Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
07-05-2017 Item 12 - Public Hearing - San Luis Ranch
Meeting Date: 7/5/2017 FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Department Prepared By: John Rickenbach, Contract Planner SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE SAN LUIS RANCH PROJECT, INCLUDING 1) RELATED ENTITLEMENTS AND 2) THE CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR). PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS INCLUDE: 1) SPECIFIC PLAN, 2) GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, 3) VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, AND 4) INITIATION OF ANNEXATION FOR THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING AND REVIEW OF A TERM SHEET AS THE BASIS FOR A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE SITE INCLUDE UP TO 580 RESIDENTIAL UNITS; 200,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT; 150,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE DEVELOPMENT; A 200-ROOM HOTEL; AND APPROXIMATELY 60.4 ACRES OF THE SITE TO REMAIN FOR AGRICULTURE AND OPEN- SPACE. RECOMMENDATION As recommended by the Planning Commission, adopt the attached resolution (Attachment A), taking the following actions to approve the San Luis Ranch Project: 1. Certify the Final EIR, adopt appropriate California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations to allow for potential project approval, and adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan; and 2. Find the proposed San Luis Ranch Specific Plan project consistent with General Plan policies; and 3. Approve the proposed Specific Plan and related project entitlements, including a General Plan Amendment and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 3096; and 4. Initiate annexation of the project site by authorizing staff to submit an application for annexation of the project site to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo); and 5. Provide comments and conceptually approve the Term Sheet for the project and authorize negotiation of a Development Agreement consistent with the terms of the Term Sheet. REPORT-IN-BRIEF The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is proposed by Coastal Community Builders to enable the development and agricultural and open space preservation of portions of the 131.3-acre site. A Final EIR has been prepared for the project, and is avai lable on the City’s website: http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-development/documents- online/environmental-review-documents/-folder-1907 The project has been presented before various City advisory bodies. On June 5, 2017, the Architectural Review Commission unanimously recommended approval of the project Design Packet Pg 197 12 Guidelines (Chapter 3 of the Specific Plan) to the City Council. In addition, the Cultural Heritage Commission found the project consistent with the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance and historic preservation policies of the General Plan on May 15, 2017. On June 7, 2017, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended that the City Council certify the Final EIR and approve all project entitlements, including the Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Term Sheet that provides the basis for a future development agreement. As part of its Resolution, the Planning Commission recommended additional modifications to the Specific Plan, which are included in the City Council Resolution (Attachment A). Planned San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area Development Type Specific Plan Zone % of Site Units Acreage Planned Development 1 Low-Medium Density Residential NG-10 16.4% 200 units 21.5 acres Medium Density Residential NG-23 5.5% 100 units 7.3 acres High Density Residential NG-30 8.4% 246 units 11.0 acres Potential Additional Units2 34 units n/a Commercial NC 9.0% 150,000 SF 11.9 acres Office NC 3.2% 100,000 SF 4.2 acres Hotel and Conference Center NC 2.7% 200 rooms 3.5 acres Public Parks 2.1% 2.8 acres Roads 6.8% 9.0 acres Agricultural and Open Space Agriculture AG 39.8% 52.3 acres Internal Open Spaces OS 5.9% 7.8 acres 1. Planned Development area is based on net site area of approximately 122.5 acres. The gross site area is approximately 131.4 acres, less approximately 8.9 acres of right-of-way associated with regional roadway improvements. 2. The project receives a density bonus of 80 market-rate units because over 5% of the units proposed will be deed restricted as affordable to Very Low Income residents. 46 of those density bonus units are provided in the High Density Residential area, and 34 units are unassigned, but may be located in the commercial area as part of a mixed -use component to the project. There are five major project components, the key elements of which are summarized in the Planning Commission staff report of May 24, 2017: • San Luis Ranch Specific Plan • General Plan Amendment/Pre-Zoning • Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map • Annexation • Term Sheet/Development Agreement The City Council’s role is to review and consider approval of the San Luis Ranch project and related entitlements, based on project-related input received from the Planning Commission, other City advisory bodies, and the Airport Land Use Commission. As a necessary step related to possible project approval, the City Council must certify the Final EIR for the project, adopt the CEQA Findings, including a Statement of Overriding Considerations for impacts determined to be Significant and Unavoidable (“Class 1 impacts”). If the Council certifies the Final EIR and Packet Pg 198 12 approves the project, staff will prepare an application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) to initiate the annexation process. Lastly, as part of this review the Council should provide input and direction about pursuing a development agreement based on the term sheet that is contained herein. DISCUSSION Background 1. Project Description Summary The project is the development of a major new City neighborhood. The project includes a mix of residential, commercial, and office uses while preserving nearly half of the site as open space and agriculture on a 131.3-acre property, as described in the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan. The intent is for the project to be consistent with the development parameters described in the City’s 2014 Land Use Element. If the project is approved, the Specific Plan area would require annexation to the City of San Luis Obispo. The project is within the City’s Sphere of Influence and Urban Reserve Line, and is designed to be consistent with both City and Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) policies, including the requirement that the annexation be compatible with the City’s General Plan and supportable by the City’s infrastructure. The project would be constructed in six phases. Phases 1, 2, and 3 would consist of residential development. Construction is planned to begin in 2018. Phases 4, 5, and 6 would consist of non- residential construction (retail, office, hotel). The above figure shows the location of proposed Packet Pg 199 12 phasing in the context of the Specific Plan. This figure illustrates the relative timing of proposed development and infrastructure that will be built under the Specific Plan. Pages 7-23 through 7-28 within Chapter 7 of the draft Specific Plan describe the conceptual financing strategy for needed major improvements within the Specific Plan area, based on a Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP), described in Section 7.8.1 of the Specific Plan. At this point, the cost and timing are still preliminary, and will depend on market and other factors. But in general, the following funding mechanisms are proposed in the Specific Plan: • Primary Funding Mechanisms ▪ Development Impact Fees ▪ Community Facilities District (CFD) • Ancillary Funding Mechanisms ▪ City and County Tax Exchange ▪ Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD) ▪ Developer Financing ▪ Landscape and Lighting District ▪ Homeowner Association Fees In general, San Luis Ranch development will pay for needed infrastructure upfront and be reimbursed for portions beyond its fair share, or it will pay its fair share upfront to contribute to the eventual construction of a needed improvement. The final infrastructure financing strategy will be based on fiscal and economic studies that examine the proposed improvements and timing, and refine the financing and fair share mechanisms needed to deliver a given infrastructure project. This funding analysis will be provided in detail during the negotiation and the City Council’s consideration of the Development Agreement. 2. Planning Commission Review and Recommendation The Planning Commission has previously considered the project on eight occasions, once during the pre-application process, twice to review a preliminary version of the Specific Plan, twice during the Draft EIR public review period, and three times to consider the project now before the City Council. On June 7, 2017, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended that the City Council certify the Final EIR and approve all project entitlements, included the Vesting Tentative Tract Map as conditioned. As part of its Resolution, the Planning Commission recommended additional modifications to the Specific Plan, which are discussed in Section 6.0 of this staff report, and included in the City Council Resolution (Attachment A). 3. Previous Advisory Body Review The project has been considered before various City advisory bodies that have carefully reviewed and commented on specific aspects of the proposed project that relate to their purview. On June 5, 2017, the Architectural Review Commission unanimously recommended approval of the project Design Guidelines (Chapter 3 of the Specific Plan) to the City Council. In addition, the Cultural Heritage Committee found the project consistent with the City’s Historic Preservation Packet Pg 200 12 Ordinance and historic preservation policies of the General Plan on May 15, 2017. Finally, the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) has reviewed the project on several occasions. On April 19, 2017, the ALUC determined that the project was consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan. Changes to the plan were required, including relocation of 27 dwelling units that would have otherwise been in a more restrictive airport safety zone. In addition, the ALUC required that a portion of the commercial area be restricted from including buildings (though parking lot improvements, landscaping, and other site improvements are allowed). (See Council Reading file for final ALUC findings and conditions.) The applicant subsequently updated the Specific Plan and Vesting Tentative Tract map to address these changes, which is the version of the project recommended by the Planning Commission, and currently being considered by the City Council. Attachment C provides a summary of the different advisory bodies that have considered the project, when these reviews occurred, as well as the purpose and outcome of these meetings. 4. Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Conclusions Consistent with City Council direction, a Draft EIR was prepared for the project, and distributed for public review from December 9, 2016, to January 30, 2017. The Planning Commission held two public hearings to solicit input on the Draft EIR, on January 11 and January 25, 2017. Portions of the Draft EIR related to the project’s energy impacts were recirculated for 45 days, from March 3 through April 17, 2017. Several mitigation measures in the Draft EIR were revised as a result of these responses to comments, in order to clarify or improve their effectiveness. The Final EIR concludes that the project will result in significant and unavoidable impacts to: • Air Quality – consistency with the Clean Air Plan; cumulative impacts related to air quality • Cultural Resources – impacts to the existing historic onsite agricultural structures, known as the San Luis Ranch Complex, as well as cumulative impacts related to cultural resources • Land Use – policies to protect historic resources and provisions related to parkland, as well as policies to achieve of multimodal objectives • Noise – short-term construction noise • Transportation – Level of Service impacts to intersection capacities are identified at Madonna Road/Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road/Froom Ranch Way; bicycle facility impacts for the Higuera Street segment between Prado and Madonna Road; and cumulative impacts to the U.S. 101 segment between Los Osos Valley Road and Madonna Road The EIR also finds that there will be significant impacts that can be mitigated to less than significant in the categories of agricultural resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use, noise, recreation, and transportation. Impacts related to aesthetics, greenhouse gas emissions, water resources, as well as certain issues related to agricultural resources, air quality, hazards, Packet Pg 201 12 hydrology and water quality, land use, noise, population and housing were found to be less than significant. Tables ES-1 through ES-3 in the Final EIR Executive Summary (Attachment D) and at the beginning of the Final EIR summarize the project’s impacts and mitigation measures. The Final EIR is available at the following website: http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-development/documents- online/environmental-review-documents/-folder-1907 CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations The Final EIR must be certified before or concurrent with an action to approve the proposed project entitlements. The Planning Commission determined that the Final EIR adequately described and analyzed the proposed project, and that the document included appropriate mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts to the extent feasible. These mitigation measures are included in a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program within the Final EIR. Based on this, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council certify the Final EIR, and to consider the attached CEQA Findings that support the proposed project, including a Statement of Overriding Considerations to address the identified significant and unavoidable impacts described in the Final EIR. These are included in Attachment B - Exhibit A (CEQA Findings). 5. General Plan Guidance and Policy Consistency The project is based on policy direction included in the General Plan, specifically Land Use Element Policy 8.1.4, which identifies the San Luis Ranch area as a Special Focus Area (SP -2), subject to policies for the development of a specific plan and certain broad development parameters and principles. For clarity, the entire policy is included within the summary of relevant General Plan policies as a Council Reading File (EIR Policy Consistency Analysis). In its Resolution of June 7, 2017, the Planning Commission found that the San Luis Ranch project was consistent with the City’s General Plan and related policies and standards. 6. Term Sheet, Development Agreement and Infrastructure Financing Background and Overview In April 2014, the City Council authorized City staff to begin a process for the City to enter into a Development Agreement with the project applicant. A Development Agreement is a land use and planning mechanism that allows public agencies to gain public benefits beyond what would either be required through a typical planning process or the CEQA process to address identified impacts related to a project. A Development Agreement typically includes a commitment by the developer to provide extraordinary benefits. In exchange, a project applicant is provided assurances related to future development, often with respect to timing. In this particular case, a Development Agreement cannot be approved unless other necessary underlying planning entitlements are approved – a Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment/Pre-Zoning, and Vesting Packet Pg 202 12 Tentative Tract Map. The project site must also be annexed to the City before its provisions become effective. Importantly, the tentative tract map is specifically conditioned on the City and the Developer executing a Development Agreement. This means that a final map cannot be recorded for any phase of the development until this document is approved or the condition is otherwise modified by the City Council. Relationship Between Term Sheet and Development Agreement For this project, a Term Sheet (“Term Sheet”) has been prepared to form the basis of the Development Agreement. The City Council is requested to provide feedback and approve the attached Term Sheet. This Term Sheet represents the tentative non-binding understanding between the applicant and the City on important areas related to the phased and orderly development of the property such as vesting rights, infrastructure financing, and growth management. Following review of the Term Sheet by the City Council and once negotiations are completed, a full Development Agreement will be presented to the Planning Commission before being presented to the City Council. Staff anticipates returning to the City Council in Fall 2017. The Development Agreement works in parallel to other entitlements, and in the case of San Luis Ranch, the proposed conditions of approval require its approval with a detailed infrastructure financing plan before certain portions of the entitlement can take effect. The Development Agreement would not change the development parameters included in the Specific Plan, but would fine-tune their implementation, building on the Conditions of Approval associated with the Vesting Tentative Tract Map. Term Sheet Review The City Council is asked to approve the Term Sheet as the basis for a Development Agreement. The attached Term Sheet (Attachment C) covers 26 areas, ranging from required terms such as length of term and permitted uses, to subject areas that are unique to the San Luis Ranch Project such as water rights, dedication of public lands, growth management ordinance, infrastructure requirements, new taxes, fees and exactions. Staff will provide an overview of the key points of the term sheet at the City Council meeting. The Term Sheet is intentionally broad because its terms are based on the totality of the project as embodied in the Specific Plan, Conditions of Approval, Development Plan, Property Tax Exchange Agreement1, EIR, and various statutes and municipal code requirements. Once it is clear what the entitlements include in their totality, a full fiscal analysis will be prepared as basis for discussing extraordinary public benefits and the project’s carrying capacity in terms of infrastructure beyond its fair share. If the Term Sheet is approved, staff anticipates returning to the Planning Commission in Fall 2017 with a draft Development Agreement. At that hearing, the Planning Commission will be required to make the following findings (17.94.100) when making a recommendation to the City Council, who would then consider the Development Agreement for possible approval: 1 A property tax exchange agreement is required to be negotiated between the City and the County as part of the annexation process. The agreement details the distribution of taxes, including property and sales taxes, in the newly annexed area. The agreement is based on a master agreement that the County and all of the cities in the County have agreed to follow. Packet Pg 203 12 17.94.100 Planning commission hearing and recommendation. The commission shall consider the proposed development agreement and shall make its recommendation to the council. The recommendation shall include whether or not the proposed development agreement meets the following findings: A. The proposed development agreement is consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan; B. The proposed development agreement complies with zoning, subdivision and other applicable ordinances and regulations; C. The proposed development agreement promotes the general welfare, allows more comprehensive land use planning, and provides substantial public benefits or necessary public improvements, making it in the city’s interest to enter into the development agreement with the applicant; and D. The proposed project and development agreement: 1. Will not adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of persons living or working in the surrounding area; 2. Will be appropriate at the proposed location and will be compatible with adjacent land uses; or 3. Will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. (Ord. 1134 § 1 (part), 1989) The City Council will then be in a position to review and consider the Develop Agreement. This too is anticipated to occur in the Fall 2017. 7. Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map The project includes a Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map (See Council Reading File), which addresses future residential development within the Specific Plan area. The map includes details that go well beyond those included in the Specific Plan, including information on lot locations, roadways, drainage, grading, and other information typically associated with Tentative Maps. The Tentative Map would facilitate development within the areas it covers. It is consistent with the Specific Plan - implementing its policies, zoning standards, and Design Guidelines. The Map also includes details regarding proposed roadways and circulation improvements. Conditions of Approval for the Tentative Map are included in the attached Resolution (Attachment A). These conditions cover issues ranging from fire safety; transportation infrastructure requirements; dedications and easements; utilities; grading, drainage, storm water, and other infrastructure requirements; air quality; relocation of historic structures; avigation easements; affordable housing; and natural resource protection. These are separate from, and in addition to, the mitigation measures and monitoring program that are included in the Final EIR. Staff’s review of the Tentative Map is that, as conditioned, it is consistent with the Specific Plan, both in terms of development potential and design. The basic development parameters allowed under the Map are described above, and previously in more detail in the May 24 P lanning Packet Pg 204 12 Commission staff report for the project. A future Tract Map (or Maps) would be required for the multi-family and commercial phases (Phases 3-6) of the project prior to approval of development within those portions of the Specific Plan. 8. Parks As required by Land Use Element Policy 8.1.4, the San Luis Ranch project is required to provide 5.8 acres of developed parkland. The project is providing 2.8 acres of developed parkland on site. Therefore, funding for 3.0 acres of developed parkland is required for the project to offset its requirement. The following table identifies the total amount of in-lieu fees necessary for the project to meet its full park requirements. The final fee amounts are subject to change based on the final acreage of developed parkland constructed across all phases of the project. Unit Type Parkland Cost Per Unit1 Park Improvement Cost Per Unit2 In-Lieu Fee Requirement (Total * 52%3) Single Family (200 units) $5,839 $6,585 $1,292,096 Multi-Family (380 units) $4,630 $4,899 $1,882,930 Total = $3,175,026 1. Current City of San Luis Obispo Parkland In-Lieu Fee Amount. 2. Most recent cost estimate for park improvement costs (Orcutt Area Neighborhood Park). 3. The in-lieu fee requirement calculated as the difference between the 2.8-acre neighborhood park and the 5.8-acre policy minimum requirement for improved parkland. Prado Road Interchange The Prado Rd. Interchange is a key piece of infrastructure associated with the development of this site. Both the Land use and Circulation Element of the General Plan contain key performance measures for the development project regarding the interchange project. The San Luis Ranch EIR performed substantial technical review of the proposed project and area transportation infrastructure. The EIR concluded that existing infrastructure along with proposed improvements of the project (with required mitigation measures) would allow the first phase of development to commence without the need for the overpass or interchange. The EIR concluded that phase two of the development project would require construction of the Prado Rd. Overpass and NB ramps to offset project traffic on area roadways. The EIR further concluded that the full interchange (addition of SB Ramps) are necessary to mitigate full City buildout of development along with growth from regional traffic. The initial phase of the interchange project can be designed and built in a multi-phase format such that the additional SB Ramps can be constructed when necessary with little impact to the initial interchange project. All right of way for the full interchange will be required to be dedicated prior to recordation of the subdivision map. The interchange project will be a City lead project. Advance development work – funded by the applicant – has been underway for the last year with a Project Study Report (PSR) being processed with Caltrans. The City and CalTrans have developed a cooperative agreement for project processing that identifies a planned opening year of 2021-22 which coincides with the Packet Pg 205 12 tentative timing of phase 2 of the development project. The recently adopted 2017-19 Financial Plan includes funding for continuation of development of the interchange with design and environmental work in the next 2-3 year period. The San Luis Ranch project will play a critical role in establishing the funding mechanism to deliver this infrastructure. A condition of the map has been constructed that prohibits Phase 2 of the development from moving forward unless funding is in hand that allows the City to begin construction. The mechanism to deliver that funding will be memorialized in the Development Agreement. The planned interchange (Overpass & NB Ramps) opening year of 2021-22 coincides with the San Luis Ranch development schedule, as San Luis Ranch proceeds with phase 1 the City will be concurrently proceeding through the interchange design and permitting process. Barring any unforeseen issues with permitting the construction plans and permits should be completed and, as required, the funding will be in hand allowing the City to begin construction of the interchange (Overpass & NB Ramps) concurrently with Phase 2 of the development. Community Facilities District As part of the 2017-2019 Financial Plan, the City Council included new financial policies which establish a framework for land based financing. For the San Luis Ranch project, it is anticipated that a Communities Facilities District (CFD) will be need for both services and infrastructure. A key requirement of the conditions of approval is that the applicant forego any protest rights regarding the formation of a CFD. One of the pillar policies2 of the City’s General Plan is that development should pay its own way unless the City chooses to pay the costs to obtain community wide benefits. City Staff worked with the applicant to prepare a detailed fiscal impact analysis of the proposed project. In summary, the analysis shows that the project will have a positive fiscal impact only if the commercial portions of the project are built. Phases 4, 5, and 6 are the later phases and are commercial. In summary, the analysis shows that at the end of Phase 3, revenues will be approximately $195,000 less than expenditures. By Phase 6, revenues will exceed expenditures by nearly $1 million dollars. Given the uncertainty and timing of the commercial phases, a CFD for services will be formed to fund this interim shortfall. CFD’s can also be used to fund any gap in infrastructure financing and can be used as either a source of reimbursement or to fund costs in excess of any fair share requirements. General Plan and Specific Plan Policies, development standards, mitigation measures and conditions of approval in combination require a significant amount of both in tract and offsite infrastructure to facilitate the orderly development of this area. A preliminary analysis concludes that the development project has the capacity to generate approximately $15 million of CFD revenue for both services and infrastructure over a 30-year timeframe. The exact amount is still be analyzed and will be part of a separate report brought to the City Council during the formation of the CFD. Next Steps 2 1.13.9. Costs of Growth: The City shall require the costs of public facilities and services needed for new development be borne by the new development, unless the community chooses to help pay the costs for a certain development to obtain community-wide benefits. The City shall consider a range of options for financing measures so that new development pays its fair share of costs of new services and facilities which are required to serve the project and which are reasonably related to the new growth attributable to the development. Packet Pg 206 12 If the City Council certifies the EIR, approves the Specific Plan and related entitlements, as well as taking the other necessary actions, these are the next steps in the process: • Prepare Development Agreement. City staff would work with the applicant to prepare a Development Agreement based on the approved Term Sheet and technical fiscal analysis. • City Council Formally Initiates Annexation Request. The City Council will forward a request for annexation to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo). City staff will prepare the annexation application and initiate negotiations with the County on taxes • Planning Commission Consideration of Development Agreement. The Planning Commission would consider the Development Agreement, and forward its recommendations to the City Council. • City Council Consideration of Development Agreement. The City Council would consider approval of the Development Agreement, based on Planning Commission recommendations. • LAFCo Consideration of Annexation. LAFCo will consider the City’s application for annexing the project area into the City. • AB 1600 Update and Establish CFD. After a joint Planning Commission/City Council study session, the City Council will consider an update of the AB 1600 fee program, and the establishment of a Community Facilities District (CFD), both of which will be necessary in order to implement development under the Specific Plan. • Project Development. Once the Development Agreement is approved, annexation has occurred, and fee structures are in place, the City’s approved project entitlements will become effective, including Development Agreement provisions. Project development could then commence, pursuant to required regulatory resource agency permitting. CONCURRENCES The City’s review of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan has involved all City departments involved in the development review process. Conditions of approval or mitigation measures will be implemented to ensure that the project is carried out in a manner that is consistent with City standards. In addition, the Airport Land Use Commission has determined that the project is consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan. FISCAL IMPACT When the Land Use and Circulation Elements of the General Plan were updated in 2014, they were accompanied by a fiscal analysis that identified the overall fiscal impact that build-out of the General Plan would have on the city’s ability to continue to provide the high level of service expected by our community. This look at the fiscal impact of the City’s land use plan is an essential aspect of land use planning in California, where property tax growth is statutorily limited. As a result, communities have to be careful to balance land uses between commercial activities that produce net revenues to support City operations, and residential uses that cost more to support than they produce in direct revenues. Normally, individual projects are not accompanied by project-specific fiscal analyses. In the case of San Luis Ranch, a detailed fiscal analysis has been prepared for a few key reasons: Packet Pg 207 12 1. The size of the project warrants a project-specific look. 2. The phasing of the project could result in short term fiscal impacts that would limit the ability of the City to maintain or deliver public facilities in the earlier phases of the project. This may result in the need for a Community Facilities District to support project maintenance or infrastructure costs. 3. Negotiations with the developer regarding the development agreement relies on a detailed understanding of the specific fiscal effects of the project. 4. Discussions with the County regarding the tax exchange agreement are also informed by a more detailed understanding of the tax revenue and costs that will be generated by the project. The fiscal impact analysis for the San Luis Ranch project was prepared by Applied Development Economics. This is the same firm that prepared the fiscal and economic analysi s for the General Plan update. A few of the key findings from the report include: 1. At full build out, the project is estimated to generate about $2.5 million per year in General Fund revenues and $1.5 million per year in municipal service costs ($2017). As noted in this report, projections show that there will be periods that expenditures exceed revenues for the first phases. 2. It should be noted that the City has made investments and anticipates additional future investments in circulation infrastructure and other public facilities that benefit the proposed project site. 3. To the extent this project generates positive net revenue for the City General Fund, those revenues may be needed to service debt for these public investments that are not funded through direct development impact fees. 4. The residential units would be built in the first three phases and all show a negative fiscal impact. The City contemplates establishing a Community Facilities District (CFD) to help mitigate this adverse fiscal impact. 5. The hotel would be built in Phase 4 and represents the single highest fiscal net revenue of any of the land uses in the project. 6. The office development would be built in Phase 5 and produces a negative fiscal impact, mainly because the property tax from the non-residential development would go to the County rather than the City and office space does not generate much sales tax to help defray the costs of services. 7. The retail commercial development in Phase 6 would generate substantial sales tax and also produce a significant fiscal benefit similar to the hotel. In conclusion, the San Luis Ranch Project is expected to have a net positive fiscal impact on the City, however, a portion of those revenues will be needed for infrastructure that is expected to benefit the City as a whole. In addition, the phasing of the project presents some fiscal impacts in the first phases that may be addressed by the establishment of a Community Facilities District to ensure that the City has sufficient resources to provide urban services and maintain public facilities prior to project build-out. Packet Pg 208 12 ALTERNATIVES 1. Continue consideration of the project entitlements. The City Council may continue its review of the San Luis Ranch project to a date certain (July 18, 2017) if additional time or information is needed to make a decision. If additional information is needed, direction should be provided to staff so that it can be presented on July 18. 2. Direct changes to the project proposal. The City Council may direct staff and the applicant to make specific changes to the project. Direction on changes should be specific and within the scope of the environmental document prepared for the project. For example, the Council could direct the applicant to reduce the number of units proposed for the project because a smaller project is evaluated in the Final EIR. However, direction to increase the number of residential units would require additional environmental review causing substantial delay to the entitlement process. 3. Deny the project. The City Council may deny the project, based on findings that the project is not consistent with the General Plan, or that the project benefits do not outweigh its negative effects. This action is not recommended because the project appears to be consistent with the General Plan, and the Final EIR for the project has identified mitigation measures that will reduce most project-related impacts to less than significant levels. Proposed Findings of Overriding Consideration recommended by the Planning Commission illustrate how the benefits of the project outweigh its negative effects. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan, FEIR, and Tentative Tract Map can be found online at the following location: http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community- development/planning-zoning/specific-area-plans/san-luis-ranch Attachments: a - Resolution b - Exhibit A - San Luis Ranch CEQA Findings c - Advisory Body Review Summary and Project Responses d - San Luis Ranch Final EIR Exec Summary e - Development Agreement Term Sheet f - Council Reading File - ALUC Findings and Conditions g - Council Reading File - Policy Consistency Analysis h - Council Reading File - Vesting Tentative Tract Map Packet Pg 209 12 R ______ RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2017 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE FINAL EIR FOR AND APPROVING THE SAN LUIS RANCH PROJECT, INCLUDING A SPECIFIC PLAN, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, PREZONING, DEVELOPMENT PLAN/VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 3096, INITIATION OF ANNEXATION FOR THE PROJECT, AND TERM SHEET FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1035 MADONNA ROAD (SPEC/ANNX/ER- 1502-2015) WHEREAS, on June 7, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo recommended the City Council 1) certify the Final EIR for the San Luis Ranch project; and 2) approve the San Luis Ranch project, including all related entitlements, consisting of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment, prezoning the site in anticipation of annexation, Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 3096, and Term Sheet; and 3) initiate an annexation application to the San Luis Obispo Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo); and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing on July 5, 2017 in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, for the purpose of considering SPEC/ANNX/ER-1502-2015, which includes entitlements consistent with the Planning Commission recommendation of June 7, 2017, including a Specific Plan that would allow up to 580 residential units, 250,000 square feet of commercial development, and other uses on a 131-acre site, with a and Vesting Tentative Tract Map that would accommodate the residential portion of the Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Final EIR, CEQA Findings, Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council hereby certifies the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR), adopts a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and adopts the following CEQA Findings in support of the San Luis Ranch Project: 1. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines, adequately addressing impacts associated with the proposed project; and Packet Pg 210 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 1 R ______ 2. The proposed project is consistent with the requirements of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) as proposed based on the attached Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations prepared consistent with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15093, and this approval incorporates those FEIR mitigation measures as applicable to VTM #3096, as detailed below, and described more fully in the attached “Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations” document. 3. All potentially significant effects were analyzed adequately in the referenced FEIR, and reduced to the extent feasible, provided the following mitigation measures are incorporated into the project and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. SAN LUIS RANCH FEIR MITIGATION MEASURES Agricultural Resources Mitigation AG-1. Agricultural Conservation. Prior to issuance of any grading permits the project proponent shall provide that for every one (1) acre of Important Farmland (Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, and Unique Farmland) on the site that is permanently converted to non-agricultural use as a result of project development, one (1) acre of land of comparable agricultural productivity shall be preserved in perpetuity. The land dedicated to agriculture pursuant to this measure shall be of size, location and configuration appropriate to maintain a viable, working agricultural operation. The acreage required to meet the 1:1 ratio may be met by the off-site agricultural conservation easement/deed restriction proposed by the project applicant, as long as this land meets the conditions outlined in this measure. Said mitigation shall be satisfied by the applicant through: 1) Granting a perpetual conservation easement(s), deed restriction(s), or other farmland conservation mechanism(s) to the City or qualifying entity which has been approved by the City, such as the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo, for the purpose of permanently preserving agricultural land. The required easement(s) area or deed restriction(s) shall therefore total a minimum of 56 acres of Prime Farmland. The land covered by said on- and/or off-site easement(s) or deed restriction(s) shall be located within or contiguous to the City’s Urban Reserve Line or Greenbelt subject to review and approval of the City’s Natural Resources Manager; or 2) Making an in-lieu payment to a qualifying entity which has been approved by the City, such as the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo, to be applied toward the future purchase of a minimum of 56 acres of Prime Farmland in San Luis Obispo County, together with an endowment amount as may be required. The payment amount shall be determined by the qualifying entity or a licensed appraiser; or 3) Making an in-lieu payment to a qualifying entity which has been approved by the City and that is organized for conservation purposes, to be applied toward a future perpetual conservation easement, deed restriction, or other farmland conservation mechanism to preserve a minimum of 56 acres of Prime Farmland in San Luis Obispo County. The amount of the payment shall be determined by the qualifying entity or a licensed appraiser; or Any combination of the above. Packet Pg 211 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 2 R ______ AG-3(a). Agricultural Conflict Avoidance Measures. The following language shall be added to Section 4.2.1, Agricultural Buffer, of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan: “Agricultural buffers will include City-approved measures to reduce availability of public access to agricultural cultivation areas adjacent to the project site (e.g., fencing, signs, etc.). Future residents will be notified of agricultural buffers as part of purchase or lease agreements.” AG-3(b). Agricultural Fencing. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City to fund installation of fencing and signs along Froom Ranch Way and Dalidio Drive/Prado Road to minimize potential for increases in trespass and vandalism of adjacent agricultural areas. AG-3(c). Buffer Landscaping. To reduce the potential for noise, dust, and pesticide drift to affect future residents on the project site, the project applicant shall ensure that project landscape plans include planting of a windrow of trees and shrubs within the agricultural buffer along Froom Ranch Way at a sufficient density to buffer the site from surrounding agricultural operations. Air Quality Mitigation AQ-1. Encourage Telecommuting. The project applicant or developers of individual projects within the Specific Plan Area shall include provisions to encourage employers within the proposed commercial, office, and hotel components of the project to implement telecommuting programs and include teleconferencing capabilities, such as web cams or satellite linkage, which will allow employees to attend meetings remotely without requiring them to travel out of the area. AQ-2(a). Fugitive Dust Control Measures. Construction projects shall implement the following dust control measures so as to reduce PM10 emissions in accordance with SLOAPCD requirements. • Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible; • Water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used during construction in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency shall be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water or a SLOAPCD- approved dust suppressant shall be used whenever possible, to reduce the amount of potable water used for dust control; • All dirt stock pile areas shall be sprayed daily as needed; • 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; • Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive grass seed and watered until vegetation is established; • All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the SLOAPCD; • All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; Packet Pg 212 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 3 R ______ • Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site; • All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials 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; • Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site; • Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water shall be used where feasible; • All of these fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans; and • 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 20 percent opacity, and to prevent transport of dust offsite. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the SLOAPCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition. AQ-2(b). Standard Control Measures for Construction Equipment. The following standard air quality mitigation measures shall be implemented during construction activities at the project site: • Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer’s specifications; • Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment with ARB certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for sue off-road); • Use diesel construction equipment meeting ARB’s Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road Regulation; • Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the ARB’s 2007 or cleaner certification standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On-Road Regulation; • Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in their fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g. captive or NOX exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative compliance; • 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 a restricted area, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation. • 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. Packet Pg 213 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 4 R ______ • Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job sites to remind drivers and operators of the 5-minute idling limit; • 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: 1. Signs that specify the no idling areas shall be posted and enforced at the site. 2. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted; 3. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors; 4. Use of alternative fueled equipment is recommended; • Electrify equipment when feasible; • Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible; and • Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel. AQ-2(c). Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for Construction Equipment. The following BACT for diesel-fueled construction equipment shall be implemented during construction activities at the project site, where feasible: • Further reducing emissions by expanding use of Tier 3 and Tier 4 off-road and 2010 on-road compliant engines where feasible; • Repowering equipment with the cleanest engines available; and • Installing California Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies, such as level 2 diesel particulate filters. These strategies are listed at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/vt/cvt.htm AQ-2(d). Architectural Coating. To reduce ROG and NOX levels during the architectural coating phase, low or no VOC-emission paint shall be used with levels of 50 g/L or less. AQ-2(e). Construction Activity Management Plan. Emissions reduction measures and construction practices required to comply with Mitigation Measures AQ-2(a) through AQ-2(d) shall be documented in a Construction Activity Management Plan (CAMP) and submitted to SLOAPCD for review and approval at least three months before the start of construction. The CAMP shall include a Dust Control Management Plan, tabulation of on and off-road construction equipment (age, horse-power and miles and/or hours of operation), construction truck trip schedule, construction work-day period, and construction phasing. If implementation of the Standard Mitigation and Best Available Control Technology measures cannot bring the project below the Tier 1 threshold (2.5 tons of NOX+ROG per quarter), off-site mitigation shall be implemented in coordination with SLOAPCD to reduce NOX and ROG emissions to below the Tier 1 threshold. AQ-3(a). Standard Operational Mitigation Measures. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall define and incorporate into the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan standard emission reduction measures from the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook to reduce emissions to below daily threshold levels. Emission reduction measures shall include, but would not be limited to: Packet Pg 214 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 5 R ______ • Increase the building energy rating by 20 percent above 2013 Title 24 requirements (used in the California Emissions Estimator Model) or consistent with 2016 Title 24 requirements, whichever is stricter. Measures used to reach the 20 percent rating cannot be double counted; • Utilize onsite renewable energy systems (e.g., solar, wind, geothermal, low-impact hydro, biomass and bio-gas); and • In addition, the proposed hotel component of the Specific Plan shall participate in the SLO Car Free Program, provide incentives to car-free travelers, and promote the program in their communication tools. AQ-3(b). Off-Site Mitigation. If implementation of standard emission reduction measures from the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook described in Mitigation Measure AQ-3(a) is insufficient to reduce emissions to below daily threshold levels, then the applicant shall coordinate with SLOAPCD to provide funding for off-site emission reduction measures to reduce emissions to below daily threshold levels. In accordance with SLOAPCD methodology, the excess emissions shall be multiplied by the cost effectiveness of mitigation as defined in the State’s current Carl Moyer Incentive Program Guidelines to determine the annual off-site mitigation amount. This amount shall then be extrapolated over the life of the project to determine total off- site mitigation. Off-site emission reduction measures may include, but would not be limited to: • Developing or improving park-and-ride lots; • Retrofitting existing homes in the project area with SLOAPCD-approved wood combustion devices; • Retrofitting existing homes in the project area with energy-efficient devices; • Constructing satellite worksites; • Funding a program to buy and scrap older, higher emission passenger and heavy-duty vehicles; • Replacing/re-powering transit buses; • Replacing/re-powering heavy-duty diesel school vehicles (i.e. bus, passenger or maintenance vehicles); • Funding an electric lawn and garden equipment exchange program; • Retrofitting or re-powering heavy-duty construction equipment, or on-road vehicles; • Re-powering marine vessels; • Re-powering or contributing to funding clean diesel locomotive main or auxiliary engines; • Installing bicycle racks on transit buses; • Purchasing particulate filters or oxidation catalysts for local school buses, transit buses or construction fleets; • Installing or contributing to funding alternative fueling infrastructure (i.e. fueling stations for CNG, LPG, conductive and inductive electric vehicle charging, etc.); • Funding expansion of existing transit services; • Funding public transit bus shelters; • Subsidizing vanpool programs; • Subsidizing transportation alternative incentive programs; • Contributing to funding of new bike lanes; • Installing bicycle storage facilities; and • Providing assistance in the implementation of projects that are identified in City or County Bicycle Master Plans. Packet Pg 215 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 6 R ______ Biological Resources Mitigation BIO-1(a). Best Management Practices. The applicant shall ensure the following general wildlife Best Management Practices (BMPs) are required for construction activity within the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area: • No pets or firearms shall be allowed at the project site during construction activities. • All trash that may attract predators must be properly contained and removed from the work site. All such debris and waste shall be picked up daily and properly disposed of at an appropriate site. • All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles shall occur at least 100 feet from Prefumo Creek and in a location where a spill would not drain toward aquatic habitat. A plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills prior to the onset of work activities. All workers shall be informed of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur. • Pallets or secondary containment areas for chemicals, drums, or bagged materials shall be provided. Should material spills occur, materials and/or contaminants shall be cleaned from the project site and recycled or disposed of to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). • Prior to construction activities in areas adjacent to Prefumo Creek and Cerro San Luis Channel, the drainage features shall be fenced with orange construction fencing and signed to prohibit entry of construction equipment and personnel unless authorized by the City. Fencing should be located a minimum of 20 feet from the edge of the riparian canopy or top of bank and shall be maintained throughout the construction period for each phase of development. Once all phases of construction in this area are complete, the fencing may be removed. • To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, appropriate erosion control BMPs (e.g., use of coir rolls, jute netting, etc.) shall be implemented to minimize adverse effects on Prefumo Creek. No plastic monofilament netting shall be utilized on site. • Construction equipment shall be inspected at the beginning of each day to ensure that wildlife species have not climbed into wheel wells or under tracks since the equipment was last parked. Any sensitive wildlife species found during inspections shall be gently encouraged to leave the area by a qualified biological monitor or otherwise trained personnel. • All vehicles and equipment shall be in good working condition and free of leaks. • Environmentally Sensitive Areas shall be delineated by a qualified biologist prior to construction to confine access routes and construction areas. • Construction work shall be restricted to daylight hours (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM) to avoid impacts to nocturnal and crepuscular (dawn and dusk activity period) species. No construction night lighting shall be permitted within 100 yards of the top of the Prefumo Creek bank. • Concrete truck and tool washout shall be limited to locations designated by a qualified biologist such that no runoff will reach Prefumo Creek or Cerro San Luis Channel. • All open trenches shall be constructed with appropriate exit ramps to allow species that accidentally fall into a trench to escape. Trenches will remain open for the shortest period necessary to complete required work. Packet Pg 216 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 7 R ______ • Existing facilities and disturbed areas shall be used to the extent possible to minimize the amount of disturbance and all new access roads other than the Froom Ranch Way Bridge shall be cited to avoid high quality habitat and minimize habitat fragmentation. • In the event that construction must occur within the creek or creek setback, a biological monitor shall be present during all such activities with the authority to stop or redirect work as needed to protect biological resources. BIO-1(b). Worker Environmental Awareness Program Training. Prior to the initiation of construction activities (including staging and mobilization), the applicant shall ensure all personnel associated with project construction attend a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training. • The training shall be conducted by a qualified biologist, to aid workers in recognizing special status resources that may occur in the project area. The specifics of this program shall include identification of the sensitive species and habitats, a description of the regulatory status and general ecological characteristics of sensitive resources, and review of the limits of construction and avoidance measures required to reduce impacts to biological resources within the work area. A fact sheet conveying this information shall also be prepared for distribution to all contractors, their employers, and other personnel involved with construction of the project. All employees shall sign a form provided by the trainer documenting they have attended the WEAP and understand the information presented to them. BIO-1(c). Western Pond Turtle and Two-Striped Garter Snake Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are implemented to avoid and minimize potential impacts to western pond turtle and two-striped garter snake (these reptiles utilize similar habitats; therefore, implementation of the proposed measures for western pond turtle are also suitable and appropriate for two-striped garter snake): • A qualified biologist(s) shall conduct a pre-construction survey within 24 hours prior to the onset of work activities within and around areas that may serve as potential western pond turtle habitat. If this species is found and the individuals are likely to be injured or killed by work activities, the approved biologist shall be allowed sufficient time to move them from the project site before work activities begin. The biologist(s) must relocate the any western pond turtle the shortest distance possible to a location that contains suitable habitat that is not likely to be affected by activities associated with the project. • Access routes, staging, and construction areas shall be limited to the minimum area necessary to achieve the project goal and minimize potential impacts to western pond turtle habitat including locating access routes and construction staging areas outside of wetlands and riparian areas to the maximum extent practicable. BIO-1(d). California Red-legged Frog, Western spadefoot, and Coast Range Newt Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall implement the following to avoid and minimize potential impacts to CRLF. Because coast range newt and western spadefoot are amphibians that utilize similar habitats to CRLF, implementation of the following measures provided for CRLF shall be implemented for these species as well. • Only USFWS-approved biologists shall participate in activities associated with the capture, handling, and monitoring of CRLF. Packet Pg 217 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 8 R ______ • Ground disturbance shall not begin until written approval is received from the USFWS that the biologist is qualified to conduct the work. If the USFWS does not authorize the relocation of CRLF occurring within the project site, CRLF found within the project site shall be avoided with a 100-foot buffer and no activities shall occur within that buffer until the CRLF has left the project site on its own. • Areas of the project site that lie within 100 feet upland from riparian or jurisdictional areas shall be surrounded by a solid temporary exclusion fence (such as silt fencing) that shall extend at least three feet above the ground and be buried into the ground at least 6 inches to exclude CRLF from the project site. Plastic monofilament netting or other similar material will not be used. The location of the fencing shall be determined by a qualified biologist. The fence shall remain in place throughout construction activities. Installation of the exclusion fencing shall be monitored by a qualified biologist to ensure that it is installed correctly. • During new grading activities in habitats within 100 feet upland from riparian or jurisdictional areas, a qualified biologist shall be on-site to recover any spadefoot toads that may be excavated/unearthed with native material or found under vegetation. If the animals are in good health, they shall be immediately relocated to a designated release area. If they are injured, the animals shall be turned over to an approved wildlife rehabilitator until they are in a condition to be released into the designated release area. • To ensure that diseases are not conveyed between work sites by the approved biologist, the fieldwork code of practice developed by the Declining Amphibian Populations Task Force shall be followed at all times. BIO-1(e). Steelhead Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential impacts to steelhead: • Before any activities begin on the project, a qualified biologist will conduct a training session for all construction personnel. At a minimum, the training will include a description of the steelhead and its habitat, the specific measures that are being implemented to conserve this species for the project, and the boundaries within which the project may be accomplished. Brochures, books, and briefings may be used in the training session, provided that a qualified person is on hand to answer any questions. • During the duration of project activities, all trash that may attract predators will be properly contained and secured, promptly removed from the work site, and disposed of regularly. Following construction, all trash and construction debris will be removed from the work areas. • All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles will occur at least 100 feet from riparian habitat or bodies of water and in a location where a potential spill would not drain directly toward aquatic habitat (e.g., on a slope that drains away from the water source). The monitor shall ensure that contamination of suitable habitat does not occur during such operations. Prior to the onset of work activities, a plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills. All workers shall be informed of the importance of preventing spills and of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur. • The number of access routes, size of staging areas, and the total area used for constructio n activities shall be limited to the minimum area necessary to achieve the project goals. • The City will only permit work within the immediate vicinity of Prefumo Creek for times of the year when potential impacts to steelhead would be minimal. Work shall be restricted during the wet season (October 15 through April 30) and should ideally occur during the late summer and early fall during the driest portion of the year; however, water may still be present during Packet Pg 218 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 9 R ______ construction. If work is proposed in the streambed and water is present during construction, a diversion will be required to dewater the work area and the following avoidance and minimization measures will apply: (1) Upstream and downstream passage for fish, including juvenile steelhead, shall be provided through or around the construction site at all times construction is occurring within the Prefumo Creek streambed. (2) A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey and be present onsite during the diversion installation and dewatering process to capture and relocate any trapped steelhead and/or other fish. Upon approval from the NMFS, the biologist(s) must relocate these individuals the shortest distance possible to a location that contains suitable habitat that is not likely to be affected b y activities associated with the project. (3) Dewatering operations shall employ a five millimeter mesh screen fastened to the intake hose to exclude fish and other wildlife species from the pump. (4) Steelhead shall be excluded from the construction zone with block nets installed upstream and downstream the of the bridge construction zone. The distance upstream and downstream for block net installation will depend on the type of construction activities occurring in the streambed. • To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, the following BMPs shall be implemented. If the BMPs are somehow ineffective, consultation with the City and appropriate resource agencies will be undertaken, and all attempts to remedy the situation will commence immediately. (1) It shall be the owner’s/contractor’s responsibility to maintain control of the entire construction operations and to keep the entire site in compliance. (2) The owner/contractor shall be responsible for monitoring erosion and sediment control measures (including but not limited to fiber rolls, inlet protections, silt fences, and gravel bags) prior, during and after storm events, monitoring includes maintaining a file documenting onsite inspections, problems encountered, corrective actions, and notes and a map of remedial implementation measures. (3) Erosion shall be controlled by covering stockpiled construction materials (i.e. soil, spoils, aggregate, fly-ash, stucco, hydrated lime, etc.) over 2.0 cubic yards that are not actively being used, consistent with the applicable construction general permit, or through other means of erosion control approved by the City (e.g., surrounding with straw bales or silt fencing). The site shall be maintained to minimize sediment-laden runoff to any storm drainage system including existing drainage swales and/or sand watercourses. (a) Construction operations shall be carried out in such a manner that erosion and water pollution will be minimized. (b) State and local laws concerning pollution abatement shall be complied with. (c) If grading operations are expected to denude slopes, the slopes shall be protected with erosion control measures immediately following grading on the slopes. (4) Specifically, in order to prevent sedimentation and debris from entering Prefumo Creek during construction, silt fencing shall be installed along the top of the banks on the west side of the channel prior to the onset of construction activities. • The project biologist will monitor construction activities, in stream habitat, and overall performance of BMPs and sediment controls for the purpose of identifying and reconciling any condition that could adversely affect steelhead or their habitat. The biologist will halt work if Packet Pg 219 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 10 R ______ necessary and will recommend site-specific measures to avoid adverse effects to steelhead and their habitat. • Equipment will be checked daily for leaks prior to the initiation of construction activities. A spill kit will be placed near the creek and will remain readily available during construction in the event that any contaminant is accidentally released. • In addition to these avoidance and minimization measures, Mitigation Measure BIO-2(a) would also ensure that potential temporary and permanent indirect impacts to steelhead from the project are reduced as much as practicable. BIO-1(f). Great Blue Heron and Monarch Butterfly Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential impacts to overwintering monarch butterflies and nesting great blue herons. • Tree trimming/removal and construction activities that affect eucalyptus trees near or within the monarch overwintering grove or active great blue heron nests identified in the San Luis Ranch Monarch Trees Inspection Memo, Results of 2015 and 2016 San Luis Ranch Heron Rookery Surveys Memo, and San Luis Ranch – Prefumo Creek Widening Biological Constraints Memo prepared by Althouse and Meade (Appendix F), shall not be conducted during the monarch butterfly overwintering season from October 1 through March 31 if monarch butterflies are present, or while great blue heron nests are active from February 1 to August 31. If construction activities must be conducted during these periods, a qualified biologist shall conduct overwintering monarch surveys and/or nesting great blue heron surveys within one week of habitat disturbance. If surveys do not locate clustering monarchs or nesting great blue herons, construction activities may be conducted. If clustering monarchs and/or nesting great blue herons are located, no construction activities shall occur within 100 feet of the edge of the overwintering grove and/or active nest(s) until the qualified biologist determines that no more monarchs are overwintering in the grove or the nest(s) are no longer active. • A qualified biologist shall prepare and implement a habitat enhancement plan to be reviewed and approved by the City’s Natural Resource Manager prior to issuance of grading permits to enhance and restore overwintering and nesting habitat that is to be preserved. The habitat enhancement plan may include but shall not be limited to: o On- or off-site planting of native shrubs and trees such as Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) that may support heron roosting and monarch butterfly overwintering. o As eucalyptus trees senesce, they shall be replaced with native species. Native trees and shrubs shall also be used to supplement gaps in canopy or act as windbreaks. o Create new offsite nesting habitat for great blue herons to mitigate for removal of onsite nesting habitat. With a qualified biologist present, the current rookery may be moved to a suitable offsite location where the same great blue herons can resume nesting, following methods detailed in Crouch et al. (2002). It should be noted that creating offsite nesting habitat for great blue herons is experimental and that the relocation techniques described in Crouch et al. (2002) were used to relocate black- crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax). In addition, an agreement with the City will be required prior to implementation of the offsite strategy on their property. The methods detailed in Crouch et al. (2002) include: Packet Pg 220 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 11 R ______ a. This entails at least one year of pre-construction monitoring of the rookery, where the timing of rookery activities will be noted: arrival of breeding adults, egg laying, hatching, and fledging. During this time, audio recordings of adults and juveniles shall be made. b. Following the completion of the nesting season in late summer, a certified arborist specializing in the translocation of trees will examine the mature trees onsite and work with the City’s Natural Resources Manager to determine whether or not it is feasible to relocate the mature trees containing nests across Madonna Road to a suitable location at Laguna Lake Open Space. c. Prior to the start of the next nesting season (based on timing of adult arrival in previous years), nesting adults will be recruited to the new location via decoys and playback of vocalizations. The new location will be monitored regularly by a qualified biologist for the following three breeding seasons. BIO-1(g). Nesting Birds Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential impacts to nesting birds: • For construction activities occurring during the nesting season (generally February 1 to September 15), surveys for nesting birds covered by the California Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 14 days prior to vegetation removal. The surveys shall include the disturbance area plus a 500-foot buffer around the site. If active nests are located, all construction work shall be conducted outside a buffer zone from the nest to be determined by the qualified biologist. The buffer shall be a minimum of 50 feet for non-raptor bird species and at least 300 feet for raptor species. Larger buffers may be required depending upon the status of the nest and the construction activities occurring in the vicinity of the nest. The buffer area(s) shall be closed to all construction personnel and equipment until the adults and young are no longer reliant on the nest site. A qualified biologist shall confirm that breeding/nesting is completed and young have fledged the nest prior to removal of the buffer. • If feasible, removal of vegetation within suitable nesting bird habitats will be scheduled to occur in the fall and winter (between September 1 and February 14), after fledging and before the initiation of the nesting season. BIO-1(h). Roosting Bats Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential impacts to roosting bats: • Prior to issuance of grading permits, a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey of existing structures within the project site to determine if roosting bats are present. The survey shall be conducted during the non-breeding season (November through March). The biologist shall have access to all interior attics, as needed. If a colony of bats is found roosting in any structure, further surveys shall be conducted sufficient to determine the species present and the type of roost (day, night, maternity, etc.) If the bats are not part of an active maternity colony, passive exclusion measures may be implemented in close coordination with CDFW. These exclusion measures must include one-way valves that allow bats to exit the structure but are designed so that the bats may not re-enter the structure. • If a bat colony is excluded from the project site, appropriate alternate bat habitat as determined by a qualified biologist shall be installed on the project site or at an approved location offsite. Packet Pg 221 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 12 R ______ • Prior to removal of any trees over 20 inches diameter-at-breast-height (DBH), a survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if any of the trees proposed for removal or trimming harbor sensitive bat species or maternal bat colonies. If a non-maternal roost is found, the qualified biologist, in close coordination with CDFW shall install one-way valves or other appropriate passive relocation method. For each occupied roost removed, one bat box shall be installed in similar habitat and should have similar cavity or crevices properties to those which are removed, including access, ventilation, dimensions, height above ground, and thermal conditions. Maternal bat colonies may not be disturbed. BIO-2(a). Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. A Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) shall be prepared which will provide a minimum 2:1 ratio (replaced: removed) for temporary and permanent impacts to riparian habitat. The HMMP will identify the specific mitigation sites and it will be implemented immediately following project completion. The HMMP shall include, at a minimum, the following components: • Description of the project/impact site (i.e. location, responsible parties, areas to be impacted by habitat type); • Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project [type(s) and area(s) of habitat to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved; specific functions and values of habitat type(s) to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved]; • Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation site (location and size, ownership status, existing functions and values of the compensatory mitigation site); • Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation site (rationale for expecting implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan [including plant species to be used, container sizes, seeding rates, etc.]); • Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including weed removal and irrigation as appropriate (activities, responsible parties, schedule); • Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site, including no less than quarterly monitoring for the first year (performance standards, target functions and values, target acreages to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved, annual monitoring reports); • Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives; said criteria to be, at a minimum, at least 80 percent survival of container plants and 80 percent relative cover by vegetation type; • An adaptive management program and remedial measures to address negative impacts to restoration efforts; • Notification of completion of compensatory mitigation and agency confirmation; and • Contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for contingency compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism). BIO-2(b). Tree Replacement. Riparian trees four inches or greater measured at diameter-at- breast-height (DBH) shall be replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 3:1 (replaced: removed). Trees 24 inches or greater inches DBH shall be replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 10:1. Willows and cottonwoods may be planted from live stakes following guidelines provided in the California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual for planting dormant cuttings and container stock (CDFW 2010). • Tree replacement shall be conducted in accordance with a Natural Habitat Restoration and Enhancement Plan to be approved by the City’s Natural Resource Manager. Packet Pg 222 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 13 R ______ • The Natural Habitat Restoration and Enhancement Plan shall prioritize the planting of replacement trees on-site where feasible, but shall allow that replacement trees may be planted off-site with approval of the City’s Natural Resource Manager. • Replacement trees may be planted in the fall or winter of the year in which trees were removed. All replacement trees will be planted no more than one year following the date upon which the native trees were removed. BIO-2(c). Froom Ranch Way Bridge Design to Avoid Riparian Areas. The Froom Ranch Way Bridge crossing footings shall be placed outside mapped riparian areas. The placement of the bridge and footings shall be indicated on the Development Plan, VTM, and HMMP, and shall show the bridge’s placement in relation to existing vegetation and the bed and bank of Prefumo Creek. Cultural Resources Mitigation CR-1(a). Historical Structure Relocation and Reconstruction Plan. In order to implement Specific Plan Policy 2.5, a relocation and reconstruction plan for the former spectator’s barn/viewing stand, main residence, and main barn shall be developed by a qualified historic architect. The plan shall include a structural/architectural report documenting existing integrity and conditions and include detailed treatment methods and measures to ensure that historic integrity is retained and that all identified character defining features will be preserved. CR-1(b). Archival Documentation of Historic Buildings. The applicant shall provide archival documentation of the San Luis Ranch Complex in as-built and as-found condition in the form of an Historic American Building Survey (HABS) Level II documentation. The documentation shall comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Architectural and Engineering Documentation (NPS 1990), and shall include large-format photographic recordation, detailed historic narrative report, and compilation of historic research. The documentation shall be completed by a qualified architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for History and/or Architectural History (NPS 1983). The original archival-quality documentation shall be offered as donated material to the History Center of San Luis Obispo County. Archival copies of the documentation shall also be submitted to the San Luis Obispo County Library. CR-1(c). Informational Display of Historic Resources. A retrospective interpretive display detailing the history of the San Luis Ranch Complex and the project site, its significance, and its important details and features shall be developed by the applicant. The information should be incorporated into a publicly-accessed building on the project site, such as the proposed Agricultural Heritage Facilities and Learning Center, or a publicly-accessed outdoor location. The display shall include images and details from the HABS documentation described in Mitigation Measure CR-1(b) and any collected research pertaining to the historic property. The content shall be prepared by a qualified architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for History and/or Architectural History (NPS 1983). Packet Pg 223 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 14 R ______ CR-2(a). Retain a Qualified Principal Investigator. In accordance with Conservation and Open Space Policies 3.5.6 and 3.5.7, a qualified principal investigator, defined as an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for professional archaeology (hereafter qualified archaeologist), shall be retained to carry out all mitigation measures related to archaeological resources. Monitoring shall involve inspection of subsurface construction disturbance at or in the immediate vicinity of known sites, or at locations that may harbor buried resources that were not identified on the site surface. A Native American monitor shall also be present because the area is a culturally sensitive location. The monitor(s) shall be on -site on a full-time basis during earthmoving activities, including grading, trenching, vegetation removal, or other excavation activities. CR-2(b). Unanticipated Discovery of Archaeological Resources. In the event that archaeological resources are exposed during construction, all work shall be halted in the vicinity of the archaeological discovery until a qualified archaeologist can visit the site of discovery and assess the significance of the cultural resource. In the event that any artifact or an unusual amount of bone or shell is encountered during construction, work shall be immediately stopped and relocated to another area. The lead agency shall stop construction within 100 feet of the exposed resource until a qualified archaeologist/paleontologist can evaluate the find (see 36 CFR 800.11.1 and CCR, Title 14, Section 15064.5[f]). Examples of such cultural materials might include: ground stone tools such as mortars, bowls, pestles, and manos; chipped stone tools such as projectile points or choppers; flakes of stone not consistent with the immediate geology such as obsidian or fused shale; historic trash pits containing bottles and/or ceramics; or structural remains. If the resources are found to be significant, they must be avoided or will be mitigated consistent with State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Guidelines. Hazardous Materials Mitigation HAZ-4. Soil Sampling and Remediation. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, a contaminated soil assessment shall be completed in the portions of land to be graded for development. Soil samples shall be collected under the supervision of a professional geologist or environmental professional to determine the presence or absence of contaminated soil in these areas. The sampling density shall be in accordance with guidance from San Luis Obispo County Environmental Health Services, so as to define the volume of soil that may require remediation. Laboratory analysis of soil samples shall be analyzed for the presence of organochlorine pesticides, in accordance with EPA Test Method SW8081A, and heavy metals in accordance with EPA Test Methods 6010B and 7471A. If soil sampling indicates the presence of pesticides or heavy metals exceeding applicable environmental screening levels, the soil assessment shall identify the volume of contaminated soil to be excavated. If concentrations of contaminants exceed EPA action levels and therefore warrant remed iation, contaminated materials shall be remediated either prior to concurrent with construction and an Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) shall be prepared. Cleanup may include excavation, disposal, bio-remediation, or any other treatment of conditions subject to regulatory action. All necessary reports, regulations and permits shall be followed to achieve cleanup of the site. The contaminated materials shall be remediated under the supervision of an environmental consultant licensed to oversee such remediation and under the direction of the lead oversight agency. The Packet Pg 224 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 15 R ______ remediation program shall also be approved by a regulatory oversight agency, such as the San Luis Obispo County Environmental Health Services, the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), or DTSC. All proper waste handling and disposal procedures shall be followed. Upon completion of the remediation, the environmental consultant shall prepare a report summarizing the project, the remediation approach implemented, and the analytical results after completion of the remediation, including all waste disposal or treatment manifests. HAZ-6. Naturally Occurring Asbestos Exposure Avoidance and Minimization: a. Prior to earthwork activities, a site-specific health and safety plan shall be developed per California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (CalOSHA) requirements. The plan shall include appropriate health and safety measures if NOA is detected in soil or bedrock beneath the project site. All construction workers that have the potential to come into contact with contaminated soil/bedrock and groundwater shall be knowledgeable of the requirements in the health and safety plan, which includes proper training and personal protective equipment. The health and safety plan shall prescribe appropriate respiratory protection for construction workers. b.Prior to beginning construction, a soil and bedrock analysis for asbestos using polarized light microscopy and transmission electron microscopy by a qualified laboratory shall be conducted. Samples of soil shall be collected from multiple locations across the site, and bedrock samples shall be collected from locations where excavation into bedrock is anticipated. If NOA is detected, appropriate regulations pertaining to excavation, removal, transportation, and disposal of NOA shall be followed. The sampling strategy shall take into account the locations of potential source areas, and the anticipated lateral and vertical distribution of contaminants in soil and/or groundwater. The results of the investigation shall be documented in a report that is signed by a California Professional Geologist. The report shall include recommendations based upon the findings for additional investigation/remediation if contaminants are detected above applicable screening levels (e.g., excavate and dispose, groundwater and/or soil vapor extraction, or in situ bioremediation). c. During earthwork activities, appropriate procedures shall be incorporated in the event that NOA is detected in soil or bedrock beneath the project site. These procedures shall be followed to eliminate or minimize construction worker or general public exposure to potential contaminants in soil. Procedures shall include efforts to control fugitive dust, contain and cover excavation debris piles, appropriate laboratory analysis of soil for waste characterization, and segregation of contaminated soil from uncontaminated soil. The applicable regulations associated with excavation, removal, transportation, and disposal of contaminated soil shall be followed (e.g., tarping of trucks and waste manifesting). These procedures may be subject to San Luis Obispo APCD requirements under the California ARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations. Hydrology and Water Quality Mitigation HWQ-1(a). Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. All required actions shall be implemented pursuant to a SWPPP and SWMP to be prepared by the project applicant and submitted by the City to the Regional Water Quality Control Board under the NPDES Phase II program. At a minimum, the SWPPP/SWMP shall including the following BMPs: Packet Pg 225 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 16 R ______ • The use of sandbags, straw bales, and temporary de-silting basins during project grading and construction during the rainy season to prevent discharge of sediment-laden runoff into stormwater facilities; • Revegetation as soon as practicable after completion of grading to reduce sediment transport during storms; • Installation of straw bales, wattles, or silt fencing at the base of bare slopes before the onset of the rainy season (October 15th through April 15th); • Installation of straw bales, wattles, or silt fencing at the project perimeter and in front of storm drains before the onset of the rainy season (October 15th through April 15th); and/or • Alternative BMPs as approved by the RWQCB as part of the SWPPP submittal. HWQ-1(b). Berms and Basins. As specified in the SWPPP, the applicant shall be required to manage and control runoff by constructing temporary berms, sediment basins, runoff diversions, or alternative BMP’s as approved by the RWQCB as part of the SWPPP submittal, in order to avoid unnecessary siltation into local streams during construction activities where grading and construction shall occur in the vicinity of such streams. • Berms and basins shall be constructed when grading commences and be periodically inspected and maintained. The project applicant shall sufficiently document, to the CCRWQCB satisfaction, the proper installation of such berms and basins during grading. HWQ-1(c). Concept Grading Plan and Master Drainage Plan. As specified in the SWPPP and the City’s Floodplain Management Regulations, the applicant shall be required to submit a Grading Plan and Master Drainage Plan to the Planning Division and City Public Works Director for approval prior to approval of the VTTM. The grading and drainage plans shall be designed to minimize erosion and water quality impacts, to the extent feasible, and shall be consistent with the project’s SWPPP. The plans shall include the following: a. Graded areas shall be revegetated with deep-rooted, native, non-invasive drought tolerant species to minimize slope failure and erosion potential. Geotextile fabrics shall be used if necessary to hold slope soils until vegetation is established; b.Temporary storage of construction equipment shall be limited to a minimum of 100 feet away from drainages on the project site; and c. Erosion control structures shall be installed. d.Demonstrate peak flows and runoff for each phase of construction. e. Be coordinated with habitat restoration efforts, including measures to minimize removal of riparian and wetland habitats and trees (Mitigation Measures BIO-2[a] and BIO-2[b]). Grading and drainage plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. The applicant shall ensure installation of erosion control structures prior to beginning of construction of any structures, subject to review and approval by the City. HWQ-3(a). Stormwater Quality Treatment Controls. BMP devices shall be incorporated into the stormwater quality system depicted in the Master Drainage Plan (refer to Mitigation Measure HWQ-1[c]). The final design of the stormwater quality system shall be reviewed and approved by the City. The Master Drainage Plan shall contain the following relevant BMPs: • Vegetated bioswales to reduce sediment and particulate forms of metals and other pollutants along corridors of planted grasses. Packet Pg 226 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 17 R ______ • Vegetated buffer strips to reduce sediment and particulate forms of metals and nutrients. HWQ-3(b). Stormwater BMP Maintenance Manual. The project applicant shall prepare a development maintenance manual for the stormwater quality system BMPs (refer to Mitigation Measure HWQ-3[a]). The maintenance manual shall include detailed procedures for maintenance and operations of all stormwater facilities to ensure long-term operation and maintenance of post- construction stormwater controls. The maintenance manual shall require that stormwater BMP devices be inspected, cleaned, and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s maintenance specifications. The manual shall require that devices be cleaned prior to the onset of the rainy season (i.e., October 15th) and immediately after the end of the rainy season (i.e., May 15th). The manual shall also require that all devices be checked after major storm events. HWQ-3(c). Stormwater BMP Semi-Annual Maintenance Report. The property manager(s) or acceptable maintenance organization shall submit to the City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department a detailed report prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer addressing the condition of all private stormwater facilities, BMPs, and any necessary maintenance activities on a semi- annual basis (October 15th and May 15th of each year). The requirement for maintenance and report submittal shall be recorded against the property. HWQ-4. Conditional Letter of Map Revision/Letter of Map Revision. The applicant, in conjunction with the City of San Luis Obispo, shall prepare the CLOMR application and obtain a LOMR from FEMA. Noise Mitigation N-1(a). Construction Vehicle Travel Route. Construction vehicles and haul trucks shall utilize roadways which avoid residential neighborhoods and sensitive receptors where possible. The applicant shall submit a proposed construction vehicle and hauling route for City review and approval prior to grading/building permit issuance. The approved construction vehicle and hauling route shall be used for soil hauling trips prior to construction as well as for the duration of construction. N-1(b). Construction Activity Timing. Except for emergency repair of public service utilities, or where an exception is issued by the Community Development Department, no operation of tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair, alteration, or demolition work shall occur daily between the hours of 7:00 PM and 7:00 AM, or any time on Sundays, holidays, or afte r sunset, such that the sound creates a noise disturbance that exceeds 75 dBA for single family residential, 80 dBA for multi-family residential, and 85 dBA for mixed residential/commercial land uses across a residential or commercial property line. N-1(c). Construction Equipment Best Management Practices (BMPs). For all construction activity at the project site, noise attenuation techniques shall be employed to ensure that noise levels are maintained within levels allowed by the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 9.12 (Noise Control). Such techniques shall include: • Sound blankets on noise-generating equipment. Packet Pg 227 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 18 R ______ • Stationary construction equipment that generates noise levels above 65 dBA at the project boundaries shall be shielded with barriers that meet a sound transmission class (a rating of how well noise barriers attenuate sound) of 25. • All diesel equipment shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be equipped with factory-recommended mufflers. • For stationary equipment, the applicant shall designate equipment areas with appropriate acoustic shielding on building and grading plans. Equipment and shielding shall be installed prior to construction and remain in the designated location throughout construction activities. • Electrical power shall be used to power air compressors and similar power tools. • The movement of construction-related vehicles, with the exception of passenger vehicles, along roadways adjacent to sensitive receptors shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM, Monday through Saturday. No movement of heavy equipment shall occur on Sundays or official holidays (e.g., Thanksgiving, Labor Day). • Temporary sound barriers shall be constructed between construction sites and affected uses. N-1(d). Neighboring Property Owner Notification and Construction Noise Complaints. The contractor shall inform residents and business operators at properties within 300 feet of the project site of proposed construction timelines and noise complaint procedures to minimize potential annoyance related to construction noise. Proof of mailing the notices shall be provided to the Community Development Department before the City issues a zoning clearance. Signs shall be in place before beginning of and throughout grading and construction activities. Noise-related complaints shall be directed to the City’s Community Development Department. N-4(a). HVAC Equipment. Retail HVAC equipment shall be shielded and located on building rooftops, or a minimum of 100 feet from the nearest residential property line. N-4(b). Parking Lot/Loading Dock Orientation and Noise Barrier. If parking areas or loading docks would be located within 250 feet of the residential properties to the west, a masonry noise barrier shall be installed along the eastern boundary of the proposed residences adjacent to the commercial land use area on the eastern portion of the project site. The noise barrier shall be constructed of any masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. N-5(a). Interior Noise Reduction. The project applicant shall implement the following measures, or similar combination of measures, which demonstrate that interior nois e levels in proposed residences adjacent to Froom Ranch Way and Madonna Road, hotel, and offices would be reduced below the City’s 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard. The required interior noise reduction shall be achieved through a combination of standard interior noise reduction techniques, which may include (but are not limited to): • In order for windows and doors to remain closed, mechanical ventilation such as air conditioning shall be provided for all units (Passive ventilation may be provided, if mechanical ventilation is not necessary to achieve interior noise standards, as demonstrated by a qualified acoustical consultant). • All exterior walls shall be constructed with a minimum STC rating of 50, consisting of construction of 2 inch by 4 inch wood studs with one layer of 5/8 inch Type “X” gypsum board on each side of resilient channels on 24 inch centers and 3 ½ inch fiberglass insulation. Packet Pg 228 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 19 R ______ • All windows and glass doors shall be rated STC 39 or higher such that the noise reduction provided will satisfy the interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. • An acoustical test report of all the sound-rated windows and doors shall be provided to the City for review by a qualified acoustical consultant to ensure that the selected windows and doors in combination with wall assemblies would reduce interior noise levels sufficiently to meet the City’s interior noise standard. • All vent ducts connecting interior spaces to the exterior (i.e., bathroom exhaust, etc.) shall have at least two 90 degree turns in the duct. • All windows and doors shall be installed in an acoustically-effective manner. Sliding window panels shall form an air-tight seal when in the closed position and the window frames shall be caulked to the wall opening around the perimeter with a non-hardening caulking compound to prevent sound infiltration. Exterior doors shall seal air-tight around the full perimeter when in the closed position. • The applicant shall submit a report to the Community Development Department by a qualified acoustical consultant certifying that the specific interior noise reduction techniques included in residential, hotel, and office components of the project would achieve interior noise levels that would not exceed 45 dBA CNEL. N-5(b). Residential Outdoor Activity Area Noise Attenuation. Outdoor activity areas (e.g., patios and hotel pool areas) associated with shared multifamily residential recreational spaces, hotel, commercial, and office uses shall be protected from sound intrusion so that they meet the City’s exterior standard of 60 dBA CNEL. Outdoor activity areas shall be oriented away from traffic noise such that intervening buildings reduce traffic noise or sh all include noise barriers capable of reducing traffic noise levels to meet the City’s exterior standard. Hotel pool areas shall be located a minimum of 500 feet from the U.S. 101 right-of-way. Noise barriers may be constructed of a material such as tempered glass, acrylic glass, or masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. The applicant shall submit a report to the Community Development Department by a qualified acoustic consultant certifying that the specific outdoor noise reduction techniques in combination with the orientation of outdoor activity areas of shared multifamily residential recreational spaces, hotel, commercial, and offices would achieve exterior noise levels that would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL. N-5(c). Froom Ranch Way Noise Barrier. A masonry noise barrier or alternative barrier, such as a landscaped berm, shall be installed along the southern property line of residential lots that abut Froom Ranch Way to protect outdoor activity areas (patios and pools) at these residences from sound intrusion from traffic along Froom Ranch Way. The noise barrier or berm shall provide, at minimum, a 6 foot high barrier between Froom Ranch Way and the neighboring residences from the final grade of whichever use (i.e., Froom Ranch Way or residences) has a higher final elevation. If a masonry noise barrier is implemented, the noise barrier shall be constructed of any masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds per squ are foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. If an alternative material is used, the developer shall submit a report to the Community Development Department by a qualified acoustical consultant certifying that the specific exterior noise reduction techniques included would achieve exterior noise levels that would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL. Packet Pg 229 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 20 R ______ N-5(d). U.S. Highway 101 Noise Barrier at Hotel. If the hotel includes an outdoor activity area (such as a patio or pool) a masonry noise barrier or alternative barrier, such as berms, landscaping, or glass, must be installed along the eastern property line of the hotel where it abuts the U.S. 101 right of way to protect these outdoor activity areas from sound intrusion from traffic along U.S. 101. If a masonry noise barrier is implemented, the noise barrier shall provide, at minimum, an 8 foot high barrier between U.S. 101 and the hotel from the final grade of whichever use (i.e., U.S. 101 or hotel) has a higher final elevation. Such a noise barrier shall be constructed of any masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. If an alternative material is used, the developer shall submit a report to the Community Development Department by a qualified acoustical consultant demonstrating that the specific exterior noise reduction techniques included in the hotel component of the project would achieve exterior noise levels that would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL. Recreation Mitigation REC-1. Parkland In-lieu Fees. The project applicant shall pay parkland in-lieu fees in accordance with the City’s parkland in-lieu fee program for the parkland shortage. The project’s specific fee shall be determined by the City at the time of project approval, after accounting for parkland provided within the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area. The in-lieu fees collected from the project shall be directed to new projects or improvements to existing parks and recreation facilities within the City of San Luis Obispo parks system. Transportation Mitigation T-1(a). Intersection #1: Madonna Road & Los Osos Valley Road. • City optimize signal timing to accommodate increased project volumes (ongoing) T-1(b). Intersection #3: Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive/Prado Road. • Extend existing westbound left turn lane on Madonna Road to Dalidio Drive/Prado Road to 310’ (Phase 1) • Install 2nd westbound 310’ left turn lane on Madonna Road to Dalidio Drive/Prado Road (Phase 1) • Install eastbound 250’ right turn pocket on Madonna Road to Dalidio Drive/Prado Road (Phase 1) • Install 2nd northbound left shared with through-lane on Prado Road/Dalidio Drive to Madonna Road (Phase 1) • Prohibit westbound U-turns on Madonna Road (Phase 1) • Provide split phase operations & optimize signal timing (Phase 1) T-1(c). Intersection #5: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass-Only, Phase 2) T-1(d). Intersection #8: Higuera Street & South Street. • Optimize Signal Timing T-1(e) . Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way. Packet Pg 230 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 21 R ______ • Install dedicated 230’ right turn lane on northbound Froom Ranch Way approach to Los Osos Valley Road (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction) • Extend right turn lane on southbound Froom Ranch Way approach to Los Osos Valley Road to 110’ (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction) • Install 2nd southbound left turn lane on Froom Ranch Way approach to eastbound Los Osos Valley Road (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction) T-1(f). Intersection #10: Los Osos Valley Road & Auto Park Way. • Signalization (Phase 1) • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2) T-1(g). Intersection #16: S. Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only Phase 2) • Extend northbound right turn pocket to 230’ and channelize movement (Phase 1) T-1(h). Intersection #21: Prado Road/Dalidio Drive & Froom Ranch Way. • Install multilane roundabout control (when connection is constructed) T-1(i). Intersection #25: Prado Road/Dalidio Drive & SC Project Driveway. • Install multilane roundabout control or restricted access (when connection is constructed) T-2(a). Intersection #1: Madonna Road & Los Osos Valley Road. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2) T-2(b). Intersection #2: Madonna Road & Oceanaire Drive. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2) T-2(c). Intersection #5: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 S.B Ramps. • Extend northbound Madonna Road left turn lane to 150’ (Phase 1) T-2(d). Intersection #6: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2) T-2(e) . Intersection #7: Madonna Road & Higuera Street. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Plus U.S. 101 northbound ramps, Phase 2) T-2(f). Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way. • Install dedicated 230’ right turn lane on Los Osos Valley Road approach to northbound Froom Ranch Way (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction) • Extend right turn lane on Los Osos Valley Road approach to southbound Froom Ranch Way to 110’ (with Froom Ranch Way Bridge construction) • Install 2nd southbound left turn lane on Froom Ranch Way approach to eastbound Los Osos Valley Road (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction) T-2(g). Intersection #12: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps. Packet Pg 231 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 22 R ______ • Extend off-ramp left turn pocket to 320’ (Phase 1) T-2(h). Intersection #13: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2) T-2(i). Intersection #14: Los Osos Valley Road & Higuera Street. • Extend eastbound right turn lane to 180’ (Phase 1) T-2(j). Intersection #18: Prado Road & Higuera Street • Install 2nd U.S. 101 northbound left turn lane (Phase 1) • Extend westbound right turn pocket to 400’ (Phase 1) T-3(a). Segments #1 - #6: Madonna Road (Los Osos Valley Road to Higuera Street) • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2) • Fund assessment of decreasing transit headways to 25 min • Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (Phase 1) T-3(b). Segments #7 - #8: Higuera Street (Madonna Road to Prado Road) • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass and U.S. 101 northbound ramps, Phase 2) • Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (Phase 1) T-3(c) . Segments #13 - #17: Los Osos Valley Road (Madonna Road to Higuera Street) • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass and U.S. 101 northbound ramps, Phase 2) • Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (Phase 3) T-3(d). Segments #18 - #20: Dalidio Drive/Prado Road (Froom Ranch Way to Higuera Street) • Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (when Prado Road is constructed/improved) T-4. Construction Traffic Management Plan. Prior to construction, a traffic management plan shall be prepared for review and approval by the City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department. The traffic management plan shall be based on the type of roadway traffic conditions, duration of construction, physical constraints, nearness of the work zone to traffic and other facilities (bicycle, pedestrian, driveway access, etc.). The traffic management plan shall include: • Advertisement. The project developer shall prepare an advertisement campaign informing the public of the proposed construction activities. Advertisements shall occur prior to beginning work and periodically during the course of the project construction. The advertising shall include notification of changes to bus schedules and potential changes to bus stop locations, potential impacts during school drop-off and pick-up times, and major intersections that may be impacted during construction. • Property Access. Access to parcels along the construction area shall be maintained to the greatest extent feasible. Affected property owners shall receive advance notice of work adjacent to their property access and when driveways would be potentially closed. • Schools. Any construction adjacent to schools shall ensure that access is maintained for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists, particularly at the beginning and end of the school day. Packet Pg 232 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 23 R ______ • Buses, Bicycles, and Pedestrians. The work zone shall provide for passage by buses, bicyclists, and pedestrians, particularly in the vicinity of schools. • Intersections. Traffic control (i.e., use of flag persons) shall be used at intersections that are determined to be unacceptably congested due to construction traffic. T-5. Froom Ranch Way Bridge Phasing. The Froom Ranch Way bridge connection shall be completed prior to occupancy of Phase 1 of the Specific Plan buildout. T-6. Project Site Intersection Roundabout Control. New roadway intersections within the Specific Plan Area shall be controlled using roundabout design, unless the City Public Works Department determines that roundabout control is infeasible. T-7. Traffic Calming Features. New roadway intersections along San Luis Ranch Road shall include neighborhood traffic circles at key intersections, and traffic -calming features, such as diverters, along longer uninterrupted segments. T-8(a). Intersection #3: Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive/Prado Road • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[b]) T-8(b). Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[e]/Mitigation Measure T-2[f]) T-8(c). Intersection #10: Los Osos Valley Road & Auto Park Way • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[f]) T-8(d). Intersection #12: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) T-8(e). Intersection #13: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) T-8(f). Intersection #14: Los Osos Valley Road & S. Higuera Street • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) T-8(g). Intersection #16: S. Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[f]) T-9(a). Intersection #1: Madonna Road & Los Osos Valley Road • Extend northbound right turn pocket on Los Osos Valley Road to 295’ • Extend southbound left turn pocket on Madonna Road to 395’ T-9(b). Intersection #2: Madonna Road & Oceanaire Drive • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[b]) Packet Pg 233 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 24 R ______ • Extend westbound right turn land on Madonna Road to 200’ T-9(c). Intersection #3: Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[b]) T-9(d). Intersection #4: Madonna Road & El Mercado • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measures T-1[b]) T-9(e). Intersection #5: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) T-9(f). Intersection #6: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) T-9(g). Intersection #8: Higuera Street & South Street • Extend northbound Higuera Street left turn pocket to 120’ • Extend eastbound South Street right turn pocket to 100’ T-9(h). Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[d]/Mitigation Measure T-2[f]) T-9(i). Intersection #11: Los Osos Valley Road & Calle Joaquin • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) T-9(j). Intersection #12: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) T-9(k). Intersection #14: Los Osos Valley Road & S. Higuera Street • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) T-9(l). Intersection #16: S. Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[g]) T-9(m). Intersection #18: Higuera Street & Prado Road • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-2[j]) T-10(a). Segments #1 - #6: Madonna Road (Higuera Street to Los Osos Valley Road) • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) T-10(b). Segments #15 - #16: Los Osos Valley Road (Calle Joaquin to U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps) • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) T-10(c). Segment #24: Prado Road/Dalidio Drive (Project Driveway to Froom Ranch Way). Packet Pg 234 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 25 R ______ • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) Other Required Mitigation from the Initial Study GEO-1. Earthquake and Ground Acceleration Design and Construction Measures . Design and construction of the buildings, roadway infrastructure and all subgrades shall be specifically proportioned to resist Design Earthquake Ground Motions (Design amax) of SD1=0.481 and SDS=0.832 and engineered to withstand Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) peak ground acceleration (PGAM) equal to 0.519 g, as described in the Soils Engineering Report for the project (GeoSolutions, Inc., 2015). The design should take into consideration the soil type, potential for liquefaction, and the most current and applicable seismic attenuation methods that are available. GEO-2. Operational Seismic Safety Requirement. For retail stores included in the project, goods for sale may be stacked no higher than 8 feet from the floor in any area where customers are present, unless provisions are made to prevent the goods from falling during an earthquake of up to 7.5 magnitude. The stacking or restraint methods shall be reviewed and approved by the City before approval of occupancy permits, and shall be a standing condition of occupancy. GEO-3. Geotechnical Design. The project plans and specifications shall include the geotechnical recommendations included in the Soils Engineering Report, prepared by GeoSolutions, Inc. on May 29, 2015. Recommendations therein that shall be incorporated into the final project building plans include specification for the following components of development preparation and design: • Building Pad Preparation • Paved Areas Preparation • Pavement Design • Interlocking Concrete Pavers • Conventional Foundations • Post-Tensioned Slabs • Slab-On-Grade Construction • Retaining Walls • Exterior Concrete Flatwork SECTION 2. Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment/Pre-Zoning, and Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map Approval with Findings & Conditions. The City Council does hereby approve application SPEC/ANNX/ER-1502-2015, a Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment/Pre-Zoning, and Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTM #3096), to allow up to 580 dwelling units, including an 80-unit density bonus consistent with City requirements, based on the following findings, and subject to the following conditions being incorporated into the Vesting Tentative Tract Map: Findings: 1. The project area was identified as one of three Specific Plan areas designated for development when the General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements update were Packet Pg 235 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 26 R ______ adopted by the City Council in December 2014. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan was prepared to implement this aspect of the General Plan. 2. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is consistent with policy direction for the area included in the General Plan, specifically Land Use Element Policy 8.1.4, which identifies the San Luis Ranch area as a Special Focus Area (SP-2), subject to policies for the development of a specific plan and certain broad development parameters and principles. The Specific Plan is also consistent with all other applicable General Plan policies, as described and analyzed in Section 6.0 of the May 24, 2017, staff report to the Planning Commission for this project, and as discussed further within the Final EIR. 3. The General Plan Amendment/Pre-Zoning allows the implementation of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan by: • Updating the City’s Land Use Map to reflect the development pattern included in the Specific Plan; • Updating the City’s Circulation Map to reflect the circulation system included in the Specific Plan; • Updating the relevant portions of the General Plan to update statistical data related to land use acreage and long-term buildout potential; and • Providing the pre-zoning information needed for LAFCo to consider annexation of the site to the City, which is a prerequisite for allowing development on the site under the City’s General Plan. 4. As conditioned, the design of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the General Plan because it is consistent with the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan, it respects existing environmental site constraints, will add to the City’s residential housing inventory, allow for appropriate non-residential development, and provides needed infrastructure and roa dway improvements identified in the City’s General Plan. 5. The Specific Plan project was reviewed by various City advisory bodies, including the Architectural Review Commission, Bicycle Advisory Committee, Parks and Recreation Commission, and Cultural Heritage Committee, and incorporates input consistent with their direction. 6. The Airport Land Use Commission found the Specific Plan project as proposed to be consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan. 7. Development will occur consistent with the Vesting Tentative Tract Map and the required architectural review process, which will allow for detailed review of development plans to assure compliance with City plans, policies, and standards. 8. As conditioned, the design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements for access through (or use of property within) the proposed subdivision, and the project is consistent with the pattern of development prescribed in the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan. Packet Pg 236 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 27 R ______ 9. The proposed project will provide affordable housing consistent with the intent of California Government Code §65915, and in compliance with City policies and the Housing Element. 10. The Tentative Map, as conditioned, will comply with all environmental mitigation measures prescribed herein, and therefore is consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act, as implemented through the San Luis Ranch Final EIR. Planning Commission Recommended Modifications to the Specific Plan 1. Madonna Road - Safe Pedestrian Crossing. Explore ways to improve pedestrian access and safety related to crossing Madonna Road near Oceanaire Drive, particularly to improve access to Laguna Lake Park. 2. Froom Ranch Way Safety. Address ways to slow vehicular speeds on Froom Ranch Way, especially in the context of improving bike safety. 3. Net Zero Carbon Policy. Explore ways to promote a Net Zero Carbon concept in new development, probably most effectively addressed as a Specific Plan policy that allows some degree of flexibility. 4. Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Stations. Modify the Specific Plan to require that garages are “EV-ready” to allow for installation of EV charging stations, without actually requiring the EV stations to be installed as part of development. Also consider allowing for EV stations adjacent to apartment buildings in higher density portions of the project. 5. Zero Lot Line. Allow for the flexibility to include more zero lot line development, as a means of creating more usable outdoor area within the small lots. Incorporate zero lot line concept with flexibility if possible. 6. Promoting a “Sense of Place”. Consistent with Architectural Review Commission direction, clarify graphics in the Specific Plan to better show how new development can create a “sense of place” through the placement of buildings and nearby outdoor usable public areas. 7. Commercial/Residential Buffer. Use text and graphics in the Specific Plan to clarify how buffer areas between residential and commercial areas can be effectively addressed to minimize land use conflicts. 8. Great Blue Heron Mitigation. Clarify how proposed FEIR Mitigation Measure BIO- 1(f), which addresses potential impacts to great blue heron habitat, can be effectively implemented through the Specific Plan. 9. Tie Fees to Modal Split Goals. Clarify in the Specific Plan that transportation fees should be tied to the attainment of modal split goals. Other Modifications to the Specific Plan to Ensure Consistency with the Final EIR and Map 10. Add a roadway classification map that is consistent with the General Plan; 11. Add a bicycle classification map that is consistent with General Plan and Bicycle Transportation Plan; Packet Pg 237 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 28 R ______ 12. Expand Section 6.5 Neighborhood Traffic Management to be consistent with the findings of the Final EIR; 13. Revise Section 6.6 Street Network & Standards such that street classifications and cross sections are consistent with general plan policy, City standards, and the vesting tentative map; 14. Revise Section 6.7 Summary of Supportive Interface with Adjacent Street and Path to include all relevant connections and improvements consistent with the findings and mitigations identified in the Final EIR; 15. Revise Section 7.4 Utilities and Streets such that discussion regarding the Dalidio/Prado Connection and Froom Ranch Way Connection is consistent with the findings and mitigation identified in the Final EIR; 16. Revise Sections 7.6 Performance Triggers & 7.7 Phasing Strategy into a single comprehensive infrastructure improvements section listing all of the applicant proposed infrastructure improvements in addition to the primary onsite infrastructure improvements identified as mitigation in the Final EIR along with phasing and establishment of which party is responsible for implementation; 17. Revise Section 7.8 Financing Strategy – Required Facilities to reflect the project description evaluated in the EIR, to include all of the improvement projects and their actual triggers as established in the EIR, to update construction estimates and impact fees, and to be consistent with the draft development agreement; 18. Revise Section 8 Implementation to add policies requiring sequential construction of the project consistent with the project description evaluated in the Final EIR, policies requiring participation in an infrastructure financing program, and policies regarding the acquisition of ROW necessary for infrastructure; 19. Eliminate Section 8.2 San Luis Ranch Approval and Adoption due to redundancy with other policies and processes; 20. Replace Table ES-1 in Appendix B of the Specific Plan with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as established in the Final EIR; and 21. Update Tables 7-14 and 7-15, which address improvement projects cost allocation and estimated project impact fees, based on the outcome of ongoing Development Agreement negotiations between the City and applicant. The phasing and infrastructure costing Tables in Chapter 7 of the Specific Plan shall be updated with accurate infrastructure costs, fair share calculations, and phasing information following a detailed financial analysis to be prepared for the Development Agreement. These tables shall be updated prior to final approval of the Development Agreement. A specific plan amendment shall not be required to update table information in the document. Vesting Tentative Tract Map Conditions: Fire 1. A second point of fire department access to the multi-family portion of the development shall be provided in accordance with the General Plan Safety Element and Fire Code Appendix D. The second access road may be for Emergency Vehicles only, shall be at least Packet Pg 238 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 29 R ______ 20 feet of drivable surface in width, be designed to support 73,000 lbs, and be accessible from either side by an automatic opening gate compatible with emergency preemption equipment. The second point of access shall be at least one half the diagonal distance of the area served separated from the main access point in accordance with the Safety Element and Fire Code Access Provisions or as approved by the Fire Chief. Access roads parallel to project buildings of 3 stories in height or more shall have an unobstructed width of 26 feet. 2. The project shall provide a minimum of two points of access to the subdivision from an existing public way wherever there are more than 30 housing units. Emergency Vehicle Access points may be accepted in lieu of full access. 3. All streets that are less than 28 feet in width shall be posted “No Parking – Fire Lane” on both sides. Streets less than 36 feet in width shall be posted on one side only. 4. The project shall provide water mains and city-standard fire hydrants to provide a minimum needed fire flow of 1500 GPM for 2 hours to within 300 feet of the exterior walls of all proposed structures. Fire hydrant spacing shall not exceed 500 feet. Transportation 5. Unless a design exception is approved by the Public Works Director, the final map shall conform to City adopted Engineering Standards, Engineering Specifications, Policies, and Plans. 6. Project construction and infrastructure shall be completed in the sequential phase order as evaluated in the San Luis Ranch Final EIR, or as agreed to between the City and Developer. If phasing is modified amendments to the Specific Plan and EIR maybe required. 7. Prado Road Interchange. As part of, or prior to, recordation of the final map the subdivider shall submit an irrevocable offer to dedicate to the City property necessary to construct the Prado Road Overcrossing and Southbound U.S. 101 Ramps Improvements (“the Improvements”), and all appurtenances to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. a. Approval of this map is contingent upon the effectiveness of an ordinance approving a development agreement for the project providing mechanism(s) to fund construction and maintenance of the Improvements (“Funding Mechanism”). b. The Development Agreement required by condition 6(a) shall waive the rights of the applicant, and any future successors in interest to the applicant in the property to oppose establishment of one or more Funding Mechanisms described in the Development Agreement or the imposing of any tax, assessment, fee or charge with respect to such a Funding Mechanism. In the event that voters or property owners dissolve a Funding Mechanism, a Homeowners Association will be obliged to fund any and all costs for infrastructure and/or services that the Funding Mechanism would otherwise have funded. CC&Rs establishing such a Homeowners Association shall be submitted for the reasonable approval of the City Attorney and recorded before any building permit may issue for the improvement of the Project. Packet Pg 239 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 30 R ______ c. Overcrossing and NB Ramp Improvements Fee Payment. The Funding Mechanism identified in 7(b), shall be adopted before occupancy of Phase 2. The subdivider shall pay its fair share mitigation fees for the Prado Rd. Overcrossing and Northbound U.S. 101 Ramps Improvements prior to the issuance of a building permit for Phase 2. d. SB Ramp Improvements Fee Payments. Fair share fees, for remainder of Improvements, not included in the initial Interchange construction, (future South Bound Ramps of the Prado Rd. Interchange and all appurtenances) shall be collected at the time of issuance of each individual building permit for each phase. 8. Madonna & Dalidio/Prado Widening of the Madonna & Dalidio/Prado intersection per Table 4.12-1 #2 of the San Luis Ranch EIR, Class I path on the South side, and ADA ramp upgrades on all corners shall be constructed by the subdivider prior to issuance of building permits. Deferral of the Class I path to “Future by others” as shown in the proposed vesting tentative map is not approved, this improvement shall be required prior to issuance of building permits for Phase 1. Prior to recordation of the final map the applicant shall complete the design of these improvements and exhaust all feasible efforts to acquire the necessary off-site dedications, easements, and agreements for construction, all to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. a. Madonna Road Travel Lanes shall be a minimum of 11’ with a minimum 2’ median or wider as necessary if pedestrian refuge is required adjacent to the left turn pockets. Where ROW is limited widening should be accommodated on the park side. b. Please refer to Engineering Development Review condition on dedications and easements. If the Developer cannot acquire the necessary interests in land to implement this mitigation measure, the Public Works Director may authorize the Developer in writing to mitigate to the greatest extent feasible within right-of-way, dedication areas, and easements under the control of the Subdivider and/or City. Alternative measures shall be established with recordation of the final map. 9. Enhanced Madonna Pedestrian/Bicycle Crossings. Unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director; prior to issuance of building permits for phase 1 the subdivider shall upgrade the pedestrian crossing at Madonna and Oceanaire to include curb extensions and a pedestrian refuge island with push button signal activation. Space for Curb extensions and refuge island should be accommodated by removing frontage street parking. Unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director; prior to issuance of building permits for Phase 3 the subdivider shall construct a “hawk” pedestrian signal and crossing at the intersection of Dogwood and Madonna interconnected with the adjacent traffic signals. 10. Dalidio/Prado & Froom a multilane roundabout shall be constructed by the subdivider at the intersection of Dalidio/Prado & Froom Ranch Way prior to the issuance of building Packet Pg 240 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 31 R ______ permits. An interim single lane roundabout is permitted prior to issuance of building permits for Phase 2. Prior to recordation of the final map the applicant shall complete the design of the multilane roundabout and exhaust all feasible efforts to acquire the necessary off-site dedications, easements, and agreements for construction all to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. If the Developer cannot acquire the necessary land interests to implement this mitigation measure, the Public Works Director may authorize the Developer in writing to modify the alignment and design of the roundabout such that off- site property interests are not necessary. The Final map shall reflect lot adjustments resulting from final roundabout design. Interim all-way stop control as shown in the proposed vesting tentative map or signalization is not approved. 11. Los Osos Valley Road & SB 101 Ramp Extension of the LOVR & SB 101 off ramp left turn lane to 320’ shall be constructed by the applicant prior to issuance of building permits. The construction of this improvement shall be coordinated with CalTrans and the City. 12. Madonna Bike Path A protected bike facility along Madonna Road shall be constructed within the existing right-of-way between El Mercado & Hwy 101 SB Ramps and between the existing bike trail termini and the intersection of Oceanaire & Madonna prior to issuance of building permits, unless otherwise deferred by the Community and Public Works Department Directors. Prior to recordation of the final map the applicant shall complete design. a. Prior to issuance of building permits the subdivider shall upgrade the existing pathway to Class I standards from El Mercado to its South Western Terminus, unless otherwise deferred by the Community and Public Works Department Directors. 13. Froom Ranch Bridge The Froom Ranch – Prefumo Creek bridge shall be constructed prior to issuance of building permits, unless otherwise deferred by the Community and Public Works Department Directors. The cross section of the bridge shall at a minimum include: 12’ clear class I multi-use path, two 6.5’ bicycle lanes, and two 11’ travel lanes. 14. Froom Ranch Widening Design of Froom Ranch widening to its final cross section from its existing northern terminus to the LOVR frontage road shall be completed prior to issuance of building permits for Phase 1 unless otherwise deferred by the Community and Public Works Department Directors. The cross section shall at a minimum include: 12’ class I multi-use path with two 2’ shoulders, two 6.5’ bicycle lanes, two 11’ travel lanes and a 10’ landscaped median. 15. Froom Ranch Road Froom Ranch Road shall have a design speed of no more than 35 miles per hour and include buffered bicycle lanes. Adjustments to lots as a result of the design shall be reflected with recordation of the final map. Packet Pg 241 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 32 R ______ 16. Froom Ranch & Los Osos Valley Intersection. The Froom Ranch and Los Osos Valley Road intersection shall be widened per San Luis Ranch EIR table 4.12-1 prior to the issuance of building permits unless otherwise deferred by the Community and Public Works Department Directors. Prior to recordation of the final map the applicant shall complete the design of this improvement and exhaust all feasible efforts to acquire the necessary off-site dedications, easements, and agreements for construction all to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. a. Please refer to Engineering Development Review condition on dedications and easements. If the Developer cannot acquire the necessary interests in land to implement this mitigation measure, the Public Works Director may authorize the Developer in writing to mitigate to the greatest extent feasible within right-of-way, dedication areas, and easements under the control of the Subdivider and/or City. Alternative measures shall be memorialized with recordation of the final map. 17. Prior to issuance of each individual building permit, the subdivider shall pay City wide transportation impact fees. Crediting of fees for eligible expenses identified in the City’s Transportation Fee Program is permitted. 18. Prior to beginning each phase, the subdivider shall pay its fair share mitigation costs proportional to each phase for the intersection improvements as prescribed in the project EIR (see Table 123 of Appendix L -Traffic Impact Study). 19. All access rights to Prado/Dalidio, Madonna Rd. and Froom Ranch Way shall be dedicated to the City. All private access points along Dalidio/Prado shall be restricted to right in & out, unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director. 20. The final map shall be revised to include a standard “knuckle” design at the intersection of San Luis Ranch Road and Haystack Place. The knuckle will include emergency access and pedestrian and bicycle access to the proposed Ped/Bike Bridge and Phase 3. 21. Final map shall include a class I connection between Harvest Street and commercially zoned property. 22. Final map shall include a trail connection between San Luis Ranch Road and the commercially zoned lot either along the drainage channel or via Haystack Place and between any two of parcels 293-296. 23. As part of final map the subdivider shall dedicate access easements for pedestrian/bicycle connections including the Cul-De-Sacs to Froom Ranch Road, San Luis Ranch Rd. Bridge, San Luis Ranch Rd. to the commercially zoned lot/Dalidio Road, and Lot 216 & Legacy lane to open space and the central park. Packet Pg 242 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 33 R ______ 24. As part of final map the subdivider shall exhaust all reasonable efforts to dedicate a 25’ access easement adjacent to the US 101 freeway frontage for maintenance purposes and potential future trails. 25. Prior to recordation of the final map, design shall be completed for in-tract traffic calming to the approval of the Public Works Director, per Final EIR Mitigation Measures T-6 and T-7. The final map shall reflect lot adjustments resulting from completed traffic calming design. 26. Parallel parking shall be prohibited on Froom Ranch Way. 27. The final map and improvement plans shall be adjusted to accommodate a channelized right turn lane with median on the Dogwood approach to Madonna. Engineering Development Review Dedications and Easements 28. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private utilities, water wells, access, grading, drainage, agriculture / open space, slope banks, construction, public and private streets/alleys, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, common driveways, and maintenance of the same shall be shown on the final map and/or shall be recorded separately prior to or concurrent with the recordation of the map, unless a deferral is requested by the subdivider and granted by the City. Said easements may be provided for in part or in total as blanket easements. 29. The final map and improvement plans shall show the extent of all on-site and known off- site offers of dedication. Subdivision improvement plans and / or preliminary designs may be required for any deferred improvements so that dedication limits can be established. These improvements may include but are not limited to road construction and widening, grading and drainage improvements, stormwater facilities, utility easements, bridges, bike bridges, transit stops, bikeways, pedestrian paths, signalized intersections, traffic circles, and roundabouts. 30. The subdivider shall dedicate a 10’ wide street tree easement and public utility easement (P.U.E.) across the frontage of each residential lot. A 10’ wide street tree easement and 15’ P.U.E. shall be provided across the frontage of each commercial or multi-family lot unless reduced with the approval of the City and of PGE. Said easements shall be adjacent to and contiguous with all public right-of-way lines bordering each lot. 31. The subdivider shall include a separate offer of dedication for any offsite easements located outside the tract boundary if needed for circulation, access, and/or utility extensions. The developer shall include a separate offer of dedication for any easements related to orderly development that could otherwise sunset with a map offer only. 32. All private improvements shall be owned and maintained by the individual property owners, a property owner association, or the Homeowner’s Association (HOA) as Packet Pg 243 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 34 R ______ applicable or by a Community Facilities District if specifically identified upon the formation of the CFD. Private improvements may include but are not limited to streets/alleys, parking lots, sidewalks, private pedestrian/bike paths, sewer mains/laterals, water services, drainage systems, detention basin(s), street lighting, landscape, landscape irrigation, common areas, pocket parks, and linear park improvements. 33. All private stormwater treatment facilities shall be owned and maintained by the Homeowners Association, Property Owner Association, property owner association, and/or by individual property owners or by a Community Facilities District if specifically identified upon the formation of the CFD. All stormdrain facilities shall be private property unless the final map and subdivision improvement plans specifically designates them as offered to the City and the City, in fact, accepts title and maintenance responsibility for them. A separate encroachment agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney, shall be recorded for any private stormwater systems, piping, BMP’s, and other components of such systems that are approved for location within the public right- of-way. 34. A notice of requirements or other agreement acceptable to the City of San Luis Obispo and the developer shall be recorded upon the City’s written request in conjunction with the Final Map to clarify development restrictions, fee payments, conditions of development, and references to any pertinent conditions of approval related to this map, off-site requirements, and/or the interaction of this development to the future development of lots 1, 2, and the commercial lots. 35. Park in-lieu fees shall be paid for each residential lot with recordation of the final map creating that lot. The vacant multi-family lots may pay park fees at map recordation based on an assumed build-out density or may defer to the time of development. If payment is received with the map, any balance due based on a change in density shall be paid prior building permit issuance for each unit in excess of those for which payments were made with the map. Deferred payment will be subject to the fees in effect at the time of re- subdivision or building permit application unless the fee payor has a vested right to pay a lesser amount. If residential occupancies, including any care-takers units, are proposed with the future development of the commercial lots, park in-lieu fees will be required to be paid prior to building permit issuance. a. As required by Land Use Element Policy 8.1.4, the San Luis Ranch project is required to provide 5.8 acres of developed parkland. The project is providing 2.8 acres of developed parkland on site. Therefore, funding for 3.0 acres of developed parkland is required for the project to offset its requirement. The following table identifies the total amount of in-lieu fees necessary for the project to meet its full park requirements. The final fee amounts are subject to change based on the final acreage of developed parkland constructed across all phases of the project. Packet Pg 244 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 35 R ______ Unit Type Parkland Cost Per Unit1 Park Improvement Cost Per Unit2 In-Lieu Fee Requirement (Total * 52%3) Single Family (200 units) $5,839 $6,585 $1,292,096 Multi-Family (380 units) $4,630 $4,899 $1,882,930 Total = $3,175,026 1. Current City of San Luis Oibpso Parkland In-Lieu Fee Amount. 2. Most recent cost estimate for park improvement costs (Orcutt Area Neighborhood Park). 3. The in-lieu fee requirement calculated as the difference between the 2.8 acre neighborhood park and the 5.8 acre policy minimum requirement for improved parkland. 36. Off-site dedication/acquisition of property for public right-of-way purposes may be necessary to facilitate orderly development, anticipated build-out improvements, and/or satisfaction of mitigation measures, conditions of approval, or compliance with City Standards and policies. The subdivider shall exhaust all reasonable efforts and diligently pursue acquisition of the necessary easement and/or right-of-way. For purposes of this section 36, the term “reasonable efforts” shall include proof the subdivider has made a commercially reasonable written offer to purchase the property interest at a fair market value, in accordance with an appraisal conducted by an MAI appraiser. In the event the subdivider is unable to acquire said rights-of-way, the City Council may consider lending the subdivider its powers of condemnation to acquire the off-site right-of-way dedication, including any necessary slope and drainage easements. The subdivider shall pay all costs associated with such acquisition or condemnation proceedings including but not limited to attorney’s fees, court costs, expert witness fees, and jury awards of any kind. Without limiting the foregoing, the subdivider shall indemnify, defend and hold City harmless from and against any and all such claims, liabilities, causes of action of any kind, associated with City’s acquisition of such real property interests. 37. With respect to all off-site improvements, prior to filing of the Final Map, the subdivider shall either: a. Clearly demonstrate their right to construct the improvements by showing title or interest in the property in a form acceptable to the City Engineer; or, b. Demonstrate, in writing, that the subdivider has exhausted all reasonable efforts to acquire interest to the subject property and request that the City assist in acquiring the property required for the construction of such improvements and exercise its power of eminent domain in accordance with Government Code Section 66462.5 to do so, if necessary. Subdivider shall also enter into an agreement with the City to pay all costs of such acquisition including, but not limited to, all costs associated with condemnation. Said agreement shall be in a form acceptable to the City Engineer and the City Attorney. If condemnation proceedings are required, the subdivider shall submit, in a form acceptable to the City Engineer, the following documents regarding the property to be acquired: Packet Pg 245 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 36 R ______ i. Property legal description and sketch stamped and signed by a Licensed Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer authorized to practice land surveying in the State of California; ii. Preliminary title report including chain of title and litigation guarantee; iii. Appraisal of the property by a City approved appraiser. In the course of obtaining such appraisal, the property owner(s) must be given an opportunity to accompany the appraiser during any inspection of the property or acknowledge in writing that they knowingly waived the right to do so; iv. Copies of all written correspondence with off-site property owners including purchase summary of formal offers and counter offers to purchase at the appraised price. v. Prior to submittal of the aforementioned documents for City Engineer approval, the Subdivider shall deposit with the City all or a portion of the anticipated costs, as determined by the City Attorney, of the condemnation proceedings. The City does not and cannot guarantee that the necessary property rights can be acquired or will, in fact, be acquired. All necessary procedures of law would apply and would have to be followed. 38. Transportation and Subdivision Improvements. Secondary access is required from all portions and/or phases of the subdivision where more than 30 dwelling units are proposed. The location and development of the proposed secondary access shall be presented to the City for review and approval prior to the preparation of the related improvement plans or final map approval. Any temporary or permanent emergency access location, construction, and controls shall be in accordance with the Fire Code, City Engineering Standards, and shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Fire Department and Public Works Department. 39. Fire Department access shall be provided for each building construction phase to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief. Phased street construction shall consider and provide suitable Fire Department hydrant access, circulation routes, passing lanes, and turn- around areas in accordance with current City codes and standards. 40. All public streets shall conform to City Engineering Standards and the specific plan including curb, gutter, and sidewalk, driveway approaches, and curb ramps as approved by the City Engineer. Where conflicts occur between the City Engineering Standards and concepts identified in the specific plan and/or represented on the tentative map, the City Engineer shall make the final determination of design approval and/or exceptions. 41. Final roadway alignment shall be consistent with the City Engineering Standards except where the applicant has requested and been granted a formal exception. A request for public street/gutter gradients of less than 1% has been approved. The applicant sh all propose final construction details, specifications, and minimum construction Packet Pg 246 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 37 R ______ tolerances/testing for review and approval by the City Engineer in support of the request. The request shall be endorsed prior to submittal of complete public improvement plans. 42. The developer shall be responsible for the placement and the maintenance of parking limitation signage to allow for periodic sweeping of the entire public street system. Said signage maintenance shall be specified by the City Engineer and shall inclu de, but need not be limited to, damage, displacement, minimum reflectivity, and the reasonable change of sweeping schedules. 43. Unless otherwise approved by the Community Development Director and City Engineer, the final street and drainage system design shall include standard center median planting/treatments along Dalidio Drive and Froom Ranch Way. The bio-retention facilities proposed for the medians shall be relocated to the adjoining commercial lots and agricultural open space. Any offset for the adjoining displaced agricultural open space lands shall be approved by the Planning Division and Natural Resources Manager. 44. Final street sections shall be approved in conjunction with the review and approval of the final project drainage report. The final design shall consider drainage, transitions, and accessibility. 45. Final traffic circle and roundabout geometry shall be consistent with applicable engineering standards and design guidelines. 46. The developer shall record a Notice of Requirements with the map regarding the designed and installed traffic calming devices and that the subdivision is not eligible for a future Residential Parking District or Neighborhood Traffic Management program processing. 47. The improvement plans shall include a line-of-sight analysis at applicable intersections to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. Fence heights and plantings in the areas of control shall be reviewed in conjunction with the analysis. A separate recorded agreement or Notice of Requirements for private property owner or HOA maintenance of sight lines may be required as a condition of the City Engineer’s approval of the improvement plans. 48. The subdivision improvement plans shall include full on-site and any off-site public and private frontage improvements as required. The plans shall comply with the City Engineering Standards, Bike Plan, Community Design Guidelines, Cal Trans Highway Design Manual, and City policies. 49. Any jurisdictional permits from authorities other than the City, including but not limited to, those from the Army Corps of Engineers, Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Regional Water Quality Control Board required for any ground disturbing activities, grading, demolitions, and/or street and road improvements shall be obtained prior to the City’s approval of improvement plans and the Developer’s commencing work in waterways within the jurisdiction of such regulatory agencies. 50. Access rights shall be offered for dedication to the City along Madonna Road, Dalidio Packet Pg 247 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 38 R ______ Drive, Prado Road, and Froom Ranch Way except at approved driveway locations. 51. The subdivider shall install public street lighting and all associated facilities including but not limited to conduits, sidewalk vaults, fusing, wiring, and luminaires along all public streets, including Madonna Road per City Engineering Standards. 52. Private street lighting may be provided along the private streets/alleys/parking areas, pocket parks, and linear parks per City Engineering Standards and/or as approved in conjunction with the final ARC approvals. 53. Street trees are required as a condition of development. Street trees shall generally be planted at the rate of one 15-gallon street tree for each 35 lineal feet of property frontage. Landscape plans may include grouping of trees to vary this standard to honor site/public improvements, achieve visual variety, or to honor line-of-sight corridors within the subdivision. 54. The public improvement plans shall provide a final analysis of the trees to be removed and trees to be retained. The existing trees located along or across the tract boundary, within areas of utility work, and/or within vacant lots proposed for future development shall be specifically identified in those plans as removed or retained. The plan/map submittals shall include a tree preservation plan and/or notice of requirements attached to the final map. Trees not previously noted and approved for removal shall be retained unless otherwise specifically approved for removal by the City. A tree preservation plan shall be provided by a Certified Arborist and approved by the City for any trees to remain or to be relocated. 55. Improvement plans for the entire subdivision, including any off-site improvements shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Utilities Department, and Fire Department prior to map recordation. Off-site improvements may include but are not limited to roadways, sewer mains, water mains, recycled water mains, storm drain improvements, off-site access roadways, transportation improvements, and utility system improvements. 