s v i s u a l s i m u l a t i o n p a c k a g e d e m o n s t r a t e s t h e v i s u a l i m p a c t o f th e R i g h e t t i R a n c h D e v e l o p m e n t f r o m s e v e n d i f f e r e n t v i e w p o i n t s i n Sa n L u i s O b i s p o . T h e v i s u a l i m p a c t f r o m t h e v a r i o u s v i e w p o i n t s a r e ex h i b i t e d t h r o u g h t h r e e v i s u a l a n a l y s i s ; a d i a g r a m o f t h e m a x i m u m bu i l d i n g e n v e l o p e f o r t h e O S A P B a s e L i n e P l a n w h i c h d o e s n o t a l t e r th e U R L ( P - 3 ) , a v i s u a l s i m u l a t i o n o f t h e P r o p o s e d P l a n ( P - 4 ) , a n d a co m p a r a t i v e a n a l y s i s o f t h e O A S P B a s e L i n e U R L P l a n a n d t h e Pr o p o s e d P l a n . Th i s v i s u a l s i m u l a t i o n p a c k a g e c o n s i s t s o f t h e f o l l o w i n g c o m p o n e n t s : P- 2 ) A K e y M a p s h o w i n g t h e c a m e r a p o s i t i o n a n d t h e a p p r o x i m a t e LP D J H  ¿ H O G  R I  Y L V L R Q  D Q J O H  D Q G  D  S K R W R J U D S K  R I  W K H  ( [ L V W L Q J  9 L H Z R I  th e s i t e . P- 3 ) T h e O A S P B a s e L i n e U R L P l a n w h i c h d o e s n o t a l t e r t h e U R L th a t w a s u s e d t o g e n e r a t e t h e O S A P m a x i m u m b u i l d i n g e n v e l o p e di a g r a m . 3   7 K H  3 U R S R V H G  3 O D Q   X V H G  W R  J H Q H U D W H  W K H  9 L V X D O  6 L P X O D W L R Q V  P- 5 , 8 , 1 1 , 1 4 , 1 7 , a n d 2 0 ) O S A P B a s e L i n e U R L B u i l d i n g (Q Y H O R S H  ' L D J U D P  3                   D Q G     7 K H  3 U R S R V H G  3 O D Q  9 L V X D O  6 L P X O D W L R Q V P- 7 , 1 0 , 1 3 , 1 6 , 1 9 , 2 2 a n d 2 3 ) C o m p a r a t i v e A n a l y s i s o f t h e O A S P Ba s e L i n e U R L P l a n a n d P r o p o s e d P l a n . 1. 1 P h o t o g r a p h 7K H  3 K R W R J U D S K  R I  W K H  ( [ L V W L Q J  9 L H Z  Z D V  W D N H Q  Z L W K  D  1 L N R Q  '    di g i t a l c a m e r a o n T a n k F a r m r o a d a t t h e l o c a t i o n i n d i c a t e d o n t h e K e y 0D S    7 K H  * 3 6  O R F D W L R Q  Z D V  G R F X P H Q W H G  X V L Q J  D  & D V L R  ( [ L O L P  (;  +   *  F D P H U D    7 K H  S K R W R J U D S K V  Z H U H  W D N H Q  D W  P L G  G D \   ap p r o x i m a t e l y 6 0 ” a b o v e t h e g r o u n d t o s i m u l a t e t h e e y e - l e v e l v i e w of a p e d e s t r i a n l o o k i n g a t t h e d e v e l o p m e n t s i t e . T h e c a m e r a s p o s i t i o n we r e e s t a b l i s h e d o n a t o p o g r a p h i c s u r v e y a n d o n G o o g l e M a p s . 1. 2 3 - D M o d e l C r e a t i o n A 3 - d i m e n s i o n a l t o p o g r a p h i c s u r v e y a n d p a r c e l m a p w a s pr o v i d e d b y C a n n o n A s s o c i a t e s ( c o m p i l e d i n A u t o C A D ) we r e i m p o r t e d i n t o R e v i t ( A u t o d e s k 3 - D m o d e l i n g s o f t w a r e pa c k a g e ) a s a b a s e t o g e n e r a t e t h e d i g i t a l t e r r a i n m a p s o f t h e pr o p o s e d d e v e l o p m e n t s i t e . T h e t e r r a i n w a s t h e n PR G H O H G  L Q  5 H Y L W  W R  U H À H F W  W K H  Y D U L R X V  J U D G L Q J  S O D Q V  I R U  W K H   OA S P B a s e L i n e P l a n a n d P r o p o s e d R e v i s e d U R L P l a n . Th e n t h e r e s i d e n c e a n d l a n d s c a p e w e r e m o d e l e d i n R e v i t fo r e a c h p l a n t y p e a n d p l a c e d o n t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g d i g i t a l te r r a i n s . T h e c o o r d i n a t e p o i n t s d e r i v e d f r o m t h e p h o t o g r a p h s & D V L R  ( [ L O L P  ( ;  +   *  Z H U H  L P S R U W H G  L Q W R  W K H  5 H Y L W  E D V H  mo d e l t o l o c a t e t h e c a m e r a l o c a t i o n s r e l a t i v e t o t h e s i t e . T h e or i g i n a l p h o t o w a s t h e n s e t a s a “ b a c k g r o u n d ” i n R e v i t t o in s u r e t h e a c c u r a c y o f t h e c a m e r a p l a c e m e n t P o s i t i o n . A f t e r WK H  D F F X U D F \  R I  W K H  F D P H U D  O R F D W L R Q  Z D V  Y H U L ¿ H G   D  F R O R U  re n d e r i n g a n d p e r s p e c t i v e l i n e d r a w i n g w e r e e x p o r t e d f o r ea c h p l a n ( O A S P B a s e L i n e P l a n , a n d P r o p o s e d R e v i s e d UR L P l a n ) t y p e i n d i c a t i n g t h e b u i l d i n g s l o c a t i o n , e n t o u r a g e lo c a t i o n , m a t e r i a l s , c o l o r s a n d m i d - d a y s h a d o w s b a s e d o n t h e da t e o f t h e p h o t o g r a p h . 1. 3 R e n d e r i n g C r e a t i o n Th e R e v i t r e n d e r i n g a n d l i n e d r a w i n g s w e r e t h e n u s e d a s t h e ba s i s t o c r e a t e a t w o - d i m e n s i o n a l v i s u a l s i m u l a t i o n o f e a c h pl a n t y p e u s i n g A d o b e P h o t o s h o p . T h e l i n e d r a w i n g s w e r e us e d l o c a t e a n d p l a c e r e a l i s t i c l a n d s c a p e a n d r e n d e r i n g s w e r e XV H G  W R  U H S U H V H Q W  P D W H U L D O V   ¿ Q L V K H V   F R O R U V   V K D G H  D Q G  Sh a d o w s o f t h e b u i l d i n g f o r e a c h p l a n t y p e . T h e b u i l d i n g s DQ G  O D Q G V F D S H  Z H U H  W K H  R Y H U O D L G  R Q  W K H  ( [ L V W L Q J  9 L H Z  Ph o t o g r a p h . 1. 4 F i n a l V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n C o m p o n e n t s 7K H  ¿ Q D O  V W H S  L Q  S U H S D U L Q J  W K H  Y L V X D O  V L P X O D W L R Q V  Z D V  ad d i n g f o r e g r o u n d l a n d s c a p i n g c o m p o s e d o f g r a s s e s t h a t oc c u r o n t h e s i t e . T h e s e l a n d s c a p e f e a t u r e s w e r e s t i t c h e d in t o t h e f r o n t o f t h e r e n d e r i n g u s i n g P h o t o s h o p . Ad d i t i o n a l l y , s o m e a t m o s p h e r i c s c r e e n i n g w a s a p p l i e d t o th e s e v i e w s i n P h o t o s h o p t o p r o v i d e a m o r e r e a l i s t i c ap p e a r a n c e t o e l e m e n t s i n t h e b a c k g r o u n d . Rigetti Ranch Development ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-173 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-2 Ke y M a p ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-174 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-3  , 1 & +       ) ( ( 7 OA S P E x i s t i n g U R L B o u n d a r y L i n e OA S P E x i s t i n g (2 0 1 0 ) U R L Bo u n d a r y L i n e Note:The “EXISTING” Urban Reserve Line (URL) location along Righetti Hill permits a residential structure of 25’ in height to be located as close as 20’ to the URL.The following plans and visual simulations compare the visual build-ing scale and massing effects of constructing residences along the OASP’s Existing and Applicant’s Proposed URL. ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-175 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-4  , 1 & +       ) ( ( 7 OA S P Ex i s t i n g U R L Bo u n d a r y L i n e Ar e a s w h e r e p r o p o s e d UR L v a r i e s f r o m ex i s t i n g U R L Ap p l i c a n t s pr o p o s e d U R L Bo u n d a r y L i n e Ap p l i c a n t s P r o p o s e d U R L B o u n d a r y L i n e C o m p a r i s o n Note:The proposed variations between the “EXISTING” Urban Reserve Line (URL) along Righetti Hill and Ap-plicant’s Proposed URL are shown in blue. Approx. 1.21 acres of Proposed URL would be added and 2.06 acres would be re-duced under the proposal. ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-176 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-5 OS A P E x i s t i n g U R L B u i l d i n g E n v e l o p e F r o m C a l l e C r o t a l o - V i e w # 1 OA S P E x i s t i n g UR L a l l o w e d Bu i l d i n g En v e l o p e ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-177 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-6 Ap p l i c a n t s P r o p o s e d U R L V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n F r o m C a l l e C r o t a l o - V i e w # 1 Pr o p o s e d UR L P l a n Ro o f L i n e ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-178 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-7 Co m p a r a t i v e A n a l y s i s o f t h e E x i s t i n g U R L a n d P r o p o s e d U R L - V i e w # 1 Pr o p o s e d UR L P l a n Ro o f L i n e OA S P E x i s t i n g UR L B u i l d i n g En v e l o p e ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-179 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-8 OS A P E x i s t i n g U R L B u i l d i n g E n v e l o p e F r o m H a n s e n L a n e - V i e w # 2 OA S P E x i s t i n g U R L Al l o w e d B u i l d i n g En v e l o p e ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-180 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-9 Ap p l i c a n t s P r o p o s e d U R L V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n F r o m H a n s e n L a n e - V i e w # 2 Pr o p o s e d UR L P l a n Ro o f L i n e ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-181 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-10 Co m p a r a t i v e A n a l y s i s o f t h e E x i s t i n g & P r o p o s e d U R L H a n s e n L a n e - V i e w # 2 Pr o p o s e d UR L P l a n Ro o f L i n e OA S P E x i s t i n g UR L B u i l d i n g En v e l o p e ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-182 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-11 OS A P E x i s t i n g U R L B u i l d i n g E n v e l o p e F r o m T a n k F a r m R o a d - V i e w # 3 OA S P E x i s t i n g U R L Al l o w e d B u i l d i n g En v e l o p e ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-183 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-12 Ap p l i c a n t s P r o p o s e d U R L V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n F r o m T a n k F a r m R o a d - V i e w # 3 Pr o p o s e d UR L P l a n R o o f L i n e ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-184 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-13 Co m p a r a t i v e A n a l y s i s o f t h e E x i s t i n g & P r o p o s e d U R L T a n k F a r m R d - V i e w # 3 Pr o p o s e d UR L P l a n R o o f L i n e OA S P E x i s t i n g UR L B u i l d i n g En v e l o p e ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-185 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-14 OS A P E x i s t i n g U R L B u i l d i n g E n v e l o p e F r o m F r e n c h P a r k B a l l f i e l d s - V i e w # 4 OA S P E x i s t i n g U R L Al l o w e d B u i l d i n g En v e l o p e ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-186 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-15 Ap p l i c a n t s P r o p o s e d U R L V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n F r o m F r e n c h P a r k B a l l f i e l d s - V i e w # 4 Pr o p o s e d UR L P l a n R o o f L i n e ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-187 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-16 Co m p a r a t i v e A n a l y s i s o f t h e E x i s t i n g & P r o p o s e d U R L F r e n c h P . B . F . - V i e w # 4 Pr o p o s e d UR L P l a n R o o f L i n e OA S P E x i s t i n g UR L B u i l d i n g En v e l o p e ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-188 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-17 OS A P E x i s t i n g U R L B u i l d i n g E n v e l o p e F r o m F r e n c h P a r k T r a i l - V i e w # 5 OA S P E x i s t i n g UR L B u i l d i n g En v e l o p e ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-189 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-18 Ap p l i c a n t s P r o p o s e d U R L V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n F r o m F r e n c h P a r k T r a i l - V i e w # 5 Pr o p o s e d UR L P l a n R o o f L i n e ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-190 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-19 Co m p a r a t i v e A n a l y s i s o f t h e E x i s t i n g & P r o p o s e d U R L F r e n c h P a r k T r a i l - V i e w # 5 Pr o p o s e d UR L P l a n R o o f L i n e Proposed URL Plan Roof Line OA S P E x i s t i n g UR L B u i l d i n g En v e l o p e OA S P E x i s t i n g UR L B u i l d i n g En v e l o p e ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-191 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-20 OS A P E x i s t i n g U R L B u i l d i n g E n v e l o p e F r o m D a r y l D a m o n S p o r t s F i e l d - V i e w # 6 OA S P E x i s t i n g UR L B u i l d i n g En v e l o p e ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-192 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-21 Ap p l i c a n t s P r o p o s e d U R L V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n D a r y l D a m o n S p o r t s F i e l d - V i e w # 6 Pr o p o s e d UR L P l a n R o o f L i n e ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-193 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-22 Co m p a r a t i v e A n a l y s i s o f t h e E x i s t i n g & P r o p o s e d U R L D a r y l D . S . F . - V i e w # 6 Pr o p o s e d UR L P l a n R o o f L i n e OA S P E x i s t i n g UR L B u i l d i n g En v e l o p e ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-194 RI G H E T T I R A N C H Vi s u a l S i m u l a t i o n Se p t e m b e r 0 9 , 2 0 1 4 #1 0 1 3 0 2 8 VS-23 Co m p a r a t i v e A n a l y s i s o f t h e E x i s t i n g & P r o p o s e d U R L D a m o n G . S . F . - V i e w # 7 No t e t h a t O S A P E x i s t i n g UR L a n d t h e P r o p o s e d UR L P l a n a r e n o t Vi s i b l e f r o m t h i s v i e w . ATTACHMENT 6 PH2-195 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Attachment 7 PH 2 - 1 9 6 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Attachment 8 PH 2 - 1 9 7 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Attachment 9 PH2-198 Attachment 9 PH2-199 Attachment 9 PH2-200 Attachment 9 PH2-201 Jones Homestead Lots Graphic Revision to VTTM 3066 Attachment 10 PH2-202 Jones Homestead Lots Narrative Revision to VTTM 3066: APN 004-705-008 The Jones family is requesting to have five (5) homestead lots remain on their property as opposed to the four lots originally submitted. Therefore Ambient Communities is requesting that the Vesting Tract Map be updated to include the additional lot for a total of 66 lots. This request is enhanced by the proposed solution for the option "A" road alignment for "B" Street and Tiburon which will best align Tiburon as the preferred option. Additionally the Jones family is requesting that, as the original owner, they retain ownership in fee of the entire property. The Jones family will grant an open space easement to the City of San Luis Obispo for the required open space areas on lot 1 and lot 3 of the proposed vesting tentative tract map. The Jones family will continue to maintain the property. If desired, the Jones family will create a Common Maintenance Agreement for the homestead lots to ensure the properties are properly maintained in perpetuity. Attachment 10 PH2-203 Attachment 11 ORCUTTAREA SPECIFIC PLAN _Appendix A A-2 INDIVIDUAL PROPERTIES -Special Considerations A distinguishing factor of the Orcutt Expansion Area is property ownership by 13 different private parties.Differences in individual owner's needs and goals have been addressed within the body of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan to the fullest extent possible. A-2-1 RESIDENTIAL HOME SITE PRESERVATION It is the intent of several of the Orcutt Area property owners to preserve their existing home sites from requirements resulting from adjacent development on either a portion of their own property,or on neighboring property (Figure A-2).The concept of a "home site"was developed early in the planning stages for the Orcutt Area to address the concerns of many property owners with different long term goals,and different existing uses on their property. The City's experience with the Airport Area annexation has shown that these "home site"policies are an important aspect of a successful annexation process.Property owners in annexation areas want protection from new fees and expenses,such as impact fees for water and sewer service until such time as they are ready and able to develop.As a result,the City's practice has been to allow for existing uses of on-site water resources and septic systems to continue until such time as new development is proposed. The City's Zoning Regulations also allows existing uses that were legally established to continue indefinitely upon annexation, even if they are non-conforming.However,there are limitations on the expansion of non-conforming uses,and all new development must meet City standards. The OASP includes the following language to address Orcutt Area properly owners concerns regarding these issues. Policy A-2a: Policy A-2b: Program A-2.1: Property owners may designate a "home site "area over a portion or all of their property.The currently designated "home sites "are identified in Figure A-2,which may be updatedfrom time to time. When a property owner,or their heirs,wish to remove the "home site"designation,such termination will be an administrative function which does not require amendment to the Specific Plan,or special approval by any City decision making body,or any other applicable agency. The designation of "home sites"was used during the planning process for the OASP to address property owners concerns over the potential for development of streets or utilities on or through existing home sites as a result of implementation of the OASP.The OASP has been designed to avoid such conflicts. The OASP also recognizes an owner's ability to set aside a "home site"until such time as the designated owner,or their heirs,withdraw this designation.Appendix A,Section A-2-2,describes each property owner's intent with respect to home site considerations,which has been considered during the planning process for the OASP. For all property in the Orcutt Area,impact fees will not be incurred until the property is developed. Impacts fees will not be due until building permits are pulled for development. Program A-2.2: March 2010 A-5 City of San Luis ObispoPH2-204 Attachment 11 ORCUTTAREA SPECIFIC PLAN Appendix A Program A-2.3: Consistent with Chapter 17.10 of the Zoning Regulations, existing non-conforming uses may be allowed to continue indefinitely. Change of ownership, tenancy or management of a nonconforming use shall not affect its legal, nonconforming status. Program A-2.4: Non-conforming uses in the Orcutt Area may include existing agricultural operations and activities, existing businesses, or existing residential uses that do not meet the standards adopted as part of the OASP. City of San Luis Obispo A- 6 March 2010 PH2-205 DRAFT SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 8, 2015 CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Chair Larson led the Pledge of Allegiance. OATH OF OFFICE: Swearing in re-appointed Commissioner John Fowler. City Clerk Mejia administered an Oath of Office to Commissioner Fowler. ROLL CALL: Commissioners Hemalata Dandekar, Michael Draze, John Fowler, Ronald Malak, William Riggs, Vice-Chairperson Michael Multari, and Chairperson John Larson Absent: None Staff: Deputy Community Development Directors Doug Davidson and Kim Murry, Assistant City Attorney Jon Ansolabehere, Interim Assistant City Attorney Anne Russell, Supervising Civil Engineer Hal Hannula, Associate Planner Rebecca Gershow, Associate Planner Rachel Cohen, Transportation Operations Manager Jake Hudson, and Recording Secretary Erica Inderlied ELECTION OF OFFICERS: On motion by Vice-Chair Multari, seconded by Commr. Draze, to appoint Chair Larson to continue serving as Chair. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. On motion by Commr. Malak, seconded by Commr. Draze, to appoint Vice-Chair Multari to continue serving as Vice-Chair. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. ATTACHMENT 12 PH2-206 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 2 ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented. MINUTES: Minutes of March 25, 2015, were approved as amended. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS: There were no comments from the public. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. City-Wide. GENP-1054-2015: General Plan Annual Report for 2014; City of San Luis Obispo—Community Development Department. Rebecca Gershow, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the Commission forward the General Plan Annual Report to the City Council for acceptance, with additional directional items if desired. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Vice-Chair Multari commented on the importance of valuing all General Plan elements and policies equally; stated that recent drought conditions may warrant a reanalysis of report items relating to water supply. In response to Vice-Chair Multari, Deputy Development Director Murry noted that information could be added regarding the Utilities Department’s update of the Water Projection Model. In response to Chair Larson, Deputy Development Directory Murry clarified that the report presented reflects the General Plan as it existed last year and does not reflect recent policy updates. Chair Larson noted desire to have the City focus attention on the following programs: construction of a community center, and the Laguna Lake Park and Sinsheimer Park Master Plans. In response to inquiry from Commr. Fowler, Deputy Community Development Director Murry confirmed that a paragraph could be added to the report addressing the passage of Measure Y and utilization of the funds therefrom. In response to inquiry from Fowler, Deputy Community Development Director Davidson stated that recent software improvements will allow better reporting of Building Division activity in future reports. ATTACHMENT 12 PH2-207 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 3 Commr. Fowler noted a desire to have the City continue to focus on the development of affordable housing; requested that staff consider the possibility of analyzing the ratio of commercial square-footage constructed to jobs created, similar to the analysis done with residential construction. Commr. Riggs noted a desire to have staff continually evaluate the effectiveness of the City’s new Odor Nuisance Ordinance; continue to focus on non-motorized transportation; work toward creating more sophisticated parking policies. There were no further comments from the Commission. On motion by Vice-Chair Multari, seconded by Commr. Draze, to forward the 2014 General Plan Annual Report to the City Council for acceptance, with additional directional items as noted. