Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Reading File - Specific Plan Initiation Agenda Minutes and Agenda Reports April 5, 2016Council Minutes City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo Tuesday, April 5, 2016 Regular Meeting of the City Council CALL TO ORDER A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on Tuesday, April 5, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Mayor Marx. ROLL CALL Council Members Present: Council Members John Ashbaugh, Carlyn Christianson, Dan Rivoire, Vice Mayor Dan Carpenter, and Mayor Jan Marx. Absent: None City Staff Present: Katie Lichtig, City Manager; Christine Dietrick, City Attorney; Derek Johnson, Assistant City Manager; and John Paul Maier, Assistant City Clerk; were present at Roll Call. Other staff members presented reports or responded to questions as indicated in the minutes. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council Member Christianson led the Pledge of Allegiance. PRESENTATIONS 1. PROCLAMATION - MONTH OF THE CHILD Mayor Marx presented a Proclamation to Melinda Skolowski, representing Community Action Partnership of San Luis Obispo (CAPSLO) Family Services, proclaiming April 2016, as "Month of the Child" and "Child Abuse Prevention Month" in the City of San Luis Obispo. 2. PROCLAMATION - SEXUAL ASSAULT AWARENESS MONTH Mayor Marx presented a Proclamation to Lisa Bruce, representing Respect Inspire Support Empower (RISE), proclaiming April 2016 as "Sexual Assault Awareness Month" and April 30th as "Walk a Mile In Her Shoes Day" in the City of San Luis Obispo. San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes. of April S, 2016 Page 2 3. PRESENTATION BY PETER WILLIAMSON REPRESENTING SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS SLOCOG REGARDING RIDESHARE'S BIKE MONTH Peter Williamson, representing San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG), provided a presentation on Rideshare's Bike Month and announced Bike to Work Day on Friday May 20, 2016. Mayor Marx requested to reorder the agenda to hear Council Communications and Liaison Reports before Public Comment. By consensus, the City Council reordered the agenda as requested. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS Vice Mayor Carpenter requested to agendize the Democracy Voucher Program for reconsideration at a future City Council meeting. By consensus, the City Council agreed to reconsider this item at a future Council Meeting. City Manager Lichtig announced that the matter would be placed on the agenda for April 19, 2016 at 4:00 p.m. LIAISON REPORTS Mayor Marx reported her attendance at the Regional Leadership Forum endorsed by the California Association of Councils of Governments (CALCOG), with no expense to the City. PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Kyle Jordon, San Luis Obispo, urged the Council to direct City staff to make safety improvements to the railroad crossing at California and Foothill a priority. Dia Hurd, San Luis Obispo, expressed gratitude to City Staff for conducting a compatibility workshop, shared concerns about traffic impacts from new developments and urged the Council to make 71 Palomar a City park. David Brodie, San Luis Obispo, asked the Council to develop a strategy to ensure the viability of locally owned, small businesses in the downtown. Allan Cooper, San Luis Obispo, shared concern about environmental impacts (water and climate) because of growth and new development. Bob Lucas, San Luis Obispo, voiced concerns regarding the reliability of water resources. Biz Steinberg expressed appreciation for the "Month of the Child" proclamation and to the Parks and Recreation Department for providing quality programs, like "Children's Day". Claudia Andersen, San Luis Obispo, expressed concerns about impacts to neighborhoods caused by college students. San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of April 5, 2016 Page 3 Cheryl Mclean, San Luis Obispo, mentioned the "100 Anniversary Find Your Park" initiative and spoke about the positive benefits of spending time outdoors in public parks, trails and outdoor spaces. She urged the City to consider neighborhood parks in the General Plan. Mila Vujovich-LaBarre, San Luis Obispo, addressed water quality/availability and climate change, and urged the City to explore some form of mitigation. CONSENT AGENDA ACTION: MOTION BY VICE MAYOR CARPENTER, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0 to approve the consent Calendar Items 4 through 6, with Council Member Ashbaugh registering a recusal on Item 6 due to a potential conflict of interest (business interest of spouse). 4. WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES CARRIED 5-0 to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate. 5. TERRACE HILL AND WASH WATER TANKS MAINTENANCE SPECIFICATION NO. 91425 CARRIED 5-0 to: 1. Approve a transfer of $57,000 from the Water Storage Reservoirs Maintenance and Tank Master Account to the design phase of the Terrace Hill and Wash Water Tanks Maintenance project account; and 2. Approve a transfer of $26,484 from the Water Completed Projects Account to the design phase of the Terrace Hill and Wash Water Tanks Maintenance project account. 6. REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT FOR A POTENTIAL PARKING STRUCTURE ASSOCIATED WITH THE SANTA ROSA INFILL PROJECT CARRIED 4-0-1 (COUNCIL MEMBER ASHBAUGH RECUSED) to: 1. Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute a Reimbursement Agreement with 1144 Higuera Investments, LLC in a final form subject to the approval of the City Attorney, reimbursing the City for consultant work related to the study of City participation in the potential parking structure associated with the Santa Rosa Infill Project; and 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the consultant contracts associated with the reimbursement agreement. San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of Apri15 2016 Page 4 PUBLIC HEARINGS 7. APPEAL OF A CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF APPEALS DECISION TO DENY PROPERTY OWNER'S APPEAL OF AN AMENDED NOTICE OF VIOLATION ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT PERMIT AND OTHER VIOLATIONS AT 1269 FREDER.ICKS Council Members announced the following Ex Parte Communications: Council Member Rivore met with City Staff, Council Mcmbcr Ashbaugh met with the Appellant and Mayor Marx met with Staff. Community Development Director Michael Codron, Chief Building Official Anne Schneider, Assistant City Attorney Jon Ansolabehere, Fire Marshal Rodger Maggio and Code Enforcement Officer Teresa Purring provided an in-depth staff report and recommendation to deny the appeal. Staff responded to Council questions. Matthew Boutte, attorney representing the Appellants Steven and Kathie Walker, provided background information and spoke in support of the appeal. Appellant Kathy Walker described difficulties she and her husband have experienced personally, with the property and with the City. Public Comments: The following San Luis Obispo residents spoke in favor of granting the appeal: Odile Ayral, Gary Dwyer, Linda White, Carolyn Smith, Tammy Cody, Camille Small, Brett Strickland, Sandra Rowley (Residents for Quality Neighborhoods), Mila Vujovich-LaBarre, Cheryl McLean, and Mike Clark. Michelle Tasseff spoke in support of the recommendation to deny the appeal. End of Public Comments --- Staff responded to additional Council questions regarding the history of issues and violations. Community Development Director Codron clarified that City Staff have not had access to the property since 2014 and emphasized that it is the City's intention to work with the property owners to develop a mutually acceptable abatement agreement to address the code violations. Lengthy Council discussion followed. Vice Mayor Carpenter argued in support of the appeal, noting that the situation is unique and that the Walkers want to move forward in good faith. The City Attorney provided guidance to the Council on proposed modifications to the draft resolution denying the appeal and advised that if the City and the Walkers reach an agreement, the matter need not return to the City Council. Vice Mayor Carpenter stated that he would prefer the matter come back to the Council. San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of April 5, 2016 _ _ Page 5 ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER ASHBAUGH, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 4-1 (VICE MAYOR CARPENTER VOTING NO) to adopt Resolution No. 10703 (2016 Series) entitled, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California denying an appeal of the Construction Board of Appeals' decision to deny an appeal filed by the property owner of an amended Notice of Violation for construction without a permit and other violations", as amended Section 2. Action: Modified to include language to deny the appeal; add the word "may" before "continue to exist"; strike "...and as such constitute a public nuisance, and the property owners are responsible for such violations."; and add the following language in italics "...The Property Owners are hereby directed to work with the Chief Building Official within the next ninety (90) days to complete a subsequent inspection and establish a time frame for compliance, ..." 8. REVIEW OF REQUEST TO INITIATE PREPARATION OF THE PROPOSED MADONNA ON LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD LOUR SPECIFIC PLAN WHICH INCLUDES A MIX OF RESIDENTIAL. COMMERCIAL, SENIOR HOUSING, R' kRK. AND OPEN SPACE USES (12165 AND 12393 LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD) Contract Planner Shawna Scott provided a detailed staff report. Community Development Director Codron summarized key issues, including the proponent's request to develop above the 150 -foot elevation, which is currently inconsistent with Land Use Element. Applicant John Madonna (John Madonna Construction) spoke to the merits of the proposed project. Vic Montgomery (RRM Design Group) provided a PowerPoint presentation highlighting the conceptual design for a mix of land uses within the proposed Froom/II Villagio Specific Plan. Council questions followed. Public Comments: The following San Luis Obispo residents spoke in favor of the concept design: Leslie Halls, Elliott Marshall, Rob Rossi, Dave Romero, Judie Reiner, Carl Dudley, Ken Reiner, Brian Ackerman, Cordelia Perry, Ray Walters (Principle of Villagio Communities), and Charlene Rosales. The following San Luis Obispo residents expressed concerns about the proposed project because of environmental impacts to wetlands, open space and wildlife: Neil Havlik, Mila Vujovich-LaBarre and William Waycott. End of Public Comments --- Individual Council comments followed in support of conceptual approval. San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of April 5-2016 Page 6 ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER ASHBAUGII, SECOND BY VICE MAYOR CARPENTER 5-0, as recommended by the Planning Commission, to adopt Resolution No. 10704 (2016 Series) entitled "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, authorizing initiation of an application for the Proposed Madonna on Los Osos Valley Road Specific Plan and General Plan amendments, including related actions in support of the application" and directed the applicant to present alternative development plans, observing the 150 -foot Elevation Development Limit Policy. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 11:29 p.m. The next Regular City Council Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 4:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. lLlL- Lee Puce, MMC Interim City Clerk APPROVED BY COUNCIL: 06/14/2016 Meeting Date: 4/5/2016 FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director Prepared By: Shawna Scott, Consulting Planner SUBJECT: REVIEW OF REQUEST TO INITIATE PREPARATION OF THE PROPOSED MADONNA ON LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD (LOVR) SPECIFIC PLAN, WHICH INCLUDES A MIX OF RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, SENIOR HOUSING, PARK, AND OPEN SPACE USES (12165 AND 12393 LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD) RECOMMENDATION As recommended by the Planning Commission, adopt a resolution entitled “A Resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, Authorizing Initiation of an Application for the Proposed Madonna on Los Osos Valley Road Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments, Including Related Actions in Support of the Application” (Attachment A).) SITE DATA Applicant John Madonna, John Madonna Construction Company Bob Richmond, Villagio Senior Living Representative Victor Montgomery, RRM Design Group Zoning Would require pre-zoning for Specific Plan General Plan SP-3 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Area Site Area 111 acres Environmental Status A Program-Level Final EIR was adopted for the LUCE in 2014. Project Environmental Review to begin upon project submittal. REPORT-IN-BRIEF John Madonna, the applicant, has requested Council’s authorization and initiation of the Madonna on Los Osos Valley Road (LOVR) Specific Plan Area (Area SP-3 per Land Use 8 Packet Pg. 213 Element Policy 8.1.5), which would ultimately lead to the development of the 111-acre property. In addition, the Specific Plan application package will include General Plan Amendments and related entitlements as discussed further in this report and referenced attachments. The applicant’s conceptual exhibit shows a mix of land uses including senior housing Continuing Care Retirement Community [CCRC]), multi-family housing, single-family housing, commercial retail uses, open space, and a neighborhood park. The applicant’s proposal includes components that require additional review and direction from the City Council, due to inconsistencies with the Land Use Element (LUE). This initiation request focuses on the following two key issues included in the applicant’s request, which will ultimately drive the components of the Specific Plan application submittal, if authorized. 1) The conceptual mix of uses, which differ from the vision identified in the Land Use Element for the SP-3 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Area because they include the CCRC and reduce the square footage of commercial retail uses; and, 2) The applicant’s request to develop above the 150-foot elevation, which is currently inconsistent with the Irish Hills Hillside Protection Policy identified in the LUE, and would require consideration of a General Plan Amendment to modify the current language presented in LUE Policy 6.4.7.H. DISCUSSION Site Description The project site consists of two parcels, totaling approximately 111 acres, located immediately west of Los Osos Valley Road within County of San Luis Obispo jurisdiction, and adjacent to the City limits (APNs 067-241-030 and 067-241-031). The current land use and natural setting includes livestock grazing, unpaved agricultural roads, the Irish Hills and Home Depot stormwater basins, the historic Froom Ranch Complex, John Madonna Construction office within the historic complex), staging and materials storage, quarry area, wetlands, grasslands, stands of mature trees, Froom Creek and associated tributaries, and vacant land. General Plan Guidance Regarding SP-3 and Hillside Protection The project site is described in the LUE as Madonna on Los Osos Valley Road (LOVR) Specific Plan Area (SP-3), and is subject to purpose and performance standards identified in the LUE for this area.1 The project site is also located within Hillside Planning Area H Irish Hills2 Attachment C, LUE Chapter 6 Resource Protection and Chapter 8 Special Focus Areas). 1 LUE Section 8.1.5 Special Focus Areas, SP-3, Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Area 8 Packet Pg. 214 Figure 1. Land Use Concept Showing 150-foot Elevation Line Project Description The applicant’s proposal includes the following significant project features (Attachment G, Applicant’s Project Description Statement and Applicant’s Review and Discussion of Issues and Attachment H, Applicant’s Exhibit Plan Set): 1. A mix of land uses within the Specific Plan area, including: a. 200 multi-family apartments; b. 75 attached or detached single-family dwellings, c. 25,000-45,000 sf of commercial; d. Neighborhood park associated with the Froom Ranch Historic Complex (education, community use); and e. Open space. 2. Senior housing (Continuing Care Retirement Community [CCRC]) including: a. 276 independent living apartments; b. 66 independent living villas and assisted living units; c. 122-bed skilled nursing and memory care facility; d. Common area facilities, such as a dining area/restaurant, reading room, indoor events area, outdoor recreation and activities areas (swimming pool(s), pathways, and gardens), recreation room, non-denominational chapel, physical therapy and exercise areas; e. Service, maintenance, and delivery facilities and office for staff; and f. Controlled access entry and exit security kiosk/gate house. 3. Development of the CCRC and residential uses above the 150-foot contour (see discussion in “Amendment to 150-foot Elevation Development Limit Policy” below). 4. Realignment and restoration of Froom Creek within the property boundaries, new passive recreation areas and gardens, and new active recreation areas including bike and pedestrian pathways and hiking trails connecting to the existing Irish Hills Natural Reserve. 5. Internal circulation system intended to provide for autos, trucks, service vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians, which would connect to existing transit and transportation systems and nearby commercial developments. 2 LUE Policy 6.4.7.H.: “The Irish Hills area should secure permanent open space with no building sites above the 150-foot elevation, in conjunction with any subdivision or development of the lower areas. (See also Section 8, Special Focus Areas.)” 8 Packet Pg. 215 6. Stormwater/floodplain management and riparian restoration and enhancements proposed via re-alignment and improvements to Froom Creek and existing stormwater basins. According to the applicant, there is adequate developable land below the 150-foot elevation to implement SP-3 as envisioned in the LUE, and the primary reason the applicant is requesting consideration of development above the 150-foot elevation is to also accommodate the proposed CCRC (a new use not envisioned in the LUE for SP-3). The proposed CCRC can also be accommodated below the 150-foot elevation, but not along with all of the uses envisioned for SP-3. For these reasons, a General Plan Amendment would be necessary to accommodate the applicant’s request as conceptually proposed. Planning Commission Review and Recommendation On December 9, 2015 the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed project initiation request and the applicant’s pre-application package (refer to Attachment D, Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes, December 9, 2015). Based on this initial review, the Planning Commission continued the item and requested additional information (refer to Attachment E, Directional Items Request to Applicant). The applicant responded to the information request and provided supplemental materials including amended exhibits, impact and constraints quantifications, and revised visual simulations (refer to Attachment F, Planning Commission Staff Report, January 27, 2016 Section 2.1 Response to Planning Commission). On January 27, 2016 the Planning Commission considered the additional materials, staff report, and testimony. During deliberation, the Commissioners identified comments, concerns, and recommendations, which are summarized below (refer to discussion under “Evaluation, Mix of Land Uses and Amendment to 150-foot Elevation Development Limit Policy”). With these comments noted, the Planning Commission has recommended the City Council initiate the Specific Plan on a 4-3 vote. The recommendation includes approval of initiation of the Specific Plan and associated General Plan Amendments as conceptually proposed by the applicant including the CCRC and consideration of a General Plan Amendment to modify LUE 6.4.7.H regarding development above the 150-foot contour), and direction to the applicant regarding supplemental materials for further evaluation in a formal application (see Attachment F, Planning Commission Resolution No. PC-1001-16). EVALUATION Mix of Land Uses The General Plan Land Use Element (LUE) identified a vision for this Specific Plan (SP-3) area3 which includes a compact mixed use development comprised of residential, commercial, parks, and open space/agriculture (refer to Attachment C, LUE Chapter 8 Special Focus Areas). 3 LUE Section 8.1.5 SP-3, Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Area: “The purpose of the specific plan [SP -3] is to provide design flexibility that will secure the appropriate development of the site while protecting sensitive 8 Packet Pg. 216 A comparison of LUE SP-3 standards to the applicant’s proposal is provided in the following discussion and Table 1, below. Table 1. Comparison Between LUE and Conceptual Project1 LUE SP-3 Development Standards Applicant’s Conceptual Land Use Mix Type/Designation Min-Max2 Approximate Area Conceptual Land Use Mix Approximate Area 1 Residential Mixed Use) / MDR, MHDR, HDR 200 to 350 units 8 – 29 acres 275 residential units 18 acres 2 Commercial / NC, CR 50,000 to 350,000 sf 3- 24 acres 25,000-45,000 sf3 2-3 acres 3 Parks / PARK -- 6.5 acres Neighborhood park, active and passive recreation 6.5 acres 4 Circulation and Stormwater management 8 acres Internal circulation system and stormwater management 8 acres 5 CCRC Not envisioned by SP-3 Not envisioned by SP-3 CCRC4 20 acres 6 Total Development approx.)1 25.5 – 67.5 acres -- 54.4 - 55.5 acres 7 Open Space / OS 50% 55 acres Open space, wetlands, drainages, steep vegetated slopes 55 acres 1 Please note the acreages identified in Table 2 are conceptual and approximate, and are intended to give the Council and the public a general understanding of the approximate acreage needed to accommodate a Specific Plan development based on the LUE standards and the applicant’s conceptual land use mix 2 There can be a reduction in the minimum requirement based on specific physical and/or environmental constraints. 3 The applicant has also indicated 50,000 sf of commercial uses to meet the LUE minimum standards. 4 CCRC not identified as a use envisioned for SP-3. 1. Consistent with General Plan SP-3: a. Proposed mix of land uses (except CCRC as discussed below) is consistent with General Plan SP-3 standards (see Table 1: lines 1, 2, 3, & 4). b. Residential unit count and approximate area is within the range identified by SP -3 see Table 1: Line 1) environmental resources on the site. Development on the site should be a compact, mixed use project that provides workforce housing options and neighborhood commercial uses that support pedestrian and bicycle access”. 8 Packet Pg. 217 c. Proposed Open Space consisting of 50% of the project site (see Table 1: Line 7) 2. Not Envisioned by General Plan SP-3: a. Senior Housing: CCRC (see Table 1: line 5) i. The CCRC is not specifically envisioned for SP-3 and the addition of the CCRC would require consideration of General Plan Amendments to allow this use in SP-3. ii. Portions of the CCRC and single-family residential areas are proposed to be located above the 150-foot elevation (refer to Attachment H, Exhibit B.1, Conceptual Land Uses) development limit line per LUE Policy 6.4.7.H4. See discussion in “Amendment to 150-foot Elevation Development Limit Policy” below. b. Proposed commercial square-footage is substantially less that SP-3 standards (see Table 1: line 2) Planning Commission Comments on Proposed Land Uses and Mix (Attachment F, Planning Commission Draft Minutes, January 27, 2016) 1. Inclusion of the CCRC into SP-3 Consideration of a new use (the CCRC) under SP -3 requires a General Plan Amendment. Some concerns were stated regarding the siting of a CCRC in this location, due to existing policy regarding hillside development. In addition the efforts expended during the City’s preparation and approval of the LUE did not include identification of a CCRC- type facility as part of SP-3. While the Commissioners agreed that the CCRC is a needed and important use within the City, some Commissioners expressed concern that the project site is not appropriate for this use, which may be more appropriately sited closer to downtown and other amenities, or even on the project site but below the 150-foot elevation limit. Ultimately, the Planning Commission approved a resolution recommending inclusion of the CCRC in the formal Specific Plan application (refer to Attachment F, Planning Commission Draft Minutes, and Resolution No. PC-1001-16, January 27, 2016). 2. Land Use Mix Some Commissioners stated that while the project must be assessed as a whole, it appears to be two projects in one location, as the project includes: 1) the land use components envisioned for SP-3 and 2) the CCRC, which was not envisioned for SP-3. Some concerns were identified that the project was jamming two distinctive projects into one Specific Plan, which may not be appropriate for the project site. Some Commissioners noted that potential considerations moving forward may include increasing the single- 4 LUE Policy 6.4.7.H.: “The Irish Hills area should secure permanent open space with no building sites above the 150-foot elevation, in conjunction with any subdivision or development of the lower areas. (See also [LUE] Section 8, Special Focus Areas.)” 8 Packet Pg. 218 family and multi-family housing units, reducing the park acreage, and reducing commercial areas based on the needs and connection to the residential and CCRC components of the project, if authorized. Additional details regarding the type and intent of proposed housing (i.e. workforce and affordable housing) was requested for further evaluation upon submittal of the formal application. No concerns were identified by the Planning Commission regarding the proposed reduction in commercial use square footage (refer to Attachment F, Planning Commission Draft Minutes, January 27, 2016). Amendment to 150-foot Elevation Development Limit Policy 1. Policy Background The language specifying the 150-foot elevation development limit was carried forward into the LUE from the City’s previously adopted Land Use Element (adopted August 23, 1994 and revised June 15, 2010). The 1994 Land Use Element included a Hillside Planning Policies and Standards section; the purpose of which was to “protect and preserve scenic hillside areas and natural features, set boundaries for commercial and residential development in sensitive hillside areas by creating a permanent open space greenbelt at the edge of the community, and to protect the health, safety and welfare of community residents by directing development away from areas with hazards”.5 The Hillside Policies identified in the 2014 LUE focus on “where and how some hillsides may be developed” (refer to Attachment C, LUE Chapter 6 Resource Protection). According to General Plan LUE 6.4.2, development limits and special design standards for hillside areas are intended to “cause development to avoid encroachment into sensitive habitats or unique resources (as defined in the Conservation and Open Space Element)6), and public health and safety problems related to utility service, access, wildland fire hazard, erosion, flooding, and landslides and other geologic hazards”; these policies also help protect the city’s scenic setting including gateways into the city.7 Development is required to be located within the development limit line unless a location outside the line “is necessary to protect public health and safety”.8 Land outside of the development limit line is required to be protected as permanent open space.9 Additional information regarding the County of San Luis Obispo’s Sensitive Resources Area and Geologic Study Area designations for the project site is available in the December Planning Commission Staff Report (Attachment D, Planning Commission Staff Report, December 9, 2015, Section 4.1.a. Initiation Request, Alteration of 150-foot maximum site development elevation, Staff Discussion). 5 Final Environmental Impact Report Land Use Element/Circulation Element Updates, August 1994 6 Refer to COSE Chapter 3 (Cultural Heritage), Chapter 7 (Natural Communities), Chapter 8 (Open Space), and Chapter 9 (Views). 7 LUE Section 6.4.2 Development Limits 8 LUE Section 6.4.3 Development Standards 9 LUE Section 6.4.4 Parcels Crossing the Limit Lines 8 Packet Pg. 219 Additionally, the Land Use and Circulation Element Update (LUCE) EIR provides an analysis of each proposed Specific Plan area, including the project site. Potential visual impacts identified in the LUCE EIR, specific to SP-3, include the following: a. Development of the site, as outlined in the proposed LUCE Update, could result in increased urbanization of the existing viewshed along the Los Osos Valley Road and could potentially block or obstruct existing public views. However, implementation of the proposed LUCE Update policies, and the existing City policies identified below, would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. b. Development of the area, as outlined in the proposed LUCE Update, has the potential to result in increased urbanization of an undeveloped area which could degrade the existing visual character and its surroundings. However, implementation of the proposed LUCE Update policies, and the existing City policies identified below, would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. c. Development of the area could result in increased in ambient nighttime lighting through the addition of residential and commercial uses and associated structural development in a primarily undeveloped area. However, implementation of the proposed LUCE Update policies, and the existing City policies identified below, would reduce impacts to less than significant levels.10 As noted above, the 150-foot development limitation line was carried forward into the recently adopted LUE, and was contributing evidence supporting the City Council’s finding that implementation of the LUE would result in less than significant aesthetic impacts. As described below, there is adequate developable land below the 150-foot elevation to accommodate development envisioned for SP-3. Any modification to the existing hillside protection policy was identified as a serious issue by the Commissioners. The Commission emphasized that, if authorized by the City Council, comprehensive analysis of any changes to the existing 150-foot development limitation policy shall be conducted during staff evaluation and preparation of the project EIR (Attachment F, Planning Commission Draft Minutes, January 27, 2016). If supported, the proposed development above the 150-foot contour would need to be evaluated during preparation of the project’s EIR. 2. Conceptual Proposal, Development Constraints The topography of the project site ranges from approximately 110-120 feet near Los Osos Valley Road to 450 feet in the upper elevations. Approximately 50 acres of the project site is located above the 150-foot elevation, and 61 acres is located below the 150-foot elevation. The applicant’s conceptual land use exhibit shows the CCRC area extending to the 250-foot elevation and single-family residential uses extending to the 180-foot elevation. 10 Land Use and Circulation Element Update Final EIR, September 2014 8 Packet Pg. 220 On December 9, 2015, the Planning Commission requested additional information from the applicant regarding potential development constraints and other justifications warranting the applicant’s request. In response, the applicant provided additional quantification of land use and environmental constraints (refer to Attachment H, Exhibits A.1, Environmental Summary Site Constraints Map and D.1, Conceptual Creek Corridor Plan and Section, and Attachment F, Planning Commission Staff Report, January 27, 2016, Section 2.1 Response to Planning Commission). Based on this information, which was presented to the Planning Commission on January 27, 2016, land use and resource constraints below the 150-foot elevation, as identified by the applicant, include historic buildings, wetlands, stormwater basins, steep slopes, Froom Creek realignment and restoration, and creek setbacks (refer to Attachment F, Planning Commission Staff Report, January 27, 2016, Section 2.1.a Planning Commission Direction #1, and Section 2.1.b. Planning Commission Direction #2). The applicant indicates that the approximate area of constrained land below the 150-foot elevation is 28.9 acres. This would leave approximately 32.1 acres of developable area below the 150-foot elevation. This acreage is a key component of the applicant’s justification for requesting the City’s consideration of development above the 150-foot elevation. As shown in Table 1 above, the approximate development acreage to meet LUE standards for SP-3 ranges between 25.5 and 67.5 acres, due to the variations in minimum to maximum units and square footage for identified land uses. Therefore, there is adequate development area below the 150-foot elevation to accommodate the LUE vision for SP-3. In addition to the development area estimated to be necessary to comply with the LUE standards, the applicant estimates that the CCRC would require an additional 20 acres of developable land. As shown in Table 1, the applicant’s conceptual plan including the CCRC would require up to approximately 55.5 acres of total developed land, which would exceed the developable land acreage below the 150-foot elevation by approximately 23.4 acres. For comparison, if a Specific Plan were proposed to meet the minimum LUE development standards (25.5 acres) and accommodate the proposed CCRC (20 acres), this concept would exceed developable land area below the 150-foot elevation by approximately 13 acres. Therefore, the applicant is requesting and the Planning Commission is recommending approval of the request to initiate a Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment process to allow submittal of an application package including development of the CCRC and residential land uses above the 150-foot elevation. As recommended by the Planning Commission, the submittal would include all necessary information to fully evaluate the potential effects of the development on natural/scenic resources. 3. Potential Impacts Resulting from Development Above 150-foot Elevation On December 9, 2015, the Planning Commission requested additional information regarding potential impacts to resources above the 150-foot elevation, noting that this information is preliminary. Potential impacts are outlined below; a complete summary of 8 Packet Pg. 221 Figure 2. Proposed Building Roof Height Limitations Above 150-foot Elevation potential impacts to visual, biological and cultural resources are presented in the attachments to this report (refer to Attachment D, Planning Commission Staff Report, December 9, 2015, Section 4.1.a. Alteration of 150-foot maximum site development elevation and Attachment F, Planning Commission Staff Report, January 27, 2016, Section 2.1.c. Planning Commission Direction #3). Visual Resources The project site is located within the Irish Hills Hillside Planning Area11, which is identified as having high scenic value. The project site is located within a scenic vista as seen from U.S. Highway 101, and is also visible from Los Osos Valley Road and other areas within the City (i.e. public streets, parks, open space). Information considered by the Planning Commission included the applicant’s pre-application submittal package (refer to Attachment G, Project Description Statement and Applicant’s Review and Discussion of Issues) and visual simulations (refer to Attachment I, Applicant’s Visual Simulations). The applicant points to existing development in the area, and feels that the specific numerical elevation appears arbitrary, and does not reflect the land form conditions (topography) and visual considerations of the project site. The applicant intends to minimize visual impacts by siting and design, including identification of maximum roof height limits refer to Figure 2 and Attachment H, Exhibit C.1, Conceptual Building Heights and Attachment D, Planning Commission Staff Report, December 9, 2015, Section 4.1.a. Alteration of 150-foot maximum site development elevation for more information). The topography may provide opportunities to screen future development from view; however, certain components including lighting and grading cut slopes may be difficult to fully “hide”, and overall, the project is anticipated to create some change in the visual environment, and may increase cumulative noticeability of the existing structures and the proposed development in the upper elevations of the Irish Hills. It is difficult to evaluate the full extent of the potential changes prior to review of a specific project. 