Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-19-16 ARC-CHC Item 1 CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE & ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: Review of the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of the Sunny Acres building for 13 residential units, a community room and office as part of an affordable housing residential care facility. The project also includes the construction of three new residential structures that contain an addi tional 21 units. Environmental review includes a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. PROJECT ADDRESS: 1600 Bishop Street BY: Rachel Cohen, Associate Planner Phone Number: (805) 781-7574 e-mail: rcohen@slocity.org FILE NUMBER: ARCH-3336-2016/ VIA: Brian Leveille, Senior Planner EID-3562-2016 FROM: Tyler Corey, Principal Planner RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Draft Resolution (Attachment 1) approving the proposed project based on findings, and subject to conditions and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. SITE DATA Applicant Transitions Mental Health Association (THMA) & HASLO Representative Joel Snyder, TenOver Architects Submittal Date 6/10/2016 Complete Date 7/6/2016 Zoning R-1 (Low Density Residential), R-2- SF (Medium Density Residential), and C/OS-40 (Conservation/Open Space) General Plan Medium High Density Residential and Open Space Site Area 57,500 square feet (1.32 acres) Environmental Status Mitigated Negative Declaration SUMMARY The applicant is proposing an adaptive reuse and rehabilitation of the of the Sunny Acres building as part of an affordable housing residential care facility with 13 residential units, a community room and office. The project also includes the construction of three new residential structures that contain an additional 21 units. In total, the project includes 34 units with 33 very-low-income single occupancy Meeting Date: September 19, 2016 Item Number: 1 ARC/CHC 1 - 1 ARCH-3336-2016 1600 Bishop Street Page 2 studio and one-bedroom units and 1 one-bedroom unit for a 24-hour on-site resident manager (Attachment 3, Project plans). 1.0 JOINT REVIEW The proposed project involves a structure that is currently not listed as a historic resource, but has been identified as having historic significance. The CHC is being asked to provide feedback and comments relative to the treatment of the structure to inform and assist the ARC in making a decision on the project. The CHC’s role is to review the project and the Cultural Resources section of the Mitigated Negative Declaration’s for consistency with Secretary of the Interior Standards and Historic Preservation Program Guidelines and provide comments to the ARC for their consideration. The ARC’s role is to review the project in terms of its consistency with the Community Design Guidelines and applicable City policies and standards, consider the Cultural Heritage Committee’s comments regarding the project, and review and take action on the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 2.1 Site Information/Setting: Site Size 57,500 square feet (1.32 acres) Present Use & Development Sunny Acres Building (vacant); The site is open and contains various oak trees, pepper trees and several shrubs Zoning Designation R-1 (Low Density Residential), R-2-SF (Medium Density Residential), and C/OS-40 (Conservation/Open Space) Topography ~13% slope Current Access From Bishop Street Surrounding Use/Zoning North: R-1 (Low Density Residential) – single family residences East: C/OS (Conservation/Open Space) West: R-1 (Low Density Residential) – vacant land South: R-2 (Medium Density Residential), PF (Public Facilities) – vacant land and Child Development Resource Center and San Luis Obispo County Probation Department 2.2 Site History The Sunny Acres building is not currently included on the City’s List of Historic Resources. A historic significance evaluation report prepared by Bertrando & Bertrando describes the building as being significant for its Architecture and concludes the structure meets the eligibility criteria of the California Register of Historic Resources . The Sunny Acres building was also found eligible for historic listing under the City’s criteria for historic resources (Attachment 4, pages 15- 16). According to the Bertrando Report, Sunny Acres was designed by the William Mooser Company Architects from San Francisco, who were responsible for the design of many important residences and government buildings throughout California such as the Santa Barbara County Court House, the tower building in Ghirardelli Square and the Maritime Museum both located in San Francisco and the Beringer in St. Helena. The firm also designed the County General Hospital. The Sunny Acres building is a Lombard or Milanese Romanesque style architecture which was popular in the 1920s and widely used for academic buildings at the UCLA and USC ARC/CHC 1 - 2 ARCH-3336-2016 1600 Bishop Street Page 3 campuses. The Bertrando evaluation states this style of architecture is the only example in the County. Sunny Acres was constructed in 1931 as a “Children's Home and Health Farm Building” And remained open from 1931 to 1974 where it was used as an orphanage and then transitioned into a home for dependent wards of the state with criminal behavior problems. Since the building’s closure in 1974, the structure has been subjected to years of vandalism and fire, largely to the interior of the building. The interior has been spray painted, interior walls and floors are in various levels of degradation from weather, fire and human intervention and windows have been heavily damaged. Although the interior is in poor shape, the exterior of the building remains intact. The building has maintained its integrity in the exterior brick façade and in the architectural details such as the gable ends, arched corbels of brick and radiating brick arches above the windows. 2.3 Project Description The project proposes the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of Sunny Acres building as part of a 33-unit affordable housing residential care facility. Bishop Street Studios will operate as a multi- unit residential care facility for clients of Transitions-Mental Health Association (TMHA). Case management is provided to all residents and will be an ongoing requirement for residency. Bishop Street Studios will be staffed by a resident manager who will live on-site and provide 24-hour assistance to the individuals who will occupy the facility (Attachment 6, Project Description). The project includes:  Rehabilitation of the existing Sunny Acres building and adaptive reuse for 13 units (8 studios and 5 one-bedroom units ranging in size between 308 to 505 square feet), a 700- square foot community room and a 212-square foot office;  Construction of three new two-story structures (Building A, B & C): o Building A (2,571 square feet)  Six one-bedroom units, ranging in size between 507 to 537 square feet  Height: approximately 18 feet, 4 inches above natural grade (A.N.G.) o Building B (2,571 square feet)  Five one-bedroom units, ranging in size between 507 to 537 square feet  Height: approximately 23 feet above A.N.G. o Building C (5,483 square feet)  Ten one-bedroom units, ranging in size between 507 and 537 square feet  Height: approximately 21 feet above A.N.G. Figure 1: Sunny Acres building and some of its character defining elements ARC/CHC 1 - 3 ARCH-3336-2016 1600 Bishop Street Page 4 17 parking spaces and 26 bicycle parking spaces (10 short-term and 16 long-term); A 720-square foot central plaza and outdoor seating area between Buildings A and B; Proposed landscaping includes the removal of one oak tree, nine pepper trees, and several shrubs/bushes onsite and planting 23 trees and a variety of shrubs, grasses, and vines (Attachment 3, Project Plans, Pages 6-7); Proposed materials on the new residential buildings include brick, Hardie cement-fiber siding, stucco, shielded exterior lighting fixtures, and metal canopies. 2.4 Project Statistics The three new proposed structures are located on the portion of the site that is zoned with two different designations: R-1 (Low Density Residential) and R-2-SF (Medium Density Residential). The proposed construction complies with the development standards of these zones with minimum setbacks of 15 feet where 5 feet is normally required and a maximum height of 23 feet from average natural grade where a maximum of 25 feet is allowed (Attachment 3, Project Plans, Pages 5 & 15). The project also includes 17 vehicle parking spaces (11 are required) and 26 bicycle parking spaces (4 are required). 3.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS Project plans were reviewed in terms of their consistency with the City’s General Plan, Zoning Regulations, Secretary of the Interior (SOI) Standards, Historic Preservation Program Guidelines, and the Community Design Guidelines (CDG) for Infill Development. 3.1 Consistency with the General Plan The proposed project is consistent with several General Plan policies as described below. In addition, on July 11, 2012, the Planning Commission determined that the surplus and sale of the Sunny Acres building and surrounding property for a residential care facility use was in conformance with the General Plan (Resolution No. PC-5576-12). Land Use Element: The proposed project is located within the General Hospital Special Planning area of the Land Use Element (LUE) which states that lands behind the hospital building that are inside the City’s Urban Reserve line will be designated as Public (for existing public facility) and a range of residential uses (Low Density and Medium Density Residential) and will include the Figure 2: Bird's eye view of the proposed project ARC/CHC 1 - 4 ARCH-3336-2016 1600 Bishop Street Page 5 ability to support residential care, transitional care use, and other residential uses consistent with the adjacent areas (LUE Policy 8.6). As proposed, the affordable housing residential care facility is consistent with this special planning area. Housing Element: The project implements Housing Element Goal 8 (encourage the creation and maintenance of housing for those with special housing needs) and is consistent with a number of Housing Element policies for affordable and special needs housing. The project is a creative strategy for rehabilitating and reusing an existing institutional structure for housing (HE Policy 3.7). The project is consistent with Housing Element Policies 8.1, 8.8, 8.11, and 8.12 because it provides housing development encouraged in the Housing Element that meets a variety of special needs including disabled persons, the elderly, veterans, the homeless (or those at risk of becoming homeless), or those seeking congregate care that is located near public transit and services. The project accommodates units for persons with disabilities and promotes “visitability” in new residential units, with first-floor accessibility (HE Policy 8.10). Conservation/Open Space Element: One of the goals of the C/OS Element is the long-term protection of cultural resources and promote adaptive reuse of historic buildings. As discussed in more detail in Section 3.2 below, the project proposes to preserve, rehabilitate and adaptively reuse a significant historic resource consistent with City standards and the SOI standards (C/OS policy 3.3.1 and 3.3.4 and 3.6.8.). 3.2 CHC Discussion Cultural Resource Rehabilitation The proposed project is best characterized as “rehabilitation” under the Secretary of Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (SOI standards) since the project proposes a compatible use for the property and proposes retention and repair of key elements of the building. As conditioned and discussed below, the project complies with the SOI standards and the City’s Historic Preservation Program Guidelines. 3.2.1: Retention of Character-Defining Features1: As noted in Section 2.2 above, the structure is not historically listed; however, it is eligible for local and California listing based on Architectural Criteria. The building is identified as a Lombard or Milanese Romanesque style architecture (Attachment 4, Historic Significance Evaluation). Characteristics of this style include round arches over the windows and entryways, asymmetrical façades, and brick or stone facades. The Bertrando report notes that the Sunny Acres structure has the following details: radiating brick arches above the windows and doors, gable end stepped, and arched brick corbels (Attachment 4, Historic Significance Evaluation). The exterior of the structure is in good condition and the project proposes minor repairs to the brick façade (end point repair, grout, etc.), roof repair and the removal of paint. The project will retain all of the key character defining features described above, and will preserve the features which convey its historical and architectural values. To ensure the rehabilitation work is carried out consistent with SOI standards 1 Historic Preservation Program Guidelines Section 3.4.3: Retention of Character-Defining Features: Alterations of historically-listed buildings shall retain character-defining features. New features on primary and secondary building facades, or features visible from a public area, should be completed in a manner that preserves the original architectural character, form, scale, and appearance of the building. ARC/CHC 1 - 5 ARCH-3336-2016 1600 Bishop Street Page 6 for rehabilitation staff is recommending the following conditions of approval:  Condition No. 3: Any measures taken to remove paint and graffiti on the building exterior shall be conducted in accordance with Secretary of Interior Standards. Only the gentlest methods of paint removal and cleaning shall be used. High-pressure water blasting; sand or other hardened material blasting; or chemical paint strippers that damage the brick shall not be used.  Condition No. 4: The clay roof tiles may be removed to repair the roof and shall be replaced once the repair work is complete. Broken tiles shall be replaced with in-kind clay tiles that match the existing tiles. Submitted building plans shall include clear notes and callouts reflecting areas where exterior repairs or modifications will occur and include any relevant measures demonstrating consistency with Secretary of Interior Standards. The existing windows are in poor condition and as a part of the rehabilitation the project proposes to replace the windows with new fiberglass single hung windows. The replacement windows will have divided lights which reflect the current windows configuration with the exception of the seven windows located at the second floor at the center of the building. Often windows are a character defining feature of a building. In this particular structure, the defining feature is the brick detail of the window openings, which will not be modified. The prominent character defining features of the building fenestration include the window openings with arches and brick sill patterning. The Windows themselves are inset and of secondary importance in defining the architectural character of the building. In consideration of the feasibility of rehabilitating the structure for the proposed residential uses, he character of the building will not be diminished as long as window changes do not introduce materials or colors which are clearly incompatible (e.g. white vinyl). Staff recommends Condition No. 5 which states the replacement windows shall not introduce incompatible materials or configurations which would be incompatible with the architectural style and fenestration of the Sunny Acres building. The replacement windows shall be compatible and complementary with the existing windows so the historic architectural character of the building is not detrimentally affected. 3.2.2: Exterior Building Changes2: The proposed project does not introduce new or conflicting architectural elements to the exterior of the Sunny Acres building. Features of the building (as described in Section 3.2.1 above) will be retained and exterior modifications only consist of repair, and where necessary replacement with materials similar in size, shape, quality, and appearance (in kind) to the existing exterior features. The project proposes to remove an existing front stairway that leads to the front door of the building and build a new staircase that is slightly to north of the existing location. The existing stairs do not appear to be an integral part of the building as they do not connect to the building or any walkway that is connected to the building. Additionally, the stairs do not appear to incorporate the same materials or details of the Sunny 2 Historic Preservation Program Guidelines Section 3.4.4 : Exterior building changes. Exterior changes to historically- listed buildings or resources should not introduce new or conflicting architectural elements and should be architecturally compatible with the original and/or prevailing architectural character of the building, its setting and architectural context. Additions to historic buildings shall comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards to complement and be consistent with the original style of the structure. Building materials used to replicate character -defining features shall be consistent with the original materials in terms of size, shape, quality and appearance. However, original materials are not required. ARC/CHC 1 - 6 ARCH-3336-2016 1600 Bishop Street Page 7 Acres building and are not an important feature in terms of how the structure conveys its historical significance. The new buildings are clearly differentiated and deferential to the Sunny Acres building by their location, lower overall height, and use of colors and materials. The three new, two-story residential structures on the site are designed to assume a secondary position to the Sunny Acres building by setting the structures into the hillside (see Figure 4 below). This design reduces the overall height to one-story nearest to the Sunny Acres building. The new structures complement the existing building’s architecture through its similar rectilinear form and the use of brick siding and brick trim detail around some of the windows and doors, and also includes contemporary architectural elements such as the horizontal siding, use of stucco and metal awnings (Attachment 3, Project Plans). 3.2.3 Environmental Review: Cultural Resources The Initial Study cultural resources evaluation (Attachment 5, Draft Initial Study, Section 5) found that with incorporation of mitigation measures (also incorporated in recommended conditions of approval) the project would have a less than significant impact on cultural resources since it would be consistent with the Secretary of Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties3. The Initial Study evaluation found less than significant impacts to archaeological resources with incorporation of monitoring requirements as mitigation measures which are incorporated into project conditions of approval. 3.2.4 Evaluation Summary The proposed project is consistent with the City’s Historic Preservation Program Guidelines and the SOI standards for rehabilitation. The project will retain the character defining features of the Sunny Acres building. The project will rehabilitate the structure into a building that once again is available for use and the project is consistent with General Plan policies as an adaptive re-use project, which rehabilitates and provides for the long-term preservation of a historically important building which is currently in poor condition and threatened. 3.3 ARC Discussion Consistency with Community Design Guidelines 3.3.1 Scale, siting, detailing and overall character: The CDG state that infill development be compatible in scale, siting, detailing and overall character with the adjacent buildings and those 3 CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b)(3): Generally, a project that follows the Secretary of the Interi or’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring and Reconstructing Historic Buildings or the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Histor ic Buildings (1995), Weeks and Grimmer, shall be considered as mitigated to a level of less than a significant impact on the historical resource. Figure 3: Existing stairway ARC/CHC 1 - 7 ARCH-3336-2016 1600 Bishop Street Page 8 in the immediate neighborhood.4 The project is proposing to construct 3 new, two-story residential structures adjacent to the existing 2-story, approximately 23-foot tall Sunny Acres building. The maximum height of the new structures range from 18.3 feet to 23 feet from average natural grade. The new structures have a similar rectilinear form to the existing building. Figure 4 shows a section of Building A and the Sunny Acres building and how they relate together in height, scale and form. The massing and scale of the new structures is consistent with the closest neighboring structures in the neighborhood, which include single story institutional buildings, and one and two-story single-family residences. 3.3.2 Building Design5 and Exterior Colors6 & Materials7: As discussed in Section 3.2.2 above the new structures are designed to complement and incorporate the elements of the Sunny Acres building’s architectural features. Consistent with CDG Section 5.3.E the proposed use of brick provides a continuity with the existing structure and the new structures and the use of horizontal siding and stucco are consistent with materials used in the adjacent residential neighborhood and public facilities. The color scheme includes earth tones and dark brown accents which complement the Sunny Acres brick exterior and minimize the visual impact of the new buildings. ARC Discussion Item: The new construction is proposing to use a rougher finished stucco. The ARC should discuss if the use of this type of stucco is appropriate for the project. 4 Community Design Guidelines Chapter 5, Section 5.3.A(1): Be compatible in scale, siting, detailing, and overall character with adjacent buildings and those in the immediate neighborhood. This is crucial when a new or remodeled house is proposed to be larger than others in the neighborhood. When new homes are developed adjacent to older ones, the height and bulk of the new construction can have a negative impact on adjacent, smaller scale buildings. 5 Community Design Guidelines Chapter 5, Section 5.3.B : Building design. An infill residential structure should incorporate the traditional architectural characteristics of existing houses in the neighborhood, including window and door spacing, exterior materials, roof style and pitch, ornamentation and other details. 6 Community Design Guidelines Chapter 5, Section 5.3.F: Exterior colors. Color schemes for infill residential structures should consider the colors of existing houses in the neighborhood, to maintain compatibility. 7 Community Design Guidelines Chapter 5, Section 5.3.E: Exterior finish materials. The thoughtful selection of building materials can enhance desired neighborhood qualities such as compatibility, continuity, and harmony. The design of infill residential structures should incorporate an appropriate mixture of the predominant materials found in the neighborhood. Common materials in San Luis Obispo are smooth, troweled, or sand-finished stucco, wood, horizontal clapboard siding, shingles, brick, and stone. Figure 4: A section of the existing Sunny Acres building and Building A (new) showing the proposed height of the new structure with the height of the existing structure. ARC/CHC 1 - 8 ARCH-3336-2016 1600 Bishop Street Page 9 3.3.3 Outdoor living areas: The project is consistent with CDG Section 5.3.D. which encourages the use of various different types of outdoor living areas. In particular, the proposed project includes the development of an outdoor plaza/courtyard for the residents and staff of the facility. Balconies and outdoor paths are also incorporated into the plan allowing for additional outdoor living space for the development (Attachment 3, Project Plans, Page 7). 3.3.4 Tree Removals The project is proposing to remove one oak tree (along the north edge of the parking lot) and nine pepper trees and planting 23 new trees (Attachment 3, Project Plans, Pages 6-7). The City Arborist has reviewed the plans and supports the removal of the nine pepper trees and is recommendin g that the oak tree be retained. Staff has included Condition No. 27 which requires that the oak tree be retained and protected to the satisfaction of the City Arborist. 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW An Initial Study has been completed for the proposed project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is recommended for adoption (Attachment 5). The MND finds that with incorporation of mitigation measures (also incorporated in recommended conditions of approval) potential impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, hazards & hazardous materials, hydrology/water quality, and utilities/service systems will be less than significant. 5.0 WATER AVAILABILITY Since the adoption of the 2014 General Plan Land Use Element (LUE), the City acquired an additional annual allocation of 2,102 acre feet of water from Nacimiento Reservoir, bringing the total annual available to 5,482 acre feet per year. This brings the City’s total annual availability to 12,109 acre feet, previously 10,007. In addition to this, the City is currently expanding its groundwater program, while concurrently designing the upgrade to the Water Resource Recovery Facility to allow highly treated wastewater to become a potable water source. The 2015 Urban Water Management Plan projected that the City’s total annual residential and non - residential water demand will be 7,496 acre feet at buildout (year 2035 with a population of 57,200) as evaluated under the 2014 LUE. This estimation uses 117 gallons per capita day consumption (gpcd), though the current usage is only 90 gpcd. As a baseline comparison, the total City annual water demand in 2015 was approximately 4,772 acre feet; 40% of the available water supply. The available annual water supply (12,109 acre feet) far exceeds the LUE projected annual buildout demand (7,496 acre feet). Since the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, water use and demand associated with the development is anticipated and included with LUE buildout projections. 6.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS The requirements of the other departments are reflected in the attached Draft Resolution as conditions of approval and code requirements, where appropriate. ARC/CHC 1 - 9 ARCH-3336-2016 1600 Bishop Street Page 10 7.0 ALTERNATIVES & RECOMMENDATION 7.1. Continue the project with direction to the applicant and staff on pertinent issues. 7.2. Deny the project based on findings of inconsistency with the General Plan, Zoning Regulations, Community Design Guidelines or other City standards. 8.0 ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Resolution 2. Vicinity Map 3. Reduced Project Plans 4. Historic Significance Evaluation by Bertrando & Bertrando 5. Draft Initial Study (without attachments as they are separately included as a part of this Staff Report) 6. Project Description Included in Commission member portfolio: project plans Available at ARC hearing: color/materials board ARC/CHC 1 - 10 RESOLUTION NO. ARC-XXXX-16 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION APPROVING THE PROPOSED REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE OF THE SUNNY ACRES BUILDING FOR 13 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, A COMMUNITY ROOM AND OFFICE AS PART OF AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF THREE NEW RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES THAT CONTAIN AN ADDITIONAL 21 UNITS AND ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED SEPTEMBER 19, 2016 1600 BISHOP STREET (ARCH-3336-2016/EID-3562-2016) WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission and Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a joint public hearing in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on September 19, 2016, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application #ARCH 3336-2016/EID-3562-2016, Transitions Mental Health Association (TMHA) and HASLO, applicant; and WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, input of the Cultural Heritage Committee, interested parties, and evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. The Architectural Review Commission hereby grants final approval to the project (ARCH-3336-2016), based on the following findings: 1. That the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons living or working at the site or in the vicinity because the project will be compatible with site constraints and the scale and character of the site and the surrounding neighborhood. 2. As conditioned, the proposed modifications to the Sunny Acres building and site which includes rehabilitation and adaptive reuse is consistent with the Historic Preservation Guidelines and Secretary of Interior Standards, since character defining features will be retained, repaired, or replaced in kind. 3. The proposed construction of the three new residential structures is consistent with Secretary of Interior Standards for new construction on historic properties since the new construction is subordinate to and compatible with the scale, size, massing and architectural features of the ATTACHMENT 1 ARC/CHC 1 - 11 Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16 1600 Bishop Street, ARCH-3336-2016/EID-3562-2016 Page 2 Sunny Acres building. 4. The project is consistent with the Conservation & Open Space Element Policies 3.3.1, 3.3.4 and 3.6.8 because it proposes to preserve, rehabilitate and promotes adaptive reuse of a historic building. 5. The proposed project is consistent with Land Use Element Policy 8.6 (General Hospital Special Planning area) because the project provides an affordable housing residential care facility. 6. That the project is consistent with the Housing Element Policies 3.7 because the project is a creative strategy for rehabilitating and reusing an existing institutional structure for special needs housing. 7. The project is consistent with Housing Element Policies 8.1, 8.8, and 8.11 - 8.12 because it encourages the dispersal of housing development for disabled persons, the elderly, veterans, the homeless (or those at risk of becoming homeless), or those seeking congregate care that is located near public transit and services and accommodates units for persons with disabilities and promotes “visitability” in new residential units, with first-floor accessibility. 8. The project design maintains consistency with the City’s Community Design Guidelines by providing architectural design that complements the character, height and scale of the Sunny Acres building and the surrounding neighborhood. 9. The project is consistent with the City’s Community Design Guidelines because the proposed project incorporates similar or complementary window and door spacing, exterior materials, and roof pitch to the existing Sunny Acres building and the surrounding neighborhood. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The Architectural Review Commission hereby adopts the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact which finds that with incorporation of mitigation measures, environmental impacts will be less than significant. Air Quality Mitigation Measure AQ 1: Prior to any construction activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that a geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if the area disturbed is exempt from the Asbestos Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) regulations. An exemption request must be filed with the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD), as applicable. If the site is not exempt from the requirements of the regulation, the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. This may include development of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan and Asbestos Health and Safety Program for approval by the APCD.  Monitoring Plan, AQ 1: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor compliance with APCD requirements. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the ATTACHMENT 1 ARC/CHC 1 - 12 Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16 1600 Bishop Street, ARCH-3336-2016/EID-3562-2016 Page 3 APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. The applicant shall provide documentation of compliance with APCD requirements to City staff prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Mitigation Measure AQ 2: Any scheduled demolition activities or disturbance, removal, or relocation of utility pipelines shall be coordinated with the APCD Enforcement Division at (805) 781-5912 to ensure compliance with NESHAP, which include, but are not limited to: 1) written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities commencing, to the APCD, 2) asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Consultant, and, 3) applicable removal and disposal requirements of identified ACM.  Monitoring Plan, AQ 2: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor compliance with APCD requirements. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. Mitigation Measure AQ 3: During construction/ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall implement the following particulate (dust) control measures. These measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and modify practices, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. a. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible. b. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site, and from exceeding the APCD’s limit of 20% opacity for no greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Increased watering frequency will be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 m.p.h. and cessation of grading activities during periods of winds over 25 m.p.h. Reclaimed (non-potable) water is to be used in all construction and dust- control work. c. All dirt stock pile areas (if any) shall be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as needed. d. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil disturbing activities. e. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established. f. 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. ATTACHMENT 1 ARC/CHC 1 - 13 Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16 1600 Bishop Street, ARCH-3336-2016/EID-3562-2016 Page 4 g. 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. h. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 m.p.h. on any unpaved surface at the construction site. i. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, are to 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 California Vehicle Code Section 23114. j. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. k. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when feasible. l. All PM10 mitigation measures required shall be shown on grading and building plans. m. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below the APCD’s limit of 20% opacity for no greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition.  Monitoring Plan, AQ 3: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor 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. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. Mitigation Measure AQ 4: Prior to any construction activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that all equipment and operations are compliant with California Air Resource Board and APCD permitting requirements, by contacting the APCD Engineering Division at (805) 781- 5912 for specific information regarding permitting requirements.  Monitoring Plan, AQ 4: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor compliance with APCD requirements. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. The applicant shall provide documentation of compliance with APCD requirements to City staff prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Mitigation Measure AQ 5: To reduce sensitive receptor emissions impact of diesel vehicles and equipment used to construct the project and export soil from the site, the applicant shall implement the following idling control techniques: 1. California Diesel Idling Regulations ATTACHMENT 1 ARC/CHC 1 - 14 Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16 1600 Bishop Street, ARCH-3336-2016/EID-3562-2016 Page 5 a. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles: 1. Shall not idle the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation; and, 2. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater than 5.0 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of restricted area, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation. b. Off-road diesel equipment shall comply with the 5-minute idling restriction identified in Section 2449(d)(2) of the California Air Resources Board’s In-Use Off-road Diesel regulation. c. Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers and operators of the state’s 5-minute idling limit. 2. Diesel Idling restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors (residential homes). In addition to the State required diesel idling requirements, the project applicant shall comply with these more restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to nearby sensitive receptors: a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors. b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be permitted. c. Use of alternative fueled equipment is recommended. d. Signs that specify the no idling areas must be posed and enforces at the site. 3. Soil Transport. The final volume of soil that will be hauled off-site, together with the fleet mix, hauling route, and number of trips per day will need to be identified for the APCD. Specific standards and conditions will apply.  Monitoring Plan, AQ 5: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor 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. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. The applicant shall provide documentation of compliance with APCD requirements to City staff prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Mitigation Measure AQ 6: Prior to issuance of construction permits, construction and architectural plans shall note the requirement to use low VOC architectural coatings (71 grams/liter or less). The applicant or contractor shall submit documentation of compliance to the City Community Development Department prior to final inspection.  