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. 2. 3761 & 3987 Orcutt Road. GP/R 95-13 / TR/ER 114-14 / SBDV-0067-2014: Request to amend the General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP), including adjustment of the Urban Reserve Line (URL), rezoning of approximately 0.85 acres of Conservation/Open Space (C/OS) zoning to Single-Family Residential (R-1-SP), reorientation of 2.8 acres of residential and parklands, reorientation of wetlands mitigation sites, rezoning of 0.38 acres of R-1-SP to R-2- SP, addition of text to the OASP to “track” amendments, adjustments and clarification to development standards; review of a new residential subdivision (Tract 3063) adjacent to Righetti Hill with 304 new homes; review of a new residential subdivision (Tract 3066) including 61 new homes and 5 existing homes on 11.56 acres; and consideration of the Initial Study and a Mitigated Negative Declaration, tiering off the OASP Final EIR (2010); R-1-SP zone; Ambient Communities, applicant. (Continued from March 25th Planning Commission meeting.) Assistant City Attorney Ansolabehere announced his recusal due to a professional conduct conflict of interest and left the staff table. Interim Assistant City Attorney Russell assumed his seat at the staff table. David Watson, Consulting Planner, and Jake Hudson, Transportation Operations Manager, presented the staff report, recommending that the Commission adopt resolutions recommending that the Council adopt the project environmental document and approve General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) amendments as outlined; approve the Vesting Tentative Tract Map for the Righetti Property; approve the Vesting Tentative Tract Map for the Jones property, based on findings and subject to ATTACHMENT 12 PH2-208 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 4 conditions which he outlined. Watson summarized revisions made to the proposal since the last hearing. Deputy Community Development Director Davidson noted public comment received from neighbors, a memorandum from the applicant dated April 8, 2015 requesting further review of particular conditions, and a memorandum from staff dated April 8, 2015 proposing clarifications to conditions, findings, and mitigation measures. In response to inquiry from Commr. Riggs, Transportation Operations Manager Hudson clarified the rationale for construction of a portion of the bike trail as Class II rather than Class I; staff clarified that staff is seeking Commission input on dispersal versus clustering of affordable housing units. Chair Larson thanked staff for proposing an alternative realignment for the intersection of E-2 Street and Hansen Lane noting that the grading required may render it infeasible. Travis Fuentez, Ambient Communities, applicant, requested that the Commission take action and allow staff to work with the applicants on unresolved issues such as phasing of improvements during public improvement plan and Final Map review by City Council. Todd Smith, Cannon Corp, project planner, summarized changes made to the proposal in response to Commission comment, gave an overview of a possible 3-phase plan. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Jean Knox, nearby property owner, spoke in support of the project; commented that more affordable units should be constructed; noted concern about mitigation of noise from the train tracks adjacent to the project site. Byron Grant, Arroyo Grande, spoke in support of the project; commented that the Urban Reserve Line was originally intended to be flexible; noted concern that this development is bearing more than its fair share of the burden of constructing and financing the improvements prescribed by the OASP. Ernest Jones, property owner representing the Jones Ranch, spoke in support of the project; urged the Commission act; noted concern that affordability decreases over time. William Vega, San Luis Obispo, noted a desire to see more affordable units proposed; stated that project is a step toward the City better-accommodating young professionals; commented on the importance of project connectivity. Jeanne Helphenstine, property owner representing Righetti Ranch, noted concern that current applicants are being asked to bear an increasingly larger share of the required plan area improvements, in apparent conflict with OASP Chapter 8. There were no further comments from the public. ATTACHMENT 12 PH2-209 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 5 COMMISSION COMMENTS: In response to Chair Larson, Deputy Community Development Director Davidson and Travis Fuentez confirmed that proposed “homesite” lots are subject to policies included in the adopted OASP, will be served by City utilities and will be subject to the same conditions as other tract map lots. In response to inquiry from Chair Larson, Ernest Jones confirmed that the family has no intent to split the homesite lots; Commr. Draze clarified that the lots could not be split without a tract map amendment in any case. Commr. Draze noted concern about the amount of liberty that could be taken if applicants and staff work together to resolve issues such as utility undergrounding; commented that caution should be exercised when conditioning specific technologies for long-term area plans, as best-available-technologies change from year to year. Draze expressed readiness to recommend approval if language requiring OASP consistency is added to the conditions. Commr. Riggs noted concern about the lack of a complete, commuter-friendly circulation plan, specifically the lack of connectivity between the proposed project’s bike trail and that along Industrial Way, and the inclusion of a section of Class II bike trail; noted concern about the minimal dispersal and integration of affordable units. Vice-Chair Multari expressed readiness to recommend approval to Council; stated that greater dispersal of affordable units would be ideal but perhaps not feasible; requested that language such as “… consistent with the OASP” be added to conditions with potential conflicts, specifically to open space ownership and maintenance. In response to inquiry from Commr. Malak, staff confirmed that use of gray water is required for common area irrigation only, but will be included as a mitigation measure to encourage residential use. Commr. Fowler disclosed direct communication with applicant Travis Fuentez; concurred that affordable unit dispersal presents a dilemma; noted readiness to recommend approval to Council if staff can provide assurance that outstanding issues can be resolved. Chair Larson expressed a comfort level with allowing staff to work with the applicant to determine if utilities will be undergrounded. Travis Fuentez stated that the applicants intend to underground overhead lines except along Bullock Lane, which is offsite and presents topographical challenges. Deputy Community Development Director Davidson noted that adding language such as “… or as approved by the Director of [the department]” to phasing/infrastructure conditions can allow the Commission to proceed with recommending existing conditions while providing possible flexibility to the applicants. Vice-Chair Multari expressed readiness to proceed with staff’s recommendation, with the addition of language requiring OASP consistency and approval of Community ATTACHMENT 12 PH2-210 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 6 Development and Public Works Directors in phasing and infrastructure conditions. Multari opined that transit is a Citywide problem and that the proposed development will still make significant connectivity contributions. Commr. Dandekar noted her absence from the previous hearing; opined that the affordable and multi-family units do not appear overtly segregated and may allow creation of workforce housing; spoke in support of recommending approval to Council. There were no further comments from the Commission. Commr. Riggs commented on the importance of construction of continuous Class I bike trail in meeting the City’s multi-modal goals; Commr. Draze expressed concern that consideration of creek impacts may hinder the development of the bridge as a Class I trail. Interim Assistant City Attorney Russell clarified that the increased trail intensity has yet to be analyzed for environmental impacts. On motion by Commr. Riggs, seconded by Vice-Chair Multari, to amend the Orcutt Area Specific Plan to prescribe a continuous Class I bike trail along “C” Street crossing the creek, subject to staff determination of environmental impact. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Fowler, Malak, Multari, Riggs NOES: Commrs. Larson, Draze RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 5:2 vote. On motion by Commr. Draze, seconded by Vice-Chair Multari, to adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve the proposed General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan amendments, including the Mitigated Negative Declaration therefor, based on findings and subject to conditions contained in the staff report, with the following revisions: 1. Revise the Orcutt Area Specific Plan Appendix A-2 map to show the configuration of homesite lots. 2. Revise findings and mitigation measures as outlined in staff’s memorandum dated April 8, 2015, on file with the Community Development Department. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. ATTACHMENT 12 PH2-211 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 7 On motion by Vice-Chair Multari, seconded by Commr. Draze, to adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map #3063 for the Righetti property, based on findings and subject to conditions contained in the staff report, with the following revisions: 1. Revise findings, conditions and mitigation measures as outlined in staff’s memorandum dated April 8, 2015, on file with the Community Development Department. 2. Add the language “ […] consistent with the Orcutt Area Specific Plan” to Conditions 5, 7 and 8 relating to open space ownership and maintenance responsibilities. 3. Add the condition to each tract “ Conditions relating to phasing and infrastructure improvements, including undergrounding utilities, are approved as contained herein, or subject to approval by the Director of Community Development or Public Works in review of the public improvement plans and Final Map.” AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari NOES: Commr. Riggs RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 6:1 vote. On motion by Commr. Malak, seconded by Vice-Chair Multari, to add a condition to Tentative Tract Map #3066 requiring the addition of electric vehicle charging stations to those mixed use portions of the project where no covered parking is proposed, in a manner acceptable to staff following research regarding standards. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Malak, Multari NOES: Commrs. Fowler, Larson, Riggs RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 4:3 vote. On motion by Vice-Chair Multari, seconded by Commr. Fowler, to adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map #3066 for the Jones property, based on findings and subject to conditions contained in the staff report, with the following revisions: 1. Revise findings, conditions and mitigation measures as outlined in staff’s memorandum dated April 8, 2015, on file with the Community Development Department. ATTACHMENT 12 PH2-212 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 8 2. Add the condition to each tract “ Conditions relating to phasing and infrastructure improvements, including undergrounding utilities, are approved as contained herein, or subject to approval by the Director of Community Development or Public Works in review of the public improvement plans and Final Map.” AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari NOES: Commr. Riggs RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 6:1 vote. The Commission recessed at 9:15 p.m. and reconvened at 9:25 p.m. with all members present. Assistant City Attorney Ansolabehere resumed his seat at the staff table. 3. 3680 Broad Street. USE-0809-2015: Review of a mixed-use, 100% affordable housing project with 4,400 square feet of commercial space and 46 residential units, including a height exception as an affordable housing incentive, and review of a master use list with a categorical exemption from environmental review; C-S-S zone; For The Future Housing, applicant. Rachel Cohen, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the Commission adopt a resolution allowing approval of the mixed-use project based on findings and subject to conditions, which she outlined. Cohen noted that staff is recommending the addition of a condition restricting extremely-low-, very-low-, and low- income units from conversion for 55 years. Assistant City Attorney Ansolabehere noted that because the proposed project includes 100% affordable units, the Commission may not add any conditions rendering the affordability of the project infeasible. In response to inquiry from Commr., Fowler, Associate Planner Cohen clarified that no elevators are proposed for the site, and that all accessible units are proposed for the ground floor. Jim Rendler, For the Future Housing, applicant, summarized the project; noted that target resident incomes are 30-60% of area median income; requested that the Commission take action due to time constrains upon project financing. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments from the public. ATTACHMENT 12 PH2-213 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 9 COMMISSION COMMENTS: In response to inquiry from Commr. Malak, Jim Rendler stated that reclaimed water will be used to irrigate the site if a stub exists; clarified that that proposed parking exceeds statutory requirements due to a lack of parking in the vicinity. Commr. Dandekar spoke in support of the project. In response to Commr. Dandekar, Associate Planner Cohen clarified that street trees will be required at back of sidewalk along anticipated pedestrian routes. In response to inquiry from Commr. Riggs, staff clarified that the South Broad Street Area Plan (BSAP) does not encompass the project site, therefore sidewalk buffering is not necessarily required. Riggs expressed desire to add a condition requiring that staff work with the applicant to implement sidewalk buffering measures consistent with the BSAP; Chair Larson noted concern that the need for sidewalk relocation may be cost- prohibitive. In response to Commr. Riggs, staff clarified that the retail component of the mixed use proposal is required, as residential uses cannot be the primary use in the Service Commercial zone. Commr. Fowler spoke in support of the project; noted concern that the single shared laundry may be a long way to travel for some tenants. There were no further comments from the Commission. On motion by Commr. Riggs, seconded by Commr. Draze, to adopt a resolution allowing approval of the mixed-use project based on findings and subject to conditions contained in the staff report, with the following revision: 1. Add a condition to read as follows: The applicant shall work with staff to consider a detached sidewalk with a five foot parkway along the Broad Street frontage to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. The City shall evaluate the future widening of the sidewalk in conjunction with the Prado Road extension. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. 4. 1300 Bishop Street. GENP-1120-2015: Review of the Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant. Robert Hill, Natural Resources Manager, and Freddy Otte, City Biologist, presented the staff report, recommending that the Commission review the draft Terrace Hill Open ATTACHMENT 12 PH2-214 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 10 Space Conservation Plan and Initial Study, and recommend to the City Council that the Plan and its Negative Declaration be adopted. On motion by Commr. Riggs, seconded by Commr. Malak, to continue the meeting past 11:00 p.m. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Buzz Kalkowski, Buena Vista HOA President, noted concern about the apparent inconsistency of the site’s R-1 zoning with the General Plan and the impact of drainage from the hillside on the surrounding neighborhoods; commented that the space is being misused by the transient population and others. There were no further comments from the public. In response to public comment, Natural Resources Manager Hill stated that rezoning could be implemented as a Plan action item. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Riggs stressed the importance of enforcement against illicit uses. There were no further comments from the Commission. On motion by Commr. Riggs, seconded by Commr. Draze, to recommend that the City Council adopt the draft Terrace Hill Open Space Conservation Plan and Initial Study/ Negative Declaration, with the following revision: 1. Staff shall add an action item addressing the inconsistency of the site’s zoning with the General Plan. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. Commr. Draze departed the meeting at 11:13 p.m. ATTACHMENT 12 PH2-215 Draft Planning Commission Minutes April 8, 2015 Page 11 COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 5. Staff a. Agenda Forecast Deputy Community Development Director Davidson gave a summary of upcoming agenda items. b. Bylaws Community Development Director Davidson presented the staff report, recommending that the Commission review the Bylaws and offer any desired updates to staff to carry forward for Council consideration. There were no comments or suggested revisions from the Commission. 6. Commission There were no comments from the Commission. ADJOURMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 11:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Erica Inderlied Recording Secretary ATTACHMENT 12 PH2-216 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ATTACHMENT 13 PH2-217 ATTACHMENT 13 PH2-218 ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN 9 Implementation Attachment 14 City of San Luis Obispo Pages 9-6 and 9-7 May 2015 NEW OASP Section 9.10 … 9.10 RECORD OF INTERPRETATIONS – ADJUSTMENTS – AMENDMENTS to the Specific Plan The following summarizes various interpretations, adjustments and amendments to the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) since the adoption of the Plan in March, 2010. References and notes are added for the Reader’s convenience, and the specific actions referenced should be consulted for mo re details as to each action. Date amendment/adjustment/clarification Dec 3, 2013 City Council interpretation that flexibility in “mass grading” and alterations of natural topography could be considered in large lot subdivision proposals (Resolution ____) (pending 2015) Righetti Ranch (Tract 3063) and Jones Ranch (Tract 3066) - City Resolution reference(s) 1. Amendments to General Plan Land Use Element Map including: a. On the Jones Ranch, 0.38 acres of Single-Family lands changed to Multi-Family lands. b. On the Righetti Ranch, approximately 2.8 acres of Recreation has been relocated in order to establish comparable acres of R-1 and R-3 reorientation. c. On the Righetti Ranch, reconfigure the location of the Urban Reserve Line including a net reduction of 0.85 acres. 