11 Identified in LUE Figure 7 Hillside Planning Areas 8 Packet Pg. 222 Biological Resources In addition to potential visual impacts, the conceptual project could also affect sensitive biological resources present both above and below the 150-foot elevation. Based on the applicant’s submitted information (Attachment J, Biological Resources Inventory by Kevin Merk Associates), Attachment H, Exhibit A.1, Environmental Summary Site Constraints Map, and Attachment H, Exhibit A.3, Basis for Design Studies), sensitive resources present above the 150-foot elevation include: wetland habitat, serpentine bunchgrass grassland, serpentine rock outcrop, special-status plants and wildlife, and coast live oak woodland. Special-status plant species documented above the 150-foot elevation include: Chorro Creek bog thistle, San Luis Obispo owl’s clover, San Luis mariposa lily, Eastwood’s larkspur, mouse- grey dudleya, Blochman’s dudleya, Jones’s layia, chaparral ragwort, Cambria morning glory, club hair mariposa lily, and Palmer’s spineflower (Attachment J). Based on an approximation of potential impacts, development of the conceptual project above the 150-foot elevation may impact approximately: 1. 6.68 acres of serpentine bunchgrass 2. 1.24 acres of California Rare Plant Rank List 1B species, and 3. 7,500 square feet of wetland habitat (road and trail drainage crossings). If the City Council authorizes initiation of the Specific Plan, potential impacts to biological resources and associated avoidance and mitigation measures would be fully evaluated pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the General Plan, and Municipal Code, as well as through consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service pursuant to the State and Federal Endangered Species Acts that may require take permits for removal and translocation or out-planting of these species (refer to Attachment F, Planning Commission Staff Report, January 27, 2016, Section 2.1.a. Planning Commission Direction #3 and Attachment G, Applicant’s Review and Discussion of Issues for additional information and discussion). Cultural Resources As documented in the applicant’s submitted Section 106 Prehistoric and Historic Report by First Carbon Solutions in February 2015 (confidential report, not attached), the project site contains both historic and archaeological resources. The Froom Ranch Historic Complex is located in the northwest portion of the project site, and with the exception of a historic dairy barn, the complex is located below the 150-foot elevation refer to Attachment H, Exhibit A.1, Environmental Summary Site Constraints Map). The applicant’s conceptual proposal includes modifications to this complex, which may include repositioning structures onsite in association with the proposed park, and incorporation of interpretive and educational elements. The applicant’s conceptual exhibits show avoidance of archaeological sites, which are located above the 150-foot elevation (refer to Attachment H, Exhibit A.3, Basis for Design Studies). 4. Planning Commission Input for Consideration by the City Council 8 Packet Pg. 223 Hillside Protection In addition to the Commissioners comments noted above (refer to “Amendment to 150-foot Elevation Development Limit Policy, Policy Background”), guidance was provided to the applicant to minimize potential visual impacts through site design and development standards, including reduction of massing and lowered building heights. Biological Resources Impacts The Commission suggested the applicant minimize impacts to special-status plants and vegetation, including native bunchgrass, through site design. Further environmental analysis is required to fully assess these impacts, in addition to the applicant’s conceptual proposal to realign and restore Froom Creek. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The certified Final EIR for the LUCE Update states that the Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan will be required to address several issues (as listed in the LUE), including environmental constraints, resource protection, hillside and open space protection, viewsheds, and views from off-site locations.12 In the event that Council approves the proposed Specific Plan initiation, full environmental analysis would be required. The Project-level EIR will need to address the impacts of future development of the site in the context of the required entitlements, including but not limited to the Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments. The scope of the EIR has not been determined, but will be based on the certified Final EIR for the LUCE Update and an Initial Study to be prepared by staff, and will likely include but not be limited to key environmental issues including: 1. Aesthetic (Visual) Resources 2. Agricultural Resources 3. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions 4. Biological Resources 5. Cultural (Archaeological, Tribal, and Historic) Resources 6. Geology and Soils 7. Hydrology (drainage, floodplain, stormwater management and quality) 8. Noise 9. Population and Housing 10. Public Services and Utilities 11. Traffic and Circulation (automobile, truck, and multi-modal) NEXT STEPS If the City Council authorizes the initiation of the project application based on staff’s recommendation, the next stops in the process are as follows: 12 “Future development to consider viewsheds, hillside and open space protection, height limits, wetland protection, access to other connections, historic farm buildings, mixed use to accommodate workforce housing, and neighborhood commercial type uses” (LUCE Final EIR 2014). 8 Packet Pg. 224 1. Submit Formal Application. A formal application will be submitted to the City that provides additional project details, and requesting the following reviews and entitlements: General Plan Amendments and Pre-Zoning; Specific Plan; Development Plan; Modification of the Urban Reserve Line; Architectural Review; Cultural Heritage Committee Review; and Airport Land Use Commission Review. 2. Initiate CEQA Process. City staff will prepare an Initial Study for the project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This document, along with a detailed project description provided by the applicant, will be part of a Request for Proposals RFP) sent to consultants to prepare an EIR. The city will also conduct the required public scoping meeting. 3. Prepare Project-level EIR. The EIR process is likely to take several months, depending on the complexity of the issues, and the extent to which the project has adequately addressed the issues as part of its application. The timeframe might also be affected if there is a high level of public interest and involvement in the process. 4. Consideration of Project Approval. Once the Final EIR is prepared, which incorporates public input on the Draft EIR, the project (including General Plan Amendments, Specific Plan, and Development Plan) would be considered by both the Planning Commission and City Council for possible approval. The Final EIR would require certification. CEQA Findings and potentially a Statement of Overriding Considerations would be required if the project is approved 5. Annexation. If the project is approved, the City would initiate the annexation process with the San Luis Obispo Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo). Annexation will depend on the City’s ability to address key issues to LAFCo, including the ability to provide public services to the site (including water and wastewater). FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with initiating the project application . The developer will reimburse the City for all staff and consultant fees associated with processing the application. As part of the application, the applicant will be required to prepare a fiscal impact study that would analyze the project’s effects on the City. Due to the size of the project, the applicant will be paying for actual costs for staff time rather than a flat fee to process all of the required permits and to coordinate the preparation of an EIR. CONCLUSION The scope of the initiation review only provides authorization for the applicant to proceed with the application process for the Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments. If the Council supports inclusion of the applicant’s request to propose alteration of the 150-foot maximum site development and modification to the mix of land uses envisioned in the Land Use Element for the Specific Plan area, the Planning Commission recommends the Council include the following direction (this language has been included in Attachment A, Draft Resolution): 1. The formal application shall include all necessary information to fully evaluate the potential effects of development on natural and scenic resources (particularly as it relates to visual impacts on the City’s edge), including but not limited to: photosimulations, 8 Packet Pg. 225 cross sections, grading plans (with cut and fill details), circulation diagrams, and preliminary building layouts and massing details; assessment of potential visual effects as seen from public areas including but not limited to roads, highways, and open space areas; a comprehensive project-specific and quantified impact analysis on special-status plants, animals, vegetative communities and trees, and creeks, drainages, and wetland habitat; proposed mitigation plan(s) for both on and off-site restoration (as applicable); and hydrological analysis accompanying proposed plans to modify and restore Froom Creek. ALTERNATIVES 1. Initiate application process for the Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments, but provide a land use mix that more closely correlates with LUE policies for Specific Plan Area 3. 2. Initiate application process for the Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment, but the formal submittal should not include a General Plan Amendment to develop above the 150- foot contour line. 3. Initiate application process for the Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment, but the formal submittal should be modified to conform to feedback given by the City Council regarding both land use mix and development above the 150-foot contour line. 4. Continue the item. An action to continue the item should include details of additional information or analysis required. 5. Determine that no major amendments should be made to the General Plan and recommend the City Council deny the request for Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment Initiation. AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE 1. Froom / Il Villagio Specific Plan Exhibits (RRM Design Group), Full Size 2. Preliminary Technical Reports and Information a. Madonna Froom Authorization to Proceed Response to E-mail dated January 7, 2016 and attached Exhibits (RRM Design Group, January 11, 2016) b. Froom / Il Villagio Specific Plan, Planning Commission January 27, 2016 (Planning Commission PowerPoint and Narrative, RRM Design Group) c. Visual Simulations (RRM Design Group, January 11, 2016) d. Biological Resources Inventory (KMA, January 2016) e. Request for Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (KMA, August 4, 2015) f. Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Letter (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, September 24, 2015) g. CONFIDENTIAL, approved persons only - Section 106 Prehistoric and Historic Report First Carbon Solutions, February 20, 2015) h. Stormwater Memorandum (RRM Design Group, February 26, 2015) i. Drainage Master Plan (Alternative #1, February 2015) ii. Drainage Master Plan (Alternative #2, February 2015) 8 Packet Pg. 226 i. Preliminary Transportation Analysis (Central Coast Transportation Consulting, April 2015) Attachments: a - Resolution b - Vicinity Map c - General Plan Policies d - PC Staff Report and Minutes December 7 2015 e - PC Directional Items f - PC Resolution, Minutes, and Staff Report January 27 2016 g - Applicant Project Description and Narrative h - Applicant Exhibits i - Applicant Visual Simulations j - Biological Resources Inventory 8 Packet Pg. 227 RESOLUTION NO. (2016 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING INITIATION OF AN APPLICATION FOR THE PROPOSED MADONNA ON LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS, INCLUDING RELATED ACTIONS IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on January 27, 2016 to consider the pre-application package for the Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan, the components of which are described in the Council Agenda Report for April 5, 2016; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on April 5, 2016, for the purpose of reviewing the applicant’s proposal and the Planning Commission’s recommendation; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the following findings: 1. The request to initiate the project application is consistent with City Regulations. 2. On January 27, 2016, the Planning Commission reviewed the pre-application package and passed a resolution recommending to the City Council that the application should be initiated, based on input from Commissioners and the general public. 3. The requested initiation does not grant land use entitlements, but formally authorizes staff to accept an application for the proposed project, including related requests for entitlements, which will require evaluation before project approval could be considered. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The proposed request for initiation involves initial feedback and direction on the proposed project and related entitlement requests, and does not include any final action or approval. Council action on the proposed initiation is exempt from environmental review per CEQA Guidelines under the General Rule (Section 15061(b)(3)). CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. It can be said with certainty that there is no possibility that the subject pre- application may have a significant effect on the environment because it is only an initiation of future applications and no project approval is occurring at this time. If initiation of an application is authorized by the City Council, a formal project submittal for consideration of the proposed project and associated discretionary entitlements will be subject to environmental review. 8.a Packet Pg. 228 At t a c h m e n t a R e s o l u t i o n 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Resolution No. _______________ (2016 Series) Page 2 SECTION 3. Action. The City Council hereby authorizes initiation of the project application allowing formal submittal of requested entitlements for evaluation and further consideration by Council including a Specific Plan, annexation of the project site to the City, modification of the Urban Reserve Line, and General Plan Amendments addressing adjustment of the 150-foot contour development limit line and the land use mix as proposed by the applicant with the following direction: 1. The formal application shall include all necessary information to fully evaluate the potential effects of development on natural and scenic resources (particularly as it relates to visual impacts on the City’s edge), including but not limited to: erection of story poles representative of potential development both above and below the 150 -foot topographic elevation, photosimulations, cross sections, grading plans (with cut and fill details), circulation diagrams, and preliminary building layouts and massing details; assessment of potential visual effects as seen from public areas including but not limited to roads, highways, and open space areas; a comprehensive project-specific and quantified impact analysis on special-status plants, animals, vegetative communities and trees, and creeks, drainages, and wetland habitat; proposed mitigation plan(s) for both on and off-site restoration (as applicable); and hydrological analysis accompanying proposed plans to modify and restore Froom Creek. 2. The formal application shall include all necessary information to fully evaluate the potential aesthetic and visual effects of a General Plan Amendment modifying Land Use Element Policy 6.4.7.H. (Hillside Planning Areas, Irish Hills area) including, but not limited to: identification of site specific maximum building elevations (as measured above average natural grade); site specific standards regarding building materials and colors; and exterior lighting standards consistent or more restrictive than City Zoning Regulations Chapter 17.23 (Night Sky Preservation) to enable a comprehensive evaluation of potential adverse effects to hillside and scenic resources. Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this ___ day of __________, 2016. Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: Lee Price Interim City Clerk 8.a Packet Pg. 229 At t a c h m e n t a R e s o l u t i o n 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Resolution No. _______________ (2016 Series) Page 3 APPROVED AS TO FORM: J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney 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 ______________, _________. Lee Price Interim City Clerk 8.a Packet Pg. 230 At t a c h m e n t a R e s o l u t i o n 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Attachment B: Vicinity Map Project Site 8.b Packet Pg. 231 At t a c h m e n t b V i c i n i t y M a p 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Figure 1. Hillside Planning Areas Project Site 8.c Packet Pg. 232 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Chapter 1 Page 1-68 6.RESOURCE PROTECTION 6.1. Overall Resource Protection Policies 6.1.1. Resource Planning The City shall protect its unique natural resources and systems by including their considerations and needs within its planning program, and giving those considerations and needs a planning priority co-equal with that accorded other community needs. Under this policy, the City will make provisions for the continued existence of its natural resources within the community. The term “community” thus includes not only the urbanized human community, dominated by urban land development and technological systems, but also a natural community rich in biological and geological diversity, as well as a pre-urban human community with a strong agricultural base. 6.2. Overall Resource Protection Programs 6.2.1. Resource Mapping The City shall prepare and maintain geographic information systems-based maps of the city, the urban reserve, and the planning area to guide in land use designations and decision-making. Maps for the city and urban reserve shall be in sufficient detail to highlight all significant natural resources and systems. Maps for the planning area may be at a lesser degree of detail. The maps shall show at least the following resources: native plant communities, wildlife habitats and corridors, aquatic ecosystems, productive or potentially productive soils (prime or other unique agricultural soil types), viewsheds, terrain, hillsides, greenbelt areas. The overlay maps shall also show development constraints such as flood hazard areas, geological hazard areas, soil hazard areas (subsidence, liquefaction), noise impact areas, airport hazard and noise areas, radiation hazard areas. The maps shall provide the basis of determining where urban development is most appropriate, and where other needs of the community outweigh the desire or need for urban development. As a result of the findings of these maps, the City shall re-evaluate its land use designations and future plans for undeveloped areas, and revise the LUE land use map accordingly. 6.2.2. Resource Protection The City shall seek to protect resource areas deemed worthy of permanent protection by fee acquisition, easement, or other means. 6.3. Open Space Policies See also the Growth Management section) 6.3.1. Open Space and Greenbelt Designations The City shall designate the following types of land as open space: A. Upland and valley sensitive habitats or unique resources, as defined in the Conservation and Open Space Element, including corridors which connect habitats. B. Undeveloped prime agricultural soils which are to remain in agricultural use as provided in Policy 1.9.2. 8.c Packet Pg. 233 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Land Use Element Page 1-69 C. Those areas which are best suited to non-urban uses due to: infeasibility of providing proper access or utilities; excessive slope or slope instability; wildland fire hazard; noise exposure; flood hazard; scenic value; wildlife habitat value, including sensitive habitats or unique resources as defined in the Conservation and Open Space Element; agricultural value; and value for passive recreation. D. A greenbelt, outside the urban reserve, that surrounds the ultimate boundaries of the urban area, and which should connect with wildlife corridors that cross the urbanized area. E. Sufficient area of each habitat type to ensure the ecological integrity of that habitat type within the urban reserve and the greenbelt, including connections between habitats for wildlife movement and dispersal; these habitat types will be as identified in the natural resource inventory, as discussed in the Background to this Land Use Element Update" and in Community Goal #8. Public lands suited for active recreation will be designated Park on the General Plan Land Use Element Map. The City may establish an agricultural designation. (See the Conservation and Open Space Element for refinements of these policies.) 6.3.2. Open Space Uses Lands designated Open Space should be used for purposes which do not need urban services, major structures, or extensive landform changes. Such uses include: watershed protection; wildlife and native plant habitat; grazing; cultivated crops; and passive recreation. The City shall require that buildings, lighting, paving, use of vehicles, and alterations to the landforms and native or cultural landscapes on open space lands are minimized, so rural character and resources are maintained. Buildings and paved surfaces, such as parking or roads, shall not exceed the following: where a parcel smaller than ten acres already exists, five percent of the site area; on a parcel of ten acres or more, three percent. (As explained in the Conservation and Open Space Element, the characteristics of an open space area may result in it being suitable for some open space uses, but not the full range.) Parcels within Open Space areas should not be further subdivided. 6.4. Hillside Policies As noted in the open space section of this element and in the Conservation and Open Space Element, San Luis Obispo wants to keep open its steeper, higher, and most visible hillsides. Some of the lower and less steep hillside areas, however, are seen as suitable for development, particularly where development is coupled with permanent open space protection of the more sensitive areas. This section focuses on where and how some hillsides may be developed. 6.4.1. The City shall maintain comprehensive standards and policies for hillside development for the following reasons: A. To protect and preserve scenic hillside areas and natural features such as the volcanic Morros, ridge lines, plant communities, rock outcroppings and steep slope areas that function as landscape backdrops for the community. B. To set the limits of commercial and residential development in hillside areas by establishing a permanent open space green belt at the edge of the community. C. To protect the health, safety and welfare of community residents by directing development away from areas with hazards such as landslides, wildland fires, flooding and erosion. 8.c Packet Pg. 234 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Chapter 1 Page 1-70 6.4.2. Development Limits The City shall establish and maintain clear development limit lines for hillside planning areas, and special design standards for the hillside areas. The location of the development limit and the standards should cause development to avoid encroachment into sensitive habitats or unique resources as defined in the Conservation and Open Space Element, and public health and safety problems related to utility service, access, wildland fire hazard, erosion, flooding, and landslides and other geologic hazards. Also, the development limit line and the standards should help protect the city’s scenic setting. (Locations of hillside planning areas are shown in Figure 7. 6.4.3. Development Standards The City shall require development – including buildings, driveways, fences and graded yard areas – on hillside parcels to: A. Be entirely within the urban reserve line or development limit line, whichever is more restrictive (though parcel boundaries may extend beyond these lines when necessary to meet minimum parcel-size standards), unless one of the following three exceptions applies: a) A location outside the urban reserve line or development limit line is necessary to protect public health and safety. b) New wireless telecommunication facilities may be appropriate on South Street Hills inside the three- acre leasehold already developed with commercial and municipal radio facilities, subject to use permit approval and architectural review and approval. Applicants shall comply with all other provisions of this section, and demonstrate that (a) new facilities will not individually or additively interfere with City radio equipment necessary for emergency response coordination, and (b) will not cause on-site radio frequency radiation levels to exceed exposure standards established for the general public by the American National Standards Institute. c) Where a legally built dwelling exists on a parcel which is entirely outside the urban reserve line or development limit line, a replacement dwelling may be constructed subject to standards B through H below. B. Keep a low profile and conform to the natural slopes; C. Avoid large, continuous walls or roof surfaces, or prominent foundation walls, poles, or columns; D. Minimize grading of roads; E. Minimize grading on individual lots; generally, locate houses close to the street; minimize the grading of visible driveways; F. Include planting which is compatible with native hillside vegetation and which provides a visual transition from developed to open areas; G. Use materials, colors, and textures which blend with the natural landscape and avoid high contrasts; H. Minimize exterior lighting. 6.4.4. Parcels Crossing the Limit Lines The City shall require that before development occurs on any parcel that crosses the urban reserve or development limit lines, the part outside the lines be protected as permanent open space. 8.c Packet Pg. 235 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Land Use Element Page 1-71 o 101 B R O A D O R C U T T BUCKLEY TANK FARM M I L L H I G U E R A C H O R R O P I S M O L O S O S O S V A L L E Y MA D ON N A FOOTHILL HIGH M A RS H L E F F F O O T H I L L W JOHNS O N T O R O PRADO O S O S SOUTH C A L I F O R NIA B U C H O N HIGUERAS S A N T A R O S A ELKS S A N LUIS EL L A HI G H L A N D B ISH O P LAUREL SLACK EVANS P O IN S ETTIA H I L L HOOVER SOUTHWOOD B U L L O C K L U N ETA D E L R I O M O U NT BIS H O P P A L M V A L L E VI S T A VILL AGE G R A N D LAWR E N C E POL Y C ANYON SY D N E Y L I Z Z I E MEISSNER SUBURBAN M IOSSI G A TH E WOOD B R I D G E R O C K VIE W LONG BEEBEE D A N A HOPE DA LIDIO SANTAFE ELM MARGARITA BOND ISABEL L A BROAD FLO R A D Orcutt L Luneta Sto neridge C Goldtree J Prefumo H Irish Hills K Madonna B Woodland Drive A Cal Poly - Cuesta Park I Billygoat Acres G Calle Joaquin F EM argarita Figure 7 Legend Hillside Planning Area Boundaries LUCE SOI Area City Limits Highway Roads Railroad o Airport Water Body Source: City of San Luis Obispo, 2012 010.5 Mile Hillside Planning Areas 8.c Packet Pg. 236 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Chapter 1 Page 1-72 6.4.5. Development Credit Transfer Any residential development credit obtained from Open Space designations outside the urban reserve line or development limit line should be transferred to land in the Downtown Core or Specific Plan area. 6.4.6. Homesites Outside the Limit Lines Where homesites are to be developed outside the urban reserve or development limit lines, and beyond the City’s jurisdiction within the City’s greenbelt, the City shall encourage the County to promote the transfer of development credits into the Downtown Core or Specific Plan area. If development is to proceed in these areas, the City shall encourage the County to only allow creation of home sites consistent with the following guidelines: A. Be on land sloping less than 15 percent; B. Have effective emergency-vehicle access from a City street or County road; C. Be on a geologically stable site; D. Have adequate water supply for domestic service and fire suppression; E. Avoid areas with high wildland fire hazard; F. Be next to existing development; G. Avoid significant visual impacts; and H. Be clustered to minimize impacts and retain open space. 6.4.7. Hillside Planning Areas The City shall urge the County to implement the following hillside policies. Specific policies to address particular concerns for the areas as shown on Figure 7 are listed below. For each of these areas, land above the development limit line should be secured as permanent open space. A. The Cal Poly – Cuesta Park area includes the hill east of Cal Poly and north of Highway 101 near Cuesta Park. Development should be separated or protected from highway traffic noise and should have adequate fire protection. The City shall urge the County to conduct architectural review of development on lots fronting Loomis Street to address visual impacts of development. B. The Woodland Drive area Development of vacant land near Woodland Drive (Figure 7) shall address the following: a) The location and design of new public streets and private drives serving several owners, and any necessary changes to existing streets in the area; b) Water and sewer systems, including new storage tanks, pumps, main pipes, and access roads, and changes to existing facilities necessary for adequate service to the area; c) New parcels and existing parcels to be changed or combined; d) Location of building sites on parcels next to or crossing the urban reserve line; e) Areas to be kept open through easements or dedication of fee ownership; f) A program for transferring development potential, consistent with these hillside planning policies; g) Location of creek easements to provide flood protection and to protect existing creekside vegetation; h) Phasing of development and public improvements. 8.c Packet Pg. 237 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Land Use Element Page 1-73 C. The Goldtree area extends up the hill from the Alrita Street neighborhood. This is a minor expansion area which can accommodate single-family houses. In addition to meeting the usual criteria for approving minor annexations, this area should: a) Provide a gravity-flow water system giving standard levels of service to all developed parts of the expansion area and correcting water-service deficiencies in the Alrita Street neighborhood; b) Correct downslope drainage problems to which development within the expansion area would contribute. c) A development plan or specific plan for the whole expansion area should be adopted before any part of it is annexed, subdivided, or developed. (Existing houses inside the urban reserve line need not be annexed along with any new subdivision) d) All new houses and major additions to houses should be subject to architectural review. D. The Orcutt area includes land on the western flanks of the Santa Lucia foothills east of the Southwood Drive neighborhood and Orcutt Road. No building sites should be located above the development limit line. E. The Margarita area includes the southern slopes of the South Street Hills. No building sites should be located above the development limit line. F. The Stoneridge area includes land on the northern slopes of South Street Hills. Development west of the end of Lawrence Drive should be subject to architectural review and to measures assuring that building sites will be stable. G. The Calle Joaquin area should allow the continuation of a commercial use for the existing building on the hill, but no further development. H. The Irish Hills area should secure permanent open space with no building sites above the 150-foot elevation, in conjunction with any subdivision or development of the lower areas. (See also Section 8, Special Focus Areas.) I. The Billygoat acres area extends into the Irish Hills above Prefumo Creek. No further development should occur beyond the urban reserve line. J. The Prefumo Creek area extends into the Irish Hills west of Prefumo Canyon Road. Development should be limited to areas within the urban reserve line with permanent protection of the creeks and upper hillsides. K. The Madonna Inn area includes land west of Highway 101 on the lower slopes of San Luis Mountain and the northeast slopes of the foothill bordering Laguna Lake Park. a) A development plan for the whole area should be adopted before any part of it is annexed, subdivided, or further developed. (See also Section 8, Special Focus Areas.) b) The City shall require that development locations and building forms respect the area's extraordinary visual quality and natural slopes, and maintain views of the mountain from the highway and nearby neighborhoods. c) The area immediately west of Highway 101 should be retained as an open space buffer. L. The Luneta Drive area includes parcels which may be used for housing, so long as new construction and major additions are approved by the Architectural Review Commission. 8.c Packet Pg. 238 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Chapter 1 Page 1-74 6.5. Hillside Programs See also Section 12, Implementation) 6.5.1. Designating Sensitive Sites Subdivision approval in hillside planning areas shall include designation of "sensitive sites," which shall be subject to architectural review. 6.5.2. Delineation of Development Limit Lines The City shall create and maintain a GIS layer to accurately document development limit lines as they are applied in the General Plan. 6.5.3. Community Design Guidelines Consistent with the Community Design guidelines, all hillside areas are considered sensitive sites, and architectural review is required for new development. The Community Development Director will screen all proposals to identify any which do not need architectural review. The City will mitigate the visual impacts of hillside structures, including revising the way maximum building height is determined. 6.6. Creeks Wetlands, and Flooding Policies San Luis Obispo's aquatic ecosystems consist of creeks, Laguna Lake, floodplains, marshes, wetlands, serpentine seeps, and springs. These aquatic ecosystems provide habitat, recreation, water purification, groundwater recharge, and soil production as well as natural flood protection by reducing the force of floodwaters as they spread and decelerate over floodplains. Creeks, which are the most obvious of these systems because they flow under and through the City, provide wildlife habitat, backyard retreats, and viewing and hiking pleasures, in addition to carrying storm water runoff. When some creeks overflow during major storms, they flood wide areas beyond their channels (Figure 8). San Luis Obispo wants to avoid injury or substantial property losses from flooding, while keeping or improving the creeks' natural character, scenic appearance, recreational value, and fish and wildlife habitat. 6.6.1. Creek and Wetlands Management Objectives The City shall manage its lake, creeks, wetlands, floodplains, and associated wetlands to achieve the multiple objectives of: A. Maintaining and restoring natural conditions and fish and wildlife habitat; B. Preventing loss of life and minimizing property damage from flooding; C. Providing recreational opportunities which are compatible with fish and wildlife habitat, flood protection, and use of adjacent private properties. D. Recognizing and distinguishing between those sections of creeks and Laguna Lake which are in urbanized areas, such as the Downtown core, and sections which are in largely natural areas. Those sections already heavily impacted by urban development and activity may be appropriate for multiple use whereas creeks and lakeshore in a more natural state shall be managed for maximized ecological value. 6.6.2. Citywide Network The City shall include the lake, creeks, and wetlands as part of a citywide and regional network of open space, parks, and – where appropriate – trails, all fostering understanding, enjoyment, and protection of the natural landscape and wildlife. 