56. A separate demolition permit will be required from the Building Division for the removal of any existing structures and related infrastructure. Building removals are subject to the Building Demolition Regulations including the additional notification and timing requirements for any structure over 50-years old. 57. The improvement plans shall clearly show all existing structures, site improvements, utilities, water wells, septic tanks, leach fields, gas and wire services, etc. The plan shall include any pertinent off-site water well and private waste disposal systems that are located within regulated distances to the proposed drainage and utility improvements. The plan shall include the proposed disposition of the improvements and any proposed phasing of their demolition and removal. 58. The map and improvement plans shall show and clarify the extent of all existing public and private easements. The developer shall provide any additional clarification regarding Packet Pg 248 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 39 R ______ the water wells shown on the proposed map and listed as City wells. The developer shall provide any additional clarification on any outstanding private easement agreements including but not limited to the billboard easement agreement (including the exact ingress and egress in favor of the Grantee of the billboard easement). The im provement plans shall clearly show and label the limits of existing and proposed improvements within the easements. 59. If phased construction of the new street pavement is proposed, the phasing plan shall provide for the ultimate structural street section and pavement life (per the City's Pavement Management Plan) prior to acceptance by the City Engineer. The engineer of record shall detail this requirement in the public improvement plans, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 60. The improvement plan submittal shall include a complete construction phasing plan in accordance with the mitigation measures, conditions of approval, City codes, and standards. A truck circulation plan and construction management and staging plan shall be included with any demolition, stockpile, grading, or improvement plan submittal. General truck routes shall be submitted for review and acceptance by the City. The engineer of record shall provide a summary of the extent of cut and fill with estimates on the yards of import and export material. The summary shall include rough grading, utility trench construction, road construction, AC paving, concrete delivery, and vertical construction loading estimates on the existing public roadways. The developer shall either: 1) complete roadway deflection testing before and after construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and shall complete repairs to the pre-construction condition, or 2) shall pay a roadway maintenance fee in accordance with City Engineering Standards and guidelines, or 3) shall propose a pavement repair/replacement program satisfactory to the City Engineer. The roadway impacts analysis and mitigation strategy shall be approved prior to commencing with grading or construction. 61. Retaining wall and/or retaining wall/fence combinations along property lines shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Planning Division and shall conform with the zoning regulations for allowed combined heights or shall be approved through the ARC or separate Fence Height exception process. 62. The ARC plans and public improvement plans shall show the location of the proposed mail receptacles or mail box units (MBU’s) to the satisfaction of the Post Master and the City Engineer. The subdivider shall provide a mailbox unit or multiple units to serve all dwelling units within this development as required by the Post Master. MBU’s shall not be located within the public right-of-way or public sidewalk area unless specifically approved by the City Engineer. Contact the Post Master at 543-2605 to establish any recommendations regarding the number, size, location, and placement for any MBU’s to serve the several neighborhoods and occupancies. 63. Porous concrete, pavers, or other surface treatments as approved by the City Engineer shall be used for private parking areas, V-gutters, private curb and gutter, etc. to the extent feasible within the over-all drainage design for water quality treatment/retention in accordance with the specific plan and Land Use Policies. Packet Pg 249 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 40 R ______ 64. The subdivision improvement plans shall show that accessibility to all common areas, linear parkways, and connecting neighborhood paths/trails is achieved per the ADA and the California Building Code to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Building Official. Utilities 65. Potable city water shall not be used for major construction activities, such as grading and dust control, as required under Prohibited Water Uses; Chapter 13.07.070.C of the City’s Municipal Code. An annual Construction Water Permit is available from the City’s Utilities Department. Recycled water is readily available near the intersection of Madonna Road and San Luis Ranch Road, and shall be stubbed within the project site with a temporary filling station / recycled water hydrant assembly before grading operations begin. 66. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the development’s recycled water system shall have: an 8-inch recycled water system along San Luis Ranch Road and Dogwood Court from Madonna Road to Froom Ranch Way, and along Froom Ranch Way from Prefumo Creek to Highway 101, and a 14” recycled water main shall extend easterly from the intersection of San Luis Ranch and Madonna Road up to the northeastern corner of the project’s frontage along Madonna Road. 67. Water flow rates and velocities shall comply with the requirements of the 2016 Potable Water Distribution System Operations Master Plan. The City of San Luis Obispo shall be the sole water purveyor for water services within the proposed development, which shall comply with all municipal code requirements. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the development’s water system shall have: a 12-inch water main extending easterly along Froom Ranch Way from Oceanaire Drive up to Dalidio Drive and southerly along Dalidio Drive up to Highway 101, and shall include a 10-inch water main along San Luis Ranch Road from Madonna Road up to Froom Ranch Way. 68. Sewer flow rates and velocities shall comply with the requirements of the 2016 Wastewater Collection System Infrastructure Renewal Strategy. Prior to issuance of a building permit the development’s sewer system shall have: a 24-inch sewer main extending along the south boundary of the parcel within a new sewer easement from Lot 209 to the Laguna Lift Station, and shall include associated improvements at the lift station to accommodate the proposed casing and sewer line. Easements and encroachment permits from Caltrans shall be secured to cross the highway, and shall include the installation of a new sewer casing per requirements of the encroachment permit. 69. Separate utilities, including water, sewer, gas, electricity, telephone, and cable TV shall be served to each lot to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department and serving utility companies. Fiber-optic communication shall be provided from the existing Laguna lift station to the proposed community park along the sewer alignment. All public and private sewer mains/laterals shall be shown on the public improvement plans and shall be constructed per City Engineering Standards unless a waiver or alternate standard is approved by the City. The plans shall clearly delineate and distinguish public and Packet Pg 250 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 41 R ______ private improvements. No sewer lift stations shall be used for the wastewater collection system given that preliminary designs demonstrate the ability to serve the development by a gravity sewer system. 70. All proposed utility infrastructure shall comply with the latest engineering design standards effective at the time of improvement plan approval, and shall have alignments for maintenance of public infrastructure acceptable to the Public Works Department. All public utilities shall be within the public right of way and the final alignments of all water and sewer mains shall be approved by the Utilities Engineer. 71. All sewer and water infrastructure impacted by the proposed Highway 101 interchange layout and associated clearances required by the Engineering Design Standards shall be relocated to the satisfaction of the Utilities Director. 72. Final grades and alignments of all public and/or private water, recycled water, sewer and storm drains shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and Utilities Department. The final location, configuration, and sizing of on-site service laterals and meters shall be approved in conjunction with the review of the building plans, fire sprinkler plans, and/or public improvement plans. 73. The limit, extent, and method of termination for all public utilities shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City Utilities Engineer. Redundant mains or mainlines located with limited access for maintenance may need to be redesigned prior to issuanc e of a building permit and as directed by the Utilities Engineer. The extension of mainlines along the subdivision boundary/frontage may be required for orderly development prior to issuance of a building permit and as a directed by the Utilities Engineer. 74. Unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, the gas main shall be located in a joint trench in accordance with PUC and utility company standards to provide additional clearances within the pavement section of all streets to accommodate the several City public utility mains. 75. The improvement plans shall show the location of all domestic and landscape water meters. The plan shall include service lateral sizes and meter sizes. Sizing calculations shall justify service and meter sizing prior to issuance of a building permit and to the satisfaction of the Utilities Director. Water impact fees related to the irrigation water meter(s) shall be paid prior to approval of the subdivision improvement plans for each map and/or construction phase depicting that meter or those meters. 76. A final sewer report and supporting documentation for the design of the public sewer main serving the future development on lots 1 & 2 shall be approved by the Utilities Department prior to approval of the public improvement plans. The depth of the off-site and on-site sewer mains shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Utilities Director. 77. The public improvement plan submittal shall show all existing and proposed overhead wire utilities. Any existing overhead primary and secondary wiring within the tract Packet Pg 251 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 42 R ______ boundary shall be undergrounded in conjunction with the subdivision improvements. Unless otherwise specifically approved, pole relocation in lieu of undergrounding is not permitted. Off-site service drops shall be eliminated. The new service feeds for the subdivision shall be completed by underground wiring without a net increase in utility poles. Terminal end utility poles shall be located off-site unless otherwise approved by the City. 78. Any widening of streets with existing overhead wire utilities shall include the undergrounding of the existing wiring. The City Engineer may require replacement streetlights per City Standards where streetlights exist on wood poles. 79. The developer shall exhaust all reasonable efforts to eliminate or underground the existing overhead wiring located along the southeast tract boundary. The elimination and/or undergrounding shall consider existing services and/or utilization equipment to remain. The plan to eliminate, reduce, or underground the existing services shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City, Cal Trans, PGE, and billboard easement grantee. Undergrounding service to any existing or proposed water well shall consider standard farming operations and the depth of deep ripping. Any proposal for partial undergrounding, waiver, or deferral shall be subject to the approval of the Community Development Director. The existing PGE high voltage wires and towers and the existing overhead wiring along Highway 101 are specifically excluded from this requirement. 80. Preliminary undergrounding plans for the entire subdivision shall be processed through PGE and any respective wire utility companies in conjunction with public improvement plan submittal. The preliminary PGE plans/memo shall be provided to the engineer of record and the City for review and approval prior to commencing with the PGE final handout package. 81. Irrigation systems using recycled water shall be designed and operated as described in the City’s Procedures for Recycled Water Use, including the requirement that sites utilizing recycled water require backflow protection on all potable service connections. Three sets of irrigation plans shall be submitted for review during the City’s improvement plan and/or building permit review process. 82. The project’s Landscape Plan shall be consistent with provisions in effect at the time of building permit issuance for declared drought emergency conditions that may require an Estimated Total Water Use (ETWU) below 50 percent of the Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA). Grading, Drainage & Storm Water 83. Any permit approvals required from the Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, or the Regional Water Quality Control Board shall be secured and presented to the City prior to the approval of any subdivision grading and/or improvements related to the jurisdictional area. The engineer of record shall review the permit approvals and any specific permit conditions for compliance with the plans, subdivision improvement designs, drainage system design/report, and soils report. The Packet Pg 252 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 43 R ______ engineer of record shall forward the permits to the City with a notation that the permits have been reviewed and are in general conformance with the design of the improvements. 84. The public improvement plans submittal shall clarify how any wetlands, creek corridors, and riparian habitat areas will be preserved to the satisfaction of the Natural Resources Manager. Include any specific details for the proposed creek crossings in accordance with any preservation strategies, mitigation measures, and other requirements and needed permits from agencies with jurisdiction or permitting authority. Sensitive areas shall be staked, fenced, or otherwise delineated and protected prior to commencing with construction, grading, or grubbing. 85. The developer shall exhaust reasonable efforts to eradicate and control the expansion of any known non-native invasive plant species to the satisfaction of the Natural Resources Manager. These plants may require treatment in advance and prior to commencing with ground disturbing activities and grading. 86. Expansion index testing or other soils analysis may be required on a lot-by-lot basis for all graded pads and for in-situ soils on natural lots in accordance with the current Building Codes or otherwise as deemed necessary by the City Engineer or Building Official. 87. Final pad certifications shall include the certification of pad construction and elevations. The soils engineer shall certify all grading prior to acceptance of the public improvements and/or prior to building permit issuance. The certification shall indicate that the graded pads are suitable for their intended use. 88. Cut and fill slopes shall be protected as recommended by the soils engineer. Brow ditches, drainage collection devices, and drainage piping may be required. The public improvement plans and final map shall reflect any additional improvements and private easements necessary for slope protection and maintenance. Unless otherwise approved for public maintenance by the City Engineer, brow ditches and drainage collection devices shall be maintained by the HOA or funded by a Funding Mechanism. 89. A separate easement agreement for the existing and altered Cerro San Luis Channel shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City. The easement agreement shall be in a format provided by the City. The agreement shall include the maintenance responsibility by the individual property owner(s), a property owner association, the Homeowner’s Association (HOA) as applicable, or by a Community Facilities District if specifically identified upon the formation of the CFD. The easement agreement shall include limitations in use within the easement area, and provisions for City access rights for maintenance in an emergency or if the responsible party fails to maintain. 90. The subdivision improvement plans shall include a complete grading plan to show site accessibility in accordance with State and Federal regulations for all public and/or private roads, transit stops, trails, paths, walks, bikeways, parks, and bridges where applicable. The submittal shall provide additional analysis if site accessibility will not be provided and for any feature or element where accessibility is purportedly not required. The accessibility regulations or guidelines in effect at the time of subdivision improvement Packet Pg 253 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 44 R ______ construction will be applied. 91. The subdivision improvement plans, grading plans, drainage plans, and drainage reports shall show and note compliance with City Codes, Standards and Ordinances, Floodplain Management Regulations, specific plan stormwater provisions, Waterways Management Plan Drainage Design Manual, and the Post Construction Stormwater Regulations as promulgated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, whichever pertinent sections are more restrictive. 92. The improvement plan submittal shall include a complete grading, drainage, and erosion control plan. The proposed grading, drainage plan, and reports shall consider the proposed construction phasing. Historic off-site and upslope watersheds tributary to the area of phased construction shall be considered. Run-on from adjoining developed or undeveloped parcels shall be considered. 93. The project plan and reports shall show compliance with the City’s Floodplain Management Regulations and FEMA requirements. This project is located within an unstudied A zone and adjacent to an AE zone. The required Conditional Letter of Map Revisions Based on Fill (CLOMR-F) shall be processed and approved by FEMA prior to commencement of construction or placement of fill within the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA). The final LOMR-F shall be submitted to FEMA, along with the required Community Acknowledgement form, within 6 months of the completion of the grading. The LOMR-F shall be approved by FEMA prior to acceptance of the final building pad and development grades by the City of San Luis Obispo and prior to building permit issuance. 94. The revised 100-year flood limits shall be shown and noted on the improvement plans and an additional final map sheet for reference. The drainage report and final plans shall clarify the 100-year flood elevations, clearances, and freeboard at all new vehicle bridge, pedestrian bridge, and pipe bridge crossings of the creek corridors. 95. The improvement plans shall clarify the extent of improvements at each respective well site related to the proposed grading, top soil removal, grade lowering, etc. The plan shall include any alterations to well head and appurtenant electrical service, pum ps, and panel boards. The plans shall show and note compliance with the City’s Floodplain Management Regulations, adopted Building Code/Electrical Code, and Department of Water Resources requirements for protection of the service equipment and the well/groundwater. 96. The engineer of record shall provide a digital copy of the final Hydrologic Engineering Center’s River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) modeling to the City in accordance with Section 4.0 of the Waterways Management Plan Drainage Design Manual. 97. The final drainage report, Post Construction Stormwater Regulation compliance strategy, and plans shall include final details related to the Cerro Channel diversion structure. The plan, report, and jurisdictional permits shall consider the limits of any necessary silt removal and construction of the diversion. The applicant shall evaluate the need for any additional upstream silt/trash removal and/or the elimination of illicit discharges from off- Packet Pg 254 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 45 R ______ site properties. The final reports and O & M Manual shall consider any need for on-going maintenance. The plan shall include reasonable provisions for the capture of silt, trash, and debris through pre-basins or other methods to minimize the impacts to the detention basin. 98. The final stormwater reports, plan, and program shall include consideration of solid waste/trash and floating trash removal from the stormdrain system and BMP’s prior to discharge to the adjoining creeks and/or waterways. The strategy shall consider any City or State regulations or guidelines regarding trash removal available at the time of public improvement plan development and shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 99. The developer shall prepare an Operations and Maintenance Manual for review and approval by the City in conjunction with the development of any stormwater BMP’s that will be maintained by the Homeowners Association, Property Owner Association, or by private property owners. A Private Stormwater Conveyance Agreement shall be recorded in a format provided by the City prior to final inspection approvals and acceptance of subdivision improvements. 100. The subdivider/developer shall provide notification to private property owners regarding any individual maintenance responsibility of any parkway or backyard stormwater BMP’s in accordance with Section E.2 of the RQWCB Resolution R3-2013-0032. The notification may be by Notice of Requirements or other method acceptable to the City. 101. The stormwater improvements other than City Standard public storm drain infrastructure shall be maintained by the individual property owner(s), a property owner association, the Homeowner’s Association (HOA) as applicable, or by a Community Facilities District if specifically identified upon the formation of the CFD. A separate encroachment/hold harmless agreement may be required in conjunction with certain private improvements proposed for location within the public rights-of-way. 102. The final details for any proposed bio-retention facilities or other stormwater BMP’s located within the public right-of-way shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The project soils engineer shall review and provide recommendations on any proposed site-constructed and/or proprietary retention systems. Analysis of impacts to the public improvements, protection of utilities, and methods to minimize piping and protection of private properties shall be addressed in the final analysis. 103. The proposed detention basins and any pre-basin shall be designed in accordance with the Waterways Management Plan Drainage Design Manual. The proposed surface runoff and drainage from the detention basin(s) shall include a non-erosive outlet to an approved point of disposal. The outlet(s) design and location should replicate the historic drainage where feasible. Any off-site detention basin, temporary basin, or other drainage improvements shall be subject to approval by the City. Any required or proposed off-site grading or drainage improvements shall be completed within recorded easements or under an appropriate license or other private agreement. Packet Pg 255 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 46 R ______ 104. The required CC&R’s shall entitle the owners of lots 1, 2, the commercial lots, and any parcels resulting from the further subdivision of those parcels to annex to the HOA to allow a common stormwater management strategy for the subdivision, at the option of those owners. The subsequent development/re-subdivisions may, at the sole discretion of those developers or subdividers, annex to the HOA, or demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City how they will provide storm drainage mitigation through their own development strategy and/or subdivision design and HOA. The HOA shall provide for maintenance of all private common area drainage channels, on-site and/or sub-regional drainage basins, water quality treatment and conveyance improvements. The CC&R's shall be approved by the City and shall be recorded prior to or concurrently with recordation of the Final Map. A Notice of Annexation or other appropriate mechanism to annex other subdivisions into the HOA, including but not limited to any shared regional detention basin, shall be recorded concurrently with the map. 105. Any existing areas of swale, creek and/or channel erosion shall be stabilized to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, Natural Resources Manager, and other permitting agencies. The existing channel shall be cleared of any illegal dumping, construction debris, or other deleterious material to the satisfaction of the City Natural Resources Manager. 106. The project soils engineer shall review the final grading and drainage plans and Low Impact Development (LID) improvements. The soils report shall include specific recommendations related to public improvements, site development, utility, and building pad/foundation construction related to the proposed LID improvements. The project soils engineering report shall be referenced on the final map in accordance with the Subdivision Regulations and City Engineering Standards. 107. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required in accordance with State and local regulations. A hard copy of the SWPPP shall be provided to the City in conjunction with the Public Improvement Plan submittal and subsequent building plan submittals. The Water Discharge Identification (WDID) number shall be included by reference on all construction plans sets. An erosion control plan shall be included with the improvement plans and all building plan submittals for demolitions, grading, and new construction. 108. The project development and grading shall comply with all air quality standards and mitigation measures. The developer shall provide written notification from the County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) regarding compliance with all local, state, and federal regulations including but not limited to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) regulations related to Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) to the City prior to plan approval, permits, and commencing with development grading. Planning Requirements 109. At the time of submittal of a request for approval of a final map, the subdivider shall provide a written report detailing the methods and techniques employed for complying with these conditions of approval and the mitigation measures imposed upon certification Packet Pg 256 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 47 R ______ of the EIR for the Project. 110. Agricultural Heritage Facility and Learning Center: Prior to issuance of building permits for Phase 3, the proposed relocation and rehabilitation/reconstruction of buildings at the Agricultural Heritage Facility and Learning Center shall be completed in conformance with Mitigation Measure CR-1(a). Prior to grading or commencement of any construction activities for infrastructure or building construction, a security and protection plan shall be submitted and approved to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. The plan shall detail methods to prevent trespassing and prevent removal of any building materials. The plan shall continue to remain in active implementation through Phases 1 & 2, and prior to the relocation action. 111. All owners, potential purchasers, occupants (whether as owners or renters), and potential occupants (whether as owners or renters) shall receive full and accurate disclosure concerning the noise, safety, or overflight impacts associated with airport operations prior to entering any contractual obligation to purchase, lease, rent, or otherwise occupy any property or properties within the airport area consistent with Section 2.6.7 of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan. 112. Prior to final map, County of San Luis Obispo Avigation easements shall be recorded for each parcel within the development. 113. Prior to the recording of any phase of the final map, the applicant shall enter into and record an Affordable Housing Agreement with the City, detailing the timing of construction of affordable units on-site, and with guarantees to ensure timely delivery of all of the required affordable housing units. The Affordable Housing Agreement must be included as an exhibit to the Development Agreement, and include appropriate guarantees to ensure the timely delivery of affordable housing units, dedication of real property, or payment of in - lieu fees, consistent with Section 5.2.2 of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan. 114. Pursuant to Government Code §66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this map and its related approvals, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review. The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action, or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. If the city fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action, or proceeding, or to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold the City harmless. 115. This map is conditioned upon the annexation of the property to the city and this approval shall not be effective until annexation of the property to the city has been completed. If the annexation is not completed within one year of the date the City Council approves the map or following any agreed extension in writing, then the approval of the map shall be null and void. Consequently, no final or parcel map may be filed until the Project site is annexed to the city. Packet Pg 257 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 48 R ______ Natural Resources 116. Subdivider shall submit a plan for the interim stockpiling and salvage of topsoils from the protected agriculture land to the satisfaction of the Natural Resources Manager and Community Development Director. The stockpiling / top soil salvage plan shall depict depths of excavation, temporary storage locations for salvaged top soil, and phasing of stockpiles so that no salvaged top soil stockpiles will be in place for a period greater than seven (7) days at a time before being replaced back in the field in order to protect soil health and viability for future farming operations. A pre-construction meeting shall be required prior to any grading or top soil salvage activity, and post-top soil replacement and finished slope and drainage aspect shall be confirmed by a surveyor using laser leveling or similar techniques. 117. A comprehensive Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) shall be submitted to the satisfaction of or approval by the Natural Resources Manager that provides detailed strategies for the restoration of riparian impacts to Prefumo Creek and Cerro San Luis Channel to mitigate impacts associated with bridge structures and the stormwater outfall locations, as well as for the restoration and protection strategy for the areas identified in the Specific Plan for monarch butterfly habitat and the heron rookery. The HMMP shall identify baseline conditions, restoration techniques, monitoring protocols, success standards, and contingency measures and identify the responsible parties and funding sources for implementing the plan. SECTION 3. Term Sheet. The City Council does hereby approve the Term Sheet to form the basis for the Development Agreement, which represents the tentative agreement between the applicant and the City on important areas related to the phased and orderly development of the property. Findings: 1. A Development Agreement, which is authorized by statute pursuant to Government Code section 65864 – 65869.5, is a contract between a developer and a city (or county) in which the city provides the developer with vested development rights for a defined period of years in exchange for the developer providing “extraordinary” public or “community” benefits that exceed what would otherwise be permissible by law, i.e. the land use regulation “police powers” delegated to local government by the State of California; 2. The Term Sheet forms the basis for the Development Agreement, which represents the tentative agreement between the applicant and the City on important areas related to the phased and orderly development of the property. 3. The Development Agreement works in parallel to other entitlements, and in the case of San Luis Ranch, the proposed conditions of approval require its approval with a detailed infrastructure financing plan before certain portions of the entitlement can take effect. 4. The Development Agreement would not change the development parameters included in the Specific Plan, but would fine-tune their implementation, building on the Conditions of Approval Packet Pg 258 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 49 R ______ associated with the Vesting Tentative Tract Map. SECTION 4. Annexation. The City Council does initiate the process of annexing the project site into the City of San Luis Obispo, by authorizing staff to make application for annexation to the San Luis Obispo Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo). Findings: 1. The project area was identified as one of three Specific Plan areas designated for development when the General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements update were adopted by the City Council in December 2014. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan was prepared to implement this aspect of the General Plan. 2. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan are is within the City’s Sphere of Influence as defined by LAFCo, which is an area designated for eventual annexation provided that City services can be provided, and that that annexation is otherwise consistent with LAFCo policies; 3. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan as conditionally approved, provides a framework for providing the necessary City services. Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2017. ____________________________________ Mayor Heidi Harmon ATTEST: ____________________________________ Carrie Gallagher City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________. Packet Pg 259 12 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 50 R ______ ____________________________________ Carrie Gallagher City Clerk Packet Pg 260 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 1 SECTION 1. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo considers and relies on the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR; State Clearinghouse Number 2015101083) for the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan in determining to carry out the project. The Final EIR consists of the Draft EIR, responses to comments on the Draft EIR, a list of persons and agencies commenting on the Draft EIR, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and technical appendices. The City Council has received, reviewed, considered, and relied on the information contained in the Final EIR, as well as information provided at hearings and submissions of testimony from official participating agencies, the public, and other agencies and organizations. Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR]) and Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code require a lead agency to adopt findings for each significant environmental impact disclosed in an EIR. Specifically, for each significant impact, the lead agency must find that: • Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR; • Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by that agency; or • Specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible. The California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15091(b) requires that the City’s findings be supported by substantial evidence in the record. Accordingly, the Lead Agency’s record consists of the following, which are located at the City Community Development Department office, San Luis Obispo, California: • Documentary and oral evidence, testimony and staff comments and responses received and reviewed by the Lead Agency during public review and the public hearings on the San Luis Ranch Project. • The City of San Luis Obispo San Luis Ranch Project Final Environmental Impact Report (May 2017). In addition to making a finding for each significant impact, if the lead agency approves a project without mitigating all of the significant impacts, it must prepare a statement of overriding considerations, in which it balances the benefits of the project against the unavoidable environmental risks. The statement of overriding considerations must explain the social, economic, or other reasons for approving the project despite its environmental impacts (14 CCR 15093, Pub. Res. Code 21081). This document contains the findings and statement of overriding considerations for the approval of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan and reflects the City’s independent judgment. This document Packet Pg 261 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 2 incorporates by reference the Final EIR. The EIR, specific plan, and other portions of the administrative record are available for review at: City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Contact: Doug Davidson (805) 781-7177 Having received, reviewed and considered the foregoing information, as well as any and all information in the record, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo hereby makes these Findings pursuant to, and in accordance with, Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code. SECTION 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. PROJECT OBJECTIVES As required by the City General Plan, the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is intended to contain policies and standards that will facilitate appropriate development of land, protection of open space, and provision of adequate public facilities. The Specific Plan is more detailed than the General Plan but less precise than subdivision maps or construction plans. The overall objective of the project is to adopt a specific plan for the San Luis Ranch project site, pursuant to the City General Plan. The City’s objectives for the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan include: 1. Provide infill growth for the City that is anticipated and desired by City planning decisions and guidelines; 2. Preserve agricultural land and open space on site, maintain agricultural views from U.S. 101; 3. Create significant entry-level, workforce housing opportunities within the City that is specifically “affordable by design;” 4. Implement a walkable-bikeable neighborhood design that is integrated with public transit access and open space amenities that encourage alternative modes of transportation; 5. Create new commercial, office and hotel opportunities that will accommodate and complement existing businesses in downtown San Luis Obispo; 6. Develop an Agriculture Heritage Facilities & Learning Center offering seasonal attractions and local goods that promote the region’s agricultural richness; 7. Establish an important link in the Bob Jones Regional Trail; 8. Provide fair-share financial contribution towards important public circulation improvements. B. PROPOSED PROJECT The San Luis Ranch Project consists of a Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment/Pre-Zoning, and Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map for a 131-acre project site, including annexation of the site into the City of San Luis Obispo. The project would also address a Development Agreement/Memorandum of Understanding, which provides a mechanism for project implementation. The project is intended to be consistent with the development parameters Packet Pg 262 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 3 described in the City’s Land Use and Circulation Element (adopted in December 2014). The project includes construction of up to 580 residential units, 150,000 square feet of commercial development, 100,000 square feet of office development, and a 200-room hotel, with a portion of the site preserved for agriculture and open space uses. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is proposed to be constructed in six phases. Phases 1, 2, and 3 would consist of residential build out, with construction planned to begin in 2017 and anticipated to be completed by 2020. Phases 4, 5, and 6 would consist of non-residential build out, with construction planned to begin in 2017 and anticipated to be completed by 2023. In addition to the land use components of the project, the project phasing plan indicates that the Froom Ranch Way extension and infrastructural improvements along Madonna Road would be constructed concurrent with Phases 1 and 2. Infrastructure improvements along Prado Road/Dalidio Drive, traffic signal improvements, and the Froom Ranch Way Bridge are proposed to be constructed beginning during Phase 3. The proposed phasing plan is shown in Figure 2-14 (Project Phasing Plan) of the Final EIR. These project elements are further described in the EIR, specifically Section 2.5, Project Characteristics. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is included in the EIR as Appendix B, and is available at the following link: http://www.slocity.org/government/department- directory/community-development/planning-zoning/specific-area-plans/san-luis-ranch SECTION 3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT A. BACKGROUND The Final EIR was prepared in compliance with CEQA and State CEQA Guidelines. In accordance with Section 15121 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the purpose of this Final EIR is to serve as an informational document for the public and City of San Luis Obispo decision makers. Although the project is a specific plan and development plan, The Final EIR contains a project-level environmental review that fulfills the requirement of a project-level EIR. As defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15161, a project-level EIR: …examines the environmental impacts of a specific development project. This type of EIR should focus primarily on the changes in the environment that would result from the development project. The EIR shall examine all phases of the project including planning, construction, and operation. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15182, “where a public agency has prepared an EIR on a specific plan after January 1, 1980, no EIR or negative declaration need be prepared for a residential project undertaken pursuant to and in conformity to that specific plan if the project,” as long as the residential project is within the scope of the EIR, no new environmental effects are anticipated to occur, and no new mitigation measures are required for the residential project. In accordance with Section 15088 of the State CEQA Guidelines, Draft EIR was circulated for a 52-day public review period that began December 9, 2016 and concluded on January 31, 2017. The original 45-day comment period was scheduled to end on January 23, 2017, but was extended one calendar week. The City held a public Planning Commission hearing on January 11, 2017, which Packet Pg 263 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 4 was continued on January 25, 2017, to receive public testimony in the form of verbal comments on the Draft EIR. The City held a Cultural Heritage Committee hearing for the project on January 23, 2017 to receive public testimony in the form of verbal comments on the Draft EIR. In addition, Section 5.0, Other CEQA-Related Discussions, of the Draft EIR was recirculated for a 45-day public review period that began March 3, 2017 and concluded on April 17, 2017. This section of the Draft EIR was revised to include an updated discussion of energy use and conservation related to the project. This recirculation also included the relevant portions of Appendix D as originally contained in the Draft EIR. It should be noted that as a result of this new discussion, no new significant impacts or mitigation measures were identified. Pursuant to Section 15088.5(c) of the State CEQA Guidelines, if the revisions subject to recirculation are limited to a few portions of the Draft EIR, the lead agency need only recirculate the portions that have been modified. Responses to each written and verbal comment that the City received are included in the Responses to Comments section of the Final EIR. The Draft EIR and Responses to Comments collectively comprise the Final EIR for the project. B. IMPACT ANALYSIS Three categories of impacts are identified in the Environmental Impact Report: Class I Class I impacts are significant and unavoidable. To approve a project resulting in Class I impacts, the CEQA Guidelines require decision makers to make findings of overriding consideration that “specific legal, technological, economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR.” Class II Class II impacts are significant but can be mitigated to a level of insignificance by measures identified in the Final EIR. When approving a project with Class II impacts, the decision makers must make findings that changes or alternatives to the project have been incorporated that reduce the impacts to a less than significant level. Class III Class III impacts are adverse but not significant. C. CLARIFICATIONS TO FINAL EIR MITIGATION MEASURES Based on feedback from the Planning Commission as well as City staff, including the City Attorney, during the preparation of Conditions of Approval for the project, the City of San Luis Obispo has revised certain Mitigation Measures from the Final EIR to clarify timing and implementation for required mitigation actions. These changes are discussed in this section, and are reflected in the Mitigation Measures detailed in Sections 5 and 6, below. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088.5, these clarifications do not constitute a change to the project or the substance of any required mitigation, nor do they present significant new information that would Packet Pg 264 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 5 require recirculation of the Final EIR, as they do not deprive the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including a feasible project alternative) that the project’s proponents have declined to implement. The Mitigation Measures that have been modified, including a brief description of these modifications, are shown here. Changes in the Final EIR Mitigation Measure text are signified by strikeouts (strikeouts) where text is removed and by underline font (underline font) where text is added. • Mitigation Measure AG-1 Agricultural Conservation has been revised to clarify the intended meaning of “comparable agricultural quality,” to indicate City staff preferential order for mitigation options, and to specify the requirement for endowment under all mitigation options to ensure permanent preservation and maintenance of agricultural land, as shown: Mitigation Measure AG-1 Agricultural Conservation. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the project proponent shall provide that for every one (1) acre of Important Farmland (Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, and Unique Farmland) on the site that is permanently converted to non-agricultural use as a result of project development, one (1) acre of land of comparable agricultural productivity (e.g., Prime- for-Prime) shall be preserved in perpetuity. The land dedicated to agriculture pursuant to this measure shall be of soil quality, size, location and configuration appropriate to maintain a viable, working agricultural operation. The acreage required to meet the 1:1 ratio may be met by the off-site agricultural conservation easement/deed restriction proposed by the project applicant, as long as this land meets the conditions outlined in this measure. Said mitigation shall be satisfied by the applicant through one or more of the following options (listed in order of preference): 1) Granting a perpetual conservation easement(s), deed restriction(s), or other farmland conservation mechanism(s) to the City or qualifying entity, which has been approved by the City, such as the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo, for the purpose of permanently preserving agricultural land. The required easement(s) area or deed restriction(s) shall therefore total a minimum of 56 acres of Prime Farmland. The land covered by said on- and/or off-site easement(s) or deed restriction(s) shall be located within or contiguous to the City’s Urban Reserve Line or Greenbelt subject to review and approval of the City’s Natural Resources Manager; or 2) Making an in-lieu payment to a qualifying entity, which has been approved by the City, such as the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo, to be applied toward the future sufficient to fund the purchase of a minimum of 56 acres of Prime Farmland in San Luis Obispo County, together with an endowment amount as may be required to ensure permanent preservation and maintenance of agricultural land. The amount of the payment amount and endowment shall be determined by the qualifying entity or a licensed appraiser; or 3) Making an in-lieu payment to a qualifying entity, which has been approved by the City and that is organized for conservation purposes, to be applied toward a future Packet Pg 265 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 6 perpetual conservation easement, deed restriction, or other farmland conservation mechanism to preserve a minimum of 56 acres of Prime Farmland in San Luis Obispo County, together with an endowment amount as may be required to ensure permanent preservation and maintenance of agricultural land. The amount of the payment and endowment shall be determined by the qualifying entity or a licensed appraiser; or 4) Any combination of the above mitigation options. Prior to issuance of any grading permits for the project, the applicant shall provide evidence of the recorded easement(s), deed restriction(s), or evidence of payment to the City Planning Department or qualifying entity, for approval by the City’s Natural Resource Manager to demonstrate compliance with this measure. • Mitigation Measure AG-3(c) Buffer Landscaping has been revised to use clearer terminology, as shown: Mitigation Measure AG-3(c) Buffer Landscaping. To reduce the potential for noise, dust, and pesticide drift to affect future residents on the project site, the project applicant shall ensure that project landscape plans include planting of a windrow windbreak hedgerow of trees and shrubs within the agricultural buffer along Froom Ranch Way at a sufficient density to buffer the site from surrounding agricultural operations. • Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Encourage Telecommuting has been revised to focus on the office component of the project, as retail and hotel components typically involve service employees that would not be able to telecommute, as shown: Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Encourage Telecommuting. The project applicant or developers of individual projects within the Specific Plan Area shall include provisions to encourage employers within the proposed commercial, office, and hotel components of the project to implement telecommuting programs and include teleconferencing capabilities, such as web cams or satellite linkage, which will allow employees to attend meetings remotely without requiring them to travel out of the area. • Mitigation Measure BIO-1(c) Western Pond Turtle and Two-Striped Garter Snake Impact Avoidance and Minimization has been revised to address a clerical error, as shown: Mitigation Measure BIO-1(c) Western Pond Turtle and Two-Striped Garter Snake Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are implemented to avoid and minimize potential impacts to western pond turtle and two- striped garter snake (these reptiles utilize similar habitats; therefore, implementation of the proposed measures for western pond turtle are also suitable and appropriate for two- striped garter snake): • A qualified biologist(s) shall conduct a pre-construction survey within 24 hours prior to the onset of work activities within and around areas that may serve as potential western pond turtle habitat. If this species is found and the individuals are likely to be Packet Pg 266 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 7 injured or killed by work activities, the approved biologist shall be allowed sufficient time to move them from the project site before work activities begin. The biologist(s) must relocate the any western pond turtle the shortest distance possible to a location that contains suitable habitat that is not likely to be affected by activities associated with the project. • Access routes, staging, and construction areas shall be limited to the minimum area necessary to achieve the project goal and minimize potential impacts to western pond turtle habitat including locating access routes and construction staging areas outside of wetlands and riparian areas to the maximum extent practicable. • Mitigation Measure BIO-1(f) Great Blue Heron and Monarch Butterfly Impact Avoidance and Minimization has been revised to clarify implementation of construction mitigation actions, to specify review and approval of the required habitat enhancement plan by the City’s Natural Resource Manager, and to subordinate the potential for creating new off- site nesting habitat as one potential mitigation action to be described in the habitat enhancement plan, as shown: Mitigation Measure BIO-1(f) Great Blue Heron and Monarch Butterfly Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential impacts to overwintering monarch butterflies and nesting great blue herons. • Tree trimming/removal and construction activities that affect eucalyptus trees near or within the monarch overwintering grove or active great blue heron nests identified in the San Luis Ranch Monarch Trees Inspection Memo, Results of 2015 and 2016 San Luis Ranch Heron Rookery Surveys Memo, and San Luis Ranch – Prefumo Creek Widening Biological Constraints Memo prepared by Althouse and Meade (Appendix F), shall not be conducted during the monarch butterfly overwintering season from October 1 through March 31 if monarch butterflies are present, or while great blue heron nests are active from February 1 to August 31. If construction activities must be conducted during these time periods in areas where overwintering or nests may be present, a qualified biologist shall conduct overwintering monarch surveys and/or nesting great blue heron surveys within one week of habitat disturbance. If surveys do not locate clustering monarchs or nesting great blue herons, construction activities may be conducted. If clustering monarchs and/or nesting great blue herons are located, no construction activities shall occur within 100 feet of the edge of the overwintering grove and/or active nest(s) until the qualified biologist determines that no more monarchs are overwintering in the grove or the nest(s) are no longer active. • A qualified biologist shall prepare and implement a habitat enhancement plan to be reviewed and approved by the City’s Natural Resource Manager prior to issuance of grading permits to enhance and restore overwintering and nesting habitat that is to be preserved. The habitat enhancement plan may include but shall include not be limited to: o On- or off-site planting of native shrubs and trees such as Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) that may support heron roosting and monarch butterfly overwintering. Packet Pg 267 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 8 o As eucalyptus trees senesce, they shall be replaced with native species. Native trees and shrubs shall also be used to supplement gaps in canopy or act as windbreaks. o Create new offsite nesting habitat for great blue herons to mitigate for removal of onsite nesting habitat. With a qualified biologist present, the current rookery may be moved to a suitable offsite location where the same great blue herons can resume nesting, following methods detailed in Crouch et al. (2002). It should be noted that creating offsite nesting habitat for great blue herons is experimental and that the relocation techniques described in Crouch et al. (2002) were used to relocate black-crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax). In addition, an agreement with the City will be required prior to implementation of the offsite strategy on their property. The methods detailed in Crouch et al. (2002) include: a. This entails at least one year of pre-construction monitoring of the rookery, where the timing of rookery activities will be noted: arrival of breeding adults, egg laying, hatching, and fledging. During this time, audio recordings of adults and juveniles shall be made. b. Following the completion of the nesting season in late summer, a certified arborist specializing in the translocation of trees will examine the mature trees onsite and work with the City’s Natural Resources Manager to determine whether or not it is feasible to relocate the mature trees containing nests across Madonna Road to a suitable location at Laguna Lake Open Space. c. Prior to the start of the next nesting season (based on timing of adult arrival in previous years), nesting adults will be recruited to the new location via decoys and playback of vocalizations. The new location will be monitored regularly by a qualified biologist for the following three breeding seasons. • Mitigation Measure T-4 Construction Traffic Management Plan has been revised to clarify the intended definition of “unacceptably congested,” as shown: Mitigation Measure T-4 Construction Traffic Management Plan. Prior to construction, a traffic management plan shall be prepared for review and approval by the City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department. The traffic management plan shall be based on the type of roadway traffic conditions, duration of construction, physical constraints, nearness of the work zone to traffic and other facilities (bicycle, pedestrian, driveway access, etc.). The traffic management plan shall include: • Advertisement. The project developer shall prepare an advertisement campaign informing the public of the proposed construction activities. Advertisements shall occur prior to beginning work and periodically during the course of the project construction. The advertising shall include notification of changes to bus schedules and potential changes to bus stop locations, potential impacts during school drop-off and pick-up times, and major intersections that may be impacted during construction. • Property Access. Access to parcels along the construction area shall be maintained to the greatest extent feasible. Affected property owners shall receive advance notice of work adjacent to their property access and when driveways would be potentially closed. Packet Pg 268 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 9 • Schools. Any construction adjacent to schools shall ensure that access is maintained for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists, particularly at the beginning and end of the school day. • Buses, Bicycles, and Pedestrians. The work zone shall provide for passage by buses, bicyclists, and pedestrians, particularly in the vicinity of schools. • Intersections. Traffic control (i.e., use of flag persons) shall be used at intersections that are determined to be unacceptably congested based on the City’s most recently adopted traffic impact thresholds due to construction traffic. • Mitigation Measure T-6 Project Site Intersection Roundabout Control has been revised to clarify the intended definition of “infeasible” in the context of the required mitigation action, as shown: Mitigation Measure T-6 Project Site Intersection Roundabout Control. New roadway intersections within the Specific Plan Area shall be controlled using roundabout design, unless the City Public Works Department determines that roundabout control is physically infeasible. It is the finding of the City Council that based on modifications to the Final EIR Mitigation Measures as described above, impacts resulting from implementation of the San Luis Ranch Project would not otherwise result in a change in the levels of impact identified in the existing analysis contained in the Final EIR. As such, the modified mitigation measures may be used to fulfill the environmental review requirements for the current project, and the information contained herein does not require recirculation pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5. SECTION 4. FINDINGS FOR LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT The findings below are for Class III impacts. Class III impacts are adverse but not significant. The City Council has concluded that the following effects are effects are adverse but not significant. A. AESTHETICS 1. Impact AES-1: Although there are potentially adverse impacts to scenic viewsheds, the project would implement the open space and agricultural preservation and design elements included in the proposed Specific Plan. Therefore, potential impacts to scenic vistas and scenic resources within a state scenic highway would be less than significant. (Refer to page 4.1-11 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. Packet Pg 269 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 10 2. Impact AES-2: The project would alter the existing visual character of the site by converting over half of the agricultural site into a predominantly residential and commercial use site. Due to the project’s visual compatibility with surrounding development, preservation of on- site open space and agricultural land, and compliance with design guidelines, the project’s impact on the visual character and quality of the site would be less than significant. (Refer to page 4.1-13 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. 3. Impact AES-3: The project would introduce a new source of nighttime lighting and daytime glare, which could increase ambient light and affect the quality of the nighttime sky. However, project compliance with existing City requirements and design guidelines would limit the magnitude of these effects. (Refer to page 4.1-15 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. 4. Cumulative Aesthetics Impacts: As determined in the LUCE Update EIR, all development that adheres to applicable General Plan policies would result in less than significant aesthetic impacts. Therefore, the overall aesthetic impact of cumulative development in the project vicinity would be less than significant. (Refer to page 4.1-16 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. B. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES 1. Impact AG-2: The project would alter the existing land use and zoning on the project site. However, these alterations would be consistent with the General Plan’s identification of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan for a mix of urban, agricultural, and open space use. (Refer to page 4.2-19 of the Final EIR.) c. Mitigation: None d. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. 2. Impact AG-4: Re-grading of the project site would not result in significant degradation of viability of on-site agricultural land. On-site farmland would remain viable with removal of topsoil, on-site soils will retain prime agricultural soils status, and stormwater will drain from the site on the same slope and aspect as the current condition following project implementation. (Refer to page 4.2-23 of the Final EIR.) Packet Pg 270 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 11 a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. 3. Cumulative Agricultural Resources Impacts: Consistent with the LUCE Update EIR, the project would implement Land Use Element Policies 1.8.1 and 1.9.2, and Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 8.6.3. (Refer to page 4.2-24 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. C. AIR QUALITY 1. Impact AQ-4: The project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. There are no major industrial uses near the project site, and the project does not include any industrial uses, and new residences on the project site would be located over 500 feet from U.S. Highway 101, consistent with ARB guidance for siting sensitive receptors. (Refer to page 4.3-29 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. D. GREENOUSE GAS EMISSIONS 1. Impact GHG-1: The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is consistent with the City’s Climate Action Plan, which serves as a Qualified GHG Reduction Strategy consistent with State CEQA Guidelines. The GHG-reducing policy provisions contained in the Climate Action Plan were prepared with the purpose of complying with the requirements of AB 32 and achieving the goals of the AB 32 Scoping Plan. As a result, the Climate Action Plan is consistent with statewide efforts established in ARB’s Climate Change Scoping Plan to reduce statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. (Refer to page 4.6-16 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. E. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 1. Impact HAZ-1: Small quantities of hazardous materials may be used in conjunction with the proposed residential and commercial retail uses on site. However, these materials would be limited in type and quantity such that they would not create a hazard to the public or environment. (Refer to page 4.7-18 of the Final EIR.) Packet Pg 271 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 12 a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. 2. Impact HAZ-2: The project site is adjacent to U.S. Highway 101, on which accidents that involve hazardous materials could occur. Such accidents could potentially create a significant hazard to the public or environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. However, compliance with applicable regulations related to the handling and storage of hazardous materials would minimize the risk of the public’s potential exposure to these substances. (Refer to page 4.7-19 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. 3. Impact HAZ-3: Two schools are located within one-quarter mile of the project site. Compliance with existing federal, State, and local regulations would ensure that hazardous materials impacts to schools would remain less than significant. (Refer to page 4.7-20 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. 4. Impact HAZ-7: Asbestos Containing Material (ACM) and Lead Based Paint (LBP) may be present in existing on-site structures. Demolition of these structures would be required to comply with applicable State and local policies and regulations for the control and remediation of hazardous materials to prevent human exposure. (Refer to page 4.7-27 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. 5. Impact HAZ-8: The project site is located within a San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport area of influence. The project would be consistent with the CALUPH Airport Safety Zones, which represent the extent of Airport-related safety hazard zones for people residing or working in these areas. (Refer to page 4.7-27 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. 6. Cumulative Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impacts: As described in the LUCE Update EIR, adherence to applicable General Plan policies and applicable State and federal regulatory requirements would reduce any cumulative hazards and hazardous materials impacts Packet Pg 272 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 13 resulting from buildout of the City under the General Plan, including buildout of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan, to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.7-30 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. F. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 1. Impact HWQ-2: The project would alter the existing drainage pattern of the project site, which could result in flooding, erosion, or siltation onsite and offsite. However, the proposed retention and detention systems, along with compliance with applicable regulations, would ensure that this impact would remain less than significant. (Refer to page 4.8-25 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. 2. Cumulative Water Quality Impacts: The project, in conjunction with pending cumulative development would not significantly increase the concentration of urban pollutants such as oil, grease, and vehicular heavy metals in surface runoff. Polluted runoff which may be generated during construction activities of cumulative development and projects considered in this analysis would be regulated by the SWRCB under General Construction, NPDES permits, and would be minimized through the implementation of standard construction BMPs. (Refer to page 4.8-33 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. 3. Cumulative Flooding Impacts: The proposed on-site drainage system would adequately capture associated runoff, and the project would not substantially contribute to flooding on- or off-site. The project grading plan has been designed such that the resulting post- development floodplain would exclude areas proposed for housing. (Refer to page 4.8-33 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. Packet Pg 273 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 14 G. LAND USE 1. Impact LU-3: The Specific Plan would be consistent with the land use strategy in SLOCOG’s 2014 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. (Refer to page 4.9-44 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. 2. Impact LU-4: The Specific Plan would allow residential and non-residential land uses consistent with density and use restrictions in the City’s Airport Safety Zones, which represent the extent of Airport-related safety hazard zones for people residing or working in these areas. The LUCE Update EIR provided substantial evidence that the development of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area under the updated General Plan land use designations would be consistent with ALUP safety and noise standards. The project would not conflict with land use policies intended to prevent airport-related safety hazards. (Refer to page 4.9- 45 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. H. NOISE 1. Impact N-2: Short-term construction activities would generate intermittent levels of groundborne vibration. However, the expected vibration level during construction of the project would not be perceptible at the nearest residential receptors. (Refer to page 4.10-19 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. 2. Impact N-3: Project-generated traffic would incrementally increase traffic-related noise on study area roadway segments, except on Madonna Road near the project site, which would potentially affect existing noise-sensitive receptors along local roadways. However, the increase in traffic noise levels along area roadways would not exceed 3 dBA, which is the increase threshold typically audible to the human ear. (Refer to page 4.10-20 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. 3. Cumulative Noise Impacts: Traffic noise levels along roadways in the project vicinity would not increase by more than 0.5 dBA due to cumulative traffic. This increase would not be Packet Pg 274 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 15 significant based on the applicable traffic noise increase threshold of 3 dBA. (Refer to page 4.10-37 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: None b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. I. WATER RESOURCES 1. Impact WR-1: The project would increase water demand as a result of new residential and commercial development on the project site. However, the Specific Plan includes water conservation measures intended to manage on-site water consumption associated with new development, and the project’s water demand would be within the City of San Luis Obispo’s projected primary water supply. (Refer to page 4.13-10 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan includes water conservation measures intended to manage on-site water consumption associated with development Specific Plan Development. No mitigation is required. b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. 2. Cumulative Water Resources Impacts: The Specific Plan includes water conservation measures intended to manage on-site water consumption associated with new development, and project’s water demand would not exceed supply when combined with all possible future development within the City. In addition, the project would reduce the overall demand on the San Luis Obispo groundwater basin as a result of reduced on-site agricultural uses and, therefore, would not exacerbate potential cumulative impacts on the local groundwater basin associated with future development within the City. (Refer to page 4.13-14 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan includes water conservation measures intended to manage on-site water consumption associated with development Specific Plan Development. No mitigation is required. b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant. Packet Pg 275 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 16 SECTION 5. FINDINGS FOR SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT THAT HAVE BEEN MITIGATED TO A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL Class II impacts are significant but can be mitigated to a level of insignificance by measures identified in the EIR. When approving a project with Class II impacts, the decision-makers must make findings that changes or alterations to the project have been incorporated that reduce the impacts to a less than significant level. This section presents the project’s significant environmental impacts and feasible mitigation measures. Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR]) and Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code require a lead agency to make findings for each significant environmental impact disclosed in an EIR. Specifically, for each significant impact, the lead agency must find that: • Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR; • Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by that agency; or • Specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible. Each of these findings must be supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record. This section identifies impacts that can be fully avoided or reduced to a less-than-significant level through the incorporation of feasible mitigation measures into the project, as identified in the Final EIR. The impacts identified in this section are considered in the same sequence in which they appear in the EIR. A. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES 1. Impact AG-1: The project would result in the direct conversion of 56 acres of Prime Farmland, as mapped by the FMMP, to non-agricultural uses. With implementation of Mitigation Measure AG-1, Agricultural Conservation, this impact would be reduced to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.2-15 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: Specific Plan Goal 2 establishes a goal to provide a community that maintains and promotes the land’s agricultural heritage. San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Policy 2.4, which requires strict monitoring of the conversion of active agriculture to non-agricultural uses and consideration of the possible effects of new development on character of the community as a whole, is intended to help achieve Specific Plan Goal 2. The project also includes a commitment, to be included in the Development Agreement, to procure an off- site agricultural conservation easement/deed restriction to comply with the Land Use Element Policy 8.1.4.f. In addition to these Specific Plan and project components, the Packet Pg 276 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 17 following mitigation measures would be required to ensure that impacts associated with the conversion of Prime Farmland are mitigated to the maximum extent feasible — Mitigation Measure AG-1 Agricultural Conservation. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the project proponent shall provide that for every one (1) acre of Important Farmland (Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, and Unique Farmland) on the site that is permanently converted to non-agricultural use as a result of project development, one (1) acre of land of comparable agricultural productivity (e.g., Prime-for-Prime) shall be preserved in perpetuity. The land dedicated to agriculture pursuant to this measure shall be of size, location and configuration appropriate to maintain a viable, working agricultural operation. The acreage required to meet the 1:1 ratio may be met by the off-site agricultural conservation easement/deed restriction proposed by the project applicant, as long as this land meets the conditions outlined in this measure. Said mitigation shall be satisfied by the applicant through one or more of the following options (listed in order of preference): 5) Granting a perpetual conservation easement(s), deed restriction(s), or other farmland conservation mechanism(s) to the City or qualifying entity, which has been approved by the City, such as the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo, for the purpose of permanently preserving agricultural land. The required easement(s) area or deed restriction(s) shall therefore total a minimum of 56 acres of Prime Farmland. The land covered by said on- and/or off-site easement(s) or deed restriction(s) shall be located within or contiguous to the City’s Urban Reserve Line or Greenbelt subject to review and approval of the City’s Natural Resources Manager; or 6) Making an in-lieu payment to a qualifying entity, which has been approved by the City, such as the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo, sufficient to fund the purchase of a minimum of 56 acres of Prime Farmland in San Luis Obispo County, together with an endowment amount as may be required to ensure permanent preservation and maintenance of agricultural land. The amount of the payment and endowment shall be determined by the qualifying entity or a licensed appraiser; or 7) Making an in-lieu payment to a qualifying entity, which has been approved by the City and that is organized for conservation purposes, to be applied toward a future perpetual conservation easement, deed restriction, or other farmland conservation mechanism to preserve a minimum of 56 acres of Prime Farmland in San Luis Obispo County, together with an endowment amount as may be required to ensure permanent preservation and maintenance of agricultural land. The amount of the payment and endowment shall be determined by the qualifying entity or a licensed appraiser; or 8) Any combination of the above mitigation options. Prior to issuance of any grading permits for the project, the applicant shall provide evidence of the recorded easement(s), deed restriction(s), or evidence of payment to the City Planning Department or qualifying entity, for approval by the City’s Natural Resource Manager to demonstrate compliance with this measure. Packet Pg 277 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 18 b. Finding The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. 2. Impact AG-3: The project would include development of commercial and residential uses adjacent to agricultural uses on the project site. This may result in conflict with existing or future urban and agricultural zoning and uses and adversely affect the long-term viability of the remaining agricultural uses onsite and at the adjacent SLO City Farm. However, with implementation of Mitigation Measures AG-3(a) through AG-3(c), which require agricultural conflict avoidance measures be added to the Specific Plan, agricultural fencing, and buffer landscaping, as well as compliance with standard APCD dust control measures and City policies, this impact would be reduced to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.2-20 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: Specific Plan Goal 2 establishes a goal to provide a community that maintains and promotes the land’s agricultural heritage. San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Policy 2.1 requires that the Specific Plan encourage open space and agricultural uses that support a green buffer surrounding residential and commercial neighborhoods in the Specific Plan area. Specific Plan Policy 2.4 requires strict monitoring of the conversion of active agriculture to non-agricultural uses and considers the possible effects of new development on character of the community as a whole. Specific Plan Policy 2.7 requires incorporation of appropriate agricultural uses in public places and neighborhoods. These policies are intended to help achieve Specific Plan Goal 2. The Specific Plan also includes a 72-foot buffer between agricultural operations and urban development to reduce and/ or avoid noise, dust, light impacts, odors, chemical use, access by people and pets, pilferage, and pesticide drift to new residential and commercial land uses on the project site. In addition, the Specific Plan proposes that on-site agricultural operations would transition to organic farming, which would not involve pesticide or chemical fertilizer use on the site. Nevertheless, the following mitigation measure would be required. — Mitigation Measure AG-3(a) Agricultural Conflict Avoidance Measures. The following language shall be added to Section 4.2.1, Agricultural Buffer, of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan: Agricultural buffers will include City-approved measures to reduce availability of public access to agricultural cultivation areas adjacent to the project site (e.g., fencing, signs, etc.). Future residents will be notified of agricultural buffers as part of purchase or lease agreements. — Mitigation Measure AG-3(b) Agricultural Fencing. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City to fund installation of fencing and signs along Froom Ranch Way and Dalidio Drive/Prado Road to minimize potential for increases in trespass and vandalism of adjacent agricultural areas. — Mitigation Measure AG-3(c) Buffer Landscaping. To reduce the potential for noise, dust, and pesticide drift to affect future residents on the project site, the project applicant shall ensure that project landscape plans include planting of a windbreak Packet Pg 278 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 19 hedgerow of trees and shrubs within the agricultural buffer along Froom Ranch Way at a sufficient density to buffer the site from surrounding agricultural operations. b. Finding The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. B. AIR QUALITY 1. Impact AQ-2: Construction of the project would generate temporary increases in localized air pollutant emissions. Construction emissions of ROG, NOX, and DPM would exceed SLOAPCD construction thresholds. However, with implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-2(a) through AG-2(e), which require fugitive dust control measures, standard control measures for construction equipment, Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for construction equipment, low or no VOC-emission paint for architectural coatings, and preparation of a Construction Activity Management Plan (CAMP), this impact would be reduced to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.3-13 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required to reduce construction emissions of ROG, NOX, DPM, and fugitive dust. — Mitigation Measure AQ-2(a) Fugitive Dust Control Measures. Construction projects shall implement the following dust control measures so as to reduce PM10 emissions in accordance with SLOAPCD requirements. • Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible; • Water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used during construction in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency shall be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water or a SLOAPCD-approved dust suppressant shall be used whenever possible, to reduce the amount of potable water used for dust control; • All dirt stock pile areas shall be sprayed daily as needed; • 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; • Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive grass seed and watered until vegetation is established; • All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the SLOAPCD; • All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; • Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site; Packet Pg 279 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 20 • 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; • Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site; • Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water shall be used where feasible; • All of these fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans; and • 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 20 percent opacity, and to prevent transport of dust offsite. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the SLOAPCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition. — Mitigation Measure AQ-2(b) Standard Control Measures for Construction Equipment. The following standard air quality mitigation measures shall be implemented during construction activities at the project site: • Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer’s specifications; • Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment with ARB certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for sue off-road); • Use diesel construction equipment meeting ARB’s Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road Regulation; • Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the ARB’s 2007 or cleaner certification standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On- Road Regulation; • Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in their fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g. captive or NOX exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative compliance; • 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 Packet Pg 280 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 21 5.0 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation. • 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. • Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job sites to remind drivers and operators of the 5 minute idling limit; • 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: 1. Signs that specify the no idling areas shall be posted and enforced at the site. 2. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted; 3. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors; 4. Use of alternative fueled equipment is recommended; • Electrify equipment when feasible; • Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible; and • Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel. — Mitigation Measure AQ-2(c) Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for Construction Equipment. The following BACT for diesel-fueled construction equipment shall be implemented during construction activities at the project site, where feasible: • Further reducing emissions by expanding use of Tier 3 and Tier 4 off-road and 2010 on-road compliant engines where feasible; • Repowering equipment with the cleanest engines available; and • Installing California Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies, such as level 2 diesel particulate filters. These strategies are listed at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/vt/cvt.htm — Mitigation Measure AQ-2(d) Architectural Coating. To reduce ROG and NOX levels during the architectural coating phase, low or no VOC-emission paint shall be used with levels of 50 g/L or less. — Mitigation Measure AQ-2(e) Construction Activity Management Plan. Emissions reduction measures and construction practices required to comply with Mitigation Measures AQ-2(a) through AQ-2(d) shall be documented in a Construction Activity Management Plan (CAMP) and submitted to SLOAPCD for review and approval at least three months before the start of construction. The CAMP shall include a Dust Control Management Plan, tabulation of on and off-road construction equipment (age, horse-power and miles and/or hours of operation), construction truck trip schedule, construction work-day period, and construction phasing. If implementation of the Standard Mitigation and Best Available Control Technology measures cannot bring Packet Pg 281 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 22 the project below the Tier 1 threshold (2.5 tons of NOX+ROG per quarter), off-site mitigation shall be implemented in coordination with SLOAPCD to reduce NOX and ROG emissions to below the Tier 1 threshold. b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. 2. Impact AQ-3: Operation of the project would generate air pollutant emissions on an ongoing daily and annual basis. The project’s daily emissions would exceed SLOAPCD daily emissions thresholds, but would not exceed annual thresholds. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-3(a), SLOAPCD Standard Operational Mitigation Measures, and Mitigation Measure AQ-3(b), Off-Site Mitigation, would reduce emissions to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.3-19 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan includes a mix of commercial and residential uses, a new transit connection, and workforce housing intended to balance jobs and housing. The project also emphasizes bikeways and pedestrian connections, all of which contribute to reduced VMT and air pollutant emissions. In addition to these project components, the following mitigation measures would be required to reduce operational emissions. All feasible on-site mitigation (Mitigation Measure AQ-3[a]) shall be implemented prior to implementation of off-site mitigation (Mitigation Measure AQ-3[b]). — Mitigation Measure AQ-3(a) Standard Operational Mitigation Measures. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall define and incorporate into the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan standard emission reduction measures from the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook to reduce emissions to below daily threshold levels. Emission reduction measures shall include, but would not be limited to: • Increase the building energy rating by 20 percent above 2013 Title 24 requirements (used in the California Emissions Estimator Model) or consistent with 2016 Title 24 requirements, whichever is stricter. Measures used to reach the 20 percent rating cannot be double counted; • Utilize onsite renewable energy systems (e.g., solar, wind, geothermal, low-impact hydro, biomass and bio-gas); and • Provide bicycle-share program. In addition, the proposed hotel component of the Specific Plan shall participate in the SLO Car Free Program, provide incentives to car-free travelers, and promote the program in their communication tools. — Mitigation Measure AQ-3(b) Off-site Mitigation. If implementation of standard emission reduction measures from the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook described in Mitigation Measure AQ-3(a) is insufficient to reduce emissions to below daily threshold levels, then the applicant shall coordinate with SLOAPCD to provide funding for off-site emission reduction measures to reduce emissions to below daily Packet Pg 282 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 23 threshold levels. In accordance with SLOAPCD methodology, the excess emissions shall be multiplied by the cost effectiveness of mitigation as defined in the State’s current Carl Moyer Incentive Program Guidelines to determine the annual off-site mitigation amount. This amount shall then be extrapolated over the life of the project to determine total off-site mitigation. Off-site emission reduction measures may include, but would not be limited to: • Developing or improving park-and-ride lots; • Retrofitting existing homes in the project area with SLOAPCD-approved wood combustion devices; • Retrofitting existing homes in the project area with energy-efficient devices; • Constructing satellite worksites; • Funding a program to buy and scrap older, higher emission passenger and heavy- duty vehicles; • Replacing/re-powering transit buses; • Replacing/re-powering heavy-duty diesel school vehicles (i.e. bus, passenger or maintenance vehicles); • Funding an electric lawn and garden equipment exchange program; • Retrofitting or re-powering heavy-duty construction equipment, or on-road vehicles; • Re-powering marine vessels; • Re-powering or contributing to funding clean diesel locomotive main or auxiliary engines; • Installing bicycle racks on transit buses; • Purchasing particulate filters or oxidation catalysts for local school buses, transit buses or construction fleets; • Installing or contributing to funding alternative fueling infrastructure (i.e. fueling stations for CNG, LPG, conductive and inductive electric vehicle charging, etc.); • Funding expansion of existing transit services; • Funding public transit bus shelters; • Subsidizing vanpool programs; • Subsidizing transportation alternative incentive programs; • Contributing to funding of new bike lanes; • Installing bicycle storage facilities; and • Providing assistance in the implementation of projects that are identified in City or County Bicycle Master Plans. b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. C. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 1. Impact BIO-1: Implementation of the project could have a substantial adverse effect on candidate, sensitive, or special status species that may occur on the project site. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(h), which require Best Packet Pg 283 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 24 Management Practices (BMPs) for construction, Worker Environmental Awareness Program Training, and avoidance or minimization measures for western pond turtle, two-striped garter snake, California red-legged frog, steelhead, great blue heron, monarch butterfly, nesting birds, and roosting bats, would reduce impacts to listed, candidate or special-status plant and wildlife species to a less than significant level and ensure that the project would comply with COSE Policies 7.3.1, Protect Listed Species, and 7.3.2, Species of Local Concern. (Refer to page 4.4-50 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: Specific Plan Policy 5.3 and Program 5.3.1 require attention be given to the preservation of biological and habitat resources through the identification of sensitive habitats and species early in the development process. Nevertheless, Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(h) would be required to reduce impacts to special status animal species. — Mitigation Measure BIO-1(a) Best Management Practices. The applicant shall ensure the following general wildlife Best Management Practices (BMPs) are required for construction activity within the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area: • No pets or firearms shall be allowed at the project site during construction activities. • All trash that may attract predators must be properly contained and removed from the work site. All such debris and waste shall be picked up daily and properly disposed of at an appropriate site. • All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles shall occur at least 100 feet from Prefumo Creek and in a location where a spill would not drain toward aquatic habitat. A plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills prior to the onset of work activities. All workers shall be informed of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur. • Pallets or secondary containment areas for chemicals, drums, or bagged materials shall be provided. Should material spills occur, materials and/or contaminants shall be cleaned from the project site and recycled or disposed of to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). • Prior to construction activities in areas adjacent to Prefumo Creek and Cerro San Luis Channel, the drainage features shall be fenced with orange construction fencing and signed to prohibit entry of construction equipment and personnel unless authorized by the City. Fencing should be located a minimum of 20 feet from the edge of the riparian canopy or top of bank and shall be maintained throughout the construction period for each phase of development. Once all phases of construction in this area are complete, the fencing may be removed. • To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, appropriate erosion control BMPs (e.g., use of coir rolls, jute netting, etc.) shall be implemented to minimize adverse effects on Prefumo Creek. No plastic monofilament netting shall be utilized on site. • Construction equipment shall be inspected at the beginning of each day to ensure that wildlife species have not climbed into wheel wells or under tracks since the equipment was last parked. Any sensitive wildlife species found during Packet Pg 284 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 25 inspections shall be gently encouraged to leave the area by a qualified biological monitor or otherwise trained personnel. • All vehicles and equipment shall be in good working condition and free of leaks. • Environmentally Sensitive Areas shall be delineated by a qualified biologist prior to construction to confine access routes and construction areas. • Construction work shall be restricted to daylight hours (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM) to avoid impacts to nocturnal and crepuscular (dawn and dusk activity period) species. No construction night lighting shall be permitted within 100 yards of the top of the Prefumo Creek bank. • Concrete truck and tool washout shall be limited to locations designated by a qualified biologist such that no runoff will reach Prefumo Creek or Cerro San Luis Channel. • All open trenches shall be constructed with appropriate exit ramps to allow species that accidentally fall into a trench to escape. Trenches will remain open for the shortest period necessary to complete required work. • Existing facilities and disturbed areas shall be used to the extent possible to minimize the amount of disturbance and all new access roads other than the Froom Ranch Way Bridge shall be cited to avoid high quality habitat and minimize habitat fragmentation. • In the event that construction must occur within the creek or creek setback, a biological monitor shall be present during all such activities with the authority to stop or redirect work as needed to protect biological resources. — Mitigation Measure BIO-1(b) Worker Environmental Awareness Program Training. Prior to the initiation of construction activities (including staging and mobilization), the applicant shall ensure all personnel associated with project construction attend a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training. • The training shall be conducted by a qualified biologist, to aid workers in recognizing special status resources that may occur in the project area. The specifics of this program shall include identification of the sensitive species and habitats, a description of the regulatory status and general ecological characteristics of sensitive resources, and review of the limits of construction and avoidance measures required to reduce impacts to biological resources within the work area. A fact sheet conveying this information shall also be prepared for distribution to all contractors, their employers, and other personnel involved with construction of the project. All employees shall sign a form provided by the trainer documenting they have attended the WEAP and understand the information presented to them. — Mitigation Measure BIO-1(c) Western Pond Turtle and Two-Striped Garter Snake Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are implemented to avoid and minimize potential impacts to western pond turtle and two-striped garter snake (these reptiles utilize similar habitats; therefore, implementation of the proposed measures for western pond turtle are also suitable and appropriate for two-striped garter snake): Packet Pg 285 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 26 • A qualified biologist(s) shall conduct a pre-construction survey within 24 hours prior to the onset of work activities within and around areas that may serve as potential western pond turtle habitat. If this species is found and the individuals are likely to be injured or killed by work activities, the approved biologist shall be allowed sufficient time to move them from the project site before work activities begin. The biologist(s) must relocate any western pond turtle the shortest distance possible to a location that contains suitable habitat that is not likely to be affected by activities associated with the project. • Access routes, staging, and construction areas shall be limited to the minimum area necessary to achieve the project goal and minimize potential impacts to western pond turtle habitat including locating access routes and construction staging areas outside of wetlands and riparian areas to the maximum extent practicable. — Mitigation Measure BIO-1(d) California Red-legged Frog, Western spadefoot, and Coast Range Newt Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall implement the following to avoid and minimize potential impacts to CRLF. Because coast range newt and western spadefoot are amphibians that utilize similar habitats to CRLF, implementation of the following measures provided for CRLF shall be implemented for these species as well. • Only USFWS-approved biologists shall participate in activities associated with the capture, handling, and monitoring of CRLF. • Ground disturbance shall not begin until written approval is received from the USFWS that the biologist is qualified to conduct the work. If the USFWS does not authorize the relocation of CRLF occurring within the project site, CRLF found within the project site shall be avoided with a 100-foot buffer and no activities shall occur within that buffer until the CRLF has left the project site on its own. • Areas of the project site that lie within 100 feet upland from riparian or jurisdictional areas shall be surrounded by a solid temporary exclusion fence (such as silt fencing) that shall extend at least three feet above the ground and be buried into the ground at least 6 inches to exclude CRLF from the project site. Plastic monofilament netting or other similar material will not be used. The location of the fencing shall be determined by a qualified biologist. The fence shall remain in place throughout construction activities. Installation of the exclusion fencing shall be monitored by a qualified biologist to ensure that it is installed correctly. • During new grading activities in habitats within 100 feet upland from riparian or jurisdictional areas, a qualified biologist shall be on-site to recover any spadefoot toads that may be excavated/unearthed with native material or found under vegetation. If the animals are in good health, they shall be immediately relocated to a designated release area. If they are injured, the animals shall be turned over to an approved wildlife rehabilitator until they are in a condition to be released into the designated release area. Packet Pg 286 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 27 • To ensure that diseases are not conveyed between work sites by the approved biologist, the fieldwork code of practice developed by the Declining Amphibian Populations Task Force shall be followed at all times. — Mitigation Measure BIO-1(e) Steelhead Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential impacts to steelhead: • Before any activities begin on the project, a qualified biologist will conduct a training session for all construction personnel. At a minimum, the training will include a description of the steelhead and its habitat, the specific measures that are being implemented to conserve this species for the project, and the boundaries within which the project may be accomplished. Brochures, books, and briefings may be used in the training session, provided that a qualified person is on hand to answer any questions. • During the duration of project activities, all trash that may attract predators will be properly contained and secured, promptly removed from the work site, and disposed of regularly. Following construction, all trash and construction debris will be removed from the work areas. • All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles will occur at least 100 feet from riparian habitat or bodies of water and in a location where a potential spill would not drain directly toward aquatic habitat (e.g., on a slope that drains away from the water source). The monitor shall ensure that contamination of suitable habitat does not occur during such operations. Prior to the onset of work activities, a plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills. All workers shall be informed of the importance of preventing spills and of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur. • The number of access routes, size of staging areas, and the total area used for construction activities shall be limited to the minimum area necessary to achieve the project goals. • The City will only permit work within the immediate vicinity of Prefumo Creek for times of the year when potential impacts to steelhead would be minimal. Work shall be restricted during the wet season (October 15 through April 30) and should ideally occur during the late summer and early fall during the driest portion of the year; however, water may still be present during construction. If work is proposed in the streambed and water is present during construction, a diversion will be required to dewater the work area and the following avoidance and minimization measures will apply: 1. Upstream and downstream passage for fish, including juvenile steelhead, shall be provided through or around the construction site at all times construction is occurring within the Prefumo Creek streambed. 2. A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey and be present onsite during the diversion installation and dewatering process to capture and relocate any trapped steelhead and/or other fish. Upon approval from the NMFS, the biologist(s) must relocate these individuals the shortest distance Packet Pg 287 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 28 possible to a location that contains suitable habitat that is not likely to be affected by activities associated with the project. 3. Dewatering operations shall employ a five millimeter mesh screen fastened to the intake hose to exclude fish and other wildlife species from the pump. 4. Steelhead shall be excluded from the construction zone with block nets installed upstream and downstream the of the bridge construction zone. The distance upstream and downstream for block net installation will depend on the type of construction activities occurring in the streambed. • To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, the following BMPs shall be implemented. If the BMPs are somehow ineffective, consultation with the City and appropriate resource agencies will be undertaken, and all attempts to remedy the situation will commence immediately. 1. It shall be the owner’s/contractor’s responsibility to maintain control of the entire construction operations and to keep the entire site in compliance. 2. The owner/contractor shall be responsible for monitoring erosion and sediment control measures (including but not limited to fiber rolls, inlet protections, silt fences, and gravel bags) prior, during and after storm events, monitoring includes maintaining a file documenting onsite inspections, problems encountered, corrective actions, and notes and a map of remedial implementation measures. 3. Erosion shall be controlled by covering stockpiled construction materials (i.e. soil, spoils, aggregate, fly-ash, stucco, hydrated lime, etc.) over 2.0 cubic yards that are not actively being used, consistent with the applicable construction general permit, or through other means of erosion control approved by the City (e.g., surrounding with straw bales or silt fencing). The site shall be maintained to minimize sediment-laden runoff to any storm drainage system including existing drainage swales and/or sand watercourses. a. Construction operations shall be carried out in such a manner that erosion and water pollution will be minimized. b. State and local laws concerning pollution abatement shall be complied with. c. If grading operations are expected to denude slopes, the slopes shall be protected with erosion control measures immediately following grading on the slopes. 4. Specifically, in order to prevent sedimentation and debris from entering Prefumo Creek during construction, silt fencing shall be installed along the top of the banks on the west side of the channel prior to the onset of construction activities. • The project biologist will monitor construction activities, in stream habitat, and overall performance of BMPs and sediment controls for the purpose of identifying and reconciling any condition that could adversely affect steelhead or their habitat. The biologist will halt work if necessary and will recommend site-specific measures to avoid adverse effects to steelhead and their habitat. • Equipment will be checked daily for leaks prior to the initiation of construction activities. A spill kit will be placed near the creek and will remain readily available during construction in the event that any contaminant is accidentally released. Packet Pg 288 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 29 • In addition to these avoidance and minimization measures, Mitigation Measure BIO-2(a) would also ensure that potential temporary and permanent indirect impacts to steelhead from the project are reduced as much as practicable. — Mitigation Measure BIO-1(f) Great Blue Heron and Monarch Butterfly Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential impacts to overwintering monarch butterflies and nesting great blue herons. • Tree trimming/removal and construction activities that affect eucalyptus trees near or within the monarch overwintering grove or active great blue heron nests identified in the San Luis Ranch Monarch Trees Inspection Memo, Results of 2015 and 2016 San Luis Ranch Heron Rookery Surveys Memo, and San Luis Ranch – Prefumo Creek Widening Biological Constraints Memo prepared by Althouse and Meade (Appendix F), shall not be conducted during the monarch butterfly overwintering season from October 1 through March 31 if monarch butterflies are present, or while great blue heron nests are active from February 1 to August 31. If construction activities must be conducted during these periods, a qualified biologist shall conduct overwintering monarch surveys and/or nesting great blue heron surveys within one week of habitat disturbance. If surveys do not locate clustering monarchs or nesting great blue herons, construction activities may be conducted. If clustering monarchs and/or nesting great blue herons are located, no construction activities shall occur within 100 feet of the edge of the overwintering grove and/or active nest(s) until the qualified biologist determines that no more monarchs are overwintering in the grove or the nest(s) are no longer active. • A qualified biologist shall prepare and implement a habitat enhancement plan to be reviewed and approved by the City’s Natural Resource Manager prior to issuance of grading permits to enhance and restore overwintering and nesting habitat that is to be preserved. The habitat enhancement plan may include but shall not be limited to: o On- or off-site planting of native shrubs and trees such as Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) that may support heron roosting and monarch butterfly overwintering. o As eucalyptus trees senesce, they shall be replaced with native species. Native trees and shrubs shall also be used to supplement gaps in canopy or act as windbreaks. o Create new offsite nesting habitat for great blue herons to mitigate for removal of onsite nesting habitat. With a qualified biologist present, the current rookery may be moved to a suitable offsite location where the same great blue herons can resume nesting, following methods detailed in Crouch et al. (2002). It should be noted that creating offsite nesting habitat for great blue herons is experimental and that the relocation techniques described in Crouch et al. (2002) were used to relocate black-crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax). In addition, an agreement with the City will Packet Pg 289 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 30 be required prior to implementation of the offsite strategy on their property. The methods detailed in Crouch et al. (2002) include: d. This entails at least one year of pre-construction monitoring of the rookery, where the timing of rookery activities will be noted: arrival of breeding adults, egg laying, hatching, and fledging. During this time, audio recordings of adults and juveniles shall be made. e. Following the completion of the nesting season in late summer, a certified arborist specializing in the translocation of trees will examine the mature trees onsite and work with the City’s Natural Resources Manager to determine whether or not it is feasible to relocate the mature trees containing nests across Madonna Road to a suitable location at Laguna Lake Open Space. f. Prior to the start of the next nesting season (based on timing of adult arrival in previous years), nesting adults will be recruited to the new location via decoys and playback of vocalizations. The new location will be monitored regularly by a qualified biologist for the following three breeding seasons. — Mitigation Measure BIO-1(g) Nesting Birds Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential impacts to nesting birds: • For construction activities occurring during the nesting season (generally February 1 to September 15), surveys for nesting birds covered by the California Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 14 days prior to vegetation removal. The surveys shall include the disturbance area plus a 500-foot buffer around the site. If active nests are located, all construction work shall be conducted outside a buffer zone from the nest to be determined by the qualified biologist. The buffer shall be a minimum of 50 feet for non-raptor bird species and at least 300 feet for raptor species. Larger buffers may be required depending upon the status of the nest and the construction activities occurring in the vicinity of the nest. The buffer area(s) shall be closed to all construction personnel and equipment until the adults and young are no longer reliant on the nest site. A qualified biologist shall confirm that breeding/nesting is completed and young have fledged the nest prior to removal of the buffer. • If feasible, removal of vegetation within suitable nesting bird habitats will be scheduled to occur in the fall and winter (between September 1 and February 14), after fledging and before the initiation of the nesting season. — Mitigation Measure BIO-1(h) Roosting Bats Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential impacts to roosting bats: • Prior to issuance of grading permits, a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey of existing structures within the project site to determine if roosting bats are present. The survey shall be conducted during the non-breeding season Packet Pg 290 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 31 (November through March). The biologist shall have access to all interior attics, as needed. If a colony of bats is found roosting in any structure, further surveys shall be conducted sufficient to determine the species present and the type of roost (day, night, maternity, etc.) If the bats are not part of an active maternity colony, passive exclusion measures may be implemented in close coordination with CDFW. These exclusion measures must include one-way valves that allow bats to exit the structure but are designed so that the bats may not re-enter the structure. • If a bat colony is excluded from the project site, appropriate alternate bat habitat as determined by a qualified biologist shall be installed on the project site or at an approved location offsite. • Prior to removal of any trees over 20 inches diameter-at-breast-height (DBH), a survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if any of the trees proposed for removal or trimming harbor sensitive bat species or maternal bat colonies. If a non-maternal roost is found, the qualified biologist, in close coordination with CDFW shall install one-way valves or other appropriate passive relocation method. For each occupied roost removed, one bat box shall be installed in similar habitat and should have similar cavity or crevices properties to those which are removed, including access, ventilation, dimensions, height above ground, and thermal conditions. Maternal bat colonies may not be disturbed. b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. 2. Impact BIO-2: Implementation of the project would have a substantial adverse effect on sensitive habitats, including riparian areas. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a), BIO-2(a), BIO-2(b), and BIO-2(c) would reduce direct impacts to sensitive habitats, including riparian areas, by implementing construction BMPs, including containing construction activities, debris, and sediment in appropriate locations outside of sensitive habitat to the maximum extent practicable, and by providing compensatory mitigation for permanently impacted riparian habitat. In addition Mitigation Measures HWQ-1(a) and HWQ-1(b) include construction management practices that would reduce construction related impacts to water quality. When combined with standard regulatory measures (including required permitting from USACE, CDFW, and RWQCB), and regulatory oversight during construction by the Environmental Monitor, implementation of required mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.4-63 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Policy 5.3 and Program 5.3.1 would be required for the project and are intended to protect and enhances the natural habitats onsite. In addition, Specific Plan Policy 5.1 would require support of restoration efforts for the creek and associated habitat. Nevertheless, the following mitigation measure would be required to address impacts related to sensitive habitats. — Mitigation Measure BIO-2(a) Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. A Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) shall be prepared which will provide a minimum 2:1 ratio (replaced: removed) for temporary and permanent impacts to riparian habitat. The HMMP will identify the specific mitigation sites and it will be Packet Pg 291 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 32 implemented immediately following project completion. The HMMP shall include, at a minimum, the following components: • Description of the project/impact site (i.e. location, responsible parties, areas to be impacted by habitat type); • Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project [type(s) and area(s) of habitat to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved; specific functions and values of habitat type(s) to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved]; • Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation site (location and size, ownership status, existing functions and values of the compensatory mitigation site); • Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation site (rationale for expecting implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan [including plant species to be used, container sizes, seeding rates, etc.]); • Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including weed removal and irrigation as appropriate (activities, responsible parties, schedule); • Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site, including no less than quarterly monitoring for the first year (performance standards, target functions and values, target acreages to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved, annual monitoring reports); • Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives; said criteria to be, at a minimum, at least 80 percent survival of container plants and 80 percent relative cover by vegetation type; • An adaptive management program and remedial measures to address negative impacts to restoration efforts; • Notification of completion of compensatory mitigation and agency confirmation; and • Contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for contingency compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism). — Mitigation Measure BIO-2(b) Tree Replacement. Riparian trees four inches or greater measured at diameter-at-breast-height (DBH) shall be replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 3:1 (replaced: removed). Trees 24 inches or greater inches DBH shall be replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 10:1. Willows and cottonwoods may be planted from live stakes following guidelines provided in the California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual for planting dormant cuttings and container stock (CDFW 2010). • Tree replacement shall be conducted in accordance with a Natural Habitat Restoration and Enhancement Plan to be approved by the City’s Natural Resource Manager. • The Natural Habitat Restoration and Enhancement Plan shall prioritize the planting of replacement trees on-site where feasible, but shall allow that replacement trees may be planted off-site with approval of the City’s Natural Resource Manager. Packet Pg 292 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 33 • Replacement trees may be planted in the fall or winter of the year in which trees were removed. All replacement trees will be planted no more than one year following the date upon which the native trees were removed. — Mitigation Measure BIO-2(c) Froom Ranch Way Bridge Design to Avoid Riparian Areas. The Froom Ranch Way Bridge crossing footings shall be placed outside mapped riparian areas. The placement of the bridge and footings shall be indicated on the Development Plan, VTM, and HMMP, and shall show the bridge’s placement in relation to existing vegetation and the bed and bank of Prefumo Creek. b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. 3. Impact BIO-3: Construction of the project could have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) andBIO-2(a) would reduce potential impacts to federally protected wetlands, any riparian habitat, or other sensitive natural communities to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.4-67 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: Specific Plan Goal 5 establishes a goal to provide a community that protects and enhances the adjacent creek and habitat. Specific Plan Policy 5.1 and Program 5.3.1 would be required of the project and are intended to help achieve this goal through protection of the creek. However, project-level impacts to jurisdictional areas would remain potentially significant, and Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) and BIO-2(a) are required to reduce this impact and ensure consistency with COSE Policy 7.5.5. b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. 4. Impact BIO-4: Development of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area would not permanently interfere with the movement of resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors along Prefumo Creek and through open agricultural lands on the project site. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a), BIO- 1(c), BIO-1(d), BIO-1(e), BIO-1(f), BIO-1-(h), and BIO-2(a) would reduce potential impacts to wildlife species, wildlife nursery sites, riparian corridors, and other sensitive natural communities to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.4-68 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan contains various goals, policies, and programs intended to protect biological and habitat resources on the project site. However, because the project would result in temporary impacts to species that use Prefumo Creek for movement, including migratory birds and raptors, this impact would be potentially significant. Implementation of BIO-1(a) requires construction BMPs that would reduce potential impacts to riparian habitat within the Prefumo Creek corridor. Implementation of Packet Pg 293 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 34 Mitigation Measures BIO-1(c), BIO-1(d), and BIO-1(e), would reduce impacts to western pond turtle, CRLF, coast range newt, and steelhead. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1(f) would reduce impacts to heron rookeries. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1(h) would reduce impacts to birds. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1(h) would reduce impacts to bats roosting in trees. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2(a) would reduce potential impacts to federally protected wetlands, any riparian habitat, or other sensitive natural community. b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. 5. Cumulative Biological Resources Impacts: Consistent with the LUCE Update EIR, the project would implement Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(h) and BIO-2(a) through BIO-2(c) to ensure compliance with the applicable goals and policies of the General Plan. As a result, the project’s contribution to this cumulative impact would be potentially significant but mitigable. (Refer to page 4.4-70 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(h) and BIO-2(a) through BIO- 2(c) would be required to reduce cumulative impacts to biological resources to a less than significant level. b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. D. CULTURAL RESOURCES 1. Impact CR-2: Identified archaeological resources on the project site are ineligible for listing in the CRHR and NRHP, and disturbance of these resources would not constitute a significant impact. However, the potential remains for the project to result in impacts to previously unidentified archaeological resources. Implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-2(a), Retain a Qualified Principal Investigator, and CR-2(b), Unanticipated Discovery of Archaeological Resources, would reduce impacts to archaeological resources to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.5-24 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan includes requirements intended to protect archaeological resources. Specific Plan Policy 3.5.4 requires a preliminary site survey for development within archaeologically sensitive areas. As described in Section 4.5.1(d), the Cultural Resources Study (Appendix G) includes an evaluation of known archaeological resources on the project site, and determined that these resources are not intact or otherwise archaeologically significant. However, excavation associated with the project grading plan would have the potential to encounter buried archaeological deposits. Therefore, the following mitigation measures are required to ensure that any discovered resources would be protected and curated if encountered during project construction. Packet Pg 294 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 35 — Mitigation Measure CR-2(a) Retain a Qualified Principal Investigator. In accordance with Conservation and Open Space Policies 3.5.6 and 3.5.7, a qualified principal investigator, defined as an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for professional archaeology (hereafter qualified archaeologist), shall be retained to carry out all mitigation measures related to archaeological resources. Monitoring shall involve inspection of subsurface construction disturbance at or in the immediate vicinity of known sites, or at locations that may harbor buried resources that were not identified on the site surface. A Native American monitor shall also be present because the area is a culturally sensitive location. The monitor(s) shall be on- site on a full-time basis during earthmoving activities, including grading, trenching, vegetation removal, or other excavation activities. — Mitigation Measure CR-2(b) Unanticipated Discovery of Archeological Resources. In the event that archaeological resources are exposed during construction, all work shall be halted in the vicinity of the archaeological discovery until a qualified archaeologist can visit the site of discovery and assess the significance of the cultural resource. In the event that any artifact or an unusual amount of bone or shell is encountered during construction, work shall be immediately stopped and relocated to another area. The lead agency shall stop construction within 100 feet of the exposed resource until a qualified archaeologist/paleontologist can evaluate the find (see 36 CFR 800.11.1 and CCR, Title 14, Section 15064.5[f]). Examples of such cultural materials might include: ground stone tools such as mortars, bowls, pestles, and manos; chipped stone tools such as projectile points or choppers; flakes of stone not consistent with the immediate geology such as obsidian or fused shale; historic trash pits containing bottles and/or ceramics; or structural remains. If the resources are found to be significant, they must be avoided or will be mitigated consistent with State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Guidelines. b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. E. GEOLOGY 1. Issues Addressed in the Initial Study – Geology and Soils Discussion: Due to the proximity of the site to the Los Osos Fault and Alquist-Priolo Zone, impacts associated with earthquakes and ground shaking would be potentially significant. In addition, the project site has been identified as being located in an area of very high liquefaction potential, moderate to high expansion potential, and high settlement potential. In addition, during historical drought years, groundwater levels in the site vicinity were lowered enough to cause subsidence. With implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-1, Earthquake and Ground Acceleration Design and Construction Measures, and GEO-2, Operational Seismic Safety Requirement, impacts related to geology and soils would be less than significant. (Refer to page 4.14-2 of the Final EIR.) Packet Pg 295 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 36 a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts related to geology and soils. — Mitigation Measure GEO-1 Earthquake and Ground Acceleration Design and Construction Measures. Design and construction of the buildings, roadway infrastructure and all subgrades shall be specifically proportioned to resist Design Earthquake Ground Motions (Design amax) of SD1=0.481 and SDS=0.832 and engineered to withstand Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) peak ground acceleration (PGAM) equal to 0.519 g, as described in the Soils Engineering Report for the project (GeoSolutions, Inc., 2015). The design should take into consideration the soil type, potential for liquefaction, and the most current and applicable seismic attenuation methods that are available. — Mitigation Measure GEO-2 Operational Seismic Safety Requirement. For retail stores included in the project, goods for sale may be stacked no higher than 8 feet from the floor in any area where customers are present, unless provisions are made to prevent the goods from falling during an earthquake of up to 7.5 magnitude. The stacking or restraint methods shall be reviewed and approved by the City before approval of occupancy permits, and shall be a standing condition of occupancy. — Mitigation Measure GEO-3 Geotechnical Design. The project plans and specifications shall include the geotechnical recommendations included in the Soils Engineering Report, prepared by GeoSolutions, Inc. on May 29, 2015. Recommendations therein that shall be incorporated into the final project building plans include specification for the following components of development preparation and design: • Building Pad Preparation • Paved Areas Preparation • Pavement Design • Interlocking Concrete Pavers • Conventional Foundations • Post-Tensioned Slabs • Slab-On-Grade Construction • Retaining Walls • Exterior Concrete Flatwork b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. F. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 1. Impact HAZ-4: Hazardous materials sites identified on and upgradient to the project site as well as residual pesticides and agricultural chemicals in soil due to historical use of pesticides and other agricultural chemicals onsite could create a hazard to construction workers during the construction phase of the project. With implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-4, Packet Pg 296 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 37 Soil Sampling and Remediation, impacts related to exposure to residual agricultural chemicals would be reduced to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.7-21 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would further reduce risk of exposure to residual agricultural chemicals in on-site soil. — Mitigation Measure HAZ-4 Soil Sampling and Remediation. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, a contaminated soil assessment shall be completed in the portions of land to be graded for development. Soil samples shall be collected under the supervision of a professional geologist or environmental professional to determine the presence or absence of contaminated soil in these areas. The sampling density shall be in accordance with guidance from San Luis Obispo County Environmental Health Services, so as to define the volume of soil that may require remediation. Laboratory analysis of soil samples shall be analyzed for the presence of organochlorine pesticides, in accordance with EPA Test Method SW8081A, and heavy metals in accordance with EPA Test Methods 6010B and 7471A. If soil sampling indicates the presence of pesticides or heavy metals exceeding applicable environmental screening levels, the soil assessment shall identify the volume of contaminated soil to be excavated. If concentrations of contaminants exceed EPA action levels and therefore warrant remediation, contaminated materials shall be remediated either prior to concurrent with construction and an Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) shall be prepared. Cleanup may include excavation, disposal, bio-remediation, or any other treatment of conditions subject to regulatory action. All necessary reports, regulations and permits shall be followed to achieve cleanup of the site. The contaminated materials shall be remediated under the supervision of an environmental consultant licensed to oversee such remediation and under the direction of the lead oversight agency. The remediation program shall also be approved by a regulatory oversight agency, such as the San Luis Obispo County Environmental Health Services, the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), or DTSC. All proper waste handling and disposal procedures shall be followed. Upon completion of the remediation, the environmental consultant shall prepare a report summarizing the project, the remediation approach implemented, and the analytical results after completion of the remediation, including all waste disposal or treatment manifests. b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. 2. Impact HAZ-6: The project site is located in an area where geologic analysis for NOA is required prior to grading and could potentially result in exposure of people to NOA during grading and construction activities. With implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-6, Naturally Occurring Asbestos Exposure Avoidance and Minimization, impacts related to exposure to NOA would be reduced to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.7-25 of the Final EIR.) Packet Pg 297 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 38 a. Mitigation: If NOA is identified at the site, an asbestos dust mitigation plan in accordance with CCR Title 17, Section 93105 Asbestos Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations would be required to be implemented during project construction, as a standard condition of approval. Additionally, the following mitigation would be required to further reduce potential impacts associated with NOA hazards: — Mitigation Measure HAZ-6 Naturally Occurring Asbestos Exposure Avoidance and Minimization. a. Prior to earthwork activities, a site-specific health and safety plan shall be developed per California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (CalOSHA) requirements. The plan shall include appropriate health and safety measures if NOA is detected in soil or bedrock beneath the project site. All construction workers that have the potential to come into contact with contaminated soil/bedrock and groundwater shall be knowledgeable of the requirements in the health and safety plan, which includes proper training and personal protective equipment. The health and safety plan shall prescribe appropriate respiratory protection for construction workers. b. Prior to beginning construction, a soil and bedrock analysis for asbestos using polarized light microscopy and transmission electron microscopy by a qualified laboratory shall be conducted. Samples of soil shall be collected from multiple locations across the site, and bedrock samples shall be collected from locations where excavation into bedrock is anticipated. If NOA is detected, appropriate regulations pertaining to excavation, removal, transportation, and disposal of NOA shall be followed. The sampling strategy shall take into account the locations of potential source areas, and the anticipated lateral and vertical distribution of contaminants in soil and/or groundwater. The results of the investigation shall be documented in a report that is signed by a California Professional Geologist. The report shall include recommendations based upon the findings for additional investigation/remediation if contaminants are detected above applicable screening levels (e.g., excavate and dispose, groundwater and/or soil vapor extraction, or in situ bioremediation). c. During earthwork activities, appropriate procedures shall be incorporated in the event that NOA is detected in soil or bedrock beneath the project site. These procedures shall be followed to eliminate or minimize construction worker or general public exposure to potential contaminants in soil. Procedures shall include efforts to control fugitive dust, contain and cover excavation debris piles, appropriate laboratory analysis of soil for waste characterization, and segregation of contaminated soil from uncontaminated soil. The applicable regulations associated with excavation, removal, transportation, and disposal of contaminated soil shall be followed (e.g., tarping of trucks and waste manifesting). These procedures may be subject to San Luis Obispo APCD requirements under the Packet Pg 298 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 39 California ARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations. b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. G. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 1. Impact HWQ-1: During project construction, the surface soil would be subject to erosion and the downstream watershed would be subject to pollution. Implementation of Mitigation Measures HWQ-1(a) through HWQ-1(c), which require preparation of and compliance with a Stormwater Pollution and Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Concept Grading Plan and Master Drainage Plan, and compliance with existing regulations would ensure that the potentially significant construction runoff and associated impacts to water quality would be reduced to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.8-22 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: Section 7.3 of the Specific Plan requires development in the Plan Area to be designed to conform to stormwater management requirements of the City of San Luis Obispo, including standards for LID set forth by SWRCB, and construction of retention and detention systems that would be adequate to meet the needs of future development and consistent with State and local requirements. Preparation of the required SWPPP and compliance with applicable State and local regulations would reduce potential impacts to water quality due to polluted runoff from construction activities. In order to ensure implementation of SWPPP requirements, incorporation of the following mitigation measures is required to reduce impacts to water quality due to due to polluted runoff from construction activities. — Mitigation Measure HWQ-1(a) Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. All required actions shall be implemented pursuant to a SWPPP and SWMP to be prepared by the project applicant and submitted by the City to the Regional Water Quality Control Board under the NPDES Phase II program. At a minimum, the SWPPP/SWMP shall including the following BMPs: • The use of sandbags, straw bales, and temporary de-silting basins during project grading and construction during the rainy season to prevent discharge of sediment-laden runoff into stormwater facilities; • Revegetation as soon as practicable after completion of grading to reduce sediment transport during storms; • Installation of straw bales, wattles, or silt fencing at the base of bare slopes before the onset of the rainy season (October 15th through April 15th); • Installation of straw bales, wattles, or silt fencing at the project perimeter and in front of storm drains before the onset of the rainy season (October 15th through April 15th); and/or • Alternative BMPs as approved by the RWQCB as part of the SWPPP submittal. Packet Pg 299 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 40 — Mitigation Measure HWQ-1(b) Berms and Basins. As specified in the SWPPP, the applicant shall be required to manage and control runoff by constructing temporary berms, sediment basins, runoff diversions, or alternative BMP’s as approved by the RWQCB as part of the SWPPP submittal, in order to avoid unnecessary siltation into local streams during construction activities where grading and construction shall occur in the vicinity of such streams. • Berms and basins shall be constructed when grading commences and be periodically inspected and maintained. The project applicant shall sufficiently document, to the CCRWQCB satisfaction, the proper installation of such berms and basins during grading. — Mitigation Measure HWQ-1(c) Concept Grading Plan and Master Drainage Plan. As specified in the SWPPP and the City’s Floodplain Management Regulations, the applicant shall be required to submit a Grading Plan and Master Drainage Plan to the Planning Division and City Public Works Director for approval prior to approval of the VTTM. The grading and drainage plans shall be designed to minimize erosion and water quality impacts, to the extent feasible, and shall be consistent with the project’s SWPPP. The plans shall include the following: a. Graded areas shall be revegetated with deep-rooted, native, non-invasive drought-tolerant species to minimize slope failure and erosion potential. Geotextile fabrics shall be used if necessary to hold slope soils until vegetation is established; b. Temporary storage of construction equipment shall be limited to a minimum of 100 feet away from drainages on the project site; and c. Erosion control structures shall be installed. d. Demonstrate peak flows and runoff for each phase of construction. e. Be coordinated with habitat restoration efforts, including measures to minimize removal of riparian and wetland habitats and trees (Mitigation Measures BIO-2[a] and BIO-2[b]). Grading and drainage plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. The applicant shall ensure installation of erosion control structures prior to beginning of construction of any structures, subject to review and approval by the City. b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. 2. Impact HWQ-3: During operation, the proposed residential and commercial uses would increase the quantities of pollutants associated with runoff and sedimentation. Implementation of Mitigation Measures HWQ-3(a) through HWQ-3(c), which require stormwater quality treatment controls, preparation of and compliance with a Stormwater BMP Maintenance Manual, and preparation of a semi-annual stormwater BMP maintenance report, and compliance with existing regulations would ensure that the potentially significant Packet Pg 300 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 41 impacts to water quality resulting from runoff during operation of the project would be reduced to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.8-26 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan includes retention and detention structures and LID measures intended to minimize pollutants associated with runoff and sedimentation, consistent with State and local requirements, including new standards for LID set forth by SWRCB. Compliance with the CCRWQCB’s Post Construction Requirements, NPDES discharge permits, the City’s SWMP, Engineering Standards, General Plan, and City Ordinance requirements would reduce potential impacts to water quality due to polluted runoff during operation of the project. However, the following mitigation is required to ensure the inclusion of locally-appropriate stormwater best management practices in the final design of the stormwater quality system, and to ensure that the stormwater quality system is maintained in order to ensure continued to ensure long-term operation. — Mitigation Measure HWQ-3(a) Stormwater Quality Treatment Controls. BMP devices shall be incorporated into the stormwater quality system depicted in the Master Drainage Plan (refer to Mitigation Measure HWQ-1[c]). The final design of the stormwater quality system shall be reviewed and approved by the City. The Master Drainage Plan shall contain the following relevant BMPs: • Vegetated bioswales to reduce sediment and particulate forms of metals and other pollutants along corridors of planted grasses. • Vegetated buffer strips to reduce sediment and particulate forms of metals and nutrients. — Mitigation Measure HWQ-3(b) Stormwater BMP Maintenance Manual. The project applicant shall prepare a development maintenance manual for the stormwater quality system BMPs (refer to Mitigation Measure HWQ-3[a]). The maintenance manual shall include detailed procedures for maintenance and operations of all stormwater facilities to ensure long-term operation and maintenance of post- construction stormwater controls. The maintenance manual shall require that stormwater BMP devices be inspected, cleaned, and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s maintenance specifications. The manual shall require that devices be cleaned prior to the onset of the rainy season (i.e., October 15th) and immediately after the end of the rainy season (i.e., May 15th). The manual shall also require that all devices be checked after major storm events. — Mitigation Measure HWQ-3(c) Stormwater BMP Semi-Annual Maintenance Report. The property manager(s) or acceptable maintenance organization shall submit to the City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department a detailed report prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer addressing the condition of all private stormwater facilities, BMPs, and any necessary maintenance activities on a semi-annual basis (October 15th and May 15th of each year). The requirement for maintenance and report submittal shall be recorded against the property. Packet Pg 301 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 42 b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. 3. Impact HWQ-4: Approximately 98 acres of the project site is within the existing 100-year flood zone. However, proposed grading and elevation modifications would ensure that the project would not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area or expose people or structures downstream of the Specific Plan Area to flood hazards due to increased runoff or loss of floodplain storage. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HWQ-4, Conditional Letter of Map Revision/Letter of Map Revision, and compliance with existing regulations would ensure that this impact would be reduced to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.8-29 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan includes a preliminary grading plan that would raise the elevation of the central portion of the project site above the post-development 100-year floodplain. The project includes a conditional letter of map revision (CLOMR) application1 requesting that the FEMA 100-year floodplain boundary be redefined consistent with the proposed site development, creek improvements and bridge, Prado Road Overpass, site and floodplain grading, and proposed detention facilities. Compliance with required City Flood Damage Prevention Regulations Code 17.84.050 and flood management measures including Special Floodplain Management Zone Regulation and the City Waterways Management Plan would reduce the risk of significant loss or injury as a result of flooding. In addition, the Specific Plan includes a preliminary drainage plan and retention and detention structures intended to ensure that that proposed development would not substantially increase runoff from the project site. Compliance with these State and local regulations would ensure that downstream flooding impacts would remain less than significant. The Specific Plan includes excavation and fill in the floodplain, peak flow management, and channel capacity enhancements for Prefumo Creek and Cerro San Luis Channel, and would satisfy City flow requirements with the proposed development. With the implementation of these measures, the project is in compliance with FEMA and City floodplain regulations and potential floodplain elevation increases affecting other properties would be avoided. However, the following mitigation is required to ensure the final grading plan and resulting post-development floodplain would exclude areas proposed for housing, and confirm that the CLOMR application to redefine the FEMA 100-year floodplain boundary is approved and an official letter of map revision (LOMR)2 is issued by FEMA. — Mitigation Measure HWQ-4 Conditional Letter of Map Revision/Letter of Map Revision. The applicant, in conjunction with the City of San Luis Obispo, shall prepare the CLOMR application and obtain a LOMR from FEMA. 1 A CLOMR is based on proposed conditions and does not change the FIRMs. A CLOMR is the method used by FEMA to let people know that if projects are constructed per the design submitted to and approved by FEMA, revision of the FIRM panel with an official letter of map revision (LOMR) is likely. 2 A LOMR is an official revision to the FIRMs issued by FEMA. LOMRs reflect changes to the 100 -year floodplains or Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHA) shown on the FIRMs. Packet Pg 302 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 43 b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. H. LAND USE 1. Impact LU-2: The Specific Plan would be potentially consistent with LAFCO policies for annexation and agricultural resources, with implementation of Mitigation Measures AG-1 and AG-3. (Refer to page 4.9-40 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measures AG-1 and AG-3 would ensure that the Specific Plan would not result in conflicts between the Specific Plan and San Luis Obispo LAFCO agricultural Policies 5, 6, 9, 10, and 12. No further mitigation is required in order to reduce this impact to a less than significant level. b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. 2. Cumulative Land Use Impacts: The proposed uses are consistent with the intent of the goals and policies established within the City’s General Plan and Zoning Regulations after implementation of mitigation required in the Final EIR for this project, and would not cumulatively contribute to the loss of open space or agricultural land beyond that already anticipated in the City’s LUCE Update and EIR. Furthermore, the Specific Plan is not expected to contribute cumulatively to potential airport noise and/or safety issues because it has been found consistent with the ALUP. As such, cumulative land use impacts would be less than significant with incorporation of the mitigation listed in the Final EIR for this project. (Refer to page 4.9-47 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required. • Section 4.2, Agricultural Resources: AG-1, AG-3 • Section 4.4, Biological Resources: BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(h) and BIO-2(a) through BIO-2(c) • Section 4.5, Cultural Resources: CR-1(a) through CR-1(c) • Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials: HAZ-4, and HAZ-6 • Section 4.10, Noise: N-1(a) through N-1(g), N-4(a), N-4(b), N-5(a) through N-5(d) • Section 4.12, Transportation and Circulation: T-1(a) through T-1(i), T-2(a) through T- 2(j), T-3(a) through T-3(d), T-4, T-5, T-6, T-7, T-8(a) through T-8(g), T-9(a) through T-9(m), T-10(a) through T-10(c) • Section 4.14, Issues Addressed in the Initial Study: GEO-1, GEO-3 b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. Packet Pg 303 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 44 I. NOISE 1. Impact N-4: Future development on the project site would generate operational noise typically associated with residential, commercial, office, and hotel development. Noise from the project would not exceed acceptable levels at existing off-site sensitive receptors. However, noise from new on-site commercial uses may exceed applicable City standards at proposed on-site residences. Mitigation Measures N-4(a), HVAC Equipment, and N-4(b), Parking Lot/Loading Dock Orientation and Noise Barrier, would ensure that noise levels at residences on the project site would not exceed the City’s standards for intermittent noise. (Refer to page 4.10-24 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan orients proposed residential development adjacent to existing residences and proposed commercial development adjacent to existing commercial uses. As such, the project’s proposed uses would be compatible with the existing noise environment of adjacent uses, and this impact would be less than significant. However, the Specific Plan does not include standards that would ensure that noise levels at on-site residences located adjacent to proposed retail uses would remain below applicable City standards. Therefore, the following mitigation measures are required to ensure that noise levels from proposed new retail uses at residences on the project site would remain below City standards. — Mitigation Measure N-4(a) HVAC Equipment. Retail HVAC equipment shall be shielded and located on building rooftops, or a minimum of 100 feet from the nearest residential property line. — Mitigation Measure N-4(b) Parking Lot/Loading Dock Orientation and Noise Barrier. If parking areas or loading docks would be located within 250 feet of the residential properties to the west, a masonry noise barrier shall be installed along the eastern boundary of the proposed residences adjacent to the commercial land use area on the eastern portion of the project site. The noise barrier shall be constructed of any masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. 