2. Amendments to the OASP text and Figure 1.3 including: a. On the Jones Ranch, 0.38 acres of Single-Family lands changed to Multi-Family lands. b. On the Righetti Ranch, approximately 2.8 acres of Recreation has been relocated in order to establish comparable acres of R-1 and R-3 reorientation. c. On the Righetti Ranch, reconfigure the location of the Urban Reserve Line (URL) including a net reduction of 0.85 acres. Figure 1.3 is graphically revised to reflect this change, and this updated URL location on Figure 1.3 shall supersede other OASP exhibits or figures otherwise in conflict. d. Reoriented wetlands mitigation areas to follow FEIR. e. Add Section 9.10 to track amendments, interpretations and adjustments within the OASP. 3. Interpretations/Adjustments to OASP standards specific to the Righetti Ranch (VTM#3063) and Jones Ranch (VTM#3066) projects include: PH2-219 ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN 9 Implementation Attachment 14 City of San Luis Obispo Pages 9-6 and 9-7 May 2015 Program 2.4.1d (setbacks and height limits on “sensitive parcels”) Site specific limits implemented by CEQA review and Tract #3063 and #3066 Conditions of Approval (COA’s) CC action date……. Building Heights in R-1 zones (otherwise 25’ max.) Site specific limits and variations between 15’-35’ implemented by CEQA review and Tract #3063 and #3066 COA’s CC action date……. Conservation / Open Space Element requires 50’ setbacks from URL The OASP provided for flexible setbacks and supersedes the C/OS Element CC action date……. Lot Coverage in R-1 zones (otherwise 40% max.) Site specific variations up to 50% maximum lot coverage by tract COA’s CC action date……. Street Sections Variation in standards subject to Public Works Director approval CC action date……. Creek Setbacks and Driveway Lengths Site specific variations implemented by CEQA review and Tract #3063 and #3066 COA’s CC action date……. PH2-220 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director Chris Staley, Acting Chief of Police Prepared By: Christine Wallace, Neighborhood Outreach Manager SUBJECT: NEIGHBORHOOD WELLNESS/COMMUNITY CIVILITY WORKING GROUP RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDATION Receive and file the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Working Group report and provide direction to staff with regards to implementation of recommendations or additional areas to explore to improve Neighborhood Wellness. DISCUSSION Background On May 21, 2013 Council approved the formation of the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Working Group. This group (Attachment 1) comprised of Cal Poly University leadership, Cuesta College leadership, City staff, residents and students of both institutions has met regularly since October 2013. The Vision and Goals of the working group were established to guide the process: Vision: A City in which year-round residents and students actively collaborate to build community and communicate in an environment that fosters mutual respect and understanding. Goals: To enhance the quality of life for all residents, with particular emphasis on building positive relations between residential and student-aged neighbors through a cultural shift in social behaviors. The Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Working Group identified six objectives to research and formulated recommendations that support the vision and goals as stated above: 1. Define short-term actions that could be implemented to enhance quality of life for all residents particularly associated in the timeframe around the opening of the Cal Poly and Cuesta campuses at the beginning of the school year 2. Define stakeholders’ needs and success 3. Identify University/City best practices 4. Review enforcement best practices 5-19-2015 SS1 SS1-1 NEIGHBORHOOD WELLNESS/COMMUNITY CIVILITY WORKING GROUP RECOMMENDATIONS Page 2 5. Engage stakeholders: review current educational and information efforts 6. Prepare for sustained engagement to achieve desired vision and goal Within the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Working Group, smaller sub- committees formed to take ownership of the research and recommendations for each objective. Each monthly meeting in late 2014 through early 2015 was specifically dedicated for the group to discuss and refine the recommendations of each individual sub-committee and work towards consensus. The final report details the recommendations of the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Working Group (Attachment 2). It is to be noted that several initiatives were developed and enacted during the time the working group has been meeting including the Safety Enhancement Zone for Start of School, the Neighborhood Officer and Neighborhood Services Specialists “Walk and Talks”, and improvements to Clean Up Week to more effectively address the abandoned refuse left by rental tenant turnover. Cal Poly University has developed an educational program for students who have been cited or arrested for off-campus alcohol related infractions through the Dean of Students office. Additionally, University Police are actively patrolling the neighborhoods immediately off campus and are assisting SLOPD with enforcement of State laws. Cuesta College has updated their scope of application board policy language in order to hold students accountable for off-campus behaviors under some circumstances. Cuesta College is also including SLOPD/Neighborhood Outreach at their resource fairs and orientation to disseminate neighborhood wellness information related to noise and blight. As part of the Council’s consideration of this item there may be desire to provide feedback to the staff on the initiatives contained in the Working Group’s report. While it would not be appropriate to direct changes to the Working Group’s report, this input could include identifying initiatives the Council wishes staff to explore further as part of the Council’s Neighborhood Wellness Other Important Objective and/or consider at a future City Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS 1. Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Working Group Membership 2. Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Working Group Report \\chstore7\Team\Council Agenda Reports\2015\2015-05-19\Neighborhood Wellness Community Civility Report (Gesell-Johnson)\Council Agenda Report.docx SS1-2 Ne i g h b o r h o o d S e r v i c e s T e a m Ca l P o l y - C i t y o f S a n L u i s O b i s p o W o r k i n g G r o u p St u d e n t / R e s i d e n t Ne i g h b o r h o o d W e l l n e s s Go v e r n a n c e S t r u c t u r e Co n s u l t & Ad v i s e Pu b l i c I n p u t Recommend 4/ 1 5 / 2 0 1 3 Pu b l i c Mi s s i o n : Re s e a r c h , i d e n t i f y a n d im p l e m e n t C o u n c i l an d C a l P o l y st r a t e g i e s t o e n h a n c e th e q u a l i t y o f l i f e f o r al l r e s i d e n t s w i t h a n em p h a s i s o n b u i l d i n g po s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s be t w e e n r e s i d e n t i a l an d s t u d e n t - a g e d ne i g h b o r s t h r o u g h a cu l t u r a l s h i f t i n s o c i a l be h a v i o r s Mission:Exchange information and ideas to implement neighborhood wellness goals. Ci t y C o u n c i l Ca l P o l y Pr e s i d e n t Po l i c e De p a r t m e n t Pu b l i c W o r k s Fi r e De p a r t m e n t Ci t y Ma n a g e r Co m m u n i t y De v e l o p m e n t De p a r t m e n t Ca l P o l y Pr e s i d e n t ’ s Of f i c e Cal Poly Student AffairsCal Poly PoliceASI Cal Poly RQ N Ne i g h b o r h o o d Gr o u p s Re s i d e n t s Cu e s t a St u d e n t s Ca l P o l y St u d e n t s Ca l P o l y A S I Ca l P o l y Ho u s i n g Parking ServicesCode EnforcementPolice Department St u d e n t L i f e (t e n t a t i v e ) Attachment 1 SS1-3 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK May 12, 2015 The Honorable Jan Marx Mayor City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Dr. Gil Stork Superintendent/President Cuesta College Highway 1 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 Dr. Jeffrey D. Armstrong President Cal Poly State University 1 Grand Avenue San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 Dear Mayor Marx, Drs. Stork and Armstrong: On behalf of the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort working group, we are pleased to present our final report for acceptance. The report contained with this letter is the result of 18 months of collaboration and discussions among residents, students, university and college staff, and City leadership. The action plans and timelines for implementation contained within this report are the result of a consensus agreement by all members of the working group, and these actions will result in improved neighborhood wellness in San Luis Obispo. All groups are ready to begin implementation, upon acceptance of this report. We welcome your suggestions to the report’s action items. The Student Community Liaison Committee is the body identified in this process to consider modifications during their oversight of this plan’s implementation. Thank you for the opportunity to serve the San Luis Obispo community! Sincerely, Keith B. Humphrey, Ph.D. Sandee L. McLaughlin Vice President for Student Affairs Vice President for Student Services & College Centers Cal Poly Cuesta College Enc. Attachment 2 SS1-4 San Luis Obispo Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort FINAL REPORT Spring 2015 - Enhancing the quality of life for all residents - Attachment 2 SS1-5 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................................. 3 PROCESS ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 OBJECTIVE ONE: Define short-term actions to enhance the quality of life .............................................. 5 OBJECTIVE TWO: Define stakeholders’ needs and success ....................................................................... 7 OBJECTIVE THREE: Identify university/city best practices ................................................................... 10 OBJECTIVE FOUR: Review enforcement best practices .......................................................................... 17 OBJECTIVE FIVE: Engage stakeholders: review current educational & information efforts .................. 23 OBJECTIVE SIX: Prepare for sustained engagement to achieve desired vision & goal ............................ 25 APPENDIX A: Working Group Membership ........................................................................................... 28 APPENDIX B: Council Agenda Report .................................................................................................... 29 APPENDIX C: Full Survey Report ........................................................................................................... 54 APPENDIX D: Matrix of All Action Items .............................................................................................. 70 APPENDIX E: Post March 7 Recommendations ...................................................................................... 76 APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Report .................................................................. 79 Attachment 2 SS1-6 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 3 OVERVIEW ith the focus of making San Luis Obispo an even more vibrant community for residents and students to reside in, community representatives, Cal Poly and Cuesta College administrators, students and San Luis Obispo city staff have worked side by side to coordinate their efforts through the Neighborhood Wellness/ Community Civility Effort. The effort was launched in May of 2013 with the support of the San Luis Obispo City Council, Cal Poly President Jeffrey Armstrong, and Cuesta College President/Superintendent Gil Stork. This initiative aimed to discuss the changing culture of neighborhoods in San Luis Obispo resulting from the shifts of owner-occupied households to the increase in rental units, specifically by student-aged individuals. Collectively, the working group has a vision of building “a community in which year-round residents and students actively collaborate to build community and communicate in an environment that fosters mutual respect and understanding.” The unified goal of the working group has been to develop ideas for stakeholder consideration that are intended to “enhance the quality of life for all residents.” The group responded to the six objectives created by the San Luis Obispo City Council with subsequent recommendations, desired outcomes, implementation leads and partners, and timelines for implementation. The objectives are outlined below, and each is addressed thoroughly in this report. Define short-term actions to enhance the quality of life Define stakeholders’ needs and success Identify university/city best practices Review enforcement best practices Engage stakeholders: review current educational and information efforts Prepare for sustained engagement to achieve desired vision and goal W From the recommendations above and active collaboration within the working group, three overall themes emerged: Increase communications from Cal Poly and Cuesta College Develop responses through solution-oriented initiatives Set in motion proactive measures to avoid repeating past mistakes and preventing new problems from occurring Attachment 2 SS1-7 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 4 PROCESS Beginning work in October of 2013, the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort working group conducted a thoughtful study of the objectives outlined by the San Luis Obispo City Council and created a process to efficiently move the community into action. Champions were assigned to each objective, and the subsequent 13 meetings, hosted by Cuesta College, were devoted to discussions of the objectives, led by the champions. Champions for the objectives are presented below: Note: Names in parentheses denote past working group members. During the robust discussions for each objective the entire working group offered feedback on the work of the champions and direction on how to proceed. Each group returned to conduct further studies based on the feedback and direction of this group. The champions provided recommendations to the working group in late 2014. Each of the recommendations were discussed and affirmed during the monthly meetings, which focused specifically on one particular objective. It is those recommendations that are presented in this report. OBJECTIVE ONE: Karen Adler, Julie Towery OBJECTIVE TWO: Katie Lichtig, Joi Sullivan (Jason Colombini), Dr. Anthony Gutierrez, Juventino Ortiz OBJECTIVE THREE: Derek Johnson, Stephanie Teaford (Justin Wellner, Betsy Kinsley) OBJECTIVE FOUR: Joe Arteaga, Steve Gesell, George Hughes, Chris Staley, Brenda Trobaugh OBJECTIVE FIVE: Scott Chedester (Charles Scovell), Dr. Anthony Gutierrez, Kimberly Hampton, Joi Sullivan (Jason Colombini), Christine Wallace OBJECTIVE SIX: Dr. Keith Humphrey, Sandee McLaughlin Attachment 2 SS1-8 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 5 Goal To define short-term actions that could be implemented to enhance the quality of life for all residents, particularly associated in the timeframe around the start of Cal Poly’s fall term. OBJECTIVE ONE: Define short-term actions to enhance the quality of life Champions Karen Adler, Community Julie Towery, Community Background Historically, there has been an increase in calls for service around the neighborhood areas adjacent to Cal Poly coinciding with start of the school year. This objective is set to define what short-term actions could lead to positive long-term effects during that timeframe. Short-term actions are also distributed among all objectives, thus are not exclusive to objective one. Recommendations Schedule regular neighborhood tours with city council, mayor, neighbors, Cal Poly and Cuesta College leaders, etc. Investigate establishing Student Nighttime Auxiliary Patrol (S.N.A.P.) Ride-Along program and promote current Police Ride Along program Explore the option of creating a noise ordinance in public spaces on streets and sidewalks for gatherings of more than 50 people by issuing citations or other alternative options Consider expanding tools to enforce ordinances for nuisance properties including, but not limited to, “tagging” properties that meet a definition of a public nuisance or unruly gatherings in terms of both property-maintenance concerns and behavior issues Evaluate policies so that new development or redevelopment does not unduly impact neighborhoods Attachment 2 SS1-9 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 6 Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Schedule regular neighborhood tours with city council, mayor, neighbors, Cal Poly and Cuesta leaders, etc. Allow neighbors to point out neighborhood issues Cal Poly Ongoing, began Summer of 2014 Investigate establishing S.N.A.P. Ride-Along program and promote current Police Ride Along program Increase the amount of support to assist with complaints and allow officers to do other police work City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2015 Explore the option of creating a noise ordinance in public spaces on streets and sidewalks for gatherings of more than 50 people by issuing citations or other alternative options Decrease number of noise complaints City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Consider expanding tools to enforce ordinances for nuisance properties including, but not limited to, “tagging” properties that meet a definition of a public nuisance or unruly gatherings in terms of both property- maintenance concerns and behavior issues Hold repeat noise violators accountable City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Evaluate policies so that new development or redevelopment does not unduly impact neighborhoods. Decrease properties that allow for high occupancy City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2016 Attachment 2 SS1-10 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 7 OBJECTIVE TWO: Define stakeholders’ needs and success Champions Dr. Anthony Gutierrez, Cuesta College Katie Lichtig, City of San Luis Obispo Juventino Ortiz, Community Joi Sullivan (Jason Colombini), Cal Poly Goal For Cal Poly, Cuesta College and the City of San Luis Obispo to use the results of the community-wide survey to suggest efforts for implementation to address community-defined issues. Background The purpose of this objective is to identify the stakeholders’ needs and suggest solutions so that the outcomes reflect a desired environment for the community. To obtain a comprehensive assessment of the community’s needs and what success looked like, a communitywide survey was mailed in May of 2014. A total of 3, 774 surveys were completed and returned, physically and electronically. Of the completed surveys, 1,706 were from non- student residents, 1,783 were from individuals identifying themselves as either Cal Poly or Cuesta students, and 318 individuals did not associate themselves with any group. The full survey results and discussion is offered in Appendix C. Recommendations The assessment results provided a clearer picture of the stakeholder perceptions, which helped develop potential recommendations, such as: Evaluate best practices and implement strategies to reduce the number of disruptions from parties and noise in neighborhoods (as referenced in Objective Three) Develop and implement a rental housing inspection program Implement a range of strategies to change the relationship and culture between students and non-students in neighborhoods Explore and implement strategies to address the concentration of bars in the downtown area and related safety issues. Consider using strategies identified in the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) update to achieve this objective Implement educational programs to increase the number of student-aged residents who bring in their trashcans on the same day the trash is picked up Implement strategies to reduce traffic issues in neighborhoods. Consider using strategies identified in the Land Use and Circulation Element update to achieve this objective Attachment 2 SS1-11 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 8 Continue to implement strategies to address homelessness in San Luis Obispo (particularly in the downtown area) Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Evaluate best practices and implement strategies to reduce the number of disruptions from parties and noise in neighborhoods (as referenced in Objective Three) Reduce noise disruptions Cal Poly and Cuesta College (programmatic) City of San Luis Obispo (enforcement) Fall 2015 Develop and implement a rental housing inspection program Insure that rental units comply with required minimum health and safety standards City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2016 Implement a range of strategies to change the relationship and culture between students and non-students in neighborhoods (no specific recommendations discerned from the survey results) Improve student and community relationships Cal Poly Associated Student, Inc. (ASI) and Associate Students for Cuesta College (ASCC) Spring 2016 Explore and implement strategies to address the concentration of bars in the downtown area and related safety issues. Consider using strategies identified in the Land Use and Circulation Element update to achieve this objective Address and decrease safety-related issues City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing per LUCE strategies Implement educational programs to increase the number of student-aged residents who bring in their trashcans on the same day the trash is picked up Increase the number of student-age residents to comply with the 24-hour ordinance City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing Continue to implement strategies to address homelessness in San Luis Obispo (particularly in the downtown area) A reduction in the impacts of homelessness on the community City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing Attachment 2 SS1-12 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 9 Implement strategies to reduce traffic issues in neighborhoods. Consider using strategies identified in the Land Use and Circulation Element update to achieve this objective Reduce traffic-related issues in neighborhoods City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing Attachment 2 SS1-13 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 10 OBJECTIVE THREE: Identify university/city best practices Champions Derek Johnson, City of San Luis Obispo Stephanie Teaford (Betsy Kinsley, Justin Wellner), Cal Poly Goal To identify best practices that can be undertaken by Cal Poly, in collaboration with the City of San Luis Obispo, to enhance positive interactions between students and permanent residents. Background Universities and colleges across the nation impact the communities in which they exist in both positive and negative ways. The impact of students in residential neighborhoods has prompted higher education