Monitoring Plan, AQ 6: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. The applicant shall provide documentation of compliance with APCD requirements to City staff prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. ATTACHMENT 1 ARC/CHC 1 - 15 Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16 1600 Bishop Street, ARCH-3336-2016/EID-3562-2016 Page 6 Biological Resources Mitigation Measure BIO 1: Prior to commencement of construction, to avoid conflicts with nesting birds, construction activities shall not be allowed during the nesting bird season (March to September), unless a City-approved and applicant funded qualified biologist has surveyed the impact zone and determined that no nesting bird activities would be adversely impacted. If any evidence of nesting activities is found, the biologist will determine if any construction activities can occur during the nesting period and to what extent. The results of the surveys will be passed immediately to the City with possible recommendations for variable buffer zones, as needed, around individual nests.  Monitoring Plan, BIO 1: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans and shall be clearly visible to contractors and City inspectors. Migratory bird mitigation shall be reviewed by the City’s Natural Resources Manager. City staff will periodically inspect the site for continued compliance with the above mitigation measures. Mitigation Measure BIO 2: The applicant shall limit tree removal to no more than one coast live oak tree and nine pepper trees. Prior to construction permit issuance, construction plans shall clearly delineate all trees within 50 feet of the proposed project, and shall show which trees are to be removed or impacted, and which trees are to remain unharmed. Prior to any ground disturbing activities, adequate protection measures (e.g., sturdy fencing) per the approved construction plans, shall be installed to protect those trees identified to remain unharmed as well as to minimize impacts for those trees identified as being impacted.  Monitoring Plan, BIO 2: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans and shall be clearly visible to contractors and City inspectors. Protection measures shall be installed prior to grading and construction. City staff will periodically inspect the site for continued compliance with the above mitigation measures. Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure CR 1: In the event archeological resources and/or human remains are unearthed or discovered during any construction activities, the following standards apply: a. Construction activities shall cease, and the City Community Development Department shall be notified so that the extent and location of discovered materials may be recorded by a qualified archaeologist, and disposition of artifacts may be accomplished in accordance with state and federal law. b. If human remains are unearthed, the applicant shall notify the City Community Development Department and shall comply with State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, which requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County of San Luis Obispo Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the human remains are determined to be Native American, the County Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours, which will ATTACHMENT 1 ARC/CHC 1 - 16 Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16 1600 Bishop Street, ARCH-3336-2016/EID-3562-2016 Page 7 determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials.  Monitoring Plan, CR 1: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans and be clearly visible to contractors and City inspectors. City staff will periodically inspect the site for continued compliance with the above mitigation measure. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Mitigation Measure HM 1: Prior to initiation of grading and construction, the applicant shall prepare and submit a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan to the City Community Development Department. The plan shall identify hazardous materials to be used on and off-site, and shall identify procedures for storage, distribution, and spill response. Equipment refueling shall be done in non-sensitive areas and such that spills can be easily and quickly contained and cleaned up without entering any existing stormwater drainage system or creek. The plan shall include procedures in the event of accidents or spills, identification of and contact information for immediate response personnel, and means to limit public access and exposure. Any necessary remedial work shall be done immediately to avoid surface or ground water contamination. The plan shall be implemented by the construction contractor, and verified by the City Public Works and Community Development Departments.  Monitoring Plan, HM 1: The Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department prior to grading and construction. A copy of the Plan shall be available onsite during grading and construction, and shall be implemented as necessary. City staff will periodically inspect the site for continued compliance with the above mitigation measures. Hydrology and Water Quality Mitigation Measure HWQ 1: The Drainage Plan and Storm Water Control Plan (Rick Engineering 2016) prepared for the proposed project includes design features and recommended Best Management Practices and Low Impact Development measures for water quality control and stormwater management and quality via the proposed bio-filtration treatment, non-grouted pavers systems with underdrains, and use of landscape areas for water treatment and retention. These measures shall become required components of project development and the project proponent shall be required to implement these design features and recommendations as set forth and approved by the City Public Works Department and Regional Water Quality Control Board.  Monitoring Plan, HWQ 1: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. Community Development Planning and Public Works staff shall review the Stormwater Control Plan as part of the Building Permit application package prior to issuance of grading or construction permits. City staff will periodically inspect the site for continued compliance with the above mitigation measure. ATTACHMENT 1 ARC/CHC 1 - 17 Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16 1600 Bishop Street, ARCH-3336-2016/EID-3562-2016 Page 8 Utilities and Service Systems Mitigation Measure UTIL 1: To meet the City’s fire flow requirements and minimum water pressure for domestic purposes, the project will install off-site improvements to the water distribution system including upsizing the existing 12-inch cast iron water main in Flora Street from the driveway at the County Probation Office to Bishop Tank to a 16-inch ductile iron water main.  Monitoring Plan, UTIL 1: Off-site improvements to the water distributions system shall be shown on building plans and reviewed by Utilities staff as part of the Building Permit application package prior to issuance of grading and construction permits. City staff will periodically inspect the site for continued compliance with the above mitigation measure. SECTION 3. Action. The Architectural Review Commission (ARC) hereby grants final approval to the project with incorporation of the following conditions: Planning 1. The applicant 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 project, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review (“Indemnified Claims”). The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Indemnified Claim upon being presented with the Indemnified Claim and the City shall fully cooperate in the defense against an Indemnified Claim. 2. Final project design and construction drawings submitted for a building permit shall be in substantial compliance with the project plans approved by the ARC. A separate, full-size sheet shall be included in working drawings submitted for a building permit that lists all conditions and code requirements of project approval listed as sheet number 2. Reference shall be made in the margin of listed items as to where in plans requirements are addressed. Any change to approved design, colors, materials, landscaping, or other conditions of approval must be approved by the Director or Architectural Review Commission, as deemed appropriate. 3. Any measures taken to remove paint and graffiti on the building exterior shall be conducted in accordance with Secretary of Interior Standards. Only the gentlest methods of paint removal and cleaning shall be used. High-pressure water blasting; sand or other hardened material blasting; or chemical paint strippers that damage to brick shall not be used. 4. The clay roof tiles may be removed to repair the roof and shall be replaced once the repair work is complete. Broken tiles shall be replaced with in-kind clay tiles that match the existing tiles. Submitted building plans shall include clear notes and callouts reflecting areas whe re exterior repairs or modifications will occur and include any relevant measures demonstrating ATTACHMENT 1 ARC/CHC 1 - 18 Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16 1600 Bishop Street, ARCH-3336-2016/EID-3562-2016 Page 9 consistency with Secretary of Interior Standards. 5. Replacement windows shall not introduce incompatible materials or configurations which would be incompatible with the architectural style and fenestration of the Sunny Acres building. The replacement windows shall be compatible and complementary with the existing windows so the historic architectural character of the building is not detrimentally affected. 6. Plans submitted for a building permit shall call out the colors and materials of all proposed building surfaces and other improvements. Colors and materials shall be consistent with the color and material board submitted with Architectural Review application. 7. The locations of all exterior lighting, including lighting on the structure, bollard style landscaping or path lighting, shall be included in plans submitted for a building permit. All wall-mounted lighting fixtures shall be clearly called out on building elevations included as part of working drawings. All wall-mounted lighting shall complement building architecture. The lighting schedule for the building shall include a graphic representation of the proposed lighting fixtures and cut-sheets on the submitted building plans. The selected fixture(s) shall be shielded to ensure that light is directed downward consistent with the requirements of the City’s Night Sky Preservation standards contained in Chapter 17.23 of the Zoning Regulations. 8. Mechanical and electrical equipment shall be located internally to the building. With submittal of working drawings, the applicant shall include sectional views of the building, which clearly show the sizes of any proposed condensers and other mechanical equipment. If any condensers or other mechanical equipment is to be placed on the roof, plans submitted for a building permit shall confirm that parapets and other roof features will provide adequate screening. A line-of-sight diagram may be required to confirm that proposed screening will be adequate. This condition applies to both initial project construction and later building modifications and improvements. 9. A final landscaping plan, including irrigation details and plans, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department along with working drawings. The legend for the landscaping plan shall include the sizes and species of all groundcovers, shrubs, and trees with corresponding symbols for each plant material showing their specific locations on plans. 10. The location of any required backflow preventer and double-check assembly shall be shown on all site plans submitted for a building permit, including the landscaping plan. Construction plans shall also include a scaled diagram of the equipment proposed. Where possible, as determined by the Utilities Director, equipment shall be located inside the building within 20 feet of the front property line. Where this is not possible, as determined by the Utilities Director, the back flow preventer and double-check assembly shall be located in the street yard and screened using a combination of paint color, landscaping and, if deemed appropriate by the Community Development Director, a low wall. The size and configuration of such equipment shall be subject to review and approval by the Utilities and Community Development Directors. ATTACHMENT 1 ARC/CHC 1 - 19 Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16 1600 Bishop Street, ARCH-3336-2016/EID-3562-2016 Page 10 Engineering Division – Public Works/Community Development 11. The improvement plan and building plan submittals shall show and label all existing and proposed public or private easements for reference. Any required on-site or off-site easements shall be recorded prior to permit issuance as necessary. 12. Development of the driveway and parking areas shall comply with the Parking and Driveway Standards for dimension, bay width, maneuverability, slopes, drainage, and materials. Alternate paving materials are recommended for water quantity and/or quality control purposes and in the area of existing or proposed trees and where the driveway or parking area may occur within the dripline of any tree. Alternate paving material shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Planning Division. 13. The building plan submittal shall show all parking spaces that are adjacent to a post, column, or wall shall be one additional foot in width per City Engineering Standard 2220. 14. The building plan submittal shall show all required short-term and long-term bicycle parking per M.C. Section 17.16, Table 6.5, and in accordance with standards contained in the 2013 Bicycle Transportation Plan, 2010 Community Design Guidelines, and any project specific conditions to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department. Include details and detail references on the plans for the proposed bicycle parking facilities and/or racks. The building plans shall provide a detailed site plan of any racks. Show all dimensions and clearances to obstructions per city standard. 15. The building plan submittal shall clarify where and how mail will be delivered. The plan shall show the location and details for a mail box unit (MBU) to the satisfaction of the Post Master and City of San Luis Obispo. 16. The building plan submittal shall include a complete site utility plan. All existing and proposed utilities along with utility company meters shall be shown. Existing underground and overhead services shall be shown along with any proposed alterations or upgrades. Services to the new structures shall be underground. All work in the public right-of-way shall be shown or noted. 17. The limits of public and private improvements shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City of San Luis Obispo. The applicant and/or engineer of record shall schedule a meeting with the Utilities Department and Engineering Development Review Division of the Community Development Department prior to completing working drawings or submitting plans for permit review. 18. A separate public improvement plan will be required for the proposed public main installations, alterations, and/or upgrades. A separate application, plan submittal, plan review, and inspection fees will be required for the review and inspection of public improvements. A separate encroachment permit will be required. ATTACHMENT 1 ARC/CHC 1 - 20 Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16 1600 Bishop Street, ARCH-3336-2016/EID-3562-2016 Page 11 19. Final construction details, line and grade of all proposed public and private utility improvements shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Utilities Engineer and Public Works Department. All public improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City Engineering Standards in effect at the time of development. 20. The building plan submittal shall include a complete grading, drainage and erosion control plan. The grading plan shall show existing structures and grades located within 15’ of the property lines and/or building pad in accordance with the grading ordinance. The plan shall include all existing and proposed grades, finish floor elevations, and spot elevations to depict the site drainage. The plan shall include all existing and proposed drainage devices and systems. The plan shall consider historic offsite drainage tributary to this property that may need to be conveyed along with the improved on-site drainage. 21. This development shall comply with the Waterway Management Plan. Provide a final hydrologic and hydraulic analysis report at the time of application for discretionary approvals in accordance with the Waterway Management Plan Volume III, Drainage Design Manual. 22. The building plan submittal shall show compliance with the Post Construction Stormwater Requirements as promulgated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board for redeveloped sites. Include a complete Post Construction Stormwater Control Plan Template as available on the City’s Website. 23. An operations and maintenance manual will be required for the post construction stormwater improvements. The manual shall be provided at the time of building permit application and shall be accepted by the City prior to building permit issuance. A private stormwater conveyance agreement will be required and shall be recorded prior to final inspection approvals. 24. EPA Requirement: General Construction Activity Storm Water Permits are required for all storm water discharges associated with a construction activity where clearing, grading or excavations result in land disturbance of one or more acres. Storm water discharges of less than one acre, but which is part of a larger common plan of development or sale, also requires a permit. Permits are required until the construction is complete. To be covered by a General Construction Activity Permit, the owner(s) of land where construction activity occurs must submit a completed "Notice of Intent" (NOI) form, with the appropriate fee, to the State Regional Water Quality Control Board. An application is required to the State Board under their recently adopted Stormwater Multi-Application, Reporting, and Tracking System (SMARTS). 25. The building plan submittal shall include a copy of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for reference. Incorporate any erosion control measures into the building plans as required by the Board, identified in the SWPPP, and in accordance with Section 10 of the city’s Waterways Management Plan. The building plan submittal shall include reference to the WDID number on the grading and erosion control plans for reference. ATTACHMENT 1 ARC/CHC 1 - 21 Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16 1600 Bishop Street, ARCH-3336-2016/EID-3562-2016 Page 12 26. The building plan submittal shall show all existing trees on the property with a trunk diameter of 3" or greater. Offsite trees along the adjoining property lines with canopies and/or root systems that extend onto the property shall be shown for reference. The plan shall note which trees are to remain and which trees are proposed for removal. Include the diameter and species of all trees. Tree canopies should generally be shown to scale for reference. The City Arborist supports the proposed removal of pepper trees and bushes with the compensatory plantings shown on the landscape plan. Any additional Tree removals may require approval by the City Arborist and/or Tree Committee. 27. The building plan submittal shall show all existing oak trees to remain including the 24” oak tree. The parking lot layout shall be altered to accommodate retaining the 24” oak tree to the satisfaction of the City Arborist. The proposed terminal end fire hydrant and hydrant service lateral may need to be relocated as part of the oak tree preservation strategy. The final details shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City Arborist, Planning Division, and Fire Marshal. 28. Tree protection measures shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Arborist for the clusters of oak trees to remain. The City Arborist shall review and approve the proposed tree protection measures prior to commencing with any demolition, grading, or construction. The City Arborist shall approve any safety pruning, the cutting of substantial roots, or gradin g within the dripline of trees. A city-approved arborist shall complete safety pruning. Any required tree protection measures shall be shown or noted on the building plans. Utilities Department 29. To meet the City’s fire flow requirements and minimum water pressure for domestic purposes, the project will install off-site improvements to the water distribution system including upsizing the existing 12-inch cast iron water main in Flora Street from the driveway at the County Probation Office to Bishop Tank to a 16-inch ductile iron water main. Required water main improvements shall be completed and operational to the satisfaction of the Utilities Director, prior to occupancy of any of the residential units. 30. Potable water infrastructure improvements shall include re-located fire hydrants, private water booster station, new looped public water mains, sewer lateral, replacement of existing water main to Bishop Tank, abandonment of existing parallel water services to the satisfaction of the Utilities Director. Code Requirements Fire 31. All access Roadway shall be posted “No Parking-Fire Lane” ATTACHMENT 1 ARC/CHC 1 - 22 Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-16 1600 Bishop Street, ARCH-3336-2016/EID-3562-2016 Page 13 Utilities Department 32. Potable city water shall not be used for major construction activities, such as grading and dust control, as required under Prohibited Water Uses; Chapter 17.07.070.C of the City’s Municipal Code. Recycled water is available through the City’s Construction Water Permit program. Information on the program is available at: http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=5909 33. During the declared drought emergency (Resolution 10628 (2015), the project’s estimated total water use (ETWU) to support new ornamental landscaping shall not exceed 50 percent of maximum applied water allowance (MAWA). Information shall be submitted during the Building Permit Review Process for review and approval by the Utilities Department prior to issuance of a Building Permit to support required water demand of the project’s proposed landscaping. On motion by Commissioner ___________, seconded by Commissioner _____________, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: REFRAIN: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 19th day of September, 2016. _____________________________ Tyler Corey, Secretary Architectural Review Commission ATTACHMENT 1 ARC/CHC 1 - 23 R-1 PF PF C/OS-40 R-1 PF-SF O-PDPF R-1 R-2 R-2-SF R-1 R-1-S R-1 R-1 R-2 PF-S R-1 R-1 C/OS-40-SP R-1 R-1 R-1-PD BISHO P J O H N S O N FI X L I N I FLOR A W I L D I N G SI E R R A S K Y L A R K VIEWM O N T P A R K L A N D ELLA VICINITY MAP USE-3336-20161600 Bishop Street ¯ ATTACHMENT 2 ARC/CHC 1 - 24 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m Bi s h o p s t r e e t s t u d i o s Ci t y o f S a n L u i s o b i s p o a r c h i t e c t u r a l r e v i e w c o m m i t t e e PR O J E C T C O N T A C T S CL I E N T : TR A N S I T I O N S M E N T A L H E A L T H A S S O C I A T I O N P.O . B O X 1 5 4 0 8 , S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A 9 3 4 0 1 80 5 . 5 4 0 . 6 5 0 0 CO N T A C T : C L A I R E C L A R K , c c l a r k @ t - m h a . o r g CL I E N T : HO U S I N G A U T H O R I T Y O F S A N L U I S O B I S P O 48 7 L E F F S T . , S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A 9 3 4 0 1 80 5 . 5 4 3 . 4 4 7 8 CO N T A C T : M I C H A E L B U R K E , m b u r k e @ h a s l o . o r g AR C H I T E C T : TE N O V E R S T U D I O 53 9 M A R S H S T . , S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A 9 3 4 0 1 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 CO N T A C T : J O E L S N Y D E R , j o e l s @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m CI V I L E N G I N E E R : R I C K E N G I N E E R I N G 71 1 T A N K F A R M R D . , S U I T E 1 1 0 , S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A 9 3 4 0 1 80 5 . 5 4 4 . 0 7 0 7 CO N T A C T : C R I S T I F R Y , c f r y @ r i c k e n g i n e e r i n g . c o m IN D E X CO V E R PR O J E C T I N F O R M A T I O N 3 CO N T E X T U A L S I T E P L A N 4 AR C H I T E C T U R A L S I T E P L A N 5 EX I S T I N G T R E E / D E M O P L A N 6 PL A N T I N G P L A N 7 PL A N T T Y P E S 8 WA T E R U S E C A L C U L A T I O N S 9 SI T E L I G H T I N G 1 0 EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G F L O O R P L A N S 1 1 - 1 2 NE W B U I L D I N G F L O O R P L A N S 1 3 - 1 4 SE C T I O N S 1 5 EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G E L E V A T I O N S 1 6 - 1 7 NE W B U I L D I N G E L E V A T I O N S 1 8 - 2 0 MO D E L I M A G E S 2 1 - 2 9 GR A D I N G A N D D R A I N A G E P L A N 3 0 CO N C E P T U A L U T I L I T Y P L A N & A C C E S S R O A D 3 1 VI C I N I T Y M A P PR O J E C T L O C A T I O N ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 25 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 3 PR O J E C T I N F O R M A T I O N PA R K I N G C A L C U L A T I O N S PA R K I N G R E Q U I R E D : CA R E T A K E R = ( 2 ) P E R U N I T : 1 U N I T x 2 2 S P A C E S RE S I D E N T I A L C A R E = ( 1 ) P E R ( 4 ) B E D S : 3 4 U N I T S / 4 = 8 . 5 9 S P A C E S TO T A L P A R K I N G R E Q U I R E D : 1 1 S P A C E S PA R K I N G P R O V I D E D : ST A N D A R D 9 ’ X 1 8 ’ 1 0 S P A C E S CO M P A C T 8 ’ X 1 7 ’ - 6 ” 7 S P A C E S TO T A L P A R K I N G P R O V I D E D : 1 7 S P A C E S BI C Y C L E P A R K I N G R E Q U I R E D ( R - 2 ) : 17 S P A C E S X 5 % 1 S P A C E SH O R T - T E R M T O T A L R E Q U I R E D ( 1 0 0 % X 1 S P A C E ) 1 S P A C E LO N G - T E R M T O T A L R E Q U I R E D N / A BI C Y C L E P A R K I N G P R O V I D E D : SH O R T - T E R M : 1 0 S P A C E S LO N G - T E R M : 1 6 S P A C E S UN I T S EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G : LO W E R F L O O R S T U D I O S : 4 U N I T S O N E B E D R O O M S : 2 U N I T S UP P E R F L O O R : S T U D I O S : 4 U N I T S O N E B E D R O O M S : 3 U N I T S E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G T O T A L : 1 3 U N I T S PR O P O S E D B U I L D I N G S : BL D G A L O W E R L E V E L O N E B E D R O O M S : 3 U N I T S BL D G A U P P E R L E V E L O N E B E D R O O M S : 3 U N I T S B U I L D I N G A T O T A L : 6 U N I T S BL D G B L O W E R L E V E L O N E B E D R O O M S : 3 U N I T S BL D G B U P P E R L E V E L O N E B E D R O O M S : 2 U N I T S B U I L D I N G B T O T A L : 5 U N I T S BL D G C L O W E R L E V E L O N E B E D R O O M S : 5 U N I T S BL D G C U P P E R L E V E L O N E B E D R O O M S : 5 U N I T S B U I L D I N G C T O T A L : 1 0 U N I T S TO T A L S T U D I O S : 8 U N I T S TO T A L O N E B E D R O O M S : 2 6 U N I T S TO T A L U N I T S 3 4 U N I T S TA X C R E D I T U N I T R E Q U I R E M E N T S 50 4 / U F A S U N I T S R E Q U I R E D 5 % M O B I L I T Y I M P A I R E D 3 4 X 5 % = 1 . 7 2 U N I T S 2 % S E N S O R Y I M P A I R E D 3 4 X 2 % = 0 . 6 8 1 U N I T AC C E S S I B L E U N I T S R E Q U I R E D 1 0 % M O B I L I T Y I M P A I R E D 3 4 X 1 0 % = 3 . 4 4 U N I T S 5 % S E N S O R Y I M P A I R E D 3 4 X 5 % = 1 . 7 2 U N I T MO B I L I T Y U N I T S P R O V I D E D 4 U N I T S SE N S O R Y U N I T S P R O V I D E D 3 U N I T S HI S T O R I C A L P R E S E R V A T I O N / R E S T O R A T I O N CH A N G E S T O E X I S T I N G F E A T U R E S • Al l e x i s t i n g f e a t u r e s o f t h e b u i l d i n g a r e t o r e m a i n . O n l y ( 3 ) w i n d o w s o n t h e r e a r el e v a t i o n s o f t h e b u i l d i n g a r e p r o p o s e d t o b e t u r n e d i n t o d o o r s . T h e o p e n i n g s d o n o t ne e d t o b e w i d e n e d s o t h e a r c h i t e c t u r a l d e t a i l i n g c a n r e m a i n i n t a c t . T h e w i n d o w s t o be c o n v e r t e d t o d o o r s a r e i n d i c a t e d o n t h e p l a n s a n d e l e v a t i o n s . RO O F • Mo s t o f t h e e x i s t i n g r o o f i s a f l a t t y p e h o t m o p o f b u i l t - u p a s p h a l t r o o f s u r r o u n d e d by p a r a p e t s . A s t h e f l a t r o o f i n g i t s e l f i s n o t v i s i b l e , i t i s p r o p o s e d t o b e r e p l a c e d b y a mo d e r n T P O o r r o l l o u t w e l d a b l e v i n y l p r o d u c t t o e n s u r e d u r a b i l i t y a n d l o n g e v i t y . • Th e p a r a p e t s a r e t o p p e d b y a d e c o r a t i v e S p a n i s h c l a y t i l e d e t a i l a s s h o w n i n t h e pl a n s . W h e r e t i l e s a r e d a m a g e d o r m i s s i n g , t h e t i l e s w i l l b e r e p l a c e d w i t h a s s i m i l a r a s po s s i b l e m a t c h . • Th e m a i n c e n t e r r o o f e l e m e n t i s a l s o S p a n i s h c l a y t i l e . T h e s t r u c t u r e s u p p o r t i n g t h e t i l e ha s b e e n c o m p r o m i s e d f r o m l a c k o f m a i n t e n a n c e a n d m a n y t i l e s h a v e b e e n b r o k e n o r fa l l e n t h r o u g h t h e r o o f s t r u c t u r e . T h e r e m a i n i n g s a l v a g e a b l e t i l e s w i l l b e r e m o v e d a n d st o r e d w h i l e t h e r o o f s t r u c t u r e i s r e p a i r e d o r r e p l a c e d . T h e t i l e s w i l l b e r e - i n s t a l l e d a n d in t e r s p e r s e d w i t h a s m a n y s i m i l a r r e p l a c e m e n t t i l e s a s r e q u i r e d . EX T E R I O R F A C A D E S • Ot h e r t h a n l a c k o f m a i n t e n a n c e a n d r e p a i r t h a t h a s c a u s e d s i g n i f i c a n t d a m a g e t o t h e bu i l d i n g , t h e m a i n s t r u c t u r e i t s e l f i s i n g o o d c o n d i t i o n . E x t e r i o r b r i c k w a l l s a r e s o u n d a s ar e a l l e x i s t i n g f o u n d a t i o n s . A s s u c h , n o s i g n i f i c a n t r e p a i r s a r e p r o p o s e d a t t h i s t i m e . • Ex i s t i n g b r i c k w i l l b e s a f e l y c l e a n e d w h e r e i t h a s b e e n p a i n t e d f r o m v a n d a l i s m . • Al l b r i c k w i l l b e r e - t u c k p o i n t e d . • Al l e x t e r i o r w i n d o w s a n d d o o r s m u s t b e r e p l a c e d . T h e r e i s o n l y o n e e x i s t i n g d o o r o n si t e t h a t s h o w s e v i d e n c e o f d o o r p r o f i l e w h i c h i n f e r s t h a t i t i s l i k e l y a l l d o o r s h a d ( 3 ) pa n e l s . A l l e x t e r i o r d o o r s a r e p r o p o s e d t o b e r e p l a c e d w i t h n e w w o o d d o o r s w i t h ( 3 ) ra i s e d p a n e l s p e r l e a f . • Wi t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f t h e w i n d o w s a t t h e c o m m u n i t y a r e a s , i t a p p e a r s t h a t m o s t of t h e w i n d o w s w e r e o r i g i n a l l y d o u b l e h u n g w o o d w i n d o w s w i t h ( 6 ) g l a s s p a n e l s pe r o p e r a b l e s e c t i o n s . N e w f i b e r g l a s s s i n g l e o r d o u b l e h u n g w i n d o w s a r e p r o p o s e d wi t h ( 6 ) g l a s s p a n e l s p e r o p e r a b l e s e c t i o n s . T h e c o m m u n i t y a r e a w i n d o w s a p p e a r to b e d o u b l e h u n g w o o d w i n d o w s w i t h n o d i v i d e d p a n e l s a n d w i l l b e r e p l a c e d w i t h fi b e r g l a s s w i n d o w s i n l i k e k i n d . In t e r i o r s • Du e t o l a c k o f m a i n t e n a n c e ( m i s s i n g w i n d o w s , l e a k i n g r o o f s , v a n d a l i s m , e t c . ) O v e r t i m e , th e w o o d c e i l i n g / r o o f a n d f l o o r / c e i l i n g s t r u c t u r a l e l e m e n t s h a v e b e e n c o m p r o m i s e d . Wh e r e e l e m e n t s a r e g e n e r a l l y i n g o o d r e p a i r , s p o t r e p l a c e m e n t c a n b e m a d e w i t h l i k e fo r l i k e l u m b e r . O t h e r l a r g e r a r e a s o f d i s r e p a i r m a y r e q u i r e c o m p l e t e r e p l a c e m e n t . I n ge n e r a l , a n y r e p l a c e m e n t s w i l l l i k e l y b e o f m a t e r i a l s i m i l a r i n s i z e a n d d i m e n s i o n . • It i s a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t s o m e l a t e r a l r e i n f o r c e m e n t o f t h e b r i c k w i l l b e r e q u i r e d . A t t h i s ti m e , w e e x p e c t t h a t a r e - b a r g r i d w i l l b e a p p l i e d t o a s e c t i o n o f t h e i n t e r i o r w a l l a t e a c h bu i l d i n g w i n g . S h o t - C r e t e w i l l b e a p p l i e d o v e r t h e r e - b a r . F o u n d a t i o n m o d i f i c a t i o n s a n d ot h e r t y p e s o f r e i n f o r c e m e n t a r e a n t i c i p a t e d . N o n e o f t h e s e t r e a t m e n t s w i l l b e v i s i b l e on c e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s c o m p l e t e . • Or i g i n a l l y , a l l i n t e r n a l s t r u c t u r a l e l e m e n t s w e r e c o v e r e d w i t h i n t e r i o r f i n i s h e s . I t i s pr o p o s e d t h a t a l l n e w a n d e x i s t i n g i n t e r i o r s t r u c t u r a l e l e m e n t s w i l l b e c o v e r e d w i t h in t e r i o r f i n i s h e s s i m i l a r t o o r i g i n a l . PR O J E C T D E S C R I P T I O N Bi s h o p S t r e e t S t u d i o s i s a n a f f o r d a b l e h o u s i n g d e v e l o p m e n t c o n s i s t i n g o f ( 3 3 ) ve r y - l o w - i n c o m e s i n g l e o c c u p a n c y s t u d i o a n d o n e b e d r o o m u n i t s f o r T r a n s i t i o n s Me n t a l H e a l t h A s s o c i a t i o n c l i e n t s p l u s ( 1 ) o n e b e d r o o m u n i t f o r a r e s i d e n t m a n a g e r fo r a t o t a l o f ( 3 4 ) u n i t s . T h e p r o j e c t i n c l u d e s t h e p r e s e r v a t i o n / r e s t o r a t i o n a n d re u s e o f t h e e x i s t i n g b u i l d i n g , t h e l o n g v a c a n t S u n n y A c r e s C h i l d r e n ’ s H o m e , i n t o (1 3 ) u n i t s p l u s t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f ( 2 1 ) a d d i t i o n a l u n i t s i n ( 3 ) p r o p o s e d b u i l d i n g s . S i t e im p r o v e m e n t s w i l l i n c l u d e t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a p a r k i n g l o t w i t h ( 1 6 ) p a r k i n g s p a c e s an d ( 1 ) a c c e s s i b l e p a r k i n g s p a c e , s i t e p e d e s t r i a n a c c e s s , a t r a s h e n c l o s u r e , a c e n t r a l pl a z a , a n d l a n d s c a p e u p g r a d e s . In a n e f f o r t t o m a x i m i z e e n e r g y c o n s e r v a t i o n , t h i s p r o j e c t i s r e n o v a t i n g a n d pr e s e r v i n g a n e x i s t i n g h i s t o r i c a l s t r u c t u r e a n d i n f i l l i n g a r o u n d i t t o m e e t t h e i r re q u i r e d p r o j e c t d e n s i t y . I n a d d i t i o n , t h i s p r o j e c t i s a i m i n g f o r G r e e n P o i n t G o l d ra t i n g f o r s u s t a i n a b i l i t y c o n s t r u c t i o n p r a c t i c e s . P h o t o v o l t a i c s a r e a p r o j e c t d e s i r e to h e l p m i t i g a t e e l e c t r i c a l a n d w a t e r h e a t i n g c o s t s , b u t h a v e n o t b e e n p r o p o s e d at t h i s t i m e d u e t o b u d g e t a r y c o n s t r a i n t s . P e n d i n g f u n d i n g s o u r c e f i n a l i z a t i o n , ph o t o v o l t a i c s m a y b e i n c l u d e d a t a f u t u r e d a t e . SI T E AD D R E S S : 1 6 0 0 B I S H O P S T R E E T LO T S I Z E : 5 7 , 5 0 0 S F ( 1 . 3 2 A C R E S ) CU R R E N T T O T A L L O T C O V E R A G E : 5 , 5 0 5 S F ( 9 . 6 % ) PR O P O S E D T O T A L L O T C O V E R A G E : 1 2 , 1 4 5 S F ( 2 1 . 1 % ) ZO N I N G : R - 1 , R - 2 - S F , C / 0 S - 4 0 HE I G H T L I M I T : 3 5 ’ M A X . A B O V E A . N . G . E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G : + / - 3 1 ’ - 6 ” A B O V E A D J A C E N T G R A D E B U I L D I N G A ( + / - 4 5 9 . 6 ’ A . N . G . ) + / - 1 8 ’ - 4 ” A B O V E A . N . G . B U I L D I N G B ( + / - 4 5 4 . 2 ’ A . N . G . ) + / - 2 3 ’ - 0 ” A B O V E A . N . G . B U I L D I N G C ( + / - 4 5 5 . 1 ’ A . N . G . ) + / - 2 1 ’ - 0 ” A B O V E A . N . G . BU I L D I N G S ( O C C U P A N C Y R - 2 . 1 ) EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G ( C O N S T R U C T I O N T Y P E I I I - A ) : LO W E R F L O O R : 4 , 0 7 0 S F UP P E R F L O O R : 5 , 1 1 0 S F T O T A L : 9 , 1 8 0 S F PR O P O S E D B U I L D I N G S ( C O N S T R U C T I O N T Y P E V - B ) : BL D G A L O W E R L E V E L : 1 , 8 3 0 S F BL D G A U P P E R L E V E L : 1 , 6 0 0 S F T O T A L : 3 , 4 3 0 S F BL D G A D E C K S : 1 7 0 S F BL D G B L O W E R L E V E L : 1 , 8 4 0 S F BL D G B U P P E R L E V E L : 1 , 8 3 0 S F T O T A L : 3 , 6 7 0 S F BL D G B D E C K S : 1 2 0 S F BL D G C L O W E R L E V E L : 2 , 9 7 0 S F BL D G C U P P E R L E V E L : 2 , 6 3 0 S F T O T A L : 5 , 6 0 0 S F BL D G C D E C K S : 2 5 0 S F TO T A L P R O P O S E D B U I L D I N G S : 1 2 , 4 1 5 S F TO T A L D E C K S : 5 4 0 S F ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 26 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 4 CO N T E X T U A L S I T E P L A N N. T . S . ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 27 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 5 AR C H I T E C T U R A L S I T E P L A N SC A L E 1 ” = 3 0 ’ - 0 ” EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G 9, 1 8 0 S F 13 U N I T S EN T R Y PR O P O S E D BU I L D I N G A 2, 5 7 1 S F 6 U N I T S PR O P O S E D F I R E T U R N - A R O U N D ; PR O V I D E T R A F F I C G R A D E PE R V I O U S P A V E R S , R E F E R T O CI V I L A N D L A N D S C A P E P L A N S PR O P O S E D PA R K I N G 17 S T A L L S PL A Z A LE V E L CI T Y O F S L O Z O N E B O U N D A R Y AN D U R B A N R E S E R V E L I N E PR O P O S E D P A V E D R O A D , RE F E R T O C I V I L P L A N S SI T E R E T A I N I N G W A L L , RE F E R T O C I V I L S H E E T S R - 2 - S F R - 1 EX I S T I N G 1 0 ' P O W E R EA S E M E N T , R E F E R TO C I V I L P L A N S R- 1 Z O N E C/ O S - 4 0 ZO N E PR O P O S E D BU I L D I N G B 2, 5 7 1 S F 5 U N I T S EX I S T I N G T R E E S , R E F E R TO L A N D S C A P E P L A N S PR O P O S E D 2 2 ' A C C E S S AN D U T I L I T Y E A S E M E N T , RE F E R T O C I V I L P L A N S EX I S T I N G T R E E S , R E F E R TO L A N D S C A P E P L A N S ± 1 9 ' - 1 0 " S E T B A C K ± 1 5 ' - 0 " S E T B A C K ±31'-0" SETBACKEX I S T I N G T O P O H I G H PO I N T ± 4 8 2 . 8 9 ' EX I S T I N G T O P O L O W PO I N T ± 4 4 3 . 4 4 ' PR O P O S E D 5 ' - 0 " S I T E W A L L , RE F E R T O C I V I L P L A N S PR O P O S E D A C C E S S I B L E W A L K MA X . 5 % S L O P E I N T H E D I R E C T I O N OF T R A F F I C A N D 2 % C R O S S S L O P E , RE F E R T O C I V I L P L A N S PR O P O S E D F I R E H Y D R A N T , RE F E R T O C I V I L P L A N S LO C A T I O N O F E X I S T I N G DI R T A C C E S S R O A D PR O P O S E D S W A L E , RE F E R T O C I V I L P L A N S LO C A T I O N O F E X I S T I N G AC C E S S D I R T R O A D PR O P O S E D A C C E S S I B L E SA F E A R E A O F D I S P E R S A L MI N . 