8.c Packet Pg. 239 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Land Use Element Page 1-75 o 101 B R O A D O R C U T T BUCKLEY TANK FARM M I L L H I G U E R A C H O R R O P I S M O L O S O S O S V A L L E Y MA D ON N A FOOTHILL HIGH M A RS H L E F F F O O T H I L L W JOHNS O N T O R O PRADO O S O S SOUTH C A L I F O R NIA B U C H O N HIGUERAS S A N T A R O S A ELKS S A N LUIS EL L A HI G H L A N D B ISH O P LAUREL SLACK EVANS P O IN S ETTIA H I L L HOOVER SOUTHWOOD B U L L O C K L U N ETA D E L R I O M O U NT BIS H O P P A L M V A L L E VI S T A VILL AGE G R A N D LAWR E N C E POL Y C ANYON SY D N E Y L I Z Z I E MEISSNER SUBURBAN M IOSSI G A TH E WOOD B R I D G E R O C K VIE W LONG BEEBEE D A N A HOPE DA LIDIO SANTAFE ELM MARGARITA BOND ISABEL L A BROAD FLO R A 101 1 Figure 8 Legend 100-Year Floodplain Creeks LUCE SOI Area City Limits Highway Roads Railroad o Airport Source: City of San Luis Obispo, 2012 010.5 Mile Creeks and Floodplains 8.c Packet Pg. 240 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Chapter 1 Page 1-76 6.6.3. Amenities and Access The City shall require new public or private developments adjacent to the lake, creeks, and wetlands to respect the natural environment and incorporate the natural features as project amenities, provided doing so does not diminish natural values. Developments along creeks should include public access across the development site to the creek and along the creek, provided that wildlife habitat, public safety, and reasonable privacy and security of the development can be maintained, consistent with the Conservation and Open Space Element. 6.6.4. Open Channels The City shall require all open channels be kept open and clear of structures in or over their banks. When necessary, the City may approve structures within creek channels under the limited situations described in the Conservation and Open Space Element. 6.6.5. Runoff Reduction and Groundwater Recharge The City shall require the use of methods to facilitate rainwater percolation for roof areas and outdoor hardscaped areas where practical to reduce surface water runoff and aid in groundwater recharge. 6.6.6. Development Requirements The City shall require project designs that minimize drainage concentrations and impervious coverage. Floodplain areas should be avoided and, where feasible, any channelization shall be designed to provide the appearance of a natural water course. 6.6.7. Discharge of Urban Pollutants The City shall require appropriate runoff control measures as part of future development proposals to minimize discharge of urban pollutants (such as oil and grease) into area drainages. 6.6.8. Erosion Control Measures The City shall require adequate provision of erosion control measures as part of new development to minimize sedimentation of streams and drainage channels. 6.7. Creeks and Flooding Programs 6.7.1. Previously Developed Areas To limit the potential for increased flood damage in urbanized areas, the City shall ensure new development complies with the City’s flood plain ordinance, setbacks, specific plans, and design standards to minimize flood damage and flood plain encroachment. 6.7.2. National Flood Program The City shall administer the National Flood Insurance Program standards. 6.7.3. Creekside Care and Notification In maintaining creek channels to accommodate flood waters, the City shall notify owners of creeks and adjacent properties in advance of work, and use care in any needed removal of vegetation. 6.7.4. Evaluate Use of Financing Districts The City shall evaluate the feasibility of establishing a financing district or districts to address flood concerns in affected areas. Cost and benefits will be weighed in relation to the cost of flood insurance for affected property owners. 8.c Packet Pg. 241 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Chapter 1 Page 1-82 8.SPECIAL FOCUS AREAS Introduction Within the Planning Area are several areas where it is appropriate to consider a range or mix of uses which do not correspond with any one open-space, residential, commercial, or public designation used by this element. However, a particular use or mix of uses may not be desirable unless it is chosen in combination with a specific physical design which solves problems of relationships between activities within the site, and between the site and its neighbors. In addition, there are areas where special design concepts can help revitalization efforts. In Special Focus Areas, the City intends to do one or more of the following: A. Require a specific plan for areas with complex development parameters (e.g. land use mix, significant infrastructure needs environmental site constraints), prior to development. B. Make a choice about appropriate land uses based on information which will become available. In some cases, the choice will be connected with approval of a development plan, possibly with customized limits on specific activities and requirements for improvements or dedications. C. Work with properties in areas where an innovative design approach is needed to help revitalize and beautify the area. Special Focus Areas are designated by number on Figure 10. These areas and the guidelines for their development are listed below. (The number following the decimal point corresponds to the map number.). The following areas require a specific plan prior to development: SP-1 (Margarita), SP-2 (San Luis Ranch/Dalidio), SP-3 (Madonna), and SP-4 (Avila Ranch). The Special Focus Areas are those that present opportunities to develop customized land use approaches or special design implementation to enhance their appearance and achieve their respective development potential: Foothill Blvd/Santa Rosa, Bishop Knoll, Alrita area, Upper Monterey, Mid-Higuera, Caltrans site, General Hospital site, Broad Street Area, Madonna Inn area, Sunset Drive-in/ Prado, Pacific Beach, Calle Joaquin auto sales area, LOVR Creek area, CalFire / Cal Poly property, and Broad Street at Tank Farm area. POLICIES Introduction To help guide the development of large land areas (previously referred to as “expansion areas”) and to provide guidance on the redevelopment of sites identified, the City shall use the following policy statements to guide their review and actions relative to these properties. 8.1. Specific Plan Areas 8.1.1. Specific Plan / General Plan Amendment The City shall require the completion and approval of a specific plan and associated General Plan Amendment prior to annexation (if applicable) and development of land within an area designated as a Specific Plan Area on Figure 10. The required General Plan Amendment will modify the General Plan Land Use Diagram to reflect the land use diagram from the approved specific plan, based on the land uses listed under Performance Standards” for each site. Attachment c 8.c Packet Pg. 242 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n 10 1 UV227 La g u n a La k e 10 1 1 7 6 3 5 8 15 13 2 10 11 12 1 9 4 14 Or c u t t A r e a SP Ai r p o r t A r e a S P SP 4 Av i l a R a n c h SP 1 Ma r g a r i t a Ar e a SP 2 Sa n L u i s Ra n c h SP 3 Ma d o n n a on L O V R B R O A D O R C U T T BUCKLEY TANK FARM J O H N S O N M I L L C H O R R O P I S M O L O S O S O S V A L L E Y FOO THILL HIGUERA S HIGH M A R S H L E F F I S L A Y HIGHLAND H I G U E R A F LO R A FOOTHILL W T O R O O S O S SOUTH GRAND C ALI F O R N I A SA N T A R O S A N S A NT A R O S A P E A C H M O N T E R E Y M A D O N N A SAN LUIS E L L A BIS H O P A U G U S T A EVANS PRADO P O IN S E T T I A LA UREL H I L L HOOVER DIA B L O LUNETA CALLE JOAQUIN VI A CA R T A D E L RIO P A L M VACHELL M O U N T B I S H O P F U L L E R O C E A N AIR E V A LL E VIS T A R O Y A L P O LY C A N Y O N C A S A L I Z Z I E LINCOLN S A C R A M E N T O ELKS LN SUBURBAN LI M A G AT H E S H I G U E R A S T WOODBRIDGE SLACK R OC K VI EW AIR P ORT LONG HAYS TI B U R O N BEEBEE LOOMIS ST SANTAFE LAWRENCE MEISSNER ST NAS ELLA PRADO RD SPANISHOAKS ELM VIA LA G U NA VISTA KENTUCK Y FER RINI SOU THWOOD K E N D A L L HANSEN IRONB ARK MURRAY M I S S I ON KLAM A T H HE L E NA DALY ISABELLA D E E R E T O SANTABARBARA T ON I N I C A U D I L L CLARION LAENTRADA McMILLAN C L O V E R B U L L O CK ALDER C U ES T A ALRITA JESPERSON S O U T H P E R I M E T E R ESPERANZA TWIN RIDGE LOSPALOS DAVENPORTCREEK PINE D A LIDIO D R HORIZON H O L L Y H O C K RACHEL STENNERCREEK C O NEJO VISTA LAG O HIDDEN SPRINGS T U LI P MELLO THREAD CRAIG WAY OAKRIDGE SISQUOCST P A C I F I C P H I L L I P S KENTWOOD SAN SIME ON L A L O M A F R O O M R A N C H P A C I F I C Pa g e 1 8 3 Packet Pg. 243 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a Land Use Element Page1-85 For each specific plan site identified in this section, the location, purpose and performance standards for that site are defined. The performance standards section defines the following standards that must be met as part of the specific plan submitted for each site. A. Type. This defines the basic type of use being described. B. Designations Allowed: This defines the standard General Plan designations that can be used to describe the development proposed. See Table 1 for ranges allowed. C. % of Site: This defines the percent of each site dedicated to open space (using the gross project site). D. Minimum: This provides a minimum development assumed for each site. For residential and commercial types, these are not considered requirements, and a number lower than that shown can be proposed. E. Maximum: In order to exceed the minimum development for a given site, transfer of development credits or other permanent protection of open space would be provided. Development credits would be transferred from areas in the city, the urban reserve, or the greenbelt where development would be less appropriate, generally those designated conservation/open space or, on the County's map, agriculture or rural lands. The performance standards listed are to supplement other City requirements, standards, and Zoning Code requirements. If a conflict occurs, the most stringent standard shall apply. 8.1.2. Specific Plan Content All specific plans prepared for a Specific Plan Area must meet the requirements of State law and be comprised of four planning frameworks. Within each framework, the specific plan will provide the goals and policies that will guide future decisions on projects within the specific plan area. The plan will also include a detailed implementation plan that will identify responsibilities, financing requirements, and phasing / timing. The Land Use Framework will include the proposed land use pattern, actual development densities in each subarea on the project site, and development phasing. The framework will also include specifics on development standards. The Specific Plan prepared will provide complete guidance on the land use provisions that will guide future development within the Planning Area. At a minimum, these provisions will address the following topics. In consultation with City staff, other topics may be required depending on site specific needs. A. Land Use Classification. A land use classification system that clearly identifies the uses that may be allowed in each subarea. Based on the land use designations listed under “Performance Standards” section for each site, the specific plan will provide further details on development standards for each subarea. This classification system would use clear terminology to define and further describe allowable uses. Both the land use classification system and the uses allowed within the various subareas will provide for an overall mix of uses. B. General Site Planning and Development Standards. These standards will specify the requirements that would be applied to all development and land uses regardless of the applicable land use designation. These would address, as appropriate, sensitive resources; site access requirements; energy efficiency; fences, walls, hedges, buffers, and other screening; noise regulations; outdoor lighting standards; performance standards (e.g., air quality, glare, vibration, etc.), undergrounding of utilities; and other similar topics. Planning should also address how the development will be designed to enhance compatibility with adjacent properties. Attachment c 8.c Packet Pg. 244 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Chapter 1 Page 1-86 C. Development Standards. Development standards for each land use designation (e.g., building forms, design objectives, land use objectives, height limitations, setback requirements, site coverage requirements, etc.) will be organized in tables and graphically illustrated wherever possible. D. Housing Mix. The specific plan will discuss the proposed mix of housing types within the area. In keeping with the City’s Housing Element, affordable housing requirements and density bonus provisions and related incentives will be incorporated as appropriate. A key to the housing component will be to incorporate a mix of housing types, and to provide phasing mechanisms that ensure to the City the development of this housing mix as a part of each phase of the project. The Design Framework will provide detailed design guidelines that will be used as the specific plan is implemented / developed. The purpose of these guidelines will be to establish the expected level of design within the area while still maintaining project flexibility and innovation. The objective of this framework is not to dictate a specific design, but to establish design expectations. The design guidelines will be illustrated to help explain the intent and expectations. This part of the Specific Plan will also incorporate detailed landscaping standards. The Design Framework will also provide guidance on the integration of the streetscape into the overall project design. The framework will define public improvements and the public rights-of-way to define the overall character of the streetscape. The Circulation Framework will include the proposed circulation network system elements, design standards, and system phasing. This framework will address all modes of circulation as well as parking and loading standards if different from the standard City requirements. The Infrastructure / Public Facilities Framework will cover infrastructure requirements (water, sewer, storm drainage, electricity, natural gas, and communications) as well as parkland, schools, and other public facilities. For infrastructure, the framework will address the proposed trunk infrastructure system improvements and system phasing necessary to support implementation of the land use plan and financing mechanisms to implement planned facilities. 8.1.3. SP-1, Margarita Area Specific Plan Update Location: The Margarita Area covers about 420 acres bounded by South Higuera Street, Broad Street, Tank Farm Road, and the ridge of the South Street Hills in the southern portion of San Luis Obispo. Purpose: Adopted in October 2004, the Margarita Area Specific Plan contains five key principles: open space and sensitive resource production, cohesive neighborhood creation, transit supporting land uses and densities, pedestrian environment, and minimizing infrastructure costs. The approved specific plan includes 868 residential dwelling units, as well as a business park, a neighborhood park, sports fields, and open space areas. Over 40 percent of the land area is designated as open space and 56 acres are designated as parks. The City shall consider this area as potentially appropriate to accommodate additional housing. Revisions to the Margarita Area Specific Plan will be required if residential development in excess of that accommodated in the plan is proposed. 8.c Packet Pg. 245 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Land Use Element Page 1-87 8.1.4. SP-2, San Luis Ranch (Dalidio) Specific Plan Area Location: This specific plan area is located in the southwest quarter of the city at the corner of Madonna Road and Dalidio Drive. The site is approximately 132 acres and is currently used for agricultural purposes. The site is primarily flat topographically. The entire site is within the City’s Planning Area, but is outside the current city limits. Purpose: This project site should be developed as a mixed use project that maintains the agricultural heritage of the site, provides a commercial / office transition to the existing commercial center to the north, and provides a diverse housing experience. Protection of the adjacent creek and a well-planned integration into the existing circulation system will be required. The specific plan for this area should consider and address the following land use and design issues. a.Provide land and appropriate financial support for development of a Prado Road connection. Appropriate land to support road infrastructure identified in the Final Project EIR (overpass or interchange) at this location shall be dedicated as part of any proposal and any area in excess of the project’s fair share of this facility shall not be included as part of the project site area used to calculate the required 50% open space. b.Circulation connections to integrate property with surrounding circulation network for all modes of travel. c.Connection to Froom Ranch and Calle Joaquin, if proposed, shall not bifurcate on- site or neighboring agricultural lands. Any connection to Calle Joaquin shall be principally a secondary / emergency access by design. d.Development shall include a transit hub. Developer shall work with transit officials to provide express connections to Downtown area. e.Maintain agricultural views along Highway 101 by maintaining active agricultural uses on the site, and maintain viewshed of Bishop Peak and Cerro San Luis. f.Maintain significant agricultural and open space resources on site (see Policy 1.13.8.B). Land dedicated to Agriculture shall be of size, location and configuration appropriate to maintain a viable, working agricultural operation. g.Where buffering or transitions to agricultural uses are needed to support viability of the agricultural use, these shall be provided on lands not counted towards the minimum size for the agriculture / open space component. Provide appropriate transition to agricultural uses on-site. h.Integrate agricultural open space with adjacent SLO City Farm and development on property. i.Site should include walkable retail and pedestrian and bicycle connections to surrounding commercial and residential areas. j.Commercial and office uses shall have parking placed behind and to side of buildings so as to not be a prominent feature. k.Neighborhood Commercial uses for proposed residential development shall be provided. 8.c Packet Pg. 246 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Chapter 1 Page 1-88 l.Potential flooding issues along Prefumo Creek need to be studied and addressed without impacting off-site uses. m.All land uses proposed shall be in keeping with safety parameters described in this General Plan or other applicable regulations relative to the San Luis Obispo Regional Airport. n.Historic evaluation of the existing farm house and associated structures shall be included. Performance Standards: This specific plan shall meet the following performance standards. Type Designations Allowed % of Site Minimum1 Maximum Residential LDR MDR MHDR HDR 350 units 500 units Commercial NC CC 50,000 SF 200,000 SF Office/High tech) O 50,000 SF 150,000 SF Hotel/Visitor-serving 200rooms Parks PARK 5.8ac Open Space / Agriculture OS AG Minimum 50%2 No maximum Public n/a Infrastructure n/a 1 There can be a reduction in the minimum requirement based on specific physical and/or environmental constraints. 2 The City Council may consider allowing a portion of required open space to be met through off-site dedication provided: a.A substantial multiplier for the amount of open space is provided for the off-site property exchanged to meet the on-site requirement; and b.Off-site land is of similar agricultural and visual value to the community; and c.Off-site land is protected through an easement, dedication or fee title in perpetuity for agriculture/open space. 8.c Packet Pg. 247 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Land Use Element Page 1-89 8.1.5. SP-3, Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Area Location: This site includes just over 111 acres and is located directly west of the intersection of Los Osos Valley Road and Calle Joaquin. Purpose: The purpose of the specific plan is to provide design flexibility that will secure the appropriate development of the site while protecting sensitive environmental resources on the site. Development on the site should be a compact, mixed use project that provides workforce housing options and neighborhood commercial uses that support pedestrian and bicycle access. The specific plan for this area should consider and address the following land use and design issues. a.Develop a design that is sensitive to environmental constraints and adjusts accordingly through design. Constraints include wetland protection, slope protection, historic structures, and open space protection. b.Maintain viewshed of surrounding mountains and secure steeper hillsides as protected open space areas. c.Variable height limits will be required to protect views of adjacent hills. d.Provide access to trails. e.Provide a plan for adequate and safe infrastructure, including appropriate points of access to Los Osos Valley Road. f.Address neighborhood commercial needs of new neighborhood. g.Provide connectivity to adjacent development. Performance Standards: This specific plan shall meet the following performance standards. Type Designations Allowed % of Site Minimum1 Maximum Residential (Mixed Use) MDR MHDR HDR 200 units 350 units Commercial NC CR 50,000 SF 350,000 SF Parks PARK Open Space / Agriculture OS AG Minimum 50% Public n/a Infrastructure n/a 1 There can be a reduction in the minimum requirement based on specific physical and/or environmental constraints. 8.c Packet Pg. 248 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Chapter 1 Page 1-90 8.1.6. SP-4, Avila Ranch Specific Plan Area Location: Avila Ranch is located on the north side of Buckley Road at the far southern edge of the City of San Luis Obispo. The three parcels that make up the Avila Ranch area comprise approximately 150 acres. The entire site is located within the Airport Area Specific Plan. Purpose: This area will be developed as primarily a residential neighborhood development with supporting neighborhood commercial, park, recreation facilities, and open space/resource protection. Within the project, emphasis should be on providing a complete range of housing types and afford abilities. The specific plan for this area should consider and address the following land use and design issues: a.Provision of a variety of housing types and affordability levels. b.Modification of the Airport Area Specific Plan to either exclude this area or designate it as a special planning area within the Airport Area Specific Plan. c.Provision of buffers along Buckley Road and along eastern edge of property from adjacent agricultural uses. d.Provision of open space buffers along northern and western boundaries to separate this development from adjacent service and manufacturing uses. e.Provision of open space buffers and protections for creek and wildlife corridor that runs through property. f.Safety and noise parameters described in this General Plan and the purposes of the State Aeronautics Act; or other applicable regulations relative to the San Luis Obispo Regional Airport. g.Participation in enhancement to Buckley Road and enhancement of connection of Buckley Road to South Higuera Street. h.Appropriate internal and external pedestrian, bicycle, and transit connections to the City’s circulation network. i.Implementation of the City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan including connections to the Bob Jones Trail. j.Water and wastewater infrastructure needs as detailed in the City’s Water and Wastewater Master Plans. This may include funding and/or construction of a wastewater lift station. k.Fire protection and impacts to emergency response times. l.Architectural design that relates to the pastoral character of the area and preserves view of agrarian landscapes. m.Provision of a neighborhood park. 8.c Packet Pg. 249 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Land Use Element Page 1-91 Performance Standards: This specific plan shall meet the following performance standards. Type Designations Allowed % of Site Minimum1 Maximum Residential LDR MDR MHDR HDR 500 700 Commercial NC 15,000 SF 25,000 SF Open Space / Agriculture OS AG 50%2 Public n/a Infrastructure n/a 1 There can be a reduction in the minimum requirement based on specific physical and/or environmental constraints. 2 Up to 1/3 of the open space may be provided off-site or through in-lieu fees consistent with the Airport Area Specific Plan. 8.2. Special Planning Areas The policies under Section 8.2 provide site specific guidance on the development / redevelopment of sites in the city. For sites that have existing development, renovation of streetscapes, landscaping, and building facades is encouraged. The City shall require property owners to prepare area plans with land uses consistent with this section, as well as multi-modal circulation and infrastructure facilities as appropriate, design guidelines and implementation programs. The City may consider implementation incentives for redevelopment areas, such as variations from development standards and/or participation in the installation or financing of infrastructure. 8.2.1. Foothill Boulevard / Santa Rosa Area This area, which includes land on both sides of Foothill Boulevard between Chorro and Santa Rosa, is currently developed as commercial centers that include highway and neighborhood serving commercial uses. At the affected property owners’ request, the boundary of this area on the north side of Foothill may be extended to include one or more of the existing commercial properties west of Chorro Street. The City shall work with property owners / developers to redevelop the area as mixed use (either horizontal or vertical mixed use) to include a mix of uses as described under the Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial and Medium High to High Density Residential designations. The non-residential component of the project should include elements that serve the nearby neighborhoods. Examples include: specialty stores and services food service entertainment, and recreational facilities (except that movie theaters, nightclubs, bars/taverns and restaurants serving alcohol after 11 pm shall be prohibited) 8.c Packet Pg. 250 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Chapter 1 Page 1-92 As part of this project, the City will evaluate adjustments to parking requirements to account for predominant pedestrian and bike access. Building height adjustments in this area can also be considered with mixed use development. Redevelopment plans shall include consideration of improving the existing complex intersections of Foothill/Chorro/Broad, the desirability of modifying Boysen at and through the property on the northeast corner of the area, and enhancement of pedestrian, bicycle and transit connections across Foothill and Santa Rosa/Highway 1 and to the campus. Among other possible incentives, building height adjustments on the North side of Foothill may be considered with mixed use development. The Fire Station will be maintained or relocated within the area. 8.2.2. Upper Monterey In the Upper Monterey area, the emphasis will be on revitalization and enhancement. The area above Johnson shall have an emphasis on land use compatibility and neighborhood preservation. The following actions will be pursued in this area. A. The City shall investigate adding the Upper Monterey area to the Downtown Parking District, thereby allowing in-lieu payment towards common parking facilities. B. The City shall integrate a new Downtown Transit Center in the Upper Monterey area and provide enhanced connectivity to the center from the Upper Monterey area. C. The City will work with hotels in the Upper Monterey area to provide shuttle service to the Downtown and Downtown Transit Center. D. The City will promote restaurant development in the Upper Monterey area, and include outdoor dining opportunities and other public activities oriented toward Monterey Street. North of California, these types of activities shall be prohibited on the creek side of buildings. E. The City will evaluate reconfiguring Monterey Street in this area to enhance bicycle and pedestrian connectivity to Downtown and to Cal Poly. F. The City will work with local hotels and Cal Poly to develop enhanced meeting rooms and conference facilities. These types of facilities would not be located on the east side of Monterey north of California Street, nor is a stand-alone conference center appropriate for this area. G. The City will work with developers to assemble adjacent properties into lots of suitable size for redevelopment limited to areas southwest of California Street. H. The City will develop an Upper Monterey area master plan and design guide that will provide guidance on street enhancements, façade improvement programs, and pedestrian enhancement along Monterey Street. As part of this effort, the City will investigate the ability to apply form-based codes to guide future development and will involve residents in adjoining areas as well as business and property owners along Monterey Street as part of the public review process in development of the master plan/design guide. Particular attention will be given to creek protection, noise, safety, light and glare, and privacy impacts to adjoining neighborhoods 8.c Packet Pg. 251 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Land Use Element Page 1-93 PROGRAMS See also Section 12, Implementation) 8.3. Ordinance 1130 The City will review and update Ordinance 1130 and involve residents to ensure that neighborhood concerns are addressed. 8.4. Mid-Higuera Area The City will update the plan for this multi-block commercial area to reflect current needs and changes that have occurred since the 2001 plan was adopted. 8.5. Caltrans Site While this area is within the Mid-Higuera Area, the unique qualities and opportunities provided by the site warranted special consideration in the General Plan. This area is planned for redevelopment from a Caltrans office and yard complex to a mixed use development. Commercial uses will be as described under the Tourist Commercial designation with some residential incorporated using a Medium High to High Density Residential component. Redevelopment plans shall consider the suitability of realignment of the Madonna/South Higuera intersection. The site should be developed to serve as a gateway into the community, with consideration of additional open space uses, retention and rehabilitation of the Master List historic structure, and retention of Heritage Trees on the site. Conference center-type uses are encouraged along with other appropriate tourist-serving uses as appropriate for the site. Building height adjustments in this area can also be considered with mixed use development. The site shall also include a park site north of Madonna Road. 8.6. General Hospital Site The General Hospital site includes County-owned property including the old hospital building (which is planned to remain as an office / treatment facility) and lands behind the facility. Lands behind the hospital building that are inside the City’s Urban Reserve line will be designated as Public (for existing public facility) and a range of residential uses (Low Density and Medium Density Residential) and will include the ability to support residential care, transitional care use, and other residential uses consistent with the adjacent areas. The remaining site outside the City’s Urban Reserve line will remain as Open Space. The City shall seek to secure permanent protection of the open space outside of the urban reserve line as part of any development proposal. The undeveloped portion of this site on the southwest side of Johnson Avenue will remain designated for Public uses. 8.7. Broad Street Area The City shall implement the South Broad Street Area Plan to create a safe, attractive and economically vital neighborhood with a mix of complementary land uses. The Area Plan shall: A. Encourage innovative design concepts that help revitalize and beautify the area. B. Facilitate housing development to meet the full range of community housing needs. C. Improve circulation safety and connectivity within the area and across Broad Street. 8.c Packet Pg. 252 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Chapter 1 Page 1-94 8.8. Madonna Inn Area The Madonna Inn Area includes land west of Highway 101 on the lower slopes of San Luis Mountain and the northeast slopes of the foothill bordering Laguna Lake Park. This area may be developed further only if surrounding hillsides including area outside the Urban Reserve Line are permanently protected as open space. (See also hillside policies under 6.4 and programs under 6.5.) A. A development plan for the whole area should be adopted before any part of it is annexed, subdivided, or further developed. B. Upon amendment to an urban designation, the area may accommodate a generously landscaped, low intensity extension of the existing tourist facilities. This area may also be suitable for assisted and/or senior living facilities. Development locations should be clustered and building forms should respect the area's extraordinary visual quality and natural slopes, and should maintain views of the mountain from the highway and nearby neighborhoods. C. The area immediately west of Highway 101 should be retained as an open space buffer. D. Any plan for further development in this area must address reconfiguration of the Marsh Street interchange and larger circulation issues throughout the area. E. Walking and biking paths shall be provided as appropriate to connect to the City’s network and to the Downtown, amenities along Madonna Road, and open space areas. 8.9. Sunset Drive-in Theater / Prado Road Area This 38-acre area should be further developed only if flooding can be mitigated without significant harm to San Luis Obispo Creek. Until flood hazards are mitigated, continued agricultural use and low-intensity recreational use are appropriate. Any use drawing substantial regional traffic also depends on providing needed infrastructure at Prado Road, extending Prado Road to connect with Madonna Road, and realignment of Elks Lane. Once flooding, access, and agricultural preservation issues are resolved, the area would be suitable for development as a mixed use (horizontal or vertical) development with a mix of Commercial uses. Permanent open space shall be required in order to protect the adjacent San Luis Obispo Creek. As part of future development, a full assessment of the Drive-in Theater site’s potential as a historic resource will need to be evaluated and addressed. Bicycle connectivity as referenced in the Bicycle Transportation Plan is an important component of future development of the area. Property within the area may need to be designed to accommodate the Homeless Services center and/or transportation agency use. 8.10. Pacific Beach Site This area is planned for redevelopment from current use as a continuation school, school office and park uses to commercial retail uses along Los Osos Valley Road and Froom Ranch Road and the remaining site maintained under a Park designation. 8.11. Calle Joaquin Auto Sales Area These four vacant lots are suitable for commercial mixed use and other uses described under the Tourist Commercial designations. Portions of the site may be appropriate for use as auto sales, depending on market demand. Development of this area must address preservation of and transition to the agricultural parcels/uses to the northwest; connectivity to the Dalidio Ranch area; viewshed preservation; and treatment as a gateway to the City visible from Highway 101. 8.c Packet Pg. 253 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Land Use Element Page 1-95 8.12. LOVR Creekside Area This area is heavily constrained by flood potential along the western boundary as well as limited circulation access to the site given its proximity to the proposed LOVR / Highway 101 interchange and its limited frontage on LOVR. Flooding and access issues must be resolved prior to developing Medium High Density Residential (in areas adjacent to existing residential uses). Agricultural Designations must be maintained along the west side of site. As part of future development, compatibility with adjacent residential areas to the east will be required. Permanent protection of the adjacent San Luis Obispo Creek will need to be addressed as part of proposed development. The south side of the site will also need to accommodate relocation of LOVR right-of-way and changes related to the planned Highway 101 interchange. 