institutions to share best practices that can lead to improvements in community relationships and mitigate negative impacts. The objective explored various programs and efforts undertaken by universities and colleges nationwide. The following recommendations could provide a framework for improving relations between student residents and permanent residents of San Luis Obispo. Attachment 2 SS1-14 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 11 Recommendations To address student rental properties Create and implement a transition to Off-Campus Living Education Program, to be shared with Cuesta College’s Student Life Office Include expectations and responsibilities of living in neighborhoods in the City of San Luis Obispo (e.g. local ordinances) The successful completion of a culminating test will result in a Preferred Renter Certification with potential benefits offered by landlords Work with the city to generate a neighborhood map of housing rental properties and provide outreach to student renters by funding welcome bags for neighbors to distribute to establish positive interactions (University of Colorado, Boulder) Create a Renter/Rental Housing Inspection Program. Students and landlords can work together for preferred renter/rental designation o Beautification Program: “Door Decal” or “Golden Arrow” for upkeep of property and meeting standards for appearance and safety o Student Affairs Awards: Awarded yearly to no-complaint housing (LaSalle University) o Preferred rental properties listed with the city o Request the release of judicial information to off campus entities (Plymouth State University) Attachment 2 SS1-15 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 12 To alleviate nighttime noise and to build compassion and understanding Develop outreach and marketing efforts toward students (University of Massachusetts, Amherst) Implement a Party Registration Program. Develop a program to incentivize party registration that provides the opportunity for the San Luis Obispo Police Department to contact the party registrant and offer a 20-minute warning before dispatching S.N.A.P. or a police officer. This provides the students a way to minimize impacts on enforcement resources (University of Colorado, Boulder) Initiate Dialog Dinners or Block Parties for students and residents to talk about what they like most about their neighborhoods (University of Colorado, Boulder) Promote the principles of the The Mustang Way in neighborhoods: o Student Neighborhood Liaisons: Block parties/events for networking. (University of Minnesota, Twin Cities & Towson University) o Neighborhood Helping Hands: Volunteerism for neighbor assistance (e.g. fruit picking, ladder needs, barn raising, etc.). Coordinate with campus departments to provide Learn by Doing experiences within neighborhoods for senior projects and other work-related majors such as horticulture, landscape architecture, construction management and others. o Peer-to-peer engagement for neighborhood policing; “Walk this Way Program” (University of Massachusetts, Amherst) Attachment 2 SS1-16 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 13 To improve collaboration and understanding among students, non-students and city groups, and to increase engagement in problem solving Continue to engage and communicate collaboratively among students, non-students and city groups. See Student Community Liaison Committee (SCLC), below. Utilize various on-campus departments and offices that support living off-campus (Off- Campus Student Life; Cuesta College Student Life and Leadership; Student & Community Relations; Office of Neighborhood Life; Student Neighborhood Relations; Neighborhood University Relations and Neighbors; and Student Life and Leadership at Cuesta College) to: o Support all students, non-students, and permanent residents in the communities surrounding Cal Poly o Educate students about university policies and local ordinances o Continue to build and strengthen neighborhood relations by facilitating dialogue o Promote civic citizenship to create a positive quality of life for everyone living in the neighborhoods (Georgetown University) o Specific communications and strategies could include: A 100 percent response policy for any time, any issue, by enforcing a prompt and meaningful response The police provide a blueprint that lets students and neighbors know exactly what to expect when a community concern is registered with the university The policy will establish a standard for reporting an incident (through a university helpline); clear steps that would be taken for follow-up with the student (through an updated sanction chart) and community members; and what data would be collected to create a metric to evaluate student success and outcomes (Georgetown University) Sustained conflict resolution services such as “SLO Solutions,” a jointly sponsored citywide conflict-resolution program specifically designed to address student-neighbor issues and provide a means for constructive resolution. Since 2004, this program has used the services of Creative Mediation to resolve a variety of community disputes at no cost to those seeking mediation Sustained SCLC effort. For more than 20 years, Cal Poly’s Associated Students, Inc. (ASI), Associated Students of Cuesta College (ASCC), and the city have served as leaders on the committee. It was established to further student and community communication and develop positive relationships Attachment 2 SS1-17 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 14 Neighborhood Concerns Phone Line: Neighbors can call in with concerns. Cal Poly and Cuesta College staff can recommend actions and contact students (Colorado University, Boulder) Quarterly walkabouts and coffee sessions with city residents and representatives from Cal Poly, Cuesta College and the city One-hour walkabouts will be scheduled, every third month and will take place at various times throughout the neighborhoods surrounding the campus. During these walks they will explore student housing rentals, party atmosphere, traffic impacts and Greek housing One-hour coffee sessions or “listening sessions” will be scheduled every third month, in the afternoon, at a local venue to discuss such topics as the Cal Poly Master Plan and vision for the future, diversity and inclusivity, students in the community, and year- end accomplishments and challenges Develop proactive engagement of law and code enforcement with visits to properties of concern; “Knock and Talk” (University of Maryland). Implement a Joint Letter Program. Police contact with students in off-campus housing who generates letters signed by the university, police and city that outlines expectations. It is sent to the resident and landlord (University of Oregon) o Tagging for repeat offending or problem properties Attachment 2 SS1-18 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 15 Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Create and implement a transition to Off-Campus Living Education Program, to be shared with Cuesta College’s Student Life Office Set expectations and responsibilities for students living in neighborhoods in the City of San Luis Obispo Cal Poly Summer 2015 Work with the city to generate a neighborhood map of housing rental properties and provide outreach to student renters by funding welcome bags for neighbors to distribute to establish positive interactions Establish positive interaction with City Cal Poly ASI , ASCC, City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Create a Renter/Rental Housing Inspection Program Rental properties that meet minimum health and safety standards Cal Poly, City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Develop outreach and marketing efforts toward students Raise awareness of the impacts of noise on neighborhood Cal Poly Spring 2016 Implement a Party Registration Program. Develop a program to incentivize party registration that provides the opportunity for the San Luis Obispo Police Department to contact the party registrant and offer a 20- minute warning before dispatching S.N.A.P. or a police officer Fewer noise citations City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Initiate Dialog Dinners or Block Parties for students and residents to talk about what they like most about their neighborhoods Create positive interactions between students and year- round residents Cal Poly ASI, ASCC Ongoing Promote the principles of the The Mustang Way in neighborhoods Enhance a positive culture of peer-to-peer accountability in neighborhoods Cal Poly ASI Ongoing Attachment 2 SS1-19 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 16 Continue to engage and communicate collaboratively among students, non-students and city groups Improve collaboration and understanding among students, non- students and city groups SCLC Ongoing Utilize various on-campus departments and offices that support living off-campus to support students, non- students and permanent residents living in neighborhoods. Educate students about university policies and ordinances, strengthen neighborhood relations by facilitating dialogs Cal Poly & Cuesta College Fall 2015 Develop proactive engagement of law and code enforcement with visits to properties of concern; “Knock and Talk”. Positive engagement with law enforcement and decrease repeat offending properties City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing Implement a Joint Letter Program. Police contact with students in off-campus housing generates letter signed by university, police and city that outlines expectations sent to resident and landlord Cal Poly Fall 2015 Attachment 2 SS1-20 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 17 Goal That Cal Poly, Cuesta College and the City of San Luis Obispo police departments consider implementing strategies to address community civility and quality-of-life matters. OBJECTIVE FOUR: Review enforcement best practices Champions Joe Arteaga, Cuesta College Steve Gesell, City of San Luis Obispo George Hughes, Cal Poly Chris Staley, City of San Luis Obispo Brenda Trobaugh, Cal Poly Attachment 2 SS1-21 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 18 Background In the past several years, both Cal Poly and the City of San Luis Obispo have engaged in numerous programs to address quality of life and community wellness. Both organizations have expanded professional staff dedicated to neighborhood wellness, created and modified ordinances, and implemented new programs to address pubic disorder and nuisance crimes including but not limited to: Amendments to the noise ordinance In 2010 the San Luis Obispo Police Department made recommendations to the city council regarding changes to the existing noise ordinance to improve noise reduction efforts. The modifications included reducing the number of allowable warnings to one every six months and to hold residential property owners responsible for repeat noise violations. Many landlords have since added language to their lease and rental agreements with penalties levied to their tenants who receive noise violations. These modifications were accepted by city council and noise complaints were significantly reduced by 30 percent for the following year and have been maintained since (see Table 1 below). Table 1: Total noise party violations reported from 2009 to 2014. 200920102011201220132014 Noise Violations 258422382013164416721729 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 Noise Party Violations Attachment 2 SS1-22 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 19 Unruly Gathering Ordinance In 2010 the San Luis Obispo Police Department conducted research on Unruly Gathering Ordinances. After extensive research and outreach to the community and Cal Poly, an Unruly Gathering Ordinance was proposed and accepted by the city council. The ordinance was intended to prevent substantial disturbances on private property in a neighborhood. This included unlawful and disruptive behavior by large groups of people. On April 6, 2010, the city council adopted section SLMC 9.13.030 Prohibition of Unruly Gatherings. A violation of the Unruly Gathering Ordinance consists of hosting a gathering on private property that: Involves 20 people or more; and Involves unlawful conduct that creates a substantial disturbance in a significant segment of a neighborhood. “Unlawful conduct that results in a substantial disturbance can include such things as excessive noise, public drunkenness, serving alcohol to minors, fighting, urinating in public, crowds overflowing into yards, sidewalks, or streets, or similar unlawful behaviors.” Neighborhood Officer Program The San Luis Obispo Police Department initiated its Neighborhood Officer Program on December 1, 2013. The goal of the Neighborhood Officer Program is to quickly identify community issues, concerns, problems and crime trends that have long-term quality-of-life impacts on a particular neighborhood. The Neighborhood Officer Program allows for officers to coordinate resources to help solve these problems. This model of policing is both a philosophy and an organizational strategy that allows police and community residents to work closely together in new ways to solve problems associated with crime, fear of crime, social disorder and neighborhood decay. Attainable goals of this program include: Maintain or increase public confidence in the Police Department Decrease fear of crime Listen to and address citizen concerns Bring community resources together to solve problems Impact specific crime problems Reduce repetitive calls for service Educate the public about its Police Department Attachment 2 SS1-23 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 20 Student Community Success Program In 2013 Cal Poly hired a full-time off-campus student life coordinator to be both proactive and reactive in supporting students and neighborhood residents with neighborhood wellness initiatives. Responsibilities of the position include: Coordinate the resolution of off-campus conduct with university administration, city government and community members to find solutions for student’s problems or concerns Assist in mediating and resolving student/community conflicts Effect change in the social climate and relationships with specific responsibility of working with students and their neighbors within the local community Implement training sessions, presentations, and educational programs regarding substance abuse, civic and social responsibility One goal of the program is to create a Student Community Success Program with the mission to help students be successful off campus and address community concerns. The program is intended to change and encourage inappropriate behavior through community and student meetings, workshops, leadership panels, and peer-mentoring opportunities. Cal Poly University Police Off-Campus Patrols By authority of the California Penal Code, the University Police Department has legal authority to exercise peace officer powers within a one-mile radius of the exterior boundaries of campus (see Appendix A). In 2014 Cal Poly hired two additional police officers to expand proactive patrols within the neighborhoods directly adjacent to campus. The focus of these patrols has been to proactively discourage and enforce public disorder crimes. Recommendations City and Cal Poly officials should craft a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) agreement between the city and university regarding police operational protocol Partner Cal Poly and Cuesta police officers with San Luis Obispo Neighborhood Officers to coordinate resources and achieve program goals Attachment 2 SS1-24 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 21 City should explore additional proactive educational opportunities with Cal Poly and Cuesta College to change the student culture related to neighborhood wellness Implement a keg registration program Conduct an internal assessment of the San Luis Obispo Police Department staffing to prepare for growth within the city and on the Cal Poly campus to ensure staffing needs match the population Conduct an internal assessment of the University Police Department staffing to meet the growth on the Cal Poly campus Explore the possibility of Cal Poly Police being able to issue City Municipal Administrative Citations Location of a university police substation within the new residence hall project to coordinate law enforcement problem-solving efforts Attachment 2 SS1-25 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 22 Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation City and Cal Poly officials to craft a Memorandum of Understanding agreement between the city and university regarding police operational protocol within a one- mile radius Allows for coordination of resources to quickly respond to community concerns Cal Poly, City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2015 Partner Cal Poly and Cuesta police officers with San Luis Obispo Neighborhood Officers to coordinate resources and achieve program goals To coordinate resources and obtain program goals City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2015 City should explore additional proactive educational opportunities with Cal Poly and Cuesta College to change the student culture related to neighborhood wellness Change student culture related to neighborhood wellness SCLC Fall 2016, and with each annual report Implement a keg registration program A reduction in underage alcohol use and an accountability mechanism for persons who serve minors City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2016 Conduct an internal assessment of the San Luis Obispo Police Department staffing to prepare for growth within the city and on the Cal Poly campus to ensure staffing needs match the population Meet the needs of the community as population grows City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Conduct an internal assessment of the University Police Department staffing to meet the growth on the Cal Poly campus Meet the needs of Cal Poly as student population grows Cal Poly Spring 2016 Explore the possibility of Cal Poly Police being able to issue City Municipal Administrative Citations To be able to patrol in neighborhoods adjacent to Cal Poly campus Addressed via MOU identified above Location of a university police substation within the new residence hall project to coordinate law enforcement problem-solving efforts Coordinate law enforcement outreach and problem solving efforts Cal Poly Fall 2018 Attachment 2 SS1-26 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 23 Goal To engage stakeholders: review current educational and informational efforts. OBJECTIVE FIVE: Engage stakeholders: review current educational & information efforts Champions Scott Chedester (Charles Scovell), Cuesta College Dr. Anthony Gutierrez, Cuesta College Kimberly Hampton, Cal Poly Joi Sullivan (Jason Colombini), Cal Poly Christine Wallace, City of San Luis Obispo Background This objective examines the methods, content and effectiveness of educational efforts put forward by Cal Poly, Cuesta College, the City of San Luis Obispo, and student resident groups. The inventory of channels of communication was compiled by representatives of Cal Poly, Cuesta College, and the City of San Luis Obispo. Neighborhood wellness meeting attendees, Cal Poly and Cuesta College student focus groups were presented with the inventory. An additional student subcommittee met to discuss the effectiveness of current methods and content. Suggestions for outreach changes made during the presentations based on the content effectiveness are reflected in the recommendations of this report. Recommendations The recommendation is to collaboratively create an annual communications plan containing neighborhood wellness messages and a process for communicating the information effectively to maximize resources. The communication plan should be reassessed annually to evaluate effectiveness and to ensure resources are not duplicated or wasted. Communications plan participants could consist of representatives from Cal Poly, Cuesta College and the city. Suggestions for the Subcommittee Produce a variety of impactful electronic and print media to educate residents on property maintenance standards, with a specific focus on repeat offenders in neighborhoods Attachment 2 SS1-27 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 24 Revive the Off-Campus Housing Guide (University of Colorado, Boulder) Produce video for new Cuesta College students to view as part of the required online orientation on “how to be a good neighbor” Produce “good neighbor” and Safety Enhancement Zone videos for www.respectslo.com (Linked to Cal Poly websites and campus television stations) Cal Poly University Housing bulletin boards made available for “good neighbor” and Safety Enhancement Zone messaging Cuesta College bulletin boards are made available for “good neighbor” and Safety Enhancement Zone messaging. Create and play radio public service announcements on KCPR Conduct annual presentations to Block P – Cal Poly Athletics Develop an information distribution plan with off-campus housing providers and property management; request Safety Enhancement and good neighbor materials be posted Housing resident assistant training to include off-campus impacts Create better avenues of communication with Greek Life house owners Produce Safety Enhancement Zone door hangers Produce banners and sandwich boards to be displayed in the Cal Poly and Cuesta College university unions about community and neighborhood wellness issues Produce table tents in Cal Poly University Union and Cuesta College cafeteria Involve