2 0 ' F R O M B U I L D I N G S CI T Y O F S L O Z O N E B O U N D A R Y AN D U R B A N R E S E R V E L I N E PR O P O S E D L O C A T I O N OF U N D E R G R O U N D PR O P A N E T A N K LO C A T I O N O F E X I S T I N G DI R T A C C E S S R O A D EX I S T I N G T R E E S , R E F E R TO L A N D S C A P E P L A N S EX I S T I N G F I R E H Y D R A N T TO B E R E L O C A T E D , RE F E R T O C I V I L P L A N S PR O P O S E D V E G I T A T E D SW A L E , R E F E R T O C I V I L AN D L A N D S C A P E P L A N S 1 2 ' - 0 " 49'-4 " 21'-2" 18'-6" TYP. STAN D A R D PR O P O S E D A C C E S S I B L E WA L K M A X . 5 % S L O P E I N TH E D I R E C T I O N O F T R A F F I C AN D 2 % C R O S S S L O P E , RE F E R T O C I V I L P L A N S PR O P O S E D A C C E S S I B L E R A M P MA X . 8 % S L O P E I N T H E D I R E C T I O N OF T R A F F I C A N D 2 % C R O S S SL O P E , R E F E R T O C I V I L P L A N S WA T E R B O O S T E R S T A T I O N , RE F E R T O C I V I L S H E E T S 17'-6" TYP. COMP A C T (2 ) P R O P O S E D U B I C Y C L E RA C K F O R ( 4 ) S H O R T - T E R M BI C Y C L E P A R K I N G ; T O T A L O F (1 0 ) S H O R T - T E R M S P A C E S (1 ) P R O P O S E D U B I C Y C L E R A C K F O R (2 ) S H O R T - T E R M B I C Y C L E P A R K I N G ; TO T A L O F ( 1 0 ) S H O R T - T E R M S P A C E S LO C A T I O N O F ( 1 6 ) P R O P O S E D LO N G - T E R M B I C Y C L E R A C K S , R E F E R TO B U I L D I N G B U P P E R F L O O R P L A N ±2 3 ' - 0 " A B O V E AV E R A G E NA T U R A L G R A D E ± 2 6 ' - 0 " S E T B A C K ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 28 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 6 EX I S T I N G T R E E / D E M O L I T I O N P L A N SC A L E 1 ” = 3 0 ’ - 0 ” ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 29 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 7 PL A N T I N G P L A N SC A L E 1 ” = 3 0 ’ - 0 ” ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 30 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 8 PL A N T T Y P E S Ol e a e u r o p a e a Le u c a d e n d r o n m e r i d i a n u m ‘ M o r e S i l v e r ’ Ph o r m i u m c o o k i a n u m ‘ B r o n z e B a b y ’ Ph o r m i u m t e n a x ‘ A t r o p u r p u r e u m ’ Ro s m a r i n u s o f f i c i n a l i s ‘ P r o s t r a t u s ’ Ca l a m a g r o s t i s f o l i o s a Ca r e x c o m a n s ‘ B r o n z e ’ M u h l e n b e r g i a c a p i l l a r i s ‘ A u t u m n B l u s h ’ M u h l e n b e r g i a r i g e n s Pa r t h e n o c i s s u s t r i c u s p i d a t a ‘ V e i t c h i i ’ Ce a n o t h u s x ‘ M o u n t a i n H a z e ’ Ar b u t u s u n e d o ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 31 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 9 WA T E R U S E C A L C U L A T I O N S Ma x i m u m A p p l i e d W a t e r A l l o w a n c e C a l c u l a t i o n s f o r N e w a n d R e h a b i l i t a t e d L a n d s c a p e s E n t e r v a l u e i n P a l e B l u e C e l l s Ta n C e l l s S h o w R e s u l t s Me s s a g e s a n d W a r n i n g s Cl i c k o n t h e b l u e c e l l o n r i g h t t o P i c k C i t y N a m e S a n L u i s O b i s p o N a m e o f C i t y ET o o f C i t y f r o m A p p e n d i x A 43 . 8 0 ET o (i n c h e s / y e a r ) En t e r t o t a l l a n d s c a p e i n c l u d i n g S L A 11 , 9 0 7 . 0 0 LA ( f t 2 ) En t e r S p e c i a l L a n d s c a p e A r e a 0 . 0 0 SL A ( f t 2 ) Re s u l t s : MA W A = ( E T o ) x ( 0 . 6 2 ) x [ ( 0 . 5 5 x L A ) + ( 0 . 4 5 x S L A ) ] 17 7 , 8 6 6 . 7 7 G a l l o n s 23 , 7 7 7 . 4 1 C u b i c F e e t 23 7 . 7 7 H C F 0. 5 5 A c r e - f e e t 0. 1 8 M i l l i o n s o f G a l l o n s MA W A c a l c u l a t i o n i n c o r p o r a t i n g E f f e c t i v e P r e c i p i t a t i o n ( O p t i o n a l ) ET o o f C i t y f r o m A p p e n d i x A 43 . 8 0 ET o ( i n c h e s / y e a r ) La n d s c a p e A r e a 1 1 , 9 0 7 . 0 0 LA ( f t 2 ) Sp e c i a l L a n d s c a p e A r e a 0 . 0 0 SL A ( f t 2 ) 0. 0 0 T o t a l a n n u a l p r e c i p i t a t i o n En t e r E f f e c t i v e P r e c i p i t a t i o n 0 . 0 0 E p p t ( i n / y r ) ( 2 5 % o f t o t a l a n n u a l p r e c i p i t a t i o n ) Re s u l t s : MA W A = ( E T o - E p p t ) x ( 0 . 6 2 ) x [ ( 0 . 5 5 x L A ) + ( 0 . 4 5 x S L A ) ] - G a l l o n s - C u b i c F e e t - H C F - A c r e - f e e t - M i l l i o n s o f G a l l o n s Es t i m a t e d T o t a l W a t e r U s e Eq u a t i o n : ET W U = ( E T o ) x ( 0 . 6 2 ) x [ ( P F x H A / I E ) + S L A ] En t e r v a l u e s i n P a l e B l u e C e l l s Ta n C e l l s S h o w R e s u l t s Me s s a g e s a n d W a r n i n g s En t e r I r r i g a t i o n E f f i c i e n c y ( e q u a l t o o r g r e a t e r t h a n 0 . 7 1 ) 0 . 9 1 Ir r i g a t i o n E f f i c i e n c y D e f a u l t V a l u e 0 . 7 1 Pl a n t W a t e r U s e T y p e P l a n t F a c t o r Lo w 0 - 0 . 3 Me d i u m 0 . 4 - 0 . 6 Hi g h 0 . 7 - 1 . 0 SL A 1 . 0 0 Hy d r o z o n e Pl a n t W a t e r Us e T y p e ( s ) (l o w , m e d i u m , hi g h ) Pl a n t F a c t o r (P F ) Hy d r o z o n e Ar e a ( H A ) (f t 2 ) P F x H A ( f t 2 ) 1 L o w 0 . 2 0 6 4 0 1 2 8 2 L o w 0 . 2 0 1 , 1 7 2 2 3 4 3 L o w 0 . 2 0 7 5 0 1 5 0 4 L o w 0 . 2 0 1 7 4 3 5 5 M e d i u m 0 . 4 0 2 6 7 1 0 7 6 L o w 0 . 2 0 1 3 1 2 6 7 L o w 0 . 2 0 9 1 6 1 8 3 8 L o w 0 . 2 0 7 5 3 1 5 1 9 L o w 0 . 2 0 1 , 1 2 0 2 2 4 10 L o w 0 . 2 0 1 , 2 6 3 2 5 3 11 L o w 0 . 2 0 1 , 0 2 8 2 0 6 12 L o w 0 . 2 0 1 , 4 4 5 2 8 9 13 L o w 0 . 2 0 2 , 2 4 8 4 5 0 0 2, 4 3 5 SL A 1 0 0 Su m 1 1 , 9 0 7 Re s u l t s MA W A = 1 7 7 , 8 6 7 E T W U = 7 2 , 6 6 9 G a l l o n s ET W U c o m p l i e s w i t h M A W A 9, 7 1 5 C u b i c F e e t 97 H C F 0. 2 2 A c r e - f e e t 0. 0 7 M i l l i o n s o f G a l l o n s ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 32 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 1 0 SI T E L I G H T I N G Ne w b u i l d i n g s - w a l l m o u n t e d Hi n k l e y - K u b e 1 7 6 6 S K - L E D i n S a t i n B l a c k Pa t h l i g h t i n g - b o l l a r d Lu c i f e r - B O L i n M a t t e B l a c k Si t e w a l l s - r e c e s s e d w a l l m o u n t e d Lu c i f e r - I S L - A L E D i n M a t t e B l a c k ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 33 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 1 1 EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G U P P E R F L O O R P L A N SC A L E : 3 / 3 2 ” = 1 ’ - 0 ” ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 34 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 1 2 EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G L O W E R F L O O R P L A N SC A L E : 3 / 3 2 ” = 1 ’ - 0 ” ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 35 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 1 3 BU I L D I N G A F L O O R P L A N S SC A L E : 3 / 3 2 ” = 1 ’ - 0 ” BU I L D I N G B F L O O R P L A N S SC A L E : 3 / 3 2 ” = 1 ’ - 0 ” ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 36 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 1 4 BU I L D I N G C F L O O R P L A N S SC A L E : 3 / 3 2 ” = 1 ’ - 0 ” ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 37 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 1 5 SI T E S E C T I O N SC A L E : 1 / 1 6 ” = 1 ’ - 0 ” UN I T T Y P E A S E C T I O N SC A L E : 3 / 3 2 ” = 1 ’ - 0 ” UN I T T Y P E B S E C T I O N SC A L E : 3 / 3 2 ” = 1 ’ - 0 ” ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 38 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 1 6 EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G E L E V A T I O N S SC A L E : 1 ” = 1 0 ’ - 0 ” KE Y N O T E S 1. E X I S T I N G H I S T O R I C A L B R I C K T O R E M A I N ; R E - T U C K P O I N T A L L B R I C K 2. E X I S T I N G D E C O R A T I V E B R I C K C O R N I C E T O R E M A I N ; P A T C H A N D R E P A I R A S R E Q U I R E D 3. E X I S T I N G D E C O R A T I V E C L A Y R O O F T I L E T O B E R E U S E D ; M I S S I N G O R D A M A G E D T I L E S T O B E R E P L A C E D T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G 4. E X I S T I N G D O O R S T O B E R E P L A C E D W I T H S O L I D C O R E W O O D D O O R S W I T H ( 3 ) P A N E L S T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G ; E X I S T I N G B R I C K T R I M T O R E M A I N , P A T C H A N D R E P A I R A S R E Q U I R E D F O R N E W D O O R I N S T A L L A T I O N 5. E X I S T I N G B R I C K C H I M N E Y T O R E M A I N 6. E X I S T I N G M A I N E N T R Y D O O R T O B E R E P L A C E D W I T H S O L I D C O R E W O O D D O O R S W I T H ( 3 ) P A N E L S T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G ; E X I S T I N G B R I C K T R I M T O R E M A I N , P A T C H A N D R E P A I R A S R E Q U I R E D F O R N E W D O O R I N S T A L L A T I O N 7. E X I S T I N G W I N D O W S T O B E R E P L A C E D W I T H S O L I D C O R E W O O D D O O R S W I T H ( 3 ) P A N E L S T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G ; E X I S T I N G O P E N I N G W I D T H A N D B R I C K T R I M T O R E M A I N , P A T C H A N D R E P A I R A S R E Q U I R E D F O R N E W D O O R I N S T A L L A T I O N 8. E X I S T I N G S I N G L E O R D O U B L E H U N G W O O D A N D M E T A L W I N D O W S W I T H ( 6 ) G L A S S P A N E L S P E R P A N E T O B E R E P L A C E D W I T H N E W F I B E R G L A S S S I N G L E H U N G W I N D O W S W I T H ( 6 ) G L A S S P A N E L S P E R P A N E 9. E X I S T I N G S I N G L E O R D O U B L E H U N G W O O D A N D M E T A L W I N D O W S A T C O M M U N I T Y S P A C E S T O B E R E P L A C E D W I T H N E W F I B E R G L A S S S I N G L E H U N G W I N D O W S 10 . E X I S T I N G H O T M O P O T B U I L D - U P A S P H A L T F L A T R O O F M A T E R I A L T O B E R E P L A C E D W I T H T P O O R R O L L O U T W E L D A B L E V I N Y L WE S T E L E V A T I O N NO R T H E L E V A T I O N ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 39 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 1 7 EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G E L E V A T I O N S SC A L E : 1 ” = 1 0 ’ - 0 ” KE Y N O T E S 1. E X I S T I N G H I S T O R I C A L B R I C K T O R E M A I N ; R E - T U C K P O I N T A L L B R I C K 2. E X I S T I N G D E C O R A T I V E B R I C K C O R N I C E T O R E M A I N ; P A T C H A N D R E P A I R A S R E Q U I R E D 3. E X I S T I N G D E C O R A T I V E C L A Y R O O F T I L E T O B E R E U S E D ; M I S S I N G O R D A M A G E D T I L E S T O B E R E P L A C E D T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G 4. E X I S T I N G D O O R S T O B E R E P L A C E D W I T H S O L I D C O R E W O O D D O O R S W I T H ( 3 ) P A N E L S T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G ; E X I S T I N G B R I C K T R I M T O R E M A I N , P A T C H A N D R E P A I R A S R E Q U I R E D F O R N E W D O O R I N S T A L L A T I O N 5. E X I S T I N G B R I C K C H I M N E Y T O R E M A I N 6. E X I S T I N G M A I N E N T R Y D O O R T O B E R E P L A C E D W I T H S O L I D C O R E W O O D D O O R S W I T H ( 3 ) P A N E L S T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G ; E X I S T I N G B R I C K T R I M T O R E M A I N , P A T C H A N D R E P A I R A S R E Q U I R E D F O R N E W D O O R I N S T A L L A T I O N 7. E X I S T I N G W I N D O W S T O B E R E P L A C E D W I T H S O L I D C O R E W O O D D O O R S W I T H ( 3 ) P A N E L S T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G ; E X I S T I N G O P E N I N G W I D T H A N D B R I C K T R I M T O R E M A I N , P A T C H A N D R E P A I R A S R E Q U I R E D F O R N E W D O O R I N S T A L L A T I O N 8. E X I S T I N G S I N G L E O R D O U B L E H U N G W O O D A N D M E T A L W I N D O W S W I T H ( 6 ) G L A S S P A N E L S P E R P A N E T O B E R E P L A C E D W I T H N E W F I B E R G L A S S S I N G L E H U N G W I N D O W S W I T H ( 6 ) G L A S S P A N E L S P E R P A N E 9. E X I S T I N G S I N G L E O R D O U B L E H U N G W O O D A N D M E T A L W I N D O W S A T C O M M U N I T Y S P A C E S T O B E R E P L A C E D W I T H N E W F I B E R G L A S S S I N G L E H U N G W I N D O W S 10 . E X I S T I N G H O T M O P O T B U I L D - U P A S P H A L T F L A T R O O F M A T E R I A L T O B E R E P L A C E D W I T H T P O O R R O L L O U T W E L D A B L E V I N Y L EA S T E L E V A T I O N SO U T H E L E V A T I O N ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 40 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 1 8 BU I L D I N G A E L E V A T I O N S SC A L E : 1 ” = 1 0 ’ - 0 ” KE Y N O T E S 1. B R I C K T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G 2. D E C O R A T I V E B R I C K C O R N I C E T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G 3. M E T A L C A N O P Y 4. H O R I Z O N T A L S I D I N G 5. W I N D O W S A N D D O O R S 6. E X T E R I O R L I G H T 7. P A I N T E D S T U C C O 8. C O P I N G 9. B R I C K T R I M T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G 10 . S T U C C O T R I M WE S T E L E V A T I O N SO U T H E L E V A T I O N NO R T H E L E V A T I O N EA S T E L E V A T I O N ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 41 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 1 9 BU I L D I N G B E L E V A T I O N S SC A L E : 1 ” = 1 0 ’ - 0 ” KE Y N O T E S 1. B R I C K T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G 2. D E C O R A T I V E B R I C K C O R N I C E T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G 3. M E T A L C A N O P Y 4. H O R I Z O N T A L S I D I N G 5. W I N D O W S A N D D O O R S 6. E X T E R I O R L I G H T 7. P A I N T E D S T U C C O 8. C O P I N G 9. B R I C K T R I M T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G 10 . S T U C C O T R I M WE S T E L E V A T I O N SO U T H E L E V A T I O N NO R T H E L E V A T I O N EA S T E L E V A T I O N ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 42 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 2 0 BU I L D I N G C E L E V A T I O N S SC A L E : 1 ” = 1 0 ’ - 0 ” KE Y N O T E S 1. B R I C K T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G 2. D E C O R A T I V E B R I C K C O R N I C E T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G 3. M E T A L C A N O P Y 4. H O R I Z O N T A L S I D I N G 5. W I N D O W S A N D D O O R S 6. E X T E R I O R L I G H T 7. M E T A L R A I L I N G 8. P A I N T E D S T U C C O 9. C O P I N G 10 . B R I C K T R I M T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G 11 . S T U C C O T R I M WE S T E L E V A T I O N SO U T H E L E V A T I O N NO R T H E L E V A T I O N EA S T E L E V A T I O N ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 43 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 2 1 VI E W F R O M D R I V E W A Y ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 44 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 2 2 VI E W T O W A R D E X I S T I N G B u i l d i n g ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 45 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 2 3 VI E W F R O M E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 46 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 2 4 VI E W O F P A T I O ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 47 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 2 5 VI E W F R O M W E S T ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 48 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 2 6 VI E W A T L O W E R L E V E L ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 49 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 2 7 VI E W F R O M D r i v e w a y ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 50 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 2 8 VI E W F R O M E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 51 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 9 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PA G E 2 9 VI E W A T L O W E R L e v e l ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 52 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 7 / 2 0 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m 2 - A L L C A N O P I E S , T R I M & C A P A T S T U C C O S W 6 9 9 1 B L A C K M A G I C 7 - S T U C C O : L A H A B R A 2 0 / 3 0 F L O A T X - 8 3 0 C L A Y 6 - H A R D I E S I D I N G S W 6 0 6 9 F R E N C H R O A S T FR O N T V I E W 3 - B R I C K V E N E E R T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G EX T E R I O R L I G H T S HI N K L E Y - K U B E 17 6 6 S K - L E D I N S A T I N B L A C K 5 - H A R D I E P L A N K H O R I Z O N T A L L A P S I D I N G PR O P O S E D B U I L D I N G M A T E R I A L B O A R D 4 - W I N D O W T R I M A T B R I C K S I D I N G T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G B U I D I N G 1 - P E R F O R A T E D M E T A L C A N O P Y 2 1 2 4 2 72 2 4S I M . 2 1 5 12 6 5 22 ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 53 B I S H O P S T R E E T S T U D I O S S A N L U I S O B I S P O , C A D A T E : 0 7 / 2 0 / 2 0 1 6 80 5 . 5 4 1 . 1 0 1 0 53 9 M a r s h S t r e e t Sa n L u i s O b i s p o , C A in f o @ t e n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m te n o v e r s t u d i o . c o m PR I M A R Y G A B L E D E T A I L SE C O N D A R Y E A V E D E T A I L BR I C K D E T A I L EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G CO M M U N I T Y E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N TY P I C A L E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N TY P I C A L P R O P O S E D C O N D I T I O N C O M M U N I T Y P R O P O S E D C O N D I T I O N EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G M A T E R I A L B O A R D ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 54 A C C E S S A N D U T I L T I E S P L A N C O N C E P T U A L ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 55 C O N C E P T U A L G R A D I N G A N D D R A I N A G E P L A N ATTACHMENT 3 ARC/CHC 1 - 56 Bertrando & Bertrando Research Consultants 267 Foothill Boulevard. San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Office Phone Numbers: 805 543-7831 805 544-1308 805 541-8306 FAX E-mail: bertrando@thegrid.net betsyb@thegrid.net Historical Significance Evaluation for Sunny Acres San Luis Obispo County, CA Prepared at the request of: Caryn Stumpenhaus, Property Manager Department of General Services San Luis Obispo County Prepared by: Betsy Bertrando, Researcher Bertrando & Bertrando Research Consultants October 1998 ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 57 ABSTRACT In 1998, Betsy Bertrando of Bertrando & Bertrando Research Consultants, at the request of Caryn Stumpenhans of San J,,uis Obispo County General Services, conducted a significance evaluation for the property containing a building known as Sunny Acres, prior to the proposed demolition of the building. The results of the research and evaluation found that Sunny Acres is eligible for listing on the State Historic Register and has been evaluated by the City of San Luis Obispo Cultural Heritage Committee as a significant local resource. CRE Swmy Acres I ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 58 INTRODUCTION On May 11, 1998, the San Luis Obispo County General Services Department completed a formal agreement with Bertrando & Bertrando Research Consultants. The work carried out for this study was conducted by Betsy Bertrando. Betsy Bertrando has over twenty years experience with the historical resources of the Central Coast and has completed numerous projects within the City and County of San Luis Obispo. The work took place during the summer of 1998. The project location is depicted on the San Luis Obispo 7.5 USGS quadrangle topographic map and is located at 2176 Johnson Avenue. The building is located on a parcel owned by the County of San Luis Obispo and is surrounded on three sides by the City of San Luis Obispo. BACKGROUND Historical Backiiound Written history in San Luis Obispo begins with the visit of Captain Gaspar de Portola in September 1769. The Spaniards had begun their journey in San Diego and on their way to finding Monterey Bay stopped near the location where the Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa would be established three years later. Fr. Crespi named the area La Canada de la Natividad de Nuestra Senora (Engelhardt 1933). During the mission period the land that included the project area was part of the fields and free range that supported the mission population. In 1822, when Spain lost California to Mexico, the mission system as practiced by Spain began its decline. Secularization, which began in 1834, caused lands previously owned by the missions to be awarded to Mexican citizens, in part to encourage Mexico's presence in Alta California. A large percentage of the land grants were awarded to retired soldiers that had served the missions (Avina 1932). In 1842, the land grant that encompassed the project area called "La Vena or La Vina" was granted to Francisco Estevan Quintana by Governor Micheltorena. F .E. Quintana came to San Luis Obispo from New Mexico and became a highly respected member of the community. "During his long life he was actively engaged in the business of stock raising, both in New Mexico and California; and being a careful and skillful business man, amassed afortune. "(Angel 1883) During this same period, a land grant was awarded to Maria Concepci6n Boronda by Governor Alvarado in 1842 (Robinson 1957). M~ch of that rancho, "Potrero de San Luis Obispo " was located on what is now Cal Poly Land. Maria Boronda traded her rancho to Quintana in 1854 for his land and estate now known as "la Loma de la Nopalera", (formerly the "La Vena"). The title for the original land grant was never petitioned or filed with the United States Government, therefore it never became a part of the land grant record. Boronda had two husbands, Oliver Deleissigues who was drowned at sea and later Judge Jose Maria Munoz (Sanchez 1998). The property later included the land that contains Sunny Acres (Vol A pg 733). CRE Sunny Acres 2 ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 59 In 1876, the map of what was called the Deleissigues Tract (A-095) was surveyed by H.C. Ward and filed with the City of San Luis Obispo. This tract included the SU1U1y Acres area as well. A part of the Deleissigues Tract is the large parcel of land that is formed from the north comer of Bishop and Johnson Avenue and continues up slope for several hundred yards. This has been an area of public care since 1880 when the county hospital was constructed. Originally planned and built to be at some distance from the town of San Luis Obispo, the land is now county land that is surrounded on three sides by the City of San Luis Obispo. A description of the county hospital from the week of 1889 found in the local newspaper follows: "Situated in the south east part of this city, is the county hospital, with fine grounds, driveways, gardens, fruit-trees, etc., and there our reporter made an excursion this morning. At the door one is met by Jesse Lewis, Superintendent, who ushers you in with every grace. A nice spacious office and waiting room is near the entrance, and here is the library with medical and miscellaneous books, and models of ships and other works of the patients while opposite this is the medical room where we found Dr. W W Hays, who kindly took us through the institution. Here every kind of drugs can be obtained, and all kinds of surgical instruments, straight jackets, splints and every thing in fact that is needed in the line of medicine or surgery. Going upstairs we find four handsome rooms which are for the accommodation of the patients who are able to pay for them, and they are furnished very nicely and with large fire places and every thing needed for comfort. On returning from these fine rooms we next came to a fine large bath room with hot and cold faucets. Going down stairs again we are shown into a fine large dining room. This is for the convenience of the Superintendent's family and the boarding patients. Crossing through an entry or hall, we came next into the dining room for the ordinary patients, where two large tables stand in the middle of the room with a large China closet at one end. Adjoining this is the kitchen, where we found a colored cook and waiter, and if they had swallow- tailed coats on, they would have been taken for employees in the Palace Hotel of San Francisco. Crossing on a spacious veranda we arrived at the door of the dormitory where we find 17 men, 5 of whom are confined in bed. Here we noticed one poor sufferer who had fallen off a load of hay and had his leg broken at the hip and who had just received a new splinting and a new coat of plaster of paris. As the unfortunate would not keep still they were compelled to strap him to a bed in order to keep him quiet. Looking at this sad picture caused the reporter to collapse, when Dr. Hays gave us a good dose of medicine to steady our nerves. After seeing the pest house and the dead house, vineyard, poultry etc., and after thanking the Doctor and Mr. Lewis we left with the feeling that when one does get sick that there is a good comfortable place to go where kindness and a cure will be given. " (Tognazzini 1889) Continuing with the concept of public care, in 1893, it was deemed necessary that a "proper pest house" be arranged to receive small pox cases. There was a "pest house" in use in 1888 but it was deemed unsuitable. It was usual for the hospital to fly a yellow flag when there CRE Sunny Acres 3 ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 60 was a quarantined patient. The citizens of San Luis Obispo had wanted the public care facilities located at some distance from town. It was not far enough for the town, however, when it related to the following circumstances that were reported by the Board of Health in May 1895: " .... a nuisance existed near the county hospital. All the sewage of the hospital empties into an open gulch near by and then flows through a big portion of the city. " This was an even more common complaint prior to the rainy. Public care among some in the community was not to be seen or heard . As the needs grew for solving care problems the area around the County Hospital grew as well and eventually included buildings and structures for the following county needs: General Hospital TB Sanitariwn/Probation Department Womens Jail Building for the Insane Ward/Record Room Ward Cottage Social Hall Sunny Acres -Children's Home/Detention Hall Dead House Pest House Support structures have included the following: Laundry Storage Large Garages Pre 1905 Henhouses Reading Room Separate Room Structures Sheds and Barns Water tanks A vineyard, fruit trees and kitchen garden supplemented food needs for the complex. The building record for the date of construction of some of the buildings can be traced through old copies of the local newspaper. This is also true of annual reports of patients cared for and improvements to the facility. "Private" hospitals were always located in town. In 1917 there were at least two private hospitals; Stover's Sanitarium and Pacific Hospital owned by Ester Biaggini. In the 1920s these were followed by the Mountain View Hospital and the "old" French Hospital on Marsh Street. CRE Sunny Acres 4 ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 61 The current building housing the Probation Department was formally the La Loma Tuberculosis Sanitarium. This building remains as the closest public care facility to Sunny Acres. At the bottom of the hill General Hospital continues in the same area with different layers of building activity as part of the current structure. A long record of public care underlies the entire area. Sunny Acres On September 22nd, 1930, bids were requested by the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors for the construction of a Children's Home and Health Farm Building to be located on the County General Hospital Site. The members of the San Luis Obispo County Federation of Women's clubs, announced that they were sponsoring the contest for a name for the new detention home. An entry form for the contest was printed in the Daily Tele2ram for January 12, 1931. The form requested that the new detention home for unfortunate children not be called "Children's Home" or "Detention Home" or "Orphan's Asylum". Names for the building started being printed in the January l S1h issue along with the announcement of a $10 merchandise coupon for the winner of the name that is selected. The prize was offered by Mr. Lannon of the Riley/Lannon Company, the forerunner of the long time popular downtown department store - Riley's -located where Copeland's is today. Name suggestions continued to be listed with a great response throughout the county on the 191h and 21st of January. Finally on the 27 1h, out of 540 names submitted, seven club women choose the name Sunny Acres that was sent in by Mrs. Mary Whitlock of Morro Bay. The article continued; "The new home for children, located on a beautiful spot near the general hospital, is now under construction and is expected to be ready for occupancy within the next few weeks. Mrs. Gertrude Graham was named matron of the home, and assumed her position the first of the year. More than 20 little girls and boys make their home at the institution. " Prior to Sunny Acres, care for orphans and runaways, was haphazard at best. Babies were given to the care of kindly mothers in town and often older youngsters were made to work for their "supper" under their appointed guardians in the late 1800s. The situation changed slightly later when a small house was used for orphan care. On Thursday, April 16, 1931, the Telegram headlined the opening of Sunny Acres with "Sunny Acres Real Home for Kiddies". " 'Sunny Acres' became a real home Thursday when 16 youngsters took possession of their new quarter provided by the county for its juvenile charges. Mrs. Gertrude Truesdale Graham, matron of the new children's home took charge of the moving activities, assisted by Jess Wynn and members of the county juvenile committee. 'This is gonna be heaven, ' one little chap smiled as he left the crowded and dilapidated quarters of the old detention home and saw the spacious new CRE Sunny Acres 5 ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 62 building on Johnson Avenue which is to be his new home. County residents built the Children 's Home and then called it 'Sunny Acres' in a naming contest held after completion of the new modern and fire- proof building. Instead of a tiny yard, the children now have spacious grounds in which to play while the new home provides ample quarters for segregation of the boys and girls." In 1947 alterations and additions were made to the Childrens Home at Sunny Acres. The alterations and additions were not explained in the Supervisors minutes but nevertheless were deemed "inadequate to care for the increased number of persons to be cared for at said institution" (Minutes C-16). During the early 1950s, the school schedule at Sunny Acres ran from 8 to 8:30 am to 3:30 in the afternoon. This was followed by a recreation program (the current basketball court was in place at that time). The program was run by the County Office of Education. At that time the youngsters were from 6 to 18 years of age . Younger charges were placed in foster homes . Usually there were 12 to 15 children, 2 cooks, 2 live in matrons, and a daily welfare and probation office visit. At night there were at least two staff members present. The charges at Sunny Acres were a combination of dependant wards of the state and criminal behavior problems. The facility was not a lock down situation nor was it fenced. According to the special education teacher at the time, Bruce Miller, "it was a friendly and open place." This did not continue however, as later "mean and vicious kids started entering the system" (Miller pers. comm.). In April 1958, the following notice appeared in the San Luis Obispo Register; "A/our and a half page indictment of the juvenile hall operations and building, written by the supervisor and made public this week is enough to jar the most complacent citizen in this county. The report contains references to the building that emphasizes its unsuitability; and reeks of sex problems because boys and girls cannot be kept separated. " The article continues with a familiar ring; "The report describes the building as completely inadequate and it is. The big question being asked by the county board of supervisors, each of whom quietly received a copy of the report for their private perusal a week ago is, 'how in heck are we going to pay for it? And are we supposed to be the ones who assume the responsibility for carrying the ball?'" At that time Juvenile Hall was under the jurisdiction of the Juvenile Court system. A new Juvenile Hall was a Bond Proposal, Proposition A, on the Primary Election Ballot for June 7 , 1960. The proposed new Juvenile Hall was planned to allow "innocent dependent children to be separated from youth off enders, and where youth offenders can be separated from seasoned CRE Sunny Acres 6 ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 63 criminals." A fact sheet was produced to answer the question of need for the new facility. It stated that juveniles were housed at three separate locations; 1) Sunnyacres, where both boys and girls, delinquents and dependents, are housed in quarters which cannot be locked by order of the state fire marshal and state fire law; 2) the county jail, for some boys; and 3) the old psychopathic ward of the county hospital for some girls . The proposed new facility was broadly supported by public agencies. During this effort it was assumed that the juvenile facility would be constructed in the same centralized area as the county hospital, public health center, county schools office, and other important individual service and welfare agencies of the county. This would be done with the aim of continuing the tradition for the large parcel off Johnson A venue. It was also suggested at that time that Sunnyacres will not be demolished but would be utilized by other county departments. It was also during this period that Sunny Acres began being recorded as: Sunnyacres. By 1966, voters had rejected two bond issues for a new juvenile hall. An article in the February 51 \ 1966 Telegram-Tribwie describes Sunny Acres as follows: " ... For most people, it's pretty easy to forget Sunnyacres is there at all. This, though its weathered brick building and wire fenced yard stand prominently on a hill overlooking San Luis Obispo. Sunnyacres, you see, is the euphemistic name for the county's juvenile hall. Its residents are as young as 10, as old as 17. Some are in trouble with the law; some are only in trouble with life. Today there are fewer than 10, but the population sometimes goes as high as 18. One teen-ager, hopefully awaiting placement with foster parents, looks up from schoolwork to tell you Sunnyacres sure is better than his real home. This couldn't be saying much. This teen-ager -not a lawbreaker - spends more than half the time locked in a Spartan room with no pictures -only a bed, dresser, toilet facilities. The building looks clean and well kept. The boys and girls are well fed. But Sunnyacres was built 40 years ago. Today it is almost totally inadequate for modern methods of juvenile rehabilitation. The staff is underpaid, short-handed: One dedicated teacher, Frank McE/rath, must handle students from seven to 17. The school classroom lacks modern equipment. Sport facilities are few. The books upstairs are old. The head matron, Mrs. Faye Hazen, doesn't have much lo work with except a concern for kids. The lawbreaker and the heartbreaker, both get the lockup -there 's no place else and no way else now. Sunnyacres has suffered from an acute shortage of money over the years. Not to mention lack of concern by the public. Nobody is "imprisoned" there. The law says you are "detained." There still are locks on the doors, bars on the windows, a stout steel fence. CRE Sunny Acres 7 ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 64 and Superior Court Judge Tim 0 'Reilly, the juvenile judge, doesn't like to send anybody there if he can help ii. His policy: send kids home -in his custody -whenever possible. Or send on as soon as possible those going to youth camps or the Youth Authority. 