8.13. Broad Street at Tank Farm Road Site Located at the northwest corner of Broad Street and Tank Farm Road, this approximate 10 acre site will be used as a mixed use site, providing for a mix of uses as described under the Community Commercial and Office designations. The site will provide a strong commercial presence at the intersection. Areas along the creek on the western edge of the site will be appropriately buffered to provide creek protections. Attention to connectivity, safety and comfort of bicycle and pedestrian circulation will be especially important in the development of this corner. 8.14. CalFire /Cal Poly-owned property on Highway 1 The Cal Poly Master Plan currently designates this area for Faculty and Staff housing. The City shall collaborate with Cal Poly in updating the Master Plan for development of campus property. Master Plan direction for this property shall address sensitive visual and habitat resources, circulation issues, impacts to City services, transition and potential impacts to surrounding neighborhoods. 8.15. North Side of Foothill (Bishop Knoll) Future development of this area shall address open space requirements under Policy 1.13.8 and open space buffers in accordance with Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 8.3.2. This area shall be subject to Architectural Review to ensure consideration of hillside and resource protection; circulation and access, and transition to existing neighborhoods. The steep hillside should be dedicated as Open Space and residential lots grouped at the bottom of the hill closer to Foothill. Development shall provide a parking lot and trail access to Bishops Peak. Circulation connectivity shall be provided to Los Cerros Drive as feasible. Density shall be limited to 7 units / acre as modified for slope under the Zoning Ordinance. 8.16. Alrita Properties Future development of this area shall address hillside planning requirements under Policy 6.4.7C. This area shall be subject to Architectural Review to ensure consideration of hillside and resource protection; circulation and access; visual impacts, and transition to existing neighborhoods. Additional analysis will need to occur in the LUCE EIR to evaluate potential water service issues. While there is a pump station nearby, more analysis is needed to determine if the City’s water distribution system can adequately serve development in this area. Density shall be limited to 7 units/acre as modified for slope under the Zoning Ordinance. 8.c Packet Pg. 254 At t a c h m e n t c G e n e r a l P l a n P o l i c i e s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: Review of request to initiate preparation of Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan PROJECT ADDRESS: 12165 and 12393 BY: Shawna Scott, Consulting Planner Los Osos Valley Road Phone: 543-7095 e-mail: sscott@swca.com VIA: Steve Matarazzo, Senior Planner Phone: 781-7522 FILE NUMBER: PRE 1293-2015 FROM: Tyler Corey, Interim Deputy Director RECOMMENDATION: Consider key issues related to proposed land uses and proposed modifications to hillside development limits and provide a recommendation to the City Council on the request to initiate the Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan (Alternatives 5.1-5.5). 1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY The applicant is requesting authorization from the City Council to pursue preparation of the Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan (identified as Specific Plan Area SP-3 in General Plan Land Use Element). The applicant has requested clarification and direction on a number of policies and regulations, which staff discusses further in this report. The Planning Commission’s role is to recommend to the City Council whether to initiate the proposed Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment. SITE DATA Applicant John Madonna, John Madonna Construction Company Bob Richmond, Villagio Senior Living Representative Victor Montgomery, RRM Design Group Zoning County of San Luis Obispo – Commercial Retail, Agriculture, Rural Lands General Plan SP-3 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Area Site Area 111 acres Environmental Status A Program-Level Final EIR was adopted for the LUCE in 2014. Meeting Date: December 9, 2015 Item Number: 1 8.d Packet Pg. 255 At t a c h m e n t d P C S t a f f R e p o r t a n d M i n u t e s D e c e m b e r 7 2 0 1 5 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n PRE-1293-2015 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Initiation Request Page 2 2.0 SPECIFIC PLAN INITIATION The applicant’s proposal includes several components that require additional review and direction from the City Council, due to inconsistencies with the Land Use Element (LUE) of the General Plan. The purpose of the Commission’s review is to evaluate the request and provide a recommendation to Council on the requested Specific Plan initiation. In addition to the initiation request, the applicant has requested clarification on how a number of development standards and policies would apply to the proposed development (Attachment 3). The initiation review is not an exhaustive analysis of the applicant’s conceptual project plans and does not identify all potential conflicts with City regulations or policies that may require amendment or which could require revisions. If the initiation request is authorized by the City Council, a subsequent formal application would be submitted and evaluated based on Council direction. The proposed project would then be evaluated comprehensively as a formal application including complete environmental review in an Environmental Impact Report EIR). The purpose of the initiation review is to receive direction on whether a formal submittal is warranted given the fact that the proposal would require amendments to General Plan Policy. Two key issues include: 1) alteration of the 150-foot maximum site development elevation and 2) the conceptual mix of uses appropriate for the SP-3 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Area. Staff has included a brief discussion of the policies and standards which will be reviewed in the formal application. The initiation review does not include definitive direction on many of the questions posed by the applicant, since most of the items will require a complete submittal, environmental review, and advisory body input. These issues include: realigning Froom Creek to reflect its historic flow pattern; management and access to the historic Froom Ranch Complex; and how the Specific Plan should comply with the 50% Open Space requirement for annexed areas. Other items included in the applicant’s initiation narrative will require further analysis, such as required setbacks from Froom Creek, avoidance of Chorro Creek bog thistle, on and off-site mitigation for impacts to native bunch grass, and determination of appropriate building heights. These issues would be addressed as part of the overall evaluation of a complete project submittal, which would occur following review of this initiation request. 3.0 SUMMARY OF APPLICANT’S REQUEST The Madonna-Froom Ranch project site consists of two parcels, totaling approximately 111 acres, currently located within County of San Luis Obispo jurisdiction, and adjacent to the City limits. The current land use and natural setting includes livestock grazing, unpaved agricultural roads, the Irish Hills and Home Depot stormwater basins, the historic Froom Ranch Complex, the John Madonna Construction office (within the historic complex), staging and materials storage, quarry area, and 8.d Packet Pg. 256 At t a c h m e n t d P C S t a f f R e p o r t a n d M i n u t e s D e c e m b e r 7 2 0 1 5 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n PRE-1293-2015 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Initiation Request Page 3 vacant land. The project site is identified in the LUE as the Madonna on Los Osos Valley Road LOVR) Specific Plan Area (SP-3) (Attachment 5, LUE Chapter 8 Special Focus Areas). The applicant intends to submit a Specific Plan, pursuant to the guidelines set forth in the LUE. The project would require pre-zoning by the City, and annexation into the City limits. The applicant’s conceptual exhibit shows a mix of land uses within the Specific Plan area, including Senior Housing Continuing Care Retirement Community), multi-family housing, single-family housing, retail sales uses, open space, and parks (Attachment 4, Exhibit B.1 Conceptual Land Uses). The preliminary proposal includes the realignment and restoration of Froom Creek within the property boundaries, and construction of parks and pathways. The applicant’s submitted narrative (Attachment 3) seeks to receive initial feedback on several issues. As noted above, this initiation request focuses on two key issues, which will ultimately drive the components of the Specific Plan application submittal, if authorized by the City Council. 4.0 EVALUATION 4.1 Initiation Request a.Alteration of 150-foot maximum site development elevation The most significant issue raised by the applicant is the request to allow development above the 150- foot elevation. The applicant’s conceptual land use exhibit shows senior housing extending to the 250- foot elevation and residential uses extending to the 180-foot elevation. The project site is located within Hillside Planning Area H Irish Hills1 (refer to Attachment 5, Figure 1). The topography of the project site ranges from approximately 110-120 feet near Los Osos Valley Road to 450 feet in the upper elevations. Approximately 44.3 percent (48.61 acres) of the project site is located above the 150- foot elevation. The applicant’s conceptual land use plan shows 19.12 acres of development (39.3 percent of the project site) above the 150-foot elevation line (refer to Attachment 4). Modification of the existing development limit line would allow development in the upper elevations of the Irish Hills above the 150-foot elevation. This area is identified as having high scenic value and is located within a scenic vista as seen from U.S. Highway 101.2 The site is also visible from Los Osos Valley Road and other areas within the City (i.e. public streets, parks, open space). Should the Council approve the proposed Specific Plan initiation, full environmental analysis would be required, including an assessment of the project’s impacts on aesthetic resources and consistency with adopted plans and policies. 1 LUE Policy 6.4.7.H.: “The Irish Hills area should secure permanent open space with no building sites above the 150 -foot elevation, in conjunction with any subdivision or development of the lower areas. (See also Section 8, Special Focus Areas.)” 2 COSE Figure 11 (Scenic Roadways and Vistas) and Circulation Element Figure 3 (Scenic Roadways) 8.d Packet Pg. 257 At t a c h m e n t d P C S t a f f R e p o r t a n d M i n u t e s D e c e m b e r 7 2 0 1 5 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n PRE-1293-2015 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Initiation Request Page 4 The language specifying the 150-foot elevation development limit was carried forward into the LUE from the City’s previously adopted Land Use Element (adopted August 23, 1994 and revised June 15, 2010). The 1994 Land Use Element included a Hillside Planning Policies and Standards section; the purpose of this section was to “protect and preserve scenic hillside areas and natural features, set boundaries for commercial and residential development in sensitive hillside areas by creating a permanent open space greenbelt at the edge of the community, and to protect the health, safety and welfare of community residents by directing development away from areas with hazards”.3 The Hillside Policies identified in the 2014 LUE focus on “where and how some hillsides may be developed” (refer to Attachment 5, LUE Chapter 6 Resource Protection). The Land Use and Circulation Element Update (LUCE) EIR provides an analysis of each proposed Specific Plan area, including the project site. Potential visual impacts identified in the LUCE EIR, specific to SP-3, include the following: Development of the site, as outlined in the proposed LUCE Update, could result in increased urbanization of the existing viewshed along the Los Osos Valley Road and could potentially block or obstruct existing public views. However, implementation of the proposed LUCE Update policies, and the existing City policies identified below, would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Development of the area, as outlined in the proposed LUCE Update, has the potential to result in increased urbanization of an undeveloped area which could degrade the existing visual character and its surroundings. However, implementation of the proposed LUCE Update policies, and the existing City policies identified below, would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Development of the area could result in increased ambient nighttime lighting through the addition of residential and commercial uses and associated structural development in a primarily undeveloped area. However, implementation of the proposed LUCE Update policies, and the existing City policies identified below, would reduce impacts to less than significant levels.4 Therefore, the less than significant impact determinations specific to visual impacts were based on compliance with policies included in the LUE, such as the 150-foot development limit. Further environmental analysis, including a viewshed study and photo-simulations, would be required to determine if development above the 150-foot elevation would result in any significant, unavoidable, adverse impacts, and to determine appropriate mitigation measures. The applicant points to existing development in the area, including Mountainbrook Church and the KSBY Station building, which are located above the 150-foot elevation line and contribute to the 3 Final Environmental Impact Report Land Use Element/Circulation Element Updates, August 1994 4 Land Use and Circulation Element Update Final EIR, September 2014 8.d Packet Pg. 258 At t a c h m e n t d P C S t a f f R e p o r t a n d M i n u t e s D e c e m b e r 7 2 0 1 5 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n PRE-1293-2015 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Initiation Request Page 5 existing visual setting. However, it should be noted that the Mountainbrook Church development was approved by the County of San Luis Obispo, pursuant to the County’s General Plan and Land Use Ordinance, and associated California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review. The City did not have discretionary review authority for the project. These developments are also located outside of the Irish Hills Hillside Area, although Mountainbrook Church is located at elevation 203, right at the line between the Irish Hills and Calle Joaquin Hillside areas (refer to Attachment 4 Exhibit A.4). The applicant notes that the specific numerical elevation appears arbitrary, and does not reflect the land form conditions (topography) and visual considerations of the project site. The applicant requests that development performance standards (for view protection) be addressed through the Specific Plan, including identification of site-specific maximum roof elevations. Staff Discussion – Alteration or deletion of the 150-foot maximum site development elevation policy to allow development standards to be established in the Specific Plan: As noted above, the 150-foot development limitation line was carried forward into the recently adopted LUE, and was contributing evidence supporting the City Council’s finding that implementation of the LUE would result in less than significant aesthetic impacts. The LUE and associated Final EIR also anticipated that further discretionary review would be required during analysis of the anticipated Specific Plan, although there is no policy or indication that the development line could or should be adjusted during discretionary review of the Specific Plan. Development limits and special design standards for hillside areas are intended to “cause development to avoid encroachment into sensitive habitats or unique resources as defined in the Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE), and public health and safety problems related to utility service, access, wildland fire hazard, erosion, flooding, and landslides and other geologic hazards” and help protect the city’s scenic setting.5 Development is required to be located within the development limit line unless a location outside the line “is necessary to protect public health and safety”.6 Land outside of the development limit line is required to be protected as permanent open space.7 The upper elevations of the project site support sensitive resources, including Chorro Creek bog thistle, native bunchgrass, and California Native Plant Society (CNPS) listed plant species. The applicant’s conceptual exhibits show avoidance of Chorro Creek bog thistle, and note that mitigation will be required for the loss of native bunchgrass and CNPS listed vegetation. Approximately 37 percent of the project site (28 acres) is located within the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 100-year flood zone. These lower elevations proximate to Los Osos Valley Road are subject to flooding, and this area includes floodway management features and two stormwater management basins, creating a significant constraint regarding development in the flat lands. 5 LUE Section 6.4.2 Development Limits 6 LUE Section 6.4.3 Development Standards 7 LUE Section 6.4.4 Parcels Crossing the Limit Lines 8.d Packet Pg. 259 At t a c h m e n t d P C S t a f f R e p o r t a n d M i n u t e s D e c e m b e r 7 2 0 1 5 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n PRE-1293-2015 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Initiation Request Page 6 As identified in the County’s General Plan, the upper elevations of the subject parcels are within the County Sensitive Resource Area (SRA) designation. The intent of the SRA is to call attention to the importance of highly scenic and important backdrops and natural landmarks visible from scenic highways and urban areas and the locations of rare or endangered plants and animals. The SRA extends down to the 200-foot elevation line.8 The project site is also located at the urban/wildland interface, and the upper elevations are located within the County of San Luis Obispo General Plan Geologic Study Area (GSA) overlay for geologic hazards. This overlay does not present a restriction; however, further study would be warranted to address potentially significant geologic hazards such as slope stability and landslide hazards. Steeper slopes also have a greater potential for rockfall and erosion. The applicant’s Conceptual Land Use exhibit (Attachment 4, Exhibit B.1) shows Senior Housing, Single Family, Park, and Open Space land uses above the 150-foot elevation line (refer to Attachment 5, Figure 2). The topography above the 150-foot elevation within the project site shows a natural plateau (0-15 percent slopes) and intervening topography, which may provide natural screening of future development; however, construction of access roads and utilities would require grading along moderately to steeply sloping topography. Additional information including photo-simulations and environmental analysis is required to fully evaluate the potential effects of raising or eliminating the development limit line and identifying specific building height elevations within the project site. Key public health and safety issues associated with the project site that may limit development in the lower elevations include flooding hazards and the need for floodway management along Los Osos Valley Road and Calle Joaquin Road. This area is identified as Open Space on the applicant’s conceptual exhibit, and is intended to support a realigned section of Froom Creek and existing and future stormwater basins. The certified Final EIR for the LUCE Update states that the Specific Plan will be required to address several issues (as listed in the LUE), including environmental constraints, resource protection, hillside 8: “Scenic and visual qualities of distant ridges, peaks and hillsides, as well as the closer or "foreground" elements such as rock outcrops, oak woodlands, creeks and other visually appealing natural formations and vegetation contribute to the widespread perception by local residents and visitors alike that the San Luis Obispo area is a desirable place to live or visit. This perception, in turn, has a beneficial effect on the economic stability of the recreation and tourist industries. Other economic sectors also benefit from local employees and employers alike who place a high value on living in San Luis Obispo. Therefore, identification and protection of the scenic resources in the San Luis Obispo planning area is an important aspect of planning. Ridges, peaks and hillsides comprise scenic backdrops and natural landmarks. They rise above urban areas and highways, terminating vistas with a largely undeveloped appearance” (County of San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo Planning Area, San Luis Obispo Sub-Area North Area Plan). 8.d Packet Pg. 260 At t a c h m e n t d P C S t a f f R e p o r t a n d M i n u t e s D e c e m b e r 7 2 0 1 5 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n PRE-1293-2015 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Initiation Request Page 7 and open space protection, viewsheds, and views from off-site locations.9 The applicant’s project narrative states the project can be designed to minimize impacts to scenic resources by using the existing topography, which may provide a natural visual barrier between the development and public viewing areas. Variations in topography may provide opportunities to screen future development from view; however, certain components including lighting and grading cut slopes may be difficult to fully hide”, and overall the project is anticipated to create some change in the visual environment, and may increase cumulative views of the existing structures and the proposed development in the upper elevations of the Irish Hills. It is difficult to evaluate the full extent of the potential changes prior to full environmental analysis and review of a specific project. This analysis would need to be undertaken as part of the recommended EIR analysis in the event Council approves the applicant proposed initiation. If the City Council authorizes initiation of the Specific Plan, including preliminary authorization to proceed with a Specific Plan that includes development above the 150-foot elevation, the application package would include a General Plan Amendment to modify the current language presented in LUE Policy 6.4.7.H to allow for hillside development above the 150-foot elevation. The planning and environmental review process would include preparation of an EIR that would evaluate the potential impacts to visual, biological, and hydrological resources, potential geologic and soils hazards, and consistency with plans and policies specifically identified to protect these sensitive resources. The review process would include review and direction from the City’s Architectural Review Commission. As proposed, the conceptual layout does not meet the intent of the LUE and COSE, which calls for a compact mixed-use project and includes numerous policies calling for the protection of hillsides in and proximate to the City. Additional information, including photo simulations of the proposed development within the hillside context would be necessary to determine if the project could be designed to protect hillside views, consistent with LUE hillside development policies and LUE resource protection policies10, Open Space Policies protecting scenic vistas, and Circulation Element policies which call for the protection of views from roadways designated as having scenic value. b.Receive confirmation that the development of more housing (CCRC, SFR, and MF Rental Housing) and less commercial space on this Specific Plan site is an acceptable refinement of the LUCE planning vision for this site. Staff Discussion – Mix of Uses: The LUCE identified a vision for this Specific Plan area, which includes a compact mixed use development including the following land uses (refer to Table 1 on the following page). A private care facility is not specifically envisioned for the project site, and this type 9 “Future development to consider viewsheds, hillside and open space protection, height limits, wetland protection, access to other connections, historic farm buildings, mixed use to accommodate workforce housing, and neighborhood commercial type uses” (LUCE Final EIR 2014). 10 LUE Chapter 6 Resource Protection 8.d Packet Pg. 261 At t a c h m e n t d P C S t a f f R e p o r t a n d M i n u t e s D e c e m b e r 7 2 0 1 5 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n PRE-1293-2015 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Initiation Request Page 8 of facility is generally not of the low to moderate housing type. The LUE identifies the following Special Focus Areas as suitable for residential care and assisted and/or senior living facilities: General Hospital Site (Special Focus Area 5, located on Johnson Avenue) Madonna Inn Area (Special Focus Area 7, located on Madonna Road) Table 1. Comparison of Land Use Standards (LUE identified and Applicant Proposed) LUE Type/Designation Min-Max1 Applicant Proposed Land Uses Residential (Mixed Use) / MDR, MHDR, HDR 200 to 350 units 200-250 apartment units 60-80 single-family units CCRC including: 276 independent living apartments 66 independent living villas and assisted living units 122-bed skilled nursing and memory care facility Commercial / NC, CR 50,000 to 350,000 sf 25,000 to 45,000 sf Parks / PARK Small neighborhood park including historic structures education, community use) Open Space, Agriculture / OS, AG 50% 50% open space to be provided throughout the project site Public To be determined Infrastructure Integrated circulation, drainage/floodway management, utilities, parking, etc. to be provided 1 There can be a reduction in the minimum requirement based on specific physical and/or environmental constraints Additional information is necessary to determine if the Specific Plan would provide the appropriate range of housing envisioned for this area of the City, in addition to meeting inclusionary and affordable housing regulations.11 Additional market analysis would be necessary to determine the economic impact resulting from the proposed mix of uses, which include a significant reduction in commercial uses compared to that identified in the LUE. 11 New development is required to provide affordable housing by: 1) constructing affordable housing, or 2) paying an in- lieu fee, or 3) contributing real property to be used as affordable housing, or 4) a combination of these methods. 8.d Packet Pg. 262 At t a c h m e n t d P C S t a f f R e p o r t a n d M i n u t e s D e c e m b e r 7 2 0 1 5 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n PRE-1293-2015 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Initiation Request Page 9 CONCLUSION The scope of the initiation review only provides authorization for the applicant to proceed with the application process for the Specific Plan. Conceptual land use plans submitted for the initiation include two key issues which are not consistent with existing General Plan Policy: 1) the proposed mix of land uses, which differ substantially from the General Plan performance standards for SP-3, and 2) comments on whether development over the 150-foot contour should be included for further evaluation in the formal submittal. Staff recommends that other issues raised by the applicant (i.e., appropriate designation of Open Space, treatment of the Froom Ranch historic complex, realignment and restoration of Froom Creek, building heights, and resource mitigation) are more appropriately addressed through further evaluation in a formal Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment application based on Council direction. The proposed project would then be evaluated comprehensively by Staff, including complete environmental review in an EIR. If the Commission recommends inclusion of the applicant’s request to propose alteration of the 150 foot maximum site development alteration and/or modification to the mix of land uses envisioned in the Land Use Element for the Specific Plan area, Staff recommends the recommendation include the following conditions: 1.The formal application shall include all necessary information to fully evaluate the potential effects of development on the hillsides above the 150-foot contour line including but not limited to: photo-simulations, cross sections, grading plans (with cut and fill details), circulation diagrams, and preliminary building layouts and massing details. The formal application shall assess potential visual effects as seen from public areas including but not limited to roads, highways, and open space areas. 2.Evaluation of the formal application shall include market analysis to determine the economic impact resulting from the proposed mix of uses, which include a significant reduction in commercial uses compared to what was identified in the LUE. 5.0 ALTERNATIVES 5.1 Recommend the City Council approve initiation of Specific Plan and General Plan amendments including authorization to proceed with including the following in the formal application for further evaluation, as requested by the applicant: (1) alteration of the 150 foot elevation maximum site development; and, (2) modification of the Land Use Element specified land use mix. 8.d Packet Pg. 263 At t a c h m e n t d P C S t a f f R e p o r t a n d M i n u t e s D e c e m b e r 7 2 0 1 5 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n PRE-1293-2015 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Initiation Request Page 10 5.2 Recommend the City Council approve initiation of Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments, but provide a land use mix that more closely correlates with LUE policies for Specific Plan Area 3 5.3 Recommend the City Council approve the initiation but the formal submittal should not include a General Plan Amendment to develop above the 150-foot contour line. 5.4 Continue the item. An action to continue the item should include a detailed list of additional information or analysis required. 5.5 Determine that no major amendments should be made to the General Plan and recommend the City Council deny the request for Specific Plan Amendment Initiation. 6.0 ATTACHMENTS 1.Draft Resolution 2.Vicinity Map 3.Applicant’s Project Description Statement and Applicant’s Review and Discussion of Issues dated April 30, 2015) 4.Applicant’s Exhibit Plan Set (8.5 x 11 in color) 5.General Plan Policies Pertinent to the Initiation Request NOTE: Not Attached to Attachment d, please refer to individual attachments to the Council Agenda Report 8.d Packet Pg. 264 At t a c h m e n t d P C S t a f f R e p o r t a n d M i n u t e s D e c e m b e r 7 2 0 1 5 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n CityofSanLuisObispo, CouncilAgenda, CityHall, 990PalmStreet, SanLuisObispo Planning Commission Minutes SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, December 9, 2015 CALL TO ORDER A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission was called to order on Wednesday, December 9, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Chair Larson. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present : Hemalata Dandekar, Michael Draze, Ronald Malak, William Riggs, Vice- Chairperson Michael Multari, and Chairperson John Larson. Commissioners Absent: Commissioner John Fowler. City Staff Present: Interim Deputy Community Development Director Tyler Corey, Assistant Planner Walter Oetzell, Natural Resources Manager Bob Hill, Assistant City Attorney Jon Ansolabehere, Civil Engineer Hal Hannula, and Recording Secretary Sarah Reinhart. ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA The agenda was accepted as presented. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of October 28, 2015 were approved as amended. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS There were no comments made from the public. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1.12165 Los Osos Valley Road. PRE-1293-2015; Request to initiate preparation of a Specific Plan and Environmental Review, including guidance regarding select City Policies, for the Madonna-Froom Ranch (SP-3); John and Susan Madonna, applicants. 8.d Packet Pg. 265 At t a c h m e n t d P C S t a f f R e p o r t a n d M i n u t e s D e c e m b e r 7 2 0 1 5 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n City Consultant, Shawna Scott, presented the staff report requesting the Commission recommend City Council approve the request to initiate the Madonna LOVR Specific Plan Alternatives 5.1-5.5). Commissioner Dandekar acknowledged being familiar with the site; Commissioner Malak stated having an ex-parte visit and tour of the site with the Applicant; Commissioner Draze stated visiting the site on his own. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD Applicant, John Madonna, summarized the project; indicated that the property is uniquely suited for a complete continuing care facility and stated there is a need in the community for this type of elder care; expressed a desire to receive authorization to move forward with the project. Applicant Representative, Victor Montgomery, provided an overview of the project; indicated having key meetings with perspective residents, neighbors, City staff, and agencies from the Froom Creek Realignment and noted no issues were brought up during those meetings that would hinder moving forward with the project. He pointed out that a site evaluation was completed; noted site constraints that would require amendments to General Plan Policy such as alteration of the 150-foot maximum site development elevation and the conceptual mix of uses appropriate for the SP-3 Madonna on Los Osos Valley Road (LOVR) Specific Plan Area; requested guidance and direction from the Commission. Judy Reiner, San Luis Obispo, voiced support for the project stating the need for a continuing care retirement community in the area; indicated there is a lack of choice for elderly care facilities and shared that her parents had to be separated and live apart due to the lack of a facility that would accommodate both of their needs. Ken Reiner, San Luis Obispo, stated that there are over 245 households over the age of 75 in the area who are interested in moving into a continuing care facility; noted that people who are retiring are very active and would like to be close to hiking and biking trails; stressed the need and interest for this type of facility in the community. Rey Walters, Avila Beach, principal of Villaggio Communities, spoke in support of the project, stated there is an overwhelming need for this type of housing; shared a presentation demonstrating statistics and demographics that reflect the lack of elder care options and the need for a continuing care facility; opined that after looking at many locations throughout the County, the LOVR location would be the best location for the project. John Wilbanks, San Luis Obispo, voiced support for the project; suggested that a General Plan amendment may not be needed to develop above the 150-foot elevation contour, noting that policy 6.4.7.H of the General Plan Land Use Element states: “The Irish Hills area should secure permanent open space with no building sites above the 150-foot elevation” and pointed out that the word “should” is permissive. 