off-campus housing providers (property management companies, housing complex managers) in outreach efforts Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Create an annual communications plan containing neighborhood wellness messages and a process for communicating the information effectively to maximize resources Effectively inform the community on matters of neighborhood wellness City of San Luis Obispo Winter 2015 Attachment 2 SS1-28 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 25 Goal The purpose of objective six of the report is to ensure that the plans developed in objectives one through five are implemented, assessed, and folded into the regular operations of the appropriate agency (for ongoing efforts). Additionally, the goal is to sustain regular communications between Cal Poly, Cuesta College, the City of San Luis Obispo, residents and students. OBJECTIVE SIX: Prepare for sustained engagement to achieve desired vision & goal Champions Dr. Keith Humphrey, Cal Poly Sandee McLaughlin, Cuesta College Background Neighborhood wellness issues in San Luis Obispo have historically been fragmented within each agency by implementing its own projects, causing confusion among year-round residents, and limiting the effectiveness of each individual effort. There is a unified desire among all constituencies in San Luis Obispo to see the quality of life improve in neighborhoods, and a structure to coordinate these efforts was missing. For almost three decades, the Student- Community Liaison Committee (SCLC) has brought the students of Cal Poly and Cuesta College together with city officials and residents for communication and discussion. This forum has been valuable to all parties, as any culture change related to neighborhood wellness rests with the students. Recommendations Re-invest in the Student-Community Liaison Committee The Student-Community Liaison Committee should assess the effectiveness of each recommendation once they have been implemented Shift SCLC memberships Host an annual town hall meeting Attachment 2 SS1-29 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 26 Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Re-invest in the Student- Community Liaison Committee Become the coordinating body responsible for monitoring the recommendations, once adopted by the city council, Cal Poly and Cuesta College SCLC Fall 2015, ongoing The Student-Community Liaison Committee should assess the effectiveness of each recommendation once they have been implemented Recommend the appropriate changes, and produce an annual report on the state of neighborhood wellness in the City of San Luis Obispo SCLC Ongoing Shift SCLC memberships SCLC memberships should be reevaluated to directly involve those individuals (by their position) most directly involved in neighborhood wellness SCLC Spring 2016 Host an annual town hall meeting Present their report to the community, receive feedback and suggestions from the broader San Luis Obispo community SCLC Spring 2016, ongoing Attachment 2 SS1-30 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 27 Attachment 2 SS1-31 Appendix A: Working Group Membership Page 28 APPENDIX A: Working Group Membership Dr. Keith Humphrey, Co-Chair Cal Poly Sandee McLaughlin, Co-Chair Cuesta College Karen Adler Community Joe Arteaga Cuesta College Scott Chedester (Charles Scovell) Cuesta College Steve Gesell City of San Luis Obispo Dr. Anthony Gutierrez Cuesta College George Hughes Cal Poly Kimberly Hampton Cal Poly Derek Johnson City of San Luis Obispo Katie Lichtig City of San Luis Obispo Juventino Ortiz Community Chris Staley City of San Luis Obispo Joi Sullivan (Jason Colombini) Cal Poly Stephanie Teaford (Betsy Kinsley, Justin Wellner) Cal Poly Julie Towery Community Brenda Trobaugh Cal Poly Christine Wallace City of San Luis Obispo Sharon Spatafora, Administrative Support Cuesta College Daisy Chavez, Copy Writing Cal Poly Yukie Murphy, Graphic Design & Editing Cal Poly Jo Ann Lloyd, Copy Editing Cal Poly Attachment 2 SS1-32 APPENDIX B: Council Agenda Report Attachment 2 SS1-33 Attachment 2 SS1-34 Attachment 2 SS1-35 Attachment 2 SS1-36 Attachment 2 SS1-37 Attachment 2 SS1-38 Attachment 2 SS1-39 Attachment 2 SS1-40 Attachment 2 SS1-41 Attachment 2 SS1-42 Attachment 2 SS1-43 Attachment 2 SS1-44 Attachment 2 SS1-45 Attachment 2 SS1-46 Attachment 2 SS1-47 Attachment 2 SS1-48 Attachment 2 SS1-49 Attachment 2 SS1-50 Attachment 2 SS1-51 Attachment 2 SS1-52 Attachment 2 SS1-53 Attachment 2 SS1-54 Attachment 2 SS1-55 Attachment 2 SS1-56 Attachment 2 SS1-57 Neighborhood Wellne ss and Community Civility Initiative: Summary Report from the City of San Luis Obispo Opinion Survey Peter B. Chi, Ph.D. Department of Statistics California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 1 Intro duction On May 21, 2013, the Neighborhood Wellne ss / Community Civility Effort was launched in order to foster and improve the relationship between year round residents of San Luis Obispo, and students of California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly), and Cuesta College. Specifically, there has been a growing concern regarding student partying and disruptive behavior across the city of San Luis Obispo. This has been highlighted by particular incidents of recent years, such as Cal Poly’s Week of Welco me (WOW) in 2012, when an estimated 2000+ students congregated in the residential area just directly south of campus, causing disruption and safety concerns as roads became impassable (City of San Luis Obispo, 2013) In addition to implementing particular strategies aimed at addressing WOW scheduling to at- tempt to keep students occupied on campus instead of disrupting neighborhoods surrounding cam- pus, the Neighborhood Wellness / Community Civility Effort implemented an opinion survey across the city of San Luis Obispo. This survey was meant to capture feedback from permanent residents and students, with the aim of identifying strategies to produce outcomes towards the overall goal of neighborhood wellness. In this report, data from the survey a re analyzed and reported in order to identify any notable trends. With no specific a priori hypotheses, this exploratory data analysis aims to capture anything that may be revealed from the data. A particular focus of the analyses, however, will be on identifying potential sources of conflict between Cal Poly students and non-student residents of San Luis Obispo. APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 54 Attachment 2 SS1-58 2 Metho dology The City of San Luis Obispo Opinion Survey was distributed with utility bills and across campus at Cal Poly. A total of 3,807 responses were received, and entered into SurveyMonkey (SurveyMonkey Inc., 2014). For analyses, the entire dataset was exported from SurveyMonkey as a comma-separated text file and imported into the statistical analys is p latform called R (R Development Core Team, 2011). Questions were written to either gain identifying information on an individual (such as “With what ethnicity do you most identify?”), or to gain content regarding how the individual feels about a particular topic or situation (such as a Likert-scale response to “I feel as though my neighbors are respectful of my property.”). For this report, these will be referred to as “identifying questions” and “content questions,” respectively. Figures 1 and 2 below are the actual survey, where the identifying questions can be seen in Figure 1: Questions 1 through 12, and the content questions are Questions 13 through the end, across both Figures 1 and 2. 1. Do you live in San Luis Obispo city limits? O Yes. I am eligible to continue with the survey. O No. If you do not currently live in San Luis Obispo we would appreciate your willingness to fill out the survey. However, our primary initial focus is to target relations within San Luis Obispo city limits and we are limiting survey participants to this area. 2. What is your age? O 18-24 years old O 59-65 years old O 25-31 years old O 66-71 years old O 32-38 years old O 72-78 years old O 39-45 years old O 79-85 years old O 46-51 years old O 86+ years old O 52-58 years old 3. With what gender do you identify? O Male O Transgender O Female O No response. 4. Are you currently attending Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, Cuesta College, or Allan Hancock College? O Yes. I am attending Cal Poly San Luis Obispo. O Yes. I am attending Cuesta College. O Yes. I am attending Allan Hancock College. O No. I am not currently attending any of these schools. If you are attending one of these schools, what year are you and what is your major? 5. With what ethnicity do you most identify? O African American/Black O American Indian/Alaska Native O Asian O Latino O Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander O White/Caucasian O Other (please specify): 6. Where is your current residence located? Please use your best judgement when picking a neighborhood O On Cal Poly’s campus. O Laguna area. O Cal Poly area. O Tank Farm/Broad area. O Johnson/Sinsheimer area. O Downtown area. O Foothill/N. Chorro area. 7. How many years have you lived in San Luis Obispo? 8. Were you born in San Luis Obispo? O Yes O No 9. How many people live in your household (include yourself in the number)? O 1 O 3 O 5 O 7 O 2 O 4 O 6 O 8+ 10. In what age group are the people who live in your household (mark all that apply)? O 0-17 years old O 52-58 years old O 18-24 years old O 59-65 years old O 25-31 years old O 66-71 years old O 32-38 years old O 72-78 years old O 39-45 years old O 79-85 years old O 46-51 years old O 86+ years old 11. How many more years do you see yourself staying in San Luis Obispo? O I have no plans of leaving. O 1 year O 5 years O 2 years O 6 years O 3 years O 7 years O 4 years O 8+ years 12. If you are renting your residence, please mark all that apply: O I am renting a room in a shared residence. O My residence is managed by a property management company. O My landlord lives outside San Luis Obispo. O My landlord lives in San Luis Obispo. O My landlord lives in my residence. O I am not renting my residence. O Other (please specify): 13. When I return to my house after school or work: O I can assume that there will be parking relatively close to my house. O I frequently have trouble finding parking relatively close to my house. O I rarely find parking relatively close to my house. Comments: 14. After the garbage companies empty the trashcans, I usually bring in my household’s trashcans off of the street: O The same evening. O Sometime the next day. O Within the next 2 – 3 days. O Within the next week. Comments: 15. After the garbage companies empty the trashcans, my neighbors usually bring in their household’s trashcans off of the street: O The same evening. O Sometime the next day. O Within the next 2 – 3 days. O Within the next week. Comments: 16. I frequently observe the following conditions in my neighborhood (check all that apply)? O Parking on the front yard. O Parking in the driveway with the vehicle extending over the sidewalk. O Fences with missing boards or that is not structurally sound. O Indoor furniture used outside or placed on rooftops. O Storage of inoperable vehicles or equipment. O Storage of building materials or other debris not associated with a valid building permit. O Illegally parked cars (i.e. opposite direction, red curb, etc.) Other (Please specify): 17. I feel my neighborhood should be quiet on a weeknight (Sunday – Thursday) by approximately: O 7 p.m. – 8 p.m. O 8 p.m. – 9 p.m. O 9 p.m. – 10 p.m. O 10 p.m. – 11 p.m. O 11 p.m. or later Comments: 18. I typically notice my neighborhood is quiet on a weeknight (Sunday – Thursday) by approximately: O 7 p.m. – 8 p.m. O 8 p.m. – 9 p.m. O 9 p.m. – 10 p.m. O 10 p.m. – 11 p.m. O 11 p.m. or later Comments: 19. I feel my neighborhood should be quiet on a weekend night (Friday – Saturday) by approximately: O 7 p.m. – 8 p.m. O 8 p.m. – 9 p.m. O 9 p.m. – 10 p.m. O 10 p.m. – 11 p.m. O 11 p.m. or later Comments: 20. I typically notice my neighborhood is quiet on a weekend night (Friday - Saturday) by approximately: O 7 p.m. – 8 p.m. O 8 p.m. – 9 p.m. O 9 p.m. – 10 p.m. O 10 p.m. – 11 p.m. O 11 p.m. or later Comments: 21. I feel comfortable addressing my neighbor if a concern arises. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 22. I feel as though my neighbors are respectful of my property. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 23. I think there is enough unsolicited police presence (not responding to a call) in my neighborhood. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 24. I would like to see more unsolicited police presence (not responding to a call) in my neighborhood. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 25. Please mark all that apply in regards to the following statement: If one of my neighbors hosts a social gathering, I often notice… O Parking becomes unavailable quickly. O Garbage is left on my or other neighbors’ property. O Vomit on my or other neighbors’ property. O Other unwanted objects on my property. O Loud and disruptive activity on the street. O Little or no problems. Comments: 26. When I first moved to San Luis Obispo, the quality of life within the San Luis Obispo residential community was: Strongly Unfavorable Neutral Favorable Strongly Unfavorable Favorable O O O O O Comments: 27. Currently, I feel the quality of life within the San Luis Obispo residential community is: Strongly Unfavorable Neutral Favorable Strongly Unfavorable Favorable O O O O O Comments: 28. If there is a discrepancy between your answers to Questions 26 and 27, please comment on the shift of your view on community climate. Comments: Figure 1: Opinion Survey, page 1 APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 55 Attachment 2 SS1-59 29. I believe the relationship between college-age students and permanent residents is important. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 30. I believe college-age students provide value to the San Luis Obispo community. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 31. I believe permanent residents provide value to the San Luis Obispo community. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 32. I believe a meaningful relationship between the college- age students and permanent residents should be a priority of the local government. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 33. I feel as if I am welcome to participate in discussions about improving community relationships. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 34. I feel as if I should be included in discussions about improving community relationships. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 35. I believe college-age students provide an important role in facilitating economic growth within the San Luis Obispo community. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 36. I would recommend living in my neighborhood to a friend. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 37. I support a rental inspection program for commercial and residential housing. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 38. I believe property owners of rental properties are responsible for ensuring tenants are not disruptive to neighbors. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 39. I believe property owners can be proactive with their tenants about not being disruptive in residential neighborhoods. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 40. I believe city leaders have enacted ordinances and programs to improve neighborhood civility. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 41. I believe Cal Poly and Cuesta have enacted policies and regulations for standards of conduct for their students to improve neighborhood civility. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O O O O O Comments: 42. Have you ever been invited to be a participant in a discussion that involved Cal Poly and/or Cuesta and permanent residents? O Yes O No Other (Please specify): 43. Have you ever participated in a discussion that involved Cal Poly/Cuesta and permanent residents? O Yes O No Other (Please specify): 44. If invited to participate in a discussion that involved Cal Poly/Cuesta and permanent residents, would you participate? O Yes O No Other (Please specify): 45. At what times of the year, if any, do you notice the most disturbances in community neighborhoods? O Winter O Spring O Summer O Fall Comments: 46. If you could fix one issue in San Luis Obispo, what would it be? 47. What suggestions do you have to improve the relations between the college-age students and permanent residents? 48. Are you interested in being contacted to share your opinions on these community related issues in the future? O Yes, my e-mail is: O No Neighborhood Wellness and Community Civility Initiative CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO OPINION SURVEY In May of 2013, community representatives, Cuesta and Cal Poly administrators, students, and San Luis Obispo officials convened and ultimately launched a Neighborhood W ellness and Community Civility Initiative. Collectively, the group has a vision of a community in which year round residents and students actively collaborate to build community and communicate in an environment that fosters mutual respect and understanding. With this vision comes a goal of enhancing the quality of life for all residents, with particular emphasis on building positive relations between residential and student–aged neighbors through a cultural shift in social behaviors. To learn more about this initiative, please visit www.slocity.org/police/communitycivility.asp The following survey is an integral s t e p i n this initiative. In order to assess the current conditions of neighborhood wellness, surveying residents of all ages and backgrounds will provide guidance for future actions taken by officials of San Luis Obispo, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, and Cuesta College. Please answer honestly and explain when you feel necessary. Should you have concerns arise about the survey, please contact Christine Wallace at cwallace@slocity.org. You have two options. You may complete the enclosed survey and return it in the postage-paid envelope OR you may complete the survey on-line at: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/PPNJHF6. Only one survey per person and only one survey per official postage-paid envelope please. Figure 2: Opinion Survey, page 2 Where appropriate, distributions of variables were compared using a standard statistical proce- dure known as a χ2 goodness-of-fit test (Pearson, 1900). As this pro ject was exploratory in nature, however, few formal statistical tests were actually performed. The ma jority of trends were simply shown in a qualitative manner, in graphical or tabular form. Additionally, a regular expression search was performed for certain free response questions, to isolate any common words that appeared most frequently. 3 Results 3.1 Descriptive Statistics An overview of our dataset, resulting from 3807 survey responses, is shown in Table 1. As expected, the vast ma jority of those between 18-24 years old are Cal Poly students (1591 out of 1672). Also, approximately 23% of non-students live in two areas that have a substantial student population: the APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 56 Attachment 2 SS1-60 All residents Non-students Cal Poly Students Cuesta Students Characteristic Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Age 18-24 years o ld 1672 47.9130.8159195.86051.7 25-31 years o ld 144 4.168 4 543.32118.1 32-38 years o ld 117 3.4101 6 100.6 5 4.3 39-45 years o ld 119 3.41076.330.2 8 6.9 46-51 years o ld 114 3.31096.50 05 4.3 52-58 years o ld 264 7.625615.210.1 6 5.2 59-65 years o ld 346 9.933619.90 076 66-71 years o ld 275 7.927316.20 01 0.9 72-78 years o ld 205 5.919611.60 02 1.7 79-85 years o ld 148 4.21448.50 01 0.9 86+ years o ld 87 2.5834.920.1 00 Ethnicity African American/Black 17 0.5 4 0.2 12 0.7 1 0.9 American Indian/Alaska Native 12 0.370.4 2 0.1 3 2.6 Asian 167 4.8352.11287.7 3 2.6 Latino 162 4.7321.91136.8 15 13 Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 14 0.480.5 5 0.3 1 0.9 White/Caucasian 2951 85.2151891.1132980.2 85 73.9 Other (please specify) 140 4623.7 69 4.2 7 6.1 Neighborhood Cal Poly area. 746 21.6 134 8 592 35.7 18 18 Downtown area. 427 12.3 281 16.7 127 7.7 19 19 Foothill/N. Chorro area. 629 18.2 252 15 354 21.4 16 16 Johnson/Sinsheimer area. 372 10.8 305 18.2 52 3.1 11 11 Laguna area. 469 13.6 333 19.8 115 6.9 16 16 On Cal Poly’s campus. 376 10.9 0 0 374 22.6 1 1 Tank Far m/Broad area. 441 12.7 373 22.2 43 2.6 19 19 Table 1: Descriptive Statistics for the entire dataset “Cal Poly area” and the “Foothill/N. Chorro area.” Among these non-student residents of these two areas, roughly 90% of them are above the age of 38, pointing towards the possibility of conflict between these residents and Cal Poly students. To determine the extent to which our study sample may have been biased with respect to the target population of all San Luis Obispo citizens, a comparison of the distributions of age and eth- nicity from our survey was made to that of 2010 Census data (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). The χ2 goodness-of-fit test revealed that our age and ethnicity distributions were indeed statistically significantly different from those of the Census data. Specifically, 18-24 year olds were overrep- resented in our sample (47.9% compared to 39.6% in Census data), and African Americans were APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 57 Attachment 2 SS1-61 underrepresented in our sample (0.5% compared to 1.2% in Census data). Additionally, Hispanic o r Latino ethnicities were not explicitly recorded in the 2010 Census data, so our accuracy with this population is unknown. 