0 'Reilly says he's determined that a new juvenile hall complex -perhaps with the county probation department nearby -be built at Camp San Luis Obispo on federal property. A switch vote by County Supervisor Milton Willeford on August, 1978, finally seemed to decide the location for the new facility -the parking lot south of General Hospital. That decision was appealed by a group of Johnson A venue homeowners when they presented a petition with 2000 signatures opposing the proposed location. They didn't want a juvenile hall built in their neighborhood. The city had grown up around Sunny Acres and again the community felt it necessary to place the new juvenile detention center facility at some distance away from the city. For much of its history, Sunny Acres was called the San Luis Obispo Children's Home. It only later became the County Juvenile Detention Center. The facility was vacated in 1974 and not long afterward the new juvenile detention center was constructed near the County Sheriffs Station off of Highway 1, just northwest of San Luis Obispo. Since that time the history of the Sunny Acres has been one of vandalism and deterioration. The brick facade is still standing high on the hill overlooking the City of San Luis Obispo, however the result of neglect, fires and criminal break-ins over so many years has severely defaced the interior. Correspondence History After the closing of Sunny Acres, a structural evaluation report was issued. The results of that report prompted the County to make the first request for demolition of the building in 1979. Since the 1980s, much of the building's history has been in the form of correspondence between the city, county, and interested persons in the community. On May 5th 1986, a letter was sent to the County Administrative Officer from C.R. Chelquist, Administrative Captain of the City of San Luis Obispo Police Department expressing concern over the illegal use of the building including the discovery of "an alter that was clearly intended to be part of a Satanic ritual" (Chelquist 1986). Chelquist requested confirmation of a solution by demolition or reuse so that the police and other agencies will no longer incur the costs involved with policing the building. In responding to the action of the Board of Supervisors approval of the sale and demolition of Sunny Acres on August 51\ 1986, Michael Multari of the San Luis Obispo Community Development Department sent a letter to Duane Leib of County General Services requested that the county present the demolition permit to the San Luis Obispo Architectural Review Commission (ARC) for review prior to issuance of the permit. The Commission would CRE Sunny Acres 8 ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 65 decide if the building is "esthetically, architecturally, or historically significant" and if so it is typically required to "provide historical documentation, plans and/or photos for archival use prior to demolition" (Multari 1986). A letter from the law firm of Ernst and Mattison in September 1986 to the Board of Supervisors carried a plea for the adaptive reuse of the building based on the buildings "fundamental beauty" .. and "too ... historical a structure to be destroyed without every effort being made towards its salvation" (Ernst, Mattison 1986). The seeds of a community organization were sown. Later in the same month George Rosenberger of County General Services received a letter from Sandy Merriam, Chairman of the San Luis Obispo Cultural Heritage Committee stating that as the result of their review, "While we are sorry to see the building go, we did not find it of enough historical or architectural character to designate it as a priority building to be conserved" (Merriam 1986). A letter dated October 1, 1986 to San Luis Obispo County Department of General Services from the Board of Directors of the California Central Coast Chapter of the American Institute of Architects regarding the proposed demolition of Sunny Acres offers services of that organization to "provide general expertise in the area of building diagnostics, security methodologies, or ideas for adaptive re-use of the building" and "If, in fact, the Sunny Acres building could serve some useful future function in the community, it represents an architectural resource which should not be discarded" (CCCCAIA 1986). During this period attempts by the County were made to advertise the building for sale or demolition. No bids were received initially. In late October, finally one bid was received for $100 which was rejected. Paul A. Lanspery, City Administrive Officer wrote a letter to William Briam, County Administrative Officer on October 13, 1986, relating to the concerns of the Police Department and the request for the demolition permit to be reviewed by the City's Architectural Review Commission (ARC) that ended with; "In the event that ARC review is not pursued, the City would endorse a strategy of adequately securing the building now and addressing the issue of rehabilitation or demolition as part of the long-term development of the site." (Lanspery 1986) By the end of 1986, discussion was occurring with the public as well. In the Telegram- Tribune, both an editorial and a guest columnist, Robert Vessely, fervently appealed to the Board of Supervisors to find a new use for the old building. Throughout most of 1989, Vessely was active in his campaign to save the building with letters and meetings wih City and County agencies. A request was made to Mark Hall-Patton, Director of the San Luis Obispo County Museum, from David Blakely, Supervisor District 5, for a determination of the significance of Sunny Acres . The request was referred to the County Historical Society Board of Directors and a letter dated July 61\ 1989 containing the following resolution was sent to Supervisor Blakely: CRE Sunny Acres 9 ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 66 "Be it resolved, that the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors of the San Luis Obispo County Historical Society does not find the Sunny Acres building to be of sufficient historic merit to be designated an historic building, and therefore takes no position relative to its preservation. " (Hall-Patton 1989) Just prior to the San Luis Obispo City Council meeting where the Sunny Acres question was on the agenda, a fire broke out in the building. In November 1989, the work to remove the asbestos from the building had not yet been started causing the firemen to use extra uniforms and equipment to fight the fire. The fire department requested the county to formally ask the supervisors to demolish the building (Parker 1989). An environmental study for an asbestos survey resulted in a report from the ENVIRO Group. The 1989 effort resulted in the eventual removal of the asbestos from Sunny Acres. An investigation took place at Sunny Acres by Fred H. Schott & Associates, Inc., Civil and Structural Engineer, at the request of the County Department of General Services to determine whether the masonry walls were reinforced or not. The report dated February 5, 1990 states that the brick masonry walls are generally of excellent quality and condition, but in his opinion the walls are unreinforced. This resulted in a flurry of correspondence from both city and county agencies. A distillation of the correspondence was prepared as a City Council Agenda Report dated February 20, 1990. At the meeting, City Council declined the County's offer for a lease agreement. The adaptive reuse forces behind Sunny Acres were gaining steam and now correspondence included the Housing Authority as part of their plan. Part of that group of concerned citizens were Donald Grant, and Robert Vessely. The plan was growing to include all the land behind General Hospital as well as Sunny Acres to satisfy various needs and interests in the community. The Concept Plan for Sunny Acres was an ambitious report produced by Crawford Multari & Starr to allow for a museum, Botanic Garden and Senior Housing. In 1990, a New Times article reiterated the conflict between the city and the county and between San Luis Obispo Major Ron Dunin and 5th District Supervisor David Blakely. Interest was being shown by the city in restoration of the building while lack of funding was being expressed by the county (Wilmer 1990). A nonprofit organization was formed and donations solicited for a "Sunny Acres Museum -The Earth and Social Science Center." The County paid for a contractor to remove the asbestos at Sunny Acres in 1993 . In the San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda Report dated March 15, 1994, a listing of seven historic properties was unanimously recommended by the Cultural Heritage Committee to be added to the City's Master List of historic properties. Sunny Acres was on that list. The City Council approved all the properties with the exception of Sunny Acres at the request of the County. Robert E. Hendrix wrote to the City again in 1994 offering the City the building, this was followed by a meeting of City and County staff. CRE Sunny Acres 10 ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 67 On July 141\ 1996, the third fire occurred at Sunny Acres. On August 13, 1996 Robert E. Hendrix, County Administrator wrote to John Dunn, the City Administrator, reiterating the offer from the Board of Supervisors to offer Sunny Acres to the City for $1 a year and stating that if the City is not interested in leasing the building the county will prepare an Request For Proposal for private interests to respond for the property. If there is no action within a reasonable time, Hendrix was directed to demolish the facility. There was no response from the City regarding his latest offer. From 1994 through 1997, 33 incident reports were recorded by the City Police Department. Most were in response to calls from concerned neighbors and related to trespassing and teenage mischief. The Department of General Services issued a request for demolition again. This report is a result of that process. Architecture Sunny Acres was designed by the William Mooser Company, Architects from San Francisco. The firm was established in 1852 by Swiss immigrants and was responsible for many of the public buildings and residences constructed in California (Fourie 1993). The design, in the style of Lombard or Milanese Romanesque architecture, is the only example of this style in the county. Sunny Acres was designed soon after the success the Company had in the design of the Court House as well as the Hall of Records, jail buildings and General Hospital in Santa Barbara (Finney 1929). The extensive Santa Barbara activity followed the earthquake of 1925 that destroyed many buildings in Santa Barbara (Mooser 1929). Mooser had previously designed court houses for five counties as well as a number of county hospitals (including our own). By 1929, three generations of William Mooser's had been designing buildings throughout California. METHODS A visit to the site was conducted on April 16, 1998 with George Rosenberger of the County General Services Department. Preliminary photograph documentation and note taking was done by this reviewer, who was assisted by Luther and Ethan Bertrando. Rosenberger has a good deal of information regarding Sunny Acres and was most helpful in sharing his knowledge. On June 22, 1998, a search of the Sunny Acres files located at the office of Bob Vessely was conducted. His research and background for the 1989 proposal for Sunny Acres as a Natural History Museum was extensive. An index and many copies of correspondence with the city and county, newspaper accounts and historical articles were made for this report from his files. Bruce Miller, an instructor at Sunny Acres, gave background on the day-to-day operations during that time period. Unfortunately, efforts made to locate records at the County Education Office for the earlier history was unproductive as the record's whereabouts were CRE Sunny Acres 11 ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 68 unknown. The archives of Bertrando & Bertrando were used for history texts and Sanborn Maps. The files at the San Luis Obispo City/County Library for Sunny Acres as well as the newspapers on microfilm were addressed. Additional newspaper microfilm study was conducted at the Cal Poly Library. A special effort was made to understand the letter from the Historical Society Board of Directors that determined Sunny Acres was of insufficient merit to be designated an historical building. The results of that issue can be found in Appendix E. RESULTS Field lnvesti&ation The visit to the site encountered evidence of vandalism everywhere. The fence was ineffective, windows were boarded, and evidence of repeated break-ins was clearly visible. The tile roof had been broken for entry from above in several places. Two or three fires had occurred inside the building. One fire had destroyed the floor between the basement and "day room" on the upper floor. Another fire had started in the area of the boiler room in the basement and continued in the room above. Rubble and graffiti was encountered everywhere. Some of the rubble, however, was caused from the removal of the asbestos. With the exception of some shelving and benches in room B 1, much of the original equipment and enhancements have been "removed". This includes almost all evidence of what was the kitchen and pantry area, the fireplace mantels, oak shelving, baseboard and two very large amber glass and wrought iron chandeliers from the back to back day room and dining room. With the exception of the tile roof mentioned above, the exterior brick facade has held up quite well and shows little damage Archival Research The north comer of Johnson Avenue and Bishop, and extending up the slope, has been the location of public care services for San Luis Obispo County since the 1880s. This area is rich in the history of the changing attitudes and procedures given to public care. In the beginning, the "public" hospital was located away from the citizens of the City of San Luis Obispo as indigent care was not a popular neighbor. The grounds also later contained the county "pest" house where patients with communicable diseases such as small pox could be taken to remove them from the general population. Located in this area was also the building for the insane which was probably later used as the women's jail. Many attempts were made to gather information for the time period from mid 1930s to 1950 with no significant results. If records exist they are not available, nor are their whereabouts known by the departments responsible for their history. Only files stored at Camp San Luis CRE Sunny Acres 12 ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 69 Obispo were not reviewed. If there was pertinent information stored at that site, this reviewer could not locate any indexes to check on that possibility. Couesponcience One of the criteria used to validate the demolition of Sunny Acres has been the letter from the San Luis Obispo County Historical Society Board and Museum dated July 6, 1989 (Appendix E). This remains the only valid response received by the County that gave an insignificant evaluation for the property, and it was of particular importance to this investigation. In the letter, the Historical Society Executive Committee adopted the following resolution: "Be it resolved, that the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors of the San Luis Obispo County Historical Society does not find the Sunny Acres building to be of sufficient historic merit to be designated an historic building, and therefore takes no position relative to its preservation. " (Hall-Patton 1989) The letter is signed by Mark Hall-Patton, Director of the Museum at that time. As part of this historical evaluation and investigation process, a letter dated May 20, 1998, was addressed to Bruce Miller, President of the San Luis Obispo County Historical Society asking the following: "To be able to understand the reasons for this decision, it is necessary that I review the minutes for the meeting that pertain to the Sunny Acres discussion. The make up of the Executive Board and their qualifications for making the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) determination would be most helpful as well. " (Bertrando 1998) On June 4, 1998, a call was received from Virginia Kennedy in response to the above letter as Bruce Miller was out of town. She stated she was not allowed in the museum office (recent turmoil within the Society precluded her effort), but she would contact Dan Krieger for an answer. Krieger was a part of the Board at that time. The following day Virginia Kennedy called and said she had received a FAX from Krieger in answer to her query. Kreiger explained that the criteria from the city (sic county) and Bob Vessely (who had also requested the evaluation from the board) for the resulting determination was as follows: " ... they were asked if it was historic because of its association with a famous person" ... the rational for the answer was " .... juvenile records were closed and there was therefor no evidence of a famous person associated with Sunny Acres .... ". (Kennedy pers. comm.) According to Wendy Waldron, who was a member of the Cultural Heritage Committee with Krieger for several years, Krieger later changed his vote and agreed with the rest of the Cultural Heritage Committee that indeed Sunny Acres was historic. A phone conversation took place on June 5, 1998, with Mark Hall-Patton, who for the last few years has resided in Las Vegas, Nevada, and had originally signed the letter in question. During the conversation Hall-Patton stated that the Board was not qualified to make the significance determination and he had been directed to write the letter. Hall-Patton recalled that CRE Sunny Acres 13 ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 70 the building had an impressive exterior and site location, but he couldn't visualize a reuse for the building that would fit the surroundings. A letter in support for the Heritage Shared Grant Application enthusiastically supporting the feasibility study for adaptive reuse for Sunny Acres was written on June 15, 1998, and received by this reviewer from Hall-Patton (Appendix E). The thoughtful letter further defines his earlier position and his current funding concerns. SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA AND EVALUATION The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was adopted and approved to set forth some basic policies for environmental protection. Historic and prehistoric resources are specifically addressed in Appendix K of CEQA' s definition of environmental resources. Section 21001 of CEQA provides that the state should "take all action necessary to provide the people with clean air and water ....... and historic environmental qualities ........ and preserve examples of the major periods of California history. Of primary concern is the definition of significance which is addressed as follows: A. Is associated with an event or person of 1. Recognized significance in California or American History, or 2. Recognized scientific importance to prehistory (PRC 21083 .2(g)). B. Can provide information which is both of demonstrable public interest and useful in addressing scientifically consequential and reasonable or archaeologicall research question; C. Has a special or particular quality such as oldest, best example, largest, or largest, or last surviving example of its kind; D. Is at least 100 years old and possesses substantial stratigraphic integrity; or, E. Involves important research questions that historical research has shown can be answered only with archaeological methods. In recent additions to CEQA further definitions are also described. Because Section 15064.5 Deterrnininii the Siiinificance of Impacts to Historical Resources and Unique Archaeoloiiical Resources. is so new, a portion bas been listed below: (2) Historical resources may include, but are not limited to, any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which is historically or archaeologically significant or is significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California. (5) b. A project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the CRE Sunny Acres 14 ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 71 significance of an historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment. In another new Section 15126.4, Consideration and Discussion of Miti~ation Measures Proposed to Minimize Si~nificant Effects: (2) In some circumstances, the effects of demolition of an historical resource are not mitigated to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur when documentation of an historical building is prepared by way of historic narrative, photographs, or architectural drawings. A recent court case in Oak.land filed February 2, 1997, League For Protection of Oak.land's Architectural and Historic Resources v. City of Oak.land -reversed a previous judgement, "based upon our conclusion that under the governing definitions and the facts presented the Montgomery Ward Building is an historical resource, which may not be approved for demolition without the preparation of an EIR." Under Section IV. The Mitiiation Measures. "Documentation of the historical features of the building and exhibition of a plaque do not reasonably begin to alleviate the impacts of its destruction." (Appendix F) The Historical Preservation Proiram Guidelines were adopted by San Luis Obispo City Council resolution No. 6158 and became effective February 3, 1987. The criteria for evaluating buildings is included within the guidelines. Below are the major headings followed by the approved criteria that applies to Sunny Acres. ~ -Current rarity although the structure reflects a once popular style. Sunny Acres represents an example of an architectural style no longer seen in San Luis Obispo. It is the only example of an architectural style described as Lombard or Milanese Romanesque. This style was popular in the l 920's, particularly in regards to academic buildings. The building has maintained its integrity in the exterior brick facade. Desiin -Overall attractiveness with aesthetic appeal because of its uniqueness, .... details and craftsmanship. The brick building has an aesthetic appeal because of details such as the gable end stepped, arched corbels of brick and radiating brick arches above the windows. Architect -A known architect who made significant contributions to the state or region. The William Mooser Company was a family firm based in San Francisco. It was responsible for many important public buildings in California. Environmental Desi in Continuity -Symbolic importance of a structure to the community CRE Sunny Acres 15 ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 72 and the degree to which it serves as a conspicuous and pivotal landmark It is an important and conspicuous landmark above Johnson A venue whose similarity of use with its neighboring structures, although not in an aesthetic style, defines a geographical area that contains the history of public care in the County of San Luis Obispo. Histozy -Person Describes a person, group, organization, or institution that has been connected with the structure ...... for at least 40 years. An institution has been connected to the structure for over 40 years. In this instance it relates to child care for the entire period of use (1931 to 1974 ). History -Event Associated with a social, political, economic, governmental, educational or other institutional event that has been important to the community. A first-of-its-kind institutional event for the county as a planned children's home. History -Context Associated with and also a prime illustration of predominant patterns of political, social, economic, cultural, medical, educational, governmental, military, industrial, or religious history. Sunny Acres reflects the changing social attitudes of the populace in a structure that occupies its original site. Sunny Acres easily fits into all or parts of the above categories. Interest shown by the Cultural Heritage Committee and the community supports the historic importance of the resource as well. As part of the Resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that defines historical preservation goals (No. 6157), Sunny Acres is at the least a Priority #4: Potentially eligible for the National Register. This position would be strengthened if included as part of a public care historic district north from the intersection of Johnson A venue and Bishop. The City Guidelines above are essentially the same as Section 4852 of California Assembly Bill 2881. The Section is entitled Types of Historical Resources and Criteria for Listimi in the California Re2ister of Historical Resources. RECOMMENDATIONS The County has three options in regards to Sunny Acres: l. Continued Vacancy; this use has resulted in neglect and negative impacts to the structure through vandalism, weather damage and discontinued regular maintenance. CRE Sunny Acres 16 ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 73 2. Demolition; this would result in the removal of the Sunny Acres building and development of a new land use for the area. Based on CEQA guidelines and the recent Oakland court case, this option would most likely necessitate a complete Environmental Impact Report which would not guarantee any proposed future use of the project area. 3. Structural Rehabilitation/Restoration; this option would allow use of the existing significant structure in some new capacity. It would maintain the historic character of the structure while allowing it to provide a service or services to the community. Based on these options, the conclusion of this report finds that Structural Rehabilitation/ Restoration is recommended over the other options as it would open the area to community use, eliminate an area with a history of vandalism and neglect, and maintain a significant historic structure to be enjoyed by future generations of the area. A secondary recommendation is for the City and County of San Luis Obispo as well as the community to work together for an appropriate solution. CONCLUSION There seems to be a consensus that Sunny Acres is important to the general community, as well as historians and architects. This reviewer also found the building to be potentially significant. The final significance determination is normally made by the State Office of Historic Preservation. In addition, there may be good reason to include the other buildings found in the surrounding area of Sunny Acres that represent the history of public care for the County of San Luis Obispo and create an historic district to commemorate that commitment. This part of the county has historically served the people of the county for 120 years beginning with the building of the County Hospital. As a part of the public care complex, Sunny Acres is potentially significant for the architect and style of architecture. It is stands unique in its history of providing care for juveniles as the first county orphanage and later detention center and juvenile hall. CRE Sunny Acres 17 ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 74 REFERENCES CITED Biblio~raphy Angel, Myron 1883 History of San Luis Obispo County. Thompson and West, Oakland. Facsimile reprint published 1979 by Valley Publishers, Fresno, CA. Avina, Rose Hollenbaugh 1932 Spanish and Mexican Land Grants in California. Thesis for the University of California. Reprinted in 1973 by R and E Research Associates, San Francisco, CA. City of San Luis Obispo 1987 The Historical Preservation Pro~ram Guidelines. Produced by the Community Development Department. · Engelhardt, Fr. Zephyrin, O.F.M. 1933 Mission San Luis Obispo in the Valley of the Bears. Mission Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA. Finney, M. Mac Lean 1929 The Court House Beautiful in The Architect and En~ineer, Vol XCVIII. F ourie, Denise 1993 Sunny Acres for the City of San Luis Obispo Historic Resources Inventozy Mooser, William A.I.A. 1929 Building of Court House within Architects Estimate in The Architect and Em~ineer. Parker, Dan 1989 Fire heavily dama~es old juyenile hall in the SLO County Telegram-Tribune, Saturday, November 25. Robinson, W.W. 1957 The Stozy of San Luis Obispo County. Title Insurance and Trust, Los Angeles, CA. Sanchez, Gil 1998 Condition Assessment and Preliminazy Rehabilitation Study -Rodriquez Adobe. Butr6n Adobe. La Loma Adobe. Produced for Friends of Las Casas de Adobe, San Luis Obispo, CA. CRE Sunny Acres 18 ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 75 Wilmer, Tom 1990 Clouds Oyer Sunny Acres in New Times, January 18. Records Reviewed Supervisors Minutes on file at the County Clerk/Recorders Office Microfilm C-16 1854 Deeds Vol A Pg 78 -Boronda to Quintana, deed in Spanish 1876 Map of the Deleissi~ues Tract. Surveyed by H.C. Ward. 1877 Deeds Vol A Pg 733 -United States to Jose Maria Munoz Correspondence 1986 C.R. Chelquist to William Briam 1986 Ernst and Mattison to Board of Supervisors 1986 Andrew G. Merriam to George Rosenberger 1986 CCCCAIA Board of Directors to County Supervisors and Department of General Services 1986 Paul A. Lanspery to William Briam Interviews Bruce Miller, former Special Education teacher at Sunny Acres-early 1950s Robert Vessely, Structural Engineer Mark Hall-Patton, former Director of the County Historical Museum CRE Sunny Acres 19 ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 76 I -} r ss·-o· I 'O JI ::.. ... :J:> I ~I ..Lb_ .. I "+! REFB>ENCE NORTH UNEXCAVATED AREA NORTH WING ' 0 • • "' ROOM.83 ROOM 81 ROOM 86 )_..._ __ ...._. SUNNY ACRES BUILDING-BASEMENT PLAN NO SCALE - I • 132'-0" --- 3s·-o· L ss·-o· I • UNEXCAVATED ARf A-0 -· CENTER WING " ... 12·-o · • "° I °' .... UNEXCAVATED AREA SOUTH WING N0RT~·SOU1 H CORRIDOR ROOM 88 cc ROOM 812 ~. ~~ I"", . ~ I t t! -- VI < .... --1•....,.qAIRWEU A \IN ENTRY . 0 I "' ..... I r P5418 A T T A C H M E N T 4 A R C / C H C 1 - 7 7 ~ UI '" CD -0 (,) REAR VESTIBULE ~ENTRANCE KITcHEN STORAGE DINING HALL . ROOM I ROOM I ROO:_[MOOM rQM rOOl; t . t i . iROO~ I ROOM I ROOM I RM I ROOM I ROOM 1 2 3 4 s . 6 . . I ~ -· .12 j . 13 14 1s 16 11 I ; ! • I l -NORTH HALLWAY . . j j I · SOUTH HALLWAY ·I ,_ ROOM I ROOM I -ROOM -1 ·i.·•• I R001.f ;1 ·~09M • 1m .-IJAllUl,IM t---~r-ROOM-• •: I· t 1 ROOM I ROOM' I: ROOM ' 7 8 I 9 -·. lO 'i :11 . • .. J==;=I; 18 19 20 : 21 -$-REFERENCE NORTH SUNNY ACRES BUILDING FIRST FLOOR PLAN NO SCALE STAIRWELL STOREROOM P5418 MAY, 1993 A T T A C H M E N T 4 A R C / C H C 1 - 7 8 APPENDIX D: Site Record ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 79 State of CalKomla • The Resources 1-Genct DEPARTMENT OF.PARKS AND RECREATION OFACE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION ·.~ ). HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY IDENTlFlCATION AND LOCATION 1 Historic name: Sunny Acres 2. Common ot current name.: Sunny.Acres 3. Number & street 2176 Johnson Cro~or. City. San Luis Obispo Vicinity only: 2lp:. 93401 4. lITM zone: A e . c 5. Quad map No. Parcel No. 003..S01.ooo4-01 Other. DESCRIPTION 6. Property category: If district, number of documented resources County: San Lule Obl•po D 7 . Briefly describe the present physical appearance ol the property, Including condition, boundaries, related featurH, surroundings, and ~I appropriate) archlteC1ural style. Sunny Acres is a large, two·story, brick structure p romi nently situated on a hilltop over1ooking San Luis Obispo and behind the County General Hospital (which was built by the same arch itect, Wi lli am Mooser). The building is basically rectangular In plan, with a gabled !1on1 entrance and a kitchen projecting from the rea.1. Th e eaves ot the gable are decorated w ith dentil1. Some wi ndows are topped with semi-circular quoins. Other notable details are the copper gutters and downspouts, and large two·1ld1d flrtplac.. The architectural style has been described as Lombard or Milanese Romanesque, which was popular In California In the 1920's, The style was widely used for academic buildings, with examples on the UCLA and USC campuses. The Sunny Acres building Is the only example of this type of architecture In San Lula Obispo County. There is ongoing discussion as to the structural Integrity ot the brick building. Recent engineering studies have connrmed that the building is unrelntorced but extremely well built. Vandalism to the Interior and the root pose the major threat to the Integrity of this vacant structure. "" 8. Planning llgency: City of San Lui• Obl1po 9. O#net' & MSdr.-. County of San Luis Obispo County Government Center San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 10 . Type of ownership: 11 . Present use : Vacant 12 . Zoning : C/OS-40 13 . Threats : Send a copy of this form to: State Oftice ot Historic Preservation, P.O. Box 942896, Sacramento, CA 94296-0001 Complete these itemi' for historic preservation compliance projects under Section 106 (38 CFR 800). All Items must be completed for historical resources survey Information. · OPR 523 (Rev. 6/90) ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 80 .1 ··~~ - HISTORICAL N=ORMATION 0 1"4. Construction dat9(s): 1931 Original location: 2178 Johnson 15. Alterdonl & dat.: 1~7; 1959 ~nterlor remodeling) 18. Architect Wiiiiam Mooaer, Jr. Builder. Unknown 17. Hstoflo ~(with number from llat): SIGNIFICANCE ANO EVAl..1.JATION 18. Conmxt fol ev-Juatlon: .Theme Atchltecture; Government Jilu.:. ' Period! Property type: •19 , Briefly dltcu11 the property'• Importance within the context. Use historical and architectural analyai1 as appropriate. Compare with similar propertlea. Sunny Acres was built by the County of SLO In i930/31 as a 'children 's home' to hous.e orphant and other ward• of th• court. The building was designed by William Mooser Company, Architects, of San Franelseo. Minor Interior remodeling took place in i947 and 1959 . Over the years-at leas\ by \he mid-i9SO's-its use changed lo that of County Juvenile detention facility. It was used as such until it was abandoned by the County in 1974. Thus, lhia Institutional building is a reminder of lmponant, yet difficult, social service functions of local government. The ~rlglnal architectural firm, William Mooser Co .,' was a firm of substantial longevity that practiced throughout California. Established in 1852, it was operated by three generations of the Mooser family until closing in 1969. Notable examples of their work Include the Santa Barbara County Counhouse; the tower building In Ghirardelll Square and the Maritime Museum, both in San Francisco; the Beringer House in St. Helena; and numerous residences and government buildings up and down the state. During the time Sunny Acres was designed, the firm was operated by William Mooser, Jr., an engineer, and his son, Willlam Mooser Ill, a graduate of the prestigious Ecole des Beaux Arts in Paris. The firm also designed the nearby county General Hospital In 1928. The style of Sunny Acres Is Lombard or Milanese Romanesque, a style of which there are no other example• In SLO County. · Thus, the significance of the building lies ln its unusual architectural style for the area, the reputation of and Ill long·ttrm use as a aoclal aervlces faclllty. 20. Sourcee: SLO City flltt; SLO County flle1 CHC fllea: Bob Vtaaely Telegram-Tribune 4/1~/3/31; 9/21-26/30 SLO City Olrectorles-1931, 1933, 1938, 1939, 1942 SLO County Museum Atchivea SLO City-County Ubrary mea 21. Appllcable National Register criteria: 22. Other recognition: State Landmark No. ~f applllcsble) 23. Evaluator. Cate 'of evaluation 24. Survey type: 25. Survey name: •26. Year fonn prepared: July 1993 By (name): Denise Fourie Organization: Cultural Heritage Committee c! Address: 83 La>~ntrada Ave. City & Zip: ~n Luis Obispo, 93405 Phone: (805) 544.9343 the architect, I "·!--.. ATTACHMENT 4 ARC/CHC 1 - 81 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM ARCH-3336-2016/EID-3562-2016 August 24, 2016 1. Project Title: Bishop Street Studios 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Rachel Cohen, Associate Planner 805-781-7574 4. Project Location: 1600 Bishop Street (APN 003-601-006) 5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Transitions Mental Health Association P.O. Box 15408 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Project Representative Name and Address: Ten Over Studio 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 6. General Plan Designation: Special Focus Area 5: General Hospital Site: The General Hospital site includes County-owned property including the old hospital building (which is planned to remain as an office / treatment facility) and lands behind the facility. Lands behind the hospital building that are inside the City’s Urban Reserve line will be designated as Public (for existing public facility) and a range of residential uses (Low Density and Medium Density Residential) and will include the ability to 1 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 82 support residential care, transitional care use, and other residential uses consistent with the adjacent areas. The remaining site outside the City’s Urban Reserve line will remain as Open Space. The City shall seek to secure permanent protection of the open space outside of the urban reserve line as part of any development proposal. The undeveloped portion of this site on the southwest side of Johnson Avenue will remain designated for Public uses. 7. Zoning: R-1 (Low Density Residential), R-2-SF (Medium Density Residential), and C/OS-40 (Conservation/Open Space) 8. Description of the Project: The proposed project consists of a 1.32-acre site located at 1600 Bishop Street, approximately 580 feet northwest of the existing terminus of Bishop Street, east of Johnson Avenue, in the City of San Luis Obispo, California (refer to Attachment 1, Site Vicinity/Location). The project site is accessed by an existing, unimproved road, which extends from the existing parking area for the San Luis Obispo County Probation offices to the project site. The former Sunny Acres Children’s Home/County Juvenile Detention Center occupies the site; this facility was vacated in 1974. The applicant proposes an affordable housing residential care facility consisting of 34 units including 33 very-low-income single occupancy studio and one bedroom units and 1 one-bedroom unit for a resident manager, as described below (refer to Attachment 2, Project Plan Set). Existing Building (9,180 square feet) The project includes the rehabilitation, and adaptive reuse of the vacated Sunny Acres Children’s Home/County Juvenile Detention Center to include 13 very-low-income studio and one-bedroom units. Four studios and two one-bedroom units are proposed on the lower floor, and four studios and three one-bedroom units are proposed on the upper floor. Each unit would range in size between 308 to 505 square feet, and would include bedroom, bathroom, kitchen, living, and closet space. Two patios are proposed on the lower level, located on the northern and southern sides of the building. In addition to the residential units, the lower floor would include an entryway, hall, and storage area. The building would include an approximately 700-square foot community room, 212-square foot office, entry area, and hall on the upper floor. Stairs and an elevator would provide access between the lower and upper floors. Proposed Building A (2,571 square feet) Proposed Building A would include six one-bedroom residential units, ranging in size between 507 to 537 square feet each. The maximum height of the two-story building would be approximately 23 feet, 6 inches (as measured from the lower floor footprint elevation). Three lower level units and three upper level units are proposed, and each unit would include a bedroom, bathroom, kitchen, living area, and storage/closet. The three upper units would include an attached 60-square foot deck; one of the unit decks would be enclosed and includes an attached 35-square foot storage area. External stairs would provide access between the lower and upper floors. Proposed Building B (2,571 square feet) Proposed Building B would include five one-bedroom units, ranging in size between 507 and 537 square feet, and one approximately 310-square foot laundry, mail, and storage area. The maximum height of the two-story building would be approximately 23 feet, 6 inches (as measured from the 2 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 83 lower floor footprint elevation). Three lower level units and two upper level units are proposed, and each unit would include a bedroom, bathroom, kitchen, living area, and storage/closet. The two upper level units would include an attached 60-square foot deck. External stairs would provide access between the lower and upper floors. Proposed Building C (5,483 square feet) Proposed Building C would include 10 one-bedroom units, ranging in size between 507 and 537 square feet each. The maximum height of the two-story building would be 23 feet, 6 inches (as measured from the lower floor footprint elevation). Five lower level units and five upper level units are proposed, and each unit would include a bedroom, bathroom, kitchen, living area, and storage/closet. The five upper level units would include an attached 60-square foot deck; one of the unit decks would be enclosed and includes an attached 35-square foot storage area. External stairs would provide access between the lower and upper floors. Additional site improvements and project details: • Proposed materials include brick, Hardie cement-fiber siding, stucco, shielded exterior lighting fixtures, and metal canopies • Access improvements include a paved, approximately 500-foot long, 20-foot wide access road within the location of the existing unpaved access road, and fire department turnout east of the Existing Building • Project includes a 17-space paved parking lot (including one accessible parking space) located between the Existing Building and Proposed Buildings A and B, an adjacent 5-foot tall retaining wall, and site pedestrian access • An approximately 720-square foot central plaza and table seating area constructed with non-grouted pavers would be located between Proposed Buildings A and B • Rain garden planters, bio-treatment areas, vegetated or cobble swale, and cobble dissipators are proposed throughout the site • Site and infrastructure improvements include signage, a trash enclosure, re-located fire hydrants, private water booster station, new looped public water mains, sewer lateral, replacement of existing water main to Bishop Tank, abandonment of existing parallel water services, and removal of utility poles and overhead lines and construction of underground electric, telephone, and community antenna television utility lines • Proposed landscaping includes the removal of one oak tree, nine pepper trees, and several shrubs/bushes onsite and planting 23 trees (strawberry tree, Wilson olive and coast live oak), and a variety of shrubs, grasses, and vines The project would result in the disturbance of over one acre, including onsite grading and development, on and off-site road improvements, and on and off-site utility trenching, placement, and removal of existing poles and overhead lines. The project will aim for Green Point Gold rating for sustainable construction practices. Onsite solar photovoltaics are not currently included in the project plans; however, these may be accommodated in the future. 