8.d Packet Pg. 266 At t a c h m e n t d P C S t a f f R e p o r t a n d M i n u t e s D e c e m b e r 7 2 0 1 5 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n There were no further comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Riggs, inquired regarding the creek setback. Natural Resources Manager, Robert Hill, clarified that the zoning regulations require a 35-foot creek setback. Commissioner Draze stated that he was not opposed to the change in uses and the mixed uses being proposed are not inconsistent with the General Plan ; agreed that there is a need for a continuing care facility; indicated there are issues related to development above the 150-foot elevation contour that still need to be evaluated and voiced concerns over the visual impacts this project could have on the edge of the community. Commissioner Dandekar stated that the intended use of this area was for workforce housing; noted concerns over allowing development above the 150-foot elevation contour due to the fact that this area serves as a gateway into the City and stated the importance of maintaining the open space character in the area. Vice-Chair Multari thanked staff for the thoughtful analysis and the applicant for their presentation; recommended the Cultural Heritage Committee and the Architectural Review Commission review the project; stated the City is over zoned for commercial uses and noted concerns over traffic on LOVR. He stated that there are pending questions which warrant further analysis as to whether this location is right for the elderly care facility, such as topography and proximity to hospitals; indicated that there is a growing demand for this type of facility; stated it would be premature to recommend conceptual approval or recommend a General Plan amendment without further examination. Commissioner Riggs noted that the development capacity of the site below the 150-foot threshold and the carrying capacity were discussed in the late summer of 2014; indicated that he was not convinced the use is critical enough to warrant development above the 150-foot elevation contour, considering the potential visual impacts; voiced concerns over possible ecological impacts from relocating Froom Creek, and noted having mixed feelings about relaxing setback policies; commented that specific zoning standards are inconsistent with the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE); indicated being concerned about circulation and access. Chair Larson stated that a General Plan amendment would be needed in order to reconcile the issues; opined that the mix of uses are consistent with the mix of uses envisioned for this area in the Land Use Element; noted not being convinced that this project would preclude workforce housing. Stated the re-alignment of the creek could be an opportunity to enhance the habitat, appearance, and functioning of the creek; agreed with Commissioner Riggs’s comments regarding circulation and access; stated it would be beneficial to receive more community input. 8.d Packet Pg. 267 At t a c h m e n t d P C S t a f f R e p o r t a n d M i n u t e s D e c e m b e r 7 2 0 1 5 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Commissioner Dandekar commented that during the LUCE deliberations the 150-foot development limit contour was seen as a safeguard to protect the open space and the City’s ambience; stated having a great deal of concern about extending the 150-foot elevation threshold. Commissioner Draze suggested that if the Commission decides to adopt alternative recommendation (5.1) “the City Council approve initiation of Specific Plan and General Plan amendments including authorization to proceed with including the following in the formal application for further evaluation, as requested by the applicant: (1) alteration of the 150-foot elevation maximum site development; and, (2) modification of the Land Use Element specified land use mix”, that language should be included to address the visual impacts of development above the 150-foot elevation. Also, stated there needs to be broader public notification in order to gain more community involvement and feedback. Commissioner Malak opined that the view shed would not be degraded by allowing the height extension from the 150-foot to the 200-foot elevation contour; noted supporting the modification to the land use element, stating that there is a need for this type of elder care facility; stated being in favor of re-locating the creek; indicated he would like to see more information regarding traffic impacts and an EIR; indicated he would like to see ADA approved apartments as well as workforce housing to be included in this project; commented that this is a great opportunity to meet the needs of the community. In response to inquiry by Vice-Chair Multari, Commissioner Riggs, clarified his position stating not being convinced that the proposed site is the most appropriate for this land use; noting that environmental impacts, the historic value of the landscape and the visual impacts are very significant issues that also needed to be addressed. Commissioner Dandekar stated that the intent for this site was dense mix-use residential, and was hoping to see an urban development in this site; indicated feeling discomforted over the visual impacts and the land use. Commissioner Draze suggested that issues regarding the creek, circulation, and visual impacts need to be addressed in an Environmental Impact Report. Commissioner Riggs stated it is important to highlight the fact that zoning regulations have not been updated to reflect the LUCE objectives; urged staff to address this issue as soon as possible. Commissioner Malak noted that the zone would remain dense; Chair Larson concurred, stating he did not think the proposal would displace housing; noted these details would have to be worked out when the project moves forward; concurred it would be beneficial to include language in the resolution to include the additional issues brought up by Commissioner Riggs. There were no further comments made from the Commission. On motion by Commissioner Draze, seconded by Commissioner Malak to adopt alternative recommendation 5.1 with the following changes: Recommending the City Council approve initiation of Specific Plan and General Plan amendments including authorization to proceed with including the following in the formal application for further evaluation, as requested by the 8.d Packet Pg. 268 At t a c h m e n t d P C S t a f f R e p o r t a n d M i n u t e s D e c e m b e r 7 2 0 1 5 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n applicant : (1) revisit of the 150-foot elevation maximum site development, particularly as it relates to visual impacts on the City’s edge; and, (2) modification of the Land Use Element specified land use mix. Including the following changes to Section 3 condition 1: Condition 1. The formal application shall include all necessary information to fully evaluate the potential effects of development on the hillsides above the 150-foot contour line, particularly as it relates to visual impacts on the City’s edge, including but not limited to: photo-simulations, cross sections, grading plans (with cut and fill details), circulation diagrams, and preliminary building layouts and massing details. The formal application shall assess potential visual effects as seen from public areas including but not limited to roads, highways, and open space areas. Removal of Finding 2. Finding 2. Evaluation of the formal application shall include market analysis to determine the economic impact resulting from the proposed mix of uses, which include a significant reduction in commercial uses compared to what was identified in the LUE. AYES: Commissioners Malak, Larson, and Draze, NOES: Commissioners Multari, Riggs, and Dandekar RECUSED: None ABSENT: Commissioner Fowler The motion did not carry 3:3. No action was taken. Commissioner Riggs requested more information regarding the re-alignment of the creek, information on the setbacks, and asked for more strategies to improve consistency with the Circulation Element. Chair Larson stated that if the proposal to re-align the creek is pursued, he would like to see an improvement to the habitat, noted that all constraints and recourses should be taken into consideration; requested additional information that is more comprehensive to help make a decision on this matter. Commissioner Dandekar expressed interest in seeing if the mix-use requirements could be met without violating the 150-foot elevation threshold. Vice-Chair Multari indicated that many of the issues are linked, and stated there were more issues aside from the elevation such as flood zones and visual impacts that needed to be addressed; stated not having the information needed to make a decision. The Commission discussed the importance of having a transparent process and having community involvement. 8.d Packet Pg. 269 At t a c h m e n t d P C S t a f f R e p o r t a n d M i n u t e s D e c e m b e r 7 2 0 1 5 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n On motion by Commissioner Riggs, seconded by Commissioner Malak, to continue to a date uncertain with the intent to provide additional information. AYES: Commissioners Dandekar, Malak, Multari, Larson, and Riggs. NOES: Commissioner Draze RECUSED: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Fowler The motioned passed on a 5:1 vote. RECESS: The Commission recessed at 8:09 p.m. and reconvened at 8:17 p.m. 2.2881 Broad Street. SBDV-1988-2015; A determination of whether the disposition of a city- owned lot and the acquisition of the property bordering 2881 Broad Street is in conformance to the City’s General Plan; R-2-S zone; Dustin Pires, applicant. Assistant Planner, Walter Oetzell, presented the staff report and provided an overview of the project, recommending, adopting a draft resolution of the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission determining the disposition of a portion of a City-owned lot at the southerly edge of Stoneridge Drive and acquisition of property along the northerly edge of Perkins Lane, adjacent to Property Located at 2881 Broad Street is in Conformance with the goals and policies of the General Plan SUBDV-1988-2015), based on findings. Commissioner Malak asked for clarification on the improvements that would be made to the area; Assistant Planner Oetzell explained that a side walk, curb and gutter were going to be added to Perkins Lane. In response to Commissioner Dandekar and Malak’s inquiries, regarding the process of determining an equitable exchange, Assistant City Attorney Ansolabehere, stated the City looks at a number of factors including the location, and the significance of the land, noting that if the property is large, they get an appraisal, but in small cases such as the one at hand the appraisal would likely exceed the fair market value of the property. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD Applicant, Dustin Pires, stated that the project would drastically improve the street and circulation in the area, noting that the exchange would be a win-win situation. COMMISSION COMMENTS On motion by Commissioner Multari, seconded by Commissioner Malak, moved to adopt staff recommendation, finding that the proposed property exchange is consistent with the General Plan goals and policies, with the addition of the following amendment: 8.d Packet Pg. 270 At t a c h m e n t d P C S t a f f R e p o r t a n d M i n u t e s D e c e m b e r 7 2 0 1 5 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15312, Surplus Government Property Sales, of the CEQA Guidelines. AYES: Commissioners Dandekar, Draze, Malak, Multari, Riggs, and Larson NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: Commissioner Fowler The motion passed on a 6:0 vote. There were no further comments made from the Commission. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION 1.Staff a.Agenda Forecast – Interim Deputy Community Development Director Tyler Corey, provided an update of upcoming projects; noted that the next meeting is scheduled for January 13, 2016, in which the Commission will be reviewing the Motel Inn project. 2.Commission Commissioner Malak brought to light a synopsis in the Tribune regarding the Fremont Square development. Commissioner Riggs pointed out that he forwarded comments from the October 28, 2015 Planning Commission meeting, and asked the Commission to review them. ADJOURMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:33 p.m. Respect fully submitted by, Sarah Reinhart Recording Secretary 8.d Packet Pg. 271 At t a c h m e n t d P C S t a f f R e p o r t a n d M i n u t e s D e c e m b e r 7 2 0 1 5 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n December 16, 2015 John Madonna 12165 Los Osos Valley Road San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Subject: PRE 1293-2015 (12165 and 12393 Los Osos Valley Road): Request to Initiate Preparation of Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan (Madonna-Froom Specific Plan) Dear Mr. Madonna: On December 9, 2015, the Planning Commission met to review the request to initiate preparation of the Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan (Madonna-Froom Specific Plan). The Planning Commission requested additional information to better inform their decision-making process. Based on this direction, staff requests that you provide the following items by January 5, 2016, with the intention of scheduling the item for a January 2016 hearing date: 1.Provide justification why development is conceptually proposed above the 150-foot elevation. 2.Clearly identify constraints warranting development above the 150-foot elevation, which correlate to Exhibit A.1 (Site Constraints Map) or an amended constraints map. 3.Quantify approximate resource impacts potentially resulting from development above the 150-foot elevation, including but not limited to: grading on slopes exceeding 20 percent; USACE and CDFW jurisdictional waters and habitat; Chorro Creek bog thistle; native bunchgrass; and mature trees by species. 4.Amend visual simulations to show elevation contours. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at (805) 543-7095 extension 6811. Sincerely, Shawna Scott Contract Planner Community Development Department sscott@swca.com 8.e Packet Pg. 272 At t a c h m e n t e P C D i r e c t i o n a l I t e m s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n 8.f Packet Pg. 273 At t a c h m e n t f P C R e s o l u t i o n M i n u t e s a n d S t a f f R e p o r t J a n u a r y 2 7 2 0 1 6 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n 8.f Packet Pg. 274 At t a c h m e n t f P C R e s o l u t i o n M i n u t e s a n d S t a f f R e p o r t J a n u a r y 2 7 2 0 1 6 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Planning Commission Minutes Draft San Luis Obispo Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission Wednesday, January 27, 2016 CALL TO ORDER A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission was called to order on Wednesday, January 27, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Chair Larson. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Hemalata Dandekar, John Fowler, Ronald Malak, William Riggs Vice-Chairperson Michael Multari, and Chairperson John Larson Absent: Commissioner Michael Draze* Note: Commissioner Draze joined the meeting at 8:27 P.M. Staff Present: Community Development Director Michael Codron, Deputy Community Development Director Doug Davidson, Associate Planner Rachel Cohen, Associate Planner Marcus Carloni, Planning Technician Kyle Bell, Assistant City Attorney Jon Ansolabehere, and Assistant City Clerk John Paul Maier ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA The agenda was accepted as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS There were none. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1.2450 Victoria Avenue. GENP-2550-2015: Review of General Plan conformance for the abandonment and acquisition of right-of-way for Victoria Avenue between Alphonso Street and Woodbridge Street and for the abandonment and acquisition of right-of-way for a sewer line, with a categorical exemption from environmental review; C-S-SF and C-R-SF zones; PC Opportunity 3, LLC., applicant. DR A FT 8.f Packet Pg. 275 At t a c h m e n t f P C R e s o l u t i o n M i n u t e s a n d S t a f f R e p o r t J a n u a r y 2 7 2 0 1 6 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n CityofSanLuisObispo, Title, Subtitle Community Development Deputy Director Davidson and Planning Technician Bell narrated a PowerPoint presentation entitled, “2450 Victoria Avenue” and reviewed the contents of the report. Planning Technician Bell provided a brief summary, noting that the alignment closely reflects the original conceptual design of the extension of Victoria Avenue of the South Broad Street Area Plan and the proposed right-of-way fulfills the City’s Land Use and Circulation Element goals. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were none. COMMISSION COMMENTS Chair Larson noted that the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing for 2450 Victoria Avenue on December 9, 2015 and mentioned that Attachment 3 of the staff report includes the report for that hearing. On motion by Commissioner Multari, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to adopt “A Resolution of the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission determining General Plan conformance for the abandonment and acquisition of right-of-way for Victoria Avenue between Alphonso Street and Woodbridge Street and for the abandonment and acquisition of right-of-way for a sewer line over portions of 783 Alphonso Street and 780 Woodbridge Street Properties for use of a right-of-way by the City of San Luis Obispo with a categorical exemption from environmental review, as represented in the staff report and attachments dated January 27, 2016 (2450 Victoria Avenue, GENP-2550- 2016),” which determines and reports to the City Council, that the proposed acquisition conforms to the General Plan. AYES: Commissioners Dandekar, Fowler, Malak, Riggs, Vice Chair Multari and Chair Larson NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: Commissioners Draze The motion passed on a 6:0 vote. 2.1101 Monterey Street. OTHR-2484-2015: Conceptual review and preliminary feedback for a Planned Development with a new 75-foot tall mixed-use project that includes an 80-room hotel, 26,000 square feet of residential units, 20,000 square feet of retail/restaurant space, 33,000 square feet of office space, a 45- foot tall parking garage and a transit center; CR zone; Stone Park Capital and NKT Commercial, applicant. Commissioner Fowler announced he would recuse himself for Item 2, due to a potential conflict of interest; noting that his employer Peoples’ Self-Help Housing is in discussion with the applicant about a possible participation in the project site. DR A FT 8.f Packet Pg. 276 At t a c h m e n t f P C R e s o l u t i o n M i n u t e s a n d S t a f f R e p o r t J a n u a r y 2 7 2 0 1 6 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n CityofSanLuisObispo, Title, Subtitle Community Development Director Codron and Associate Planner Cohen provided the staff report, highlighting that the presented project is a planned development for conceptual review and preliminary feedback; noted the opportunity for the public to learn about and comment on a project proposal early in the design phase; recognized the Downtown Concept Plan and Downtown Core/Monterey Focus Area Key Policies. Applicant representatives Andrew Firestone and Pam Ricci summarized the plans submitted for conceptual review and described the project. The applicants addressed public concerns, concluding that a floor of office space would be removed from the original design to allow for four floors of work-force and affordable housing. PUBLIC COMMENTS Dia Hurd, expressed concerns with allowing a 75 foot building at this location and inquired if construction of the parking structure would be built first. William Cochran, San Luis Obispo, spoke about the Commission’s purview, noting concerns with parking and noise effects on small businesses in the area; expressed concerns with the proposed 75 foot height of the structure; urged the Planning Commission to consider the scenic views of the hillside, when deciding the height of the project. Pam Orth, San Luis Obispo, expressed gratitude for consideration of the parking, affordable housing, and transit center elements of the project; voiced concerns with the current empty retail stores, suggesting that currently, new developments are constructed and have a difficulty in retaining occupants; urged the Planning Commission to consider the size and scope of the project for this location. Allan Cooper, San Luis Obispo, noted that he submitted a letter of concerns, highlighting increases for downtown building heights and intensity limits; noted negative impacts of taller buildings associated in a small town ambience; expressed concerns with the project conforming to the policy objectives; and urged that a 75 foot tall building must meet all planned development objectives. Diane Duenow, San Luis Obispo, expressed concerns with the size of the 75 foot building in the proposed location and consistency of heights of the other buildings in the area; opined that to allow a project of that scale, it should be considered at an alternative location; explained that the City needs Ordinances to allow developers to follow when designing plans and urged the Planning Commission to consider the scenic views when considering future developments. Ron DeCarhi, Executive Director of San Luis Obispo Council of Governments, spoke about a study completed in 2012 to determine a location for a transit center; expressed support for a public-private partnership and urged the City to work closely with transit agencies to allow a mixed use facility and transit center; urged the Planning Commission to support the construction of a transit center at the presented location. DR A FT 8.f Packet Pg. 277 At t a c h m e n t f P C R e s o l u t i o n M i n u t e s a n d S t a f f R e p o r t J a n u a r y 2 7 2 0 1 6 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n CityofSanLuisObispo, Title, Subtitle Jerry Rioux, San Luis Obispo, stated that construction of a new transit center will improve parking in the downtown area; spoke about the San Luis Obispo County government building’s height in comparison to the proposed project. Dave Garth, San Luis Obispo, stated that he is a former president of the Chamber of Commerce and highlighted the different elements of a downtown area; spoke about the height of the proposed project, noting that the location chosen for this project is ideal; urged support to the conceptual plan. Camille Small, San Luis Obispo, stated that the building is too large for the City’s downtown area; opined that allowing this building in the downtown would be a drastic change; voiced concerns with the proposed project. Linda White, San Luis Obispo, submitted a letter, expressing concerns with the height of the proposed project; stated that the developers should consider a 45 foot building; stated that the building scale and mass are not consistent with the other buildings in the downtown area. Cheryl McLean, San Luis Obispo, identified similar buildings in comparison to proposed structure, relating to the mass and scale; spoke about the downtown area of Santa Maria and how it has developed; stated that the proposed height of structure is too tall. John Grady, San Luis Obispo, spoke about the benefits of a new transit center; urged the Commission to enforce a 45 foot height limit for the proposed project; stated that the City of Santa Barbara has similar regulations for the downtown area, regarding the height of buildings that limits new development to 45 feet. Melissa James, San Luis Obispo, spoke about economic development in the downtown area; noted that the City has a difficulty in attracting and retaining a growing workforce; opined that there is a need for affordable housing in the City of San Luis Obispo. Russell Brown, Save Our Downtown - San Luis Obispo Chair, stated that the proposed structure is too large for the downtown area; explained that the building is not consistent in aspects of height and mass; spoke about his service on the Land Use Task Force, noting that the entry point of San Luis Obispo downtown area needs to be carefully considered. Baylin Vieeland, San Luis Obispo, urged support to the proposed project, regarding the element of additional residential living spaces in the downtown area; spoke about preservation of the downtown area and the effects of additional residential space of a downtown. Mila Vujovich-La Barre, San Luis Obispo, voiced concerns regarding the mass and scale of the proposed structure; explained that the proposed structure is not consistent with the existing residential area; urged the Commission to consider a 45 foot limit for the proposed mixed-use project. DR A FT 8.f Packet Pg. 278 At t a c h m e n t f P C R e s o l u t i o n M i n u t e s a n d S t a f f R e p o r t J a n u a r y 2 7 2 0 1 6 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n CityofSanLuisObispo, Title, Subtitle Bob Lucas, San Luis Obispo, submitted a letter to the Planning Commission, addressing affordable workforce housing in the downtown area; expressed concerns with plans for a proposed hotel. Chuck Crotser, San Luis Obispo, about the preservation of open space and the downtown area; urged the Commission to consider policies and projects thoughtfully when updating the downtown; stated that cities that consider development projects need to be well designed, regardless of scale. Paul Rys, San Luis Obispo, stated that development projects need to have parking on site; spoke about the impacts of off-site parking; explained that employees of the County offices park in residential areas due to a lack of parking. Dominic Tartalia, San Luis Obispo, explained that he neither supports or disagrees with the proposed project; expressed support to invigorate the downtown area through private investment. Charlene Rosales, Chamber of Commerce, expressed support to the conceptual project; stated that the proposed project brings the opportunity of a new transit center and affordable housing to the community. Chair Larson recessed the meeting at 8:16 P.M. Chair Larson called the meeting to order at 8:27 P.M. Commissioner Draze joined the meeting at 8:27 P.M. DR A FT 8.f Packet Pg. 279 At t a c h m e n t f P C R e s o l u t i o n M i n u t e s a n d S t a f f R e p o r t J a n u a r y 2 7 2 0 1 6 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n CityofSanLuisObispo, Title, Subtitle COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Riggs expressed support to the mixed-use element of the proposed project; stated that additional housing and a transit center are needed; urged the developer to include a wider sidewalk; stated that this site is appropriate for the level of density; expressed concerns with the traffic flow of vehicles, noting that there would be a high volume of drivers who may make sudden turns behind the building; encouraged the developer to include a pedestrian interface, possibly including the corner and a pedestrian scramble. Commissioner Draze voiced support to Commissioner Riggs’ comments and expressed support to the proposed transit center; stated that he is a proponent of vertical design rather than horizontal design. Chair Larson expressed support of a proposed transit center, noting the importance and convenience for bus riders in the downtown area; urged the developer to consider the importance of the scenic views, including hillsides; noted that the proposed project mass is not consistent to the area; urged the developer to consider the integration of a parking structure; expressed support to integrating pedestrian space and consideration of a pedestrian scramble. Commissioner Dandekar expressed support to the mixed-use component of the proposed project, including additional housing and urged the developer to maximize the number of units in the structure; urged the developer to consider design details for public space and how it will enhance the downtown; expressed support to a 60 foot range for the proposed structure and consider store-fronts around the building. Commissioner Malak expressed support to Commissioners’ Riggs and Dandekar comments, regarding an open patio or open area; urged the developer to consider an open area at the corner of the development; expressed support to the proposed transit center; urged the developers to consider additional store-fronts around the front of the building, noting the importance of sidewalk space; expressed support to a 60 foot height limit for the proposed structure. Vice Chair Multari expressed support to additional housing; expressed support to Commissioners Riggs’ and Malak’s comments, relating to moving the transit center; stated that housing should be located farther away from the transit center; expressed support to Malak’s comments regarding a structure that maintains the downtown character. Commissioner Riggs’s stated that the Commission needs to consider the effects to the community, relating to parking and architectural use for this project. In response to the Public and Commissioner comments, Chair Larson urged the applicants to consider the provided feedback and to work with staff in developing the project. There were no further comments made from the Commission. DR A FT 8.f Packet Pg. 280 At t a c h m e n t f P C R e s o l u t i o n M i n u t e s a n d S t a f f R e p o r t J a n u a r y 2 7 2 0 1 6 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n CityofSanLuisObispo, Title, Subtitle 3.12165 Los Osos Valley Road. PRE-1293-2015: Request for authorization to proceed with Specific Plan and Environmental Review and guidance regarding select City policies; John and Susan Madonna, applicant. (Shawna Scott, SWCA) Deputy Director Davidson and Consulting Planner Scott reviewed the contents of the report, highlighting that the presented project is a continued hearing to review request to initiate preparation of the Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan and associated general amendments and provided a brief background. Consulting Planner Scott explained that the Planning Commission considered the applicant's request on December 9, 2015 at a Planning Commssion Meeting, providing feedback and direction for the conceptual land use plan. Applicant Representative Victor Montgomery of RRM Design Group narrated a PowerPoint presentation and responded to Commissioners’ inquiries. PUBLIC COMMENTS Ray Walters, Co-Applicant, spoke about a shortage of senior housing in the State; expressed support to the location of the proposed retirement care facility; noted that there are no continuing care retirement communities in the County of San Luis Obispo. Judy Riener, San Luis Obispo, spoke about a need for retirement communities in San Luis Obispo; explained that her parents lived in a rental apartment in a retirement community. Ken Riener, San Luis Obispo, spoke about different properties and locations considered for a continuing care retirement community and the need for a CCRC; provided a history of problematic locations, noting that the proposed location would be better if nearer to a hospital. John Madonna, Applicant, stated that senior housing is underserved in the area and there are no similar retirement facilities in the County; stated that without the allowance of the 150 foot proposal the creek would not be moved; and voiced support for a need of a continuing care retirement community. Mila Vujovich-La Barre, San Luis Obispo, expressed support to the retirement facility concept; expressed concerns regarding water resources for the proposed development; and expressed concerns with the proposed projects as it relates to the 150 foot height limit. COMMISSION COMMENTS Deputy Director Davidson clarified that the fundamental question for the proposed development is the consideration of a proposed development that is above 150 feet. The Commission deliberated the Applicant’s requests for two projects on the same property, noting consideration of change of policies to the Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment. Chair Larson noted that there are two major considerations for the proposed development: authorization of a General Plan Amendment to change the 150 foot contour line and to allow consideration of a new use at this location. DR A FT 8.f Packet Pg. 281 At t a c h m e n t f P C R e s o l u t i o n M i n u t e s a n d S t a f f R e p o r t J a n u a r y 2 7 2 0 1 6 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n CityofSanLuisObispo, Title, Subtitle On motion by Commissioner Malak, seconded by Commissioner Draze, to allow continuance of the Planning Commission meeting and hear the agenda item after 11:00 p.m. AYES: Commissioners Dandekar, Draze, Fowler, Malak, Riggs, Vice Chair Multari and Chair Larson NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 6:0 vote. On motion by Commissioner Malak, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to adopt the attached Planning Commission resolution, “a Resolution of the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission recommending the City Council authorize initiation of the Madonna-Froom Ranch Specific Plan (PRE 1293-2015)” and providing a recommendation to the City Council for consideration of the request to initiate the Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan and associated General Plan amendments. AYES: Commissioners, Fowler, Malak, Riggs, Vice Chair Multari and Chair Larson NOES: Commissioners Dandekar, Riggs, and Vice Chair Multari RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 4:3 vote. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION Deputy Director Davidson provided an agenda forecast of upcoming items. On motion by Commissioner Malak, seconded by Commissioner Draze, to direct staff to provide workshops on usage and conservation for energy and water. AYES: Commissioners Dandekar, Draze, Malak, Multari and Chair Larson NOES: Commissioners Fowler and Riggs RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 5:2 vote. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, John Paul Maier Assistant City Clerk Approved by the Planning Commission on xx-xx-xxxx. Lee Price Interim City Clerk DR A FT 8.f Packet Pg. 282 At t a c h m e n t f P C R e s o l u t i o n M i n u t e s a n d S t a f f R e p o r t J a n u a r y 2 7 2 0 1 6 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: Continued hearing to review request to initiate preparation of the Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan and associated General Plan amendments PROJECT ADDRESS: 12165 and 12393 BY: Shawna Scott, Consulting Planner Los Osos Valley Road Phone: 543-7095 ext. 6811 e-mail: sscott@swca.com VIA: Marcus Carloni, Associate Planner Phone: 781-7176 FILE NUMBER: PRE 1293-2015 FROM: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director RECOMMENDATION: Consider key issues related to proposed land uses and proposed modifications to hillside development limits and provide a recommendation to the City Council on the request to initiate the Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan and associated General Plan amendments Alternatives 4.1-4.5). 1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY The applicant is requesting authorization from the City Council to pursue preparation of the Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan (identified as Specific Plan Area SP-3 in the General Plan Land Use Element). The action was initially considered by the Planning Commission on December 9, 2015; at that time, the Planning Commission moved to continue the item and provided direction to staff and the applicant, which is addressed in this report. The Planning Commission’s role is to recommend to the City Council whether to initiate the proposed Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment. SITE DATA Applicant John Madonna, John Madonna Construction Company Bob Richmond, Villagio Senior Living Representative Victor Montgomery, RRM Design Group Zoning County of San Luis Obispo – Commercial Retail, Agriculture, Rural Lands General Plan SP-3 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Area Site Area 111 acres Environmental Status A Program-Level Final EIR was adopted for the LUCE in 2014. Meeting Date: January 27, 2016 Item Number: 3 8.f Packet Pg. 283 At t a c h m e n t f P C R e s o l u t i o n M i n u t e s a n d S t a f f R e p o r t J a n u a r y 2 7 2 0 1 6 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n PRE 1293-2015 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Initiation Request Page 2 2.0 SPECIFIC PLAN INITIATION HEARING CONTINUANCE On December 9, 2015, the Planning Commission considered the applicant’s request to initiate the Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan and provided feedback and direction regarding several key issues identified in the applicant’s submitted project description narrative and the staff report (refer to Attachment 3, December 9, 2015 staff report and attachments). The Planning Commission generally supported the applicant’s proposed mix of uses, which include Senior Housing (Continuing Care Retirement Community), multi-family housing, single-family housing, retail sales uses, open space, and parks (Attachment 3, Exhibit B.1 Conceptual Land Uses). The most significant issue raised by the applicant is the request to allow development above the 150-foot elevation. The applicant’s conceptual land use exhibit shows the senior housing land use area extending to the 250-foot elevation (existing grade) and residential use area extending to the 180-foot elevation (existing grade). As indicated by the applicant, the conceptual land use plan includes 19.12 acres of development above the 150-foot elevation line (refer to page 3 of Attachment 3, Planning Commission Staff Report, December 9, 2015). The Planning Commission moved to continue the item pending receipt of additional information and clarification as discussed in section 2.1 below. 