3.2 Strong Majority Opinion Exploration Our first analysis was to examine whether any content questions had a strong ma jority responding in any particular way. We scanned through the entire survey responses, with a threshold of 80% indicating a strong ma jority. Also, we looked at this within subgroups of the dataset, with subgroups defined by combinations of the identifying questions. Among all of the content questions, only two questions surfaced as having strong ma jority opin- ions through this exploration. They were (with majority response bolded): • W hen I return to my house after school or work: – I can assume that there will be parking relatively close to my house – I frequently have trouble finding parking relatively close to my house – I rarely find parking relatively close to my house • After the garbage companies empty the trashcans, I usually bring in my household’s trashcans off of the street: – The same evening – Sometime the next day – Within the next 2-3 days – Within the next week In the entire dataset, 81.1% responded that they can find parking relatively close to their house, and 80.9% responded that they bring in their trashcans on the same evening. Among subgroups defined by age, gender, ethnicity and all other identifying questions, plus combinations thereof, many subgroups identified these same two questions/responses at a greater than 80% rate. No other content question surfaced as having at least 80% of responses matching. APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 58 Attachment 2 SS1-62 Prop o rtion 0.0 0 .2 0 .4 0 .6 0 .8 3.3 Contrasting Questions Exploration 3.3.1 Trashcans As observed in the previous section, 80.9% of the study sample reported that they bring their trashcans in on the same day. While this does not directly point to any possible conflict, we can compare this to the responses of the next question: “After the garbage companies empty the trashcans, my neighbors usually bring in their household’s trashcans off of the street. . . ” Specifically, we can examine the distribution of responses among those who stated that they bring in their trashcans on the same day. Any of these individuals who report that their neighbors do anything other than bring their trashcans in on the same day will form a group who are potentially upset by this situation. This is summarized in Figure 3. Neighbors bring in their trashcans... (among those who responded that they bring in their trashcans the same evening) The same Sometime the Within the Within the evening next day next 2−3 days next week Response Figure 3: Distribution of responses about their neighbors, by people who reported bringing in their own trashcans on the same evening as the garbage companies empty them Since this is only among those who responded that they themselves bring in their trashcans on APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 59 Attachment 2 SS1-63 Prop o rtion 0. 0 0 . 2 0 . 4 0 . 6 0 . 8 1 . 0 the same evening that the garbage companies empty them, it is plausible that they might expect the same from their neighbors. Thus, we observe that just over 30% of these individuals might potentially be upset by this situation. Additionally, we explored whether this dichotomy was driven by a differing attitude between students and non-students. That is, when do students b ring in their trashcans, and when do non- students b ring in their trashcans? This is summarized in Figure 4. After the garbage companies empty the trashcans, I usually bring in my trashcans off the street: Non−students CP students The same Sometime the Within the Within the evening next day next 2−3 days next week Response Figure 4: Student vs. non-student responses regarding when they bring in their own trashcans As we observe above, Cal Poly students tend to bring their trashcans in at a later time than the non-student population. In particular, only about 60% of Cal Poly students report that they bring their trashcans in on the same evening. Finally, we examined the free responses attached to this question. Among a total of 156 non- students who left a free response, approximately 35 of them left a comment that voiced frustration at the situation, such as: • “But some NEVER bring them in!” • “The adults do. Students not so much.” • “Po ly students don’t understand trash rules.” APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 60 Attachment 2 SS1-64 Prop o r tion 0. 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 0 . 5 7−8p m 8−9p m 9−10 p m 10 −11 p m 11 p m o r lat e r In contrast, approximately 10 of the comments appeared to indicate that this should not be a concern of the city, e.g.: “I actually have no idea, I don’t care what my neighbors do with their trash cans as long as they don’t block my driveway.” The remaining comments appeared to be either neutral or of undeterminable tone. Also, an exam- ination of the student comments to this question revealed virtually zero who voiced frustration at the situation. It is important to note, however, that all of these counts are quite imprecise, as it was left entirely up to human judgement of a written phrase. 3.3.2 Time that it should b e quiet Questions 17 and 18 asked contrasting questions about what time it should be, and actually is, quiet on a weeknight. The overall distributions are summarized in Figure 5. I feel my neighborhood should be/is quiet on a weeknight (Sunday −Thursday) by approximately: should be is Figure 5: Side-by-side distributions of when it should be and is quiet on a weeknight. To determine the proportion who might potentially be upset at the situation surrounding this ques- tion, we categorized people as “potentially upset” if they responded that it usually is quiet at a later time than what they stated for when it should be quiet. In the entire dataset, 16.8% responded that it is quiet at a later time than they feel that it should be, on a weeknight. When separated APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 61 Attachment 2 SS1-65 Prop o r tion 0. 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 0 . 5 7−8p m 8−9p m 9−10 p m 10 −11 p m 11 p m o r lat e r into Cal Po ly students and non-students, the percentage potentially upset was 17.0% and 16.4%, respectively. Questions 19 and 20 were similar to Questions 17 and 18, but posed for the weekend nights. The overall distributions are summarized in Figure 6. I feel my neighborhood should be/is quiet on a weekend (Friday−Satu rday) by approximately: should be is Figure 6: Side-by-side distributions of when it should be and is quiet on a weekend. To determine the proportion who might potentially be upset at the situation surrounding this ques- tion, we categorized people as “potentially upset” if they responded that it usually is quiet at a later time than what they stated for when it should be quiet. In the entire dataset, 14.8% responded that it is quiet at a later time than they feel that it should be, on a weekend night. When separated into Cal Poly students and non-students, the percentages potentially upset were 9.9% and 18.0%, respectively. 3.3.3 Quality of life at first vs. currently Questions 26 and 27 asked about the quality of life in San Luis Obispo, when first moved to the town, and currently. The overall distributions are summarized in Figure 7. Overall, it appears that people are reporting a declining quality of life after living in San Luis Obispo for some amount of tim e. Specifically, 28.8% of all respondants reported that their current quality of life is worse than when they first moved to San Luis Obispo. W hen separated into Cal Poly students and non-students, the percentages reporting a worse quality of life currently were 13.0% and 40.4%, respectively. APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 62 Attachment 2 SS1-66 Prop o rtion 0. 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 0 . 5 Quality of live when first moved to / currently in San Luis Obispo: When first moved Currently Strongly Favorable Neutral Unfavorable Strongly Favorable Unfavorable Figure 7: Side-by-side distributions of quality of life when first m oved to San Luis Obispo vs. currently. An examination of the written comments, however, revealed no obvious trend or cause of the decline. Among non-students, comments ranged from “crime, drugs, late nite partys, housing authority trash/noise” to “Too much nit-picking while real problems go unresolved.” Although far fewer Cal Poly students reported a decline in quality of life over the time that they have lived here, there was a modest trend towards comments that expressed disdain for increasing rules/restrictions and police presence among those who did (16 out of 37 total written comments from Cal Po ly students). 3.4 Cal Poly and Footh ill / N. Chorro area residents As mentioned in Section 3.1, the Cal Poly and Foothill / N. Chorro area are two locations in San Luis Obispo with a high mixing of students and non-students. A summary of responses to the Likert scale questions, separated by students and non-students in these areas, is shown in Table 2. APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 63 Attachment 2 SS1-67 Table 2: Likert scale questions for residents of the Cal Poly and Foothill / N. Chorro area residents, separated by Cal Poly students and non-students. Strongly Strongly AgreeAgree Neutral Disagree Disagree I feel as though my neighbors are respectful of my property. Cal Poly Students 0.21 0.46 0.18 0.11 0.05 Non-students 0.29 0.41 0.14 0.11 0.05 I would like to see more unsolicited police presence (not responding to a call) in my neighborhood. Cal Poly Students 0.03 0.11 0.27 0.25 0.33 Non-students 0.200.290.360.110.05 I believe the relationship between college age students and permanent residents is important. Cal Poly Students 0.34 0.53 0.10 0.02 0.01 Non-students 0.540.390.05 0.010.01 I believe college age students provide value to the San Luis Obispo community. Cal Poly Students 0.51 0.39 0.07 0.02 0.01 Non-students 0.260.510.180.040.02 I believe permanent residents provide value to the San Luis Obispo community. Cal Poly Students 0.39 0.49 0.10 0.02 0.01 Non-students 0.710.260.010.010.01 I believe a meaningful relationship between the college age students and permanent residents should be a priority of the local government. Cal Poly Students 0.19 0.40 0.26 0.11 0.05 Non-students 0.420.400.130.020.02 I feel as if I am welcome to participate in discussions about improving community relationships. Cal Poly Students 0.07 0.28 0.33 0.22 0.10 Non-students 0.140.510.260.070.02 I feel as if I should be included in discussions about improving community relationships. Cal Poly Students 0.20 0.46 0.29 0.05 0.00 Non-students 0.170.510.290.020.01 I believe college age students provide an important role in facilitating economic growth within the San Luis Obispo community. Cal Poly Students 0.60 0.33 0.05 0.01 0.00 I would recommend living in my neighborhood to a friend. Non-students 0.29 0.44 0.19 0.06 0.02 Cal Poly Students 0.390.45 0.110.030.02 Non-students 0.320.330.140.100.11 I support a rental inspection program for commercial and residential rental housing. Cal Poly Students 0.200.320.270.140.08 Non-students 0.370.310.160.080.07 I believe property owners of rental properties are responsible for ensuring tenants are not disruptive to neighbors. Cal Poly Students 0.09 0.270.240.260.14 Non-students 0.53 0.310.05 0.060.05 I believe property owners can be proactive with their tenants about not being disruptive in residential neighborhoods. Cal Poly Students 0.110.500.25 0.090.06 Non-students 0.55 0.370.060.020.01 I believe city leaders have enacted ordinances and programs to improve neighborhood civility. Cal Poly Students 0.05 0.300.380.130.14 Non-students 0.100.45 0.320.100.03 I believe Cal Poly and Cuesta have enacted policies and regulations for standards of conduct for their students to improve neighborhood civility. Cal Poly Students 0.060.35 0.380.130.08 Non-students 0.040.280.410.200.09 11 Attachment 2 SS1-68 Notably, the distribution of responses for Cal Po ly students vs. Non-students differed at a statistically significant level for all of the questions in the table above, except for the question: “I feel as if I should be included in discussions about improving community relation- ships.” That is, every other Likert scale question in the above table points to a dichotomy of attitudes when comparing students vs. non-students who live in the Cal Poly and Foothill / N. Chorro areas. One specific contrast of interest is the differing of attitudes about who should be responsible for whether tenants are disruptive to their neighbors o r not. Among non-students, roughly 80- 90% believe (either “Strongly Agree” or “Agree”) that property owners should be responsible for their tenants regarding their disruptiveness to neighbors, whereas only about 30% of students feel similarly. On the other hand, when asked if property owners can be proactive about the same issue, approximately 60% of students responded with either “Strongly Agree” or “Agree,” pointing to at least some degree of openness to communication with their landlords regarding noise issues. Additionally, the trashcan and quiet time issues from Sections 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 are at an increased level in the Cal Poly and Foothill / N. Chorro areas. Using the same “potentially upset” definition as in the previous sections, approximately 37.0% of non-students living in these areas fall into this categorization. By comparison, in Section 3.3.1 we saw that approximately 30% of all citizens (that is, all students and non-students) fell into this categorization; in fact, this percentage is the same for non-students across all neighborhoods, indicating an increase in the proportion in this category for the Cal Poly and Foothill / N. Chorro areas. Regarding the tim e that it should be quiet on a weekday night, approximately 28.0% of non-students are categorized as potentially upset, and 31.2% are potentially upset for the weekend nights (compared to 17.0% and 18.0% as stated in Section 3.3.2). 3.5 Issues and Suggestions: written comments Question 46 asked: “If you could fix one issue in San Luis Obispo, what would it be?” APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 65 Attachment 2 SS1-69 Using a regular expression search, Table 3 shows the most common words found in the responses, separated by students and non-students. non-students Cal Poly students word count word count downtown 110 students 142 homeless 90 college91 traffic 87 residents 53 rental 72 noise52 Poly 58 campus 47 street 42 parking 46 noise 41 housing 46 bars 40 police42 residents 39 permanent 41 cars 35 Poly 39 Table 3: Most common words found in written responses to the question, “If you could fix one issue in San Luis Obispo, what would it be?” All short words such as prepositions, conjunctions, and other low-content words (such as “more”) were removed from the list. Some words that do appear on the list may not be that revealing, such as the usage of “students” or “college” by Cal Poly students in their comments. On the other hand, an examination of the non-student comments containing the word “downtown” showed comments that mainly focused on homelessness (overlapping with #2) and disruptive behavior associated with the bars (overlapping with #8). Question 47 asked: “W hat suggestions do you have to improve the relations between the college-age students and permanent residents?” Again using a regular expression search, Table 4 shows the most common words found in the responses to this question, separated by students and non-students. APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 66 Attachment 2 SS1-70 non-students Cal Poly students word count word count students 335 students 192 neighbors 103 residents 153 residents 93 college137 Poly 80 permanent 111 college 80 community 71 campus 75 campus 55 respect 70 neighbors 45 community 60 noise36 landlords 45 people 35 behavior 44 think 35 Table 4: Most common words found in written responses to the question, “W hat suggestions do you have to improve the relationship between the college-age students and permanent residents?” Again, not all words are extremely revealing. Of note, however, is the fact that the words “rule(s),”, “regulation(s),” and “fine(s)” do not appear on either list, suggesting that neither students nor non-students tend to believe that an increase in city ordinances is the answer. In contrast, we see words such as “respect,” “community” and “neighbors,” suggesting that ultimately, students and non-students would like to co-exist in a harmonious manner. A specific response to this question that exemplifies this sentiment is one from a non-student living in the Foothill / N. Chorro area that states: “Have a beer with them - as long as they are of legal drinking age. Otherwise, you might have to buy them a fountain drink.” 4 Discussion and Conclusions In this report, we summarize the results f rom the City of San Luis Obispo Opinion Survey. Certain trends were explored, with a focus on potential sources of conflict between Cal Poly students and non- student residents of San Luis Obispo. It is important to note that, since this analysis was exploratory in nature, all of the findings must be treated as suggestive, rather than as strong evidence in favor or in opposition of any notion. Additionally, there is a slight concern for bias in the dataset, as noted in Section 3.1. The distributions of age and ethnicity in our survey dataset were statistically significantly different from APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 67 Attachment 2 SS1-71 that of the Census data. However, the differences were not drastic; although this may indeed be a concern, it is relatively minor. Among all potential sources of conflict in San Luis Obispo, the one with the largest indication is the time that neighbors bring their trashcans in, with approxim ately 30% of all residents being potentially upset. Noise at night does not appear to be as much of an issue, except specifically in the Cal Poly and Foothill / N. Chorro areas, where non-students are potentially upset at a rate of approximately 30% on both weeknights and weekends. The survey also revealed a vast dichotomy of attitudes between non-students and Cal Poly students. This is exposed in the responses to the Likert Scale questions in Table 2, and also with regard to when each group tends to bring their trashcans in. It does not appear likely that this systematic difference in attitude could be corrected by specific fines and ordinances. Rather, any strategy to remedy this must be aimed at addressing this broadly, both am ong students who plan to live off-campus, and for non-students who live in heavily student-populated areas. Future work could examine the question of whether any implemented strategies are working. In particular, certain increases in fines have indeed been in place since May 2010, aimed specifically at Halloween and St. Patrick’s Day (City of San Luis Obispo, 2013). Fr om a statistical standpoint, the data up to this point do not suggest that the increase in fines have been an effective deterrent of citable offenses. It is of course possible that, with more data, the evidence could arise, and this question could possibly be addressed properly at that time. However, as mentioned above, this report does not support the notion that specific increases in fines will achieve outcomes consistent with neighborhood wellness. As student and non-student attitudes and expectations about residential life in San Luis Obispo are so dichotomous at this time, this must be addressed systematically, rather than by attempting to deter specific behaviors. APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 68 Attachment 2 SS1-72 References City of San Luis Obispo. Council agenda report, 2013. K. Pearson. On the criterion that a given system of deviations from the probable in the case of a correlated system of variables is such that it can be reasonably supposed to have arisen from random sampling. Philosophical Magazine Series, 50:157–175, 1900. R Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foun- dation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2011. ISBN 3-900051-07-0. SurveyMonkey Inc. Surveymonkey. http://www.surveymonkey.com, 2014. U.S. Census Bureau. Census 2010, 2010. APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 69 Attachment 2 SS1-73 APPENDIX D: Matrix of all action items Objective One: Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Schedule regular neighborhood tours with city council, mayor, neighbors, Cal Poly and Cuesta leaders, etc. Allow neighbors to point out neighborhood issues Cal Poly Ongoing, began Summer of 2014 Investigate establishing S.N.A.P. Ride-Along program and promote current Police Ride Along program Increase the amount of support to assist with complaints and allow officers to do other police work City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2015 Explore the option of creating a noise ordinance in public spaces on streets and sidewalks for gatherings of more than 50 people by issuing citations or other alternative options Decrease number of noise complaints City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Consider expanding tools to enforce ordinances for nuisance properties including, but not limited to, “tagging” properties that meet a definition of a public nuisance or unruly gatherings in terms of both property- maintenance concerns and behavior