9. Setting and Surrounding Land Uses: The project site is occupied by the former Sunny Acres Children’s Home/County Juvenile Detention Center, which was vacated in 1974. Based on a Historic Evaluation for the site, the 3 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 84 structure is considered eligible for listing as a historic resource on the National Register (Bertrando & Bertrando 1998). The building is not currently included on the City’s Master List of Historic Resources. An unpaved access road extends from the northeastern terminus of Bishop Street and loops through the site. The topography is gently to moderately sloping, and existing vegetation includes grasses, oak trees, pepper trees, and bushes/shrubs. Existing uses surrounding the site area are as follows: West: Vacant land, portion within biological open space easement, single-family residences, zoned R-1 (Low-Density Residential). North: Single family residences, zoned R-1 (Low-Density Residential) and CO/S-40 (Conservation/Open Space); County land designated Public Facilities and Open Space northeast of the City limits. East: Vacant land, zoned CO/S-40 (Conservation/Open Space); County land designated Public Facilities and Rural Lands east of the City limits. South: Vacant land, Child Development Resource Center, San Luis Obispo County Probation Department, City Bishop water pump station, San Luis Obispo County Health Agency (to the southwest), City Bishop water tank (to the southeast), zoned R-2-SF (Medium Density Residential, Special Focus), PF (Public Facility), and PF-SF (Public Facility, Special Focus); County land designated Public Facilities and Rural Lands southeast of the City limits. 10. Project Entitlements Requested: Architectural review and approval by the Architectural Review Commission (ARC). 11. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.): Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP); Air Pollution Control District (APCD) portable equipment permits, as applicable. 4 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 85 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 X Hazards & Hazardous Materials Public Services X Air Quality X Hydrology / Water Quality Recreation X Biological Resources Land Use / Planning Transportation / Traffic X Cultural Resources Mineral Resources X Utilities / Service Systems Geology / Soils Noise X 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 Wildlife 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 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)) unless otherwise approved by the State Clearinghouse pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15205(d), 15206, and Appendix K; the shortened public review period shall be no less than 20 days. 5 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 86 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 87 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 7 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 88 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 1,5, 17,31 --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? 5,17, 31 --X-- c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? 1,5, 10,12, 17, 31 --X-- d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 10,12, 17,31 --X-- Evaluation The City is located eight miles from the Pacific Ocean and lies at the convergence of two main drainages: the Los Osos Valley which drains westerly into Morro Bay via Los Osos Creek, and San Luis Valley which drains to the south-southwest into the Pacific Ocean at Avila Beach via the San Luis Obispo Creek. The topography of the city and its surroundings is generally defined by several low hills and ridges such as Bishop Peak and Cerro San Luis. These peaks are also known as Morros and provide scenic focal points for much of the City. The Santa Lucia Mountains and Irish Hills are the visual limits of the area and are considered the scenic backdrop for much of the City. The surrounding hills have created a hard urban edge where development has remained in the lower elevations. The project is located east of Johnson Avenue on a site that exhibits a more rural character than other areas of the City, due to the site’s proximity to undeveloped open space and hillsides. The visual character of the project site and adjacent land is defined by the existing Sunny Acres Children’s Home, vacant land immediately proximate to the site, surrounding mature vegetation including individual and clustered oak and pepper trees, grasses, and bushes/shrubs. The topography of the site is gently to moderately sloping. The visual character of the area varies from dense, urban development to the north, south, and west along Johnson Avenue, including residential neighborhoods and County facility buildings. The visual character of the areas east of the site is rural, vacant, and highly scenic. The hillsides extending to the east present a highly scenic backdrop to the City’s eastern edge. As shown on Conservation and Open Space Element Figure 11 Scenic Roadways and Vistas, the project site is located within a scenic vista cone of view along a segment of Johnson Avenue; this segment near Bishop Street is designated as having high scenic value. This scenic vista is characterized by the hillsides rising to the east of the City, above the line of residential and facility development east of Johnson Avenue. Due to the presence of existing development and mature vegetation and trees along the eastern side Johnson Avenue, all of which is located at a progressively higher elevation than the roadway, and mature vegetation and trees to remain west and southwest of the project site, the existing structure is not visible from Johnson Avenue. The structure is not a visible element within the identified scenic vista. The project site is visible from public open space and recreational areas within the City that are at a higher elevation than the site, including: Terrace Hill, approximately 0.4 mile to the west; potentially the Reservoir Canyon Trail at the top of the ridgeline approximately 0.7 mile to the west; the peak of South Hills, approximately 1.4 miles to the southwest; and Cerro San Luis, approximately two miles to the northwest. The scenic views from these public open space and recreational areas include urban development within the City, proximate development within the County and on the California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly) campus, open space and agricultural lands along Los Osos Valley Road and State Route 1 (SR-1), and surrounding Morros and ridgelines. a) The existing building to remain has a structural elevation of 503 above mean sea level (msl), and as noted above, this structure is not visible from Johnson Avenue or Bishop Street (except from the existing eastern terminus of Bishop Street near the County Probation building). Proposed Buildings A, B, and C would be located to the west of the existing building; the maximum height of these structures would be 479.4, 478.7, and 477.5 feet above msl, respectively. As the existing structure is not visible from major public roadways due to the presence of existing development and mature vegetation and trees between the project site and Johnson Avenue, and the height of the proposed structures would not surpass the height of the existing structure, it can reasonably be concluded that the development would not be visible within the scenic vista along Johnson Avenue. 8 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 89 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Although the Conservation and Open Space Element does not specifically identify scenic vistas from the Morros, hilltops, and ridgelines both within and surrounding the City, the public views from trails and overlooks within these open space areas can be described as scenic vistas. While the project may be visible from these locations, development would occur between the existing structure and existing urban development along Johnson Avenue, and would not encroach into the scenic hillsides to the east. The development would appear as in-fill, and would not significantly impact the overall scenic vista from these open space areas. Therefore, based on the location of the project, and proposed configuration and location proposed new structures, implementation of the project would not result in a significant impact on a scenic vista. b) The site is not located near any state-designated scenic highways, nor is it visible from any highways or on/off ramps. Therefore, no impact will occur. c) The City of San Luis Obispo regulates aesthetics of buildings and public spaces through implementation of adopted policies and programs. The City’s General Plan Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) Update, Conservation and Open Space Element, as well as the implementing statutes of the Municipal Code/Zoning Code and Community Design Guidelines are the core of this mechanism. The applicant proposes development of a 34-unit, very low-income, affordable housing residential care facility on the site of the existing Sunny Acres Children’s Home (discussion of impacts on the structure are discussed in Section 8 Cultural Resources below). The project site exhibits a fairly open lot configuration dominated by the existing structure, which would be preserved, rehabilitated, and adaptively reused to accommodate housing units. The new construction is designed to maintain views towards the existing building, and locates new development to the west of the structure, in areas zoned for low-density and medium- density residential development. The new construction is proposed to be built into the hillside in order to minimize its massing on the hillside. The proposed structure, massing, and materials to be used for construction of the three new residential buildings would be compatible with the existing structure, and would incorporate brick, curved lintels, and other features that would promote compatibility with the character of the site. Proposed landscaping would include a mix of species similar to native and ornamental trees and vegetation in the surrounding area, which would complement the buildings and provide a visual transition from the more urban landscaping within the City to native vegetation present on the hillsides and valleys to the north and east. Based on the location of the project, proximate urban development, and visual compatibility with the existing structure, the project would not result in a significant impact on visual character. In addition, the project proposal will be reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) for conformance with the City of San Luis Obispo Community Design Guidelines, General Plan, and Zoning Code, which will further address compatibility of the proposed development on the site and in relation to its surroundings. The ARC may provide direction to the applicant to further ensure compatibility with City policies and codes. d) The project is located in a developed area with light sources from neighboring commercial and residential uses. The proposed project would result in a general increase in residential density and development within the subject site. The project is required to conform to the City’s Night Sky Preservation Ordinance (Zoning Regulations Chapter 17.23) and General Plan Policy 9.2.3, which sets operational standards and requirements for lighting installations, including requiring all light sources to be shielded and downward facing. As such, impacts resulting from creating new sources of light will be less than significant. Conclusion: The project will have a less than significant impact on aesthetics. 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, 19, 31 --X-- b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? 1, 12, 31 --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? 18 --X-- 9 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 90 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Evaluation The city is located in the heart of San Luis Obispo County and the Central Coast Region, both of which are important key agricultural centers within the State of California. The region’s agricultural industry is an important part of the local economy. It provides employment and income directly for those in agriculture, and it helps drive growth in the tourism industry, which in turn generates further economic activity and consumer spending. Based on review of the Important Farmland Map for San Luis Obispo County, the project site is designed as “Other Land”. Other Land is defined as: “land not included in any other mapping category. Common examples include low density rural developments, brush, timber, wetland, and riparian areas not suitable for livestock grazing, confined livestock, poultry, or aquaculture facilities, strip mines borrow pits, and water bodies smaller than 40 acres. Vacant and nonagricultural land surrounded on all sides by urban development and greater than 40 acres is mapped as other land” (California Department of Conservation 2015). a) The project site is not designated as Prime or Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in conversion of these agricultural resources to nonagricultural use. b) The project site is not located on farmland, nor is it under a Williamson Act contract. The Project site is designated for residential care uses in the General Plan and is zoned R-1, R-2 and C/OS-40 (Low-Density and Medium-Density Residential and Conservation/Open Space). The project site is surrounded by developed properties and open space. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. c) Redevelopment of the site will not contribute to conversion of farmland. No impacts to existing on site or off site agricultural resources are anticipated with development of the project site. Conclusion: No impacts to agricultural resources are anticipated. 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? 9, 21, 13, 31 --X-- b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? 9, 20, 21, 13, 31 --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)? 9, 20, 21, 13, 31 --X-- d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? 9, 21, 13, 31 --X-- e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? 9, 21, 13, 31 --X-- Evaluation Air quality in the San Luis Obispo region of the County is characteristically different than other regions of the County (i.e., the Upper Salinas River Valley and the East County Plain), although the physical features that divide them provide only limited barriers to transport pollutants between regions. The County is designated nonattainment for the one‐hour California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for ozone and the CAAQS for respirable particulate matter (PM10). The County is designated attainment for national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Measurements of ambient air quality from the monitoring station at 3220 South Higuera Street are representative of local air quality conditions. 10 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 91 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) The San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) adopted the 2001 Clean Air Plan (CAP) in 2002. The 2001 CAP is a comprehensive planning document intended to provide guidance to the SLOAPCD and other local agencies, including the City, on how to attain and maintain the state standards for ozone and PM10. The CAP presents a detailed description of the sources and pollutants which impact the jurisdiction, future air quality impacts to be expected under current growth trends, and an appropriate control strategy for reducing ozone precursor emissions, thereby improving air quality. The proposed project is consistent with the general level of development anticipated and projected in the CAP. The project is consistent with the CAP’s land use planning strategies, including locating a residential care development within an urban area proximate to an existing roadway, near transit services and shopping areas. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. b), c), d) Both the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have established ambient air quality standards for common pollutants. These ambient air quality standards are levels of contaminants representing safe levels that avoid specific adverse health effects associated with each pollutant. The ambient air quality standards cover what are called “criteria” pollutants because the health and other effects of each pollutant are described in criteria documents. Areas that meet ambient air quality standards are classified as attainment areas, while areas that do not meet these standards are classified as nonattainment areas. As mentioned above, San Luis Obispo is currently designated as nonattainment for the state and federal ambient air quality standards for ground-level ozone and PM2.5 as well as the state standards for PM10. CEQA Appendix G states the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make significance determinations. Assessment of potential air quality impacts that may result from the proposed project was conducted using the April 2012 CEQA Air Quality Handbook, which is provided by the APCD for the purpose of assisting lead agencies in assessing the potential air quality impacts from residential, commercial and industrial development. Under CEQA, the APCD is a responsible agency for reviewing and commenting on projects that have the potential to cause adverse impacts to air quality. Construction Significance Criteria: Construction activities would generate fugitive dust particles (PM10), ozone precursors (ROG+NOx), and diesel exhaust (DPM) that could result in a temporary increase in criteria pollutants and could also contribute to the existing non-attainment status for ozone and PM10. Reactive organic gasses (ROG) would be released during drying of architectural coatings. Site preparation and grading would involve the greatest amount of heavy equipment and the most substantial generation of fugitive dust. Potential construction emissions were estimated using CalEEMod. Based on limited information about grading and construction, defaults were applied. Table 1 Construction Emissions (Unmitigated) shows the estimated construction-related emissions. Based on the air quality modeling, the construction of the project would generate emissions exceeding quarterly Tier 1 thresholds, primarily due to architectural coatings, and mitigation is necessary. As shown in Table 2 Construction Emissions (Mitigated for ROG), use of low-volatile organic compound (VOC) architectural coatings in the interior of the proposed buildings would reduce ROG emissions to below APCD thresholds. Table 1. Construction Emissions (Unmitigated) ROG and NOx (lbs/day) PM10 (lbs/day) DPM (lbs/day)1 ROG and NOx (tons/quarter) PM10 (tons/quarter) DPM (tons/quarter)1 Project Emissions 88.98 5.88 3.11 2.75 0.18 .096 Daily Threshold 137 n/a 7.0 --- --- --- Mitigation Required No n/a No --- --- --- Tier 1 Threshold (t/q) --- --- --- 2.5 2.5 0.13 Mitigation Required --- --- --- Yes No No 1. The DPM estimations were derived from the “PM10 Exhaust” output from CalEEMod as recommended by SLOAPCD. This estimation represents a worst case scenario because it includes other PM10 exhaust other than DPM. 11 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 92 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Table 2. Construction Emissions (Mitigated for ROG) ROG and NOx (lbs/day) ROG and NOx (tons/quarter) Project Emissions 1 42.54 1.32 Daily Threshold 137 --- Mitigation Required No --- Tier 1 Threshold (t/q) --- 2.5 Mitigation Required --- Yes 1. Mitigation includes use of low VOC paint in the interior of the buildings (71 g/L) Construction activities can generate fugitive dust, which could be a nuisance to local residents and businesses in close proximity to the proposed construction site. Sensitive receptors potentially affected by fugitive dust, diesel particulates, and construction equipment emissions are located approximately 80 feet to the northwest. Based on the proximity of these sensitive receptors, diesel idling restrictions would apply to the project during construction. Construction equipment itself can be the source of air quality emission impacts, and may be subject to California Air Resources Board or APCD permitting requirements. This includes portable equipment, 50 horsepower (hp) or greater or other equipment listed in the APCD’s 2012 CEQA Handbook, Technical Appendices, page 4-4. Naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) has been identified by the state Air Resources Board (ARB) as a toxic air contaminant. Serpentine and ultramafic rocks are very common throughout California and may contain naturally occurring asbestos. The APCD has identified that NOA may be present throughout the City of San Luis Obispo (APCD 2012 CEQA Handbook, Technical Appendix 4.4). The proposed project would result in grading and therefore may encounter NOA. Under the State Air Resources Board Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations, prior to any construction or grading activities at the site, the applicant must comply with all applicable requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM, which include a geologic investigation to determine if NOA is present, and if applicable, preparation of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan and/or an Asbestos Health and Safety Program. Therefore, impacts related to NOA are considered to be significant but mitigable. The project will include grading and interior demolition, which has the potential to disturb asbestos that is often found in older structures as well as underground utility pipes and pipelines (i.e. transite pipes or insulation on pipes). Demolition can have potential negative air quality impacts, including issues surrounding proper handling, demolition, and disposal of asbestos containing material (ACM). As such, the project may be subject to various regulatory jurisdictions, including the requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40CFR61, Subpart M – asbestos NESHAP). Impacts related to the proposed demolition of existing structures on the subject site are considered to be significant but mitigable. Operational Screening Criteria for Project Impacts: Table 1-1 of the CEQA Air Quality Handbook indicates that the construction of an apartment building (low rise) with less than 109 dwelling units would not exceed the threshold of significance for the APCD Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Annual Bright Line threshold (MT CO2e). The threshold of significance for reactive organic gases (ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) is 25 pounds per day; this threshold would not be exceeded by the proposed project (maximum size resulting in a potentially significant impact is stated at 94 dwelling units). Air emission modeling using CaleeMod confirms that the project would not generate emissions exceeding APCD operational thresholds of significance. The total daily operational emissions would be: 4.54 pounds/day of ROG+NOx; 0.10 pounds/day of DPM; 1.31 pounds/day of PM10; and 13.4 pounds per day of carbon monoxide (CO). Therefore, operational phase air quality impacts are considered less than significant. e) The project includes the development of an affordable housing residential care facility, as anticipated by the R-1, R-2 and C/OS-40 (Low-Density and Medium-Density Residential and Conservation/Open Space) zoning and Land Use Element Program 8.6, and therefore would not include any land uses which would have the potential to produce objectionable odors in 12 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 93 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact the area. There are no uses in the area that generate objectionable odors that may affect future residents, employees, or visitors. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measure AQ 1: Prior to any construction activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that a geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if the area disturbed is exempt from the Asbestos Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) regulations. An exemption request must be filed with the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD), as applicable. If the site is not exempt from the requirements of the regulation, the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. This may include development of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan and Asbestos Health and Safety Program for approval by the APCD. Mitigation Measure AQ 2: Any scheduled demolition activities or disturbance, removal, or relocation of utility pipelines shall be coordinated with the APCD Enforcement Division at (805) 781-5912 to ensure compliance with NESHAP, which include, but are not limited to: 1) written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities commencing, to the APCD, 2) asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Consultant, and, 3) applicable removal and disposal requirements of identified ACM. Mitigation Measure AQ 3: During construction/ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall implement the following particulate (dust) control measures. These measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, modify practices as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. a. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible. b. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the APCD’s limit of 20% opacity for no greater than 3 minutes in any 60 minute period. Increased watering frequency will be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 m.p.h. and cessation of grading activities during periods of winds over 25 m.p.h. Reclaimed (non-potable) water is to be used in all construction and dust-control work. c. All dirt stock pile areas (if any) shall be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as needed. d. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil disturbing activities. e. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established. f. 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. g. 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. h. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 m.p.h. on any unpaved surface at the construction site. i. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, are to 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 California Vehicle Code Section 23114. j. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. k. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when feasible. l. All PM10 mitigation measures required shall be shown on grading and building plans. m. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below the APCD’s limit of 20% opacity for no greater than 3 minutes in any 60 minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition. Mitigation Measure AQ 4: Prior to any construction activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that all equipment and operations are compliant with California Air Resource Board and APCD permitting requirements, by contacting the APCD Engineering Division at (805) 781-5912 for specific information regarding permitting requirements. 13 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 94 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Mitigation Measure AQ 5: To reduce sensitive receptor emissions impact of diesel vehicles and equipment used to construct the project and export soil from the site, the applicant shall implement the following idling control techniques: 1. California Diesel Idling Regulations a. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles: 1. Shall not idle the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation; and, 2. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater than 5.0 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of restricted area, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation. b. Off-road diesel equipment shall comply with the 5 minute idling restriction identified in Section 2449(d)(2) of the California Air Resources Board’s In-Use off-Road Diesel regulation. c. Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers and operators of the state’s 5 minute idling limit. 2. Diesel Idling restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors (residential homes). In addition to the State required diesel idling requirements, the project applicant shall comply with these more restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to nearby sensitive receptors: a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors. b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be permitted. c. Use of alternative fueled equipment is recommended. d. Signs that specify the no idling areas must be posed and enforces at the site. 3. Soil Transport. The final volume of soil that will be hauled off-site, together with the fleet mix, hauling route, and number of trips per day will need to be identified for the APCD. Specific standards and conditions will apply. Mitigation Measure AQ 6: Prior to issuance of construction permits, construction and architectural plans shall note the requirement to use low VOC architectural coatings (71 grams/liter or less). The applicant or contractor shall submit documentation of compliance to the City Community Development Department prior to final inspection. Conclusion: With recommended construction mitigation measures, the project will have a less than significant impact on air quality. 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? 5,17, 18,28, 29, 31 --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? 5,17, 18,28, 31 --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? 5,17, 18,28, 31 --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? 5,17, 18,28, 29, 31 --X-- 14 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 95 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? 5,17, 18, 31 --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? 5,17, 18, 31 --X-- Evaluation The urbanized area of the City of San Luis Obispo lies at the convergence of two main geologic features: the Los Osos Valley which drains westerly into Morro Bay via Los Osos Creek, and the San Luis Valley which drains to the south‐ southwest into the Pacific Ocean at Avila Beach via San Luis Obispo Creek. San Luis Obispo, Stenner, Prefumo, and Brizzolara Creeks, and numerous tributary channels pass through the city, providing important riparian habitat and migration corridors connecting urbanized areas to less‐developed habitats in the larger area surrounding the City. Much of area outside the city limits consist of open rangeland grazed year round, along with agricultural lands dominated by annual crop rotations and vineyards. A variety of natural habitats and associated plant communities are present within the City, and support a diverse array of native plants and resident, migratory, and locally nomadic wildlife species, some of which are considered as rare, threatened, or endangered species. This City of San Luis Obispo also maintains a list of “Species of Local Concern”. Protective measures are therefore identified in the Conservation and Open Space for rare, threatened, endangered, or species of local concern. However, the largest concentrations of natural and native habitats are located in the larger and less developed areas outside the city limits. The following discussion, as outlined in the LUCE Update EIR, provides a general overview of the habitat type found on the project site: Urban/Developed Habitats: Based on a project site visit and observations of the property, the site exhibits the characteristics associated with the “Urban/Developed” habitat commonly found concentrated within and adjacent to the developed portions of the City, and in discrete areas adjacent to Highway 1 and Broad Street/Highway 227. These areas typically provide low potential to support native plant or animal species occurrences. Within the City limits, occurrences of sensitive natural habitats are present in low‐lying areas (riparian and wetland areas), and on undeveloped hills and steep slopes above the Urban Reserve or development limit lines (coastal scrub, chaparral, woodlands, and grasslands). Wildlife occurrences within urban/developed areas would consist primarily of urban‐ adapted avian species such as house sparrow (Passer domesticus) and Eurasian collared dove (Streptopelia decaocto) utilizing the abundant tree canopy and concentrated food sources, common animal species adapted to human presence such as raccoon (Procyon lotor), opossum (Didelphis virginiana), and striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), and aquatic, semi‐aquatic, and terrestrial species resident in or utilizing riparian areas. Based on the site’s proximity to undeveloped open space, additional wildlife uses may include foraging by birds and mammals, nesting/roosting activities by birds and bats, and travel/migration by mammals such as coyote (Canis latrans), gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargentus), raccoon, opossum, mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), and badger (Taxidea taxus). (a-d) Based on City staff evaluation of the site, including site visits conducted on July 6, 2016 and August 2, 2016, the project site is dominated by non-native annual grassland, with very low potential to support special-status plant species or those of local concern. The site contains fairly mature landscaping including trees and shrubs, including several oak trees adjacent to the existing Sunny Acres Children’s Home. The mature landscaping present at the project site provides the tree and shrub habitats that have the potential to support wildlife habitat limited primarily to urban-adapted avian and common wildlife species discussed above. In November 2015, City staff conducted a California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) inquiry, which revealed that the Western mastiff bat had been recorded in the proximity of the site. A report produced by Gregory Smith (2015), biologist, determined that the existing structure does not provide openings consistent with the described requirements for the Western mastiff bat. The report states “with the lack of records for the species in San Luis Obispo County, the negative findings of numerous surveys at Hearst Castle, and the lack of suitable roost sites on the Bishop Street address (Children’s Home), it would be improbable that this species is present in the project site.” The site does not support riparian or wetland areas. Implementation of the project will include compliance with the stormwater management and erosion and sedimentation control ordinances and policies, which would mitigate for any potential indirect impacts to surface and jurisdictional waters located outside of the project area. 15 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 96 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Therefore, based on the habitat present onsite, City staff observations, and proposed development footprint, potential impacts to special-status species and species of local concern and their habitat would be less than significant with the mitigation measures described below. d) The project includes the removal of one 24 inch oak tree and nine pepper trees, which have the potential to support nesting habitat for birds. Grassland habitat presents the potential for ground nesting birds. The removal of trees and construction activity proximate to nests may result in abandonment of eggs and potential avian harm or mortality, resulting in a potentially significant impact. This impact would be mitigated to less than significant by implementation of mitigation identified below, which requires either avoidance of tree removal and construction within the nesting bird season, or pre-construction surveys and avoidance measures to ensure nests, eggs, and nesting birds are not harmed. (e) No heritage trees or significant native vegetation exist on the portion of the site to be developed. A mature native tree and several non-native landscaping trees and shrubs would be removed as part of the proposed project development. This includes a 24 inch oak tree, pepper trees and bushes. The project would require grading and development proximate to six oak trees. Grading and development within the root zones of these trees, including soil compaction and changes to existing drainage patterns, may impact the health of these trees, resulting in a potentially significant impact. Mitigation is identified below, which would require protection fencing installed at the drip-line of these trees to prevent inadvertent harm to the root zones, canopy, and overlying soils of these trees. Based on implementation of this mitigation, potential impacts would be mitigated to less than significant. The landscape plan indicates a robust planting scheme that includes planting 23 evergreen shade trees including oak trees, and drought tolerant shrubs and grasses. The applicant would plant eight 15-gallon coast live oak trees onsite, which would mitigate for the loss of the one mature coast live oak tree and any potential impacts to the oak trees to remain onsite. Please refer to the project Landscape Plan for a detailed list of proposed landscaping scheme and planting palate. f) The project site is not part of a local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan; therefore, no impact would occur. Mitigation Measure BIO 1: Prior to commencement of construction, to avoid conflicts with nesting birds, construction activities shall not be allowed during the nesting bird season (March to September), unless a City-approved and applicant funded qualified biologist has surveyed the impact zone and determined that no nesting bird activities would be adversely impacted. If any evidence of nesting activities is found, the biologist will determine if any construction activities can occur during the nesting period and to what extent. The results of the surveys will be passed immediately to the City with possible recommendations for variable buffer zones, as needed, around individual nests. Mitigation Measure BIO-2: The applicant shall limit tree removal to no more than one 24 inch coast live oak tree and nine pepper trees and plant at least 23 evergreen shade trees site, eight of which shall be 15-gallon coast live oak trees. Prior to construction permit issuance, construction plans shall clearly delineate all trees within 50 feet of the proposed project, and shall show which trees are to be removed or impacted, and which trees are to remain unharmed. Prior to any ground disturbing activities, adequate protection measures (e.g., sturdy fencing) per the approved construction plans, shall be installed to protect those trees identified to remain unharmed as well as to minimize impacts for those trees identified as being impacted. Conclusion: With the recommended mitigation measures, the project will have a less than significant impact on biological resources. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource as defined in §15064.5. 5, 23, 24,26, 31,36 --X-- b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5) 23,24, 26,31, 37 --X-- c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? 5, 31,37 --X-- 16 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 97 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? 5, 24, 31 --X-- Evaluation Pre-Historic Setting: As outlined in the City’s LUCE Update EIR, archaeological evidence demonstrates that Native American groups (including the Chumash) have occupied the Central Coast for at least 10,000 years, and that Native American use of the central coast region may have begun during the late Pleistocene, as early as 9000 B.C., demonstrating that historical resources began their accumulation on the central coast during the prehistoric era. The City of San Luis Obispo is located within the area historically occupied by the Obispeño Chumash, the northernmost of the Chumash people of California. The Obispeño Chumash occupied much of San Luis Obispo County, including the Arroyo Grande area, and from the Santa Maria River north to approximately Point Estero. The earliest evidence of human occupation in the region comes from archaeological sites along the coast. Based on the results of an Archaeological Inventory (CRMS 2006), no archaeological resources were documented within or proximate to the project site. Paleontological Setting. The Pleistocene history of the region is marked by glacially controlled sea level fluctuations and tectonic uplift during which the shoreline advanced and retreated as much as 30 miles across the continental shelf. Sea level advance cut a system of marine terraces, 12 of which are exposed in the Point San Luis area 8‐9 miles southwest of the city. These terraces range in age from 83,000 to 49,000 years, and reach elevations of 79 feet above modern sea level. The formations that compose these terraces are the most paleontologically productive in the region. The only fossil resources likely to occur in the vicinity are of Quaternary (Pleistocene) age. The Quaternary is the most recent of the three Periods of the Cenozoic Era in the geologic time scale. It follows the Tertiary Period, spanning from about 2,588,000 years ago to the present. The Quaternary includes two geologic epochs: the older Pleistocene‐‐sometimes known as the "Ice Ages"‐‐ and the younger Holocene, which began approximately 10,000 years before present (ybp). The Pleistocene epoch began approximately 1,800,000 ybp. On the basis of vertebrate fauna from the nonmarine, late Cenozoic deposits in the San Francisco Bay region, two major divisions of Pleistocene‐age fossils are recognized in California: the older Irvingtonian and the younger Rancholabrean. The Rancholabrean fauna includes bison and other large mammals such as mammoths, mastodons, camels, horses, and ground sloths, as well as other species alive today. There are three vertebrate localities documented along the coast within 9 miles of the city. These localities occur in Pleistocene fluvial deposits overlying marine terraces, and include assemblages of the Rancholabrean mammals Equus sp. and E. occidentalis (horse); Camelops sp. and C. hesternus (camel); Bison antiquus and B. latifrons (bison), and Mammut americanum (mammoth). Other, more distal localities in San Luis Obispo County are noted as well. The geologic formation underlying the project site is Franciscan Complex Melange (KJfm), Mesozoic age (Cretaceous to Jurassic), which has the potential to produce fossils. Historic Resource Setting: The area of San Luis Obispo became colonialized by the Spanish Incursion initially in 1542, with the first official settlement on Chumash Territory occurring in 1772, when the Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa was established. By the 1870’s (after the earliest arrivals of Chinese immigrants in 1869), a Chinatown district had been established in the downtown area near Palm and Morro Street. By 1875, 2,500 residents were documented in a 4-square mile area around what is now the City of San Luis Obispo. By 1901, the City was served by the Pacific Coast Railway and mainline Southern Pacific, and in 1903 the California Polytechnic State University was established. The last era of growth generally lasted from 1945 to the present. Many of the residential subdivisions in the Foothill and Laguna Lake area were developed between 1945 and 1970 and the city’s population increased by 53% during this time. The subject property at 1600 Bishop Street is referred to as the Sunny Acres Children’s Home. A historic evaluation of the Sunny Acres Children’s Home was conducted by Bertrando & Bertrando Research Consultants (October 1998, Attachment 3). a) The Bertando & Bertrando evaluation (October 1998, Attachment 3) states that Sunny Acres is an example of Lombard or Milanese Romanesque style architecture designed by the William Mooser Company, a well -known San Francisco architectural firm. This style was popular in the l920's, particularly in regards to academic buildings. The structure has been subjected to years of vandalism; however, the exterior of the building remains generally intact. The building has maintained its integrity in the exterior brick façade and in the architectural details such as the gable end stepped, arched corbels of brick and radiating brick arches above the windows. The structure occupies its original site, and its exterior character maintains enough of its historic character to be recognized as a historic resource. It is an important and conspicuous landmark above Johnson Avenue whose similarity of use with its neighboring structures, although not in its aesthetic style, defines a geographical area that 17 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 98 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact contains the history of public care in the County of San Luis Obispo. The evaluation concludes that the structure meets the eligibility criteria of the California Register of Historical Resources, and meets local criteria for designation as a historic resource. Therefore, the Sunny Acres Children’s Home meets the criteria for consideration as a historical resource pursuant to CEQA. The project is proposing an adaptive reuse and rehabilitation of the Sunny Acres Children’s Home as part of a 34 unit, very- low-income affordable housing residential care facility. The project proposal includes adaptive reuse of the existing structure for 13 residential units, a 700-square foot community room, and a 212-square foot office and the construction of 3 new residential structures below the Sunny Acres Home. The project will be reviewed and conditioned by the City of San Luis Obispo Cultural Heritage Committee for compliance with the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior’s (SOI) Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse The overall visual character of the Children’s Home and prominent architectural elements will remain intact; this includes the building shape, exterior brick walls, principal entry to the building, gable ends, arched brick corbels, radiating brick arches above the windows and doors, and clay-tiled roof/parapet. The brick exterior will be repaired as needed and all paint and graffiti will be removed per SOI standards (Chemical or physical treatments will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatment that cause damage to historic materials will not be used). The clay tiles will be removed to repair the roof and put back in place. Broken tiles will be replaced with in-kind clay tiles that match the existing tiles. All of the existing windows have been damaged beyond repair and the project proposes to replace the windows with new fiberglass single hung windows. This is consistent with the SOI standard that states where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and where possible, materials. With incorporation of SOI standards for the proposed rehabilitation and adaptive reuse will not result in adverse impacts to historical resources. New Development The setting surrounding of the Sunny Acres Children’s Home has experienced considerable urbanization with the development of nearby County Government buildings to the south and west and single-family residences to the north of the site. The proposed new structures for the site will be located downslope of the Sunny Acres Children’s Home and designed to assume a secondary position to the Children’s Home. The buildings are clearly differentiated from the Home by their use of materials (such a stucco), modern design, and overall lower building height. The new structures share similar architectural features, such as the use of a brick exterior façade and radiating brick arches or brick trim above the windows and doors. The new buildings will not overwhelm the Children’s Home and will not obscure views of the primary elevations of the structure. The distinctiveness of the Sunny Acres Children’s Home would remain intact and the project would not result in a significant impact to historic resources. b, d) The property does not contain any known prehistoric or historic archaeological resources identified on City maintained resource maps, but is considered an archaeologically and historically sensitive area. A cultural resources inventory prepared for the project included a Phase I archaeological survey of the subject property to determine the presence or likelihood of archaeological historical resources. The surface survey resulted in no evidence of prehistoric or historic archaeological materials (CRMS 2006). In order to reduce potential impacts to unknown cultural resources, which could be impacted during ground disturbance activities, mitigation is identified below, which requires that construction activities cease in the area of the finding until the resource can be assessed. In the unlikely event that the project results in the discovery of human remains, standard protocol and notifications shall occur, as identified below. Therefore, potential impacts to archaeological resources would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. c) The geologic formation underlying the project site is Franciscan Complex Melange (KJfm), Mesozoic age (Cretaceous to Jurassic), which has the potential to produce fossils. Based on the limited area of disturbance, and past grading and development that has occurred in the areas proposed for grading, the potential for significant paleontological discovery is low. Therefore, potential impacts to paleontological resources would be less than significant. Mitigation Measure CR 1: In the event archeological resources and/or human remains are unearthed or discovered during any construction activities, the following standards apply: 18 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 99 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a. Construction activities shall cease, and the City Community Development Department shall be notified so that the extent and location of discovered materials may be recorded by a qualified archaeologist, and disposition of artifacts may be accomplished in accordance with state and federal law. b. If human remains are unearthed, the applicant shall notify the City Community Development Department and shall comply with State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, which requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County of San Luis Obispo Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the human remains are determined to be Native American, the County Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours, which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. Conclusion: Based on the analysis presented above, the project will have a less than significant impact on cultural resources. 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: 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. 4,9, 12,14, 28,31, 37 --X-- II. Strong seismic ground shaking? 4,9, 12,14, 28,31, 37 --X-- III. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 4,9, 12,14, 28,31, 37 --X-- IV. Landslides? 4,9, 12,14, 28,31 --X-- b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 4,9, 12,14, 28,31, 34,37 --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? 4,9, 12,14, 28,31, 34,37 --X-- d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1802.3.2 [Table 1806.2) of the California Building Code (2007) [2010], creating substantial risks to life or property? 4,9, 12,14, 28,31, 34,37 --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? 28 --X-- Evaluation As discussed in the recent City LUCE Update EIR, San Luis Obispo lies within the southern Coast Range Geomorphic Province. This province lies between the Central Valley of California and the Pacific Ocean and extends from Oregon to 19 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 100 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact northern Santa Barbara County. The Coast Range province is structurally complex, and is comprised of sub‐parallel northwest‐ southeast trending faults, folds, and mountain ranges. Rock types in the San Luis Obispo area are mainly comprised of volcanic, metavolcanics, and a mixture of serpentinite and greywacke sandstone. These rocks are highly fractured and are part of the Mesozoic aged Franciscan Formation. Intrusive and extrusive volcanic deposits of Tertiary age and marine sedimentary deposits of the Miocene aged Monterey Formation are also found in the area. The most distinctive geomorphological feature of the San Luis Obispo area is the series of Tertiary aged volcanic plugs (remnants of volcanoes) which extend from the City of San Luis Obispo northwesterly to Morro Bay. Hollister Peak, Bishop Peak, Cerro San Luis Obispo, Islay Hill, and Morro Rock are all comprised of these volcanic plugs. A Geotechnical Feasibility Study was conducted for the project site (Earth Systems Pacific 2007). The results of that evaluation are incorporated into the discussion below. Faulting and Seismic Activity: The predominant northwest‐southeast trending structures of the Coast Range Province are related to the San Andreas Fault Transform Boundary. Other faults in the San Luis Obispo area that are considered active or potentially active include the San Juan Fault, the East and West Huasna Faults, the Nacimiento Fault Zone, the Oceano Fault, the Oceanic Fault, Cambria Fault, the Edna Fault, the Hosgri Fault, and the Los Osos Fault. The East and West Huasna Faults, the Nacimiento Fault Zone, the Cambria Fault, and the Edna Fault have not yet been officially classified by the California Division of Mines and Geology. The Alquist‐Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (formerly known as a Special Studies Zone) is an area within 500 feet from a known active fault trace that has been designated by the State Geologist. Per the Alquist‐Priolo legislation, no structure for human occupancy is permitted on the trace of an active fault. The portion of the fault zone closest to the city is located near the southern flank of the Los Osos Valley, northwest of Laguna Lake, but lies just outside of the city limits. The Los Osos Fault is located approximately three miles to the southwest of the project site. The Cambria Fault, which is not considered active, is located approximately one mile from the project site. Seismically Induced Ground Acceleration: Seismically induced ground acceleration is the shaking motion that is produced by an earthquake. Probabilistic modeling is done to predict future ground accelerations, taking into consideration design basis earthquake ground motion, applicable to residential or commercial, or upper‐bound earthquake ground motion, applied to public use facilities like schools or hospitals. Landslides: Landslides occur when the underlying support can no longer maintain the load of material above it, causing a slope failure. Ground shaking and landslide hazards are mapped by the City and are shown in the General Plan. Much of the development in San Luis Obispo is in valleys, where there is low potential for slope instability. However, the city contains extensive hillsides. Several are underlain by the rocks of the Franciscan group, which is a source of significant slope instability. The actual risk of slope instability is identified by investigation of specific sites, including subsurface sampling, by qualified professionals. The building code requires site‐specific investigations and design proposals by qualified professionals in areas that are susceptible to slope instability and landslides. Evidence of slope failures was documented in the steeper slopes northeast of the project site; however, no evidence of slumps landslide activity, or slope failure was noted within the area proposed for development. Liquefaction: Liquefaction is defined as the transformation of a granular material from a solid state to a liquefied state as a consequence of increased pore water pressure. As a result, structures built on this material can sink into the alluvium, buried structures may rise to the surface or materials on sloped surfaces may run downhill. Other effects of liquefaction include lateral spread, flow failures, ground oscillations, and loss of bearing strength. Liquefaction is intrinsically linked with the depth of groundwater below the site and the types of sediments underlying an area. The soils in the San Luis Obispo area that are most susceptible to ground shaking, and which contain shallow ground water, are the ones most likely to have a potential for settlement and for liquefaction. The actual risk of settlement or liquefaction is identified by investigation of specific sites, including subsurface sampling, by qualified professionals. Previous investigations have found that the risk of settlement for new construction can be reduced to an acceptable level through careful site preparation and proper foundation design, and that the actual risk of liquefaction is low. 20 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 101 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Differential Settlement: Differential settlement is the downward movement of the land surface resulting from the compression of void space in underlying soils. This compression can occur naturally with the accumulation of sediments over porous alluvial soils within river valleys. Settlement can also result from human activities including improperly placed artificial fill, and structures built on soils or bedrock materials with differential settlement rates. This phenomenon can alter local drainage patterns and result in structural damage. Portions of the City have been identified as possibly being underlain by soft organic soils, resulting in a high potential for settlement (General Plan Safety Element). Subsidence: Ground subsidence occurs where underlying geologic materials (typically loosely consolidated surficial silt, sand, and gravel) undergo a change from looser to tighter compaction. As a result, the ground surface subsides (lowers). Where compaction increases (either naturally, or due to construction), the geologic materials become more dense. As a result, the ground surface overlying the compacting subsurface materials subsides as the underlying geologic materials settle. Ground subsidence can occur under several different conditions, including: • Ground‐water withdrawal (water is removed from pore space as the water table drops, causing the ground surface to settle) • Tectonic subsidence (ground surface is warped or dropped lower due to geologic factors such as faulting or folding); and • Earthquake‐induced shaking causes sediment liquefaction, which in turn can lead to ground‐surface subsidence. Expansive Soils: Expansive soils are soils that are generally clayey, swell when wetted and shrink when dried. Wetting can occur in a number of ways (i.e., absorption from the air, rainfall, groundwater fluctuations, lawn watering, broken water or sewer lines, etc.). Soil expansion can cause subtle damage that can reduce structural integrity. Portions of the city are known to exhibit the soil types (refer to General Plan Safety Element) identified as having a moderate to high potential for expansion. The underlying soils have a moderate to high expansion potential. a) Although there are no fault lines on the project site or within close proximity, the site is located in an area of “High Seismic Hazards,” specifically Seismic Zone D, which means that future buildings constructed on the site will most likely be subjected to excessive ground shaking in the event of an earthquake. Structures must be designed in compliance with seismic design criteria established in the California Building Code for Seismic Zone D. To minimize this potential impact, the California Building Code and City Codes require new structures be built to resist such shaking or to remain standing in an earthquake. The Safety Element of the General Plan indicates that the project site has a moderate landslide potential. Development will be required to comply with all City Codes, including Building Codes, which require proper documentation of soil characteristics for designing structurally sound buildings to ensure new structures are built to resist such shaking or to remain standing in an earthquake. The underlying soil map units include: 130 Diablo and Cibo clays, 9 to 15 percent slopes and 164 Los Osos-Diablo complex, 15 to 30 percent slopes. Soil types with dominating clay composition typically have a low liquefaction risk; and due to the presence of shallow bedrock, the potential for liquefaction to affect the site is considered negligible. Based on the geotechnical evaluation of the project site, seismically induced settlement is considered to be very low. The potential for seismically induced slope failure is present in the steeper hillsides to the northeast. Based on the gently to moderately sloping topography of the project site, and lack of evidence of slope failure or slope breaks within or proximate to the proposed development area, this risk is not considered significant. Incorporation of required California Building Code, City Codes, and development in accordance with the General Plan Safety Element will reduce impacts related to seismic and geologic hazards to less than significant levels. b) The erosion hazard of the underlying soils is moderate. The most significant source of potential erosion of on-site soils would be during initial site ground disturbance/construction and from stormwater runoff. The applicant has provided a Stormwater Control Plan (Rick Engineering 2016), which would be implemented during construction of the project. Erosion control measures that would be required for the project during construction may include, but not be limited to: scheduling ground disturbance to avoid the rain events (if feasible), use of hydroseeding, planting, and mulch to stabilize soils, dust control to stabilize stockpiles, unpaved roads, and graded areas, protection of storm drain inlets, use of sediment traps, construction of a stabilized page of aggregate and filter fabric at the construction access entrance, street sweeping, and use of silt fencing, sand/gravel bags, and fiber rolls. All construction projects in the city require the installation, maintenance, routine inspection (i.e. weekly, before predicted rain events, after rain events and during prolonged rain events) and the repair or replacement, as needed, of best management practices (BMPs) throughout the course of the construction project in order to protect local water quality. Most BMPs (i.e. concrete / tool washouts and street sweeping) are required year long and others are specifically required during the rainy season (i.e. October 15th through April 15th) or prior to a predicted rain event, even if that rain event 21 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 102 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact is predicted during the summer months. Enforcement of stormwater regulations occurs all year long. Failure to develop a plan and/or failure to implement the plan in accordance with the Central Coast RWQCB’s erosion and sediment control requirements would result in the issuance of a “Notice to Comply.” For sites with exposed soil, a Project Stop Work Notice may be issued at this time unless erosion and siltation control measures are actively being installed. After October 15th, a Project Stop Work Notice would be issued for all work except the installation of erosion control measures, and the RWQCB would be notified. Therefore, based on compliance with existing state and local regulations, potential impacts as a result of erosion and down- gradient sedimentation would be less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are necessary. During operation of the project, proposed landscaping planting, rain garden planters, bio-treatment areas, vegetated or cobble swales proposed throughout the site will help ensure the natural retention of stormwater and help address potential erosion. Erosion impacts are considered less than significant. c) As noted above, the project site is located in an area with moderate landslide potential. Based on field observations by City staff, and the results of the geotechnical investigation, there is no evidence of soil slump or slope failure within the area proposed for development. Based on the underlying soils and shallow bedrock, the potential for liquefaction is negligible. There is no known occurrence of lateral spreading or subsidence in the project area. Incorporation of required California Building Code, City Codes, and development in accordance with the General Plan Safety Element will reduce impacts related to soils and geologic hazards to less than significant levels. d) The underlying soils have high shrink-swell characteristics, and moderate to high expansion potential. Incorporation of required California Building Code, City Codes, and development in accordance with the General Plan Safety Element will reduce impacts related to expansive soils to less than significant levels. e) The proposed project will be required to connect to the City’s sewer system. Septic tanks or alternative wastewater systems are not proposed and will not be used on the site; therefore, no impact would occur. Conclusion: With proposed development in accordance with applicable CBC and local Building Code requirements, and implementation of the project Stormwater Control Plan and Conceptual Landscape Plan, impacts are considered 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? 1,13, 20,21, 31 X b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. 1,13, 20,21, 31 X Evaluation As outlined in the recent City LUCE Update EIR, prominent GHG emissions contributing to the greenhouse effect are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Anthropogenic (human‐caused) GHG emissions in excess of natural ambient concentrations are responsible for intensifying the greenhouse effect and have led to a trend of unnatural warming of the earth’s climate, known as global climate change or global warming. Global sources of GHG emissions include fossil fuel combustion in both stationary and mobile sources, fugitive emissions from landfills, wastewater treatment, agricultural sources, deforestation, high global warming potential (GWP) gases from industrial and chemical sources, and other activities. The major sources GHG emissions in the City are transportation‐related emissions from cars and trucks, followed by energy consumption in buildings. These local sources constitute the majority of GHG emissions from community‐wide activities in the city, and combine with regional, statewide, national, and global GHG emissions that result in the cumulative effect of global warming, which is causing global climate change. A minimum level of climate change is expected to occur despite local, statewide, or other global efforts to mitigate GHG emissions. The increase in average global temperatures will result in a number of locally‐important adverse effects, including sea‐level rise, changes to precipitation patterns, and increased frequency of extreme weather events such as heat waves, drought, and severe storms. 22 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 103 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Statewide legislation, rules and regulations that apply to GHG emissions associated with the Project Setting include the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill [AB] 32), the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (Senate Bill [SB] 375), Advanced Clean Cars Rule, Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Renewable Portfolio Standard, California Building Codes, and recent amendments to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to SB 97 with respect to analysis of GHG emissions and climate change impacts. Plans, policies and guidelines have also been adopted at the regional and local level that address GHG emissions and climate change effects in the City. The San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) adopted a CEQA Review Handbook, as well as guidance on GHG emission thresholds and supporting evidence, that may be applied by lead agencies within San Luis Obispo County. The City also adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) that includes a GHG emissions inventory, identifies GHG emission reduction targets, and includes specific measures and implementing actions to both reduce community‐wide GHG emissions. The CAP also includes measures and actions to help the city build resiliency and adapt to the effects of climate change. a, b) The proposed project will result in development located near to transit, services and employment centers. City policies recognize that compact development allows for more efficient use of existing infrastructure and Citywide efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The City’s CAP also recognizes that energy efficient design will result in significant energy savings, which result in emissions reductions. The emissions from project-related vehicle exhaust comprise the vast majority of the total project CO2 emissions; see Air Quality discussion is Section 3 (above) for discussion. The remaining project CO2 emissions are primarily from building heating systems and increased regional power plant electricity generation due to the project’s electrical demands. Based on the results of CalEEMod emissions modeling, the proposed project would not exceed the identified “Bright Line Threshold” of 1,150 metric tons CO2e (refer to Table 3 below). Table 3. GHG Emissions Annual Emissions (metric tons CO2e) Construction Emissions 246.36 Amortized (50 years) 4.93 Operational Emissions 309.77 Total 314.7 Bright-line Threshold 1,150.00 Mitigation Required No Based on the project’s consistency with the 2012 CAP and results of air emission modeling, the project would not result in cumulatively considerable generation of GHG, and impacts would be less than significant. Conclusion: Based on the analysis above, the project would not result in significant GHG impacts. 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? 4, 31 --X-- 23 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 104 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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? 4, 31 --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? 12 --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? 30, 31 --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? 1, 4 --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? 1, 4 --X-- g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 4, 17 --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? 