2. Impact N-5: Existing noise sources near the project site include vehicles on local roadways and U.S. 101. Development of the project would expose future residents on the project site to traffic noise from local roadways and U.S. 101. With mitigation, traffic noise levels on the project site would not exceed City standards. Mitigation Measures N-5(a), Interior Noise Reduction, N-5(b), Residential Outdoor Activity Area Noise Attenuation, N-5(c), Froom Ranch Way Noise Barrier, and N-5(d), U.S. Highway 101 Noise Barrier at Hotel, Parking Lot/Loading Dock Orientation and Noise Barrier, would ensure that traffic noise levels would not exceed City standards. (Refer to page 4.10-28 of the Final EIR.) Packet Pg 304 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 45 a. Mitigation: Section 3.8.2 of the Specific Plan (Commercial, Office, Hotel Design Guidelines) requires future development on the project site to include screen walls and fences around storage areas, open work areas, or refuse collection areas on the project site to be of sufficient height and material to protect adjacent properties and public streets from visual and noise impacts. In addition, Section 2.6, Airport Compatibility Performance Standards, of the Specific Plan would require that all interior space of residential dwellings, as well as offices, meeting rooms, public reception areas, worker break rooms, and research, development, and production areas, meet the interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL and 60 dBA Lmax. However, the Specific Plan does not identify specific measures to achieve the interior noise standards identified in Section 2.6. Similarly, the Specific Plan does not include specific mitigative components that would reduce future on-site traffic noise below the City’s exterior noise standard of 60 dBA CNEL (see Table 4.10-3). Therefore, the following mitigation measures would be required to reduce interior and exterior noise levels in outdoor activity areas of proposed residential, hotel, and office uses to a less than significant level. — Mitigation Measure N-5(a) Interior Noise Reduction. The project applicant shall implement the following measures, or similar combination of measures, which demonstrate that interior noise levels in proposed residences adjacent to Froom Ranch Way and Madonna Road, hotel, and offices would be reduced below the City’s 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard. The required interior noise reduction shall be achieved through a combination of standard interior noise reduction techniques, which may include (but are not limited to): • In order for windows and doors to remain closed, mechanical ventilation such as air conditioning shall be provided for all units (Passive ventilation may be provided, if mechanical ventilation is not necessary to achieve interior noise standards, as demonstrated by a qualified acoustical consultant). • All exterior walls shall be constructed with a minimum STC rating of 50, consisting of construction of 2 inch by 4 inch wood studs with one layer of 5/8 inch Type “X” gypsum board on each side of resilient channels on 24 inch centers and 3 ½ inch fiberglass insulation. • All windows and glass doors shall be rated STC 39 or higher such that the noise reduction provided will satisfy the interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. • An acoustical test report of all the sound-rated windows and doors shall be provided to the City for review by a qualified acoustical consultant to ensure that the selected windows and doors in combination with wall assemblies would reduce interior noise levels sufficiently to meet the City’s interior noise standard. • All vent ducts connecting interior spaces to the exterior (i.e., bathroom exhaust, etc.) shall have at least two 90 degree turns in the duct. • All windows and doors shall be installed in an acoustically-effective manner. Sliding window panels shall form an air-tight seal when in the closed position and the window frames shall be caulked to the wall opening around the perimeter with Packet Pg 305 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 46 a non-hardening caulking compound to prevent sound infiltration. Exterior doors shall seal air-tight around the full perimeter when in the closed position. The applicant shall submit a report to the Community Development Department by a qualified acoustical consultant certifying that the specific interior noise reduction techniques included in residential, hotel, and office components of the project would achieve interior noise levels that would not exceed 45 dBA CNEL. — Mitigation Measure N-5(b) Residential Outdoor Activity Area Noise Attenuation. Outdoor activity areas (e.g., patios and hotel pool areas) associated with shared multifamily residential recreational spaces, hotel, commercial, and office uses shall be protected from sound intrusion so that they meet the City’s exterior standard of 60 dBA CNEL. Outdoor activity areas shall be oriented away from traffic noise such that intervening buildings reduce traffic noise or shall include noise barriers capable of reducing traffic noise levels to meet the City’s exterior standard. Hotel pool areas shall be located a minimum of 500 feet from the U.S. 101 right-of-way. Noise barriers may be constructed of a material such as tempered glass, acrylic glass, or masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. The applicant shall submit a report to the Community Development Department by a qualified acoustic consultant certifying that the specific outdoor noise reduction techniques in combination with the orientation of outdoor activity areas of shared multifamily residential recreational spaces, hotel, commercial, and offices would achieve exterior noise levels that would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL. — Mitigation Measure N-5(c) Froom Ranch Way Noise Barrier. A masonry noise barrier or alternative barrier, such as a landscaped berm, shall be installed along the southern property line of residential lots that abut Froom Ranch Way to protect outdoor activity areas (patios and pools) at these residences from sound intrusion from traffic along Froom Ranch Way. The noise barrier or berm shall provide, at minimum, a 6 foot high barrier between Froom Ranch Way and the neighboring residences from the final grade of whichever use (i.e., Froom Ranch Way or residences) has a higher final elevation. If a masonry noise barrier is implemented, the noise barrier shall be constructed of any masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. If an alternative material is used, the developer shall submit a report to the Community Development Department by a qualified acoustical consultant certifying that the specific exterior noise reduction techniques included would achieve exterior noise levels that would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL. — Mitigation Measure N-5(d) U.S. Highway 101 Noise Barrier at Hotel. If the hotel includes an outdoor activity area (such as a patio or pool) a masonry noise barrier or alternative barrier, such as berms, landscaping, or glass, must be installed along the eastern property line of the hotel where it abuts the U.S. 101 right of way to protect these outdoor activity areas from sound intrusion from traffic along U.S. 101. If a masonry noise barrier is implemented, the noise barrier shall provide, at minimum, an 8 foot high barrier between U.S. 101 and the hotel from the final grade of whichever Packet Pg 306 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 47 use (i.e., U.S. 101 or hotel) has a higher final elevation. Such a noise barrier shall be constructed of any masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. If an alternative material is used, the developer shall submit a report to the Community Development Department by a qualified acoustical consultant demonstrating that the specific exterior noise reduction techniques included in the hotel component of the project would achieve exterior noise levels that would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL. b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. J. RECREATION 1. Impact REC-1: The project would accommodate new residents in the City of San Luis Obispo who will use existing and planned parks and recreation facilities. Provision of on-site parks and recreation facilities would not meet the adopted City parkland standard for the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area. Mitigation Measure REC-1, which requires payment of the City’s required parkland in-lieu fees, would ensure compliance with the policies and performance standards in the City’s General Plan as part of the project. (Refer to page 4.11-7 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan includes requirements intended to protect open space and recreation areas. Specific Plan Policies 1.5, 4.1, 4.4, and 5.4 require the promotion and integration of parks and recreational space throughout the plan area and development components. Although the project includes development of 3.4 acres of parkland it would result in a 2.4-acre shortfall in parkland standard for the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area. Therefore, the following mitigation measure would be required to reduce impacts to parks and recreational facilities — Mitigation Measure REC-1 Parkland In-lieu Fees. The project applicant shall pay parkland in-lieu fees in accordance with the City’s parkland in-lieu fee program for the parkland shortage. The project’s specific fee shall be determined by the City at the time of project approval, after accounting for parkland provided within the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area. The in-lieu fees collected from the project shall be directed to new projects or improvements to existing parks and recreation facilities within the City of San Luis Obispo parks system. b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. 2. Cumulative Recreation Impacts: The project would not meet the Citywide parkland standards and would exacerbate the exiting shortfall of parks and recreational facilities within the City. With payment of the City’s required parkland in-lieu fees to ensure compliance with the policies and performance standards in the City’s General Plan as part of the project, Packet Pg 307 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 48 required by Mitigation Measure REC-1, the project contribution to cumulative impacts associated with parks and recreational facilities would be reduced to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.11-8 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measure REC-1 would be required to reduce the project contribution to cumulative impacts associated with parks and recreational facilities. b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. K. TRANSPORTATION 1. Impact T-4: Project construction activities would create traffic impacts due to construction vehicles causing congestion and deteriorating pavement conditions. Mitigation would reduce these impacts to an acceptable level. Implementation of Mitigation Measure T-4, Construction Traffic Management Plan, would ensure that impacts associated with construction traffic would be less than significant after mitigation. (Refer to page 4.12-81 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: The following mitigation is required to reduce potentially significant construction traffic impacts. — Mitigation Measure T-4 Construction Traffic Management Plan. Prior to construction, a traffic management plan shall be prepared for review and approval by the City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department. The traffic management plan shall be based on the type of roadway traffic conditions, duration of construction, physical constraints, nearness of the work zone to traffic and other facilities (bicycle, pedestrian, driveway access, etc.). The traffic management plan shall include: • Advertisement. The project developer shall prepare an advertisement campaign informing the public of the proposed construction activities. Advertisements shall occur prior to beginning work and periodically during the course of the project construction. The advertising shall include notification of changes to bus schedules and potential changes to bus stop locations, potential impacts during school drop-off and pick-up times, and major intersections that may be impacted during construction. • Property Access. Access to parcels along the construction area shall be maintained to the greatest extent feasible. Affected property owners shall receive advance notice of work adjacent to their property access and when driveways would be potentially closed. • Schools. Any construction adjacent to schools shall ensure that access is maintained for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists, particularly at the beginning and end of the school day. • Buses, Bicycles, and Pedestrians. The work zone shall provide for passage by buses, bicyclists, and pedestrians, particularly in the vicinity of schools. Packet Pg 308 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 49 • Intersections. Traffic control (i.e., use of flag persons) shall be used at intersections that are determined to be unacceptably congested based on the City’s most recently adopted traffic impact thresholds due to construction traffic. b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. 2. Impact T-5: Construction of the proposed Froom Ranch Way bridge during phase 3 of the Specific Plan buildout would result in significant level of service and queuing impacts at study area intersections and roadway segments. Mitigation Measure T-5, Froom Ranch Way Bridge Phasing, would ensure that LOS and queuing impacts associated with the project’s proposed infrastructure phasing would be less than significant after mitigation. (Refer to page 4.12-83 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: The following mitigation is required to reduce potentially significant LOS and queuing impacts that would result from the project’s proposed infrastructure phasing. — Mitigation Measure T-5 Froom Ranch Way Bridge Phasing. The Froom Ranch Way bridge connection shall be completed prior to occupancy of Phase 1 of the Specific Plan buildout. b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. 3. Impact T-6: The project site plan would result in and contribute to increased access conflicts. Proposed access controls are not consistent with General Plan policy. Mitigation Measure T- 6, Project Site Intersection Roundabout Control, would ensure that the project would be consistent with General Plan Circulation Element Policy 7.1.2, and would ensure that transportation impacts due to access conflicts would be reduced to a less than significant level after mitigation. (Refer to page 4.12-84 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: Specific Plan Policies 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 are intended to integrate the proposed new development and associated circulation into the City’s existing circulation system by ensuring a multimodal approach to the transportation networks for the Specific Plan Area, development of a circulation system that interfaces with existing adjacent streets and paths, and development of a safe and efficient circulation system that successfully interfaces with adjacent streets and paths. The project proposes signalized control at various intersections. However, General Plan Circulation Element Policy 7.1.2 requires roundabout control, unless otherwise physically infeasible. Therefore, the following mitigation is required to ensure that the project would be consistent with General Plan Circulation Element Policy 7.1.2. — Mitigation Measure T-6 Project Site Intersection Roundabout Control. New roadway intersections within the Specific Plan Area shall be controlled using roundabout Packet Pg 309 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 50 design, unless the City Public Works Department determines that roundabout control is physically infeasible. b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. 4. Impact T-7: The project site plan would result in on-site traffic volumes and speeds that may exceed General Plan policy thresholds, resulting potential traffic hazards within the project site. Mitigation Measure T-7, Traffic Calming Features, would ensure that potential traffic hazards within the Specific Plan area would be reduced to a less than significant level after mitigation. (Refer to page 4.12-85 of the Final EIR.) c. Mitigation: San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Policies 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 are intended to integrate the proposed new development and associated circulation into the City’s existing circulation system by ensuring a multimodal approach to the transportation networks for the Specific Plan Area, development of a circulation system that interfaces with existing adjacent streets and paths. The proposed layout of San Luis Ranch Road and other roadways internal to the Specific Plan area would result in on-site traffic speeds that would exceed General Plan thresholds, which may result in potential traffic hazards within the Specific Plan area. Therefore, the following mitigation is required to ensure that on-site traffic volumes and speeds would not exceed General Plan policy thresholds, and potential traffic hazards along on-site collector and residential streets would be reduced. — Mitigation Measure T-7 Traffic Calming Features. New roadway intersections along San Luis Ranch Road shall include neighborhood traffic circles at key intersections, and traffic-calming features, such as diverters, along longer uninterrupted segments. d. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. Packet Pg 310 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 51 SECTION 6. SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT FOR WHICH SUFFICIENT MITIGATION IS NOT AVAILABLE Class I impacts are significant and unavoidable. To approve a project resulting in Class I impacts, the CEQA Guidelines require decision makers to make findings of overriding consideration that "... specific legal, technological, economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR...". This section presents the project’s significant environmental impacts and feasible mitigation measures. Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR]) and Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code require a lead agency to make findings for each significant environmental impact disclosed in an EIR. Specifically, for each significant impact, the lead agency must find that: • Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR; • Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by that agency; or • Specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible. Each of these findings must be supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record. This section identifies impacts that can be reduced, but not to a less-than-significant level, through the incorporation of feasible mitigation measures into the project, and which therefore, remain significant and unavoidable, as identified in the Final EIR. The impacts identified in this section are considered in the same sequence in which they appear in the EIR. Where adoption of feasible mitigation measures is not effective in avoiding an impact or reducing it to a less-than-significant level, the feasibility of adopting alternatives to the proposed project is considered in Section 7 of this document. A. AIR QUALITY 1. Impact AQ-1: The project would be inconsistent with the SLOAPCD 2001 Clean Air Plan because it would result in an increase in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) that would exceed the rate of population growth. (Refer to page 4.3-9 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: The incorporation of Mitigation Measures AQ-3(a) through AQ-3(b) are recommended to improve consistency with the CAP. The following additional measure is also required: • Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Encourage Telecommuting. The project applicant or developers of individual projects within the Specific Plan Area shall include Packet Pg 311 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 52 provisions to encourage employers within the proposed office components of the project to implement telecommuting programs and include teleconferencing capabilities, such as web cams or satellite linkage, which will allow employees to attend meetings remotely without requiring them to travel out of the area. b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measure AQ-1 is feasible and has been adopted. However, mitigation is not available that would reduce projected VMT such that the project’s vehicle trip rate increase would not exceed population growth in the region. Therefore, impacts related to consistency with the 2001 CAP would remain significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8. 2. Cumulative Air Quality Impacts: The project is inconsistent with the 2001 CAP and would exceed SLOAPCD construction and operational thresholds. Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would reduce this cumulative impact to the maximum extent feasible. However, no additional mitigation is available to address cumulative air quality impacts. As such, cumulative impacts on air quality would remain significant and unavoidable. (Refer to page 4.3-30 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would reduce this cumulative impact to the maximum extent feasible. No other feasible mitigation is available that would meet the project objectives. b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measure AQ-1 is feasible and has been adopted. However, no additional feasible mitigation is available for cumulative air quality impacts, which would remain significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8. B. CULTURAL RESOURCES 1. Impact CR-1: The project would result in the relocation, demolition, and removal of structures on the San Luis Ranch property which are individually identified as historic resources. In addition, the project would eliminate the San Luis Ranch Complex, which is eligible for listing as a historic resource. Relocation, demolition, and/or removal of these historic resources would permanently alter the historic context of the project site and on-site structures. Required Mitigation Measures CR-1(a) through CR-1(c), which require a relocation and reconstruction plan for the former spectator’s barn/viewing stand, main residence, and main barn, archival documentation of historic buildings, and informational displays of historic resources, would reduce this impact to the maximum extent feasible. However, mitigation would not avoid the removal of the main barn, despite the proposed reuse of salvageable materials from the structure to the greatest extent possible in the construction of a new barn in the project’s proposed Agricultural Heritage and Learning Center. Therefore, the potential impact to the San Luis Ranch Complex and the main barn individuall y would remain Packet Pg 312 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 53 significant and unavoidable despite implementation of the required mitigation. (Refer to page 4.5-20 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan proposes programs and policies intended to reduce impacts to historical resources to the maximum extent practicable. The following additional measures are also required: • Mitigation Measure CR-1(a). Historical Structure Relocation and Reconstruction Plan. In order to implement Specific Plan Policy 2.5, a relocation and reconstruction plan for the former spectator’s barn/viewing stand, main residence, and main barn shall be developed by a qualified historic architect. The plan shall include a structural/architectural report documenting existing integrity and conditions and include detailed treatment methods and measures to ensure that historic integrity is retained and that all identified character defining features will be preserved. • Mitigation Measure CR-1(b). Archival Documentation of Historic Buildings. The applicant shall provide archival documentation of the San Luis Ranch Complex in as- built and as-found condition in the form of a Historic American Building Survey (HABS) Level II documentation. The documentation shall comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Architectural and Engineering Documentation (NPS 1990), and shall include large-format photographic recordation, detailed historic narrative report, and compilation of historic research. The documentation shall be completed by a qualified architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for History and/or Architectural History (NPS 1983). The original archival-quality documentation shall be offered as donated material to the History Center of San Luis Obispo County. Archival copies of the documentation shall also be submitted to the San Luis Obispo County Library. • Mitigation Measure CR-1(c). Informational Display of Historic Resources. A retrospective interpretive display detailing the history of the San Luis Ranch Complex and the project site, its significance, and its important details and features shall be developed by the applicant. The information should be incorporated into a publicly- accessed building on the project site, such as the proposed Agricultural Heritage Facilities and Learning Center, or a publicly-accessed outdoor location. The display shall include images and details from the HABS documentation described in Mitigation Measure CR-1(b) and any collected research pertaining to the historic property. The content shall be prepared by a qualified architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for History and/or Architectural History (NPS 1983). b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measures CR-1(a) through CR-1(c) are feasible and have been adopted. Mitigation Measure CR-1(a) would mitigate impacts to the main residence and barn/viewing stand to the maximum extent feasible, and that Mitigation Measures CR- 1(b) and CR-1(c) would reduce significant direct impacts to the remainder of the Packet Pg 313 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 54 historically significant San Luis Ranch Complex, including the individually significant historic main barn, to the maximum extent feasible. However, the removal and/or demolition of the historically significant main barn and the relocation, demolition, and removal of other structures in the San Luis Ranch Complex would change the historic context of the San Luis Ranch property. Furthermore, mitigation would not avoid the removal of the main barn, despite the proposed reuse of salvageable materials from the structure to the greatest extent possible in the construction of a new barn in the project’s proposed Agricultural Heritage and Learning Center. Therefore, the potential impact to the San Luis Ranch Complex and the main barn individually would remain significant and unavoidable despite implementation of the required mitigation. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8. 2. Cumulative Cultural Resources Impacts: The project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact associated with the removal, relocation, or reconstruction of individually historic structures that are part of the historically significant San Luis Ranch Complex. As such, the project would contribute to the cumulative loss of historic resources in the City. Required Mitigation Measures CR-1(a) through CR-1(c) would reduce this cumulative impact to historical resources to the maximum extent feasible. However, no additional mitigation is available to address this cumulative impact. Therefore, cumulative cultural resources impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. (Refer to page 4.5-26 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan contains goals and policies which would reduce cumulative impacts to historic and cultural resources. In addition, implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1(a) through CR-1(c) would further reduce cumulative impacts to historic resources. No other feasible mitigation is available that would meet the project objectives. b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measures CR-1(a) through CR-1(c) are feasible and have been adopted. No additional feasible mitigation is available for the cumulative loss of historic resources in the City, which would remain a significant and unavoidable impact. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8. C. LAND USE 1. Impact LU-1: The Specific Plan would be potentially consistent with the majority of adopted City policies in the General Plan, with implementation of Mitigation Measures throughout the Final EIR. The project would be potentially inconsistent with adopted General Plan policies designed to protect historical resources. Required Mitigation Measures in the EIR would reduce inconsistencies with General Plan policies to the maximum extent feasible. However, Specific Plan conflicts with Land Use Element Policy 1.10.4 (Design Standards) and Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 3.3.2 (Demolitions) would remain potentially inconsistent. The City acknowledges the importance and breadth of the potential inconsistencies associated with the Specific Plan by finding them to be significant and unavoidable impacts. (Refer to page 4.9-9 of the Final EIR.) Packet Pg 314 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 55 a. Mitigation: The incorporation of Mitigation Measures AG-1, AG-3, BIO-1(a) through BIO- 1(h), BIO-2(a) through BIO-2(c), CR-1(a) through CR-1(c), GEO-1, GEO-3, HAZ-4, HAZ-6, N-1(a) through N-1(g), N-4(a), N-4(b), N-5(a) through N-5(d), and T-1(a) through T-1(i), T-2(a) through T-2(j), T-3(a) through T-3(d), T-4, T-5, T-6, T-7, T-8(a) through T-8(g), T-9(a) through T-9(m), T-10(a) through T-10(c), would ensure that the majority of potential conflicts between the San Luis Obispo City General Plan and the Specific Plan would be reduced to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measures CR-1(a) through CR-1(c) would reduce potential conflicts with Land Use Element Policy 1.10.4 (Design Standards) and Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 3.3.2 (Demolitions) to the maximum extent feasible. b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible. The mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. However, Specific Plan conflicts with Land Use Element Policy 1.10.4 (Design Standards) and Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 3.3.2 (Demolitions) were identified in the Final EIR as potentially inconsistent. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8. D. NOISE 1. Impact N-1: Temporary construction activity would create noise that could exceed City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code regulations. Required Mitigation Measures N-1(a) through N- 1(g) require implementation of noise reduction devices and techniques during construction, and would reduce noise associated with on- and off-site construction activity to the maximum extent feasible. Although Mitigation Measure N-1(a) would reduce impacts from haul trucks by requiring the haul route to avoid residential areas and noise sensitive uses where possible, haul truck noise would continue to exceed the 75 dBA threshold for intermittent noise. Therefore, noise impacts from haul trucks would be minimized, but not eliminated. As a result, temporary noise impacts associated with off-site construction activity would be significant and unavoidable. (Refer to page 4.10-15 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: Implementation of the following measures would reduce noise impacts to the maximum extent feasible and are required. • N-1(a). Construction Vehicle Travel Route. Construction vehicles and haul trucks shall utilize roadways which avoid residential neighborhoods and sensitive receptors where possible. The applicant shall submit a proposed construction vehicle and hauling route for City review and approval prior to grading/building permit issuance. The approved construction vehicle and hauling route shall be used for soil hauling trips prior to construction as well as for the duration of construction. • N-1(b). Construction Activity Timing. Except for emergency repair of public service utilities, or where an exception is issued by the Community Development Department, no operation of tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair, alteration, or demolition work shall occur daily between the hours of 7:00 PM and 7:00 Packet Pg 315 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 56 AM, or any time on Sundays, holidays, or after sunset, such that the sound creates a noise disturbance that exceeds 75 dBA for single family residential, 80 dBA for multi- family residential, and 85 dBA for mixed residential/commercial land uses across a residential or commercial property line. • N-1(c). Construction Equipment Best Management Practices (BMPs). For all construction activity at the project site, noise attenuation techniques shall be employed to ensure that noise levels are maintained within levels allowed by the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 9.12 (Noise Control). Such techniques shall include: o Sound blankets on noise-generating equipment. o Stationary construction equipment that generates noise levels above 65 dBA at the project boundaries shall be shielded with barriers that meet a sound transmission class (a rating of how well noise barriers attenuate sound) of 25. o All diesel equipment shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be equipped with factory-recommended mufflers. o For stationary equipment, the applicant shall designate equipment areas with appropriate acoustic shielding on building and grading plans. Equipment and shielding shall be installed prior to construction and remain in the designated location throughout construction activities. o Electrical power shall be used to power air compressors and similar power tools. o The movement of construction-related vehicles, with the exception of passenger vehicles, along roadways adjacent to sensitive receptors shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM, Monday through Saturday. No movement of heavy equipment shall occur on Sundays or official holidays (e.g., Thanksgiving, Labor Day). o Temporary sound barriers shall be constructed between construction sites and affected uses. • N-1(d). Neighboring Property Owner Notification and Construction Noise Complaints. The contractor shall inform residents and business operators at properties within 300 feet of the project site of proposed construction timelines and noise complaint procedures to minimize potential annoyance related to construction noise. Proof of mailing the notices shall be provided to the Community Development Department before the City issues a zoning clearance. Signs shall be in place before beginning of and throughout grading and construction activities. Noise-related complaints shall be directed to the City’s Community Development Department. b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measures N-1(a) through N-1(d) are feasible and have been adopted. Available mitigation would not reduce the noise below the applicable City standards for relatively long term construction activity. Therefore temporary noise impacts associated with on-site construction activity would be significant and Packet Pg 316 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 57 unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8. E. TRANSPORTATION 1. Impact T-1: Under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions nine study area intersections would operate at unacceptable automobile, bicycle, or pedestrian LOS based on adopted multimodal level of service standards during AM and PM peak hours. (Refer to page 4.12-43 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measures T-1(a) through T-1(i) identify improvements at study area facilities that are required to reduce potentially significant project-specific impacts at study area intersections under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project Conditions. The project’s equitable share of these improvements will be calculated using the method for calculating equitable mitigation measures outlined in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (Caltrans, December 2002). Costs above and beyond the project’s equitable share can be addressed through such options as fee credits, reimbursement agreements, or development agreements, based on City requirements. Implementation of Mitigation Measures T-1(a) through T-1(i) would reduce impacts to multimodal level of service at study area intersections under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions to a feasible extent. • T-1(a). Intersection #1: Madonna Road & Los Osos Valley Road. o City optimize signal timing to accommodate increased project volumes (ongoing) • T-1(b). Intersection #3: Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive/Prado Road. o Extend existing westbound left turn lane on Madonna Road to Dalidio Drive/Prado Road to 310’ (Phase 1) o Install 2nd westbound 310’ left turn lane on Madonna Road to Dalidio Drive/Prado Road (Phase 1) o Install eastbound 250’ right turn pocket on Madonna Road to Dalidio Drive/Prado Road (Phase 1) o Install 2nd northbound left shared with through-lane on Prado Road/Dalidio Drive to Madonna Road (Phase 1) o Prohibit westbound U-turns on Madonna Road (Phase 1) o Provide split phase operations & optimize signal timing (Phase 1) • T-1(c). Intersection #5: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps. o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass-Only, Phase 2) • T-1(d). Intersection #8: Higuera Street & South Street. o Optimize Signal Timing Packet Pg 317 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 58 • T-1(e). Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way. o Install dedicated 230’ right turn lane on northbound Froom Ranch Way approach to Los Osos Valley Road (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction) o Extend right turn lane on southbound Froom Ranch Way approach to Los Osos Valley Road to 110’ (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction) o Install 2nd southbound left turn lane on Froom Ranch Way approach to eastbound Los Osos Valley Road (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction) • T-1(f). Intersection #10: Los Osos Valley Road & Auto Park Way. o Signalization (Phase 1) o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2) • T-1(g). Intersection #16: S. Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road. o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only Phase 2) o Extend northbound right turn pocket to 230’ and channelize movement (Phase 1) • T-1(h). Intersection #21: Prado Road/Dalidio Drive & Froom Ranch Way. o Install multilane roundabout control (when connection is constructed) • T-1(i). Intersection #25: Prado Road/Dalidio Drive & SC Project Driveway. o Install multilane roundabout control or restricted access (when connection is constructed) b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measures T-1(a), T-1(c) through T-1(d), and T-1(f) through T- 1(i) are feasible and have been adopted. Potential right-of-way constraints at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections may reduce the feasibility of Mitigation Measures T-1(b) and T-1(e). Accordingly, the potential impacts associated with multimodal level of service standards identified for Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections may not be feasibly mitigated to a less than significant level. Therefore, the potential impacts to multimodal level of service at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions would remain significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8. 2. Impact T-2: Under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions, the volume of traffic at 19 study area intersections would exceed lane capacities. (Refer to page 4.12-58 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measures T-2(a) through T-2(j) identify improvements at study area facilities that are required to reduce potentially significant project-specific impacts at Packet Pg 318 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 59 study area intersections under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project Conditions. The project’s equitable share of these improvements will be calculated using the method for calculating equitable mitigation measures outlined in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (Caltrans, December 2002). Costs above and beyond the project’s equitable share can be addressed through such options as fee credits, reimbursement agreements, or development agreements, based on City requirements. Implementation of Mitigation Measures T-2(a) through T-2(j) would reduce impacts associated with lane capacities identified for Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions to a feasible extent. • T-2(a). Intersection #1: Madonna Road & Los Osos Valley Road. o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2) • T-2(b). Intersection #2: Madonna Road & Oceanaire Drive. o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2) • T-2(c). Intersection #5: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 S.B Ramps. o Extend northbound Madonna Road left turn lane to 150’ (Phase 1) • T-2(d). Intersection #6: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps. o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2) • T-2(e). Intersection #7: Madonna Road & Higuera Street. o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Plus U.S. 101 northbound ramps, Phase 2) • T-2(f). Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way. o Install dedicated 230’ right turn lane on Los Osos Valley Road approach to northbound Froom Ranch Way (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction) o Extend right turn lane on Los Osos Valley Road approach to southbound Froom Ranch Way to 110’ (with Froom Ranch Way Bridge construction) o Install 2nd southbound left turn lane on Froom Ranch Way approach to eastbound Los Osos Valley Road (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction) • T-2(g). Intersection #12: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps. o Extend off-ramp left turn pocket to 320’ (Phase 1) • T-2(h). Intersection #13: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps. o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2) • T-2(i). Intersection #14: Los Osos Valley Road & Higuera Street. o Extend eastbound right turn lane to 180’ (Phase 1) Packet Pg 319 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 60 • T-2(j). Intersection #18: Prado Road & Higuera Street. o Install 2nd U.S. 101 northbound left turn lane (Phase 1) o Extend westbound right turn pocket to 400’ (Phase 1) b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measures T-2(a) through T-2(e) and T-2(g) through T-2(j) are feasible and have been adopted. Potential right-of-way constraints at the Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersection may reduce the feasibility Mitigation Measure T- 2(f). Accordingly, the potential impacts associated with lane capacities identified for Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions at the Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersection may not be feasibly mitigated to a less than significant level. As a result, impacts to lane capacities at the Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersection under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions would remain significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8. 3. Impact T-3: Under Existing and Near-Term conditions four study area segment groups would operate at unacceptable automobile, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit LOS based on adopted multimodal level of service standards during AM and PM peak hours. (Refer to page 4.12-63 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measures T-3(a) through T-3(d) identify improvements at study area facilities that are required to reduce potentially significant project-specific impacts at study area roadway segments under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project Conditions. The project’s equitable share of these improvements will be calculated using the method for calculating equitable mitigation measures outlined in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (Caltrans, December 2002). Costs above and beyond the project’s equitable share can be addressed through such options as fee credits, reimbursement agreements, or development agreements, based on City requirements. Implementation of Mitigation Measures T-3(a) through T-3(d) would reduce impacts associated with multimodal level of service standards at study area roadway segments identified for Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions to a feasible extent. • T-3(a). Segments #1 - #6: Madonna Road (Los Osos Valley Road to Higuera Street) o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2) o Fund assessment of decreasing transit headways to 25 min o Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (Phase 1) • T-3(b). Segments #7 - #8: Higuera Street (Madonna Road to Prado Road) o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass and U.S. 101 northbound ramps, Phase 2) o Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (Phase 1) Packet Pg 320 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 61 • T-3(c). Segments #13 - #17: Los Osos Valley Road (Madonna Road to Higuera Street) o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass and U.S. 101 northbound ramps, Phase 2) o Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (Phase 3) • T-3(d). Segments #18 - #20: Dalidio Drive/Prado Road (Froom Ranch Way to Higuera Street) o Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (when Prado Road is constructed/improved) b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measures T-3(a) through T-3(c) are feasible and have been adopted. Potential right-of-way constraints along the Higuera Street segments (Segments #7 and #8) may reduce the feasibility of (Mitigation Measure T-3(b). Accordingly, the potential impacts associated with multimodal level of service standards identified for Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions along the Higuera Street segments (Segments #7 and #8) may not be feasibly mitigated to a less than significant level. As a result, impacts associated with multimodal level of service standards at the Higuera Street segments (Segments #7 and #8) under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions would remain significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8. 4. Impact T-8: Under Cumulative Plus Project conditions nine study area intersections would operate at unacceptable automobile, bicycle, or pedestrian LOS based on adopted multimodal level of service standards during AM and PM peak hours. (Refer to page 4.12-87 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measures T-8(a) through T-8(g) identify improvements at study area facilities that are required to reduce potentially significant project-specific impacts at study area intersections under Cumulative Plus Project Conditions. The project’s equitable share of these improvements will be calculated using the method for calculating equitable mitigation measures outlined in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (Caltrans, December 2002). Costs above and beyond the project’s equitable share can be addressed through such options as fee credits, reimbursement agreements, or development agreements, based on City requirements. Implementation of Mitigation Measures T-8(a) through T-8(g) would reduce impacts to multimodal level of service at study area intersections under Cumulative Plus Project conditions to a feasible extent. • T-8(a). Intersection #3: Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive/Prado Road. o Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T- 1[b]) Packet Pg 321 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 62 • T-8(b). Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way. o Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T- 1[e]/Mitigation Measure T-2[f]) • T-8(c). Intersection #10: Los Osos Valley Road & Auto Park Way. ▪ Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[f]) • T-8(d). Intersection #12: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps. o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) • T-8(e). Intersection #13: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps. o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) • T-8(f). Intersection #14: Los Osos Valley Road & S. Higuera Street. o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) • T-8(g). Intersection #16: S. Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road. o Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T- 1[f]) b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measures T-8(c) through T-8(g) are feasible and have been adopted. Potential right-of-way constraints at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections may reduce the feasibility of Mitigation Measures T-8(a) and T-8(b). Accordingly, the potential impacts associated with multimodal level of service standards identified for Cumulative Plus Project conditions at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections may not be feasibly mitigated to a less than significant level. Therefore, the potential impacts to multimodal levels of service at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections under Cumulative Plus Project conditions would remain significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8. 5. Impact T-9: Under Cumulative Plus Project conditions, the volume of traffic at 18 study area intersections would exceed lane capacities. (Refer to page 4.12-97 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measures T-9(a) through T-9(m) identify improvements at study area facilities that are required to reduce potentially significant project-specific impacts at study area intersections under Cumulative Plus Project Conditions. The project’s equitable share of these improvements will be calculated using the method for calculating equitable mitigation measures outlined in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (Caltrans, December 2002). Costs above and beyond the project’s equitable Packet Pg 322 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 63 share can be addressed through such options as fee credits, reimbursement agreements, or development agreements, based on City requirements. Implementation of Mitigation Measures T-9(a) through T-9(m) would reduce impacts associated with lane capacities identified for Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions to a feasible extent. • T-9(a). Intersection #1: Madonna Road & Los Osos Valley Road. o Extend northbound right turn pocket on Los Osos Valley Road to 295’ o Extend southbound left turn pocket on Madonna Road to 395’ • T-9(b). Intersection #2: Madonna Road & Oceanaire Drive. o Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T- 1[b]) o Extend westbound right turn land on Madonna Road to 200’ • T-9(c). Intersection #3: Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive. o Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T- 1[b]) • T-9(d). Intersection #4: Madonna Road & El Mercado. o Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measures T- 1[b]) • T-9(e). Intersection #5: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps. o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) • T-9(f). Intersection #6: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps. o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) • T-9(g). Intersection #8: Higuera Street & South Street. o Extend northbound Higuera Street left turn pocket to 120’ o Extend eastbound South Street right turn pocket to 100’ • T-9(h). Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way. o Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T- 1[d]/Mitigation Measure T-2[f]) • T-9(i). Intersection #11: Los Osos Valley Road & Calle Joaquin. o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) • T-9(j). Intersection #12: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps. o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) • T-9(k). Intersection #14: Los Osos Valley Road & S. Higuera Street. Packet Pg 323 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 64 o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) • T-9(l). Intersection #16: S. Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road. o Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T- 1[g]) • T-9(m). Intersection #18: Higuera Street & Prado Road. o Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T- 2[j]) b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measures T-9(a) through T-9(b), T-9(d) through T-9(g), and T- 9(i) through T-9(m) are feasible and have been adopted. Potential right-of-way constraints at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections may reduce the feasibility of Mitigation Measures T-9(c) and T-9(h). Accordingly, the potential impacts associated with lane capacities identified for Cumulative Plus Project conditions at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections may not be feasibly mitigated to a less than significant level. As a result, impacts to lane capacities at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections under Cumulative Plus Project conditions would remain significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8. 6. Impact T-10: Under Cumulative Plus Project conditions five study area segment groups, as well as mainline segments of U.S. 101, would operate at unacceptable automobile, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit LOS based on adopted multimodal level of service standards during AM and PM peak hours. (Refer to page 4.12-101 of the Final EIR.) a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measures T-10(a) through T-10(c) identify improvements at study area facilities that are required to reduce potentially significant project-specific impacts at study area roadway segments under Cumulative Plus Project Conditions. The project’s equitable share of these improvements will be calculated using the method for calculating equitable mitigation measures outlined in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (Caltrans, December 2002). Costs above and beyond the project’s equitable share can be addressed through such options as fee credits, reimbursement agreements, or development agreements, based on City requirements. Implementation of Mitigation Measures T-10(a) through T-10(c) would reduce impacts associated with multimodal level of service standards at study area roadway segments identified for Cumulative Plus Project conditions to a feasible extent. • T-10(a). Segments #1 - #6: Madonna Road (Higuera Street to Los Osos Valley Road). o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) Packet Pg 324 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 65 • T-10(b). Segments #15 - #16: Los Osos Valley Road (Calle Joaquin to U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps). o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) • T-10(c). Segment #24: Prado Road/Dalidio Drive (Project Driveway to Froom Ranch Way). o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measures T-10(a) through T-10(c) are feasible and have been adopted. However, potential impacts identified for the northbound and southbound lanes of the mainline segments of U.S. 101 at Los Osos Valley Road and Madonna Road under Cumulative Plus Project conditions would not be mitigated to a less than significant level. No additional mitigation measures are feasible due to economic and physical constraints. As a result, impacts under Cumulative Plus Project conditions would remain significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8. Packet Pg 325 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 66 SECTION 7. FINDINGS FOR ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT A. INTRODUCTION As identified in Section 6 of this document, the proposed project will cause the following significant and unavoidable environmental impacts to occur: • Impact AQ-1: Clean Air Plan (CAP) consistency • Cumulative air quality impact • Impact CR-1: Removal of historic resources • Cumulative cultural resource impact • Impact LU-1: Potential City policy inconsistency • Impact N-1: Temporary construction activity noise • Impact T-1: Unacceptable multimodal level of service at study area intersections under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions • Impact T-2: Traffic volumes exceeding lane capacities under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions • Impact T-3: Unacceptable multimodal level of service at study area roadway segments under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions • Impact T-8: Unacceptable multimodal level of service at study area intersections under Cumulative Plus Project conditions • Impact T-9: Traffic volumes exceeding lane capacities under Cumulative Plus Project conditions • Impact T-10: Unacceptable multimodal level of service at study area roadway segments, including mainline segments of U.S. 101, under Cumulative Plus Project conditions Because the proposed project will cause significant and unavoidable environmental impacts to occur as identified above, the City must consider the feasibility of any environmentally superior alternatives to the project, as proposed. The City must evaluate whether one or more of these alternatives could substantially lessen or avoid the unavoidable significant environmental effects. As such, the environmental superiority and feasibility of each alternative to the project is considered in this section. Specifically, this section evaluates the effectiveness of these alternatives in reducing the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed project. B. DESCRIPTION OF THE ALTERNATIVES The Final EIR for the project evaluates the following four alternatives to the project: (1) a no project, no development alternative; (2) a no project, existing entitlements alternative; (3) an alternative that would retain the San Luis Ranch Farm Complex; and (4) an alternative that would retain 50 percent of the net site acreage as on-site agricultural and open space. 1. Alternative 1: No Project, No Development. As required by CEQA, this EIR evaluates the environmental consequences of not proceeding with the project. This alternative assumes that Packet Pg 326 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 67 the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is not adopted, that none of the proposed entitlements are implemented, including annexation to the City, and that no further development would occur on the project site. The project site would continue to support existing agricultural land uses, and the existing structures on the site would remain. 2. Alternative 2: No Project, Measure J Entitlements. This alternative assumes that the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is not adopted and that none of the proposed entitlements are implemented, including annexation to the City. Therefore, this alternative represents a project that would be processed by San Luis Obispo County, and considers what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future based on current plans and consistency with available infrastructure and community services. There are existing entitlements on the project site for development in the County from the voter-approved initiative known as “Measure J,” which was passed in 2006 and upheld in 2009. The Measure J entitlements include 60 multi-family dwelling units, 560,000 square feet of regional commercial and outdoor sales areas, 198,000 square feet of office space, and a 150-room hotel and ancillary facilities. Because the Measure J entitlements would leave the project site under the jurisdiction of the County, but surrounded entirely by the City limit, these entitlements would also require the use of private water from onsite wells and an onsite wastewater treatment facility. Figure 6-1 of the Final EIR depicts the Measure J site plan and approximate development area of this alternative. 3. Alternative 3: Historical Resource Preservation. This alternative assumes that the San Luis Ranch Farm Complex, as well as associated eucalyptus trees, located in the northwest portion of the project site would be retained, and that the proposed multi-family residential development would be relocated and integrated into the proposed single-family residential development area on the central portion of the project site. This configuration would likely result in fewer single-family homes and a corresponding increase in the number of multi- family or cluster-style residential development in order to preserve the total residential unit count on the project site. Figure 6-2 of the Final EIR depicts the approximate development area of this alternative. 4. Alternative 4: 50% On-Site Agriculture/Open Space. This alternative would retain 50 percent of the net site acreage as on-site agricultural and open space uses to be consistent on-site with the City’s General Plan Land Use Element Policy 8.1.4.f. This alternative would retain the portion of land designated for commercial uses (NC) southeast of Froom Ranch Way and southwest of Prado Road in agriculture. This alternative would reduce the portion of the site available for residential and commercial development on the project site. C. EFFECTIVENESS OF ALTERNATIVES IN AVOIDING SIGNIFICANT PROJECT IMPACTS This section evaluates the effectiveness of the alternatives in reducing the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed project. 1. Significant and Unavoidable Air Quality Impacts. The proposed project would result in significant and unavoidable project-level and cumulative impacts related to Clean Air Plan Packet Pg 327 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 68 (CAP) inconsistency. Under Alternative 1 (No Project, No Development), no development would occur, and no additional vehicle trips would be generated; therefore air quality impacts would be substantially reduced. Under Alternative 2 (No Project, Measure J Entitlements), additional vehicle trips would result in increased emissions compared to the proposed project, which would cumulatively impact air quality; therefore air quality impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Alternative 3 (Historical Resource Preservation) would provide denser residential development, incrementally reducing vehicle miles traveled and associated air pollutant emissions; therefore, air quality impacts would be incrementally reduced, but would remain significant and unavoidable. Alternative 4 (50% On-Site Agriculture/Open Space) would also result in fewer trips and emissions, as a result of the reduced total number of dwelling units and expected population compared to the proposed project; however, the significant cumulative air quality impacts would not be avoided. 2. Significant and Unavoidable Cultural Resources Impacts. The proposed project would result in significant and unavoidable project-level and cumulative impacts to historic resources as a result of the removal of the San Luis Ranch Complex. Alternative 1 and Alternative 3 would not remove the San Luis Ranch Complex; therefore, the project-level and cumulative impact to historic resources would not occur. Alternative 2 would remove the San Luis Ranch Complex, but would not relocate, reconstruct, or otherwise preserve or document the historic San Luis Ranch Complex or its individually historic structures; therefore, impacts to historic resources would be greater in comparison to the project Alternative 4 would remove the San Luis Ranch Complex, similar to the proposed project; therefore, the project- level and cumulative impact to historic resources would remain significant and unavoidable. 3. Significant and Unavoidable Land Use/Policy Consistency Impact. The proposed project would result in significant and unavoidable land use impacts due to potential inconsistencies with adopted City policies in the General Plan designed to protect historical resources and ensure adequate multimodal transportation levels of service. Under Alternative 1, no development would occur; therefore, the significant and unavoidable land use impact would be avoided. Alternative 2 would result in a project developed by San Luis Obispo County, rather than the City, which would not be required to be consistent with the City’s General Plan, making it impossible for the City to achieve the goals established for this area in the General Plan, as well as overall General Plan goals related to housing, agricultural protection, minimizing impacts to creeks, and circulation; therefore, this alternative would result in greater inconsistencies with the General Plan, and this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Alternative 3 would not remove the San Luis Ranch Complex; therefore, this alternative would not conflict with adopted City policies in the General Plan designed to protect historical resources; therefore, this alternative would reduce inconsistencies with the General Plan, but this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Alternative 4 would dedicate one half of the total project site for agriculture and open space, achieving on-site consistency with General Plan Land Use Element Policy 8.1.4.f. However, Alternative 4 would remain potentially inconsistent with General Plan policies designed to protect historical resources and ensure adequate multimodal transportation levels of service; therefore, impacts to land use would remain significant and unavoidable. Packet Pg 328 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 69 4. Significant and Unavoidable Temporary Noise Impacts. The proposed project would cause temporary noise impacts as a result of construction activity associated with project development. Under Alternative 1, no development would occur; therefore, the significant and unavoidable construction noise impact would be avoided. Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 would result in a similar level of overall construction activity on the project site, and would therefore result in similar significant and unavoidable impacts associated with temporary construction noise. 5. Significant and Unavoidable Transportation Impacts. The proposed project would result in project-level transportation impacts associated with potentially infeasible transportation mitigation measures at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections and cumulative transportation impacts along the mainline segments of U.S. 101 at Los Osos Valley Road and Madonna Road due to increased vehicle use of these facilities. Under Alternative 1, no development would occur; therefore, the significant and unavoidable transportation impacts would be avoided. Alternative 2 would result in an incrementally higher number of vehicle trips to and from the project site; therefore, this alternative would result in greater transportation impacts that would remain significant and unavoidable. Alternatives 3 and 4 would incrementally reduce the number of vehicle trips to and from the project site. However, project-generated vehicle traffic would still exceed the capacity and LOS thresholds for area intersections and roadways; therefore, impacts to transportation under these alternatives would remain significant and unavoidable. D. ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE AND FEASIBILITY OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 1. Finding: Alternative 1 (No Project, No Development) is environmentally superior overall, since no development would occur under the City jurisdiction. However, the existing Land Use Element establishes the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area as a City Expansion Area and requires that a Specific Plan be adopted prior to urban development. Alternative 1 fails to meet the City’s objectives for the project area as well as any of the project objectives. As a result, the City finds that Alternative 1 would be infeasible to implement. 2. Finding: Alternative 2 (No Project, Measure J Entitlements) would result in increased physical environmental impacts when compared to the proposed San Luis Ranch Specific Plan. With a higher density, commercially-focused design, this alternative requires more disturbed area, resulting in less of the site being retained in agriculture and open space. This alternative would also require the use of private water from onsite wells and an onsite wastewater treatment facility. Alternative 2 does not avoid any of the Class I impacts associated with the proposed project, and would not meet the project objectives to provide infill growth, preserve agricultural land and open space, create significant entry-level, workforce housing opportunities, implement a walkable-bikeable neighborhood design, create new commercial office and hotel opportunities, develop an agricultural heritage facilities & learning center, establish a link in the Bob Jones Regional Trail, and provide a fair-share financial contribution toward public circulation improvements. As a result, the City finds that Alternative 2 is not environmentally superior to the proposed project, and would not satisfy the project objectives. Packet Pg 329 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 70 3. Finding: Among the development scenarios, Alternative 3 (Historical Resource Preservation) would be considered environmentally superior. This alternative is considered environmentally superior to the proposed San Luis Ranch Specific Plan for each issue except for aesthetics, agricultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, recreation, transportation, utilities and service systems, and water resources. Alternative 3 avoids the Class I impact related to historical resources by avoiding development on the northwest portion of the project site near Madonna Road, where the San Luis Ranch Complex is located. However, this alternative would result in greater impacts to transportation, because the proposed roadway connection through the northwestern portion of the project site near Madonna Road would not be constructed. This would result in increased traffic loading on other access roadways into the Specific Plan area, including Froom Ranch Way, Dalidio Drive, and the proposed Prado Road extension. Alternative 3 would not meet the project objectives to implement a walkable-bikeable neighborhood design integrated with public transit and open space amenities and develop an agriculture heritage facilities & learning center. Alternative 3 would not develop the northwest portion of the project site near Madonna Road, and without the associated pedestrian and bicycle connections to Madonna Road, would be inferior to the proposed project in terms of its ability to provide pedestrian and bicycle connections to off-site amenities, such as Laguna Lake Park, commercial uses in the project site vicinity, and off-site transit connections, which is a project objective and City priority. Alternative 3 would not relocate and preserve historically important structures from the San Luis Ranch Complex, which is a project objective. As a result, the City finds that Alternative 3 would not satisfy the project objectives. 4. Finding: Alternative 4 (50% On-Site Agriculture/Open Space) is environmentally superior to the proposed Specific Plan because there would be fewer residential units on the site and a reduced overall site footprint. The impacts from this alternative are similar to the proposed San Luis Ranch Specific Plan in the areas of biological resources, cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, land use/policy consistency, noise, and recreation. Alternative 4 would not reduce any of the project’s Class I impacts to a level below significance thresholds. However, Alternative 4 would result in incrementally reduced impacts to several issue areas, including air quality, GHG emissions, transportation, aesthetics, and agricultural resources. Alternative 4 would not meet the project objectives to develop infill growth for the City and create significant entry-level, workforce housing opportunities within the City. Alternative 4 would result in fewer total residential units than the proposed project (536 vs. 580), and with less housing overall, would be inferior to the proposed project in terms of its ability to provide infill growth and create a variety of housing types, including affordable housing, which the City has identified as a priority. Alternative 4 would also provide approximately one-third less commercial square footage than the project, and would be inferior to the proposed project in terms of its ability to provide new commercial office opportunities that will compliment existing businesses in downtown San Luis Obispo, which is a project objective. As a result, the City finds that Alternative 4 would not satisfy the project objectives. Packet Pg 330 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 71 SECTION 8. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS A. INTRODUCTION The Final EIR for the project identifies the following significant and unavoidable impacts of the project: 1. The project would be inconsistent with the SLOAPCD 2001 Clean Air Plan because it would result in an increase in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) that would exceed the rate of population growth. 2. The project is inconsistent with the 2001 Clean Air Plan, which SLOAPCD guidance states is a cumulative air quality impact. 3. The project would result in the relocation, demolition, and removal of structures on the San Luis Ranch property which are individually identified as historic resources. In addition, the project would eliminate the San Luis Ranch Complex, which is eligible for listing as a historic resource. Relocation, demolition, and/or removal of these historic resources would permanently alter the historic context of the project site and on-site structures. 4. Removal of the San Luis Ranch Complex would contribute to the cumulative loss of historic resources in the City. 5. The project would be potentially inconsistent with adopted City policies in the General Plan designed to protect historical resources and ensure adequate multimodal transportation levels of service. 6. Temporary construction activity would create noise that could exceed City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code regulations, and mitigation may not be feasible to reduce the impact to less than the applicable threshold. 7. Under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions nine study area intersections would operate at unacceptable automobile, bicycle, or pedestrian LOS based on adopted multimodal level of service standards during AM and PM peak hours. Mitigation would reduce impacts at seven of these intersections to an acceptable level. However, impacts at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections would be significant and unavoidable. 8. Under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions, the volume of traffic at 19 study area intersections would exceed lane capacities. Mitigation would reduce impacts at 18 of these intersections to an acceptable level. However, impacts at the Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersection would be significant and unavoidable. 9. Under Existing and Near-Term conditions four study area segment groups would operate at unacceptable automobile, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit LOS based on adopted multimodal level of service standards during AM and PM peak hours. Mitigation would reduce impacts at three of these segment groups to an acceptable level. However, impacts at Higuera Street roadway segments would be significant and unavoidable. 10. Under Cumulative Plus Project conditions nine study area intersections would operate at unacceptable automobile, bicycle, or pedestrian LOS based on adopted multimodal level of service standards during AM and PM peak hours. Mitigation would reduce impacts at seven of these intersections to an acceptable level. However, impacts at the Madonna Packet Pg 331 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 72 Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections would be significant and unavoidable. 