issues Hold repeat noise violators accountable City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Evaluate policies so that new development or redevelopment does not unduly impact neighborhoods. Decrease properties that allow for high occupancy City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2016 Appendix D: Matrix of all action items Page 70 Attachment 2 SS1-74 Objective Two: Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Evaluate best practices and implement strategies to reduce the number of disruptions from parties and noise in neighborhoods (as referenced in Objective Three) Reduce noise disruptions Cal Poly and Cuesta College (programmatic) City of San Luis Obispo (enforcement) Fall 2015 Develop and implement a rental housing inspection program Insure that rental units comply with required minimum health and safety standards City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2016 Implement a range of strategies to change the relationship and culture between students and non-students in neighborhoods (no specific recommendations discerned from the survey results) Improve student and community relationships Cal Poly Associated Student, Inc. (ASI) and Associate Students for Cuesta College (ASCC) Spring 2016 Explore and implement strategies to address the concentration of bars in the downtown area and related safety issues. Consider using strategies identified in the Land Use and Circulation Element update to achieve this objective Address and decrease safety-related issues City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing per LUCE strategies Implement educational programs to increase the number of student-aged residents who bring in their trashcans on the same day the trash is picked up Increase the number of student-age residents to comply with the 24-hour ordinance City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing Continue to implement strategies to address homelessness in San Luis Obispo (particularly in the downtown area) A reduction in the impacts of homelessness on the community City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing Implement strategies to reduce traffic issues in neighborhoods. Consider using strategies identified in the Land Use and Circulation Element update to achieve this objective Reduce traffic-related issues in neighborhoods City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing Appendix D: Matrix of all action items Page 71 Attachment 2 SS1-75 Objective Three: Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Create and implement a transition to Off-Campus Living Education Program, to be shared with Cuesta College’s Student Life Office Set expectations and responsibilities for students living in neighborhoods in the City of San Luis Obispo Cal Poly Summer 2015 Work with the city to generate a neighborhood map of housing rental properties and provide outreach to student renters by funding welcome bags for neighbors to distribute to establish positive interactions Establish positive interaction with City Cal Poly ASI , ASCC, City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Create a Renter/Rental Housing Inspection Program Rental properties that meet minimum health and safety standards Cal Poly, City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Develop outreach and marketing efforts toward students Raise awareness of the impacts of noise on neighborhood Cal Poly Spring 2016 Implement a Party Registration Program. Develop a program to incentivize party registration that provides the opportunity for the San Luis Obispo Police Department to contact the party registrant and offer a 20- minute warning before dispatching S.N.A.P. or a police officer Fewer noise citations City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Initiate Dialog Dinners or Block Parties for students and residents to talk about what they like most about their neighborhoods Create positive interactions between students and year- round residents Cal Poly ASI, ASCC Ongoing Promote the principles of the The Mustang Way in neighborhoods Enhance a positive culture of peer-to-peer accountability in neighborhoods Cal Poly ASI Ongoing Appendix D: Matrix of all action items Page 72 Attachment 2 SS1-76 Continue to engage and communicate collaboratively among students, non-students and city groups Improve collaboration and understanding among students, non- students and city groups SCLC Ongoing Utilize various on-campus departments and offices that support living off-campus to support students, non- students and permanent residents living in neighborhoods. Educate students about university policies and ordinances, strengthen neighborhood relations by facilitating dialogs Cal Poly & Cuesta College Fall 2015 Develop proactive engagement of law and code enforcement with visits to properties of concern; “Knock and Talk”. Positive engagement with law enforcement and decrease repeat offending properties City of San Luis Obispo Ongoing Implement a Joint Letter Program. Police contact with students in off-campus housing generates letter signed by university, police and city that outlines expectations sent to resident and landlord Cal Poly Fall 2015 Objective Four: Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation City and Cal Poly officials to craft a Memorandum of Understanding agreement between the city and university regarding police operational protocol within a one- mile radius Allows for coordination of resources to quickly respond to community concerns Cal Poly, City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2015 Partner Cal Poly and Cuesta police officers with San Luis Obispo Neighborhood Officers to coordinate resources and achieve program goals To coordinate resources and obtain program goals City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2015 City should explore additional proactive educational opportunities with Cal Poly and Change student culture related to neighborhood SCLC Fall 2016, and with each annual report Appendix D: Matrix of all action items Page 73 Attachment 2 SS1-77 Cuesta College to change the student culture related to neighborhood wellness wellness Implement a keg registration program A reduction in underage alcohol use and an accountability mechanism for persons who serve minors City of San Luis Obispo Fall 2016 Conduct an internal assessment of the San Luis Obispo Police Department staffing to prepare for growth within the city and on the Cal Poly campus to ensure staffing needs match the population Meet the needs of the community as population grows City of San Luis Obispo Spring 2016 Conduct an internal assessment of the University Police Department staffing to meet the growth on the Cal Poly campus Meet the needs of Cal Poly as student population grows Cal Poly Spring 2016 Explore the possibility of Cal Poly Police being able to issue City Municipal Administrative Citations To be able to patrol in neighborhoods adjacent to Cal Poly campus Addressed via MOU identified above Location of a university police substation within the new residence hall project to coordinate law enforcement problem-solving efforts Coordinate law enforcement outreach and problem solving efforts Cal Poly Fall 2018 Objective Five: Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Create an annual communications plan containing neighborhood wellness messages and a process for communicating the information effectively to maximize resources Effectively inform the community on matters of neighborhood wellness City of San Luis Obispo Winter 2015 Appendix D: Matrix of all action items Page 74 Attachment 2 SS1-78 Objective Six: Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation Leads & Partners Timeline for Implementation Re-invest in the Student- Community Liaison Committee Become the coordinating body responsible for monitoring the recommendations, once adopted by the city council, Cal Poly and Cuesta College SCLC Fall 2015, ongoing The Student-Community Liaison Committee should assess the effectiveness of each recommendation once they have been implemented Recommend the appropriate changes, and produce an annual report on the state of neighborhood wellness in the City of San Luis Obispo SCLC Ongoing Shift SCLC memberships SCLC memberships should be reevaluated to directly involve those individuals (by their position) most directly involved in neighborhood wellness SCLC Spring 2016 Host an annual town hall meeting Present their report to the community, receive feedback and suggestions from the broader San Luis Obispo community SCLC Spring 2016, ongoing Appendix D: Matrix of all action items Page 75 Attachment 2 SS1-79 APPENDIX E: Post March 7 Recommendations Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Working Group Ideas to Investigate arranged by Objective *NOTE: These ideas were generated by the City of San Luis Obispo (e.g. public comment at March 17, 2015 City Council Meeting) and Cal Poly staff through a number of forums after the March 7, 2015 roof collapse on Hathway Street. These ideas were not discussed by the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort working group and their inclusion in this report should not be considered an endorsement by the working group. Objective 1: Define short-term actions that could be implemented to enhance quality of life for all residents particularly associated in the timeframe around the opening of the Cal Poly and Cuesta College campuses at the beginning of the school year. 1 Develop smoother lines of communication between the city, Cal Poly and Cuesta both proactively and reactively. 2 Students need to be informed of the consequences of their actions off campus and perhaps have responses strengthened to moderate behavior. 3 Quicker administrative response is needed to violations of behavior off campus by the city, Cal Poly and Cuesta. Objective 2: Define Stakeholders’ Needs and Success 4 Create a tip line where anyone (students, neighbors, etc.) can report potential problems before they have negative impact on the community. Objective 3: Identify University/City Best Practices 5 Advance the effort to house Greek organizations on the Cal Poly campus. 6 Create a student ambassador program that has two components. The first component should be to promote positive relations in the community. The second component should be an anonymous social event attendee to report unsafe behavior to the appropriate authority. 7 Improve response time by SLOPD and UPD to reports of noise off campus. 8 Bring alternative social/entertainment opportunities on campus to reduce the reliance on off campus events for socialization. 9 Reach out to universities who consistently host regulated tailgate parties, with monitored alcohol distribution. Learn what works well for them and bring their best practices to Cal Poly tailgates. 10 Increase the methods to hold landlords accountable for the negative behavior of their tenants including court appearances by the landlord or denial of business license. 11 Suggest that landlords add clause in rental agreements that prevents any activity on roof. Appendix E: Post March 7 Recommendations Page 76 Attachment 2 SS1-80 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Working Group Ideas to Investigate arranged by Objective *NOTE: These ideas were generated by the City of San Luis Obispo (e.g. public comment at March 17, 2015 City Council Meeting) and Cal Poly staff through a number of forums after the March 7, 2015 roof collapse on Hathway Street. These ideas were not discussed by the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort working group and their inclusion in this report should not be considered an endorsement by the working group. 12 Aggressively advance the Rental Inspection ordinance to identify unsafe and unhealthy properties. 13 Evaluate “Neighborhood Specialists” like in Davis (Maybe adjust hours/days of existing Neighborhood Specialists. 14 Continue to develop strategies that promote more diverse neighborhoods, including more owner-occupied and long-term rentals (ie workers and family rentals, not short term academic year rentals) 15 SLOPD and UPD should collaborate on methods to deter large crowds from migrating from area to area. 16 Implement programs that create peer to peer pressure, that help students own their actions and accept responsibility for behavior that does not promote neighborhood wellness. Objective 4: Review Enforcement Best Practices 17 Consider the size and scope of a party to help determine what safety and hazard city ordinances can be created/enforced? Perhaps double or triple fines during peak hours or holidays where large parties/events are expected. 18 Limit the number of student rental properties to one per street. 19 Create and enforce a 10:00 pm noise curfew with escalating noise fines by the hour. 20 More visible UPD presence on campus and in the residential neighborhoods immediately surrounding campus (an MOU is currently being finalized to allow UPD to issue municipal citations off campus). 21 Issue a citation to the leadership figure of the organization responsible for hosting an out- of-control party. Consider exploring ways to hold the national organization responsible as well. 22 Consider installing more security cameras to effectively monitor activity. 23 Create a staff position to investigate potential dangerous student activity before events take place. 24 Enforce limits on the size of parties at residential addresses. 25 Create a culture change regarding informants. Students offer information to a point, but stop divulging information for fear of implicating themselves. Re-work current policy to ensure informants will not be reprimanded to encourage future sharing. 26 Citations should be issued to those students who participated in negative events. 27 City approval should be required for individuals or organizations hosting a party over a Appendix E: Post March 7 Recommendations Page 77 Attachment 2 SS1-81 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Working Group Ideas to Investigate arranged by Objective *NOTE: These ideas were generated by the City of San Luis Obispo (e.g. public comment at March 17, 2015 City Council Meeting) and Cal Poly staff through a number of forums after the March 7, 2015 roof collapse on Hathway Street. These ideas were not discussed by the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort working group and their inclusion in this report should not be considered an endorsement by the working group. certain number of people. 28 Red tag ordinance for houses that have unruly gatherings/noise citations should be implemented and last longer than the academic year. 29 Find a way to hold property managers or management companies accountable for the negative behavior at properties they manage. 30 Serious academic consequences up to suspension and expulsion should be on the table for Students who engage in activities that do not promote neighborhood wellness. 31 Immediately suspend or permanently ban fraternities who allow in any way illegal activities to happen via their instigation: rapes, underage drinking, hazing deaths, racist displays, unruly gatherings. Second chances seem to mean “go ahead” to this crowd. 32 Parental notification should be explored for off campus behavior. 33 Higher fines, double fines, longer fines, fines able to be raised at certain time of day. Objective 5: Engage Stakeholders: Review Current Educational And Information Efforts 34 Require students to complete an alcohol/safety education program before being allowed rush for a Greek organization (we should also consider limiting Greek organization recruitment to the first quarter of attendance). 35 Monitor Yik Yak and other social mediums used by our student population as a resource to inform us of potential dangerous situations. 36 SLOPD should consider utilizing social media scanning software to be more aware of activities planned off campus. 37 The city should inform the landlord every time the police are called to a rental property, even if no violation is found. 38 Enhance education on the dangers of large crowds: students need to learn this is as bad as drinking too much, nonconsensual sex and other immature or inappropriate or illegal behaviors. 39 Evaluate systems & structures in dorms to prevent mass exodus to mega social gathering and complement protocols to inform authorities (student affairs UPD SLOPD) of eminent threat of unruly gathering (mega social gathering). 40 Targeted patrolling by city and university police. Wider area for UPD patrols. Objective 6: Prepare for Sustained Engagement to Achieve Desired Vision and Goal 41 None. Appendix E: Post March 7 Recommendations Page 78 Attachment 2 SS1-82 MAINTAINING BALANCED NEIGHBORHOODS A Research Paper presented to the San Luis Obispo Civility W orking Group on Different Approaches to Students Living in Established Residential Areas July 18, 2014 APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 79 Attachment 2 SS1-83 I . . APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 80 Attachment 2 SS1-84 ""' CITY OF S.flll LUIS OBISPO Civilit y W orking Group The City of San Luis Obispo Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort is a working group comprised of City residents and representatives of Cal Poly State University (Cal Poly), Cuesta College and the City of San Luis Obispo (City). The goal of the working group is to enhance the quality of life for all residents, with particular emphasis on building positive relations between residential and student-aged neighbors through a cultural shift in social behavior. This goal is to be reached by identifying the needs of those involved and the short- term actions, long-term best practices and engagement efforts required by the City and schools to successfully meet those needs. Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort Cal Pol y President City Council Cuesta College President CUESTA 11LtJ COLLEGE ...- - ,•._.._,...,,..»..p. ublic lnput----lllllliiiiii Mission: Rf!s Mr.h, ill ntffy and implement Cal ..,...,..i--..;;::;r;;...., _..Recommend"'"•'"""""-''"'""""'"'"''"'.,...,_..,"",.a. Poly, Council, and Cvl!staJtrategies to l.'nh.m[ethequality of life for all residents with an emphasis on builtUngposltive relations between resldentiilland student-aced neighbors through COmmliltlllt'( De opment Deparl nt foWe DrD tl li'NI"I PubUcWor De:::: nl t1t Cal Poly l'rflld«llf'• v M.m.: grr omcr Cal Poly-City- Cuesta Working Group 7 ( LICOifii• ( NTI (I)iMIJ• Vir.ePfl.'SIJ:lNII Studuttufe l Smd""\' S•I'II M & qd .......,Hp A.!.todf{fd Slli OO"" PrM.Idt"nt acullurill!.hiltiu '------------------;r"' social behaviors Public / . _/\_\ Neighborhood Services Team Mission: EKChange .jei wJ -,; jl1 c.WHI c Y Neighborhood CM'M <i!.I YdMU C<Jifloty!>twh•JJl'> Cl f'oJyA I C.lll'olyHnu< "i Group\ Rfowdi' •Tf Information and Ideas to Implement nel&hborhood 1fllj21.Jl APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 81 Attachment 2 SS1-85 CITY OF S.fill LUIS OBISPO FROM: Katie Lichtig, City Manager, City of San Luis Obispo Prepared By: James David, Principal Analyst Lisa Letteriello, Administration Intern SUBJECT: MAINTAINING BALANCED NEIGHBORHOODS PURPOSE Review current local town-gown neighborhood issues and provide alternative practices in other communities that face similar student housing challenges in residential areas. DISCUSSION Situation The City of San Luis Obispo (City) is in close proximity to two colleges; Cuesta College and Cal Poly. Cuesta College is a commuter school without campus housing, and Cal Poly does not have sufficient on-campus housing for all enrolled students (there are plans to create more housing opportunities on-campus in the next five years). Furthermore, college students often prefer to live off-campus in their junior and senior years. These factors mean students seek housing in the City limits, and the most predominant housing type in the City is low-density single-family housing in established neighborhoods. A number of issues have been reported over the years related to students living in low-density residential neighborhoods: 1. Students tend to live in certain areas close to campus, which affects neighborhood diversity. High concentrations of student renters living in neighborhoods compounds and intensifies issues like partying, noise and parking. Renter-occupancy estimates for census tracts immediately adjacent to Cal Poly range from 59 to 95 percent renters: Selected Housing Characteristics from U.S. Census 1 CHARACTERISTIC CENSUS TRACT 109.01 CENSUS TRACT 109.02 CENSUS TRACT 112 TOTAL {ALL 3 TRACTS) CITYWIDE Total Housing Units 1,032 1,561 3,033 5,626 20,553 Single-Family Residences 10% 40% 62% 46% 54% Units Built 1950 to 1979 53% 64% 62% 61% 48% Owner-occupied Units 5% 13% 41% 26% 38% Renter-occupied Units 95% 87% 59% 74% 62% 1 Estimates do not include on-campus housing units, which are classified as "group quarters" by the U.S. Census. Source: 2008-12 American Community Survey, 2010 U.S. Census APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 82 Attachment 2 SS1-86 CITY OF SHU LUIS OBISPO Reference Map of Census Tracts near Cal Poly 2. Rental costs are high, which drives more students (smaller incomes) to live together in one single family home. Most single-family homes are not designed for four to five adults, especially in terms of bathroom facilities and parking. 