2.1 Response to Planning Commission a.Planning Commission Direction #1: Clearly identify constraints warranting development above the 150-foot elevation: Approximately 61 acres of the 111-acre project site is located below the 150-foot elevation. As indicated by the applicant and as graphically shown on the applicant’s Environmental Summary Site Constraints Map (refer to Attachment 4, Exhibit A.1), existing land use and resource constraints below the 150-foot elevation include: 1.Existing historic buildings associated with the Froom Ranch Historic Complex (1.5 acres) 2.Wetland habitat proximate to Los Osos Valley Road and Calle Joaquin Road (7.0 acres) 3.Stormwater basin serving adjacent commercial development (2.8 acres) 4.Slopes 21 percent or greater (6.0 acres) The applicant’s preliminary conceptual plans include the realignment and restoration of Froom Creek below the 150-foot elevation (refer to Attachment 5, Exhibit D.1, Conceptual Creek Corridor Plan and Section). This component would result in approximately 11.6 acres of drainages onsite; this acreage includes a 35-foot building setback from Froom Creek and a 20-foot building setback from an unnamed tributary to Froom Creek. Therefore, the applicant indicates that approximate area of constrained land below the 150-foot elevation is 28.9 acres. This would leave approximately 32.1 acres of developable area below the 150- foot elevation. This acreage is a key component of the applicant’s justification for requesting 8.f Packet Pg. 284 At t a c h m e n t f P C R e s o l u t i o n M i n u t e s a n d S t a f f R e p o r t J a n u a r y 2 7 2 0 1 6 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n PRE 1293-2015 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Initiation Request Page 3 the City’s consideration of development above the 150-foot elevation, as discussed further below. b.Planning Commission Direction #2: Provide justification for development above the 150- foot elevation: The applicant’s justification for development above the 150-foot elevation relates to the acreage of unconstrained land, compliance with the LUE standards for SP-3, and the additional Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC) component of the conceptual plan. As noted above, the applicant has identified approximately 32.1 acres of developable land below the 150-foot elevation. As shown in Table 1 below, the approximate acreage to meet LUE standards for SP-3 ranges between 25.5 and 67.5 acres, due to the variations in minimum to maximum units and square footage for identified land uses. Please note the acreages identified in Table 1 on the following page are conceptual and approximate, and are intended to give the Planning Commission and the public a general understanding of the comparison between developable acreage and the approximate acreage needed to accommodate a Specific Plan development. In addition to the development area estimated to be necessary to comply with the LUE standards which could feasibly be accommodated in some form below the 150-foot elevation, the applicant estimates that the CCRC would require an additional 20 acres of developable land to accommodate activities and life transitions from active adult to skilled nursing and hospice. As shown in Table 1, the applicant’s conceptual plan, which includes general compliance with the LUE SP-3 standards and the CCRC, would require up to approximately 55.5 acres of total developed land, which would exceed the developable land acreage below the 150-foot elevation by approximately 23.4 acres. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a recommendation to initiate the Specific Plan that would allow submittal of an application package including development of the CCRC and residential land uses above the 150-foot elevation. As shown in Table 1, if a Specific Plan were proposed to meet the minimum LUE development standards (25.5 acres) and accommodate the proposed CCRC (20 acres), this concept would exceed developable land area below the 150-foot elevation by approximately 13 acres. 8.f Packet Pg. 285 At t a c h m e n t f P C R e s o l u t i o n M i n u t e s a n d S t a f f R e p o r t J a n u a r y 2 7 2 0 1 6 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n PRE 1293-2015 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Initiation Request Page 4 Table 1. Developable Land Requirements1 LUE SP-3 Development Standards Applicant’s Conceptual Land Use Mix Type/Designation Min-Max2 Approximate Area Conceptual Land Use Mix Approximate Area Residential Mixed Use) / MDR, MHDR, HDR 200 to 350 units 8 – 29 acres 275 dwelling units 18 acres CCRC including: 276 independent living apartments 66 independent living villas and assisted living units 122-bed skilled nursing and memory care facility 20 acres Commercial / NC, CR 50,000 to 350,000 sf 3- 24 acres 25,000-45,000 sf3 2-3 acres Parks / PARK -- 6.5 acres Small neighborhood park including historic structures education, community use) 6.5 acres Circulation and Stormwater management 8 acres Circulation and stormwater management 8 acres Total (approx.) -- 25.5 – 67.5 acres -- 54.4 - 55.5 acres 1 Does not include 50% Open Space Requirement (55 acres) 2 There can be a reduction in the minimum requirement based on specific physical and/or environmental constraints 3 The applicant has also indicated 50,000 sf of commercial uses to meet the LUE minimum standards c.Planning Commission Direction #3: Description of potential impacts to environmental resources as a result of potential development above the 150-foot elevation Prior to formulation of a recommendation to the City Council regarding initiation of the Specific Plan, the Commission requested additional information regarding the resources potentially affected by development above the 150-foot elevation. Based on the applicant’s submitted Biological Resources Inventory (Kevin Merk Associates [KMA], January 2016) Attachment 7), Section 106 Prehistoric and Historic Report (First Carbon Solutions, February 2015) (confidential report), and Environmental Summary Site Constraints Map refer to Attachment 4, Exhibit A.1), sensitive environmental resources present above the 150-foot elevation include special-status plant species and habitats, a portion of the Froom Ranch Historic Complex, and archaeological resources. Due to the conceptual nature of the current proposal, which does not yet include a Specific Plan application package, impacts to 8.f Packet Pg. 286 At t a c h m e n t f P C R e s o l u t i o n M i n u t e s a n d S t a f f R e p o r t J a n u a r y 2 7 2 0 1 6 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n PRE 1293-2015 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Initiation Request Page 5 these resources as a result of a specific project has not yet been determined; however, preliminary information based on the conceptual plan is presented below. Special Status Habitats and Plant Species As shown on the applicant’s Environmental Summary Site Constraints Map dated December 16, 2015 (Attachment 4, Exhibit A.1), sensitive habitats present above the 150-foot elevation include: wetland habitat, serpentine bunchgrass grassland, serpentine rock outcrop, and coast live oak woodland. Special-status plant species documented above the 150-foot elevation include: Chorro Creek bog thistle, San Luis Obispo owl’s clover, San Luis mariposa lily, Eastwood’s larkspur, mouse-grey dudleya, Blochman’s dudleya, Jones’s layia, chaparral ragwort, Cambria morning glory, club hair mariposa lily, and Palmer’s spineflower (KMA, January 2016). Based on an approximation of potential impacts, development of the conceptual project above the 150-foot elevation may impact approximately: 1.6.68 acres of serpentine bunchgrass 2.1.24 acres of California Rare Plant Rank List 1B species, and 3.7,500 square feet of wetland habitat (road and trail drainage crossings). The applicant’s conceptual exhibit shows approximately 24 individual Chorro Creek bog thistle plants located onsite and identifies a 50-foot buffer surrounding these plants (refer to Attachment 3, Exhibit A.3 April 2015 Pre-Application Basis for Design Studies). If the City Council authorizes initiation of the Specific Plan, potential impacts to biological resources and associated avoidance and mitigation measures would be fully evaluated pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the General Plan, and Municipal Code. Historic and Archaeological Resources The Froom Ranch Historic Complex is located in the northwest portion of the project site. With the exception of a historic dairy barn, the complex is located below the 150-foot elevation (refer to Attachment 4, Exhibit A.1). The two intact prehistoric resources (CA- SLO-783 and CA-SLO-1195) onsite are located above the 150-foot elevation. These resources are comprised of bedrock mortars and lithics, dietary shellfish, and bone remains, and it is possible that undiscovered subsurface resources are present. In addition, a number of isolate prehistoric artifacts and historic features were documented onsite, including a small concentration of stone artifacts, isolate waste flakes, linear rock wall features, and a stacked stone revetment/retaining wall (First Carbon Solutions, February 2015). The applicant’s conceptual exhibits show avoidance of archaeological sites (refer to Attachment 3, Exhibit A.3 April 2015 Pre-Application Basis for Design Studies). If the City Council authorizes initiation of the Specific Plan, potential impacts to historic and prehistoric resources, and avoidance and mitigation measures would be fully evaluated pursuant to CEQA, the General Plan, and Municipal Code. 8.f Packet Pg. 287 At t a c h m e n t f P C R e s o l u t i o n M i n u t e s a n d S t a f f R e p o r t J a n u a r y 2 7 2 0 1 6 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n PRE 1293-2015 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Initiation Request Page 6 d.Planning Commission Direction #4: Amended visual simulations to show elevation contours and graphic simulations In response to the Planning Commission’s questions and concerns regarding potential impacts to scenic viewsheds and hillsides, the applicant provided a visual simulations package (refer to Attachment 6) including the following scenarios for comparison: 1.Photograph of existing view 2.Photo-simulation of conceptual development 3.Photo-simulation of conceptual development showing the approximate location of the 150-foot elevation line 4.Photo-simulation of conceptual development showing only proposed buildings above the 150-foot elevation 5.Photo-simulation of conceptual development showing only proposed buildings below the 150-foot elevation If the City Council authorizes initiation of the Specific Plan, potential impacts to visual resources including independent verification and analysis of project photo-simulations would be conducted pursuant to CEQA, the General Plan, and Municipal Code. 3.0 CONCLUSION The scope of the initiation review only provides authorization for the applicant to proceed with the application process for the Specific Plan. If the Commission recommends inclusion of the applicant’s request to propose alteration of the 150-foot maximum site development alteration and/or modification to the mix of land uses envisioned in the Land Use Element for the Specific Plan area, Staff recommends the Planning Commission’s recommendation include the following direction: 1.The formal application shall include all necessary information to fully evaluate the potential effects of development on natural and scenic resources (particularly as it relates to visual impacts on the City’s edge), including but not limited to: photo- simulations, cross sections, grading plans (with cut and fill details), circulation diagrams, and preliminary building layouts and massing details; assessment of potential visual effects as seen from public areas including but not limited to roads, highways, and open space areas; a comprehensive project-specific and quantified impact analysis on special-status plants, animals, vegetative communities and trees, and creeks, drainages, and wetland habitat; proposed mitigation plan(s) for both on and off-site restoration (as applicable); and hydrological analysis accompanying proposed plans to modify and restore Froom Creek. 4.0 ALTERNATIVES 4.1 Recommend the City Council approve initiation of Specific Plan and General Plan amendments including authorization to proceed with including the following in the formal application for further evaluation, as requested by the applicant: (1) revisit the 150 foot elevation maximum site development, particularly as it relates to visual 8.f Packet Pg. 288 At t a c h m e n t f P C R e s o l u t i o n M i n u t e s a n d S t a f f R e p o r t J a n u a r y 2 7 2 0 1 6 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n PRE 1293-2015 Madonna on LOVR Specific Plan Initiation Request Page 7 impacts on the City’s edge; and, (2) modification of the Land Use Element specified land use mix. 4.2 Recommend the City Council approve initiation of Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments, but provide a land use mix that more closely correlates with LUE policies for Specific Plan Area 3. 4.3 Recommend the City Council approve the initiation but the formal submittal should not include a General Plan Amendment to develop above the 150-foot contour line. 4.4 Continue the item. An action to continue the item should include a detailed list of additional information or analysis required. 4.5 Determine that no major amendments should be made to the General Plan and recommend the City Council deny the request for Specific Plan Amendment Initiation. 5.0 ATTACHMENTS 1.Draft Resolution 2.Vicinity Map 3.Planning Commission Staff Report and Attachments, December 9, 2015 4.Environmental Summary Site Constraints Map (Updated Exhibit A.1) 5.Conceptual Creek Corridor Plan and Section (Updated Exhibit D.1) 6.Applicant’s Updated Photo-simulations 7.Biological Resources Inventory (KMA 2016) NOTE: Not Attached to Attachment f, please refer to individual attachments to the Council Agenda Report 8.f Packet Pg. 289 At t a c h m e n t f P C R e s o l u t i o n M i n u t e s a n d S t a f f R e p o r t J a n u a r y 2 7 2 0 1 6 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n 8.g Packet Pg. 290 At t a c h m e n t g A p p l i c a n t P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n a n d N a r r a t i v e 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n 8.g Packet Pg. 291 At t a c h m e n t g A p p l i c a n t P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n a n d N a r r a t i v e 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n 8.g Packet Pg. 292 At t a c h m e n t g A p p l i c a n t P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n a n d N a r r a t i v e 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n 8.g Packet Pg. 293 At t a c h m e n t g A p p l i c a n t P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n a n d N a r r a t i v e 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n 8.g Packet Pg. 294 At t a c h m e n t g A p p l i c a n t P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n a n d N a r r a t i v e 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n 8.g Packet Pg. 295 At t a c h m e n t g A p p l i c a n t P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n a n d N a r r a t i v e 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n 8.g Packet Pg. 296 At t a c h m e n t g A p p l i c a n t P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n a n d N a r r a t i v e 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n 8.g Packet Pg. 297 At t a c h m e n t g A p p l i c a n t P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n a n d N a r r a t i v e 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n 8.g Packet Pg. 298 At t a c h m e n t g A p p l i c a n t P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n a n d N a r r a t i v e 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n 8.g Packet Pg. 299 At t a c h m e n t g A p p l i c a n t P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n a n d N a r r a t i v e 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n 8.h Packet Pg. 300 At t a c h m e n t h A p p l i c a n t E x h i b i t s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n 8.h Packet Pg. 301 At t a c h m e n t h A p p l i c a n t E x h i b i t s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n 8.h Packet Pg. 302 At t a c h m e n t h A p p l i c a n t E x h i b i t s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n 8.h Packet Pg. 303 At t a c h m e n t h A p p l i c a n t E x h i b i t s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n 8.h Packet Pg. 304 At t a c h m e n t h A p p l i c a n t E x h i b i t s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n 8.h Packet Pg. 305 At t a c h m e n t h A p p l i c a n t E x h i b i t s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n 8.h Packet Pg. 306 At t a c h m e n t h A p p l i c a n t E x h i b i t s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n 8.h Packet Pg. 307 At t a c h m e n t h A p p l i c a n t E x h i b i t s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n MEMORANDUM Date: February 26, 2015 To: Victor Montgomery Organization: RRM Design Group From: William Strand Title: Manager of Engineering Project Name: Froom Ranch Specific Plan (Il Villaggio) Project Number: 1014012 Topic: Froom Ranch Specific Plan (Il Villaggio) Stormwater Location and Existing Conditions The Froom Ranch Specific Plan (Il Villaggio) project is located in the city of San Luis Obispo, California on the west side of Los Osos Valley Road and approximately 600 feet northwest of Highway 101. The project boundary is approximately 111 acres with approximately 76 acres proposed to be developed. The site is underlain by soils with high clay content which are poorly suited for infiltration (5.). The site is mainly undeveloped and used as range land with approximately 4 existing buildings and dirt roads at the northern end of the site. An existing drainage channel (Q100 = 102 cfs) runs south along Los Osos Valley Road conveying runoff from upstream development through the property (1.). Froom Creek also flows through the site along the northwestern and southeastern boundaries and has a 100-year flow rate of 1,066 cfs (2.). Approximately 28 acres (37%) of the project area lies within the FEMA 100-year floodplain (Zone A). The site has two existing stormwater basins that receive runoff from the adjacent Home Depot and Irish Hills commercial sites. The basin serving the Home Depot development was sized to retain a water quality volume equal to the 95th percentile capture volume of 1.27 ac-ft. The detention basin serving the Irish Hills shopping center has a capacity of 2.03 ac-ft. (sized per County of San Luis Obispo Standards to detain the 50-year storm while discharging at the 2-year storm flow rate). Proposed Development Proposed improvements include the construction of approximately 55 acres of single family, multi-family, and assisted living and 21 acres of commercial developments. Existing drainage patterns along Los Osos Valley Road, and Froom Creek will be maintained. Froom Creek will be slightly re-aligned and modified to contain the 100-year storm event; however, the channel will still release at the historical point of discharge. A channel with a capacity of 102 cfs will be constructed to convey flows parallel to Los Osos Valley Road. Above and below ground stormwater basins will be constructed to provide storage for the existing 1.27 ac-ft. Home Depot basin and 2.03 ac-ft. Irish Hills basin. Culverts and channels will be designed to provide capacity for flows from the 100-year storm event. No upgrades to culverts at Highway 101 are proposed. Stormwater Requirements Stormwater requirements are listed in the Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region. The proposed improvements to the Froom Ranch property will require compliance with Runoff Retention and Peak Management. The design of this project will be driven by the Runoff Retention requirement since this volume is greater than the Peak Management Volume. 8.h Packet Pg. 308 At t a c h m e n t h A p p l i c a n t E x h i b i t s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Runoff Retention Most of the proposed project area lies within Watershed Management Zone 1—requiring capture of the 95th percentile storm event without runoff for water quality (3.). The 95th percentile storm depth is 2.0 inches. Since harvesting/reuse and infiltration are infeasible, retention volumes shall be multiplied by 1.2. The total required runoff retention volume is 10.91 acre-ft. Sub-Basin Depth inches) Landuse Post-Dev. Runoff Coeff. Dev. Area acres) Capture Vol. (ac- ft.) 1 2.0 Commercial 0.7520.95 3.14 2 2.0 CCRC 0.7511.16 1.67 3 2.0 Residential 0.7027.04 3.79 4 2.0 Residential 0.7016.51 2.31 75.66 10.91 Total Peak Management Post-development peak flows discharged from the site shall not exceed pre-project peak flows for the 2- through 10-year storm events (respective depths of 2.00” and 4.51”) (4.). The required Peak Management volume is 7.71 acre-ft. Existing On-site Retention Ponds Sub- Basin Pre- dev. Runoff Coeff. Landuse Post- Dev. Runoff Coeff. Dev. Area acres) 95th Percentil e Depth inches) Detention Basin Q-50 – Q- 2)ac-ft. 95th Percentile Capture Vol. (ac-ft) Home Depot 0.45 Commerci al 0.75 10.14 2.0 -- 1.27 Irish Hills 0.45 Commerci al 0.75 18.62 2.0 2.03 2.33 Notes: 1.Per pg. V-6, Eagle Hardware EIR 10-1-2014 Sub- Basin Pre- Dev. Runof f Coeff Proposed Landuse Post- Dev. Runoff Coeff. Dev. Area acre s) 2-Year, 24 Hr Depth in.) 10- Year, 24 Hr Depth in.) 2-Year Peak Manageme nt Volume ac-ft) 10-Year Peak Manageme nt Volume ac-ft) 1 0.45 Commerci al 0.75 20.95 2.00 4.51 1.05 2.36 2 0.45 CCRC 0.75 11.16 2.00 4.51 0.56 1.26 3 0.45 Residential 0.70 27.04 2.00 4.51 1.13 2.54 4 0.45 Residential 0.70 16.51 2.00 4.51 0.69 1.55 75.66 7.71 Total 8.h Packet Pg. 309 At t a c h m e n t h A p p l i c a n t E x h i b i t s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n 2.Per pg. 22, Revised Hydraulic Study Report Los Osos Valley Road/US 101 Interchange Improvement Project. November 2010. San Luis Obispo County 3.Per Section B.4 Post Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region 4.Per Section B.5 Post Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region 5.Per USGS Web Soil Survey 8.h Packet Pg. 310 At t a c h m e n t h A p p l i c a n t E x h i b i t s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n 8.h Packet Pg. 311 At t a c h m e n t h A p p l i c a n t E x h i b i t s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n 8.h Packet Pg. 312 At t a c h m e n t h A p p l i c a n t E x h i b i t s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Ja n u a r y 1 1 2 0 1 6 VI S U A L S I M U L A T I O N S Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Packet Pg. 313 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Vi e w f r o m N o r t h b o u n d 1 0 1 1 Before Packet Pg. 314 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Vi e w f r o m N o r t h b o u n d 1 0 1 1 After Packet Pg. 315 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Vi e w f r o m D a l i d i o P r o p e r t y 2 Before Packet Pg. 316 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Vi e w f r o m D a l i d i o P r o p e r t y 2 After Packet Pg. 317 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Vi e w 2 3 P r o Vi e w f r o m D a l i d i o P r o p e r t y 2 After Ap p r o x i m a t e 15 0 f t E l e v a t i on Packet Pg. 318 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Vi e w 2 4 P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n Vi e w f r o m D a l i d i o P r o p e r t y P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n g s B e l o w 1 5 0 E l e v a t i o n 2 After Ap p r o x i m a t e 15 0 f t E l e v a t i on Packet Pg. 319 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Vi e w 2 5 P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n Vi e w f r o m D a l i d i o P r o p e r t y P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n g s A b o v e 1 5 0 E l e v a t i o n 2 After Ap p r o x i m a t e 15 0 f t E l e v a t i on Packet Pg. 320 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Th i s p a g e h a s b e e n i n t e n t i o n a l l y l e f t b l a n k Packet Pg. 321 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an 3 Before Vi e w f r o m C a l l e J o a q u i n Packet Pg. 322 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an 3 After Vi e w f r o m C a l l e J o a q u i n Packet Pg. 323 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Vi e w 3 3 P r o 3 After Vi e w f r o m C a l l e J o a q u i n Ap p r o x i m a te 15 0 f t E l e v a t Packet Pg. 324 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Vi e w 3 4 P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n 3 After Vi e w f r o m C a l l e J o a q u i n P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n g s B e l o w 1 5 0 E l e v a t i o n Ap p r o x i m a t e 15 0 f t E l e v a t i Packet Pg. 325 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Vi e w 3 5 P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n 3 After Vi e w f r o m C a l l e J o a q u i n P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n g s A b o v e 1 5 0 E l e v a t i o n Ap p r o x i m a t e 15 0 f t E l e v a t i Packet Pg. 326 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Th i s p a g e h a s b e e n i n t e n t i o n a l l y l e f t b l a n k Packet Pg. 327 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an 4 Before Vi e w f r o m C a l l e J o a q u i n a n d L o s O s o s V a l l e y R o a d Packet Pg. 328 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an 4 After Vi e w f r o m C a l l e J o a q u i n a n d L o s O s o s V a l l e y R o a d Packet Pg. 329 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Vi e w 4 3 P r o 4 After Vi e w f r o m C a l l e J o a q u i n a n d L o s O s o s V a l l e y R o a d Ap p r o x i m a t e 15 0 f t E l e v a t i on Packet Pg. 330 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Vi e w 4 4 P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n 4 After Vi e w f r o m C a l l e J o a q u i n a n d L o s O s o s V a l l e y R o a d P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n g s B e l o w 1 5 0 E l e v a t i o n Ap p r o x i m a te 15 0 f t E l e v a t i on Packet Pg. 331 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Vi e w 4 5 P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n 4 After Vi e w f r o m C a l l e J o a q u i n a n d L o s O s o s V a l l e y R o a d P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n g s A b o v e 1 5 0 E l e v a t i o n Ap p r o x i m a te 15 0 f t E l e v a t i on Packet Pg. 332 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Th i s p a g e h a s b e e n i n t e n t i o n a l l y l e f t b l a n k Packet Pg. 333 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an 5 Before Vi e w f r o m L o s O s o s V a l l e y R o a d O v e r p a s s o v e r 1 0 1 F r e e w a y Packet Pg. 334 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an 5 After Vi e w f r o m L o s O s o s V a l l e y R o a d O v e r p a s s o v e r 1 0 1 F r e e w a y Packet Pg. 335 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Vi e w 5 3 P r o 5 After Vi e w f r o m L o s O s o s V a l l e y R o a d O v e r p a s s o v e r 1 0 1 F r e e w a y Ap p r o x i m a t e 15 0 f t E l e v a t i on Packet Pg. 336 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Vi e w 5 4 P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n 5 After Vi e w f r o m L o s O s o s V a l l e y R o a d O v e r p a s s o v e r 1 0 1 F r e e w a y P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n g s B e l o w 1 5 0 E l e v a t i o n Ap p r o x i m a t e 15 0 f t E l e v a t i on Packet Pg. 337 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Vi e w 5 5 P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n 5 After Vi e w f r o m L o s O s o s V a l l e y R o a d O v e r p a s s o v e r 1 0 1 F r e e w a y P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n g s A b o v e 1 5 0 E l e v a t i o n Ap p r o x i m a t e 15 0 f t E l e v a t i on Packet Pg. 338 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Th i s p a g e h a s b e e n i n t e n t i o n a l l y l e f t b l a n k Packet Pg. 339 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Pa g e 2 8 6 Before Vi e w f r o m S o u t h H i g u e r a a n d L o s O s o s V a l l e y R o a d Packet Pg. 340 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an 6 After Vi e w f r o m S o u t h H i g u e r a a n d L o s O s o s V a l l e y R o a d Packet Pg. 341 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an 7 Before Vi e w f r o m M a d o n n a R o a d O v e r p a s s o v e r 1 0 1 F r e e w a y Packet Pg. 342 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an 7 After Vi e w f r o m M a d o n n a R o a d O v e r p a s s o v e r 1 0 1 F r e e w a y Packet Pg. 343 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an 8 Before Vi e w f r o m S o u t h b o u n d 1 0 1 a c r o s s f r o m P r a d o R o a d Packet Pg. 344 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an 8 After Vi e w f r o m S o u t h b o u n d 1 0 1 a c r o s s f r o m P r a d o R o a d Packet Pg. 345 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Vi e w 8 3 P r o 8 After Vi e w f r o m S o u t h b o u n d 1 0 1 a c r o s s f r o m P r a d o R o a d Ap p r o x i m a t e 15 0 f t E l e v a t i on Packet Pg. 346 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Vi e w 8 4 P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n 8 After Vi e w f r o m S o u t h b o u n d 1 0 1 a c r o s s f r o m P r a d o R o a d P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n g s B e l o w 1 5 0 E l e v a t i o n Ap p r o x i m a t e 15 0 f t E l e v a t i on Packet Pg. 347 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Vi e w 8 5 P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n 8 After Vi e w f r o m S o u t h b o u n d 1 0 1 a c r o s s f r o m P r a d o R o a d P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t w i t h o u t B u i l d i n g s A b o v e 1 5 0 E l e v a t i o n Ap p r o x i m a t e 15 0 f t E l e v a t i on Packet Pg. 348 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an Th i s p a g e h a s b e e n i n t e n t i o n a l l y l e f t b l a n k Packet Pg. 349 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an 9 Before Vi e w f r o m F r o o m R a n c h W a y L o s O s o s V a l l e y R o a d I n t e r s e c t i o n Packet Pg. 350 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an 9 After Vi e w f r o m F r o o m R a n c h W a y L o s O s o s V a l l e y R o a d I n t e r s e c t i o n Packet Pg. 351 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an 10 Before Vi e w f r o m F r o o m R a n c h W a y Packet Pg. 352 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Fr o o m R a n c h S p e c i f i c P l an 10 After Vi e w f r o m F r o o m R a n c h W a y Packet Pg. 353 At t a c h m e n t i A p p l i c a n t V i s u a l S i m u l a t i o n s 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n FROOM RANCH PROJECT SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY,CALIFORNIA BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY Prepared for: John Madonna Construction,Inc. P.O.Box 5310 San Luis Obispo,California93403 Prepared by: KMA Kevin Merk Associates,LLC P.O.Box318 San Luis Obispo,California 93406 January 2016 8.j Packet Pg. 354 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. ES--i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Kevin Merk Associates,LLC KMA)conducted a biologicalresourcesinventory to support development planning efforts on the Froom Ranch locatedin San Luis Obispo County,California.Thepurpose of the study was to characterize the existing conditionson the property and evaluate the potentialforspecial status biological resourcestobepresent within the studyarea.A background literature review, floristic inventory,tree inventory and special status species evaluationwasconducted. The studytook place over the course ofthewinter,spring,summer and fallof2015 to delineate and characterize plant communities onsite,conduct rare plant surveys,and identify any habitat thatcould potentially support special status speciesorotherwise be of concern to the UnitedStatesFishand Wildlife USFWS),U.S.Army Corps of EngineersUSACE),NOAA Fisheries,California Departmentof Fish andWildlife CDFW),California Regional Water Quality ControlBoardRWQCB),and theCity of San Luis Obispo.As stated above,prior to field work,abackground literature review including past biological studies conducted in theregion and environmental documents from projects onsiteandin the immediate area was conducted.The California NaturalDiversity Data Base CNDDB)maintained by theCDFW was queried to compile a list of specialstatus resources known to occurinthearea that could potentially be present onsite.The field effort mappedonsitehabitat types,characterized natural drainage features,and identified all plantswithin the studyarea to a sufficient level to determinetheir respective rarity status.For special status wildlife,a habitat suitability analysis wasusedtodetermine the species that could potentially occur withinthestudyarea.The following findings were gatheredin the report: Existing Conditions.The siteisa 111 acre working cattle/horse ranch that supportsprimarily grassland habitat both nativebunchgrass andnon--native annual).Oak woodlands,coastal scrub,and serpentine outcrops were identified within the studyarea.Froom Creek andthree tributary drainages are alsopresent onsite.Froom Creek is atributary to San Luis Obispo Creek locatedoffsitetothe southeast.Asite locationmap,aerial overviewmap,soils map,habitat map,CNDDB botanical occurrences map,special status plant occurrences map,and CNDDB wildlifeoccurrencesmapare provided herein.A list of plant and animal speciesobserved,special status species knowntooccurin the region and an evaluation of their potential tooccuronsite,a photo plate,andtree inventory data are included as appendices. Special StatusBiological Resources.The site containsFroom Creek and associated tributary drainages.The upper elevation areasinthesouthwest of the site have serpentinederivedsoils and rock outcrops.Grasslands in the southwestpart of the study areacontainnative species suchaspurple needlegrass Stipa pulchra),and was mappedasserpentine bunchgrass grasslandseparated from the annual grasslandthat forms thedominant cover onsite.Other special status resources onsite include coast liveoak/California bay woodland,and wetland and riparian habitat associated with natural drainage features.In addition,wetlands were delineated along Calle Joaquin andLosOsosValleyRoad where surface and subsurface hydrology has been impounded due to theconstructionofroadsand adjacent development. The floristic inventory identified thefollowing special status plants occurringin the serpentine bunchgrass grassland,wetlands and on scattered serpentine outcropsin the southwest part of thesite: Blochman's dudleyaDudleya blochmaniae;CRPR List1B.1); Brewer's spineflowerChorizanthe breweri;CRPR List1B.3); Cambria morning gloryCalystegia subacaulisssp.episcopalis;CRPR List4.2); Chaparral ragwortSenecio aphanactis;CRPR List2.2); Chorro Creek bog thistleCirsium fontinalevar.obispoense;federal and state endangeredand CRPR List 1B.2); club hair mariposalilyCalochortus clavatus ssp.clavatus CRPR List4.3); 8.j Packet Pg. 355 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. ES--ii Congdon's tarplantCentromadia parryissp.congdonii;CRPR List1B.1); Eastwood’s larkspurDelphinium parryi ssp.eastwoodiae;CRPR List1B.2); Jones's layiaLayia jonesii;CRPR List1B.2); mouse--gray dudleyaDudleya abramsii ssp.murina;CRPR List1B.2); Palmer’s spineflowerChorizanthe palmeri:CRPR List4.2); San Luis mariposalilyCalochortus obispoensis;CRPR List1B.2);and San Luis Obispoowl's--clover Castilleja densiflorassp.obispoensis;CRPR List1B.2). No rare animalswere observedonsite during the field surveys,but based on ahabitatsuitability analysis,the followingspecial status animalscould potentially occuronsite: American badgerTaxidea taxus;species of specialconcern) Burrowing owl Athene cunicularia;species of specialconcern); California homed lark Eremophila alpestris actia;watch list); Cooper’s hawk Accipiter cooperi;watch list); Golden eagle Aquila chrysaetos;watch list and CDFW FullyProtected); Loggerhead shrike Lanius ludovicianus;species of specialconcern); Merlin Falco columbarius;watch list); Northern harrier Circus cyaneus;species of specialconcern); Purple martin Progne subis;species of specialconcern); Sharp--shinned hawk Accipiter striatus;watch list); Tricolored blackbird Agelaius tricolor;candidate species and species of specialconcern); White--tailed kite Elanus leucurus;CDFW Fully Protected); Yellow warbler Dendroica petechia brewsteri;species of specialconcern); Big free--tailed bat Nyctinomops macrotis;species of specialconcern; Hoary bat Lasiurus cinereus;special animal); Pallid bat Antrozous pallidus;species of special concern); San Diego woodrat Neotoma lepida intermedia;species of specialconcern); Steelhead Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus;federal threatened and speciesofconcern); Townsend’s westernbig--eared bat Corynorhinus townsendi townsendi;species of special concern); Western mastiffbat Eumops perotis californicus;species of specialconcern); Western redbat Lasiurus blossevilli;species of special concern);and Yuma Myotis Myotis yumanensis;special animal). A variety of birds and bats could also utilize the larger trees withintheoak/baywoodlandandriparian habitat for nesting and roosting activities.In addition,several bird speciescouldpotentiallyusethe grassland habitat in the study area for nesting.Given the property containsamosaicofhabitattypes, birds and bats would be expected to forage throughouttheproperty. 