4, 17, 31 --X-- Evaluation As outlined in the recent City LUCE Update EIR, the analysis of hazards and hazardous material impacts relates to hazards regarding safety risks posed by airport flight patterns, impeding of adopted emergency response/evacuation plans, and wildland fires where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas; and hazardous materials or substances regarding routine transport or disposal of substances, explosion or release of substances, and emissions or handling of substances within one‐quarter mile of an existing or planned school. The following is a brief outline of the primary identified hazards: Fire Hazards: Fires have the potential to cause significant losses to life, property, and the environment. Urban fire hazards result from the materials that make up the built environment, the size and organization of structures, and spacing of buildings. Additional factors that can accelerate fire hazards are availability of emergency access, available water volume and pressure for fire suppression, and response time for fire fighters. Fire hazard severity in rural areas, including areas on the edge between urban and rural land (commonly called the wildland interface), are highly influenced by the slope of the landscape and site vegetation and climate. This risk is somewhat amplified by the native, Mediterranean vegetation common to the rural setting in which the City is located that has evolved to rely on wildfires for its ecological sustainability. Where wildland fires may be a threat, plant fuels are often managed by replacement planting, grazing, plowing, or mechanical clearing. Hazardous Materials: Hazardous materials are defined as substances with physical and chemical properties of ignitability, corrosively, reactivity, or toxicity, which may pose a threat to human health or the environment. This includes, for example, chemical materials such as petroleum products, solvents, pesticides, herbicides, paints, metals, asbestos, and other regulated chemical materials. Additionally, hazards include known historical spills, leaks, illegal dumping, or other methods of release of hazardous materials to soil, sediment, groundwater, or surface water. If a historical release exists, then there is a risk associated with disturbing the historical release area. The potential for risks associated with hazardous materials are varied regionally. The primary risk concerns identified by the city, as stipulated in the City’s General Plan Safety Element, include radiation hazards and the transportation of hazardous materials in and around the city. Most of these incidents are related to the increasing frequency of transport of chemicals over roadways, railways or through industrial accidents. Highway 101 and a rail corridor are major transportation corridors through the San Luis Obispo area. 24 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 105 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Airport Hazards: The San Luis Obispo County Airport provides commuter, charter, and private aviation service to the area. The primary hazard associated with land uses near the airport is the risk of aircraft incidents on approach and take‐off. Aircraft flight operations are determined largely by the physical layout of the airport and rules of the Federal Aviation Administration. The County manages activities on the airport property through the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). As the means of fulfilling these basic obligations, the ALUC, must prepare and adopt Airport Land Use Plans for each airport within their jurisdiction. The policies in the ALUP are intended to minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards while providing for the orderly expansion of airports (Public Utility Code Section 21670(a)(2). The ALUC has developed an Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) for the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport that was first adopted in 1973, was updated in May 2005 and is currently being updated. The ALUP has identified safety zones with associated land use density and intensity restrictions. The ALUP defines these as: • Runway Protection Zones – Areas immediately adjacent to the ends of each active runway, within which the level of aviation safety risk is very high and in which, consequently, structures are prohibited and human activities are restricted to those which require only very low levels of occupancy. • Safety Areas S‐1 a through c– The area within the vicinity of which aircraft operate frequently or in conditions of reduced visibility at altitudes less than 500 feet above ground level (AGL). • Safety Area S‐2 – The area within the vicinity of which aircraft operate frequently or in conditions of reduced visibility at altitudes between 501 and 1000 feet above ground level (AGL). Because aircraft in Area S‐2 are at greater altitude and are less densely concentrated than in other portions of the Airport Planning Area, the overall level of aviation safety risk is considered to be lower than that in Area S‐1 or the Runway Protection Zones. a) The proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Construction of the proposed project would be required to comply with applicable building, health, fire, and safety codes. Hazardous materials would be used in varying amounts during construction and occupancy of the project. Construction and maintenance activities would use hazardous materials such as fuels (gasoline and diesel), oils, and lubricants; paints and paint thinners; glues; cleaners (which could include solvents and corrosives in addition to soaps and detergents); and possibly pesticides and herbicides. The amount of materials used would be small, so the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, as such uses would have to comply with applicable federal, state, and local regulations, including but not limited to Titles 8 and 22 of the CCR, the Uniform Fire Code, and Chapter 6.95 of the California Health and Safety Code. With respect to operation of the project, residential units do not generate significant amounts of hazardous materials, and only a minimal amount of routine “household” chemicals would be stored on-site. These materials would not create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. b,c) The proposed project is approximately 1/4 of a mile north east of San Luis Obispo Christian School and approximately 700 feet from the Child Development Resource Center of the Central Coast. As discussed above (refer to response to a), the proposed project would not result in the routine transport, use, disposal, handling, or emission of any hazardous materials that would create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment. Implementation of Title 49, Parts 171–180, of the Code of Federal Regulations and stipulations in the General Plan Safety Element would reduce any impacts associated with the potential for accidental release during construction or occupancy of the proposed project or by transporters picking up or delivering hazardous materials to the project site. These regulations establish standards by which hazardous materials would be transported, within and adjacent to the proposed project. Where transport of these materials occurs on roads, the California Highway Patrol is the responsible agency for enforcement of regulations. If potentially hazardous materials, including cleaning supplies, oils, paint, and fuels are stored onsite for continued maintenance of the residential units, the applicant would be required to prepare a Hazardous Materials Business Plan, which would approved by the County Department of Public Health. This plan would document the safe and legal storage and use of standard materials, including paints, oils, fuels, cleaning materials, and other compounds onsite. The project also includes interior demolition of an existing structure on the property (the Sunny Acres Children’s Home), which, given the age of the structures, could contain asbestos and lead. Asbestos, a naturally occurring fibrous material, was used as a fireproofing and insulating agent in building construction before being banned by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the 1970s. Because it was widely used prior to discovery of its negative health effects, asbestos can be found in a variety of building materials and components including sprayed-on acoustic ceiling materials, thermal insulation, wall and 25 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 106 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact ceiling texture, floor tiles, and pipe insulation. Asbestos is classified into two main categories: friable and non-friable. Friable asbestos can release asbestos fibers easily when disturbed and is considered Regulated Asbestos-Containing Material (RACM). Friable (easily crumbled) materials are particularly hazardous because inhalation of airborne fibers is the primary mode of asbestos entry into the body, which potentially causes lung cancer and asbestosis. Non-friable asbestos will release fibers less readily than RACM and is referred to as Category I or Category II, non-friable. Non-friable asbestos and encapsulated friable asbestos do not pose substantial health risks. The California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) considers asbestos-containing building materials (ACBM) to be hazardous when a sample contains more than 0.1 percent asbestos by weight; Cal/OSHA requires it to be handled by a licensed, qualified contractor. Lead can be found in paint, water pipes, plumbing solder, and in soils around buildings and structures with lead-based paint. In 1978, the federal government required the reduction of lead in house paint to less than 0.06 percent (600 parts per million [ppm]). However, some paints manufactured after 1978 for industrial uses or marine uses legally contain more than 0.06 percent lead. Exposure to lead can result in bioaccumulation of lead in the blood, soft tissues, and bones. Children are particularly susceptible to potential lead-related health problems because lead is easily absorbed into developing systems and organs. Prior to any building demolition, CCR Title 8 Section 5208 requires that a state-certified risk assessor conduct a risk assessment and/or paint inspection of all structures constructed prior to 1978 for the presence of asbestos. If such hazards are determined to exist on site, the risk assessor would prepare a site-specific hazard control plan detailing ACBM removal methods and specific instructions for providing protective clothing and gear for abatement personnel. If necessary, the project sponsor would be required to retain a state-certified ACBM removal contractor (independent of the risk assessor) to conduct the appropriate abatement measures as required by the plan. Wastes from abatement and demolition activities would be disposed of at a landfill(s) licensed to accept such waste. Once all abatement measures have been implemented, the risk assessor would conduct a clearance examination and provide written documentation to the City that testing and abatement have been completed in accordance with all federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Several regulations and guidelines pertain to abatement of and protection from exposure to lead-based paint. These include Construction Safety Order 1532.1 from Title 8 of the CCR and lead-based paint exposure guidelines provided by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). In California, lead-based paint abatement must be performed and monitored by contractors with appropriate certification from the California Department of Health Services. Compliance with existing regulation would ensure impacts related to hazardous materials exposure would be less than significant. Construction of the proposed project would require the use of fuels and materials, if spilled, could result in a hazard to the public. In addition to compliance with state and local water quality regulations (refer to Sections 6 and 9 of this Initial Study), the applicant would implement mitigation requiring the development and implementation of a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan, which would include regular inspection of equipment and materials, and feasible measures to quickly contain and clean up an accidental spill or leak. Any remaining materials onsite prior to construction would be removed and transported to an approved facility. The project would be subject to existing regulations regarding the legal storage and use of potentially hazardous materials used in construction and maintenance of the residential units. Therefore, based on compliance with existing regulations, and implementation of identified mitigation, potential impacts related to the accidental release of hazardous materials would be less than significant. d) The project site is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 as: Sunny Acres Community School, Site ID 40830002, DTSC Site Type: School Investigation, DTSC Status: No Action Required (DTSC 2016). A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was conducted for the site in 2003, in association with a previous demolition and redevelopment proposal by the San Luis Obispo County Office of Education. Based on the results of that investigation, the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) determined that “neither a release of hazardous material nor the presence of a naturally occurring hazardous material, which would pose a threat to human health or the environment under any land use, was indicated at the site, with the exception of the ACBM. SLOCOE should arrange for asbestos abatement by a licensed contractor during the demolition/renovation activities in accordance with the existing local, city and state regulations. DTSC concurs with the conclusion of the Phase I that no further environmental investigation is required and hereby approves the Phase I. As with any real property, if a previously unidentified contamination is discovered during school construction, the SLOCOE must stop construction at the area of concern, notify DTSC and take any actions required by DTSC” (DTSC 2004). 26 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 107 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact While the current proposal is not subject to the same regulations as SLOCOE, the potential for materials containing asbestos and lead requires the applicant to comply with existing regulations specific to the management and disposal of these potentially hazardous materials. As no further action is required, aside for compliance with existing regulations, this impact is considered less than significant. e, f) The project site is not located within an airport land use plan area or within 2 miles of a public use airport or airstrip. There are no private airstrips in the vicinity of the project site that would result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. g) The project would be subject to the requirements contained in the City’s emergency response and evacuation plans. The project does not include any features that would impede emergency response or evacuation. Therefore, impacts related to impaired implementation or physical interference with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan are considered less than significant. h) The project site is located in the City of San Luis Obispo, within a high fire hazard severity zone (see General Plan Safety Element Figure 5 Fire Hazard Severity Zone). The site is located at the urban/wildland interface, which presents a greater risk of exposure to wildfire, and a greater risk of ignition sources on the site resulting in a wildfire. The proposed project would be constructed consistent with the California Building Code and Fire Code, and would be reviewed and inspected for compliance by the City Fire Department prior to occupation. The project is required to comply with California Building Code Chapter 7A (Materials and Construction Methods for Exterior Wildfire Exposure), which requires the use of ignition-resistant materials and non-combustible construction. An existing fire hydrant onsite would be relocated during construction, and would be located adjacent to the existing and proposed buildings. The site design includes access suitable for emergency responders, including a fire truck turnout. Therefore, based on compliance with the California Building Code/Fire Code, potential impacts related to fire would be less than significant. Mitigation Measure HM 1: Prior to initiation of grading and construction, the applicant shall prepare and submit a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan to the City Community Development Department. The plan shall identify hazardous materials to be used on and off-site, and shall identify procedures for storage, distribution, and spill response. Equipment refueling shall be done in non-sensitive areas and such that spills can be easily and quickly contained and cleaned up without entering any existing stormwater drainage system or creek. The plan shall include procedures in the event of accidents or spills, identification of and contact information for immediate response personnel, and means to limit public access and exposure. Any necessary remedial work shall be done immediately to avoid surface or ground water contamination. The plan shall be implemented by the construction contractor, and verified by the City Public Works and Community Development Departments. Conclusion: Based on compliance with existing regulations, potential hazards and hazardous materials impacts are considered less than significant. 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? 5, 15,16, 27, 31 --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)? 5, 15,16, 27, 31, 35 --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? 5, 15,16, 27, 31 --X-- 27 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 108 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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? 5, 15,16, 27, 31 --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? 5,15,1 6, 27, 31 --X-- f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 5, 27, 31 --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? 4,5, 15,27, 31,38 --X-- h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? 4,5, 15,27, 31,38 --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? 4,5, 15,27, 31,38 --X-- j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 4, 31 --X-- Evaluation Water Supply. The applicant proposes to use City water as the domestic water source. Groundwater, the Whale Rock Reservoir, the Salinas Reservoir, and the Nacimiento Reservoir contribute water to the City’s supply. The water is treated at the City water treatment plant prior to distribution. Total annual water use in the City was 5,541 acre feet in 2012. The 2014 LUCE estimated that water demand will increase to 7,815 acre feet per year upon build-out. The estimated water supply is 9,980 acre feet, including the City’s primary water supply (7,815 acre feet), reliability reserve (1,214 acre feet), and secondary water supply (951 acre feet). Based on the City’s Urban Water Management Plan and 2014 LUCE Final EIR, the City does not anticipate a need for supplemental water supplies through the year 2035 and build-out of the LUCE. In October 2006, the City completed construction of a Water Reuse Project, which included eight miles of distribution pipelines and improvements to the City’s Water Reclamation Facility. In 2013, 176.82 acre feet of recycled water was used for landscape irrigation for several City parks, the Laguna Lake Golf Course, a middle school, landscaping along U.S. 101, and other landscape medians. The project site is located within the Water Reuse Master Plan Area, and the distribution system extends to the site. The Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) estimated that upon build-out of the City, including the project site, city-wide water demand would increase to 7,815 afy. The City’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan incorporates mandated water conservation targets in response to the severe drought conditions. The City’s 2015 interim target gallons per capita per day (GPCD) was 120, and the actual 2015 GPCD was 92; as noted in the Draft Plan, the City met and surpassed 2015 interim water use reduction targets. The City’s water supply includes the Salinas and Whale Rock reservoirs (6,940 afy, safe annual yield), Nacimiento reservoir (5,482 afy), and recycled water, which exceeds projected demand. Regarding future and continued water supply, conceptually, the City will use its contractual water supply from Nacimiento Reservoir first, with Whale Rock and Salinas used as needed to meet the City’s overall potable water demand. In 2016, this contractual water supply was increased from 3,380 acre-feet to 5,482 acre-feet annually, with the additional 2,102 acre-feet as a secondary water supply for use during water shortages. The City assumes it will continue to use these water supplies in this coordinated manner, to supply a projected 7,493 afy of water by 2035, including 5,482 afy of contractual water, 1,611 afy of supplier-produced surface water, and 400 afy of recycled water. The Plan includes an assessment of water supply reliability, and considers single and multiple dry water years, and includes a Water Shortage Contingency Plan including actions required during a short-term water supply emergency, including drought. Under a multiple dry year scenario, which assumes compliance with water conservation mandates (which was successfully accomplished in 2015), demand ranging between 6,314 afy (year 2020) and 5,329 afy (year 2035) would not exceed supply 28 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 109 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact (12,622 afy). Assuming water demand during a normal (non-drought) year, the estimated demand (7,779 afy in 2035) would not exceed normal year supply (12,772 afy). This indicates the City’s water resources are reliable during extended drought periods, and the City is confident in the reliability of its multi-source water supply portfolio. In addition, while it is not a requirement that Urban Water Management Plans address climate change, the City is concerned about the potential long-term effects of climate change on its water supply. While the City has secured an adequate water supply to serve the projected build- out of the City, and uses conservative water projection methods, the City continues to focus on securing supplemental water sources and promoting conservation to strengthen its multi-source water supply to withstand potential long-term effects of climate change. Hydrology. As discussed in the City’s LUCE Update EIR, the project site is located within the San Luis Obispo Creek Hydrologic Subarea of the Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit, an area that corresponds to the coastal draining watersheds west of the Coastal Range. The Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit stretches roughly 80 miles between the Santa Maria River and the Monterey County line and includes numerous individual stream systems. Within the Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit, the San Luis Obispo Creek watershed drains approximately 84 square miles. The City of San Luis Obispo is generally located within a low‐lying valley centered on San Luis Obispo Creek. San Luis Obispo Creek is one of four major drainage features that create flood hazards in the city, with the others being Stenner Creek, Prefumo Creek, and Old Garden Creek. In addition, many minor waterways drain into these creeks, and these can also present flood hazards. Because of the high surrounding hills and mountains in the area, the drainage sheds of these creeks are relatively small, but the steep slopes and high gradient can lead to intense, fast moving flood events in the city. According to the RWQCB, water quality in the San Luis Obispo Creek drainage system is generally considered to be good. However, the water quality fluctuates along with seasonal changes in flow rates. In summer months, when the flows decrease and dilution is reduced, water quality decreases. According to the RWQCB Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Project for San Luis Obispo Creek, the creek has been reported to exceed nutrient and pathogen levels. Groundwater within the San Luis Obispo Valley Sub‐basin flows toward the south‐southwest, following the general gradient of surface topography. Groundwater within the San Luis Obispo area is considered suitable for agricultural water supply, municipal and domestic supply, and industrial use. In order to evaluate the specific nature of the hydrology and water quality issues for the subject property, the project proponents have submitted a Preliminary Drainage Study (Rick Engineering 2016) and Storm Water Control Plan (Rick Engineering 2016). The intent of these reports are to address the drainage stormwater requirements set forth by the City and the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region. a, f) Implementation of the project would include grading and development within a gently to moderately sloping area. Disturbance of soils and use of equipment may result in the discharge of sediment, hydrocarbons, and other pollutants into the City storm system, and potentially the unnamed drainage to the northeast. Operation of the project would include use of parking areas; accidental leaks or spill may result in the transport of oils and fuels into stormwater and down-gradient surface waters. Discharge of any pollutants (e.g. herbicides, pesticides, janitorial cleaning products, and toxic substances such as motor oil, gasoline, and anti-freeze) or heated water (e.g. from steam cleaning sidewalks) into a storm water system or directly into surface waters is illegal and subject to enforcement action by the RWQCB. The proposed project is subject to several existing regulations and programs, including the City’s Storm Water Management Program, the 2014 LUCE, and Drainage Design Manual (DDM) of the Waterway Management Plan and Post Construction Requirements for storm water control. Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Pollution Prevention Methods (PPMs) are required to be incorporated into grading and construction plans for the short and long-term management and protection of water quality. Additional discussion of drainage and stormwater runoff requirements is provided in the response to impacts c, d, and e below. Based on compliance with existing regulations, and incorporation of identified mitigation measures to protect water quality, the project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, and potential impacts would be less than significant. b) Implementation of the proposed project is anticipated to require approximately 6.8 acre feet of water per year (afy). Based on review of the Urban Water Management Plan (2016) and review by the City Utilities Department, existing water supply is available to serve the project, and use of municipal water for the project would not deplete groundwater resources. 29 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 110 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact c,d,e) Under existing conditions, drainage generally sheet flows from northeast to southwest across the site. Immediately upland of the Sunny Acres Children’s Home, there is an existing sump area and fence line that splits the upland drainage and directs it around the building to both the northwest and southeast. The northeasterly upland drainage returns to sheet flow across the paved area northwest of the abandoned building and heads towards a seasonal drainage course adjacent to Fixlini Street, approximately 400 feet west of the site. Overflow from the sump area is directed along the south side of the existing driveway that tees off the main driveway to access the rear of the abandoned building. Further to the southeast, the main paved driveway is sloped back towards the hillside and it intercepts a portion of the upland drainage and conveys it southeasterly to an existing drainage basin near the County Probation building. Implementation of the project would result in a total of 31,693 square feet of impervious area (net increase of 11,483 square feet of impervious area). Due to its size and location, the project is subject to the Drainage Design Manual (DDM) of the Waterway Management Plan (WWMP) and Post Construction Requirements for storm water control. The proposed project will include the construction of residential units and associated hardscape and landscape. Based on the Preliminary Drainage Report provided by the applicant, the project would meet DDM requirements as summarized below. Discharge at Natural Locations. The proposed site layout follows the existing topography as much as possible and the outflow from the separate areas of the project is directed in their historical directions. Onsite Conveyance Design. Proposed onsite storm drain system will be sized to convey the 10-year storm event. Offsite Runoff Analyses, Design, and Mitigation. An offsite runoff tributary to the site is intercepted by an earthen berm east of the project site. The runoff would be split and conveyed around the site to outlet to cobble dissipaters on the north side and allowed to sheet flow to the west. Runoff from the project site will be treated before exiting the site, in conformance with Post Construction Requirements. Erosion Control and Storm Water Quality Management. The project would comply with the Storm Water Control Plan (Rick Engineering 2016), as approved by the RWQCB. Low impact development (LID) measures include the following: roof drains for the proposed buildings will be disconnected from the storm drain system; non-grouted pavers with underdrains are proposed to minimize runoff and provide storm water treatment; and bio-retention facilities will be incorporated into landscape design to provide runoff reduction and treatment. This project is located in the designated Storm Water Management Area 9, results in more than 2,500 sf of net impervious area, and would disturb over 22,500 square feet of area. Thus, this development is subject to the Central Coast RWQCB Post Construction Stormwater Management Requirements, adopted on March 6, 2014. The project includes bio-filtration treatment and non-grouted pavers systems with underdrains to comply with runoff retention requirements, and landscape areas will be used for water treatment and retention. Post-development peak flows, discharged from the site, shall not exceed pre-project peak flows for the 2- through 10-year storm events. Proposed onsite subsurface drainage facilities are designed to handle a storm of 25-year intensity. All surface flow facilities are sized to handle a storm of 100-year intensity (Rick Engineering 2016). Based on the analysis discussed above, and implementation of the BMPs identified in the project Drainage Plan and Storm Water Control Plan, water quality impacts will be reduced to the extent feasible. With the required incorporation of these measures, and adherence to the stormwater facilities operations and maintenance recommendations provided in the Drainage Plan and Stormwater Control Plan, impacts will be reduced to less than significant levels. g), h) Based on review of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map No. 06079C1069G (effective on11/16/2012), the project site is not located within a 100-year flood zone. The project would not impede or redirect flood waters. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. i), j) The proposed development is outside the zone of impacts from seiche or tsunami, and the existing upslope projects do not generate significant storm water runoff such to create a potential for inundation by mudflow. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measure HWQ-1: The Drainage Plan and Storm Water Control Plan (Rick Engineering 2016) on file in the Community Development Department prepared for the proposed project includes design features and recommended Best 30 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 111 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Management Practices and Low Impact Development measures for water quality control and stormwater management and quality via the proposed bio-filtration treatment, non-grouted pavers systems with underdrains, and use of landscape areas for water treatment and retention. These measures shall become required components of project development and the project proponent shall be required to implement these design features and recommendations as set forth and approved by the City Public Works Department and Regional Water Quality Control Board. Conclusion: With the implementation of the project Drainage Plan and Stormwater Control Plan designs and recommendations, impacts are considered less than significant. 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? 1, 10, 31 --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? 1, 9, 25, 31 --X-- c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? --X-- Evaluation a) The proposed development project is consistent with the development anticipated for the project site under the General Plan and zoning designation. The development of this site was anticipated in the General Plan, and the proposed residential care use is consistent with the vision for this area (designated as Special Focus Area 5: General Hospital Site). The project would not include any features that would physically divide an established community. Impacts are considered less than significant. b) The project site is currently occupied by the Sunny Acres facility, which was vacated in 1974. Surrounding uses include a residential neighborhood to the north/northwest, County facilities to the west, southwest, and southeast, and undeveloped open space to the east. The proposed project is subject to the City General Plan and Zoning Code, Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE), San Luis Obispo Creek Waterway Management Program, Community Design Guidelines, and Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines. These documents include standards to protect aesthetic quality and scenic viewsheds, biological resources, cultural resources, hydrological resources, and public health and safety. Specific requirements or policies identified in these documents are discussed in specific resource sections. Based on project design and compliance with existing regulations, the project would not be inconsistent with policies adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating environmental effects. c) The project site is not located in an area subject to a habitat conservation plan or community conservation plan; therefore, no impact would occur. Conclusion: Impacts are considered less than significant. 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? 5, 31 --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? 5, 31 --X-- Evaluation a, b) No known mineral resources are present at the project site. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource. The project site is not designated by the general plan, specific plan, or other land use plans as a locally important mineral recovery site. 31 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 112 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Conclusion: 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? 3, 9, 10, 12,31 --X-- b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? 3, 9, 10, 12,31 --X-- c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 3, 9, 10, 12,31 --X-- d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 3, 9, 10, 12,31 --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, 3, 9, 10, 12, 31 --X-- 31 --X-- Evaluation As analyzed in the City’s LUCE Update EIR, a number of noise‐sensitive land uses are present within the City, including various types of residential, schools, hospitals and care facilities, parks and recreation areas, hotels and transient lodging, and place of worship and libraries. Based on ambient noise level measurements throughout the City, major sources of noise include traffic noise on major roadways, passing trains, and aircraft overflights. a) Residences are designated as noise sensitive by the Noise Element. The Noise Element indicates that noise levels of 60 dB are acceptable for outdoor activity areas and 45 dB for indoor areas. Exterior noise levels will be less than 60 dB when attenuation afforded by building features and elevation is taken into account. As shown on Noise Element Figure 5 build-out Noise Contours Northern Section of San Luis Obispo, the project site is not located in an area subject to transportation-related noise exceeding 60 decibels at General Plan Build-out; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. Implementation of the project would generate approximately 327 average daily trips (based on a conservative trip generation rate of 9.6 daily trips per residential unit). As documented in the LUCE EIR, average daily trips along Johnson Avenue between San Luis Drive and Laurel Lane average 15,695 trips per day; therefore, the project’s contribution to transportation-related noise in the area would not be significant enough to result in a noticeable change in noise levels. Activity on the project site would generate noise related to human activity. Based on the level of trip generation, and human activity similar to existing activity in the area, implementation of the project would not generate noise that would result in a significant impact to nearby residential areas. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. b) Long-term operational activities associated with the proposed project would be residential care uses, which would not involve the use of any equipment or processes that would result in potentially significant levels of ground vibration. Increases in groundborne vibration levels attributable to the proposed project would be primarily associated with short-term construction- related activities. Construction activities would likely require the use of various types of heavy equipment, such as forklifts, concrete mixers, and haul trucks. Because construction activities are restricted to the days, hours, and sound levels allowed by City ordinance (Chapter 9.12 of the Municipal Code), impacts associated with groundborne vibration and noise would be less than significant. c) As discussed above, long-term operation of the project involves residential care use, which is consistent with existing uses in the project vicinity. Residential care uses would not result in substantial changes to the existing noise environment. Operation 32 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 113 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact of the project would be consistent with the existing uses in the vicinity of the project site and would not result in substantial changes to the existing noise environment. Other noise sensitive uses in the vicinity include other neighboring residential developments. These uses will be shielded from noise generated by residential care uses by distance and by the structures themselves. d) Noise generated by the project would occur during short-term construction of the proposed affordable housing residential care facility. Noise levels during construction would be higher than existing noise levels, but only for the duration of construction. Although there would be intermittent construction noise in the project area during the construction period, noise impacts would be less than significant because the construction would be short term and restricted to the hours and noise levels allowed by City ordinance. e, f) The project site is not located within an airport land use plan area or within 2 miles of a public use airport or private airstrip. Implementation of the proposed project would not expose individuals to excessive noise levels associated with aircraft operations. Conclusion: Less than significant impact. 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, 31 --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, 31 --X-- 1, 31 --X-- Evaluation: a) The proposed project includes construction of a very-low-income affordable housing residential care facility, which would have the potential to add to the population of the City. However, it is important to note that Land Use Element policy 1.10.2 (Residential Growth Rate) indicates that the City shall manage its housing supply so that it does not exceed a growth rate of one percent per year, on average, excluding dwellings affordable to residents with extremely low, very low or low incomes as defined by the State Department of Housing and Community Development for the City and County of San Luis Obispo and reflected in the City’s Housing Element. The project site is zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential), R-2-SF (Medium Density Residential), and C/OS-40 (Conservation/Open Space). The existing Sunny Acres facility would remain within the C/OS-40 zone, and proposed residential buildings A, B, and C would primarily be located within the R-1 zone, with a portion of Building C within the R-2-SF zone. The proposed project includes development consistent with the anticipated use of the site and in accordance with the housing needs identified for the City under anticipated community development under the recently updated Land Use Element. New employment generated by the proposed project would not be considered substantial. The project would not include any proposed infrastructure that would be considered a removal of an impediment to growth; the infrastructure would serve the development similar to other developments that require connection to the City’s water supply, sewer system, and other utilities. The proposed project would not involve any other components that would induce further growth not already anticipated under the General Plan envisioned under the current site zoning designation. Impacts are considered less than significant. b), c) The existing Sunny Acres Facility has not been in operation since 1974. The project includes the rehabilitation, and adaptive reuse of this structure to provide housing units, and would not result in the displacement of any housing or people. Therefore, no impact would occur. Conclusion: Population and housing impacts would be less than significant. 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 33 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 114 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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, 4, 9,31 --X-- b) Police protection? 1, 4, 9,31 --X-- c) Schools? 1, 4, 9,31 --X-- d) Parks? 1, 4, 9,31 --X-- e) Roads and other transportation infrastructure? 1, 4, 9,31 --X-- f) Other public facilities? 