3. The City's code enforcement data shows a correlation between high rental areas and reported violations of municipal codes. Some repeated reported violations include: a. Noise, public drunkenness, vandalism and crime b. Property maintenance issues c. Parking 4. Local housing costs are inflated because four to five students can and will pay more for rental housing than the majority of the local workforce, especially those workers in industries with lower wages. This causes many workers to commute, which affects infrastructure (roads), environment (emissions) and society (less owner- occupancy/pride of ownership). These issues are common in many town-gown communities when large student populations move . in to residential neighborhoods; sometimes referred to as "studentification". Studentification is a term coined by Dr. Darren Smith (2002) and is defined as the social and environmental changes caused by a very large number of students living in particular areas of a APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 83 Attachment 2 SS1-87 CITY OF S.Hn LUIS OBISPO town or city. It is not necessarily students living in the community, but instead the substitution of a local community by a student community. 1 The City desires to avoid "studentification" in its low-density residential neighborhoods. The following sections identify ideas for potential solutions -including best management practices from nationwide research- to be considered by the Civility Working Group. Potential Solutions Two main focus areas should be (1) increasing neighborhood diversity and (2) enhancing affordable housing options. 1. Increasing Neighborhood Diversity Diversifying neighborhoods means creating a healthy balance of renters and owner-occupants, as well as a mix of resident types (families, students, couples, singles, etc.). Within the context of student housing, limiting concentration of student rentals increases neighborhood diversity. A. Consider a Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP). The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and many other communities facing foreclosure and abandonment issues, instituted an NSP to help troubled neighborhoods rebound. 2 Using a revolving NSP fund, abandoned and foreclosed homes were purchased and then resold at a discounted price to homebuyers in need of assistance. The same philosophy could be implemented in residential neighborhoods to create more opportunities for owner-occupied housing units. Potential NSP elements may include: a. Establish a revolving fund to be used exclusively to purchase single-family homes within targeted neighborhoods (such as Alta Vista and Monterey Heights) as they become available on the open market. b. Resell all homes purchased with the revolving fund within a reasonable time to likely owner-occupants; university staff, faculty or other workforce buyers. c. Evaluate legally permissible mechanisms to perpetuate owner-occupancy, such as a homeowners association (HOA), that are consistent with fair housing provisions of State and Federal laws. Developing a HOA for NSP homes is preferable because the HOA can impose conditions, covenants and agreements that require owner-occupancy of the primary residence for a minimum length of time. d. Proceeds from all home sales would go to replenish the revolving fund. e. Maintain "right of first refusal" granting the NSP the right to re-purchase the home when it is offered for sale. f. The NSP could be established on a limited-term basis, or terminated when owner-occupancy rates for single-family units within targeted neighborhoods reach a certain level that could be seen as self-sustaining. 1 Town and Gown Glossary. http://www.towngownworld.com/towngownglossary.html 2 http: //portal.hud.gov/hudportai/HUD?sr c=/program offices/comm plannlng/communitydevelopment/programs/neighborhoodspg. APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 84 Attachment 2 SS1-88 CITY OF S.flnLUIS OBISPO This alternative has complicated legal issues surrounding real property rights, equal protection, and privacy that will require more research if the Civility W orking Group supports further development of a NSP. B. Look for opportunities to create faculty and staff housing in student areas. The College of San Mateo, California, has an award winning 44-unit rental housing development for faculty and staff (College Vista), which offers a first-class living environment with rents at half the market average.3 A local example is the 69-unit Bella Montana workforce housing project located in a neighborhood that is impacted with student rentals immediately adjacent to Cal Poly campus. The ground sublease has a ranking priority hierarchy that encourages purchase by Cal Poly faculty and staff, with a back-up market priority for public education, public agency, other CSU employees, and the general public. In all, there are 24 priority rankings in the sublease with newly recruited Cal Poly faculty receiving the highest priority and the general public receiving the lowest. Bella Montana is different from most condominiums in that the structures are owned by the buyers, while Cal Poly remains the owner of the ground upon which the structure sits and has greater control over the conditions of sale of the condos. C. Evaluate strengthening occupancy restrictions to avoid single-family residential overcrowding. The City of Fort Collins, home to Colorado State University, restricts occupancy in all residential dwelling units (single-family, duplex, and multifamily) to one family and not more than one additional person; or two adults and their dependents, and not more than one additional person, or up to four unrelated persons in a dwelling unit located in an apartment complex containing units which were approved to house four unrelated persons.4 The City of San Luis Obispo's Zoning Regulations prohibit six or more adult occupants in the low-density residential zone without a High Occupancy Use Permit. D. Develop a rental inspection program that checks occupancy. The City of Bloomington, home to Indiana University Bloomington, implemented a Rental Occupancy Program that requires rental property inspection every three to five years to validate current occupancy permits. Occupancy permits allow up to three unrelated adults in single- family zoning districts, and up to five in multi-family zoning districts. 5 The City of Santa Cruz, California adopted a 2010 ordinance that requires all owners of one or more residential rental dwelling units to register with the city and participate in an annual inspection. The Santa Cruz program aims to address unpermitted dwelling units and the renting of spaces not intended for habitation, as well as substandard, overcrowded, unsanitary and unsafe housing conditions that render a housing _unit unfit or unsafe for occupancy.6 The City of San Luis Obispo is currently developing a multifamily rental inspection program to be presented to the public and City Council in late 2014. '.h ttp://www.smccd .edy/accounis/smccd/department s/faclllt les/BestAmerlca nllvlngAwa rd.shtml. 'http://www.fcgov.com/neighborhoodservices/occupancy. php 'http://www.ltgau.org/userAies/flles/CityBrochure-Bioomi ngton.pdf 6 Santa Cruz Residential Rental Inspection Program. http:l!www.cityofsantacruz.com/index.aspx?page=1536. APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 85 Attachment 2 SS1-89 CITY OF S.fin LUIS OBISPO E. Work with common interest developments on restrictive leases. In California, courts have allowed homeowners associations to limit or ban rentals in private condominium projects or planned developments. Restrictions against leasing in a common interest development must be shown to be reasonable in order to be enforceable per California Civil Code Sections 711 and 1354. In the case City of Oceanside v. McKenna (1989), the Oceanside court found that restrictions on a publicly subsidized condominium project to require owner-occupancy and forbid the leasing of units was valid. The justification offered by the City and its Community Development Commission was found reasonable since prohibiting leasing would foster the redevelopment goals of providing a stabilized community of owner-occupied units for low and moderate income persons.7 F. Create more on-campus housing. Giving students more opportunities to live on-campus may reduce concentration of students living in nearby low-density residential neighborhoods. Cal Poly and the City have adopted policies that support student housing on-campus, and Cal Poly is planning to build a new 1475-bed campus housing facility soon. Other universities require all freshmen to live on-campus, and some also require that freshmen leave their cars at home the first year. In addition to providing new campus housing, Cal Poly could formally adopt a goal to house a certain percentage of students on campus b y a specified date. 2. Enhancing Affordable Housing Options Creating affordable housing is a local, regional and national objective. Within the context of student housing, creating affordable options means offering more housing types with different cost profiles so that students may avoid overcrowding in single-family residences. A. Create partnerships to achieve common affordable housing goals. Northeastern University, Massachusetts, provides a good example of this approach in its Davenport Commons. The project consists of 125 units of housing for students and staff, 60 affordable owner-occupied townhouses, and 2,100 square feet of retail space. 8 It was a complex project, involving many stakeholders and negotiations including a community benefits package of affordable housing, helping homeowners start a condominium association and providing both technical assistance and education for first-time homebuyers. B. Continue to distribute Good Neighbor guides and update off-campus housing outreach materials. The University of Virginia 9 and the City of Fort Collins10 have developed guides that include tips for finding affordable off-campus housing, advice about the financial responsibilities of living on their own, and behavior expected of a good neighbor and community member. Cal Poly, Cuesta College and the City should update their off-campus housing guides to include affordable housing options in the region. The 7 The Case for Rental Restrictions. http://www.hoa-iaw.com/publicalions/case--rental-restridions.shtml 'http://www.dhkinc.com/Housing/affordable/9703.asp • http://www.itgau.org/userfiles/files/off grounds guide.pdf 10 http://www.fcgov.com/nelghborhoodservlces/pdf/lthandbook.pdf?20081224 APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 86 Attachment 2 SS1-90 CITY OF SHU LUIS OBISPO guides should also list reasons why overcrowding in low-density residential housing can adversely affect health and safety of tenants, impact available parking, arid contribute to noise and privacy conflicts. Additional Resources The following four resources come from other town-gown communities that have formed public-private task forces with a similar mission to the Civility W orking Group. Each document contains recommended actions to address issues that often arise from off-campus student living in residential neighborhoods. 1. Central Austin Community Development Corporation. 2005. What Other College Communities Have Done: Examples of Regulatory Actions to Preserve the Single-Family, Residential Character of a Campus Neighborhood. http://centralaustincdc.org/fair affordable housing/west urbana na ccupancy.pdf 2. Rutgers University. 2013. Task Force for Off Campus Issues and Concerns: Final Report and Recommendations. http://studentconduct.rutgers.edu/files/documents/OffCampusTas kForceReport.pdf 3. St. Paul P lanning Commission. May 2012. Student Housing Zoning Study: Report and Recommendations. http://www.stpaul.gov/DocumentCenter/Home/View/20436 4. Temple University. 2012. Final Report of the Community and Student Off Campus Issues and Concerns Task Force. http://w ww.temple.edu/studentaffairs/deanofstudents/documents/StudentComm unityOff CampuslssuesTaskForceFina1ReportforW ebsiteNov2012.pdf The remaining four resources listed below are academic studies and white papers on the issues of studentification and town-gown collaborations. 5. Smith, Darren P. 2005. Studentification: the gentrification factory? http://southwarknotes.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/studentification-darren-smith.pdf 6. Smith, Darren P. 2008. The Politics of Studentification and (Un)balanced Urban Populations: Lessons for Gentrification and Sustainable Communities? http://usj.sagepub.com/content/45/12/2541.full.pdf+html 7. U.K. National HMO Lobby. 2008. Balanced Communities & Studentification: Problems and Solutions. http://www.itgau.org/userfiles/files/Nationai%20HM0%20Lobby.pdf 8. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. 2009. Town-Gown Collaboration in Land Use and Development. http://community-wealth.org/ pdfs/news/recent-articles/11-09/report- sungu-eryilmaz.pdf APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 87 Attachment 2 SS1-91 Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 28 - Enhancing the quality of life for all residents - Attachment 2 SS1-92 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK RECEIL'IE17 THENewspaper of the Central Coast,i,`;'' MBUNE 3825 South Higuera • Post Office Box 112 • San Luis Obispo, California 93406 -0112 • (805) 781 -7800 In The Superior Court of The State of California In and for the County of San Luis Obispo AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION AD # 1723991 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ss. County of San Luis Obispo I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen and not interested in the above entitled matter; I am now, and at all times embraced in the publication herein mentioned was, the principal clerk of the printers and publishers of THE TRIBUNE, a newspaper of general Circulation, printed and published daily at the City of San Luis Obispo in the above named county and state; that notice at which the annexed clippings is a true copy, was published in the above -named newspaper and not in any supplement thereof — on the following dates to wit; MAY 8, 2015 that said newspaper was duly and regularly ascertained and established a newspaper of general circulation by Decree entered in the Superior Court of San Luis Obispo County, State of California, on June 9, 1952, Case #19139 under the Government Code of the State of California. I certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. (Signatllte of Principal Clerk) DATED: MAY 8, 2015 AD COST: $259.60 crff OF B MLMOO SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The San Luis Obispo City Council invites all interested persons to attend a public hearing on Tuesday, May 19, 2015, at 6.00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Cham- ber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, relative to the following: REgtlEST TO AM ND THE GENERAL. PLAN,' ©RCUTT A 1E_A SPECIFIC PLAN' (GASP). URBAN RESERVE 14NE [URLi, ZONING MAP, BICYCLE TRANSPORTA- TION PLAN AND CONSIDERATION OF TWO NEW RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVI- SIONS_(VESTING TENTATIVE TirACT PAPS) AD IACFNT TO RiGHETTI }TILL IN THE GASP AND CONSIDERATION OF AN INITIAL STUD_ Y AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 11S40�1?],_ AS A TIER OF THE OASP FINAL EIR.(2010) The Planning Commission reviewed the proposal on March 25 and April 8, 2015, and recommends that the City Council ap- prove the following: 1. Approve the Proposed Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS -MND) and amend the General Plan and Orcutt Area Specific Plan, including: a. Modifications to the URL along Righetti Hill; b. Reconfiguration of open space, parks and residential zoning within VTM #3063; c. Reorientation of wetlands mitigation sites within VTM #3063; d. Rezoning of 0.38 acres of R -1 -SP to R -2 -SP within VTM #3066; e. Amend the GASP Circulation Plan to change the "C" Street Bike Lane (cross- ing the creek) from a Class II bike lane to a Class I bike path; and, f, Addition of Section 9.10 to the OASP to "track" amendments, adjustments and clarifications to the Specific Plan. 2. Approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 413063 for the Righetti property (TR -114- 14). 3. Approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 43066 for the Jones property (SBDV -0067- 2014). 4. Amend the Bicycle Transportation Plan (Maps 1 and 8) and Appendix A to change the "C" Street Bike Lane (crossing the creek) from a Class II bike lane to a Class I hike path, subject to the IS -MND refer- enced above. For more information, you are invited to Contact Phil Dunsmore of the City's Com- munity Development Department at (805) 781 -7522 or by email at pdunsmore @slo city.orq, or David Watson of the City's Com- munity Development Department at (805) 704 -8728 or by email at davi&-watsonplan ning.us. The City Council may also discuss olfler hearings or business items before or after the items listed above. If you challenge the proposed projects in court, you may be IIm- ited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, orr in written corre- spondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearings. Reports for this meeting will be available for review in the City Clerk's Office and on- line at www.slocitV.org on Wednesday, May 13, 2015. Please call the City Clerk's Office at (805) 781 -7100 for more informa- tion. The City Council meeting will be tele- vised live on Charter Cable Channel 20 and live streaming on www.slocitV.org. Anthony J. Mejia City Clerk City of San Luis Obispo May 8. 2015 1721 'ori__y THENewspaper of the Central Coast M-BUINE MAY 1 I nlq 3825 South Higuera • Post Office Box 112 • San Luis Obispo, California 93406 -0112 • (805) 781 -7800 In The Superior Court of The State of California interested in the above entitled matter; I am now, and at In and for the County of San Luis Obispo all times embraced in the publication herein mentioned AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Crff O Conservation Plan. 2. Adopt a Negative Declaration of envl. THE TRIBUNE, a newspaper of general Circulation, AD # 1724015 printed and published daily at the City of San Luis CITY OF SALT LUIS OBISPO SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK at which the annexed clippings is a true copy, was For more information, you are invited to me San Luis Obispo City Council invites contact Robert Hill of the City's Administra. lion Department at (805) 781 - -7211 or by' all interested persons to attend a public email at fitll ®slocltv.oro hearing on Tuesday, May 19, 2015, at STATE OF CALIFORNIA 4 :00 p.m. in the City Hell Council Cham. ber, 9" Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, SS. California, relative to the following: County of San Luis Obispo TBRRACE ILL OP N $PACE CONS5R -, 11 � — H — ... I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the The Planning Commission and Parks ant County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen and not Recreation Commission have reviewed the 1,lan and'.Commands that the City Councl interested in the above entitled matter; I am now, and at "'r.". the following: all times embraced in the publication herein mentioned 1. Adopt the Terrace Hill Open Space was, the principal clerk of the printers and publishers of Conservation Plan. 2. Adopt a Negative Declaration of envl. THE TRIBUNE, a newspaper of general Circulation, ronmental impact for the project. 3. Add Terrace Hill Open Space to the printed and published daily at the City of San Luis City's Contributing Properties List of His - Obispo in the above named county and state; that notice toric Resources. at which the annexed clippings is a true copy, was For more information, you are invited to published in the above -named newspaper and not in any contact Robert Hill of the City's Administra. lion Department at (805) 781 - -7211 or by' supplement thereof — on the following dates to wit; email at fitll ®slocltv.oro MAY 8, 2015 that said newspaper was duly and The City Council may also discuss other regularly ascertained and established a newspaper of hearings or business items before or after the items listed above. If you challenge the general circulation by Decree entered in the Superior proposed projects in court, you may be lim- Court of San Luis Obispo County, State of California, on ited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing June 9 1952 Case # 19139 under the Government Code > > described in this notice, or in written crrrre- spondencs delivered to the City Council at, of the State of California. or prior to, the public hearings. Reparls for this meeting will be available I certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the for review In the City Clerk's Office end on- foregoing is true and correct. line at www,slocity.org on Wednesday, May 13, 2015. Please call the City Clerks Office at (805) 781 -7100 for more Informa• lion. The City Council meeting will be lela- o vlsed live on Charter Cable Channel 20 and live streaming on www.slocity.org. (Signatih of Principal Clerk) DATED: MAY 8 2015 � Anthony J. Melia City Clerk AD COST: $156.20 City of San Luis Obispo May e, 2015 :72401 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AGENDA STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO )SS. CITY Of SAN LUIS OBISPO ) AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING — CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL AND REGULAR AGENDA OF: May 19, 2015 I, Kevin Christian, declare as follows: That I am the Administrative Assistant for the City of San Luis Obispo; that a copy of the above referenced meeting agenda of May 19, 2015 was posted on the bulletin board outside City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, and on the City's website www.slocity.or g at 12:30 p.m. on March 12, 2015. I declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. K :;VIN CHRISTIAN ADMIN ASSISTANT