8.j Packet Pg. 356 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 METHODS 1 2.1 Background Literature Review 1 2.2 SpecialStatus Biological Resources Definition 4 2.3 Field Surveys 5 2.4 Tree Inventory 6 2.5 Floristic Inventory 7 2.6 Wildlife Assessment 7 3.0 RESULTS 8 3.1 Habitat Types 11 3.2 TreeSurvey 15 3.3 Drainage Features 15 3.4 Soils 18 3.5 Special Status Biological Resources 19 5.0 CONCLUSION 26 6.0 REFERENCES 27 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Site LocationMap 2 Figure 2 Aerial OverviewMap 3 Figure 3 Soils Map 9 Figure 4 Habitat Map 10 Figure 5 Tree SurveyMap 16 Figure 6 CNDDB Botanical Occurrences Map 20 Figure 7 Special Status Plant OccurrencesMap 22 Figure 8 CNDDB Wildlife OccurrencesMap 24 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Survey Dates and Personnel 6 APPENDICES Appendix A List of Plantsand AnimalsObserved Onsite Appendix B CNDDB Table of SpecialStatusBiological ResourcesKnown orPotentially Occurring on the Site Appendix C Photo Plate Appendix D Tree Survey Data Form 8.j Packet Pg. 357 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory Report John Madonna Construction, Inc. 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION Kevin Merk Associates,LLCKMA)conducted a biological resourcesinventory on the Froom Ranch located just outside the current city limits oftheCity ofSan Luis Obispo,in San Luis Obispo County, California.The purpose of theinvestigation was to provide baseline information ofthebiological resources present or potentially present on the site for future developmentplanningandreviewby the project team and the City ofSanLuisObispo.The site is located intheeastern flank ofthe Irish Hills of theSan Luis Rangejustnorth andwest of Highway101,and west ofLos Osos ValleyRoad please refertoFigures 1 and 2).The subject property is boundedby the Irish Hills Plazatothe north,Los Osos ValleyRoad LOVR)to the east,the City of San Luis Obispo IrishHillsNatural Reserve to the west,and Mountainbrook Church and several hotels alongCalleJoaquintothesouth. The Froom Ranch has a long history asaworking ranchcomposed ofa diverse array of coastal habitats including annual and perennialgrasslands,coastal scrub,chaparral,oak and bay woodland, riparian and wetland creatingamosaicof plant communitiesacross the landscape. The region is characterizedas a Mediterranean climate with mild,wet wintersandwarm,dry summers.Duetothe site’s proximity to the PacificOcean,daily temperatures do not fluctuateas much as the County’s interiornortheast of the Santa LuciaMountains.Average annual temperatures range from approximately 41degreesFahrenheit F)to 71 degreesF,andannual precipitation in the San LuisObispoarearanges from approximately 21 to 24 inchesdependingon location Western Regional Climate CenterandNational Oceanic andAtmospheric Administration, 2015).Most ofthe rain occurs between November and March with a smallamount attributed to coastal fogand monsoonal flowduring the summer months. The biological resourcesinventory was prepared at the requestofMr.John Madonna to identify plant communities,plants and wildlifepresenton the property that could be of specialregulatory importance.In addition,a delineation of waters of the United States andStateofCaliforniawas conducted onsite KMA 2015),and the report was reviewed by the U.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers USACE).Based on field and office reviewofthedelineation report,theUSACE confirmed the maps identified the extent of their Clean WaterActjurisdiction letter dated September 24,2015). 2.0 METHODS 2.1 Background Literature Review Prior toconducting field work,KMA’s Principal Biologist,KevinMerk,and Senior Biologist,Robert Sloan,reviewed pertinent background information from the generalarea.This included the review of past studies conducted byKMA and other biological consultants in theregionandon the subject site.Portions of the studyarea and surroundinglands have been subject to previous biological studies.Several Environmental Impact Reportsfor nearby development projects were also reviewed.Several surrounding development projects included wetland delineationsand some focused biological studies.In some instances,the focusedstudiesincluded the northern and eastern parts of the study area i.e.:Home Depot/Irish Hills PlazaandCalleJoaquinImprovement projects).Hydrologic studies and wetland mitigation plans and subsequent mitigationmonitoring reports were also prepared and reviewed as part of theinvestigation.Clean Water Act permitting for the Home Depotproject,and subsequent regulatory actions taken bytheUSACE for permit violations during the construction ofHomeDepotresulted inasettlement agreement e.g.,Consent Decree dated August 12,2002)between the former owner of the propertyandtheUSACE.The Consent Decree has been resolved and all stipulationsweremet letter from the USACEon 2/19/2015). 8.j Packet Pg. 358 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Site Location Froom Ranch Figure 1 Sources: Sources: National Geographic, Esri, DeLorme, HERE, UNEP-WCMC, USGS, NASA, ESA, METI, NRCAN, GEBCO, NOAA, increment P Corp.© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed 1 inch = 10,000 feet Site Location John Madonna Construction, Inc.Site Location 1 in = 400,000 ft 8.j Packet Pg. 359 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Froom Ranch John Madonna Construction, Inc. Figure 2 Aerial Overview Sources: (c) ESRI and its data providers; USFWS, NWI Data; City of San Luis Obispo Study Area Boundary 1 inch = 1,500 feet HWY101 L o s O s o s V a ll e y R d Mado n n a R d S. HigueraSt 8.j Packet Pg. 360 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory Report John Madonna Construction, Inc. 4 The following documents werereviewed as part of the existing conditions characterization and preliminary biological constraints analysis: Madonna Eagle Hardware Environmental Impact Report1998); Biological Resources Analysis Letter of Findings for the Los OsosValleyRoadImprovement Project Olberding Environmental,2001); Wetland Restoration andMitigation Plans Relating to the Froom Ranch/HomeDepot Project Olberding Environmental,2002); San Luis Obispo Creek Watershed Enhancement Plan Land ConservancyofSanLuisObispo County,2002); Year 1 Wetland Monitoring Report for the Froom Ranch/BoysenRanchMitigationSites Olberding Environmental,2003); Calle Joaquin Realignment Wetland Delineation MorroGroup,2004); Irish Hills Plaza II Wetland Delineation Map MorroGroup,2004); Froom Ranch Wetland Assessment Morro Group,2005); Hydrologic Monitoring PlanforSustaining a Separated WetlandNear Calle Joaquin Balance Hydrologics,2005); Irish Hills Plaza Detention Basin Report WallaceGroup,2006); Year 5 Wetland Monitoring Report for the Froom Ranch/HomeDepotSiteOlberding Environmental,2007); Los Osos ValleyRoad/U.S.101 Interchange Improvements Project Biological Assessment for Central California Coast Steelhead2008);and Irish Hills Natural Area Conservation Plan Update2011). The California Natural Diversity Database maintained by the CaliforniaDepartmentofFishand Game updated in2015;CNDDB)was searched for special status biologicalresourcesdocumented within the United States Geological Survey’sUSGS)7.5--minute topographic quadranglemaps centered on and surrounding the site.This included theMorroBaySouth,SanLuis Obispo,Lopez Mtn.,Port San Luis,Pismo Beach and Arroyo Grande NE quads.Giventheprojectsite’sproximityto the Pacific Ocean and geographic setting within the San Luis Range incloseproximitytoSanLuis Obispo,the focus on thesesixquadswas deemed a sufficient search area to identifyspecialstatus species occurring in the vicinity of the site for inclusion in the study.Alargersearchradiuspicks up a number of plants andanimalsknown from higher elevations in the SantaLuciaMountains and further south in the Callendar and Guadalupe Dunes that would not beexpectedtooccuronthissite based on the lack of suitable habitatandsoils. The Natural Resources Conservation Service NRCS)Web Soil Survey wasreviewedtodetermine the soilmapping units present within thestudyareaU.S.Department of Agriculture2015).TheU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s online Wetland and CriticalHabitatMapper http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html;http://criticalhabitat.fws.gov/crithab/)were also reviewed to evaluate the extent of documented wetlands and designatedcriticalhabitat defined in the region. 2.2 Special Status Biological Resources Definition For the purpose of this report,special status species are those plantsandanimalslisted,proposed for listing,or candidates for listing as Threatened or Endangered bytheU.S.FishandWildlife Service USFWS)underthe federal Endangered Species Act ESA);those listedorproposedfor listing as Rare,Threatened,or Endangered by the CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife 8.j Packet Pg. 361 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory Report John Madonna Construction, Inc. 5 CDFW)under the California Endangered Species Act CESA);animals designatedasSpeciesof Special Concern,”Fully Protected,”or Watch List”bytheCDFW;and plants occurring onCalifornia Rare Plant Rank 1,2,3and4developed by theCDFW working in concert with the CaliforniaNative Plant Society CNPS).Thespecific code definitions areas follows: Rank 1A Plants presumed extinctinCalifornia; Rank 1B.1 Rare or endangered in California and elsewhere;seriouslyendangered in California over 80%of occurrences threatened/high degreeandimmediacyof threat); Rank 1B.2 Rareorendangered in California and elsewhere;fairlyendangeredin California 20--80%occurrences threatened); Rank 1B.3 Rare or endangered in California and elsewhere,notveryendangered in California 20%of occurrences threatened or no currentthreatsknown); Rank 2 Rare,threatened or endangered in California,butmorecommon elsewhere; Rank 3 Plants needing more information mostarespeciesthatare taxonomically unresolved;few species on this list meet the definitionsofrarity under CEQA);and Rank 4.2 Plants of limited distribution watch list),fairlyendangeredin California 20--80%occurrences threatened,seldom meets the definitionofrarity under CEQA). Rank 4.3=Plants of limited distribution watch list),notveryendangeredin California seldom meets the definition of rarityunderCEQA). Sensitive or special status natural communities are those plant communities listedasrareinthe CNDDB queried in AprilandNovember 2015.In addition,those habitat types or plant communities that have special regulatory status such as riparianhabitatsprotected by California Fish andGame Code or the Clean Water Act are also identified as specialstatusbiologicalresources. 2.3 Field Surveys Kevin Merkand Robert Sloanwere the primary investigators forall field workassociated with the biological resources inventory.Additional field support wasprovidedbyKMAstaff,Mr.Jaryd Block.Surveys were conducted onmultipledays through thewinter,spring,summer andfallof 2015.In addition,Mr.Merk conductedmultiple site visitsprior to,during and immediately following winter rain events during2013/2014to evaluate and characterize onsitewetlands to support the delineation of waters of the United States and stateofCaliforniapreparedbyKMA in August 2015.A focused treesurvey,a full floristic inventory,and a wildlife habitat assessment were conducted on thesite. The following table providesthedate and personnel for eachsurvey conducted in 2015: 8.j Packet Pg. 362 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory Report John Madonna Construction, Inc. 6 Table 1.2015 Survey DatesandPersonnel. Survey Date Survey Personnel January 28,Merk,Sloan,Block February 10 Sloan,Block March 3 Merk,Sloan March 11 Merk,Sloan,Block March 20 Merk,Sloan April 3 Merk,Sloan April 24 Merk May 22 Sloan June 1 Merk,Sloan June 19 Merk July 21 Merk,Sloan August 19 Merk September 17 Merk October 15 Merk The entireproperty was included in the study.Duringeachsurvey,thestudy area wastraversed on foot with special attention given to the drainagefeatures,wetlands,native grasslands and serpentine rock outcrops.Extensive time wasspentonsite,especiallyin the lower elevation grasslands along Los Osos Valley Road andCalleJoaquin,to delineate the extent of federalandstate jurisdictional wetlands and other waters please refer to KMA’s Delineation of Waters oftheUnited States and State of Californiaprepared in August2015for further information).Existing plant communities were mapped on an aerial photographobtainedfromGoogle Earth and ESRI,both from 2015.Serpentine bunchgrass grassland was identified based on the dominantcoverofnative bunchgrasses and forb associates,and then delineated withaTrimbleGPSunit.Historic aerial imagery obtained from Google Earth was also utilized to assessplantcommunitydistribution onsite during field surveys.Photos of notable features including special status plantswerealsotaken to document existing conditions of thestudyarea. 2.4 Tree Inventory KMA Senior BiologistRobert Sloan with field supportfrom Jaryd Block and Kevin Merk conducted an inventory of trees within the Froom Ranch propertyonFebruary10 and March3,2015.The survey covered the entire FroomRanchproperty.Trees on the steep westernhillside area were not tagged due to access and densepoisonoak.All other trees located within the propertywitha diameter at breast heightabout 4.5 feet abovegrade;DBH)of approximately four 4)inchesor greater were identified,measured,tagged,and evaluated during the inventory.Tagsconsistedof aluminum disks numbered 1 through96,and wereattached with aluminum nails to the eastsideof the main trunk.The locations of all tagged treeswererecordedwitha TrimbleGPS unit.Willow shrubs/trees along LOVRthatwere four inches DBHor greaterwere not tagged,but were counted and generally evaluated for health orvigor. Basic tree characteristics and physical conditions were evaluated for eachtaggedtree,andoverall health was evaluated based on vigor,presence of damage i.e.pathogens,insectpests,and other forms of natural andhuman--caused damage),and comparison to the typical archetypeofthesame species.Field evaluations of all trees considered thefollowingattributes: 8.j Packet Pg. 363 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory Report John Madonna Construction, Inc. 7 Trunk diameter The diameter of the trunk of each taggedtreewasmeasured at approximately4.5 feet above grade using a forester’ssteeldiameter--equivalent tape measure.Trees withmultiple trunks or stems were measured at the same height and measurementsforalltrunkslargerthan four inches were collected. Damage Identification of damage caused by pathogens or insect pests,bynaturalcausessuchas wildlife interaction,or by humanactivity was noted. Vigor rating All tagged trees were evaluated based on various parameters,includingamountof new growth,leafcolor,bark conditions,dead wood,evidence of wilt,excessivebranchorleaf necrosis,thinning of crown,presence of exudate,etc.A subjective rankingwasassignedtoquantify the overall physical condition of each tree based ontheratingsdescribedbelow: High:A healthy and vigorously growing tree characteristic ofitsspeciesandreasonably free of any visible signs of stress,disease,orpestinfestation. Moderate:A healthy and vigorous tree with minor visible signsofstress,disease,and/or pest infestation.Some dead wood,broken branches,or yellowingleavesmaybepresent. Low:A tree exhibiting signs of dieback,necrosis,stress,disease,orinsectdamageatlevels above what is typically expected for the species.Symptomscouldalsoinclude sparse leaf growth,predominately yellow leaves,dead or rotted wood in lowertrunk,brokenlimbs, exposed roots,and parasitegrowth. Dead:Tree had no foliage and exhibited nosignoflifeorvigor. 2.5 Floristic Inventory Kevin Merk and RobertSloan conductedthe botanical surveys in accordance withaccepted protocols developed by the USFWS U.S.Fish and WildlifeService,2000),CDFW California Department of FishandWildlife,2000),and CNPSCalifornia Native Plant Society,2001),which means:1)survey personnel traversed all suitable habitat within the entireprojectareaonfootby walking meandering transects to ensure thorough coverage of the area;2)surveyswerespaced throughout thelate winter,spring,summer and fall seasons to document the site’s flora;a3) surveys were floristic in nature,and all plant species observed wererecordedandidentifiedtoa sufficient level to determinerarity.Plant taxonomy followed nomenclature included intheJepson Manual,second additionBaldwin et al.,2012).Robert Hoover’s The Vascular Plants of San Luis Obispo County,California 1970)was also used to identify plants observedonsite.Speciesnot readily identifiable in the field were brought to the officeforfurtheranalysis.Calflora www.calflora org)and the Consortium of California Herbariumwerealsoaccessed online to obtain records of special statusplant observations from theregion.Special status plant occurrences observed in the field were delineated usingaTrimbleGPSGeoXH 6000)unit capableofsub--meter and decimeter accuracy. 2.6 Wildlife Assessment Direct observations of wildlife including their sign i.e.:tracksandscat)werenotedin the fieldand are included on the species list inAppendixA.The evaluationof special status animal speciesand identification of habitat that could support these species was basedonourfieldobservations coupled with an understanding of thespeciesbiology.Definitive or protocol--level surveys to determine the presence orabsence of theanimal species that mayoccur within the projectarea were not conducted.USFWS protocol surveys for special statuswildlifespecies,such asthefederal threatened California red--legged frogRana draytonii;CRLF),require extensive fieldtime to be 8.j Packet Pg. 364 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory Report John Madonna Construction, Inc. 8 conducted only at certain times oftheyear.In addition,given that 2015 is thefourthyearofan ongoing drought,no sufficient aquatic habitat was present to search forspeciessuchastheCRLF. Further,we reliedonsurvey datafrom the immediate project vicinity contained in theCNDDBand conducted by other knowledgeable biologists to conclude whether or not certainspecialstatus animals were expected to occur onsite.Known occurrence recordsinthe region coupled with our site--specific observations were usedto make presence/absence determinations for specialstatus wildlife potentially occurring onsite. 3.0 RESULTS The Froom Ranch covers approximately 111 acres spanningtwo Assessor’s parcels APN 067--241-- 030 and 067--241--031).The ranch has been grazed by cattle and horses formanyyears,andis composed of a mixofhabitat types,includingannual grassland,serpentine bunchgrass grassland, coastal scrub/chaparral,coast liveoak/California bay woodland,wetland,and riparian.Also present are developed and disturbed or ruderal)areas includingexistingbuildings,roads,an active mine in the northwestern partofthesite,and storm water detention facilitiesforthe neighboring Irish Hills Plaza tothenorth.Planted trees suchasblue gum eucalyptusEucalyptus globulus)and peppertreeSchinus molle)are also present. The primary parent material underlying the site is serpentinite withvaryingamalgamationsof serpentine derived clays that affect the distribution of vegetationonthe site.Serpentine rock outcrops are scattered acrosstheupper western part ofthesite and support a diverse assemblage of native plants adapted to the high metal content,including somethathavespecialregulatory status.Many of the nativeplantsare endemic to this area,and occur nowhereelseonearth. Hoover 1970)referred to this biologicalhotspot,which is within an approximateten--mile radius around San Luis Obispo,as the Obispoanpocket ofendemism. Froom Creek and three smalltributary drainages are present on the study area.Inseveralareas, the drainagesinclude pockets of wetland habitat.In addition,the steeperhillsidesin the southwestern part of thesitecontain springs,or seeps,where fresh water daylights”outofthe ground.Coastal scrub/chaparral occurs ondrier,shallow rocky soilson the steep slopesinthe upper western part of thesite.Coast liveoak/California bay woodlands are presentalongdrainage courses identified as Drainages 1and2)and more north--facing slopesin thesouthwestern partof the site.As stated above,wetlands are present at seeps and springsformedatfracturesinthe serpentinite bedrock,along drainages,andalong Los Osos Valley Road and CalleJoaquinwherethe roads have impoundedsurface and subsurfaceflow.Riparian habitat is also presentonsite,but primarily restricted to thedrainageditch constructed along Los OsosValleyRoad. A total of204 plant species were identified in thestudyarea,including 151 native species and53 non--natives.Thirteen of the native plants are specialstatusspecies as defined in this report.Of this numberone plant is a federal and state endangeredspecies,nine 9)are California Rare Plant Rank CRPR)List 1B species and one 1)is a CRPRList 2 species.Three 3)are CRPR List4species, which is a watch list.The endangeredandList1Band 2species meet the rarity thresholddefined in Section 15380of the California Environmental QualityAct CEQA).List 4 species typicallydonot. 37 animal specieswere observed within the project areaduringfield surveys. A soils map is provided asFigure3 to illustrate soil map units present onsite,andFigure4 illustrates the plant communities,orhabitattypes,present onsite.A listofplants and animals observed during thesurveys is included as Appendix A.AppendixBincludes a list of allspecial status species and plant communities identifiedintheCNDDB,and identifies whether theywere 8.j Packet Pg. 365 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Study Area Boundary Soil Type Cropley clay, 0 to 2 percent slopes Diablo and Cibo clays, 15 to 30 percent slopes Diablo and Cibo clays, 9 to 15 percent slopes Los Osos-Diablo complex, 15 to 30 percent slopes Los Osos-Diablo complex, 5 to 9 percent slopes Obispo-Rock outcrop complex, 15 to 75 percent slopes Riverwash Salinas silty clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Xererts-Xerolls-Urban land complex, 0 to 15 percent slopes 0 230 460 690920115Feet Soils Map Figure3FroomRanch Source(s): (c) Microsoft Corporation and its data suppliers (2010): NRCS, SLO County Soils Data (2008) John Madonna Construction, Inc. 1 in = 400 ft HWY101 L o s O s o s V a lle y R d Calle Joaquin 8.j Packet Pg. 366 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Irish Hills Plaza Mountainbrook Church Los Oso s V alle y R d HWY 101 CalleJoaquin Irish Hills Natural Reserve Froom Creek Drainage 1 Drainage 2 Drainage 3 Study Area Boundary Storm Water Basin (5.21 ac) Sycamore Trees (0.13 ac) Developed/Disturbed (8.88 ac) Eucalyptus Trees (0.61 ac) Arroyo Willow Riparian Scrub (1.87 ac) Wetland (7.25 ac) Drainage Feature (2.66 ac) Coast Live Oak/CA Bay Woodland (3.23 ac) Serpentine Rock Outcrop (1.96 ac) Serpentine Bunchgrass Grassland (13.46 ac) Coastal Scrub/Chaparral (6.52 ac) Annual Grassland (59.22 ac) 0 230 460 690920115Feet Habitat Map Figure4FroomRanch Source(s): ESRI and its data providers; San Luis Obispo County Parcel Information John Madonna Construction, Inc. 1 in = 400 ft 8.j Packet Pg. 367 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory Report John Madonna Construction, Inc. 11 observed onsite.If they werenotobserved,an evaluation as to theirpotentialto occur onsite is provided.Appendix C includesaseries of photographs of representative areasofthesiteand special status plantstaken during the field surveys.Appendix D includes the tree inventorydata. 3.1 Habitat Types Six primary habitat types,or plant communities,were observed withintheprojectsite,and included native bunchgrass grassland Valley and Foothill Grassland/SerpentineBunchgrass Grassland),non--native annual grassland,coastal scrub,coast live oak woodland,wetland,and riparian.In addition,serpentine rock outcrops are present throughout thestudyareathatsupport an interesting assemblage of native plants that thrive duetothelowercompetition fromnon--native species as a result of the highermetalcontent.The characterizations of these plantcommunities generally follow those of Holland’s 1986)vegetation classificationsystemandtheplant community descriptions in the ManualofCalifornia Vegetation,second edition Sawyer,Keeler-- Wolf,and Evens;2009).Other mapped features onsite included natural drainagefeaturesthat traverse the property and horticultural plantings ofMontereycypressHesperocyparis macrocarpa) and blue gumeucalyptus Eucalyptus globulus).The following discusses thehabitattypes delineated on Figure 4 and provides a characterization of the existingconditions. 3.1.1 Annual GrasslandLolium perenne Semi--Natural Herbaceous Stands) The primary grassland type observed onsiteis dominated by annual species,andoccurs on theflat portions of the propertyhistorically impacted by cattle and horse grazing.Theannualgrassland habitat type corresponds to theperennial rye grass fieldsdescribed in the ManualofCalifornia Vegetation 2009,second edition)with the exception that it is dominated by theannualItalianrye grass.It corresponds tothe Non--native Grassland described by Holland 1986).Theannual grassland onsite was dominatedbyItalian ryegrassLolium multiflorum Festuca perennis).Other non--native grasses observed in this habitattypeincluded wild oatsAvena barbata),false brome Brachypodium distachyon),soft chessBromus hordeacous),and prickly sowthistleSonchus asper).Pockets ofyellow star thistleCentaurea solstitialis)were also present adjacentto disturbed areas.This grassland type was also present along the ranchroadsastheybecome recolonized by vegetation. Annual grasslands provide foraging,breeding habitatandmovement corridors for manywildlife species.Several mammals,such as the CaliforniagroundsquirrelSpermophilus beecheyi),Botta’s pocket gopherThomomys bottae),and deermicePeromyscus spp.)were observed within this habitat type.Numerousinvertebrate species such as insects),many of whichprovideafood source for larger animals such as lizards,birds and some small mammalscanalsobefoundwithin grassland communities.A variety of birds rely on open expanses ofgrasslandsforforaginghabitat. Grasslands that are bordered by habitats containing trees are particularlyimportantforraptors because the birds can use the large trees as nesting,roosting,andasobservationpointstolocate potential prey within nearby grassland habitats.Reptiles are also frequently found ingrasslands. In addition,in areas wheregrasslands surround creeks,wetlands and seasonalwater availabilityis important for wildlife. 3.1.2 Serpentine Bunchgrass Grassland Native grassland composed of purpleneedlegrass Stipa pulchra)along with a mix ofnativeand non--native specieswas present primarily in the upper elevation southwestportionofthestudy area where serpentine soils influence plantdistribution.The native grassland onsite correspondsto 8.j Packet Pg. 368 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory Report John Madonna Construction, Inc. 12 the Valley Needlegrass and Serpentine Bunchgrass Grasslands described by Holland1986)andthe Nassella or Stipa)pulchra Herbaceous Alliance purple needlegrass grassland)describedby Sawyer,Keeler--Wolf and Evens 2009).Occurrencesofnon--native species,such asred--stemmed filaree Erodium cicutarium),cat’s earHypochaeris glabra),and hairy vetchVicia villosassp. villosa)were observed scattered in this habitat on the site,but forthemostpart,theareawas dominated by native species such as yarrow Achillea millefolium),Cambria morning glory Calystegia subacaulisssp.episcopalis),checker bloomSidalcea malviflora),blue--eyed grass Sisyrinchium bellum),and western vervainVerbena lasiostachys). Similar to the wildlife habitat discussionabove,this grassland type provides suitablehabitatfora number of species common tothearea. 3.1.3 Coastal Scrub/Chaparral The shrubland association found on the project sitewasdominatedbyopen to dense stands of California sagebrush Artemisia californica),with other shrub constituents such as blacksage Salvia mellifera)primarily occurring ondrier serpentine soils and rockoutcrops in the steepupper reaches of the projectsite.This habitat typewas described by Sawyer,Keeler--Wolf and Evensas the Artemisia californica--Salvia mellifera Shrubland Alliance Manual of California Vegetation,2009), and the Central Lucian Coastal Scrub byHolland1986).In some areas,the scrubvegetation segued into more chaparral habitat withspeciessuchas buck brushCeanothus cuneatus)forming the dominant cover.Also included in this shrub habitat wereoccurrencesofpoison oak Toxicodendron diversilobum),bush monkey flowerMimulus aurantiacus),California fuchsia Epilobium canum),and deerweed Acmispon glaber).The understory was composed of leaflitterin may places,but in some open areas theherbaceouslayer consisted of scattered occurrencesofnon-- native grasses suchas ripgut brome Bromus diandrus)and rattail fescueFestuca myuros)with pockets of purple needlegrass also present. Coastal scrub/chaparral communities provide cover and nesting habitat for avarietyofanimals such as western fencelizardSceloporus occidentalis),western rattlesnakeCrotalis viridis),blue-- gray gnatcatcherPolioptila caerulea),wrentitChamae fasciata),California towheeMelazone crissalis),California mousePeromyscus californicus),and grayfoxUrocyon cinereoargentus). Larger mammals such ascoyoteCanis latrans)and bobcat Lynx rufus)would alsobe expectedto occur onsite and use the entireproperty.Mountain lionsFelix concolor)have alsobeen documented in the region and could occur onsiteasararetransient. 3.1.4 Coast Live Oak/California BayWoodland The woodland community observedinthe study area was dominated by coastliveoakand California bay trees.This habitat type corresponds to the coast live oakwoodlandandCalifornia bay forestQuercus agrifoliaand Umbellularia californicawoodland alliances)described bySawyer et al.in the Manual of California Vegetation 2009).Holland 1986)classifiedthiscommunityas the coast live oak woodland and California bay forest.Shrubs andunderstoryspeciesobservedin this part of the site consistedoftoyonHeteromeles arbutifolia),California coffeeberryRhamnus Frangula californica),poison oak,and hummingbirdsageSalvia spathacea).In areaswhere California bay trees formed the dominant cover,the understory was sparseandconsistedmostlyof leaf litter.Similarly,verylittle understory vegetation was present where the oaktreecanopywas dense. Oak/bay woodlands,in general,provide quality habitat for a large varietyofwildlifespecies.Large 8.j Packet Pg. 369 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory Report John Madonna Construction, Inc. 13 trees provide nesting sites and cover for birdsandmanymammals.Dead anddecaying trees with few branches or no leaves providehawkingsites”for raptors and perches for otherbirdspecies. They also contribute woody debris to the duff in the woodland understory,whichprovidesforaging areas for small mammals and microclimates suitable for amphibians and reptiles inadditionto fungi.Acorns are a valuable food source for many animal species,includingacornwoodpecker Melanerpes formicivorus),scrub jayAphelocoma corulescens),western gray squirrelSciurus griseus),andblack--tailed deerOdocoileus hemionus).Scrub jay,westernbluebirdSialia mexicana),turkey vulture Cathartes aura),red--tailed hawkButeo jamaicensis),and black--tailed deer were observed within oak/bay woodlands onsite.Other representative animalspecies that could potentially occur in the oak dominatedwoodlandon--site include western screechowlOtus kennicottii),oak titmouseBaeolophus inornatus),and Virginia opossumDidelphis virginianus). 3.1.5 Wetland This habitat type is acombination of the Coastal and Valley Freshwater MarshandVernalMarsh vegetation communities described by Holland 1986).Sawyer,Keeler--Wolf and Evens haveseveral classifications for wetlands that describe the perennial and seasonal wetlandsonsite,includingthe Eleocharis macrostachya,Juncus effusus,Juncus patens,and Juncus phaeocephalus Herbaceous Alliances spike rush,soft rush,and westernmarshes).In the wetland area adjacent toCalle Joaquin,a more perennial wetland wasobservedthat supports occurrences of other wetland plants such asround--leaf leather rootHoita orbicularis),seep spring monkey flower Mimulus guttatus), silverleaf Potentilla anserina),California bulrushSchoenoplectus californicus),and rough sedge Carex senta).Seasonalwetlands consisted of speciessuchas rabbitfoot grassPolypogon monspeliensis),Italian ryegrass,and grass polyLythrum hyssopifolia). Wetlands occur in nutrient--rich mineral soils that are saturated through partoralloftheyear. Wetland communities are best developed in locationswithslow--moving,stagnant or ponded shallow water,which is the case with the impounded hydrology createdbytheconstructionofLos Osos Valley Road and CalleJoaquin.In between the large constructed basinandthemapped wetland along Calle Joaquin,an extensive reed fescue occurrence was observed,mostlikelydueto the historic grazing regime onthesite. Small ponded areas withinthese wetlands may provide habitat for aquatic invertebratessuchas water stridersfamily Gerridae)and boatmen family Carixidae),andmore opportunistic amphibians such as the Pacificchorusfrog Psuedacris regilla).Seasonal ponded water wouldalso be expected to be used as a drinking source for larger animals,andalsoapotentialstop overor foraging site for ducks and greatblueheronsArdea herodias). 3.1.6 Riparian This habitaton--site is consistent with the Arroyo Willow Shrubland Allianceasdescribedby Sawyer,Keeler--Wolf and Evens 2009),and corresponds totheCentralCoast Arroyo Willow Riparian Scrubcommunity described by Holland1986).This vegetation community wasrestricted to the lower reachofthe study area alongLOVR.This habitat was mostly dominatedbyarroyo willow Salix lasiolepis)and contained a fewyoung cottonwoods in the ditch behindTJMaxx.The dry ephemeral natureofFroom Creek and historic grazing pressure limited the extentofriparian vegetation development.In one location in the northwestern part of the site,asmalloccurrenceof riparian scrub was observedon the creekbank,south of the existing buildings andequipment storage yard.Common plant species observed in thishabitatincludedHimalayan blackberry Rubus discolor),poison oak,and stingingnettleUrtica dioica).Central Coast Arroyo Willow 8.j Packet Pg. 370 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory Report John Madonna Construction, Inc. 14 Riparian Scrub is a form of forested wetlandthatisconsidered a sensitive natural communityby the CDFW. Riparian communitiesalong larger drainage coursesare important for many wildlife speciessince the abundance of moistureandassociated vegetation provide structure,materials,andfoodsources for nesting and roosting animals.However,the onsite riparian habitat consists of arelativelyyoung monoculture of arroyo willows growing along a constructedroadsideditch.This severely limitsthe forage value within the understoryandexpected use of this habitat as coveror as a corridorfor movement along the edges of openareas.In addition,people have been using theriparianhabitat in this area as shelter. Given the limitedextent of this habitatonsite,common wildlife such as the Pacific chorusfrog, western fence lizard,raccoon Procyon lotor),opossum,and striped skunkMephitis mephitis) would be expected to use this areaperiodically.While nesting habitat islimitedin this area,house wren Troglodytes aedon),ruby--crowned kingletRegulus calendula),song sparrowMelospiza melodia),black phoebeSayornis nigricans),and goldfinches Carduelis spp.)could potentially nest, perch and forage in thishabitat.As stated above,the willows are relatively young,andwouldnot be expected to provide suitable nesting or perching habitat for largerraptorssuchasthered--tailed hawk that are present inthearea. Seasonal water and the wetnessofthesoilwould typicallyincrease the value of thishabitatfor wildlife if it wasn’t associated with aroadsideditch.This riparian habitatlikely improves water quality by protectingthe ditch from erosion,and filtering sediment and somepollutantsfrom runoff beforeitdrains to the Calle Joaquin wetland area,and eventually offsitetowardsSanLuis Obispo Creek. 