1, 4, 9,31 --X-- Evaluation Fire Protection: The San Luis Obispo Fire Department (SLOFD) provides fire and emergency services to the City of San Luis Obispo. The Fire Department is organized into five divisions: Emergency Operations, Fire Prevention and Life Safety, Training and Equipment, Administrative, and Support Services. In addition to providing fire and emergency services to the city, SLOFD maintains an Emergency Services Contract with Cal Poly. Under the current contract, SLOFD provides fire and emergency services to the university in return for a set annual fee. Police Protection: The San Luis Obispo Police Department (SLOPD) provides police protection services within the city limits. SLOPD is responsible for responding to calls for service, investigating crimes and arresting offenders, enforcing traffic and other laws, and promoting community safety through crime prevention and school‐safety patrols. The Police Department consists of two bureaus, Administration and Operations, each of which has four divisions. The Police Department operates out of one main facility located at 1042 Walnut Street and a small additional office at 1016 Walnut Street. Public Schools: The San Luis Coastal Unified School District (SLCUSD) serves an area between the coast and the Los Padres National Forest, and from Morro Bay to the north and Arroyo Grande to the south. In total, the District operates ten elementary schools, two middle schools, two high schools, one continuation high school, and an adult education facility. In addition to the K‐12 educational program, the SLCUSD offers a variety of additional educational programs, including: cooperative preschool, preschool early education, and parent participation. Within the San Luis Obispo LUCE Planning Subarea, the District operates six elementary schools, one middle school, one high school, and one continuation high school. a) The proposed project site is served by the City of San Luis Obispo Fire Department. Implementation of the proposed project would increase the intensity of use of the site and would marginally increase the demand for fire protection services over existing conditions. The project would be similar to the land uses on surrounding properties, and the site is already served by the City for fire protection. Although the project would have the potential to alter the number of housing units or population in the City, the development of the site is consistent with the anticipated land use for the site and proposed development would be consistent with the residential zoning for the site and consistent with the neighboring residential uses. As stated in the recent City LUCE Update EIR, adherence to the Safety Element Policy 3.0 (Adequate Fire Services) will reduce impacts related to increased fire protection needs. b) The project site is served by the City of San Luis Obispo Police Department for police protection services. Redevelopment of the site would not result in the need for increased patrols or additional units such that new police facilities would need to be constructed. There would be no physical impacts related to the construction of new police facilities, and impacts related to police protection would be less than significant. c) Consistent with SB 50, the proposed project will be required to pay developer fees to the SLOCUSD. These fees would be directed toward maintaining adequate service levels, which include incremental increases in school capacities. Implementation 34 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 115 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact of this state fee system would ensure that any significant impacts to schools which could result from the proposed project would be offset by development fees, and in effect, reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. d) Because the proposed project would result in a minor increase in the number of people utilizing park facilities relative to the City’s existing population, and significant deterioration or accelerated deterioration at parks and recreation-oriented public facilities from possible increased usage is not expected. The proposed project would have a less than significant impact on parks. e) As noted above, because the proposed use is similar to surrounding uses and would result in a relatively minor increase in users relative to the City’s existing population, significant deterioration or accelerated deterioration of transportation infrastructure and other public facilities from possible increased usage is not expected. The proposed project would have a less than significant impact on transportation infrastructure and public facilities. f) No other facilities; therefore, no impacts would occur. Conclusion: Impacts are considered less than significant. 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, 10, 31,37 --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: As discussed in the recent City LUCE Update EIR, there are 26 parks in the city, consisting of eight community parks, 10 neighborhood parks, and eight mini parks. There are also six joint use facilities, and several recreation centers and special facilities (e.g., Damon Garcia Sports Fields and the SLO Swim Center). There is currently approximately 151.65 acres of parkland in the City, of which 33.53 acres are neighborhood parks. In addition to developed parks, the City owns or manages over 6,970 acres of open space within and adjacent to San Luis Obispo, some of which provide trails that accommodate hiking and mountain biking. a) The project will add incrementally to the demand for parks and other recreational facilities. However, no significant recreational impacts are expected to occur with redevelopment of the site. Park Land In-Lieu fees will be required to be paid to the City to help finance additional park space, maintenance or equipment in the vicinity, per existing City policy. Collection of these fees helps offset the impacts of new projects on the City’s recreational facilities. Impacts are considered less than significant. b) The project does not include any recreational facilities; therefore, no impacts would occur. Conclusion: Less than significant impact 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? 2,12, 21,31 --X-- 35 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 116 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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, 2, 4, 31 --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? 12, 31 --X-- d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? 2, 21, 28, 31 --X-- e) Result in inadequate emergency access? 4, 31 --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? 2,31 --X-- Evaluation As discussed in the recent City LUCE Update EIR, the City is accessed primarily by roadways including US 101, SR-1 and SR-227. Routes of regional significance providing access include Los Osos Valley Road, Foothill Road, Broad Street, O’Connor Way, Prefumo Canyon Road, South Higuera Street and Orcutt Road. The local roadway system is characterized by a regular street grid in the downtown area and neighborhood street patterns in other parts of the City. Although federal transportation regulations mandate the use of a federal classification system, local jurisdictions, such as City of San Luis Obispo, also develop classification systems to define their own roadways. A total of 75 roadway segments in the local, county, and state roadway system were studied under the LUCE Update EIR using the City’s AADT LOS thresholds. The City of San Luis Obispo considers roadways operating at LOS D or better to be acceptable, excepting segments downtown where LOS is allowed to drop to E. The only segment noted to be deficient under existing conditions is Broad Street south of Buckley Road, which is under State of California and County jurisdiction. a,b) Regional access to the project site is provided by Johnson Avenue and Bishop Street. Implementation of the project would generate approximately 327 average daily trips (based on a conservative trip generation rate of 9.6 daily trips per residential unit). As documented in the LUCE EIR, average daily trips along Johnson Avenue between San Luis Drive and Laurel Lane average 15,695 trips per day, and Johnson Avenue operates at an acceptable level of service (LOS B). Under cumulative (build- out) conditions, Johnson Avenue is expected to handle 21,500 average daily trips, and would continue to operate at LOS B. The project’s contribution to trips along Johnson Avenue would not result in an unacceptable LOS; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. c) The project is not located in the vicinity of any public or private airports and will not result in any changes to air traffic patterns, nor does it conflict with any safety plans of the Airport Land Use Plan. d) The project would not modify existing intersections or roadways, with the exception the proposed access road improvements extending from the current terminus of Bishop Street. The project access road would be consistent with City code requirements for ingress/egress to safely and adequately serve the project. Because the project is a similar use to those in the immediate vicinity, the project would not introduce any incompatible uses. e) The project has been reviewed by the City Fire Marshal to ensure adequate emergency access, including an emergency vehicle turn-out, have been provided. As proposed, the project would not alter the existing travel flow of vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians or substantially increase traffic on local streets. Therefore, the proposed project would not have a negative effect on emergency access. f) The project is consistent with policies supporting alternative transportation due to the site’s location within the City’s urban center, and its proximity to shopping, parks, transit, and services. Johnson Avenue is served by SLO Transit, the City bus agency. San Luis Obispo City bus lines are located within walking distance (Johnson Avenue) that allows public transportation 36 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 117 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact services to the Downtown and Cal Poly campus. City standards require provision of on-site bicycle storage. The proposed project includes 16 long term bicycle parking spaces and 10 short term bicycle parking spaces, consistent with City policy. Conclusion: Transportation/circulation impacts are considered less than significant. 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? 7,16, 31 --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? 7,16, 27,31, 32, 33 --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? 7,16, 27, 31 --X-- d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new and expanded entitlements needed? 7,16, 31,35 --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? 5, 7,16, 31, 32, 33 --X-- f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? 5, 8, 31 --X-- g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? 5, 8, 31 --X-- Evaluation Water: As discussed in the City’s LUCE Update EIR, the City of San Luis Obispo Utilities Department provides potable and recycled water to the community and is responsible for water supply, treatment, distribution, and resource planning. The City is the sole water provider within the city limits and most of the City’s water is supplied from multiple surface water sources. However, the City also uses groundwater to supplement surface water supplies and recycled water is used to supplement irrigation demand. With the update of the City’s Water and Wastewater Element and Urban Water Management Plan in June 2016, the City Council reaffirmed the policy for a multi‐source water supply (refer to Section 9 Hydrology and Water Quality for additional information). Wastewa ter: The wastewater system for the City includes facilities for wastewater collection and treatment. The City’s collection system serves residential, commercial, and industrial customers. Sewer service is provided only to properties within the city limits, with the exception of a few residential properties located just outside of the city limits, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, and the County of San Luis Obispo Airport. There are approximately 14,400 service connections. The City’s Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) processes wastewater in accordance with the standards set by the State’s RWQCB. The WRRF removes solids, reduces the amount of nutrients, and eliminates bacteria in the treated wastewater, which is then discharged to San Luis Obispo Creek. The WRRF is designed for an average dry weather flow capacity of 5.1 million gallons per day (MGD) and a peak wet weather flow capacity of 22 MGD. In 2015, average flows to the WRRF were approximately 3.5 MGD. Solid Waste: The City’s Utilities Department is responsible for administering an exclusive franchise agreement with San Luis Garbage Company to collect and dispose solid waste generated by residential, commercial, and industrial customers in San Luis Obispo. This agreement also includes curbside recycling, and green waste service. There are three solid waste disposal facilities within San Luis Obispo County. Most solid waste collected in the city is disposed of at the Cold Canyon Landfill. Cold Canyon Landfill is currently (2012) permitted to receive up to 1,620 tons of solid waste per day, with an estimated 37 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 118 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact remaining capacity of 1,830,000 cubic yards (16.8 percent remaining capacity). In 2010, the Cold Canyon Landfill operator estimated the landfill is expected to reach capacity in 2018. a), c) The proposed project would result in an incremental increase in demand on City infrastructure, including wastewater and storm water facilities. Development of the site is required to be served by City sewer service. The project includes drainage and stormwater management infrastructure, which is assessed for potential impacts in this Initial Study. This project has been reviewed by the City’s Utilities Department and no major resource/infrastructure deficiencies have been identified. b) The proposed project would result in an incremental increase in demand on City infrastructure, including water infrastructure. Development of the site is required to be served by City water service. The project includes a looped water system to ensure adequate flow and quality. This project has been reviewed by the City’s Utilities Department and no major resource deficiencies related to water supply have been identified. In order to meet the City’s fire flow requirements and minimum water pressure for domestic purposes, the City has identified mitigation requiring the applicant to install off-site improvements to the water distribution systems, including upsizing the existing 12-inch cast iron water main in Flora Street from the driveway at the County Probation Office to Bishop Tank to a 16-inch ductile iron water main. This action would occur within an existing, disturbed and developed roadway and utility trench, and would not result in significant impacts not already identified for the project; identified mitigation would apply, including but not limited to protection of trees, air pollutant mitigation, protection of water quality, and erosion and sedimentation control measures. Therefore, this impact is considered less than significant with incorporation of identified mitigation. d) The proposed project would result in an incremental increase in demand on water supplies, as anticipated under the recent General Plan Update. As analyzed in the LUCE Update EIR, the City has sufficient water supplies for build-out of the City’s General Plan. Since the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, water use and demand associated with the project is anticipated and included with Land Use Element buildout projections. This project has been reviewed by the City’s Utilities Department and no resource/infrastructure deficiencies have been identified. e) The City completed a Sanitary Sewer Flow Monitoring and Inflow/Infiltration Study in 2012 and the Wastewater Collection System Infrastructure Renewal Strategy (WCSIRS) in January 2016. The WCSIRS included preparation of a hydraulic model of the wastewater collection system. According to the WCSIRS, the wastewater collection system has adequate capacity to serve the project. f), g) The proposed project will be served by San Luis Garbage Company, which maintains standards for access and access to ensure that collection is feasible, both of which will be reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission. The location and size of trash enclosures proposed for the project have been reviewed by the City and have been determined that they are sufficient in size to handle the demands of the proposed project. The Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) requires each city and county in California to reduce the flow of materials to landfills by 50% (from 1989 levels) by 2000. The proposed project is required to reduce the waste stream generated by development consistent with the City’s Conservation and Open Space Element policies to coordinate waste reduction and recycling efforts (COSE 5.5.3), and Development Standards for Solid Waste Services (available at http://www.slocity.org/utilities/download/binstandards08.pdf). A solid waste reduction plan for recycling discarded construction materials is a submittal requirement with the building permit application. The incremental additional waste stream generated by this project is not anticipated to create significant impacts to solid waste disposal. Mitigation Measure UTIL-1: To meet the City’s fire flow requirements and minimum water pressure for domestic purposes, the project will install off-site improvements to the water distribution system including upsizing the existing 12-inch cast iron water main in Flora Street from the driveway at the County Probation Office to Bishop Tank to a 16-inch ductile iron water main. Conclusion: Impacts are considered to be less than significant. 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 --X-- 38 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 119 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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? The project is a residential care facility in an urbanized area of the city. Without mitigation, the project could have the potential to have adverse impacts on all of the issue areas checked in the Table on Page 3. As discussed above, potential impacts to aesthetics, air quality, biological and cultural resources, geology and soils and hydrology and water quality will be less than significant with incorporation of recommended mitigation measures. 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-- The impacts of the proposed project are individually limited and not considered “cumulatively considerable.” Although incremental changes in certain issue areas can be expected as a result of the proposed project, all environmental impacts that could occur as a result of the proposed project would be reduced to a less than significant level through compliance with existing regulations discussed in this Initial Study and/or implementation of the mitigation measures recommended in this Initial Study for the following resource areas: aesthetics, air quality, biological and cultural resources, geology and soils and hydrology and water quality. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? --X-- Implementation of the proposed project would result in no environmental effects that would cause substantial direct or indirect adverse effects on human beings with incorporation of the mitigation measures recommended in this Initial Study. 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. City of San Luis Obispo Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) Update EIR, available for review at the City Community Development Department (919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401), or at the following web site: http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-development/planning-zoning/general-plan 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. Applicable excerpts, analysis and conclusions from the LUCE Update EIR have been added to each impact issue area discussion. Where project specific impacts and mitigation measures have been identified that are not addressed in the LUCE Update EIR, original analysis has been provided and mitigation has been recommended to reduce impact levels as needed. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions of the project. N/A 20. SOURCE REFERENCES. 1. City of SLO General Plan Land Use Element, December 2014 2. City of SLO General Plan Circulation Element, December 2014 3. City of SLO General Plan Noise Element, May 1996 4. City of SLO General Plan Safety Element, March 2012 5. City of SLO General Plan Conservation & Open Space Element, April 2006 6. City of SLO General Plan Housing Element, January 2015 39 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 120 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 7. City of SLO Water and Wastewater Element, July 2010 8. City of SLO Source Reduction and Recycling Element, on file in the Utilities Department 9. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code 10. City of San Luis Obispo Community Design Guidelines, June 2010 11. City of San Luis Obispo, Land Use Inventory Database 12. City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations March 2015 13. City of SLO Climate Action Plan, August 2012 14. 2013 California Building Code 15. City of SLO Waterways Management Plan 16. Water Resources Status Report, July 2012, on file with in the Utilities Department 17. Site Visit 18. City of San Luis Obispo Staff Knowledge 19. Website of the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency: http://www.consrv.ca.gov/dlrp/FMMP/ 20. CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Air Pollution Control District, April 2012 21. Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, on file in the Community Development Department 22. City of San Luis Obispo, Archaeological Resource Preservation Guidelines, on file in the Community Development Department 23. City of San Luis Obispo, Historic Site Map 24. City of San Luis Obispo Burial Sensitivity Map 25. Ordinance No.1130 (1989 Series) 26. Archaeological Inventory Survey. CRMS. December 13, 2006 27. Preliminary Drainage Study and Updated Calculations / Storm Water Control Plan. Rick Engineering. 2016 28. Project Plans 29. Western Mastiff Bat December 1, 2015 30. Website of the California Environmental Protection Agency, Cortese List: http://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/default.htm 31. San Luis Obispo Land Use and Circulation Element Update EIR. June 13, 2014. 32. 2012 Sanitary Sewer Flow Monitoring and Inflow/Infiltration Study 33. 2016 Wastewater Collection System Infrastructure Renewal Strategy 34. Natural Resources Conservation Service, Websoils. Accessed August 7, 2016. 35. 2015 Draft Urban Water Management Plan. May 2016 36. Historic Significance Evaluation for Sunny Acres. Bertrando & Bertrando. October 1998. 37. Geotechnical Feasibility Study. Earth Systems Pacific. January 23, 2007. 38. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Map No. 06079C1069G, effective on 11/16/2012. Note All of the above reference sources that are not attached as appendices to this Initial Study are available upon request in the Community Development Department, City of San Luis Obispo Attachments: 1. Site Vicinity/Project Location Map (Figure 1) 2. Project Plans 3. Historic Evaluation Report by Bertrando & Bertrando (October 1998) 40 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 121 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS Air Quality Mitigation Measure AQ 1: Prior to any construction activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that a geologic evaluation is conducted to determine if the area disturbed is exempt from the Asbestos Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) regulations. An exemption request must be filed with the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD), as applicable. If the site is not exempt from the requirements of the regulation, the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. This may include development of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan and Asbestos Health and Safety Program for approval by the APCD.  Monitoring Plan, AQ 1: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor compliance with APCD requirements. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. The applicant shall provide documentation of compliance with APCD requirements to City staff prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Mitigation Measure AQ 2: Any scheduled demolition activities or disturbance, removal, or relocation of utility pipelines shall be coordinated with the APCD Enforcement Division at (805) 781-5912 to ensure compliance with NESHAP, which include, but are not limited to: 1) written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities commencing, to the APCD, 2) asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Consultant, and, 3) applicable removal and disposal requirements of identified ACM.  Monitoring Plan, AQ 2: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor compliance with APCD requirements. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. Mitigation Measure AQ 3: During construction/ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall implement the following particulate (dust) control measures. These measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and modify practices, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. a. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible. b. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site, and from exceeding the APCD’s limit of 20% opacity for no greater than 3 minutes in any 60 minute period. Increased watering frequency will be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 m.p.h. and cessation of grading activities during periods of winds over 25 m.p.h. Reclaimed (non-potable) water is to be used in all construction and dust-control work. 41 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 122 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact c. All dirt stock pile areas (if any) shall be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as needed. d. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil disturbing activities. e. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established. f. 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. g. 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. h. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 m.p.h. on any unpaved surface at the construction site. i. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, are to 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 California Vehicle Code Section 23114. j. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. k. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when feasible. l. All PM10 mitigation measures required shall be shown on grading and building plans. m. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below the APCD’s limit of 20% opacity for no greater than 3 minutes in any 60 minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition.  Monitoring Plan, AQ 3: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor 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. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. Mitigation Measure AQ 4: Prior to any construction activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that all equipment and operations are compliant with California Air Resource Board and APCD permitting requirements, by contacting the APCD Engineering Division at (805) 781-5912 for specific information regarding permitting requirements.  Monitoring Plan, AQ 4: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor compliance with APCD 42 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 123 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact requirements. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. The applicant shall provide documentation of compliance with APCD requirements to City staff prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Mitigation Measure AQ 5: To reduce sensitive receptor emissions impact of diesel vehicles and equipment used to construct the project and export soil from the site, the applicant shall implement the following idling control techniques: 1. California Diesel Idling Regulations a. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles: 1. Shall not idle the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location, except as noted in Subsection )d) of the regulation; and, 2. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater than 5.0 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of restricted area, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation. b. Off-road diesel equipment shall comply with the 5 minute idling restriction identified in Section 2449(d)(2) of the California Air Resources Board’s In-Use off-Road Diesel regulation. c. Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers and operators of the state’s 5 minute idling limit. 2. Diesel Idling restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors (residential homes). In addition to the State required diesel idling requirements, the project applicant shall comply with these more restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to nearby sensitive receptors: a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors. b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be permitted. c. Use of alternative fueled equipment is recommended. d. Signs that specify the no idling areas must be posed and enforces at the site. 3. Soil Transport. The final volume of soil that will be hauled off-site, together with the fleet mix, hauling route, and number of trips per day will need to be identified for the APCD. Specific standards and conditions will apply.  Monitoring Plan, AQ 5: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor 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. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. The applicant shall provide documentation of compliance with APCD requirements to City staff prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Mitigation Measure AQ 6: Prior to issuance of construction permits, construction and architectural plans shall note the requirement to use low VOC architectural coatings (71 grams/liter or less). The applicant or 43 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 124 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact contractor shall submit documentation of compliance to the City Community Development Department prior to final inspection.  Monitoring Plan, AQ 6: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. The applicant shall provide documentation of compliance with APCD requirements to City staff prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Biological Resources Mitigation Measure BIO 1: Prior to commencement of construction, to avoid conflicts with nesting birds, construction activities shall not be allowed during the nesting bird season (March to September), unless a City-approved and applicant funded qualified biologist has surveyed the impact zone and determined that no nesting bird activities would be adversely impacted. If any evidence of nesting activities is found, the biologist will determine if any construction activities can occur during the nesting period and to what extent. The results of the surveys will be passed immediately to the City with possible recommendations for variable buffer zones, as needed, around individual nests.  Monitoring Plan, BIO 1: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans and shall be clearly visible to contractors and City inspectors. Migratory bird mitigation shall be reviewed by the City’s Natural Resources Manager. City staff will periodically inspect the site for continued compliance with the above mitigation measures. Mitigation Measure BIO 2: The applicant shall limit tree removal to no more than one coast live oak tree and nine pepper trees. Prior to construction permit issuance, construction plans shall clearly delineate all trees within 50 feet of the proposed project, and shall show which trees are to be removed or impacted, and which trees are to remain unharmed. Prior to any ground disturbing activities, adequate protection measures (e.g., sturdy fencing) per the approved construction plans, shall be installed to protect those trees identified to remain unharmed as well as to minimize impacts for those trees identified as being impacted.  Monitoring Plan, BIO 2: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans and shall be clearly visible to contractors and City inspectors. Protection measures shall be installed prior to grading and construction. City staff will periodically inspect the site for continued compliance with the above mitigation measures. Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure CR 1: In the event archeological resources and/or human remains are unearthed or discovered during any construction activities, the following standards apply: a. Construction activities shall cease, and the City Community Development Department shall be notified so that the extent and location of discovered materials may be recorded by a qualified archaeologist, and disposition of artifacts may be accomplished in accordance with state and federal law. b. If human remains are unearthed, the applicant shall notify the City Community Development Department and shall comply with State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, which requires 44 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 125 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact that no further disturbance shall occur until the County of San Luis Obispo Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the human remains are determined to be Native American, the County Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours, which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials.  Monitoring Plan, CR 1: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans and be clearly visible to contractors and City inspectors. City staff will periodically inspect the site for continued compliance with the above mitigation measure. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Mitigation Measure HM 1: Prior to initiation of grading and construction, the applicant shall prepare and submit a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan to the City Community Development Department. The plan shall identify hazardous materials to be used on and off-site, and shall identify procedures for storage, distribution, and spill response. Equipment refueling shall be done in non-sensitive areas and such that spills can be easily and quickly contained and cleaned up without entering any existing stormwater drainage system or creek. The plan shall include procedures in the event of accidents or spills, identification of and contact information for immediate response personnel, and means to limit public access and exposure. Any necessary remedial work shall be done immediately to avoid surface or ground water contamination. The plan shall be implemented by the construction contractor, and verified by the City Public Works and Community Development Departments.  Monitoring Plan, HM 1: The Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department prior to grading and construction. A copy of the Plan shall be available onsite during grading and construction, and shall be implemented as necessary. City staff will periodically inspect the site for continued compliance with the above mitigation measures. Hydrology and Water Quality Mitigation Measure HWQ 1: The Drainage Plan and Storm Water Control Plan (Rick Engineering 2016) prepared for the proposed project includes design features and recommended Best Management Practices and Low Impact Development measures for water quality control and stormwater management and quality via the proposed bio-filtration treatment, non-grouted pavers systems with underdrains, and use of landscape areas for water treatment and retention. These measures shall become required components of project development and the project proponent shall be required to implement these design features and recommendations as set forth and approved by the City Public Works Department and Regional Water Quality Control Board.  Monitoring Plan, HWQ 1: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. Community Development Planning and Public Works staff shall review the Stormwater Control Plan as part of the Building Permit application package prior to issuance of grading or construction permits. 45 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 126 Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources ARCH -3336-2016 Sources Potentially Significant Issues Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact City staff will periodically inspect the site for continued compliance with the above mitigation measure. Utilities and Service Systems Mitigation Measure UTIL 1: To meet the City’s fire flow requirements and minimum water pressure for domestic purposes, the project will install off-site improvements to the water distribution system including upsizing the existing 12-inch cast iron water main in Flora Street from the driveway at the County Probation Office to Bishop Tank to a 16-inch ductile iron water main.  Monitoring Plan, UTIL 1: Off-site improvements to the water distributions system shall be shown on building plans and reviewed by Utilities staff as part of the Building Permit application package prior to issuance of grading and construction permits. City staff will periodically inspect the site for continued compliance with the above mitigation measure. 46 ATTACHMENT 5 ARC/CHC 1 - 127 A T T A C H M E N T 1 A T T A C H M E N T 5 A R C / C H C 1 - 1 2 8 Bishop Street Studios Project Description Bishop Street Studios will operate as a multiple unit residential care facility for clients of Transitions-Mental Health Association (TMHA), a non-profit organization and local mental health and human services agency that provides programs, support and services to persons experiencing mental illness in San Luis Obispo County. Much of this work is done in concert with San Luis Obispo County Behavioral Health Services. Residents will have a diagnosed mental illness and an open case with San Luis Obispo County Behavioral Health Services (SLO BHS). Many of the case management and support services will be on-site and conducted in coordination with medication and psychiatric services provided at the adjacent SLO BHS. Bishop Street Studios will be staffed by a resident manager who will live on-site and provide assistance to the unrelated individuals who will occupy the rental units. The manager will provide oversight of the facility as well as nonmedical care and r egular support for residents. This assistance along with case management (provided primarily by TMHA staff) is essential for sustaining the activities of daily living for the individuals residing at Bishop Street. The case management provided to all residents will be an ongoing requirement for residency, and shows the ongoing commitment TMHA has to each resident’s wellness and recovery. The recovery process includes attention to the routine activities of life: meal preparation, laundry, employment, budgeting and social interaction. Bishop Street Studios is a supportive housing project that offers opportunities for growth in these areas in a stable setting. ATTACHMENT 6 ARC/CHC 1 - 129