11. Under Cumulative Plus Project conditions, the volume of traffic at 18 study area intersections would exceed lane capacities. Mitigation would reduce impacts at 17 of these intersections to an acceptable level. However, impacts at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections would be significant and unavoidable. For projects which would result in significant environmental impacts that cannot be avoided, CEQA requires that the lead agency balance the benefits of these projects against the unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the projects. If the benefits of these projects outweigh the unavoidable impacts, those impacts may be considered acceptable (CEQA Guidelines Section 15093[a]). CEQA requires that, before adopting such projects, the public agency adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations setting forth the reasons why the agency finds that the benefits of the project outweigh the significant environmental effects caused by the project. This statement is provided below. B. REQUIRED FINDINGS The City has incorporated all feasible mitigation measures into the project. Although these measures will lessen the unavoidable impacts listed above, the measures will not fully avoid these impacts. The City has also examined a reasonable range of alternatives to the project and has determined that none of these alternatives is feasible, environmentally superior, and would satisfy the project objectives to the same or greater extent as the project. Alternative 1 would avoid all of the significant impacts of the project, but would not achieve the City’s objectives for the project and is not considered feasible. Alternative 2 is considered to be environmentally inferior to the proposed project. Alternative 3 would be environmentally superior to the project in some aspects, but would result in greater impacts to transportation, and would not achieve City objectives for the project, including implementing a walkable-bikeable neighborhood design integrated with public transit and open space amenities and developing an agriculture heritage facilities & learning center. Alternative 4 is superior to the proposed project in that it incrementally reduces impacts to air quality, GHG emissions, transportation, aesthetics, and agricultural resources. However, Alternative 4 is inferior to the proposed project in terms of its ability to achieve City objectives for the project, including developing infill growth for the City and creating significant entry-level, workforce housing opportunities within the City. In preparing this Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has balanced the benefits of the proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks. For the reasons specified below, the City finds that the following considerations outweigh the proposed project’s unavoidable environmental risks: 1. Provision of new Residential and Commercial Uses. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan will develop a new residential neighborhood that fulfills a portion of the City’s unmet housing Packet Pg 332 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 73 needs and that designates sufficient land for neighborhood serving commercial uses to provide for the convenience of area residents, consistent with Land Use Element Policies 2.3.6, 3.3.1, and 8.1.4. 2. Provision of a Variety of Housing Types for all Income Levels. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan provides a variety of housing types and costs to meet the needs of renters and buyers with a variety of income-levels, including inclusionary affordable housing for residents with moderate, low, and very-low income levels, consistent with General Plan Land Use Element Goal 2, Affordability. 3. Open Space and Agricultural Protection: Implementation of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan would preserve approximately 53 acres of the site in agriculture adjacent to the San Luis Obispo City Farm, including development of the agricultural heritage facilities & learning center, which would relocate and preserve historically important structures from the San Luis Ranch Complex and integrate them into an enhanced and inter-connected, working agricultural setting. The project would also preserve approximately 7.4 acres of the site in open space. 4. Provision of Park and Recreational Facilities. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan will provide a variety of park and recreational facilities for residents of the City, such as parks, trails and other recreational facilities, and passive recreational opportunities within open space, both by constructing facilities on site and providing needed funding for enhancement of existing offsite City park and recreational facilities. 5. Well-Planned Neighborhood Would Reduce Per-Capita Vehicle Trips: The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan would develop a new residential neighborhood to meet the City’s housing needs and that designates sufficient land for neighborhood serving commercial uses to reduce vehicle trips and provide for the convenience of area residents. In addition, the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan encourages the use of bicycles and walking within the Plan Area by including specific policies and development standards that will result in subdivision and building designs that facilitate bike use and pedestrian access and incorporating multiple classes of bike lanes and including bike and pedestrian paths through the parks and open space areas. 6. Provision of New Jobs: The project would create new construction-related and permanent jobs in the project area. Planned commercial development would provide jobs in close proximity to housing, consistent with Community Goal 34 in the General Plan Land Use Element and Land Use Element Policy 1.5, which states that the gap between housing demand and supply should not increase. 7. Transient Occupancy Tax: Development of commercial hotel uses would contribute Transient Occupancy Tax revenues that help fund needed City services. 8. National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and the Community Rating System (CRS) Rating Improvement: The proposed significant dedication of acreage for designated Natural Beneficial Functions (CRS Activity 420) would improve the City’s point total with the CRS point system. The City has improved its CRS rating steadily from a Class 10 community to a Packet Pg 333 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations San Luis Ranch Specific Plan City of San Luis Obispo July 2017 74 Class 6 community. The improvement in class is directly related to a reduction in flood insurance premiums citywide. 9. Implementation of the General Plan: As required by the City General Plan, the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan contains policies and standards that will facilitate appropriate development of land, protection of open space, and provision of adequate public facilities consistent with the City’s recent LUCE update and the housing and transportation objectives. Accordingly, the City finds that the project’s adverse, unavoidable environmental impacts are outweighed by these considerable benefits. Dated: __________________, 2017 Heidi Harmon Mayor, City of San Luis Obispo Packet Pg 334 12 Advisory Body Review Summary and Project Responses The proposed Specific Plan now includes revisions from the version of the Plan that formed the basis of the Project Description in the Draft EIR. The revisions are in response to advisory body input and incorporates EIR mitigation measures to reduce environmental impacts. The updated Plan includes more refined details, including additional environmental protections, provisions and regulations to reduce environmental impacts identified in the EIR for the Project. The changes associated with the updated Specific Plan that respond to EIR mitigation measures are included in Appendix B of the Specific Plan. The most substantial of these address the following issues: • Relocation of historical structures • Construction vehicle access and activities • Transportation improvements, primarily to City streets • Agricultural conservation, including offsite mitigation • Dust control measures • Biological resource mitigation, including for habitat restoration and tree replacement • Storm water pollution prevention, and approaches to onsite grading practices • Noise reduction and mitigation through design Below, staff has provided a brief summary of the main points discussed in each advisory body meeting and the resulting main project changes, along with a summary of each meeting: Planning Commission (PC) • In order to have a broader mix of densities so there can be a greater variety of product and affordability, the plan was revised from NG-1 (which encompassed the single family and small lot areas) to NG 10 and NG 23, which are now separate zones. The NG-23 zone reflects a higher density to allow a variety of very small lot products. The SP illustrates front and rear yard loaded units, both attached and detached. • Cul-de-sacs have been avoided to the extent possible. The plan has been revised to have only 2 cul-de-sacs in the single family, each with a connection to Froom Ranch. There is one cul-de-sac in the multifamily, with a pedestrian connection to the rest of the project. • Road and infrastructure phasing and timing specifically the overpass and interchange has been updated. The Planning Commission has previously considered the project on eight occasions, once during the pre-application process, twice to review a preliminary version of the Specific Plan, twice during the Draft EIR public review period, and three times to consider the project now before the City Council. On June 7, 2017, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended that the City Council certify the Final EIR and approve all project entitlements, included the Vesting Tentative Tract Map as conditioned. As part of its Resolution, the Planning Commission recommended additional modifications to the Specific Plan which are included in the City Packet Pg 335 12 Council Resolution. Previous Planning Commission meetings, hearings, and workshops are summarized below: • February 12, 2014. The Planning Commission held a pre-application review of materials related to the project, providing direction to the project applicant that became the basis for the August 2015 Draft Specific Plan, which was examined in the EIR for the project. • February 10, 2016. The Planning Commission received a presentation regarding an overview of a Specific Plan, and provided conceptual input to the applicant regarding the first four chapters of the plan, focusing on land use, neighborhood form, agriculture, open space and parks. No formal action was taken at that time. • March 23, 2016. The Planning Commission received a presentation regarding an overview of a Specific Plan, and provided conceptual input to the applicant regarding the remaining chapters of the plan, focusing on circulation and infrastructure issues. No formal action was taken at that time. • January 11, 2017. The Planning Commission held a public workshop on the Draft EIR, taking public testimony on the document, and providing input for considerati on in the Final EIR. • January 25, 2017. The Planning Commission held a second public workshop on the Draft EIR, taking public testimony on the document, and providing input for consideration in the Final EIR. • May 24, 2017. The Planning Commission considered the proposed project and related entitlements, and took public testimony. • May 25, 2017. The Planning Commission considered the proposed project and related entitlements, took further public testimony, and provided input to staff and the applicant regarding the project. The Commission was primarily focused on the Final EIR, Specific Plan, and General Plan Amendment. • June 7, 2017. The Planning Commission considered the proposed project and related entitlements, primarily focused on the Vesting Tentative Tract Map and related conditions. After taking further public testimony, the Commission unanimously recommended that the City Council certify the Final EIR and approve all project entitlements, included the Vesting Tentative Tract Map as conditioned. As part of the Resolution, the Planning Commission recommended additional modifications to the Specific Plan. Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) • The committee preferred the development of a crossing of Highway 101 at Prado Road even if it is for bicycle only for overall bicycling facility network connectivity. The Prado Road overcrossing will contain bike paths on both sides of the bridge. Previous Bicycle Advisory Committee meetings are summarized below: Packet Pg 336 12 • November 19, 2015. The BAC reviewed a preliminary version of the Specific Plan, and provided comments on the bicycle planning provisions included in the document. • January 19, 2017. The BAC provided comments on the updated bicycle planning aspects of the Specific Plan that responded to previous input received in November 2015. The BAC conceptually concurred with the Specific Plan as presented. This review occurred during the public comment period of the Draft EIR, but the BAC did not have any substantive comment that related to the adequacy of the Draft EIR analysis. Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) • In order to incorporate additional passive recreational opportunities (i.e. trails) on-site, the site contains a 6’ wide trail that follows the San Luis Channel and Perfumo Creek. It winds through sections of preserved area for monarch butterflies. • The Specific Plan has been revised from a Park/Open Space zoning designation to just Open Space. As a result, the Open Space area will have a less manicured and more natural look and feel. The previous Parks and Recreation Commission meeting is summarized below: • February 3, 2016. The PRC reviewed the proposed parks and recreation components of the draft Specific Plan, and provided comments on these aspects of the project. As a result of this review, the Specific Plan was modified to more clearly differentiate and describe the various park facilities included in the project. The PRC also determined that any shortfall in required onsite parks acreage would be most effectively addressed through payment of in-lieu fees, which could be applied to areas that might more appropriately serve the greater community. Cultural Heritage Committee • The conceptual Agricultural Heritage Center site plan revised to more accurately convey the number and location of buildings. • The updated plan provides more detail with regards to the relocation and rehabilitation of historic structures. • Three major buildings will be preserved through relocation and rehabilitation, not two as originally proposed. Following CHC comments on the Draft EIR, the plan was revised to include the preservation of the Main Barn, which was one of the individually significant buildings in the historic complex. January 23, 2017. The CHC conducted a public hearing to review the cultural resource evaluation in the Draft EIR. The hearing provided an opportunity for members of the Committee and the public to receive a summary presentation of the project as well as the major findings of Packet Pg 337 12 the Draft EIR related to cultural and historical resources. As a result of CHC input, and b ecause the project already proposed to construct a new barn in the project’s proposed Agricultural Heritage and Learning Center using salvageable materials from the historically significant main barn, Mitigation Measure CR-1(a) was modified for the Final EIR to incorporate the main barn. May 15, 2017. The CHC considered the applicant’s revised and updated approach to addressing impacts to the historic San Luis Ranch complex, based on previous CHC input and direction from the Final EIR. The CHC found the project consistent with the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance and historic preservation policies of the General Plan. Architectural Review Commission (ARC) • Revisions to design guidelines based on Commission input have been made to address internal inconsistencies, clarify design standards, provide better illustrations, and make the document more user-friendly. November 16, 2015. The Draft Specific Plan Guidelines (Chapter 3 of the Specific Plan) were reviewed by the ARC. At that time, the ARC provided the applicant direction on the structure and content of the design guidelines, architectural styles, and neighborhood form. May 1, 2017. The applicant team addressed ARC concerns raised in November 2015 in an updated version of the Design Guidelines. ARC provided additional comments to ensure internal consistency of the text and photographic examples provided, as well as other key direction to improve the long-term utility of the Design Guidelines. The applicant team is revising the document, which is Chapter 3 of the Specific Plan, to address these concerns. This chapter will be conceptually considered at an ARC workshop on May 22, then again on June 5 , when it will make a formal recommendation on this information to the City Council. May 22, 2017. The applicant team conceptually addressed ARC concerns raised on May 1, and took further input from the ARC in a workshop format. June 5, 2017. The ARC reviewed the revised Design Guidelines, which incorporated input received at previous meetings. The ARC unanimously recommended approval of the project Design Guidelines (Chapter 3 of the Specific Plan) to the City Council. Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) (to ensure consistency with safety, density, overflight, and noise policies): • Delineation of 200’ no build zone affecting commercial areas • A change of approximately 3 acres of residential NG-23 zoning to General Commercial • 27 units removed from Sb-1 zone with 8 units relocated to the S-2 zone • ALUC findings of consistency have been incorporated into Appendix C of the Specific Plan February 15, 2017. The ALUC continued the consideration of the item to its March 29, 2017 meeting, in order to allow the applicant to update the airport safety provisions of the Specific Plan to achieve consistency with the ALUP. March 29, 2017. The ALUC reviewed the project as updated, and provided additional direction to the applicant to address potential ALUP inconsistency issues. Packet Pg 338 12 April 19, 2017. The ALUC reviewed the project, and determined that the project was consistent with the ALUP, with conditions related to relocating 27 dwelling units that would have otherwise been in a more restrictive airport safety zone, and by requiring a portion of the designated commercial area be restricted from having developed structures). The applicant subsequently updated the Specific Plan and Vesting Tentative Tract map to address these changes, which is the version of the project currently being considered by the City Council. These changes did not affect the analysis or conclusions of the Final EIR. Packet Pg 339 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This section summarizes the characteristics of the proposed San Luis Ranch Project, alternatives to the project, as well as environmental impacts, mitigation measures, and residual impacts associated with the project. PROJECT SYNOPSIS Lead Agency City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, California 93401 Contact: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director John Rickenbach, AICP, Project Manager Project Proponent Coastal Community Builders c/o Marshall Ochylski (Project Representative) 979 Osos, Suite F7 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P.O. Box 13 Pismo Beach, CA 93449 Project Description The San Luis Ranch Project consists of a Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment/Pre-Zoning, and Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map for a 131-acre project site, including annexation of the site into the City of San Luis Obispo. It would also address a Development Agreement/Memorandum of Understanding, which provides a mechanism for project implementation. The project is intended to be consistent with the development parameters described in the City’s Land Use and Circulation Element (adopted in December 2014). The project includes construction of up to 580 residential units, 150,000 square feet of commercial development, 100,000 square feet of office development, and a 200-room hotel, with a portion of the site preserved for agriculture and open space uses. The project is planned to be constructed in six phases, beginning in 2017. The specific location and characteristics of the project are described in greater detail in Section 2.0, Project Description. ALTERNATIVES As required by Section 15126(d) of the State CEQA Guidelines, this EIR examines a range of reasonable alternatives to the project that could feasibly achieve similar objectives. This includes the following four alternatives: Packet Pg 340 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-2 • Alternative 1: No Project, No Development • Alternative 2: No Project, Measure J Entitlements • Alternative 3: Historical Resource Preservation • Alternative 4: 50% On-Site Agriculture/Open Space Alternative 1 assumes that the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is not adopted, that none of the proposed entitlements are implemented, including annexation to the City, and that no further development would occur on the project site. Alternative 2 also assumes that the Specific Plan is not adopted and that none of the proposed entitlements are implemented, including annexation to the City. However, this alternative represents a project that would be processed by San Luis Obispo County, and considers what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future based on current plans and consistency with available infrastructure and community services. There are existing entitlements on the project site for development in the County from the voter-approved initiative known as “Measure J,” which include 60 multi-family dwelling units, 560,000 square feet of regional commercial and outdoor sales areas, 198,000 square feet of office space, a 150- room hotel and ancillary facilities. Because the Measure J entitlements would leave the project site under the jurisdiction of the County, but surrounded entirely by the City limit, these entitlements would also require the use of private water from onsite wells and an onsite wastewater treatment facility. Since this alternative (Alternative 2) assumes that the project site would be developed under an existing entitlement, this alternative would not require environmental review under CEQA. Alternative 3 would preserve the San Luis Ranch Complex, as well as associated eucalyptus trees, located in the northwest portion of the project site would be retained, and assumes that the proposed multi-family residential development would be relocated and integrated into the proposed single-family residential development area on the central portion of the project site. By preserving the San Luis Ranch Complex, this alternative would avoid the project’s significant and unavoidable impact to historic resources. In addition, this alternative would also reduce other potential environmental impacts to air quality, GHG emissions, noise, biological resources, land use/policy consistency, and hydrology and water quality, while resulting in slightly increased impacts to transportation. Alternative 4 would retain 50 percent of the net site acreage as on-site agricultural and open space uses to be consistent on-site with the City’s General Plan Land Use Element Policy 8.1.4.f. This alternative would retain the portion of land designated for commercial uses (NC) southeast of Froom Ranch Way and southwest of Prado Road in agriculture. This alternative would reduce the portion of the site available for residential and commercial development on the project site. The No Project, No Development Alternative (Alternative 1) would have the fewest environmental impacts. However, since this is a “No Project” alternative, CEQA requires that a separate alternative also be identified as the Environmentally Superior Alternative. Because Alternative 3 would avoid the significant and unavoidable impact to historic resources identified for the project, as well as reducing other potential environmental effects due to the preservation of the eucalyptus grove in the northwest portion of the project site along Madonna Road, and due to the reduced overall development footprint this alternative is identified as the environmentally superior alternative over other alternatives. Packet Pg 341 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-3 The complete alternatives analysis is included in Section 6.0, Alternatives. AREAS OF CONCERN Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines §15123(b)(2), this EIR acknowledges the areas of controversy and issues to be resolved which are known to the City of San Luis Obispo or were raised during the scoping process. A Notice of Preparation (NOP) was prepared and circulated for a 30-day public review period that began on October 26, 2015 and ended November 24, 2015. Several comment letters from public agencies and members of the public were received in response to the NOP. The NOP and Initial Study, and NOP comment letters are included in Appendix A of this EIR. Primary environmental areas of concern raised by the commenting agencies and public include: AREA OF CONCERN EIR SECTION Access to U.S. Highway 101 Section 4.12: Transportation Drainage characteristics, hydrology, flooding, and other impacts associated with the area floodplain Section 4.8: Hydrology and Water Quality Aviation Safety and airport/aviation hazards Section 4.7: Hazards, Section 4.9: Land Use/Policy Consistency Construction equipment regulation and permit requirements associated with air pollution emissions Section 4.3: Air Quality Existing structure demolition and potential to encounter asbestos containing materials Section 4.7: Hazards Naturally occurring asbestos exposure Section 4.3: Air Quality Operational permit requirements associated with air pollutant emissions Section 4.3: Air Quality Long-term and short-term air quality impacts Section 4.3: Air Quality Impacts associated with greenhouse gas emissions Section 4.6: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Alternatives to the project Section 6.0: Alternatives Routing plans relative to access to site and nearby land uses Section 4.12: Transportation Residential displacement Section 4.9: Land Use/Policy Consistency, Section 4.14: Issues Addressed in the Initial Study FINAL EIR ERRATA In accordance with Section 15088 of the State CEQA Guidelines, Draft EIR was circulated for a 52-day public review period that began December 9, 2016 and concluded on January 31, 2017. Each written and verbal comment that the City received is included in Section 8.0, Responses to Comments. Responses to these comments have been prepared to address the environmental concerns raised by the commenters and to indicate where and how the Draft EIR addresses pertinent environmental issues. The Draft EIR and responses to comments collectively comprise the Final EIR for the project. The responses to comments summarize the comment and direct the commenter to the section of the Draft EIR that addresses their comment. In some cases, revisions have been made to the Packet Pg 342 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-4 Draft EIR to clarify information, data, or intent, or to make minor typographical corrections or minor working changes. Any changes made to the text of the Draft EIR to are noted in the Final EIR as changes from the Draft EIR. Where a comment results in a change to the Draft EIR text, a notation is made in the response indicating that the text is revised. Changes in the Draft EIR text are signified by strikeouts where text is removed and by underline font where text is added. If text is added where the font is already bold or underlined, additions are noted using underlined bold font. Mitigation measures in the Draft EIR that were revised as part of the responses to comments are listed below. Revisions to these mitigation measures are also shown in Table ES-1, applicable sections of the Draft EIR, and in Section 8.0, Responses to Comments. • AG-1. Agricultural Conservation. • AQ-2(a). Fugitive Dust Control Measures. • AQ-2(b). Standard Control Measures for Construction Equipment. • AQ-2(e). Construction Activity Management Plan. • AQ-3(a). Standard Operational Mitigation Measures. • BIO-1(e). Steelhead Impact Avoidance and Minimization. • BIO-1(f). Great Blue Heron and Monarch Butterfly Impact Avoidance and Minimization. • BIO-2(b). Tree Replacement. • CR-1(a). Historical Structure Relocation and Reconstruction Plan. • HAZ-5(a). Groundwater Assessment for Contamination at Untested Wells. • HAZ-5(b). Groundwater Remediation. • HWQ-3(a). Stormwater Quality Treatment Controls. • N-4(b). Parking Lot/Loading Dock Orientation and Noise Barrier. • N-5(a). Interior Noise Reduction. • N-5(c). Froom Ranch Way Noise Barrier. • N-5(d). U.S. Highway 101 Noise Barrier at Hotel. SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Tables ES-1 through ES-3 provide a summary of the potential environmental impacts of the project. The mitigation measures associated with each impact, which are to be implemented in order to reduce the environmental impacts to the maximum extent feasible, are also summarized therein. In accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines, the tables identify the following types of potential impacts associated with the project: Packet Pg 343 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-5 • Class I, Significant and Unavoidable: An impact that cannot be reduced to below the threshold level given reasonably available and feasible mitigation measures. Such an impact requires a ‘Statement of Overriding Considerations’ to be issued if the project is approved per §15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines. • Class II, Significant but Mitigable: An impact that can be reduced to below the threshold level given reasonably available and feasible mitigation measures. Such an impact requires ‘Findings’ to be made under §15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines. • Class III, Not Significant: An impact that may be adverse, but does not exceed the threshold levels and does not require mitigation measures. However, mitigation measures that could further lessen the environmental effect may be suggested if readily available and easily achievable. Significant and Unavoidable Impacts The project would result in twelve significant and unavoidable (Class I) impacts. Issue areas with Class I impacts include air quality (Clean Air Plan consistency and cumulative air quality impacts), cultural resources (historic resources and cumulative historic resources), land use/policy consistency (General Plan policy consistency), noise (construction noise), and transportation (existing and near-term intersection operations, existing and near-term lane capacities, existing and near-term segment operations, cumulative intersection operations, cumulative lane capacities, and cumulative segment operations). Packet Pg 344 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-6 Table ES-1 Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact AIR QUALITY Impact AQ-1. The project would be inconsistent with the SLOAPCD 2001 Clean Air Plan because it would result in an increase in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) that would exceed the rate of population growth. This impact would be Class I, significant and unavoidable. AQ-1. Encourage Telecommuting. The project applicant or developers of individual projects within the Specific Plan Area shall include provisions to encourage employers within the proposed commercial, office, and hotel components of the project to implement telecommuting programs and include teleconferencing capabilities, such as web cams or satellite linkage, which will allow employees to attend meetings remotely without requiring them to travel out of the area. Mitigation is not available that would reduce projected VMT such that the project’s vehicle trip rate increase would not exceed population growth in the region. Therefore, impacts related to consistency with the 2001 CAP would remain significant and unavoidable. Cumulative Air Quality Impacts. The project is inconsistent with the 2001 CAP and would exceed SLOAPCD construction and operational thresholds. As such, cumulative impacts on air quality would be Class I, significant and unavoidable. No additional mitigation is available to address cumulative air quality impacts. Cumulative air quality impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. CULTURAL RESOURCES Impact CR-1. The project would result in the relocation, demolition, and removal of structures on the San Luis Ranch property which are individually identified as historic resources. In addition, the project would eliminate the San Luis Ranch Complex, which is eligible for listing as a historic resource. Relocation, demolition, and/or removal of these historic resources would permanently alter the historic context of the project site and on-site structures. This impact CR-1(a). Historical Structure Relocation and Reconstruction Plan. In order to implement Specific Plan Policy 2.5, a relocation and reconstruction plan for the former spectator’s barn/viewing stand, and main residence, and main barn shall be developed by a qualified historic architect. The plan shall include a structural/architectural report documenting existing integrity and conditions and include detailed treatment methods and measures to ensure that historic integrity is retained and that all identified character defining features will be preserved. CR-1(b). Archival Documentation of Historic Buildings. The applicant shall provide archival documentation of the San Luis Ranch Complex in as-built and as- found condition in the form of an Historic American Building Survey (HABS) Level II documentation. The documentation shall comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Architectural and Engineering Documentation (NPS 1990), and shall include large-format photographic recordation, detailed historic narrative report, and compilation of historic research. The documentation shall be completed by a qualified architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s The removal and/or demolition of the historically significant main barn and the relocation, demolition, and removal of other structures in the San Luis Ranch Complex would change the historic context of the San Luis Ranch property. Furthermore, mitigation would not avoid the removal of the main barn, despite the proposed reuse of salvageable materials from the structure to the greatest extent possible in the construction of a new barn in the project’s proposed Agricultural Heritage and Learning Center. Therefore, the potential Packet Pg 345 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-7 Table ES-1 Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact would be Class I, significant and unavoidable. Professional Qualification Standards for History and/or Architectural History (NPS 1983). The original archival-quality documentation shall be offered as donated material to the History Center of San Luis Obispo County. Archival copies of the documentation shall also be submitted to the San Luis Obispo County Library. CR-1(c). Informational Display of Historic Resources. A retrospective interpretive display detailing the history of the San Luis Ranch Complex and the project site, its significance, and its important details and features shall be developed by the applicant. The information should be incorporated into a publicly-accessed building on the project site, such as the proposed Agricultural Heritage Facilities and Learning Center, or a publicly-accessed outdoor location. The display shall include images and details from the HABS documentation described in Mitigation Measure CR-1(b) and any collected research pertaining to the historic property. The content shall be prepared by a qualified architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for History and/or Architectural History (NPS 1983). impact to the San Luis Ranch Complex and the main barn individually would remain significant and unavoidable despite implementation of the required mitigation. Cumulative Cultural Resources Impacts. The project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact associated with the removal, relocation, or reconstruction of individually historic structures that are part of the historically significant San Luis Ranch Complex. As such, the project would contribute to the cumulative loss of historic resources in the City. Therefore, the project would result in a Class I, significant and unavoidable, cumulative impact to historical resources. No additional mitigation is available to address cumulative cultural resources impacts. Cumulative cultural resources impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. LAND USE Impact LU-1. The project would be potentially inconsistent with adopted City policies in the General Plan designed to The following Mitigation Measures would apply to this impact: • Section 4.1, Aesthetics: AES-1(a) and AES-1(b) • Section 4.2, Agricultural Resources: AG-1, AG-3 • Section 4.4, Biological Resources: BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(h) and BIO-2(a) Specific Plan conflicts with Land Use Element Policy 1.10.4 (Design Standards), Land Use Element Policy 8.1.4 (SP-2, San Luis Ranch Packet Pg 346 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-8 Table ES-1 Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact protect historical resources, and ensure provision of parkland. This would be a Class I, significant and unavoidable, impact. through BIO-2(c) • Section 4.5, Cultural Resources: CR-1(a) through CR-1(c) • Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials: HAZ-4, HAZ-5(a), HAZ-5(b), HAZ-6 • Section 4.10, Noise: N-1(a) through N-1(g), N-4(a), N-4(b), N-5(a) through N- 5(d) • Section 4.12, Transportation and Circulation: T-1(a) through T-1(i), T-2(a) through T-2(j), T-3(a) through T-3(d), T-4, T-5, T-6, T-7, T-8(a) through T-8(g), T-9(a) through T-9(m), T-10(a) through T-10(c) • Section 4.14, Issues Addressed in the Initial Study: GEO-1, GEO-3 (Dalidio) Specific Plan Area), and Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 3.3.2 (Demolitions) would remain potentially inconsistent. The City acknowledges the importance and breadth of the potential inconsistencies associated with the Specific Plan by finding them to be Class I, significant and unavoidable impacts. NOISE Impact N-1. Temporary construction activity would create noise that could exceed City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code regulations. Mitigation is available to address construction noise, but it may not be feasible to reduce the impact to less than the applicable threshold. Impacts would be Class I, significant and unavoidable. N-1(a). Construction Vehicle Travel Route. Construction vehicles and haul trucks shall utilize roadways which avoid residential neighborhoods and sensitive receptors where possible. The applicant shall submit a proposed construction vehicle and hauling route for City review and approval prior to grading/building permit issuance. The approved construction vehicle and hauling route shall be used for soil hauling trips prior to construction as well as for the duration of construction. N-1(b). Construction Activity Timing. Except for emergency repair of public service utilities, or where an exception is issued by the Community Development Department, no operation of tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair, alteration, or demolition work shall occur daily between the hours of 7:00 PM and 7:00 AM, or any time on Sundays, holidays, or after sunset, such that the sound creates a noise disturbance that exceeds 75 dBA for single family residential, 80 dBA for multi-family residential, and 85 dBA for mixed residential/commercial land uses across a residential or commercial property line. N-1(c). Construction Equipment Best Management Practices (BMPs). For all construction activity at the project site, noise attenuation techniques shall be employed to ensure that noise levels are maintained within levels allowed by the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 9.12 (Noise Control). Such techniques shall include: • Sound blankets on noise-generating equipment. • Stationary construction equipment that generates noise levels above 65 dBA at the project boundaries shall be shielded with barriers that meet a sound transmission class (a rating of how well noise barriers attenuate sound) of 25. • All diesel equipment shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be Mitigation Measures N-1(a) through N-1(g) require implementation of noise reduction devices and techniques during construction, and would reduce noise associated with on- and off-site construction activity to the maximum extent feasible. Noise from trucks can reach up to 88 dBA at 50 feet from the source. Although Mitigation Measure N-1(a) would reduce impacts from haul trucks by requiring the haul route to avoid residential areas and noise sensitive uses where possible, haul truck noise would continue to exceed the 75 dBA threshold for intermittent noise. Therefore, noise impacts from haul trucks would be minimized, but not eliminated. As a result, temporary noise impacts associated with off-site construction activity would be significant and unavoidable. Packet Pg 347 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-9 Table ES-1 Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact equipped with factory-recommended mufflers. • For stationary equipment, the applicant shall designate equipment areas with appropriate acoustic shielding on building and grading plans. Equipment and shielding shall be installed prior to construction and remain in the designated location throughout construction activities. • Electrical power shall be used to power air compressors and similar power tools. • The movement of construction-related vehicles, with the exception of passenger vehicles, along roadways adjacent to sensitive receptors shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM, Monday through Saturday. No movement of heavy equipment shall occur on Sundays or official holidays (e.g., Thanksgiving, Labor Day). • Temporary sound barriers shall be constructed between construction sites and affected uses. TRANSPORTATION Impact T-1. Under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions nine study area intersections would operate at unacceptable automobile, bicycle, or pedestrian LOS based on adopted multimodal level of service standards during AM and PM peak hours. Mitigation would reduce impacts at seven of these intersections to an acceptable level. However, impacts at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections would be Class I, significant and unavoidable. T-1(a) Intersection #1: Madonna Road & Los Osos Valley Road. • City optimize signal timing to accommodate increased project volumes (ongoing) T-1(b) Intersection #3: Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive/Prado Road. • Extend existing westbound left turn lane on Madonna Road to Dalidio Drive/Prado Road to 310’ (Phase 1) • Install 2nd westbound 310’ left turn lane on Madonna Road to Dalidio Drive/Prado Road (Phase 1) • Install eastbound 250’ right turn pocket on Madonna Road to Dalidio Drive/Prado Road (Phase 1) • Install 2nd northbound left shared with through-lane on Prado Road/Dalidio Drive to Madonna Road (Phase 1) • Prohibit westbound U-turns on Madonna Road (Phase 1) • Provide split phase operations & optimize signal timing (Phase 1) T-1(c) Intersection #5: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass-Only, Phase 2) T-1(d) Intersection #8: Higuera Street & South Street. • Optimize Signal Timing Potential right-of-way constraints at Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way may reduce the feasibility of mitigation at these intersections. Accordingly, some of the potential impacts associated with multimodal level of service standards identified for Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions may not be feasibly mitigated to a less than significant level. As a result, impacts associated with multimodal level of service standards at these intersections under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions would remain significant and unavoidable. Implementation of mitigation measures that require off-site improvements would generally not result in significant residual Packet Pg 348 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-10 Table ES-1 Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact T-1(e) Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way. • Install dedicated 230’ right turn lane on Los Osos Valley Road northbound Froom Ranch Way approach to northbound Froom Ranch Way Los Osos Valley Road (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction) • Extend right turn lane on Los Osos Valley Road southbound Froom Ranch Way approach to southbound Froom Ranch Way Los Osos Valley Road to 110’ (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction) • Install 2nd southbound left turn lane on Froom Ranch Way approach to eastbound Los Osos Valley Road (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction) T-1(f) Intersection #10: Los Osos Valley Road & Auto Park Way. • Signalization (Phase 1) • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2) T-1(g) Intersection #16: S. Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only Phase 2) • Extend northbound right turn pocket to 230’ and channelize movement (Phase 1) T-1(h) Intersection #21: Prado Road/Dalidio Drive & Froom Ranch Way. • Install multilane roundabout control (when connection is constructed) T-1(i) Intersection #25: Prado Road/Dalidio Drive & SC Project Driveway. • Install multilane roundabout control or restricted access (when connection is constructed) impacts, as these improvements would occur within existing roadway rights-of-way, or within urbanized paved/landscaped areas immediately adjacent to existing roadway rights-of-way. The primary exception to this is the Prado Road/U.S 101 overpass/interchange. During construction of the overpass, northbound ramps, and southbound ramps, potential issue areas that may be temporarily affected would include air quality, cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, water quality, noise and transportation. Construction-related environmental impacts would be mitigated through compliance with City and Caltrans permitting and construction monitoring requirements and standard SLOAPCD dust and diesel emission control measures. Long- term impacts of the Prado Road/U.S. 101 overpass/interchange would include potential obstruction of scenic views, loss of prime agricultural land west of U.S. 101, and land use impacts associated with acquisition of additional right-of-way. Impact T-2. Under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions, the volume of traffic at 19 study area intersections would exceed lane capacities. Mitigation would reduce impacts at 18 of these intersections to an T-2(a) Intersection #1: Madonna Road & Los Osos Valley Road. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2) T-2(b) Intersection #2: Madonna Road & Oceanaire Drive. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2) T-2(c) Intersection #5: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 S.B Ramps. Potential right-of-way constraints at Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way may reduce the feasibility of mitigation at this intersection. Accordingly, some of the potential impacts associated with lane capacities identified for Packet Pg 349 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-11 Table ES-1 Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact acceptable level. However, impacts at the Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersection would be Class I, significant and unavoidable. • Extend northbound Madonna Road left turn lane to 150’ (Phase 1) T-2(d) Intersection #6: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2) T-2(e) Intersection #7: Madonna Road & Higuera Street. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Plus U.S. 101 northbound ramps, Phase 2) T-2(f) Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way. • Install dedicated 230’ right turn lane on Los Osos Valley Road approach to northbound Froom Ranch Way (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction) • Extend right turn lane on Los Osos Valley Road approach to southbound Froom Ranch Way to 110’ (with Froom Ranch Way Bridge construction) • Install 2nd southbound left turn lane on Froom Ranch Way approach to eastbound Los Osos Valley Road (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction) T-2(g) Intersection #12: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps. • Extend off-ramp left turn pocket to 320’ (Phase 1) T-2(h) Intersection #13: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2) T-2(i) Intersection #14: Los Osos Valley Road & Higuera Street. • Extend eastbound right turn lane to 180’ (Phase 1) T-2(j) Intersection #18: Prado Road & Higuera Street. • Install 2nd U.S. 101 northbound left turn lane (Phase 1) • Extend westbound right turn pocket to 400’ (Phase 1) Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions may not be feasibly mitigated to a less than significant level. As a result, impacts to lane capacities at this intersection under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions would remain significant and unavoidable. Implementation of mitigation measures that require off-site improvements would generally not result in significant residual impacts, as these improvements would occur within existing roadway rights-of-way, or within urbanized paved/landscaped areas immediately adjacent to existing roadway rights-of-way. The primary exception to this is the Prado Road/U.S 101 overpass/interchange. During construction of the overpass, northbound ramps, and southbound ramps, potential issue areas that may be temporarily affected would include air quality, cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, water quality, noise and transportation. Construction-related environmental impacts would be mitigated through compliance with City and Caltrans permitting and construction monitoring requirements and standard SLOAPCD dust and diesel emission control measures. Long- term impacts of the Prado Road/U.S. 101 Packet Pg 350 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-12 Table ES-1 Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact overpass/interchange would include potential obstruction of scenic views, loss of prime agricultural land west of U.S. 101, and land use impacts associated with acquisition of additional right-of-way. Impact T-3. Under Existing and Near-Term conditions four study area segment groups would operate at unacceptable automobile, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit LOS based on adopted multimodal level of service standards during AM and PM peak hours. Mitigation would reduce impacts at three of these segment groups to an acceptable level. However, impacts at Higuera Street roadway segments would be Class I, significant and unavoidable T-3(a) Segments #1 - #6: Madonna Road (Los Osos Valley Road to Higuera Street) • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2) • Fund assessment of decreasing transit headways to 25 min • Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (Phase 1) T-3(b) Segments #7 - #8: Higuera Street (Madonna Road to Prado Road) • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass and U.S. 101 northbound ramps, Phase 2) • Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (Phase 1) T-3(c) Segments #13 - #17: Los Osos Valley Road (Madonna Road to Higuera Street) • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass and U.S. 101 northbound ramps, Phase 2) • Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (Phase 3) T-3(d) Segments #18 - #20: Dalidio Drive/Prado Road (Froom Ranch Way to Higuera Street) • Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (when Prado Road is constructed/improved) Implementation of the identified mitigation measures would improve LOS at all impacted study area roadway segments to acceptable levels, and impacts on these facilities under Existing and Near- Term Plus Project conditions would be less than significant after mitigation. However, potential right- of-way constraints along Higuera Street (Segments #7 and #8) may reduce the feasibility of mitigation along these segments. Accordingly, some of the potential impacts associated with multimodal level of service standards identified for Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions may not be feasibly mitigated to a less than significant level. As a result, impacts associated with multimodal level of service standards at these roadway segments under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions would remain significant and unavoidable. Implementation of mitigation measures that require off-site improvements would generally not result in significant residual impacts, as these improvements would occur within existing roadway Packet Pg 351 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-13 Table ES-1 Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact rights-of-way, or within urbanized paved/landscaped areas immediately adjacent to existing roadway rights-of-way. The primary exception to this is the Prado Road/U.S 101 overpass/interchange. During construction of the overpass, northbound ramps, and southbound ramps, potential issue areas that may be temporarily affected would include air quality, cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, water quality, noise and transportation. Construction-related environmental impacts would be mitigated through compliance with City and Caltrans permitting and construction monitoring requirements and standard SLOAPCD dust and diesel emission control measures. Long- term impacts of the Prado Road/U.S. 101 overpass/interchange would include potential obstruction of scenic views, loss of prime agricultural land west of U.S. 101, and land use impacts associated with acquisition of additional right-of-way. Impact T-8. Under Cumulative Plus Project conditions nine study area intersections would operate at unacceptable automobile, bicycle, or pedestrian LOS based on adopted multimodal level of service standards during AM and PM peak hours. Mitigation T-8(a). Intersection #3: Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive/Prado Road. • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[b]) T-8(b). Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way. • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T- 1[e]/Mitigation Measure T-2[f]) T-8(c). Intersection #10: Los Osos Valley Road & Auto Park Way. • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[f]) Potential right-of-way constraints at Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way may reduce the feasibility of mitigation at these intersections. Accordingly, some of the potential impacts associated with multimodal level of service standards identified for Cumulative Packet Pg 352 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-14 Table ES-1 Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact would reduce impacts at seven of these intersections to an acceptable level. However, impacts at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections would be Class I, significant and unavoidable. T-8(d). Intersection #12: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) T-8(e). Intersection #13: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) T-8(f). Intersection #14: Los Osos Valley Road & S. Higuera Street. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) T-8(g). Intersection #16: S. Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road. • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[f]) Plus Project conditions may not be feasibly mitigated to a less than significant level. As a result, impacts associated with multimodal level of service standards at these intersections under Cumulative Plus Project conditions would remain significant and unavoidable. Implementation of mitigation measures that require off-site improvements would generally not result in significant residual impacts, as these improvements would occur within existing roadway rights-of-way, or within urbanized paved/landscaped areas immediately adjacent to existing roadway rights-of-way. The primary exception to this is the Prado Road/U.S 101 overpass/interchange. During construction of the overpass, northbound ramps, and southbound ramps, potential issue areas that may be temporarily affected would include air quality, cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, water quality, noise and transportation. Construction-related environmental impacts would be mitigated through compliance with City and Caltrans permitting and construction monitoring requirements and standard SLOAPCD dust and diesel emission control measures. Long- term impacts of the Prado Road/U.S. 101 overpass/interchange would include Packet Pg 353 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-15 Table ES-1 Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact potential obstruction of scenic views, loss of prime agricultural land west of U.S. 101, and land use impacts associated with acquisition of additional right-of-way. Impact T-9. Under Cumulative Plus Project conditions, the volume of traffic at 18 study area intersections would exceed lane capacities. Mitigation would reduce impacts at 18 of these intersections to an acceptable level. Mitigation would reduce impacts at 17 of these intersections to an acceptable level. However, impacts at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections would be Class I, significant and unavoidable. T-9(a). Intersection #1: Madonna Road & Los Osos Valley Road. • Extend northbound right turn pocket on Los Osos Valley Road to 295’ • Extend southbound left turn pocket on Madonna Road to 395’ T-9(b). Intersection #2: Madonna Road & Oceanaire Drive. • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[b]) • Extend westbound right turn land on Madonna Road to 200’ T-9(c). Intersection #3: Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive. • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[b]) T-9(d). Intersection #4: Madonna Road & El Mercado. • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measures T-1[b]) T-9(e). Intersection #5: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) T-9(f). Intersection #6: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) T-9(g). Intersection #8: Higuera Street & South Street. • Extend northbound Higuera Street left turn pocket to 120’ • Extend eastbound South Street right turn pocket to 100’ T-9(h). Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way. • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T- 1[d]/Mitigation Measure T-2[f]) T-9(i). Intersection #11: Los Osos Valley Road & Calle Joaquin. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and Potential right-of-way constraints at Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way may reduce the feasibility of mitigation at these intersections. Accordingly, some of the potential impacts associated with lane capacities identified for Cumulative Plus Project conditions may not be feasibly mitigated to a less than significant level. As a result, impacts to lane capacities at these intersections under Cumulative Plus Project conditions would remain significant and unavoidable. Implementation of mitigation measures that require off-site improvements would generally not result in significant residual impacts, as these improvements would occur within existing roadway rights-of-way, or within urbanized paved/landscaped areas immediately adjacent to existing roadway rights-of-way. The primary exception to this is the Prado Road/U.S 101 overpass/interchange. During construction of the overpass, northbound ramps, and southbound ramps, potential issue areas that may be temporarily affected would Packet Pg 354 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-16 Table ES-1 Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact southbound ramps) T-9(j). Intersection #12: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) T-9(k). Intersection #14: Los Osos Valley Road & S. Higuera Street. • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) T-9(l). Intersection #16: S. Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road. • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[g]) T-9(m). Intersection #18: Higuera Street & Prado Road. • Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-2[j]) include air quality, cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, water quality, noise and transportation. Construction-related environmental impacts would be mitigated through compliance with City and Caltrans permitting and construction monitoring requirements and standard SLOAPCD dust and diesel emission control measures. Long- term impacts of the Prado Road/U.S. 101 overpass/interchange would include potential obstruction of scenic views, loss of prime agricultural land west of U.S. 101, and land use impacts associated with acquisition of additional right-of-way. Impact T-10. Under Cumulative Plus Project conditions five study area segment groups, as well as mainline segments of U.S. 101, would operate at unacceptable automobile, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit LOS based on adopted multimodal level of service standards during AM and PM peak hours. Mitigation would reduce impacts at each of the five study area segment groups to an acceptable level. However, impacts at the mainline segments of U.S. 101 at Los Osos Valley Road and Madonna Road would be Class I, significant and unavoidable. T-10(a). Segments #1 - #6: Madonna Road (Higuera Street to Los Osos Valley Road). • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) T-10(b). Segments #15 - #16: Los Osos Valley Road (Calle Joaquin to U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps). • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) T-10(c). Segment #24: Prado Road/Dalidio Drive (Project Driveway to Froom Ranch Way). • Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps) Potential impacts identified for the northbound and southbound lanes of the mainline segments of U.S. 101 at Los Osos Valley Road and Madonna Road under Cumulative Plus Project conditions would not be mitigated to a less than significant level. As a result, impacts under Cumulative Plus Project conditions would remain significant and unavoidable. Implementation of mitigation measures that require off-site improvements would generally not result in significant residual impacts, as these improvements would occur within existing roadway rights-of-way, or within urbanized paved/landscaped areas Packet Pg 355 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-17 Table ES-1 Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact immediately adjacent to existing roadway rights-of-way. The primary exception to this is the Prado Road/U.S 101 overpass/interchange. During construction of the overpass, northbound ramps, and southbound ramps, potential issue areas that may be temporarily affected would include air quality, cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, water quality, noise and transportation. Construction-related environmental impacts would be mitigated through compliance with City and Caltrans permitting and construction monitoring requirements and standard SLOAPCD dust and diesel emission control measures. Long- term impacts of the Prado Road/U.S. 101 overpass/interchange would include potential obstruction of scenic views, loss of prime agricultural land west of U.S. 101, and land use impacts associated with acquisition of additional right-of-way. Packet Pg 356 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-18 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES Impact AG-1. The project would result in the direct conversion of 59.356 acres of Prime Farmland, as mapped by the FMMP, to non-agricultural uses. Therefore, impacts would be Class II, significant but mitigable. AG-1. Agricultural Conservation. Prior to issuance of any grading permits the project proponent shall provide that for every one (1) acre of Important Farmland (Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, and Unique Farmland) on the site that is permanently converted to non-agricultural use as a result of project development, one (1) acre of land of comparable agricultural productivity shall be preserved in perpetuity. The land dedicated to agriculture pursuant to this measure shall be of size, location and configuration appropriate to maintain a viable, working agricultural operation. The acreage required to meet the 1:1 ratio may be met by the off-site agricultural conservation easement/deed restriction proposed by the project applicant, as long as this land meets the conditions outlined in this measure. Said mitigation shall be satisfied by the applicant through: 1) Granting a perpetual conservation easement(s), deed restriction(s), or other farmland conservation mechanism(s) to the City or qualifying entity which has been approved by the City, such as the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo, for the purpose of permanently preserving agricultural land. The required easement(s) area or deed restriction(s) shall therefore total a minimum of 59.356 acres of Prime Farmland. The land covered by said on- and/or off-site easement(s) or deed restriction(s) shall be located within or contiguous to the City’s Urban Reserve Line or Greenbelt subject to review and approval of the City’s Natural Resources Manager; or 2) Making an in-lieu payment to a qualifying entity which has been approved by the City, such as the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo, to be applied toward the future purchase of a minimum of 59.356 acres of Prime Farmland in San Luis Obispo County, together with an endowment amount as may be required. The payment amount shall be determined by the qualifying entity or a licensed appraiser; or 3) Making an in-lieu payment to a qualifying entity which has been approved by the City and that is organized for conservation purposes, to be applied toward a future perpetual conservation easement, deed restriction, or other farmland conservation mechanism to preserve a minimum of 59.356 acres of Prime Farmland in San Luis Obispo County. The amount of the payment shall be determined by the qualifying entity or a licensed appraiser; or 4) Any combination of the above. W ith implementation of Mitigation Measure AG-1, this impact would be reduced to a less than significant level. Impact AG-3. The project would include development of commercial and residential uses adjacent to agricultural uses on AG-3(a). Agricultural Conflict Avoidance Measures. The following language shall be added to Section 4.2.1, Agricultural Buffer, of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan: Agricultural buffers will include City-approved measures to reduce availability of W ith implementation of Mitigation Measures AG-3(a) through AG-3(c) this impact would be reduced to a less than significant level. Packet Pg 357 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-19 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact the project site. This may result in conflict with existing or future urban and agricultural zoning and uses and adversely affect the long-term viability of the remaining agricultural uses onsite and at the adjacent SLO City Farm. However, with implementation of agricultural buffers, and compliance with standard APCD dust control measures and City policies, this impact would be Class II, significant but mitigable. public access to agricultural cultivation areas adjacent to the project site (e.g., fencing, signs, etc.). Future residents will be notified of agricultural buffers as part of purchase or lease agreements. AG-3(b). Agricultural Fencing. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City to fund installation of fencing and signs along Froom Ranch Way and Dalidio Drive/Prado Road to minimize potential for increases in trespass and vandalism of adjacent agricultural areas. AG-3(c). Buffer Landscaping. To reduce the potential for noise, dust, and pesticide drift to affect future residents on the project site, the project applicant shall ensure that project landscape plans include planting of a windrow of trees and shrubs within the agricultural buffer along Froom Ranch Way at a sufficient density to buffer the site from surrounding agricultural operations. AIR QUALITY Impact AQ-2. Construction of the project would generate temporary increases in localized air pollutant emissions. Construction emissions of ROG, NOX, and DPM would exceed SLOAPCD construction thresholds. Impacts would be Class II, less than significant with mitigation incorporated. AQ-2(a). Fugitive Dust Control Measures. Construction projects shall implement the following dust control measures so as to reduce PM10 emissions in accordance with SLOAPCD requirements. • Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible; • Water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used during construction in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency shall be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water or a SLOAPCD-approved dust suppressant shall be used whenever possible;, to reduce the amount of potable water used for dust control; • All dirt stock pile areas shall be sprayed daily as needed; • 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; • Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non- invasive grass seed and watered until vegetation is established; • All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the SLOAPCD; • All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; According to the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, if estimated construction emissions are expected to exceed either of the SLOAPCD Quarterly Tier 2 thresholds of significance after the standard and BACT measures are factored into the estimation, then an SLOAPCD approved Construction Activity Management Plan (CAMP) and offsite mitigation need to be implemented in order to reduce potential air quality impacts to a less than significant level. If construction emissions do not exceed Tier 2 thresholds with implementation of standard and BACT measures, SLOAPCD considers emissions less than significant, even if Tier 1 thresholds continue to be exceeded. Table 4.3-7 shows mitigated construction emissions with implementation of Packet Pg 358 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-20 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact • Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site; • All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials 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; • Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site; • Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water shall be used where feasible; • All of these fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans; and • 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 20 percent opacity, and to prevent transport of dust offsite. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the SLOAPCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition. AQ-2(b). Standard Control Measures for Construction Equipment. The following standard air quality mitigation measures shall be implemented during construction activities at the project site: • Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer’s specifications; • Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment with ARB certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for sue off-road); • Use diesel construction equipment meeting ARB’s Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road Regulation; • Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the ARB’s 2007 or cleaner certification standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On-Road Regulation; • Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in their fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g. captive or NOX exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative compliance; Tier 3 off-road engine compliance and level 2 diesel particulate filters required by Mitigation Measure AQ- 2(c), as well as low VOC-emission paint required by Mitigation Measure AQ-2(d). As shown therein, with implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-2(c) and AQ-2(d) construction emissions would not exceed either of the SLOAPCD Quarterly Tier 2 thresholds of significance. Therefore, implementation of a CAMP and offsite mitigation is not required and impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. Packet Pg 359 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-21 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact • 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 a restricted area, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation. • 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. • All on and off-road diesel equipment shall not idle for more than 5 minutes. Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job sites to remind drivers and operators of the 5 minute idling limit; • 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: 1. Signs that specify the no idling areas shall be posted and enforced at the site. 2. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted; 3. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors; 4. Use of alternative fueled equipment is recommended; • Electrify equipment when feasible; • Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible; and • Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel. AQ-2(c). Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for Construction Equipment. The following BACT for diesel-fueled construction equipment shall be implemented during construction activities at the project site, where feasible: • Further reducing emissions by expanding use of Tier 3 and Tier 4 off-road and Packet Pg 360 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-22 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact 2010 on-road compliant engines where feasible; • Repowering equipment with the cleanest engines available; and • Installing California Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies, such as level 2 diesel particulate filters. These strategies are listed at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/vt/cvt.htm AQ-2(d). Architectural Coating. To reduce ROG and NOX levels during the architectural coating phase, low or no VOC-emission paint shall be used with levels of 50 g/L or less. AQ-2(e). Construction Activity Management Plan. Emissions reduction measures and construction practices required to comply with Mitigation Measures AQ-2(a) through AQ-2(d) shall be documented in a Construction Activity Management Plan (CAMP) and submitted to SLOAPCD for review and approval at least three months before the start of construction. The CAMP shall include a Dust Control Management Plan, tabulation of on and off-road construction equipment (age, horse-power and miles and/or hours of operation), construction truck trip schedule, construction work-day period, and construction phasing. If implementation of the Standard Mitigation and Best Available Control Technology measures cannot bring the project below the Tier 1 threshold (2.5 tons of NOX+ROG per quarter), off-site mitigation shall be implemented in coordination with SLOAPCD to reduce NOX and ROG emissions to below the Tier 1 threshold. Impact AQ-3. Operation of the project would generate air pollutant emissions on an ongoing daily and annual basis. The project’s daily emissions would exceed SLOAPCD daily emissions thresholds, but would not exceed annual thresholds. Implementation of SLOAPCD’s standard mitigation measures and off-site mitigation would reduce emissions to a less than significant level. Impacts would be Class II, less than significant with mitigation incorporated. AQ-3(a). Standard Operational Mitigation Measures. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall define and incorporate into the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan standard emission reduction measures from the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook to reduce emissions to below daily threshold levels. Emission reduction measures may shall include, but would not be limited to: • Prohibit residential wood burning appliances; • Install a ‘Park and Ride’ lot with bike lockers in a location of need defined by SLOCOG; • Trusses for south-facing portions of roofs shall be designed to handle dead weight loads of standard solar-heated water and photovoltaic panels. Roof design shall include sufficient south facing roof surface, based on structures size and use, to accommodate adequate solar panels. For south facing roof pitches, the closest standard roof pitch to the ideal average solar exposure shall be used; • Increase the building energy rating by 20 percent above 2013 Title 24 requirements (used in the California Emissions Estimator Model) or consistent Implementation of the measures identified in Mitigation Measure AQ- 3(a) and AQ-3(b) would reduce impacts to regional air quality. For informational purposes, Table 4.3- 11 and Table 4.3-12 show anticipated project emissions with incorporation of measures achieving a 20 percent exceedance of Title 24 requirements and a prohibition on residential wood burning devices, which are quantifiable in CalEEMod. As shown in Table 4.3-11 and Table 4.3-12, implementation of these measures alone would not reduce daily operational emissions of Packet Pg 361 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-23 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact with 2016 Title 24 requirements, whichever is stricter. Measures used to reach the 20 percent rating cannot be double counted; • Design building to include roof overhangs that are sufficient to block the high summer sun, but not the lower winter sun, from penetrating south facing windows (passive solar design); • Utilize high efficiency gas or solar water heaters; • Install door sweeps and weather stripping (if more efficient doors and windows are not available); • Install energy-reducing programmable thermostats; • Participate in and implement available energy-efficient rebate programs including air conditioning, gas heating, refrigeration, and lighting programs; • Use roofing material with a solar reflectance values meeting the U.S. EPA/DOE Energy Star® rating to reduce summer cooling needs. • Utilize onsite renewable energy systems (e.g., solar, wind, geothermal, low- impact hydro, biomass and bio-gas); and • Provide and require the use of battery powered or electric landscape maintenance equipment for new development; • Provide a display case or kiosk displaying transportation information in a prominent area accessible to employees or residents; • Provide neighborhood electric vehicles/ car share program; • Provide bicycle-share program;. • Provide bicycle lockers for ‘Park and Ride’ lots; • Provide vanpool, shuttle, mini bus service (alternative fueled preferred); • Provide free-access telework terminals and/or wi-fi access in multi-family projects. In addition, the proposed hotel component of the Specific Plan shall participate in the SLO Car Free Program, provide incentives to car-free travelers, and promote the program in their communication tools. AQ-3(b). Off-Site Mitigation. If implementation of standard emission reduction measures from the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook described in Mitigation Measure AQ-3(a) is insufficient to reduce emissions to below daily threshold levels, then the applicant shall coordinate with SLOAPCD to provide funding for off-site emission reduction measures to reduce emissions to below daily threshold levels. In accordance with SLOAPCD methodology, the excess emissions shall be multiplied by the cost effectiveness of mitigation as defined in the State’s current Carl Moyer Incentive Program Guidelines to determine the annual off-site mitigation amount. This amount shall then be extrapolated over the life of the project to determine total ROG, NOX, DPM, or dust to below SLOAPCD’s daily significance thresholds. However, with implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-3(a), Standard Operational Mitigation Measures, and AQ-3(b), Off-Site Mitigation, annual emissions would be reduced below SLOAPCD’s annual operational thresholds. Therefore, long-term operational impacts would be less than significant. Packet Pg 362 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-24 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact off-site mitigation. Off-site emission reduction measures may include, but would not be limited to: • Developing or improving park-and-ride lots; • Retrofitting existing homes in the project area with SLOAPCD-approved wood combustion devices; • Retrofitting existing homes in the project area with energy-efficient devices; • Constructing satellite worksites; • Funding a program to buy and scrap older, higher emission passenger and heavy-duty vehicles; • Replacing/re-powering transit buses; • Replacing/re-powering heavy-duty diesel school vehicles (i.e. bus, passenger or maintenance vehicles); • Funding an electric lawn and garden equipment exchange program; • Retrofitting or re-powering heavy-duty construction equipment, or on-road vehicles; • Re-powering marine vessels; • Re-powering or contributing to funding clean diesel locomotive main or auxiliary engines; • Installing bicycle racks on transit buses; • Purchasing particulate filters or oxidation catalysts for local school buses, transit buses or construction fleets; • Installing or contributing to funding alternative fueling infrastructure (i.e. fueling stations for CNG, LPG, conductive and inductive electric vehicle charging, etc.); • Funding expansion of existing transit services; • Funding public transit bus shelters; • Subsidizing vanpool programs; • Subsidizing transportation alternative incentive programs; • Contributing to funding of new bike lanes; • Installing bicycle storage facilities; and • Providing assistance in the implementation of projects that are identified in City or County Bicycle Master Plans. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Impact BIO-1. Implementation of the project could have a substantial adverse effect on candidate, sensitive, or special status species that may occur BIO-1(a). Best Management Practices. The applicant shall ensure the following general wildlife Best Management Practices (BMPs) are required for construction activity within the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area: • No pets or firearms shall be allowed at the project site during construction activities. Implementation of BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(h) would reduce impacts to listed, candidate or special-status plant and wildlife species to a less than significant level and ensure Packet Pg 363 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-25 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact on the project site. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant but mitigable. • All trash that may attract predators must be properly contained and removed from the work site. All such debris and waste shall be picked up daily and properly disposed of at an appropriate site. • All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles shall occur at least 100 feet from Prefumo Creek and in a location where a spill would not drain toward aquatic habitat. A plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills prior to the onset of work activities. All workers shall be informed of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur. • Pallets or secondary containment areas for chemicals, drums, or bagged materials shall be provided. Should material spills occur, materials and/or contaminants shall be cleaned from the project site and recycled or disposed of to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). • Prior to construction activities in areas adjacent to Prefumo Creek and Cerro San Luis Channel, the drainage features shall be fenced with orange construction fencing and signed to prohibit entry of construction equipment and personnel unless authorized by the City. Fencing should be located a minimum of 20 feet from the edge of the riparian canopy or top of bank and shall be maintained throughout the construction period for each phase of development. Once all phases of construction in this area are complete, the fencing may be removed. • To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, appropriate erosion control BMPs (e.g., use of coir rolls, jute netting, etc.) shall be implemented to minimize adverse effects on Prefumo Creek. No plastic monofilament netting shall be utilized on site. • Construction equipment shall be inspected at the beginning of each day to ensure that wildlife species have not climbed into wheel wells or under tracks since the equipment was last parked. Any sensitive wildlife species found during inspections shall be gently encouraged to leave the area by a qualified biological monitor or otherwise trained personnel. • All vehicles and equipment shall be in good working condition and free of leaks. • Environmentally Sensitive Areas shall be delineated by a qualified biologist prior to construction to confine access routes and construction areas. • Construction work shall be restricted to daylight hours (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM) to avoid impacts to nocturnal and crepuscular (dawn and dusk activity period) species. No construction night lighting shall be permitted within 100 yards of the top of the Prefumo Creek bank. • Concrete truck and tool washout shall be limited to locations designated by a qualified biologist such that no runoff will reach Prefumo Creek or Cerro San that the project would comply with COSE Policies 7.3.1, Protect Listed Species, and 7.3.2, Species of Local Concern. Packet Pg 364 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-26 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact Luis Channel. • All open trenches shall be constructed with appropriate exit ramps to allow species that accidentally fall into a trench to escape. Trenches will remain open for the shortest period necessary to complete required work. • Existing facilities and disturbed areas shall be used to the extent possible to minimize the amount of disturbance and all new access roads other than the Froom Ranch Way Bridge shall be cited to avoid high quality habitat and minimize habitat fragmentation. • In the event that construction must occur within the creek or creek setback, a biological monitor shall be present during all such activities with the authority to stop or redirect work as needed to protect biological resources. BIO-1(b). Worker Environmental Awareness Program Training. Prior to the initiation of construction activities (including staging and mobilization), the applicant shall ensure all personnel associated with project construction attend a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training. • The training shall be conducted by a qualified biologist, to aid workers in recognizing special status resources that may occur in the project area. The specifics of this program shall include identification of the sensitive species and habitats, a description of the regulatory status and general ecological characteristics of sensitive resources, and review of the limits of construction and avoidance measures required to reduce impacts to biological resources within the work area. A fact sheet conveying this information shall also be prepared for distribution to all contractors, their employers, and other personnel involved with construction of the project. All employees shall sign a form provided by the trainer documenting they have attended the WEAP and understand the information presented to them. BIO-1(c) . Western Pond Turtle and Two-Striped Garter Snake Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are implemented to avoid and minimize potential impacts to western pond turtle and two-striped garter snake (these reptiles utilize similar habitats; therefore, implementation of the proposed measures for western pond turtle are also suitable and appropriate for two-striped garter snake): • A qualified biologist(s) shall conduct a pre-construction survey within 24 hours prior to the onset of work activities within and around areas that may serve as potential western pond turtle habitat. If this species is found and the individuals are likely to be injured or killed by work activities, the approved biologist shall be allowed sufficient time to move them from the project site before work Packet Pg 365 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-27 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact activities begin. The biologist(s) must relocate the any western pond turtle the shortest distance possible to a location that contains suitable habitat that is not likely to be affected by activities associated with the project. • Access routes, staging, and construction areas shall be limited to the minimum area necessary to achieve the project goal and minimize potential impacts to western pond turtle habitat including locating access routes and construction staging areas outside of wetlands and riparian areas to the maximum extent practicable. BIO-1(d) . California Red-legged Frog, Western spadefoot, and Coast Range Newt Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall implement the following to avoid and minimize potential impacts to CRLF. Because coast range newt and western spadefoot are amphibians that utilize similar habitats to CRLF, implementation of the following measures provided for CRLF shall be implemented for these species as well. • Only USFWS-approved biologists shall participate in activities associated with the capture, handling, and monitoring of CRLF. • Ground disturbance shall not begin until written approval is received from the USFWS that the biologist is qualified to conduct the work. If the USFWS does not authorize the relocation of CRLF occurring within the project site, CRLF found within the project site shall be avoided with a 100-foot buffer and no activities shall occur within that buffer until the CRLF has left the project site on its own. • Areas of the project site that lie within 100 feet upland from riparian or jurisdictional areas shall be surrounded by a solid temporary exclusion fence (such as silt fencing) that shall extend at least three feet above the ground and be buried into the ground at least 6 inches to exclude CRLF from the project site. Plastic monofilament netting or other similar material will not be used. The location of the fencing shall be determined by a qualified biologist. The fence shall remain in place throughout construction activities. Installation of the exclusion fencing shall be monitored by a qualified biologist to ensure that it is installed correctly. • During new grading activities in habitats within 100 feet upland from riparian or jurisdictional areas, a qualified biologist shall be on-site to recover any spadefoot toads that may be excavated/unearthed with native material or found under vegetation. If the animals are in good health, they shall be immediately relocated to a designated release area. If they are injured, the animals shall be turned over to an approved wildlife rehabilitator until they are in a condition to be released into the designated release area. Packet Pg 366 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-28 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact • To ensure that diseases are not conveyed between work sites by the approved biologist, the fieldwork code of practice developed by the Declining Amphibian Populations Task Force shall be followed at all times. BIO-1(e) . Steelhead Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential impacts to steelhead: • Before any activities begin on the project, a qualified biologist will conduct a training session for all construction personnel. At a minimum, the training will include a description of the steelhead and its habitat, the specific measures that are being implemented to conserve this species for the project, and the boundaries within which the project may be accomplished. Brochures, books, and briefings may be used in the training session, provided that a qualified person is on hand to answer any questions. • During the duration of project activities, all trash that may attract predators will be properly contained and secured, promptly removed from the work site, and disposed of regularly. Following construction, all trash and construction debris will be removed from the work areas. • All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles will occur at least 100 feet from riparian habitat or bodies of water and in a location where a potential spill would not drain directly toward aquatic habitat (e.g., on a slope that drains away from the water source). The monitor shall ensure that contamination of suitable habitat does not occur during such operations. Prior to the onset of work activities, a plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills. All workers shall be informed of the importance of preventing spills and of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur. • The number of access routes, size of staging areas, and the total area used for construction activities shall be limited to the minimum area necessary to achieve the project goals. • The City will only permit work within the immediate vicinity of Prefumo Creek for times of the year when potential impacts to steelhead would be minimal. Work shall be restricted during the wet season (October 15 through April 30) and should ideally occur during the late summer and early fall during the driest portion of the year; however, water may still be present during construction. If work is proposed in the streambed and water is present during construction, a diversion will be required to dewater the work area and the following avoidance and minimization measures will apply: (1) Upstream and downstream passage for fish, including juvenile Packet Pg 367 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-29 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact steelhead, shall be provided through or around the construction site at all times construction is occurring within the Prefumo Creek streambed. (2) A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey and be present onsite during the diversion installation and dewatering process to capture and relocate any trapped steelhead and/or other fish. Upon approval from the NMFS, the biologist(s) must relocate these individuals the shortest distance possible to a location that contains suitable habitat that is not likely to be affected by activities associated with the project. (3) Dewatering operations shall employ a five millimeter mesh screen fastened to the intake hose to exclude fish and other wildlife species from the pump. (4) Steelhead shall be excluded from the construction zone with block nets installed upstream and downstream the of the bridge construction zone. The distance upstream and downstream for block net installation will depend on the type of construction activities occurring in the streambed. • To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, the following BMPs shall be implemented. If the BMPs are somehow ineffective, consultation with the City and appropriate resource agencies will be undertaken, and all attempts to remedy the situation will commence immediately. (1) It shall be the owner’s/contractor’s responsibility to maintain control of the entire construction operations and to keep the entire site in compliance. (2) The owner/contractor shall be responsible for monitoring erosion and sediment control measures (including but not limited to fiber rolls, inlet protections, silt fences, and gravel bags) prior, during and after storm events, monitoring includes maintaining a file documenting onsite inspections, problems encountered, corrective actions, and notes and a map of remedial implementation measures. (3) Erosion shall be controlled by covering stockpiled construction materials (i.e. soil, spoils, aggregate, fly-ash, stucco, hydrated lime, etc.) All earth stockpiles over 2.0 cubic yards that are not actively being used, shall be covered with a tarp consistent with the applicable construction general permit, or through other means of erosion control approved by the City (e.g., and ringedsurrounding with straw bales or silt fencing). The site shall be maintained to minimize sediment-laden runoff to any storm drainage system including existing drainage swales and/or sand watercourses. (a) Construction operations shall be carried out in such a manner that erosion and water pollution will be minimized. Packet Pg 368 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-30 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact (b) State and local laws concerning pollution abatement shall be complied with. (c) If grading operations are expected to denude slopes, the slopes shall be protected with erosion control measures immediately following grading on the slopes. (4) Specifically, in order to prevent sedimentation and debris from entering Prefumo Creek during construction, silt fencing shall be installed along the top of the banks on the west side of the channel prior to the onset of construction activities. • The project biologist will monitor construction activities, in stream habitat, and overall performance of BMPs and sediment controls for the purpose of identifying and reconciling any condition that could adversely affect steelhead or their habitat. The biologist will halt work if necessary and will recommend site-specific measures to avoid adverse effects to steelhead and their habitat. • Equipment will be checked daily for leaks prior to the initiation of construction activities. A spill kit will be placed near the creek and will remain readily available during construction in the event that any contaminant is accidentally released. • In addition to these avoidance and minimization measures, Mitigation Measure BIO-2(a) would also ensure that potential temporary and permanent indirect impacts to steelhead from the project are reduced as much as practicable. BIO-1(f). Great Blue Heron and Monarch Butterfly Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential impacts to overwintering monarch butterflies and nesting great blue herons. • Tree trimming/removal and construction activities that affect eucalyptus trees near or within the monarch overwintering grove or active great blue heron nests identified in the San Luis Ranch Monarch Trees Inspection Memo, Results of 2015 and 2016 San Luis Ranch Heron Rookery Surveys Memo, and San Luis Ranch – Prefumo Creek Widening Biological Constraints Memo prepared by Althouse and Meade (Appendix F), shall not be conducted during the monarch butterfly overwintering season from October 1 through March 31 if monarch butterflies are present, or while great blue heron nests are active from February 1 to August 31. If construction activities must be conducted during these periods, a qualified biologist shall conduct overwintering monarch surveys and/or nesting great blue heron surveys within one week of habitat disturbance. If surveys do not locate clustering monarchs or nesting great blue herons, construction activities may be conducted. If clustering monarchs and/or nesting Packet Pg 369 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-31 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact great blue herons are located, no construction activities shall occur within 100 feet of the edge of the overwintering grove and/or active nest(s) until the qualified biologist determines that no more monarchs are overwintering in the grove or the nest(s) are no longer active. • A qualified biologist shall prepare and implement a habitat enhancement plan prior to issuance of grading permits to enhance and restore overwintering and nesting habitat that is to be preserved. The habitat enhancement plan shall include native shrubs and trees such as Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) that may support heron roosting and monarch butterfly overwintering. As eucalyptus trees senesce, they shall be replaced with native species. Native trees and shrubs shall also be used to supplement gaps in canopy or act as windbreaks. • Create new offsite nesting habitat for great blue herons to mitigate for removal of onsite nesting habitat. With a qualified biologist present, the current rookery may be moved to a suitable offsite location where the same great blue herons can resume nesting, following methods detailed in Crouch et al. (2002). It should be noted that creating offsite nesting habitat for great blue herons is experimental and that the relocation techniques described in Crouch et al. (2002) were used to relocate black-crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax). In addition, an agreement with the City will be required prior to implementation of the offsite strategy on their property. The methods detailed in Crouch et al. (2002) include: (a) This entails at least one year of pre-construction monitoring of the rookery, where the timing of rookery activities will be noted: arrival of breeding adults, egg laying, hatching, and fledging. During this time, audio recordings of adults and juveniles shall be made. (b) Following the completion of the nesting season in late summer, a certified arborist specializing in the translocation of trees will examine the mature trees onsite and work with the City’s Natural Resources Manager to determine whether or not it is feasible to relocate the mature trees containing nests the mature trees containing nests shall be boxed and moved across Madonna Road to a suitable location at Laguna Lake Open Space. (c) Prior to the start of the next nesting season (based on timing of adult arrival in previous years), nesting adults will be recruited to the new location via decoys and playback of vocalizations. The new location will be monitored regularly by a qualified biologist for the following three breeding seasons. BIO-1(g). Nesting Birds Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall Packet Pg 370 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-32 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential impacts to nesting birds: • For construction activities occurring during the nesting season (generally February 1 to September 15), surveys for nesting birds covered by the California Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 14 days prior to vegetation removal. The surveys shall include the disturbance area plus a 500-foot buffer around the site. If active nests are located, all construction work shall be conducted outside a buffer zone from the nest to be determined by the qualified biologist. The buffer shall be a minimum of 50 feet for non-raptor bird species and at least 300 feet for raptor species. Larger buffers may be required depending upon the status of the nest and the construction activities occurring in the vicinity of the nest. The buffer area(s) shall be closed to all construction personnel and equipment until the adults and young are no longer reliant on the nest site. A qualified biologist shall confirm that breeding/nesting is completed and young have fledged the nest prior to removal of the buffer. • If feasible, removal of vegetation within suitable nesting bird habitats will be scheduled to occur in the fall and winter (between September 1 and February 14), after fledging and before the initiation of the nesting season. BIO-1(h) . Roosting Bats Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential impacts to roosting bats: • Prior to issuance of grading permits, a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey of existing structures within the project site to determine if roosting bats are present. The survey shall be conducted during the non-breeding season (November through March). The biologist shall have access to all interior attics, as needed. If a colony of bats is found roosting in any structure, further surveys shall be conducted sufficient to determine the species present and the type of roost (day, night, maternity, etc.) If the bats are not part of an active maternity colony, passive exclusion measures may be implemented in close coordination with CDFW. These exclusion measures must include one-way valves that allow bats to exit the structure but are designed so that the bats may not re-enter the structure. • If a bat colony is excluded from the project site, appropriate alternate bat habitat as determined by a qualified biologist shall be installed on the project site or at an approved location offsite. • Prior to removal of any trees over 20 inches diameter-at-breast-height (DBH), a survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if any of the Packet Pg 371 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-33 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact trees proposed for removal or trimming harbor sensitive bat species or maternal bat colonies. If a non-maternal roost is found, the qualified biologist, in close coordination with CDFW shall install one-way valves or other appropriate passive relocation method. For each occupied roost removed, one bat box shall be installed in similar habitat and should have similar cavity or crevices properties to those which are removed, including access, ventilation, dimensions, height above ground, and thermal conditions. Maternal bat colonies may not be disturbed. Impact BIO-2. Implementation of the project would have a substantial adverse effect on sensitive habitats, including riparian areas. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant but mitigable. BIO-2(a). Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. A Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) shall be prepared which will provide a minimum 2:1 ratio (replaced: removed) for temporary and permanent impacts to riparian habitat. The HMMP will identify the specific mitigation sites and it will be implemented immediately following project completion. The HMMP shall include, at a minimum, the following components: • Description of the project/impact site (i.e. location, responsible parties, areas to be impacted by habitat type); • Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project [type(s) and area(s) of habitat to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved; specific functions and values of habitat type(s) to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved]; • Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation site (location and size, ownership status, existing functions and values of the compensatory mitigation site); • Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation site (rationale for expecting implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan [including plant species to be used, container sizes, seeding rates, etc.]); • Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including weed removal and irrigation as appropriate (activities, responsible parties, schedule); • Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site, including no less than quarterly monitoring for the first year (performance standards, target functions and values, target acreages to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved, annual monitoring reports); • Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives; said criteria to be, at a minimum, at least 80 percent survival of container plants and 80 percent relative cover by vegetation type; • An adaptive management program and remedial measures to address negative impacts to restoration efforts; Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a), BIO-2(a), BIO- 2(b), BIO-2(c), and BIO-3 would reduce direct impacts to sensitive habitats, including riparian areas, by implementing construction BMPs, including containing construction activities, debris, and sediment in appropriate locations outside of sensitive habitat to the maximum extent practicable, and by providing compensatory mitigation for permanently impacted riparian habitat. In addition Mitigation Measures HWQ-1(a) and HWQ-1(b) include construction management practices that would reduce construction related impacts to water quality. When combined with standard regulatory measures (including required permitting from USACE, CDFW, and RWQCB), and regulatory oversight during construction by the Environmental Monitor, implementation of required mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a less than significant level and ensure that the project would comply with applicable General Plan policies for the protection of habitat and other Packet Pg 372 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-34 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact • Notification of completion of compensatory mitigation and agency confirmation; and • Contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for contingency compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism). BIO-2(b) . Tree Replacement. Riparian trees four inches or greater measured at diameter-at-breast-height (DBH) shall be replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 3:1 (replaced: removed). Trees 24 inches or greater inches DBH shall be replaced in- kind at a minimum ratio of 10:1. Willows and cottonwoods may be planted from live stakes following guidelines provided in the California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual for planting dormant cuttings and container stock (CDFW 2010). • Tree replacement shall be conducted in accordance with a Natural Habitat Restoration and Enhancement Plan to be approved by the City’s Natural Resource Manager. • The Natural Habitat Restoration and Enhancement Plan shall prioritize the planting of replacement trees on-site where feasible, but shall allow that replacement trees may be planted off-site with approval of the City’s Natural Resource Manager. • Replacement trees may be planted in the fall or winter of the year in which trees were removed. All replacement trees will be planted no more than one year following the date upon which the native trees were removed. BIO-2(c). Froom Ranch Way Bridge Design to Avoid Riparian Areas. The Froom Ranch Way Bridge crossing footings shall be placed outside mapped riparian areas. The placement of the bridge and footings shall be indicated on the Development Plan, VTM, and HMMP, and shall show the bridge’s placement in relation to existing vegetation and the bed and bank of Prefumo Creek. biological resources. Impact BIO-3. Construction of the project could have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Impacts would be Class II, potentially significant but mitigable. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) and BIO-2(a) would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. No additional mitigation is required. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) andBIO-2(a would reduce potential impacts to federally protected wetlands, any riparian habitat, or other sensitive natural communities to a less than significant level and ensure that the project would be consistent with COSE Policy 7.5.5. Packet Pg 373 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-35 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact Impact BIO-4. Development of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area would not permanently interfere with the movement of resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors along Prefumo Creek and through open agricultural lands on the project site. This impact would be Class II, potentially significant but mitigable. Implementation of BIO-1(a) requires construction BMPs that would reduce potential impacts to riparian habitat within the Prefumo Creek corridor. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(c), BIO-1(d), and BIO-1(e), would reduce impacts to western pond turtle, CRLF, coast range newt, and steelhead by requiring pre- construction surveys by qualified biological staff and construction worker training to ensure individuals of these species are not impacts during project construction activity within or adjacent to riparian and riverine habitat. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1(f) would reduce impacts to heron rookeries by requiring preconstruction surveys, mapping, exclusionary fencing, and offsite compensatory mitigation. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1(h) would reduce impacts to birds by requiring construction monitoring for nesting birds, and requiring appropriate buffers for construction activity in proximity to active nests. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1(h) would reduce impacts to bats roosting in trees by requiring trees that may provide habitat for roosting bats to be surveyed by a qualified biologist prior to removal. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2(a) would reduce potential impacts to federally protected wetlands, any riparian habitat, or other sensitive natural community to a less than significant level. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a), BIO-1(c), BIO- 1(d), BIO-1(e), BIO-1(f), BIO-1-(h), and BIO-2(a) would reduce potential impacts to wildlife species, wildlife nursery sites, riparian corridors, and other sensitive natural communities to a less than significant level. Cumulative Biological Resources Impacts. Consistent with the LUCE Update EIR, the project would implement mitigation measures to ensure compliance with the applicable goals and policies of the General Plan. As a result, the project’s contribution to this cumulative impact would be potentially significant but mitigable. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(h) and BIO-2(a) through BIO-2(c) would reduce cumulative impacts to biological resources to a less than significant level. Implementation of required mitigation measures would reduce cumulative impacts to a less than significant level. CULTURAL RESOURCES Impact CR-2. Identified archaeological resources on the project site are ineligible for listing in the CRHR and NRHP, and disturbance of these resources would not constitute a significant impact. However, the CR-2(a). Retain a Qualified Principal Investigator. In accordance with Conservation and Open Space Policies 3.5.6 and 3.5.7, a qualified principal investigator, defined as an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for professional archaeology (hereafter qualified archaeologist), shall be retained to carry out all mitigation measures related to archaeological resources. Monitoring shall involve inspection of subsurface construction disturbance at or in Implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-2(a) and CR-2(b) would reduce impacts to archaeological resources to a less than significant level. Packet Pg 374 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-36 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact potential remains for the project to result in impacts to previously unidentified archaeological resources. Therefore, this impact would be Class II, significant but mitigable. the immediate vicinity of known sites, or at locations that may harbor buried resources that were not identified on the site surface. A Native American monitor shall also be present because the area is a culturally sensitive location. The monitor(s) shall be on-site on a full-time basis during earthmoving activities, including grading, trenching, vegetation removal, or other excavation activities. CR-2(b). Unanticipated Discovery of Archaeological Resources. In the event that archaeological resources are exposed during construction, all work shall be halted in the vicinity of the archaeological discovery until a qualified archaeologist can visit the site of discovery and assess the significance of the cultural resource. In the event that any artifact or an unusual amount of bone or shell is encountered during construction, work shall be immediately stopped and relocated to another area. The lead agency shall stop construction within 100 feet of the exposed resource until a qualified archaeologist/paleontologist can evaluate the find (see 36 CFR 800.11.1 and CCR, Title 14, Section 15064.5[f]). Examples of such cultural materials might include: ground stone tools such as mortars, bowls, pestles, and manos; chipped stone tools such as projectile points or choppers; flakes of stone not consistent with the immediate geology such as obsidian or fused shale; historic trash pits containing bottles and/or ceramics; or structural remains. If the resources are found to be significant, they must be avoided or will be mitigated consistent with State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Guidelines. Packet Pg 375 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-37 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact HAZARDS/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Impact HAZ-4. Hazardous materials sites identified on and upgradient to the project site as well as residual pesticides and agricultural chemicals in soil due to historical use of pesticides and other agricultural chemicals onsite could create a hazard to construction workers during the construction phase of the project. Impacts would be Class II, significant but mitigable. HAZ-4. Soil Sampling and Remediation. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, a contaminated soil assessment shall be completed in the portions of land to be graded for development. Soil samples shall be collected under the supervision of a professional geologist or environmental professional to determine the presence or absence of contaminated soil in these areas. The sampling density shall be in accordance with guidance from San Luis Obispo County Environmental Health Services, so as to define the volume of soil that may require remediation. Laboratory analysis of soil samples shall be analyzed for the presence of organochlorine pesticides, in accordance with EPA Test Method SW8081A, and heavy metals in accordance with EPA Test Methods 6010B and 7471A. If soil sampling indicates the presence of pesticides or heavy metals exceeding applicable environmental screening levels, the soil assessment shall identify the volume of contaminated soil to be excavated. If concentrations of contaminants exceed EPA action levels and therefore warrant remediation, contaminated materials shall be remediated either prior to concurrent with construction and an Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) shall be prepared. Cleanup may include excavation, disposal, bio-remediation, or any other treatment of conditions subject to regulatory action. All necessary reports, regulations and permits shall be followed to achieve cleanup of the site. The contaminated materials shall be remediated under the supervision of an environmental consultant licensed to oversee such remediation and under the direction of the lead oversight agency. The remediation program shall also be approved by a regulatory oversight agency, such as the San Luis Obispo County Environmental Health Services, the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), or DTSC. All proper waste handling and disposal procedures shall be followed. Upon completion of the remediation, the environmental consultant shall prepare a report summarizing the project, the remediation approach implemented, and the analytical results after completion of the remediation, including all waste disposal or treatment manifests. With implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-4, impacts related to exposure to residual agricultural chemicals would be reduced to a less than significant level. Impact HAZ-5. Tetrachloroethene (also called perchloroethylene, or PCE) has been detected in the shallow aquifer in concentrations that exceed the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) in active irrigation wells on the HAZ-5(a). Groundwater Assessment for Contamination at Untested Wells. Any groundwater wells on the project site that would be used for agricultural irrigation shall be sampled by a registered soils engineer or remediation specialist to determine the presence or absence of regulated contaminants prior to issuance of grading permits. This assessment shall target on-site PCE associated with off-site dry cleaning operations. HAZ-5(b). Groundwater Remediation. If groundwater sampling indicates the W ith incorporation of these mitigation measures, this impact would be less than significant. Packet Pg 376 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-38 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact eastern portion of the site. As future on-site residents or workers could potentially be exposed to PCE from irrigation water, this would be a Class II, significant but mitigable, impact. presence of any contaminant in hazardous quantities, the project applicant (or authorized agent thereof) shall contact the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and Department of Toxic Substances (DTSC) to determine the level of any necessary remediation efforts. These may include: • Installation of charcoal filtration into well-head systems at wells where PCE is identified in hazardous quantities. After installation of charcoal filtration, groundwater wells shall be re-sampled consistent with Mitigation Measure HAZ- 5(a). • Groundwater remediation to contaminant concentrations below applicable standards in compliance with applicable laws prior to issuance of grading permits. A copy of the applicable remediation certification from Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and/or Department of Toxic Substances (DTSC), or written confirmation that a certification is not required, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department. Impact HAZ-6. The project site is located in an area where geologic analysis for NOA is required prior to grading and could potentially result in exposure of people to NOA during grading and construction activities. Therefore, this impact would be Class II, significant but mitigable. HAZ-6. Naturally Occurring Asbestos Exposure Avoidance and Minimization: a. Prior to earthwork activities, a site-specific health and safety plan shall be developed per California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (CalOSHA) requirements. The plan shall include appropriate health and safety measures if NOA is detected in soil or bedrock beneath the project site. All construction workers that have the potential to come into contact with contaminated soil/bedrock and groundwater shall be knowledgeable of the requirements in the health and safety plan, which includes proper training and personal protective equipment. The health and safety plan shall prescribe appropriate respiratory protection for construction workers. b. Prior to beginning construction, a soil and bedrock analysis for asbestos using polarized light microscopy and transmission electron microscopy by a qualified laboratory shall be conducted. Samples of soil shall be collected from multiple locations across the site, and bedrock samples shall be collected from locations where excavation into bedrock is anticipated. If NOA is detected, appropriate regulations pertaining to excavation, removal, transportation, and disposal of NOA shall be followed. The sampling strategy shall take into account the locations of potential source areas, and the anticipated lateral and vertical distribution of contaminants in soil and/or groundwater. The results of the investigation shall be documented in a report that is signed by a California Professional Geologist. The report shall include recommendations based upon the findings for additional investigation/remediation if contaminants are detected above applicable screening levels (e.g., excavate and dispose, groundwater and/or soil vapor extraction, or in situ bioremediation). With implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-6, impacts related to exposure to NOA would be reduced to a less than significant level. Packet Pg 377 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-39 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact c. During earthwork activities, appropriate procedures shall be incorporated in the event that NOA is detected in soil or bedrock beneath the project site. These procedures shall be followed to eliminate or minimize construction worker or general public exposure to potential contaminants in soil. Procedures shall include efforts to control fugitive dust, contain and cover excavation debris piles, appropriate laboratory analysis of soil for waste characterization, and segregation of contaminated soil from uncontaminated soil. The applicable regulations associated with excavation, removal, transportation, and disposal of contaminated soil shall be followed (e.g., tarping of trucks and waste manifesting). These procedures may be subject to San Luis Obispo APCD requirements under the California ARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Impact HWQ-1. During project construction, the surface soil would be subject to erosion and the downstream watershed would be subject to pollution. The project’s impact on water quality during construction would be Class II, significant but mitigable. HWQ-1(a). Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. All required actions shall be implemented pursuant to a SWPPP and SWMP to be prepared by the project applicant and submitted by the City to the Regional Water Quality Control Board under the NPDES Phase II program. At a minimum, the SWPPP/SWMP shall including the following BMPs: • The use of sandbags, straw bales, and temporary de-silting basins during project grading and construction during the rainy season to prevent discharge of sediment-laden runoff into stormwater facilities; • Revegetation as soon as practicable after completion of grading to reduce sediment transport during storms; • Installation of straw bales, wattles, or silt fencing at the base of bare slopes before the onset of the rainy season (October 15th through April 15th); • Installation of straw bales, wattles, or silt fencing at the project perimeter and in front of storm drains before the onset of the rainy season (October 15th through April 15th); and/or • Alternative BMPs as approved by the RWQCB as part of the SWPPP submittal. HWQ-1(b). Berms and Basins. As specified in the SWPPP, the applicant shall be required to manage and control runoff by constructing temporary berms, sediment basins, runoff diversions, or alternative BMP’s as approved by the RWQCB as part of the SWPPP submittal, in order to avoid unnecessary siltation into local streams during construction activities where grading and construction shall occur in the vicinity of such streams. • Berms and basins shall be constructed when grading commences and be periodically inspected and maintained. The project applicant shall sufficiently Implementation of the mitigation measures and compliance with existing regulations would ensure that the potentially significant construction runoff and associated impacts to water quality would be reduced to a less than significant level. Packet Pg 378 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-40 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact document, to the CCRWQCB satisfaction, the proper installation of such berms and basins during grading. HWQ-1(c). Concept Grading Plan and Master Drainage Plan. As specified in the SWPPP and the City’s Floodplain Management Regulations, the applicant shall be required to submit a Grading Plan and Master Drainage Plan to the Planning Division and City Public Works Director for approval prior to approval of the VTTM. The grading and drainage plans shall be designed to minimize erosion and water quality impacts, to the extent feasible, and shall be consistent with the project’s SWPPP. The plans shall include the following: a. Graded areas shall be revegetated with deep-rooted, native, non-invasive drought tolerant species to minimize slope failure and erosion potential. Geotextile fabrics shall be used if necessary to hold slope soils until vegetation is established; b. Temporary storage of construction equipment shall be limited to a minimum of 100 feet away from drainages on the project site; and c. Erosion control structures shall be installed. d. Demonstrate peak flows and runoff for each phase of construction. e. Be coordinated with habitat restoration efforts, including measures to minimize removal of riparian and wetland habitats and trees (Mitigation Measures BIO- 2[a] and BIO-2[b]). f. Grading and drainage plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. The applicant shall ensure installation of erosion control structures prior to beginning of construction of any structures, subject to review and approval by the City. Impact HWQ-3. During operation, the proposed residential, and commercial, and agricultural uses would increase the quantities of pollutants associated with runoff and sedimentation. The project’s impact on water quality would be Class II, significant but mitigable impact. HWQ-3(a). Stormwater Quality Treatment Controls. BMP devices shall be incorporated into the stormwater quality system depicted in the Master Drainage Plan (refer to Mitigation Measure HWQ-1[c]). The final design of the stormwater quality system shall be reviewed and approved by the City. The Master Drainage Plan shall contain the following relevant BMPs: • Vegetated bioswales to reduce sediment and particulate forms of metals and other pollutants along corridors of planted grasses. • Vegetated buffer strips to reduce sediment and particulate forms of metals and nutrients. • Hydrodynamic separation products to reduce suspended solids greater than 240 microns, trash, and hydrocarbons. These hydrodynamic separators shall be sized to handle peak flows from the project site consistent with applicable regulatory standards. Implementation of required mitigation measures and compliance with existing regulations would ensure that the potentially significant impacts to water quality resulting from runoff during operation of the project would be reduced to a less than significant level. Packet Pg 379 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-41 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact HWQ-3(b). Stormwater BMP Maintenance Manual. The project applicant shall prepare a development maintenance manual for the stormwater quality system BMPs (refer to Mitigation Measure HWQ-3[a]). The maintenance manual shall include detailed procedures for maintenance and operations of all stormwater facilities to ensure long-term operation and maintenance of post-construction stormwater controls. The maintenance manual shall require that stormwater BMP devices be inspected, cleaned, and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s maintenance specifications. The manual shall require that devices be cleaned prior to the onset of the rainy season (i.e., October 15th) and immediately after the end of the rainy season (i.e., May 15th). The manual shall also require that all devices be checked after major storm events. HWQ-3(c). Stormwater BMP Semi-Annual Maintenance Report. The property manager(s) or acceptable maintenance organization shall submit to the City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department a detailed report prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer addressing the condition of all private stormwater facilities, BMPs, and any necessary maintenance activities on a semi-annual basis (October 15th and May 15th of each year). The requirement for maintenance and report submittal shall be recorded against the property. Impact HWQ-4. Approximately 98 acres of the project site is within the existing 100-year flood zone. However, proposed grading and elevation modifications would ensure that the project would not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area or expose people or structures downstream of the Specific Plan Area to flood hazards due to increased runoff or loss of floodplain storage. This impact would be Class II, significant but mitigable. HWQ-4. Conditional Letter of Map Revision/Letter of Map Revision. The applicant, in conjunction with the City of San Luis Obispo, shall prepare the CLOMR application and obtain a LOMR from FEMA. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HWQ-4 and compliance with existing regulations would ensure that this impact would be reduced to a less than significant level. LAND USE Impact LU-2. The Specific Plan would be potentially consistent with LAFCO policies for Mitigation Measures AG-1 and AG-3 would ensure that the Specific Plan would not result in conflicts between the San Luis Obispo LAFCO agricultural policies and the Specific Plan. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AG-1 and AG-3 would ensure that this impact would Packet Pg 380 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-42 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact annexation. This impact would be Class II, less than significant with mitigation incorporated. remain less than significant. Cumulative Land Use Impacts. The proposed uses are consistent with the intent of the goals and policies established within the City’s General Plan and Zoning Regulations after implementation of mitigation, and would not cumulatively contribute to the loss of open space or agricultural land beyond that already anticipated in the City’s LUCE Update and EIR. Furthermore, the Specific Plan is not expected to cumulatively contribute to potential airport noise and/or safety issues. As such, cumulative land use impacts would be less than significant with incorporation of the mitigation included in this EIR. The following Mitigation Measures would apply to this impact: • Section 4.1, Aesthetics: AES-1(a) and AES-1(b) • Section 4.2, Agricultural Resources: AG-1, AG-3 • Section 4.4, Biological Resources: BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(h) and BIO-2(a) through BIO-2(c) • Section 4.5, Cultural Resources: CR-1(a) through CR-1(c) • Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials: HAZ-4, HAZ-5(a), HAZ-5(b), HAZ-6 • Section 4.10, Noise: N-1(a) through N-1(g), N-4(a), N-4(b), N-5(a) through N- 5(d) • Section 4.12, Transportation and Circulation: T-1(a) through T-1(i), T-2(a) through T-2(j), T-3(a) through T-3(d), T-4, T-5, T-6, T-7, T-8(a) through T-8(g), T-9(a) through T-9(m), T-10(a) through T-10(c) • Section 4.14, Issues Addressed in the Initial Study: GEO-1, GEO-3 This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. NOISE Impact N-4. Future development on the project site would generate operational noise typically associated with residential, commercial, office, and hotel development. Noise from the project would not exceed acceptable levels at existing off-site sensitive receptors. However, noise from new on-site commercial uses may exceed applicable City standards at proposed on-site N-4(a). HVAC Equipment. Retail HVAC equipment shall be shielded and located on building rooftops, or a minimum of 100 feet from the nearest residential property line. N-4(b). Parking Lot/Loading Dock Orientation and Noise Barrier. Parking areas and loading docks within the proposed retail areas shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from the property lines of the nearest residential properties. For parking areas and loading docks located a minimum of 250 feet from the property line of residential properties to the west, or for parking areas and loading docks located a minimum of 150 feet from the property line of residential properties to the west with a building intervening line-of-sight between the parking area/loading dock and the residential property, no further mitigation would be required. If parking areas or loading docks would be located closer to the within 250 feet of This mitigation would ensure that noise levels at residences on the project site would not exceed the City’s standards for intermittent noise. Packet Pg 381 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-43 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact residences. This impact would be Class II, less than significant with mitigation incorporated. the residential properties to the west than described above, a masonry noise barrier shall be installed along the eastern boundary of the proposed residences adjacent to the commercial land use area on the eastern portion of the project site. The noise barrier shall be constructed of any masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. Impact N-5. Existing noise sources near the project site include vehicles on local roadways and U.S. 101. Development of the project would expose future residents on the project site to traffic noise from local roadways and U.S. 101. With mitigation, traffic noise levels on the project site would not exceed City standards. Therefore, this impact would be Class II, less than significant with mitigation incorporated. N-5(a). Interior Noise Reduction. The project applicant shall implement the following measures, or similar combination of measures, which demonstrate that interior noise levels in proposed residences adjacent to Froom Ranch Way and Madonna Road, hotel, and offices would be reduced below the City’s 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard. The required interior noise reduction shall be achieved through a combination of standard interior noise reduction techniques, which may include (but are not limited to): • In order for windows and doors to remain closed, mechanical ventilation such as air conditioning shall be provided for all units (Passive ventilation may be provided, if mechanical ventilation is not necessary to achieve interior noise standards, as demonstrated by a qualified acoustical consultant). • All exterior walls shall be constructed with a minimum STC rating of 50, consisting of construction of 2 inch by 4 inch wood studs with one layer of 5/8 inch Type “X” gypsum board on each side of resilient channels on 24 inch centers and 3 ½ inch fiberglass insulation. • All windows and glass doors shall be rated STC 39 or higher such that the noise reduction provided will satisfy the interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. • An acoustical test report of all the sound-rated windows and doors shall be provided to the City for review by a qualified acoustical consultant to ensure that the selected windows and doors in combination with wall assemblies would reduce interior noise levels sufficiently to meet the City’s interior noise standard. • All vent ducts connecting interior spaces to the exterior (i.e., bathroom exhaust, etc.) shall have at least two 90 degree turns in the duct. • All windows and doors shall be installed in an acoustically-effective manner. Sliding window panels shall form an air-tight seal when in the closed position and the window frames shall be caulked to the wall opening around the perimeter with a non-hardening caulking compound to prevent sound infiltration. Exterior doors shall seal air-tight around the full perimeter when in the closed position. The applicant shall submit a report to the Community Development Department by a qualified acoustical consultant certifying that the specific interior noise reduction techniques included in residential, hotel, and office components of the project would This mitigation would ensure that traffic noise levels would not exceed City standards. Packet Pg 382 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-44 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact achieve interior noise levels that would not exceed 45 dBA CNEL. N-5(b). Residential Outdoor Activity Area Noise Attenuation. Outdoor activity areas (e.g., patios and hotel pool areas) associated with shared multifamily residential recreational spaces, hotel, commercial, and office uses shall be protected from sound intrusion so that they meet the City’s exterior standard of 60 dBA CNEL. Outdoor activity areas shall be oriented away from traffic noise such that intervening buildings reduce traffic noise or shall include noise barriers capable of reducing traffic noise levels to meet the City’s exterior standard. Hotel pool areas shall be located a minimum of 500 feet from the U.S. 101 right-of-way. Noise barriers may be constructed of a material such as tempered glass, acrylic glass, or masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. The applicant shall submit a report to the Community Development Department by a qualified acoustic consultant certifying that the specific outdoor noise reduction techniques in combination with the orientation of outdoor activity areas of shared multifamily residential recreational spaces, hotel, commercial, and offices would achieve exterior noise levels that would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL. N-5(c). Froom Ranch Way Noise Barrier. A masonry noise barrier or alternative barrier, such as a landscaped berm, shall be installed along the southern property line of residential lots that abut Froom Ranch Way to protect outdoor activity areas (patios and pools) at these residences from sound intrusion from traffic along Froom Ranch Way. The noise barrier or berm shall provide, at minimum, a 6 foot high barrier between Froom Ranch Way and the neighboring residences from the final grade of whichever use (i.e., Froom Ranch Way or residences) has a higher final elevation. If a masonry noise barrier is implemented, tThe noise barrier shall be constructed of any masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. If an alternative material is used, the developer shall submit a report to the Community Development Department by a qualified acoustical consultant certifying that the specific exterior noise reduction techniques included would achieve exterior noise levels that would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL. N-5(d). U.S. Highway 101 Noise Barrier at Hotel. If the hotel includes an outdoor activity area (such as a patio or pool) a masonry noise barrier or alternative barrier, such as berms, landscaping, or glass, must be installed along the eastern property line of the hotel where it abuts the U.S. 101 right of way to protect these outdoor activity areas from sound intrusion from traffic along U.S. 101. If a masonry noise Packet Pg 383 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-45 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact barrier is implemented, tThe noise barrier shall provide, at minimum, an 8 foot high barrier between U.S. 101 and the hotel from the final grade of whichever use (i.e., U.S. 101 or hotel) has a higher final elevation. Such a The noise barrier shall be constructed of any masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. If an alternative material is used, the developer shall submit a report to the Community Development Department by a qualified acoustical consultant demonstrating that the specific exterior noise reduction techniques included in the hotel component of the project would achieve exterior noise levels that would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL. RECREATION Impact REC-1. The project would accommodate new residents in the City of San Luis Obispo who will use existing and planned parks and recreation facilities. Provision of on-site parks and recreation facilities would not meet the adopted City parkland standard for the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area. Therefore, impacts to parks and recreational facilities would be Class II, potentially significant but mitigable. REC-1. Parkland In-lieu Fees. The project applicant shall pay parkland in-lieu fees in accordance with the City’s parkland in-lieu fee program for the parkland shortage. The project’s specific fee shall be determined by the City at the time of project approval, after accounting for parkland provided within the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area. The in-lieu fees collected from the project shall be directed to new projects or improvements to existing parks and recreation facilities within the City of San Luis Obispo parks system. With payment of the City’s required parkland in-lieu fees to ensure compliance with the policies and performance standards in the City’s General Plan as part of the project, impacts associated with parks and recreational facilities would be less than significant. Cumulative Recreation Impacts. The project would not meet the Citywide parkland standards and would exacerbate the exiting shortfall of parks and recreational facilities within the City. As a result, cumulative adverse physical effects on the environment from recreational development would be potentially significant, and the project’s contribution to this impact would be cumulatively considerable. With payment of the City’s required parkland in-lieu fees to ensure compliance with the policies and performance standards in the City’s General Plan as part of the project, required by Mitigation Measure REC-1, the project contribution to cumulative impacts associated with parks and recreational facilities would be reduced to a less than significant level. Implementation of required mitigation measures would reduce cumulative impacts to a less than significant level. Packet Pg 384 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-46 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact TRANSPORTATION Impact T-4. Project construction activities would create traffic impacts due to construction vehicles causing congestion and deteriorating pavement conditions. Mitigation would reduce these impacts to an acceptable level. This impact would be Class II, less than significant with mitigation. T-4. Construction Traffic Management Plan. Prior to construction, a traffic management plan shall be prepared for review and approval by the City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department. The traffic management plan shall be based on the type of roadway traffic conditions, duration of construction, physical constraints, nearness of the work zone to traffic and other facilities (bicycle, pedestrian, driveway access, etc.). The traffic management plan shall include: • Advertisement. The project developer shall prepare an advertisement campaign informing the public of the proposed construction activities. Advertisements shall occur prior to beginning work and periodically during the course of the project construction. The advertising shall include notification of changes to bus schedules and potential changes to bus stop locations, potential impacts during school drop-off and pick-up times, and major intersections that may be impacted during construction. • Property Access. Access to parcels along the construction area shall be maintained to the greatest extent feasible. Affected property owners shall receive advance notice of work adjacent to their property access and when driveways would be potentially closed. • Schools. Any construction adjacent to schools shall ensure that access is maintained for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists, particularly at the beginning and end of the school day. • Buses, Bicycles, and Pedestrians. The work zone shall provide for passage by buses, bicyclists, and pedestrians, particularly in the vicinity of schools. • Intersections. Traffic control (i.e., use of flag persons) shall be used at intersections that are determined to be unacceptably congested due to construction traffic. Implementation of the identified mitigation would ensure that impacts associated with construction traffic would be less than significant after mitigation. Impact T-5. Construction of the proposed Froom Ranch Way bridge during phase 3 of the Specific Plan buildout would result in significant level of service and queuing impacts at study area intersections and roadway segments. Mitigation would reduce these impacts to an acceptable level. This impact would be Class II, less than significant with mitigation. T-5. Froom Ranch Way Bridge Phasing. The Froom Ranch Way bridge connection shall be completed prior to occupancy of Phase 1 of the Specific Plan buildout. Implementation of the identified mitigation would ensure that LOS and queuing impacts associated with the project’s proposed infrastructure phasing would be less than significant after mitigation. Packet Pg 385 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-47 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact Impact T-6. The project site plan would result in and contribute to increased access conflicts. Proposed access controls are not consistent with General Plan policy. Mitigation would reduce these impacts to an acceptable level. This impact would be Class II, less than significant with mitigation. T-6. Project Site Intersection Roundabout Control. New roadway intersections within the Specific Plan Area shall be controlled using roundabout design, unless the City Public Works Department determines that roundabout control is infeasible. Implementation of the identified mitigation would ensure that the project would be consistent with General Plan Circulation Element Policy 7.1.2, and would ensure that transportation impacts due to access conflicts would be reduced to a less than significant level after mitigation. Impact T-7. The project site plan would result in on-site traffic volumes and speeds that may exceed General Plan policy thresholds, resulting potential traffic hazards within the project site. Mitigation would reduce these impacts to an acceptable level. This impact would be Class II, less than significant with mitigation. T-7. Traffic Calming Features. New roadway intersections along San Luis Ranch Road shall include neighborhood traffic circles at key intersections, and traffic- calming features, such as diverters, along longer uninterrupted segments. This mitigation would ensure that potential traffic hazards within the Specific Plan area would be reduced to a less than significant level after mitigation. ISSUES ADDRESSED IN THE INITIAL STUDY Due to the proximity of the site to the Los Osos Fault and Alquist-Priolo Zone, impacts associated with earthquakes and ground shaking would be potentially significant. In addition, the project site has been identified as being located in an area of very high liquefaction potential, moderate to high expansion potential, and high settlement potential. In addition, during historical drought years, groundwater levels in the site vicinity were lowered enough to cause GEO-1. Earthquake and Ground Acceleration Design and Construction Measures. Design and construction of the buildings, roadway infrastructure and all subgrades shall be specifically proportioned to resist Design Earthquake Ground Motions (Design amax) of SD1=0.481 and SDS=0.832 and engineered to withstand Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) peak ground acceleration (PGAM) equal to 0.519 g, as described in the Soils Engineering Report for the project (GeoSolutions, Inc., 2015). The design should take into consideration the soil type, potential for liquefaction, and the most current and applicable seismic attenuation methods that are available. GEO-2. Operational Seismic Safety Requirement. For retail stores included in the project, goods for sale may be stacked no higher than 8 feet from the floor in any area where customers are present, unless provisions are made to prevent the goods from falling during an earthquake of up to 7.5 magnitude. The stacking or restraint methods shall be reviewed and approved by the City before approval of occupancy permits, and shall be a standing condition of occupancy. With implementation of the mitigation described above, impacts related to geology and soils would be less than significant. Packet Pg 386 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-48 Table ES-2 Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact subsidence. GEO-3. Geotechnical Design. The project plans and specifications shall include the geotechnical recommendations included in the Soils Engineering Report, prepared by GeoSolutions, Inc. on May 29, 2015. Recommendations therein that shall be incorporated into the final project building plans include specification for the following components of development preparation and design: • Building Pad Preparation • Paved Areas Preparation • Pavement Design • Interlocking Concrete Pavers • Conventional Foundations • Post-Tensioned Slabs • Slab-On-Grade Construction • Retaining Walls • Exterior Concrete Flatwork Packet Pg 387 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-49 Table ES-3 Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact AESTHETICS Impact AES-1. Although there are potentially adverse impacts to scenic viewsheds, the project would implement the open space and agricultural preservation and design elements included in the proposed Specific Plan. Therefore, potential impacts to scenic vistas and scenic resources within a state scenic highway would be Class III, less than significant. No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. Impact AES-2. The project would alter the existing visual character of the site by converting over half of the agricultural site into a predominantly residential and commercial use site. Due to the project’s visual compatibility with surrounding development, preservation of on-site open space and agricultural land, and compliance with design guidelines, the project’s impact on the visual character and quality of the site would be Class III, less than significant. No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. Impact AES-3. The project would introduce a new source of nighttime lighting and daytime glare, which could increase ambient light and affect the quality of the nighttime sky. However, project compliance with existing City requirements No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. Packet Pg 388 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-50 Table ES-3 Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact and design guidelines would limit the magnitude of these effects. This would be Class III, less than significant. Cumulative Aesthetics Impacts. As determined in the LUCE Update EIR, all development that adheres to applicable General Plan policies would result in less than significant aesthetic impacts. Therefore, the overall aesthetic impact of cumulative development in the project vicinity would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES Impact AG-2. The project would alter the existing land use and zoning on the project site. However, these alterations would be consistent with the General Plan’s identification of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan for a mix of urban, agricultural, and open space use. Therefore, this impact would be Class III, less than significant. No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. Impact AG-4. Re-grading of the project site would not result in significant degradation of viability of on-site agricultural land. Therefore, this impact would be Class III, less than significant. No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. Packet Pg 389 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-51 Table ES-3 Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact Cumulative Agricultural Resources Impacts. Consistent with the LUCE Update EIR, the project would implement Land Use Element Policies 1.8.1 and 1.9.2, and Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 8.6.3. As a result, cumulative impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. AIR QUALITY Impact AQ-4 . The project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. This impact would be Class III, less than significant. No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Impact GHG-1. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is consistent with the City’s Climate Action Plan. This impact would be Class III, less than significant. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is consistent with the City’s Climate Action Plan. No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. HAZARDS/ HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Impact HAZ-1. Small quantities of hazardous materials may be used in conjunction with the proposed residential and commercial retail uses on site. However, these materials would be limited in type and quantity such that they would not create a hazard to the public or environment. Therefore, this impact would be Class III, less No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. Packet Pg 390 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-52 Table ES-3 Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact than significant. Impact HAZ-2. The project site is adjacent to U.S. Highway 101, on which accidents that involve hazardous materials could occur. Such accidents could potentially create a significant hazard to the public or environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. However, compliance with applicable regulations related to the handling and storage of hazardous materials would minimize the risk of the public’s potential exposure to these substances, resulting in a Class III, less than significant, impact. Transport of hazardous materials on U.S. 101 and other roadways, including U.S. 101, would be required to comply with all federal, State, and local laws pertaining to the handling of hazardous materials. No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. Impact HAZ-3. Two schools are located within one-quarter mile of the project site. Compliance with existing federal, State, and local regulations would ensure that hazardous materials impacts to schools would remain Class III, less than significant. No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. Impact HAZ-7. Asbestos Containing Material (ACM) and Lead Based Paint (LBP) may be present in existing on-site structures. Demolition of these structures would be required to comply with applicable State and local policies and regulations for the control and No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. Packet Pg 391 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-53 Table ES-3 Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact remediation of hazardous materials to prevent human exposure. Therefore, this impact would be Class III, less than significant. Impact HAZ-8. The project site is located within a San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport area of influence. The project would be consistent with the CALUPH Airport Safety Zones, which represent the extent of Airport-related safety hazard zones for people residing or working in these areas. Therefore, this impact would be Class III, less than significant. No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. Cumulative Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impacts. As described in the LUCE Update EIR, adherence to applicable General Plan policies and applicable State and federal regulatory requirements would reduce any cumulative hazards and hazardous materials impacts resulting from buildout of the City under the General Plan, including buildout of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan, to a less than significant level. The uses proposed for the San Luis Ranch Project would be consistent with the CALUPH Airport Safety Zones, which represent the extent of Airport- related safety hazard zones for No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. Packet Pg 392 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-54 Table ES-3 Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact people residing or working in these areas. As such, the project would not result in a substantial contribution to cumulative aircraft related hazards in the City. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Impact HWQ-2. The project would alter the existing drainage pattern of the project site, which could result in flooding, erosion, or siltation onsite and offsite. However, the proposed retention and detention systems, along with compliance with applicable regulations, would ensure that this impact would remain Class III, less than significant. No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. Cumulative Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts. Water Quality. The project, in conjunction with pending cumulative development would not significantly increase the concentration of urban pollutants such as oil, grease, and vehicular heavy metals in surface runoff. Polluted runoff which may be generated during construction activities of cumulative development and projects considered in this analysis would be regulated by the SWRCB under General Construction, NPDES permits, and would be minimized through the implementation of standard No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. Packet Pg 393 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-55 Table ES-3 Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact construction BMPs. Cumulative impacts would therefore be less than significant for water quality. Flooding. The proposed on-site drainage system would adequately capture associated runoff, and the project would not substantially contribute to flooding on- or off-site. The project grading plan has been designed such that the resulting post-development floodplain would exclude areas proposed for housing. Overall, cumulative impacts to hydrology and water quality would be less than significant. LAND USE Impact LU-3. The Specific Plan would be consistent with the land use strategy in SLOCOG’s 2014 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. This impact would be Class III, less than significant. No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. Impact LU-4. The Specific Plan would allow residential and non- residential land uses consistent with density and use restrictions in the City’s Airport Safety Zones, which represent the extent of Airport-related safety hazard zones for people residing or working in these areas. The LUCE Update EIR provided substantial evidence that the development of the San Luis No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. Packet Pg 394 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-56 Table ES-3 Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact Ranch Specific Plan Area under the updated General Plan land use designations would be consistent with ALUP safety and noise standards. The project would not conflict with land use policies intended to prevent airport-related safety hazards. Therefore, this impact would be Class III, less than significant. NOISE Impact N-2. Short-term construction activities would generate intermittent levels of groundborne vibration. However, the expected vibration level during construction of the project would not be perceptible at the nearest residential receptors. This impact would be Class III, less than significant. No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. Impact N-3. Project-generated traffic would incrementally increase traffic-related noise on study area roadway segments, except on Madonna Road near the project site, which would potentially affect existing noise- sensitive receptors along local roadways. However, the increase in traffic noise levels along area roadways would not exceed 3 dBA, which is the increase threshold typically audible to the human ear. Therefore, the effect of increased traffic noise would be Class III, less than significant. No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. Packet Pg 395 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-57 Table ES-3 Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact Cumulative Noise Impacts. Traffic noise levels along roadways in the project vicinity would not increase by more than 0.5 dBA due to cumulative traffic. This increase would not be significant based on the applicable traffic noise increase threshold of 3 dBA. Therefore, the project’s contribution to traffic noise would not be cumulatively considerable or significant. No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. WATER RESOURCES Impact WR-1. The project would increase water demand as a result of new residential and commercial development on the project site. However, the project’s water demand would be within the City of San Luis Obispo’s projected primary water supply. Therefore, impacts to water supply would be Class III, less than significant. No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. Cumulative Water Resources Impacts. The project’s water demand would not exceed supply when combined with all possible future development within the City. In addition, the project would reduce the overall demand on the San Luis Obispo groundwater basin as a result of reduced on-site agricultural uses and, therefore, would not exacerbate potential cumulative impacts on the local No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant without mitigation. Packet Pg 396 12 San Luis Ranch Project EIR Executive Summary City of San Luis Obispo ES-58 Table ES-3 Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact groundwater basin associate with future development within the City. Accordingly, the project’s cumulative water supply impact would be less than significant. Packet Pg 397 12 FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH 071928\8719071v2 1 180317.1 TERM SHEET FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND MI SAN LUIS RANCH, LLC 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE a. The purpose of this Term Sheet is to outline basic terms by which the City of San Luis Obispo (“City”) and MI San Luis Ranch, LLC (“Developer”) will be negotiating a proposed Development Agreement for the orderly development of the Project described in the Specific Plan (“Project”) on the real property identified as APN: 067-121-022 (“Property”). This Term Sheet generally addresses the list of issues described herein and memorializes the anticipated terms of the proposed Development Agreement or outlines a process and/or general approach to reach agreement. b. The objective of the Development Agreement is to coordinate all entitlements and provide for and secure for the orderly development of the Project and delineate a process to specify both general and extraordinary benefits related to the Development Agreement. c. The final terms for the Development Agreement shall be negotiated in good faith and nothing in this Term Sheet is binding on either party. This Term Sheet, by memorializing the discussions to date between City and Developer, is intended to provide clarity in planning for and facilitating the Project’s compliance with CEQA, the processing of entitlements for the Project, and, if approved, the orderly development of the Project. d. Because full environmental review under CEQA and/or other state, federal, and local environmental laws is required as part of City’s evaluation of whether to approve the Project, nothing set forth in this Term Sheet commits or otherwise requires City or any other federal, state, or other local agency to approve, in whole or in part, the Project. 2. DURATION OF AGREEMENT a. The duration of the Development Agreement is expected to be 20-30 years from the date the Development Agreement becomes effective (“Effective Date”), but shall comply with the time extensions and cancellations in City Municipal Code section 17.94.190 and California Government Code sections 65868 and 65869.5 and other applicable law. The Development Agreement shall include an expiration date within five years of effective date if the first phase of construction is not completed. b. The Development Agreement shall specify commencement of construction dates along with related milestones. Failure to meet designated milestones may result in cancellation of, and/or a reduction in the term of, the Development Agreement. Packet Pg 398 12 FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH 071928\8719071v2 2 180317.1 3. PERMITTED USES OF THE PROPERTY a. The permitted uses of the Property are those identified, described, and otherwise shown in the approved Specific Plan and other regulatory documents to be included in the Development Agreement by reference. The Project shall be limited to the expressed density and intensity of uses as shown in the approved Specific Plan and other Project entitlements. 4. MAXIMUM DENSITY, HEIGHT, AND SIZE OF BUILDINGS a. Any vested right relating to maximum density, height, and size of buildings shall be for the term of the Development Agreement, subject only to the procedures and design review standards for review of individual building projects (i.e., Architectural Review Commission, Cultural Heritage Commission, etc.). The density, heights, and sizes of buildings are subjected to all Specific Plan polices or other regulatory documents to be included in the Development Agreement by reference. 5. PROVISIONS FOR RESERVATION OR DEDICATION OF LAND FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES a. Before the sooner of (i) the recordation of a subdivision map for any portion of the Project or (ii) the issuance of a building permit for the first structure to be built as part of the first phase of the Project, Developer shall offer to dedicate to City a conservation easement, or multiple conservation easements, preserving the land designated by the Specific Plan as either Agriculture or Open Space in the form of an Agriculture Easement (“Agriculture Easement”) and an Open Space Easement (“Open Space Easement,” and collectively, the “Conservation Easements”). Developer shall be entitled to make use of the land subject to the Conservation Easements consistent with (i) the requirements of the Conservation Easements; (ii) City rules, regulations, and policies, including but not limited to those governing agriculture, agricultural buffers, wells, groundwater treatment facilities, water lines, recreational and educational uses (including bicycle and pedestrian paths), unpaved roadways and parking areas for agricultural purposes and maintenance access, and surface drainage and flood management; (iii) Specific Plan Policies, General Plan Policies, CEQA mitigation measures, conditions of subdivision maps, and other project entitlements; and (iv) any other applicable law or development standards in place on the Effective Date. b. Developer shall partially fulfill the obligations of the Conservation Easements by dedicating a portion of the Property for use as agricultural and open space land consistent with City’s adopted General Plan and certified Final Environmental Impact Report (“FEIR”) Mitigation Measures for the Project and any other applicable conditions of approval or applicable regulations for the Project. c. A portion of the agricultural/open space land may be mitigated off-site through an agricultural/open space conservation easement on comparable land by providing land for an agricultural/open space easement at a ratio to be determined by the City’s Natural Resource Manager that contain specific characteristics of the land proposed consistent in accordance with the FEIR, or through the payment of fees to City for City’s use as a portion of monies available for the subsequent purchase of a larger parcel of acceptable off-site mitigation property in fee or the purchase of agricultural/open space conservation easements. In no case, shall comparable Packet Pg 399 12 FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH 071928\8719071v2 3 180317.1 offsite mitigation ratios be less than 1acre to 1acre. Any obligations of the Project and Developer to meet those agriculture and open space requirements shall also comply with all FEIR Mitigation Measures for the Project and any other policies and development standards for the Project. d. Developer agrees to fulfill its Quimby Act, General Plan Park Element, and other applicable City park and recreation obligations by constructing the appropriate onsite park and recreation improvements to the satisfaction of the Parks and Recreation Commission. Should the amount of acreage dedicated to parks and recreation amenities be insufficient to meet Developer’s obligation, Developer shall dedicate property off-site, and/or pay applicable fees to accomplish the same. e. City agrees to consider an access easement to Developer for agricultural operations on San Luis Ranch and temporary construction access across the property commonly known as “City Farm property” (APN’s 053-152-006, 053- 152-008, and 053-152-007) within the area covered by the extension of Calle Joaquin to the common property line. The Development Agreement shall specify the terms for shared maintenance obligations of City and Developer as to that access easement, as well as any necessary improvements. 6. INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIRED a. Developer shall construct all infrastructure, including but not limited to that required by the subdivision map(s), as outlined in the FEIR for the Project, conditions of approval for the Project, the Specific Plan, or any other related policies or standards, subject to any reimbursement requirements identified in the Development Agreement or other Project entitlements. Infrastructure shall include, but shall not be limited to, improvements for streets and sidewalks, parks and recreation facilities, stormwater management and wetlands, grading and floodplain management, storm drain, sanitary sewer, domestic and recycled water infrastructure, and transit to support the development of the Project as shown in the approved entitlements, including but not limited to the Project’s Specific Plan, FEIR, conditions of approval, or other related development standards. City shall consider granting easements across City property that may be required for the orderly development of the Project. b. City and Developer shall mutually agree on the timing of infrastructure improvements to be constructed by Developer. Construction of these improvements shall not commence any later than the triggering date or event for these improvements as determined by the certified FEIR or other conditions of approval. A financing plan for the improvements shall be included in the Development Agreement. The financing plan shall identify Developer funding, City impact fees, other private investment, land-secured (special district) funding, and non-Developer funding from City or other public agencies. c. Project entitlements shall include typical conditions of approval, including acquisition of fee and/or easement rights of access, construction, and maintenance-repair-replacement for any off-site infrastructure improvements outside of the control of either City or Developer as required by California Government Code section 66462.5. In addition to the options provided to the City by Government Code section 66462.5, the City may opt at the sole discretion of Packet Pg 400 12 FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH 071928\8719071v2 4 180317.1 the Public Works Director to require the Developer to design and construct the roundabout as specified in the subdivision map on the Project site. d. Prior to recordation of the final map the Developer shall complete the design of Dalidio Road improvements and exhaust all feasible efforts to acquire the necessary off-site dedications, easements, and agreements to construct any infrastructure for the Project on the site at 1655 Dalidio Drive on which the United States Post Office is currently located (APN: 053-012-013). In addition to the options provided to the City by Government Code section 66462.5, the City may opt to require the Developer to explore other feasible alternatives within the scope of the EIR mitigate any impacts. e. Developer and City shall cooperate to provide and make available real property currently owned by either Developer or City and necessary for construction of those public improvements, such as, but not limited to (i) construction of the Prado Road Overcrossing and/or Freeway Interchange required by the certified FEIR, (ii) extension of Froom Ranch Way, (iii) improvements to Madonna Road, (iv) or other improvements needed to satisfy Project approvals. f. Prior to approval of the final subdivision map for the Project, Developer shall convey by fee or by grant of an irrevocable offer of dedication rights across the Property required for construction of the improvements associated with: 1) the Prado Road Overcrossing and/or Freeway Interchange, 2) Madonna Road, 3) Dalidio/Prado Road, 4) Froom Ranch Way and 5) any other street for public purposes. g. City and Developer shall diligently pursue all aspects of the applications to Caltrans, the Army Corps of Engineers, and other agencies required for construction of the Prado Road Overcrossing or Freeway Interchange, and all environmental processing and supporting technical studies. City and Developer shall diligently and cooperatively pursue the planning, engineering, cost estimating, and other efforts necessary to determine the final cost and design of the Prado Road Overcrossing or Freeway Interchange. City shall provide timely review and responses to all such applications made in respect to the Prado Road Overcrossing and/or Freeway Interchange. 7. WATER RIGHTS a. The Project shall comply with the California Water Code and the regulations imposed pursuant to the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) for all matters related to water rights. City and Developer acknowledge that Developer neither relinquishes nor conveys to City any rights with respect to groundwater or other water rights with respect to the Property. Further, Developer expressly reserves any and all water rights it has in connection with the Property and the Project. Developer shall be entitled to irrigate the agricultural/open space land utilizing groundwater as long as water quality meets or exceeds all applicable water quality standards, and shall not be required by City to irrigate that land with reclaimed water in lieu of groundwater unless Developer at its sole option chooses to connect to City’s water system for purposes of irrigation of agricultural/openspace; provided, however, that nothing in the Development Agreement shall exempt the Project or Developer from groundwater regulations imposed by a Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA). City and Developer Packet Pg 401 12 FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH 071928\8719071v2 5 180317.1 acknowledge that pursuant to applicable rules and regulations, Developer may use well water for irrigation purposes within the parcel boundary of agricultural/open space land. 8. AFFORDABLE HOUSING a. At a minimum, developer shall provide affordable housing, including rental and for-sale units, consistent with the approved Affordable Housing Plan for the Project. All affordable units required for the residential development will be integrated into the neighborhoods on-site and will be subject to long-term affordability agreements. The housing units required for the commercial development could be provided on-site, off-site, or the requirement may be met by payment of in-lieu fees. 9. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE a. The Community Development Director may authorize the Developer to construct up to 50% of annual units in a calendar year in excess of those permitted by the approved phasing schedule required by the Specific Plan if he or she determines that doing so is necessary to allow financing of essential project infrastructure. The purpose of this section is to expressly allow for the financing of infrastructure and is not a general waiver of the requirements under the City’s Growth Management Ordinance. 10. FEES AND EXACTIONS a. The Developer shall be required to pay all City-wide and Project-specific development impact fees, excluding sewer and water impact fees addressed in section 10(b) below, for the Project’s fair share of the cost to mitigate Project impacts as identified in the Final Impact Report, Specific Plan, conditions of approval or otherwise specified in the Development Agreement in effect when each final map is recorded. All development impact fees shall be adjusted annually based on an inflation index identified upon imposition of the fee. b. The Developer shall be required to pay sewer and water impact fees in accordance with the AB1600 analysis in effect when each Final Map is recorded. Sewer and water impact fees in effect as of the date that the Final Map is recorded and may be adjusted annually and shall be paid upon recordation of each final map at the rate then effective. c. Fees imposed by City, including but not limited to planning, engineering, building permit, fire plan check and development impact fees, but excluding sewer and water impact fees governed by section 10(b) above, shall be in accordance with the fees in effect as of the date of when the Final Map is recorded and may be adjusted annually in conformance with applicable City Policies. d. If the City amends any existing Development Impact Fee (DIF) program to include additional projects or costs for the benefit of the Project (either new projects or increased costs for projects included in the analysis supporting existing fees) for improvements necessary to satisfy Project requirements, Developer will be required to pay the amended fees. Credits applied towards infrastructure costs advanced by Developer shall apply when building permits are issued or fees are otherwise due and shall arise only from Developer funded construction of Packet Pg 402 12 FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH 071928\8719071v2 6 180317.1 infrastructure or community facilities included in the project list on which a particular fee was based. Credits applied when building permits are issued or fees are otherwise due pursuant to this section shall be adjusted for inflation consistently with such adjustments of the fees against which credits are allowed. e. The Developer shall pay all then-current processing fees for any subsequent planning applications and permits as adopted by the City Council. f. City acknowledges that Developer may dedicate property and install infrastructure improvements beyond its “fair share” cost. The City agrees to consider fee credits and reimbursements, funded by Development Impact Fees paid by other developers, and traffic impact fees, where eligible, but excluding sewer and water impact fees. Nothing in the Development Agreement shall preclude City and Developer from entering infrastructure-item-specific reimbursement agreements for the portion of the cost of any dedications, public facilities and/or infrastructure the City may require the Developer to construct as conditions of the Project Approvals to the extent that they exceed the Project’s “fair share”. g. The Developer may be reimbursed by other private development(s) for those developments’ “Fair Share” of the cost to construct sewer and water infrastructure per San Luis Obispo Municipal Code sections 16.20.100 and 16.20.110. The Developer will provide a study identifying the benefit area for each such reimbursement agreement, conforming to San Luis Obispo Municipal Code section 16.20.110, for review and approval of the Utilities Director, and may provide for reimbursement for segments of infrastructure which meet a utility’s minimum size standard if the study shows those minimally sized facilities to benefit identified additional developments. h. The Developer has advanced funding to process a Caltrans Project Study Report (PSR) for the US 101/Prado Road Interchange. The Developer will either be reimbursed by other development projects for costs beyond the Project’s “Fair Share” of this improvement or receive an upfront fee credit for expenditures for the PSR as established in the final Development Agreement. 11. NEW TAXES a. Any City-wide taxes enacted or increased after the Effective Date shall apply to the Project only if (i) such taxes apply City-wide and do not discriminate against Developer, (ii) such taxes apply to the Property prospectively, and (iii) the application of such taxes would not prevent development in accordance with the Development Agreement. 12. INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCING a. The Development Agreement shall include a financing plan that specifies the form and mechanism of public financing to be used and the obligations of City and Developer as to such public financing (“Financing Plan”). To fund timely construction of necessary improvements as discussed in section 6, the Financing Plan may require Developer to pay for some portion of the public improvements beyond the Project’s “fair share” of costs and before funding for related Packet Pg 403 12 FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH 071928\8719071v2 7 180317.1 reimbursement by City has been secured. This may be accomplished through reimbursement agreements; land-secured public financing for the Project, such as formation of a community facilities district; use of tax increment financing through an infrastructure financing district; negotiation of the Tax Exchange Agreement with the County of San Luis Obispo; or outside sources of public investment, such as grants. City’s General Fund shall not be obligated for such debt. City agrees to create and administer the financing mechanism(s) and to make best efforts in consultation with Developer to identify other funding sources to support the orderly development of the Project. Nothing in this Term Sheet or the Development Agreement shall constitute an unlawful pre-commitment of the City’s legislative discretion or its discretion as to quasi-judicial matters which are required to be determined after notice and hearing and on the basis of an adequate administrative record. Nothing in this Term Sheet or the Development Agreement shall be in denigration of the rights of third parties under applicable law. 13. RESPONSIBILITY FOR CEQA MITIGATION AND OTHER MITIGATION MEASURES a. The Development Agreement will incorporate by reference all applicable FEIR mitigation measures adopted for the Project in addition to the conditions of other Project approvals. 14. COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT a. As stated in section 12(a) above, the Developer will agree to the formation of one or more community facilities districts as one of many sources of revenue to fund infrastructure. The City agrees to bring forward the formation of one or more community facilities district for Council consideration to finance public infrastructure and/or public services. Such community facilities districts may levy special taxes to fund public facilities, local infrastructure maintenance, and City services to the Project so it does not negatively impact City service levels to other residents and property owners. b. Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R’s) applicable to real property shall obligate a homeowner’s association, or other common-interest association, to bear any and all obligations for funding local infrastructure maintenance and support for City services if an applicable community facilities district is repealed by initiative pursuant to article XIII C, section 3 of the California Constitution, or repealed in any other manner other than voluntary rescission by the City Council. Each portion of the project which includes infrastructure to be maintained by the benefited properties shall be subject to CC&Rs sufficient to attain the objective of this paragraph (b), although the parties recognize multiple homeowner or property-owner associations may be created for portions or phases of the development. 15. PHASING a. The Development Agreement shall require Developer to construct certain improvements in addition to those “in-tract” improvements required pursuant to the subdivision map(s) for all six phases of the Project, per the phasing schedule approved as part of the Specific Plan. Developer shall construct and convey to City identified infrastructure and community facilities concurrently with Packet Pg 404 12 FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH 071928\8719071v2 8 180317.1 development of the discrete phases of the Project to be served by each infrastructure element or community facility. b. The Public Works and Community Development Directors may defer the deadline for the Developer to construct and convey an infrastructure element or community facility consistently with applicable Project mitigation measures, City policies and the Development Agreement. c. Notwithstanding the provisions of any phasing requirements in the Project approvals, City and Developer recognize that economic and market conditions may necessitate changing the order in which the infrastructure is constructed. Therefore, City and Developer will agree that if it becomes necessary or desirable to develop any portion of the Project's infrastructure in an order that differs from the order set forth in the Project approvals, Developer may propose any such modification request which the City will consider in good faith so long as the modification continues to ensure adequate infrastructure is available to serve that portion of the Project being developed subject to environmental analysis and any other regulatory actions necessary to inform the public and decision makers of the potential impacts of any deviations from the planned order set forth in Project approvals. Developer acknowledges that such a modification of the project will be subject to CEQA and may require an amendment of the Development Agreement or other entitlements. 16. MORATORIUM a. No City-imposed moratorium or other limitation (whether relating to the rate, timing, or sequencing of the development or construction of all or any part of the Project, whether imposed by ordinance, initiative, resolution, policy, order, or otherwise, and whether enacted by the City Council, an agency of City, the electorate, or otherwise) affecting parcel or subdivision maps (whether tentative, vesting tentative, or final), building permits, occupancy certificates or other entitlements to use or service (including, without limitation, water and sewer) approved, issued, or granted within City, or portions of City, following the approval of the Specific Plan, shall apply to the Project to the extent such moratorium or other limitation is in conflict with the Development Agreement; provided, however, the provisions of this Section shall not affect City’s compliance with moratoria or other limitations mandated by other governmental agencies or court-imposed moratoria or other limitations. 17. FORECE MEJEURE a. Language shall be included in the Development Agreement which exempts the City from any liability whatsoever in the event of force majeure. 18. SUBDIVISION MAPS a. The term of any approved tentative subdivision map shall be extended through the term of the Development Agreement and beyond the minimum term for such maps under the Subdivision Map Act, City regulations, and other applicable law and in the manner and subject to such notice as is required by such law. Subsequent phased tentative and final maps shall be processed in accordance with Packet Pg 405 12 FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH 071928\8719071v2 9 180317.1 applicable law, including applicable City standards and regulations Amendments to any approved subdivision maps shall not extend the term of the Development Agreement. 19. SUBSEQUENT APPROVALS a. Applications for approval of building and architectural plans shall include a final package of materials, including a site plan identifying the building location, floor plans, exterior materials and colors, vertical dimensions, hardscape and landscape concepts, and fenestration in accordance with the requirements of the Specific Plan. Any deviation from the requirements of the Specific Plan of these items shall be subject to review and approval by the Architectural Review Commission pursuant to adopted design standards and guidelines. Developer will incorporate construction elements that reduce potable water and energy consumption, utilize “state of the art” irrigation systems, and offer access to solar energy options required by the applicable Building Code in effect at the time each building permit is issued for development of the Project. Buildings shall incorporate non- reflective roofing material and roof-mounted equipment to minimize glare impacts on overflying aircraft. b. City shall approve, consistently with applicable law, a Rough Grading Plan and allow rough grading of the land subject to each final subdivision map before its approval and recordation subject to conditions as determined by the Community Development Director. A rough grading permit will comply with all applicable approvals and be subject to regulations to ensure public health and safety. Furthermore, issuance of a rough grading permit will be subject to the Community Development Director’s determination that Developer is working diligently and cooperatively to move the Project toward full permits and construction. c. Public and private parks will be subject to Parks and Recreation Commission review and approval. Plans will include (at a minimum) landscape, irrigation, hardscape, park furniture, and play equipment, along with proposed public art, all consistent with applicable City regulations. 20. ASSIGNMENT AND TRANSFERS a. Developer may transfer the Property (or portions of the Property) and the rights and responsibilities of the Development Agreement in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and City standards and regulations. However, in implementing such transfers, the Development Agreement may require the original landowner to remain fully responsible for all Developer obligations under the Development Agreement (e.g., construction of infrastructure and obligation for public benefits), unless City is satisfied that the subsequent landowner has the resources and experience to meet these obligations. Restrictions on transfer shall not apply to a transfer by Developer to an affiliate of Developer. 21. ANNUAL REVIEW a. The Community Development Director shall review compliance with the Development Agreement at time intervals specified in the Development Agreement, but not less than once every twelve months, as required by California Packet Pg 406 12 FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH 071928\8719071v2 10 180317.1 Government Code section 65865.1. The purpose of the review shall be to determine whether the terms or conditions of the Development Agreement are being met. 22. INDEMNIFICATION a. The Development Agreement shall include an indemnification provision, in which Developer agrees to defend, indemnify, save, and hold harmless City and its elected and appointed boards, commissions, officers, agents, and employees from any and all claims, costs, and liability for any damages, personal injury, or death, which may arise, directly or indirectly, from Developer’s, or Developer’s contractors’, subcontractors’, agents’, or employees’ operations under the Development Agreement, whether such operations be performed by Developer or by any of Developer’s contractors or subcontractors or by any one or more persons directly or indirectly employed by or acting as agent for Developer or any of Developer’s contractors or subcontractors. 23. VESTED RIGHTS a. During the term of the Development Agreement, Developer shall have a vested right to develop the Project as defined in the Project approvals in accordance with the applicable rules, regulations, and policies identified in the Development Agreement. City agrees not to take any actions, formal or informal, prior to annexation that would negatively impact the existing entitlements on the Property. If state or federal laws or regulations enacted after execution of the Development Agreement prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of the Development Agreement, City will modify or suspend the Development Agreement as required by California Government Code section 65869.5 only to the extent necessary to comply with such laws or regulations. Subsequent City ordinances, regulations, and requirements applicable to the Development Agreement shall be governed by City Municipal Code section 17.94.160, and the Development Agreement may be amended pursuant to City Municipal Code section 17.94.190 and California Government Code section 65868. 24. EXTRAORDINARY PUBLIC BENEFITS a. The Development Agreement shall identify and include extraordinary public benefits, such as infrastructure improvements, public open space, or monetary payments such as “in lieu” fees, in exchange for certainty related to Developer’s entitlements and other considerations conferred by the Development Agreement. Extraordinary public benefits are those that exceed the exactions that may be required for development under City’s Subdivision Map Ordinance or other City land use regulations. b. Developer shall be required to share financial information with City and/or an independent third party selected by the City as its representative if necessary for City’s evaluation of the financial capacity of the Project and/or Developer to provide the extraordinary public benefits referenced in the Development Agreement. City shall maintain such data in confidence as permitted by California Government Code section 6254, subdivisions (h), (i) & (n), and California Government Code section 6255. Packet Pg 407 12 FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH 071928\8719071v2 11 180317.1 25. LOCALLY ADOPTED REQUIREMENTS a. The Development Agreement shall comply with City Municipal Code Chapter 17.94. 26. DEFAULT, CURE, AND REMEDIES a. The Development Agreement will include standard terms specifying how either City or Developer may enforce it; provided, however, that in no event shall City be liable for damages for any breach of the Development Agreement. Developer’s remedy against City for breach shall be limited to specific performance. Packet Pg 408 12 THE Newspaper of the Central Coast 3825 South Higuera • Post Office Box 112 • San Luis Obispo, In The Superior Court of The State of California In and for the County of San Luis Obispo AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION AD #3135394 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ss. County of San Luis Obispo I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen and not interested in the above entitled matter; I am now, and at all times embraced in the publication herein mentioned was, the principal clerk of the printers and publishers of THE TRIBUNE, a newspaper of general Circulation, printed and published daily at the City of San Luis Obispo in the above named county and state; that notice at which the annexed clippings is a true copy, was published in the above-named newspaper and not in any supplement thereof — on the following dates to wit; JUNE 23, 2017 that said newspaper was duly and regularly ascertained and established a newspaper of general circulation by Decree entered in the Superior Court of San Luis Obispo County, State of California, on June 9, 1952, Case #19139 under the Government Code of the State of California. I certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. (Sigr6ture of Principal Clerk) DATE: JUNE 23, 2017 AD COST: $400.20 %CE t'I,ji Crf OF SfIR LU S OBIM SAN LUIS OBISPO CrrY GOUNCiL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARit+IG rhe San Luis Obispo City Council invites all interested persons to attend a public hearing on Wednesday, July 5, 2017, at 6:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, Callfornla, relative to the following: 1. Certify the Final EnviMnmerttal Impact Report, adopt appro- priate California Efrvironmeatal Qualify Act Findings and State- ment of overriding Consideratiom to allow [or potential project approval, and adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan; 2. Find the proposod San Luis Ranch Specific Plan project corn sistsnt with General Plan policies: 3. Approve the proposed Specific Plan and related project entk tlements, including a General Pian Amendment and vesting Tentative Tract Map No, 3m; 4, Approve the Term Sheet for the project to use as the basis fora pevelopment Agreement: and 5, Initiate annexation of the project site by aulhodZing staff to submit an appEication for annexation of the project site to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo). For more Information on this item, you ase Invited to nomad Brian Leveille of the City's Community Devaloprnard Department at ;805] 781-7166 or try email atbleveilies ks�.o The City Council may also discuss Other hearings or business items before or after the items listed above, If you Challenge the proposed project in court, you may be limited to raising only those "uas you or someone else raised at the public hearing desCri- bed in this notice, or in written Correspondence delivered to the City Council at. or prior to, the public hearing. Repons for this meeting will be availah£e for review in the City Clerk's Office and online at www.slocittiorg on Wednesday. June 28.2017. Please call the City Clerk's Office at (805) 781.7100 for more information. The City Council meeting Wil be televised WE Ion Charter Cable Channel 20 and live streaming on Carrie Gallagher City Clerk City of San Luis Obispo Jurr. 23, 2017 3135394 San Luis Ranch Specific Plan1035 Madonna RoadSPEC-ANNX-ER-1502-2015Public Hearing for the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Project July 5, 2017Applicant: Coastal Community BuildersRepresentatives: Marshall Ochylski, Rachel Kovesdi07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Recommendation (see Resolution starting on Packet Page 210)1. Consider the following recommended actions and provide direction to staff:Certify the Final EIR, adopt appropriate CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations to allow for potential project approval, and adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan;Find the proposed San Luis Ranch Specific Plan project consistent with General Plan policies;Approve the proposed Specific Plan and related project entitlements, including a General Plan Amendment and Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 3096;Initiate annexation of the project site through an application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo); andProvide comments and conceptually approve the Term Sheet for the project and authorize negotiation of a Development Agreement consistent with the Term Sheet 2.Continue the meeting to a date certain, July 18, 2017, to allow additional project financial analysis to occur.07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation City Council ActionsReview Specific Plan and Related EntitlementsConsider Planning Commission and other Advisory Body RecommendationsTake Public InputConsider Project Approval07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Project Summary07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Project Site and Location07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Project DescriptionSpecific Plan, General Plan Amendment/Pre-Zoning, and Development Plan/Tentative Tract Map for the 131-acre project siteSpecific Plan will guide land use, circulation, parks and open space, infrastructure, and architecture/design07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Project Components and EntitlementsSan Luis Ranch Specific PlanGeneral Plan Amendment/Pre-ZoningDevelopment Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract MapAnnexationTerm Sheet/Development Agreement07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Proposed Project Phasing07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Proposed Project PhasingSix PhasesPhases 1-3 would be residentialPhases 4-6 would be non-residentialNecessary infrastructure and roadways built with each phase Construction to begin in 2018Completion occurs as market factors allow07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Advisory Body Review and Recommendations07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Planning Commission Review Considered on nine occasions from 2014-17Once during pre-applicationTwice to review preliminary draft version of the projectThree times during the EIR processThree times to consider the current project Unanimous recommendation of approval on June 7, 2017Includes all entitlements, including map as conditionedIncludes additional recommendations to modify Specific Plan (in attached resolution)07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Other City Advisory Body ReviewArchitectural Review Commission (ARC)Three reviews from Nov 2015 to May 2017June 5, 2017. Recommended approval of Design Guidelines to City Council (consistent residential projects in first 2 phases may not need additional ARC review)Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC)Twice reviewed – in January and May 2017May 15, 2017. Concurrence with proposed SP historic preservation approach and policy consistency07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Other City Advisory Body ReviewBicycle Advisory Committee (BAC)November 19, 2015. Preliminary Draft SP reviewJanuary 19, 2017. Conceptual concurrence with Draft SP as revised Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC)February 3, 2016. Preliminary Draft SP Review; input reflected in EIR and revised SPProject Condition 35 confirms park-in-lieu fees to address developed parkland acreage shortfall of 3.0 acres 07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Airport Land Use Commission ReviewPreliminary review in February and March 2017April 19, 2017 – ALUC finds project consistentFound project as consistent with ALUP, subject to conditions (land use restrictions)These conditions are now included in updated Specific Plan07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Final Environmental Impact Report and CEQA Findings07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation CEQA ProcessApril 1, 2014. City Council authorizes EIR preparationOctober 26, 2015. Notice of Preparation/Initial StudyDecember 9, 2016. Draft EIR released (45-day review period; subsequently extended to 52 days)January 30, 2017. 52-day public review period ends 07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation CEQA ProcessMarch 3, 2017. Portion of DEIR (Energy Demand Impacts section) recirculated for 45 days April 17, 2017. Recirculation public review period endsMarch through May 2017. Responses to comments lead to modification of some analysis and mitigation measures. No new impacts introduced, or changes in the level of severity of previously-identified impacts. May 16, 2017. Final EIR released, including responses to comments and changes from Draft EIR07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation CEQA Environmental Resources Analyzed in Draft and Final EIRAestheticsAgricultural ResourcesAir Quality & Greenhouse Gas EmissionsBiological ResourcesCultural ResourcesHazards & Hazardous MaterialsHydrology & Water QualityLand Use/Policy ConsistencyNoiseRecreationTransportation & TrafficWater ResourcesEnergy Use07-05-2017 Item 12, Staff Presentation07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Transportation35%35%20%10%~ 17,000 Daily Trips~ 1,600 Peak Hr Trips07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation TransportationMadonna & Dalidio / PradoLOVR & FroomHiguera & Prado07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Recommended Condition:The Intersections of Madonna & Dalidio/Prado and LOVR & Froom shall be designed as protected intersections per NACTO guidelines unless otherwise determined to be infeasible. If determined to be infeasible these intersections shall include augmented bicycle treatments under NACTO guidance.07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation TransportationRecommended Condition:The applicant shall fund monitoring of Hwy 101 mainline merge, diverge, and weave level of service between Marsh & LOVR at occupancy of 100 units and again at occupancy of 200 units during phase 1 of the project. If deemed necessary by the City and Caltrans components of the Prado Road Interchange Project, such as ramp metering or auxiliary lanes, may be advanced.07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Final EIR ConclusionsNo new impacts or change in level of severity of previously identified impactsPrimary change to Draft EIR –Refinement of Mitigation MeasuresSignificant and Unavoidable (Class I) Impacts remain the same as in Draft EIRSpecific Plan incorporates mitigation measures 07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Final EIR ConclusionsClass I (Significant Unavoidable Impacts)Air QualityCultural ResourcesLand Use (certain policies; since found consistent)NoiseTransportation07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Significant and Unavoidable (Class I) ImpactsAir QualityClean Air Plan consistency (AQ-1)Cumulative impacts related to air qualityMitigationConstruction measures to control dust and diesel emissions, low-VOC architectural coatingsOperational emission control measures and off-site mitigation funding consistent with SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Significant and Unavoidable (Class I) ImpactsCultural ResourcesElimination of San Luis Ranch farm complex (CR-1)Cumulative impacts related to historic resourcesMitigation/Project FeaturesHistorical Structure Relocation and Reconstruction Plan (saves and reuses three of the most important buildings)Archival documentation of historic buildingsInformational display of historic resources in the proposed new Agricultural Heritage FacilityConstruction monitoring for archaeological and Native American resources07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Significant and Unavoidable (Class I) ImpactsLand UsePotential inconsistency with General Plan policies related to meeting multi-modal transportation objectives (LU-1)Mitigation/Project FeaturesMitigation T-6 and T-7 (traffic calming, roundabouts)Planning Commission recommends tying fees to modal split goalsWith mitigation and conditions, project subsequently determined to be consistent with key policies07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Significant and Unavoidable (Class I) ImpactsNoiseShort-term construction noise (N-1)Mitigation/Project FeaturesConstruction noise reduction measuresConstruction vehicle travel routeConstruction activity timingEquipment best management practicesNeighboring property owner notificationCommercial noise attenuation (HVAC shielding, parking lot orientation, noise barriers)07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Significant and Unavoidable (Class I) ImpactsTransportationProject and cumulative impacts to intersection capacity at Los Osos Valley Road/Froom Ranch Way (T-2; T-9)Impacts to the Higuera Street segment between Prado and Madonna Road (T-3)Project and cumulative impacts to intersection capacity at Madonna Road/Dalidio Drive (T-8; T-9)Cumulative impacts to the U.S. 101 segment between Los Osos Valley Road and Madonna Road (T-10)07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Final EIR Certification and CEQA Findings Final EIR must be certified to allow project approvalIncludes Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramCEQA Findings must be adoptedFindings are the link between the FEIR and the projectDescribes how the mitigation measures are carried forward in the projectIncludes a Statement of Overriding Considerations for Significant Unavoidable (Class I) impactsIncluded as part of Resolution (Attachment 1)07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Statement of Overriding Considerations Provision of new Residential and Commercial UsesProvision of a Variety of Housing Types for all Income LevelsOpen Space and Agricultural ProtectionProvision of Park and Recreational FacilitiesWell-Planned Neighborhood Would Reduce Per-Capita Vehicle TripsProvision of New JobsTransient Occupancy TaxNational Flood Insurance Program Rating Improvement Implementation of the General Plan07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation General Plan Guidance andPolicy Consistency07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Land Use Element Policy 8.1.407-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Land Use Element Policy 8.1.4a. Land for Prado Road connection must be providedb. Multi-modal Circulation needs to be includedc. Circulation not to bifurcate onsite Agricultured. Transit hub requirede. Maintain agricultural views from 101f. Maintain agricultural and open space resources onsiteg. Ag buffers (when needed) need to be placed on non-ag landsh. Integrate onsite ag uses with developmenti. Include walkable retail and bike/ped connectionsj. Commercial parking shall be visually screened to the extent possiblek. Neighborhood commercial for residential uses shall be providedl. Flood issues need to be addressed onsitem. Land uses need to be in keeping with applicable ALUC regulationsn. Historic evaluation of onsite farm structures is required.07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Policy ConsistencyKey General Plan PoliciesSpecific Plan is based on LU Policy 8.1.4Discussed and Analyzed in Section 4.9 of the Final EIRFEIR Consistency AnalysisProject is Consistentwith all City policies with prescribed mitigation measures07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Term Sheet and Development Agreement07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Term SheetProvides the basis for a Development AgreementDevelopment Agreement is a legal tool per Government Code Sections 65864-65869.5 to allow public agenciesto gain public improvements beyond those related to project impacts in exchange for more development certaintyDevelopment Agreement is required in order for other entitlements to take effect. DA does not take effect until: Other project entitlements are approved, including annexationThere is a detailed infrastructure financing plan to allow for implementation07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Term SheetTerm Sheet covers 26 points, including:Length of termDedication of public landsWater rightsInfrastructure requirementsNew taxes, fees and exactionsMoratoriumPublic benefits07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Term SheetTerm Sheet/Development Agreement does not change development parameters, but addresses implementationIf approved, Term Sheet will be used as the basis for a Development AgreementThis will be reviewed by Planning Commission and approved by City CouncilReview and consideration of approval likely in Fall 201707-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Development Plan andVesting Tentative Tract Map07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract MapImplementsa portion of the Specific Plan Addresses future residential development in Phases 1 and 2 and required infrastructureIncludes development details: lot locations, roadways, drainage, grading, other infrastructure, and more118 Conditions of Approval included in Resolution Address fire safety, transportation, infrastructure, easements and dedications, utilities, air quality, historic structure relocation, affordable housing, natural resource protection and moreFuture Tract Map(s) would be needed for multi-family residential and commercial development (Phases 3-6)07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract MapFuture Tract Map(s) would be needed for multi-family and commercial development (Phases 3-6)07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation ParksPolicy 8.1.4 requires 5.8 acres of developed parklandProject provides 2.8 acres of developed parklandProject to provide in-lieu fees for 3.0 acres of developed parkland07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Tree Removals & Replanting244 Total removals (230 eucalyptus)582 Trees to remain within creek corridors Removals in riparian zones (based on Althouse & Meade recommendations – tree health & safety)Riparian trees require 10:1 replacement for trees over 24-inch DBH (BIO-2(b) 3:1 others2:1 replacement in riparian habitat with replacements as part of Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP –Bio-2(a)Street tree requirement 1 tree per 35 feet07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Prado Road ConnectionLand Use and Circulation Elements call for overpass or interchangeEIR concluded that exiting infrastructure and proposed project improvements would allow first phase to be developed without overpass or interchangeOutset of Phase 2 development would require overpass and NB rampsFull interchange needed (addition of SB ramps) to mitigate full City buildout and regional growth07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Prado Road ConnectionInterchange is a City lead project in cooperation with CaltransOverpass and NB ramps planned for 2021-22; coincides with Phase 2 of developmentMap condition prohibits Phase 2 development unless funding is in hand to allow City to begin construction of interchange07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Project Financing07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Project FinancingProject will provide substantial phased infrastructureReimbursed for portions beyond fair shareWill pay fair share fees upfront for other needed improvementsFees and FinancingTo be in accordance with Specific PlanFees and financing mechanisms to be determined through updated Public Facilities Financing Plan (in preparation)Cannot be completed until Citywide Capital Facilities Fee Program Update (AB 1600) is completed07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Infrastructure Financing StrategyPrimary Funding MechanismsDevelopment Impact FeesCommunity Facilities District (CFD)Possible Ancillary Funding MechanismsCity/County Tax ExchangeEnhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD)Developer FinancingLandscape and Lighting DistrictHomeowner Association Fees07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Community Facilities District (CFD)CFD anticipated for project as part of City Financial PlanDevelopment must “pay its own way” Fiscal analysis shows phases 1-3 revenues less than expenditures; but by phase 6, revenues will exceed expendituresCFD needed to fund the interim revenue shortfall in early project phases07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Fiscal ImpactFiscal impact analysis preparedAt full buildout, project would have net positive fiscal impactestimated to generate $2.5M per year with $1.5M annual service costs (2017 dollars)First three phases show net negative revenue, so CFD needed to make up interim shortfall07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Next StepsPrepare Development AgreementPlanning Commission to consider Development Agreement City Council to approve Development AgreementAnnexationCity Council to forward annexation request to LAFCoLAFCo to consider City’s annexation applicationAB 1600 Update and Establish CFDJoint Planning Commission/City Council study sessionCity Council to approve CFD; required to implement Specific PlanProject Development07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Alternatives to Project ApprovalContinue consideration of project entitlementsDirect changes to the project proposalDeny the project07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Recommendation (see Resolution starting on Packet Page 210)Certify the Final EIR, adopt appropriate CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations to allow for potential project approval, and adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan;Find the proposed San Luis Ranch Specific Plan project consistent with General Plan policies;Approve the proposed Specific Plan and related project entitlements, including a General Plan Amendment and Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 3096;Initiate annexation of the project site through an application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo); andProvide comments and conceptually approve the Term Sheet for the project and authorize negotiation of a Development Agreement consistent with the Term Sheet 07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation Existing City Park Ratios152 acres of parkland in City (of which 34 neighborhood parks)3.3 acres per 1,000 residents.7 neighborhood parks per 1,000San Luis Ranch is providing 2.16 acres/thousand residents of neighborhood parkLUCE EIR identified existing shortfall CitywideSan Luis Ranch EIR concludes that the project would not exacerbate shortfalls with payment of in-lieu fees to make up the project specific shortfall07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation San Luis Ranch Requirement5.8 acres - San Luis Ranch Policy Minimum (LUE 8.1.4)2.8 acres provided on-siteIn-lieu fees calculated to make up for 3-acre shortfallApplicant also paying improvement costs per unit, which effectively doubles the normal in-lieu fee to address REC-1 mitigation measureConcept discussed and supported by the Planning Commission07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation 07-05-2017 Item 12, Staff Presentation07-05-2017, Item 12 Staff Presentation 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation Site History Longtime County "donut-hole” - •Over 90 Years: Dalidio family ranch •2004:Marketplace development approved by City after more than 10 years of review •2006:Measure J passes with 65% countywide voter approval •2009: 2nd Court of Appeals reaffirms Measure J Marketplace entitlements with no further discretionary review and limit of $4.5m for public infrastructure This property has been the subject of contentious discussions for decades. San Luis Ranch is the legacy solution that provides certainty, along with the blend of housing, recreation, multi-modality and agriculture to celebrate San Luis Obispo’s heritage and embrace the future.HWY 101BROADFOOTHILLOR C U T T BUCKLEYHIGUERA TANK FARM S A N T A R O S A JO H N SON LOS O S O S V A L L E Y MILL O C O N N O R MARS H T O R O PRADO MAD O N NA SOUTHCALIFORNIA VACHELLEDNAALT E G R E S S ELKSUNNAMEDVIA CARTASAN LUISELLA BISHOPAUGU S T A HOOVEREVANS LAURELMIOS S I BU L LOC K SEQU OI A DRIVEWAY D E L R I O TIBURON ONTARIOPALM OC E A N A I R EBLUE GRANITEPI N N A C L E S HW Y 1 POLY CANYONCASALIZZIE S A C R A M E N T O MEISSNER COUNTRY DAVENPORT CREEKSUBURBAN CIDER SLACK LONGDIRT ROAD INDUST RI A L DANA BEEBEEIRIS D A L I D I O ISABELLA FI X L IN I OAK HIND SI E R R A VI A L A G U N A V I S T A FERRINIG A L L E O N ACCES S R O A D HANSEN KENDALL CORRIDAAL HILHOPKINSKLAMATHDALY D E E R PART N E R SERPA RANCH LAG U N A ETO KINGFELTON CLARION MELLOE L M E R C A D O AERO TRUCKEE MCMILLANFIERO CANYON ALRITA JOHE ESPERANZARAMONA VI S T A L A G O HARMONY CREEKSIDEMO N T R O S E BEECHS UN S E T TOLOSA U N N AM E D UNNAM E DDRIVEWAYDRIVEWAY ACCES S R O A D BROADA C C E S S RO A D UNNAME D SLACK UNNA MED UNNAMEDUNNAMED ACCE S S RO AD PALM DRIVEWAY DR I V EW A Y UNNAME D A C C E S S R O A D © OpenStreetMap (and) contributors, CC-BY-SA, County of San Luis Obispo Legend Major Roads Service Area Sphere of Influence Copyright:© 2009 ESRI City of San Luis Obispo City Limits & Sphere of Influence Adopted: April 2012 Prepared By SLOLAFCO Name: City of San Luis Obispo_SOI Bndy Date: 2/6/2014 San Luis Obispo County San L u i s O b i s p o C o u n t y S a n L u i s O b i s p o C o u n t y San t a B a r b a r a C o u n t y Monterey County K e r n C o u n t y - San Luis Obispo San L u i s O b i s p o C o u n t y S a n L u i s O b i s p o C o u n t y K e r n C o u n t y 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation Measure J –Existing Entitlements and Zoning (13 acres) 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation Existing Measure J vs. San Luis Ranch Density 12:00 a.m.-6:00 a.m.6:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.12:00 p.m.-6:00 p.m.6:00 p.m.-12:00 a.m.12:00 a.m.-6:00 a.m. Flight Activity 1 4 9 9 1 SLR Persons at Site 1,805 2,183 2,183 2,500 1,805 Measure J Persons at Site 540 4,741 4,741 3,000 540 1 4 9 9 1 1,805 2,183 2,183 2,500 1,805 540 4,741 4,741 3,000 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Persons at SiteNumber of Commercial FlightsSan Luis Ranch vs Measure J Development 12:00 a.m.-6:00 a.m.6:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.12:00 p.m.-6:00 p.m.6:00 p.m.-12:00 a.m.12:00 a.m.-6:00 a.m. SLR Persons at Site 1,805 2,183 2,183 2,500 1,805 Measure J Persons at Site 540 4,741 4,741 3,000 540 1,805 2,183 2,183 2,500 1,805 540 4,741 4,741 3,000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 Persons at SiteSan Luis Ranch vs Measure J Development 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation Years in the Making Community involvement creating a solution-driven project: •2012-2014 LUCE Participation (Task Force, Planning Commission, and Council meetings) •2014-17 Community Outreach and Workshops •2014-17 Airport Land Use Commission* •2015-17 Architectural Review Committee* •2015-17 Bicycle Advisory Committee •2015-17 Cultural Heritage Committee * •2016-17 Parks and Recreation Commission •2015-17 Planning Commission* * Votes of Unanimous Support 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation Sustainable Communities – 2014 LUCE Goals •Provide diverse housing affordable to residents. •Create more sustainable communities, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and support all modes of circulation. •Increase the health and well-being of residents in the City of San Luis Obispo by expanding access to healthy food and community design that encourages walking and biking. •Recognize and enhance the importance of farming to the economy of the planning area. 6 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation 2014 City Land Use Element Goals include: Relieve jobs/workforce housing imbalance and reduce commuting impacts (regional traffic, air quality, GHG)- •Without encroaching into greenbelt •Without "Upzoning" existing neighborhoods •Instead, utilizing high-density infill sites 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation Land Use Element Policy 8.1.4 8 ü a.Land for Prado Road connection must be provided ü b.Multi-modal Circulation needs to be included ü c.Circulation not to bifurcate onsite Agriculture ü d.Transit hub required ü e.Maintain agricultural views from 101 ü f.Maintain agricultural and open space resources onsite ü g.Ag buffers (when needed) need to be placed on non-ag lands ü h.Integrate onsite ag uses with development ü i.Include walkable retail and bike/ped connections ü j.Commercial parking shall be visually screened to the extent possible ü k.Neighborhood commercial for residential uses shall be provided ü l.Flood issues need to be addressed onsite ü m.Land uses need to be in keeping with applicable ALUC regulations ü n.Historic evaluation of onsite farm structures is required. 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation Infill Project Site with Adjacent Uses 1050 Southwood Drive San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P 805.544.7407 F 805.544.3863 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation “Core Four” Principles: 10 •Agriculture •Outdoor Recreation •Diverse Housing •Multi-modality Something for everyone in our community: 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation •Whole neighborhood is agri-centric •>50 acres of on-site food production •Community participation and education •Farm-to-table, healthy lifestyle •Community gardens •Harvest baskets and CSA •Edible landscape •Unanimously supported by CHC 11 Agricultural Heritage Learning Center 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation Open Spaces and Pedestrian Path Connectivity Transit Stop Fitness Loop Bridge Connection Commercial Connections Heritage Connections to Hotel Center Connection Pedestrian Connection Connections To Parks/OS Sidewalk Connection Community Garden Highway 101 Overpass Pedestrian Connection To Fitness Loop Froom Ranch Way Bridge 1 Multi-modal and Recreational Circulation Pedestrian -oriented, interconnected walking and biking paths, transit hub 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation Multimodal Improvements •Bicycle and Walking Paths •Bob Jones Connection •Green Spokes Connections to Central Neighborhood Parks and Open Space •Bike connections to Madonna Road, Dalidio Drive and Froom Ranch Way •EV Outlets throughout project •Public Transit Center and Stops 13 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation Off-site Multimodal Improvements -Example Completes Madonna Class I Bike Lanes from Oceanaire to 101/Madonna Interchange 14 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation Multimodal Improvements 15 More than Fair Share – •Provides tens of millions of $$$ for infrastructure •Addresses existing deficiencies throughout southern portion of the City •Includes Prado Road connection over 101 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation •Lot sizes almost 50% smaller than City standard •Zoned for multi-modal transportation, not single- occupancy automobiles •Neighborhood Diversity •Reduced lot sizes allow for more Ag land and Open Space •Less Maintenance •Workforce Pricing Standard City Lot sizes: Proposed lot sizes: R1 typ. 6,000sf lot NG 10 typ. 3,200sf lot R2 typ. 5,000sf lot NG 23 typ. 2,400sf lot 1 Workforce -Affordable Housing by Design 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation Workforce by Design -Density Comparison Existing Arbors Neighborhood: Same number of Residences Existing Oceanaire South Neighborhood: Same number of Residences *To meet LUCE and State Climate goals, affordability; respect site constraints (ALUC safety zone, open space, ag, and drainage areas) 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation DESIGN: ü Infill location close to jobs and services ü Small Lots –Single-Family Residential (SFR) lots ranging from 1,000 – 3,200 square feet, some with Secondary Dwelling Units (SDUs) ü Diverse Product -Housing units range from 250 - 2,200 square feet, 0 – 4 bedrooms (primarily 2 to 3 bedrooms) ü Strategic, efficient infrastructure –reducing commuting time & cost CONDITIONS: ü Overnight parking in garages only for SFR units -no driveway or street parking ü SDUs require SFR primary occupancy ü All rentals required to be within 10% of Moderate Income Level PROGRAMS: ü Developer Buy-Back/No Flip Policy for All Phases: right of 1st refusal, ½ profit penalty ü City of San Luis Obispo & Private Bank Equity Share, 5-year depreciation equity ü Local Heroes discount & financing for public safety, hospital workers, teachers ü Lottery Events -open to: 1) Current City of SLO workers and residents 2) Current SLO County workers and residents 1 Workforce Housing by Design GOALS: ü Workforce -Oriented, aimed at professionals/public service ü Entry-level and Fixed-Income ü Long-term Residency 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation 1 Affordable Housing GOALS: ü Affordable (a mix of housing types to meet the City’s requirements on-site for Very Low, Low and Moderate incomes) ü Fixed-Income (for those on fixed income who cannot meet Market Rate financing requirements) ü Long-term Residency AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGIES: Diverse Product Types: ü Secondary Dwelling Units (SDUs) 400 to 450 sq. ft. integrated within the neighborhoods ü Single Room Occupancies (SROs) 200 to 250 sq. ft. located within multifamily residential ü Condominium Units located within the multifamily residential ü Single-Family Residential (SFR) integrated within the neighborhoods Deed Restricted Unit Mix: ü 22 Apartments (1 bedroom, studio) ü 4 Condominiums (2 bedroom) ü 4 SFR Townhomes (2 bedroom) ü 4 SFR integrated (3 bedroom) Programs: ü People’s Self Help ü Housing Authority of the City of San Luis Obispo ü City of San Luis Obispo Equity Share ü Private Equity Share Small Lot SDU examples 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation •Reduce commuting & greenhouse gasses •50% water use reduction •Net-Zero Energy & Water efficient design •Live where you work •Promote healthy, outdoor lifestyle •Integrated community design with ag history Sustainability •Workforce housing – jobs housing balance •Diverse housing types •Neighborhood commercial –easy walking and biking 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation Home Grown Solutions ü Substantial Workforce Housing with a Variety of Types ü Diverse Affordable On-Site Housing ü Implementing Climate Action Plan and Net Zero ü Reduction of Congestion and Resulting Greenhouse Gases on Highway 101 ü Integrated Site Layout with Homes, Services and Jobs ü Seamless Connectivity with City ü Legacy Ag Community Preserves Over 50 Contiguous Acres of Agricultural Land ü Preservation of Scenic Corridor ü 8 Acres of Public Open Space ü Bob Jones Trail Connection ü Miles of New Bike Paths ü Prado Road Extension ü Froom Ranch Way Extension ü City Sewer Line Enhancement and Other Important Infrastructure ü Historic and Ag Influenced Architecture ü Permanently Supersedes Measure J and Provides Certainty ü Eliminates County “Donut Hole” ü Implements All Aspects of the LUCE and Fulfills All Its Goals And Objectives 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation Thank You! 07-05-2017 Item 12, Applicant Presentation