3.1.7 Developed/Disturbed Ruderal) The existing ranchroads,equipment storage area,buildings andactivemine were mappedas Developed/Disturbed also knownasruderal)habitat based on the presence ofbaresoils,base rock,and structures.Developed/Disturbed Ruderal)habitat is not a native plantcommunity,nor is it describedbythe vegetation classification systems used inthisstudy since it is ananthropogenic influenced land type.Along road margins,high concentrations of invasive,non--native specieswere present,likelydue to thehistoric disturbance.Someplants characteristic of theonsiteannual grassland habitat described above werepresent,in addition todominant weedy species suchas Italian thistleCarduus pycnocephalus)andyellow star thistle.Because of the highlydisturbed nature of this habitat,it is of marginal value to wildlife.Nonetheless,itsproximitytothenatural plant communities onsite allow several common species such as the westernfencelizardand California ground squirrel toutilizedisturbed orruderal areas of thesite for basking in thesunand foraging. 3.1.8 Serpentine Rock Outcrop Scattered throughout thesteeper portionsofsite,primarily in the southwest part ofthestudyarea, are areas of serpentine rockoutcroppings.Theexposed serpentine rockswere mostly bare,butdid support native plants in cracks or areas of talusaccumulation.Species observedincluded several species of mariposalilyCalochortus clavatusssp.clavatus,C.obispoensis),cryptanthaCryptantha clevelandii),mouse gray dudleyaDudleya abramsiissp.murina),Blochman’s dudleyaDudleya blochmaniae),and stinging phaceliaPhacelia imbricata). 8.j Packet Pg. 371 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory Report John Madonna Construction, Inc. 15 3.1.9 Eucalyptus and Sycamore Trees Within the study area,several planted blue gum eucalyptustreeswerepresent.In addition,several sycamore Platanus racemosa)trees were identified in the active mine in thenorthwesternpartof the site.The extent oftree canopieswas delineated on thehabitat map included asFigure4.While bird nests were not observed duringsurveys,these trees provide perching andnesting opportunities for a varietyofbirds,includingraptors such as greathorned owl and red--tailed hawk. 3.2 Tree Survey A total of 96 treeswithDBH of four 4)inches orgreater were tagged within the studyarea,and included five 5)species of native treesandtwo 2)non--native tree species.Please refer to Figure 5 the Tree Survey Map.Trees were concentrated primarilyalong Drainage1.Nativetrees recorded included 41 Coast liveoakQuercus agrifolia),31 Californiabay Umbellularia californica), three 3)western sycamorePlatanus racemosa),three 3)Fremont cottonwood Populus fremontii),three 3)arroyo willowSalix lasiolepis),andone 1)holly--leaf cherryPrunus ilicifolia). Non--native trees present included 12 blue gumeucalyptusEucalyptus globulus),andtwo 2) Peruvian pepperSchinus molle).Generally,the majority of trees present exhibitedhighor moderate vigor.Several large oak and bay trees exhibited hollow or deadmaintrunks,buthad large,healthy secondary trunk growth.Several trees exhibited sparse canopy growthandpoorleaf development. The very steep upper portionofDrainage 1 in thesouthwestern corner of the sitecontained oak and bay trees in a narrowcanyonarea.This area was not accessibleduetosteep terrain,dense vegetation and poisonoak. The LOVR roadside channelcontained approximately 200 arroyo willowshrubs/trees that have established along the channel over the last 10 years.Thesewillowsconsisted primarily of multi-- stemmed specimens some with 10 ormoretrunks)located mostly withinthecenterline of the ditch.The willow occurrences were mapped as riparian habitat as partoftheplantcommunityor habitat type mapping effort,and the arealextentcalculated. 3.3 Drainage Features 3.3.1 Froom Creek and Tributaries Froom Creekis an intermittent streamwith a relatively small watershed that originatesintheIrish Hills to the southwest of thestudyarea.The creek channelbisects thestudy area in a generally north to south direction,and ultimately passes beneath CalleJoaquinandU.S.Highway 101 via two concrete box culverts,heading to its confluence with San Luis ObispoCreek.SanLuisObispoCreek flows in a westerly direction ultimately connecting to the PacificOceanatAvilaBeach.Due to the lack of dominant wetland vegetation withinoradjacent to the channel,Froom Creekwasclassified as Riverine Intermittent Streambed per Cowardin,andas non--wetland waters of the U.S.andstate of California subjecttoUSACE,RWQCB and CDFW jurisdiction. Three small ephemeral drainage featuresidentified as Drainages 1,2,and 3)arepresentinthe southwestern portion of the study area that are tributaries to Froom Creek.Duetothepresenceof a defined bed and bank,OHWM,and hydrologic connectivity to FroomCreek,thesesmallfeatures were classified as Riverine IntermittentStreambed per Cowardin,andconstitute jurisdictionalnon-- wetland waters of the U.S.and stateofCalifornia.While these drainages were mostly comprisedof 8.j Packet Pg. 372 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Los Os o s V alle y R d CalleJoaquin HWY 101 Irish Hills Plaza Mountainbrook Church Tagged Trees (96 total) Arroyo Willow California Bay Coast Live Oak Eucalyptus Fremont Cottonwood Hollyleaf Cherry Peruvian Pepper Tree Western Sycamore Study Area Boundary Untagged Arroyo Willow Riparian Scrub Untagged Coast Live Oak Forest John Madonna Construction, Inc. 0 230 460 690920115Feet Tree Survey Map Source(s): ESRI and its data providers; San Luis Obispo County Froom Ranch Figure51in = 400 ft 8.j Packet Pg. 373 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory Report John Madonna Construction, Inc. 17 upland vegetation,areas of wetlandhabitat were observed and mapped in specificlocations.In addition,several seeps or springs were observed originating on adjacenthillsidesandwere hydrologically connected to the drainagefeature.In--channel areas and abutting areasdominated by wetlandvegetation are classifiedasPalustrine Emergent Wetlandper Cowardin,andconstitute wetlands under USACE,RWQCB and CDFW jurisdiction. 3.3.2 LOVR Roadside Channel The LOVR Roadside Channelis located along the northern propertyboundary,andcontained a dense willow canopy and wetland understory,along a narrow and shallowconstructedchannel area.The willow canopy hasdevelopedsince the ditch was constructed,and the channel appearsto have lost capacity due to vegetative growth andsedimentaccumulation.Current channel dimensions in this area ranged from six inches to two feet deep,andonetofourfeetwide.Willow canopy and wetland vegetation extended beyond the channelbanksintotheadjacent meadow area, apparently the result of theconstructed roadways impounding seasonal surface andsubsurface water.Because the majorityofin--channel and abuttingareaswere dominated by wetland vegetation,the LOVRRoadside Channel is classifiedasPalustrine Emergent Wetlandper Cowardin, and constitutes wetland waters under USACE,RWQCB and CDFW jurisdiction.Jurisdictional boundaries in thisareawere mapped into the LOVRright--of way to the road shoulder,whichwas outside the Froom Ranch propertyline.Please refer to the KMA DelineationofWatersof The U.S. and State of California for furtherdetail. 3.3.3 Detention Basins The northern basin is an approximatelyone--acre temporary basin constructed in uplandgrassland areas to receive runoff during the construction of HomeDepot.Duringconstruction of theIrish Hills Plaza,a swale and culverts were installed behind the currentWholeFoodsandTJMaxx buildings to direct surface runoff into this basin and then let itspreadoverlandtosupportthe historic wetland feature in the area.Seasonally ponded water was evident in thebasinduring aerial photograph review,and patchy occurrences of seasonal wetlandvegetationwerenoted during field workconducted in 2015confirming some wetland habitat attributes are stillpresent. However,it isourunderstanding that once the Home Depot and surroundingareaswere constructed,surface runoff from this development was directed into thelargerbasinsconstructed further south.As a result,this temporary basin was notidentifiedasapotentialjurisdictional feature subject to Clean Water Actregulationsince it was constructed in an uplandasatemporary basin to support construction of the neighboringproject. The approximately3.2--acre southern basin is a permanent feature constructedinuplandgrassland habitat to receive runoff from the Plaza Hills I development frontingLOVR.Followingdevelopment of the Home Depot project,surface runoff was then directed into thisbasin.Itconsistsoftwo basins and a spillway,and was sizedtocontainrunoff from any future Phase II developmentwithin the study area Wallace Group,2006).This basin releases water totheLOVRRoadsideChannelby a storm drain and swale.During large storm events,it was designedtodischargewaterintothe wet meadowarea along Calle Joaquin via a concrete spillway.Otherwise,waterleavesthebasin through evaporation and percolation into the ground.This feature wasalsonotidentifiedasa potential jurisdictional feature since it was constructed inanuplandareaand is part ofthe neighboring project’s storm drainagesystem. Because both basins areman--made structures constructed inuplands that arefed primarilyby concentrated hardscape runoff from neighboring development,these basins andassociatedswales 8.j Packet Pg. 374 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory Report John Madonna Construction, Inc. 18 are not expected to be subject to Clean Water Act or California FishandGameCoderequirements. The 2015 USACE verificationof the Wetland Delineation does not include these featuresasWaters of the U.S. 3.4 Soils The NRCS identified eight soilmapunits as occurring on the study area refertoFigure3).Of these map units,Riverwash,andXererts--Xerolls are listed as hydric soils by the NRCSCaliforniaHydric Soils List for San Luis Obispo County.AnunnamedcomponentofCropley clay,0--2 slopes,is also considered hydric,when present in drainageways. Cropley clay0--2 slopes.Cropley clay consists of a dark gray or black10YR4/1,3/1,2/1moist) clay horizon about 36 inches thick,underlain by a light brown calcareousclayloamto60inches or more.Permeability of this soil is slow and the available watercapacityishigh.Cropleysoils formed in alluvium developed from sedimentaryrocks.An unnamed componentofCropley clayis listed as a hydric soil when present indrainageways.This inclusion is typically very darkgray throughout,with mottles present in the lower horizons.This darkgraysoilwasnotobservedon-- site.Mapped inclusions within this series include Diablo clay,Los Ososloam,andSalinassiltyclay loam. Diablo and Ciboclays 9--15 and15 30 slopes.Diabloclayconsists of a 0 to 23 inch,black10YR 2/1)clay formed in residual material weathered from sandstone,shale,ormudstone,commonly displaying fine rootstofour inches.The structure is granularto4 inches,and coarse,angular,and blocky to 23 inches.This moderately to steeply sloping soil is very poorlydrained.Thesoilhas moderate erodibility and highshrink--swell characteristics,and has potential septicsystem constraints due to steepslopes and slow percolation. Cibo clay consists of a 0 to 31 inch,dark brown 7.5YR 3/2)clayformedinresidualmaterial weathered from hard metasedimentary rocks,and commonly displaying fine roots.Thestructureis coarse and angular blocky.This moderately to steeply sloping soil is consideredverypoorly drained.The soil has moderate erodibilityandhighshrink--swell characteristics,and potential septic system constraints due to steep slopes,shallow depth to bedrock,andslowpercolation. Los Osos--Diablo Complex5--9 and15--30 percent slopes.LosOsos--Diablo Complex consists ofabout 40 percent Los Osos soil,and 35 percent Diablo soil,found on foothillsandmountainridgetops. These soils are moderately deep,well drained,andhavelowpermeability.Typical LosOsos--Diablo Complex soil moist)consists of a very dark grayish brown 10YR3/2)loamorblack10YR2/2) clay,40--60 inches thick.Permeability ofLosOsos--Diablo Complex soil is rapid,andtheavailable water capacity is low.Theavailable water capacity ofLosOsos--Diablo Complex soil is lowtovery high,while surface runoff israpid. Obispo--Rock outcrop15--75%slopes.Obispo--Rock outcrop consists of about 50 percentObisposoil and 30 percent Rock outcrop.Obisposoilsareshallow,well drained,slowly permeable soilsformed in residual materials weathered from serpentine rock.Typical Obispo soilmoist)consistsofa black 10YR 2/1)clay to a depth of about 18 inches,underlain byserpentinerock.Theavailable water capacity of Obispo--Rock outcrop soil is low,while surface runoff israpidorveryrapid. Riverwash includes soils found in active stream and river channels,andconsistsofexcessively drained,water deposited sand,loamy sand,and sandy loamwithvaryingamounts of graveland cobbles present.Riverwash soils located in and along stream channelsaregenerallysubjectto 8.j Packet Pg. 375 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory Report John Madonna Construction, Inc. 19 flooding during and immediately after every storm.Riverwash soilsaretypicallyexcessively drained,but can be somewhat poorlydrainedinlow lying areas.Permeability is veryrapid,surface runoff is very slow,and the erosion hazard is variable.TypicalinclusionsincludePsamments and Fluvents,and Corralitossoils.Riverwash and Psamments and Fluvents located indrainagewaysare listed as hydric soils.These soils have a HydricCriteriaCodeof4:soils that are frequentlyflooded for long or very long duration during thegrowingseason. Xererts--Xerolls--Urban land complex0--15%slopes.The Xererts--Xerolls--Urban land complex consists of nearly level to strongly sloping soils and miscellaneous areasthatarecoveredbyurban structures.Most areas of these soils are used for urban development.Thesoilmaterialshavebeen modified by earthmoving equipment or covered byurbanstructures so that much of theiroriginal shape and physical characteristics have been altered.The Xererts ofthiscomplexareCropleyor Los Osos--Diablo soils.The percentage of the various soils in thiscomplexandthedegreeof urbanization vary from placeto place SCS 1984).An unnamed inclusionoftheXererts--Xerolls-- Urban land complex associated with depressions has a HydricCriteriaCodeof2A:soils in Aquic suborder that are somewhat poorly drained and have a frequently occurringwatertablelessthan 0.5 feet from the surface for a significant period usually 14 consecutive daysormore)duringthegrowing season. 3.5 Special StatusBiological Resources The San Luis Obispoarea supports numerous special status,or rare,plant communities,andspecies of plants and animals.As stated in the methodologysectionabove,the biological resources inventory used a six quadranglesearchof the CNDDB in addition to the reviewofenvironmental documents prepared for projects inthearea to identify specialstatus resourcesthat couldbe present onsite.Appendix B providesa table withthespecial status biological resources occurrence data,listing status for all special statusspeciesand habitats,the results of thesurveys,and an evaluation of wildlife presence or potential to occuronsite.The following discussion provides further detail regarding the special status biological resources occurring or potentiallyoccurringon the Froom Ranch studyarea. 3.5.1 Special Status Natural Communities The CNDDBsearch identified occurrencesofnine 9)special status plant communities withinthe general area and includedCentral DuneScrub,Central Foredunes,Central Maritime Chaparral, Coastal Brackish Marsh,Coastal and ValleyFreshwaterMarsh,Northern Coastal Marsh,Northern Interior Cypress Forest,Serpentine Bunchgrass,and ValleyandFoothillGrassland.Please referto Figure 6 illustrating the botanical data obtainedfromtheCNDDB.Our observations onsite identified another special status naturalcommunity in the area,consisting of the riparian habitat along LOVR and FroomCreek.Three special status natural communities,including the Coastaland Valley Freshwater Marsh Wetland),Riparian,and theSerpentine Bunchgrass Grassland were observed onsiteplease referto Figure 6)and meet the special status naturalcommunities definition pursuanttothe CDFW.In addition,special status plants occur onserpentinerock outcrops or in areas of annual grassland,these features shouldalsobeconsideredspecial status resources since they support special statusplants. 8.j Packet Pg. 376 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n USGS QUAD PORT SAN LUIS USGS QUAD PISMO BEACH USGS QUAD MORRO BAY SOUTH USGS QUAD LOPEZ MTN.USGS QUAD SAN LUIS OBISPO USGS QUAD ARROYO GRANDE NE Study Area Boundary USGS Quadrangle Search Radius (5 miles) CNDDB Occurrences (CDFW October 2014) Agrostis hooveri Arctostaphylos cruzensis Arctostaphylos morroensis Arctostaphylos pechoensis Arctostaphylos pilosula Astragalus didymocarpus var. milesianus Calochortus obispoensis Calochortus simulans Calystegia subacaulis ssp. episcopalis Carex obispoensis Castilleja densiflora var. obispoensis Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii Chorizanthe breweri Cirsium fontinale var. obispoense Cirsium occidentale var. lucianum Clarkia speciosa ssp. immaculata Delphinium parryi ssp. blochmaniae Delphinium parryi ssp. eastwoodiae Dudleya abramsii ssp. bettinae Dudleya abramsii ssp. murina Dudleya blochmaniae ssp. blochmaniae Eriodictyon altissimum Eryngium aristulatum var. hooveri Fritillaria viridea Horkelia cuneata var. puberula Layia jonesii Lupinus ludovicianus Monardella palmeri Monardella sinuata ssp. sinuata Monolopia gracilens Sanicula maritima Scrophularia atrata Senecio aphanactis Streptanthus albidus ssp. peramoenus Trifolium hydrophilum Central Maritime Chaparral Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh Serpentine Bunchgrass John Madonna Construction, Inc04,700 9,40014,10018,8002,350 Feet CNDDB Botanical Occurrences Map Figure6FroomRanch Source(s): ESRI and its data providers: CDFW, CNDDB, October 2014; USFWS Critical Habitat Data, September 2015 1 in = 8,000 ft 8.j Packet Pg. 377 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory Report John Madonna Construction, Inc. 21 3.4.2 Special Status Plants The CNDDB contains records of many special status plant species thatareknowntooccurwithin the greater San Luis Obispoarea please refer to Figure6).Special status plant speciestypically have highly localized habitat requirements and many are known tooccuronserpentinerock outcrops and soils,active and stabilized coastal dunes,or in maritimechaparral,andbrackish marsh habitats.Coastal dunes,central maritime chaparral and brackishmarshhabitatsdonot occur on the property,and therefore,species such asbeachspectaclepodDithyrea maritima), Morro manzanitaArctostaphylos morroensis),and salt marsh bird’sbeakChloropyron maritimum) are not expected to occur onsite based on the lack of suitable habitat.Inaddition,anumberof species identified in the database search occur at higher elevations intheSantaLuciaMountains further to the north of theRanch.This includes species such as the San BenitofritillaryFritillaria viridea),hooked popcorn flowerPlagiobothrys uncinatus),and Cuesta Pass checkerbloomSidalcea hickmanii ssp.anomala). While elevation alone is not sufficient to ruleoutaspeciesfrom a particular study area,these species were not observed during the focused surveys of the propertyatatimeofyearwhenthey would have been identifiable.Therefore,it is reasonable to concludethattheyarenotexpectedto occur onsite.Moreover,special status perennials would havebeenidentifiable at the time thefield surveys were conducted.Perennial shrubs such as Arroyo de laCruzmanzanitaArctostaphylos cruzensis),Santa Lucia manzanitaArctostaphylos luciana),and Santa Margarita manzanita Arctostaphylos pilosula)were not observed during field surveys,andasaresult,are not expectedto occur on the projectsite. Special status plants identified in the area by the CNDDB that are known tooccuronserpentinebased soils were identified as having potential to occuronsiteand put on thetargetsearch list during the surveys please refer to Appendix B forfurtherdetail).Surveysconducted in 2015 located the 13 special statusplants listed below.Please refer to Figure7 for species locations. Blochman's dudleyaDudleya blochmaniae;CRPR List1B.1); Brewer's spineflowerChorizanthe breweri;CRPR List1B.3); Cambria morning gloryCalystegia subacaulisssp.episcopalis;CRPR List4.2); Chaparral ragwortSenecio aphanactis;CRPR List2.2); Chorro Creek bog thistleCirsium fontinalevar.obispoense;federal and state endangeredand CRPR List 1B.2); club hair mariposalilyCalochortus clavatusssp.clavatus CRPR List4.3); Congdon's tarplantCentromadia parryissp.congdonii;CRPR List 1B.1); Eastwood’s larkspurDelphinium parryi ssp.eastwoodiae;CRPR List1B.2); Jones's layiaLayia jonesii;CRPR List1B.2); mouse--gray dudleyaDudleya abramsiissp.murina;CRPR List1B.2); Palmer’s spineflowerChorizanthe palmeri:CRPRList 4.2); San Luis mariposalilyCalochortus obispoensis;CRPR List1B.2);and San Luis Obispoowl's--clover Castilleja densiflorassp.obispoensis;CRPR List1B.2). Even though drought conditions were experienced in the project regionoverthecourseofthe last four years,sufficient rain fellduring the 2015 growing season to allow an accurate inventoryofthesite’s vegetation and identification of special status plants on the studyareaasshownonFigure7 the Special Status Plant OccurrencesMap. 8.j Packet Pg. 378 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n De paeaLajo De pa ea De pa La jo Ca de ob Ca deobCaob Du ab mu La jo Ca deobLajo Ca de ob La joCadeobLajo Ca de ob Du bl Du bl Du bl La jo Du ab mu Se ap Ca de ob Du ab mu Ch br Ch br Ca de ob Du bl Ce pa co La jo Study Area Boundary Cirsium fontinale var. obispoense CDFW List 1B Species John Madonna Construction, Inc. 0 200 400 600800100Feet Special Status Plant Occurrences Map Froom Ranch Figure71in = 350 ft Irish Hills Natural Reserve Irish Hills Plaza Mountainbrook Church Ca de ob = Castilleja densiflora ssp. obispoensis Ca ob = Calochortus obsipoensis Ce pa co = Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii Ch br = Chorizanthe breweri De pa ea = Delphinium parryi ssp. eastwoodiae Du ab mu = Dudleya abramsii ssp. murina Du bl = Dudleya blochmaniae La jo = Layia jonesii Se ap = Senecio aphanactis 8.j Packet Pg. 379 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory Report John Madonna Construction, Inc. 23 3.4.3 Special Status Animals The CNDDB contained occurrencedatafornumerous special status animal speciesinthegeneral area.Please refertoFigure 8 and Appendix B for the special statusanimalsthat were evaluatedin this study,and a determination as to their potentialtooccuronsite.Similar to the plant evaluation above,many of these special status animal species are not expected to occuronthesubjectsitedue to the lack of suitablehabitat.Species such as California blackrailRallus longirostris obsoletus), western snowy ploverCharadrius alexandrines nivosus),Morro shoulderband snail Helminthoglypta walkeriana),and Morro Bay bluebutterflyPlebejus icarioides morroensis)are coastal species thathave specific habitat attributes and requirements that arenotpresentonsite, and therefore,are not expected to occurontheproperty because suitable habitat is notpresent. A number of avian species are known fromthegeneralareaand could potentially utilizethe grasslands,coast live oak/California bay woodland,coastal scrub,andeucalyptusstandsfor nesting and foraging.Given the large expanses of open grasslands andmixedshrub/woodlandsonthe property,many of thespecial status birds known from the general area couldpotentiallyoccuron the property at least as transients movingthroughtheregion seasonally.Ground nesting birds,and small songbirds could potentially use the site for nesting activities.Specialstatus species identified in the CNDDB and that could potentially occur onsite includethegrasshoppersparrow Ammodramus savannarum),ferruginous hawkButeo regalis),peregrine falconFalco peregrinus anatum),Cooper’s hawkAccipiter cooperii),burrowingowl Athene cunicularia),and white--tailed kite Elanus leucurus). Bat species,such as the pallid batAntrozous pallidus),Townsend’s big--eared batCorynorhinus townsendii),and various speciesofMyotis have large home ranges,andcould forage overand around the site,as well as roost intreesandunder the evesofexisting structures.The Monarch butterfly Danaus plexippus)isa relatively common species from the generalarea,and could forage onsite.It would not be expectedtooverwinteron theRanch because the species requires specific autumnal and overwintering habitat attributestypically observed closer tothecoast.The small grouping of eucalyptus trees,and riparian oakandbay trees that are presentin the study area are not suitabletosupport monarch butterfly overwintering habitat. Based on the lack ofsuitablesandy soils,the legless lizardAnniella pulchra)and coast horned lizard Phrynosoma blainvillii)are not expected to occurinthecoastal scrub habitat mappedonsite. The heavy clay soils on the property preclude fossorial burrowing)reptilessuchasthelegless lizard from occurring under shrubs on the slopes or flatterareasofthesite.Species such astheSan Diego woodratNeotoma lepida intermedia)and American badger Taxidea taxus)could potentially occur onsite,and woodrat nests were observedindenseoak/California bay woodland areas in the southwestern part of theproperty. The portion ofFroom Creek within the sitedoes notappear to contain appropriate aquatic and riparian habitat to supportthefederally threatenedCalifornia red--legged frogRana draytonii; CRLF).The closest known occurrence is from the waste water treatmentpondsontheeastsideof Highway 101.No records of CRLF intheimmediateproject area were found.It appearsthatFroom Creek does not contain flowing water or any deep pools during thelatespringorsummermonths to support a breeding populationofCRLF.The small tributary drainages in the higherelevationsof the study area also 8.j Packet Pg. 380 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n USGS QUAD PORT SAN LUIS USGS QUAD PISMO BEACH USGS QUAD MORRO BAY SOUTH USGS QUAD SAN LUIS OBISPO USGS QUAD LOPEZ MTN. USGS QUAD ARROYO GRANDE NE Study Area Boundary USGS Quadrangle Search Radius (5 miles) CNDDB Occurrence (CDFW September 2015) American badger Atascadero June beetle California red-legged frog Coast Range newt San Luis Obispo pyrg Townsend's big-eared bat black legless lizard (silver legless lizard) ferruginous hawk foothill yellow-legged frog monarch butterfly pallid bat prairie falcon steelhead - south/central California coast DPS tidewater goby vernal pool fairy shrimp western mastiff bat western pond turtle western yellow-billed cuckoo white-tailed kite USFWS Critical Habitat California red-legged frog (USFWS 2010) Steelhead Critical Habitat (USFWS 2005) John Madonna Construction, Inc. 0 4,100 8,20012,30016,4002,050 Feet CNDDB Wildlife Occurrences Map Figure8FroomRanch Source(s): (c)ESRI and its data suppliers (2010): CDFW, CNDDB, October 2014; USFWS Critical Habitat Data, September 2015 1 in = 7,000 ft 8.j Packet Pg. 381 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory Report John Madonna Construction, Inc. 25 did not contain suitable aquatic habitat tosupportCRLF.The constructed detention basinsonsite lack suitable aquatic habitat with a sufficient hydroperiodtosupportCRLF,and did not containany emergent vegetation. Southern steelheadOncorhynchus mykiss irideus)are known to occur furthertothesoutheast of the project site in San LuisObispoCreek.They havealso been identified as occurring withinthe upper reaches of Froom Creek outside the study areapersonal communication with FreddyOtte, City of San Luis ObispoBiologist).Also,other highly aquatic species such asthewesternpond turtle Emys marmorata),thetwo--striped garter snakeThamnophis hammondii),and theCoast Range newtTaricha torosatorosa)are not expectedto occur onsitein Froom Creek,its tributaries or the constructed basinsbased onthe lack of seasonally flowing and pondedwater. The USFWS has identified critical habitat for steelhead andCRLFintheregion.The projectsite, however,does not occur inthecritical habitat polygons developed for CRLF,but Froom Creekis identified ascritical habitatfor southern steelhead.It is highlyunlikely,however,that FroomCreek supports a steelhead run since it isseparatedfromSan Luis Obispo Creek by a series ofculvertsand man--made ditches. The Coast Range newtisa species of concern known to occur in the SantaLuciaMountainsand Santa Margarita region north of the project site.This species lives interrestrialhabitatsand breeds in ponds and slow moving streams duringwintermonths.Although the speciesisnot documented from the Irish Hills of the SanLuisRange,there is potential for this animal tooccurfurther upstream in the watershed.It is unlikelytooccurwithin the study area due to thelackofsuitable habitat. The evaluation of special status speciesoccurrences onsite was based on a habitatsuitability analysis coupled with on the groundobservations.Please refer to AppendixB for further detail. The investigation did not include definitive surveys to determine thepresenceorabsence of species such as theCRLF,but did include direct observation of onsite and offsiteconditions,inspectionof the drainage channels and their respective hydrologic regime,and review of biologicalreportsand the CNDDB records documenting recorded occurrence data from the areatoconcludewhetheror not a particular species could be expected to occur.Basedonthisanalysis,the following species have the potentialto be presentwithin the project studyarea at some point intime: American badgerTaxidea taxus;species of specialconcern) Burrowing owl Athene cunicularia;speciesofspecial concern); California homed lark Eremophila alpestris actia;watch list); Cooper’s hawk Accipiter cooperi;watch list); Golden eagle Aquila chrysaetos;watch list and CDFW FullyProtected); Loggerhead shrike Lanius ludovicianus;speciesofspecial concern); Merlin Falco columbarius;watch list); Northern harrier Circus cyaneus;species ofspecial concern); Purple martin Progne subis;speciesofspecial concern); Sharp--shinned hawk Accipiter striatus;watch list); Tricolored blackbird Agelaius tricolor;candidate species and species of specialconcern); White--tailed kite Elanus leucurus;CDFW Fully Protected); Yellow warbler Dendroica petechia brewsteri;species of specialconcern); Big free--tailed bat Nyctinomops macrotis;species of specialconcern; Hoary bat Lasiurus cinereus;special animal); 8.j Packet Pg. 382 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory Report John Madonna Construction, Inc. 26 Pallid bat Antrozous pallidus;species of specialconcern); San Diego woodrat Neotoma lepida intermedia;species of specialconcern); Steelhead Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus;federal threatened and speciesofconcern); Townsend’s westernbig--eared bat Corynorhinus townsendi townsendi;species of special concern); Western mastiffbat Eumops perotis californicus;species of specialconcern); Western redbat Lasiurus blossevilli;species of specialconcern);and Yuma Myotis Myotis yumanensis;special animal). As stated above,CRLF,western pond turtle,Coast Range newt,andtwo--striped garter snakeare known from the region.Given Froom Creek’s inconsistent flow regime,thesespeciesarenot expected to occur onsite based on the lack of seasonalaquatichabitat.Under above average rainfall years when Froom Creek is flowingandseasonalin--channel poolspersist for a longerperiod,itis possible,albeit unlikely,that these species could find their wayontothesite.Furthermore, seasonally ponded water along Calle Joaquincouldalso potentially provide seasonal habitatfor these highly aquatic species. 5.0 CONCLUSION The Froom Ranch is situated in a biologicallyrichareaof San Luis ObispoCountycomposed of a mosaic ofannual andnative grasslands,coast liveoak/California bay woodland and coastal scrub/chaparral habitats bisected by natural drainages in the northeastern flank ofthe Irish Hills of the San LuisRange.Froom Creek traverses the site in a mostly north tosouthdirectionandjoins San Luis Obispo Creeksouthof the site before flowing to the Pacific OceaninAvilaBeach.Wetland habitat occurs along the unnamed tributary drainages to FroomCreek,andin flat grasslandareas where surface and subsurface water is impounded by LOVRandCalleJoaquin.The LOVR Roadside Channel also contained riparian habitat composed of an arroyo willowmonoculture.The most significant biological resources present onsite are the naturaldrainagefeatures i.e.:FroomCreek and itsthree tributary drainages)and associated wetland and riparianhabitats,and the native serpentine bunchgrass grassland and serpentine rock outcrops supporting a suiteofspecialstatus plant species,many of which are endemic to theSanLuisObispoarea. Non--native annual grasslandwas the dominantplant community on the ranch,primarilyoccurring in the flatter portions of the site where past disturbancessuchascattle/horse feeding has occurred. The southwestern part of the sitecontained native serpentine bunchgrass grassland whererock outcrops and thinner,lessdeveloped soilswere present.The wetland,riparian,and native bunchgrass grassland habitats delineatedonthe habitatmap were identifiedas special status natural communities. Occurrences of special statusplantswere identifiedwithin thestudy area and their occurrences shown on Figure 7,the Special Status PlantOccurrenceMap.Nine of the special status plantsare California Rare Plant Rank List 1B species,and one is a List 2 species.List2meansthatthespecies is rareinCalifornia but more widespread elsewhere.The federal and stateendangeredandCRPR List 1B Chorro Creek bog thistle was also identified onsite,and wasconfinedtowetlandareasin Drainages 1 and 2 in the southwestern partofthestudyarea.List 4species are on a watchlistand are relatively common in the projectarea.No special status wildlife species were observedonsite, but Froom Creek could potentially provide a movement corridor forthefederalthreatened southern steelhead between upstreambreeding areas and San Luis Obispo Creekwhenflowing water was present.In addition,a number of species of special concernincludingadiverserangeof birds,including raptors),andbats could potentially occur onsite on a seasonalbasis. 8.j Packet Pg. 383 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory Report John Madonna Construction, Inc. 27 6.0 REFERENCES Baldwin,B.G.,D.H.Goldman,D.J.Keil,R.Patterson,T.J.Rosatti,and D.H.Wilken,editors.2012.The Jepson Manual:vascular plants of California,second edition.UniversityofCaliforniaPress, Berkeley. Calflora.2015.Information onwild California plants for conservation,education,and appreciation. Berkeley,CA.Accessedvia:http://www.calflora.org/. California Department of Fish and Game.2009.Protocols for SurveyingandEvaluatingImpactsto Special Status Native PlantPopulations and Natural Communities.November24,2009. California Department of Fish and Game.2001.Fish and Game CodeofCalifornia,Section3503.5. Gould Publications,Altamonte Springs,FL. California Department of Fish and Game.2003.CaliforniaNatural Diversity Database,Rarefind V. 3.QueriedApril and November 2015. County of San Luis Obispo.2009.Guidelines for Preparation of BiologicalReports.Departmentof Planning and Building,EnvironmentalDivision. Granger,T.,T.Hruby,A.McMillan,D.Peters,J.Rubey,D.Sheldon,S.Stanley,E.Stockdale.April 2005.Wetlands in WashingtonState Volume 2:Guidancefor Protecting and Managing Wetlands.Washington State Department ofEcology.Publication 05--06--008.Olympia,WA. Holland,R.F.1986.Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural CommunitiesofCalifornia. California Department of Fish and Game,Sacramento. Hoover,Robert F.1970.The Vascular Plants of San Luis ObispoCounty,California.Universityof California Press,Berkeley,CA. Jennings,M.R.,and M.P.Hayes.1994.Amphibian and reptilespeciesofspecialconcernin California,1 November 1994.California Department of Fish andGame,InlandFisheries Division,Rancho Cordova,California.255pp. National Marine Fisheries Service.2006 January).50 CFR Parts 223and224.Endangeredand Threatened Species:Final Listing Determinations for 10 Distinct PopulationSegmentsofWest Coast Steelhead;Final Rule.National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,UnitedStates Department of Commerce. Natural Resources Conservation Service.2015.Web Soil Survey.National Cooperative SoilSurvey, U.S.Department of Agriculture.Accessed via:http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app. Sawyer,J.O.,T.Keeler--Wolf,and J.M.Evens.2009.A Manual of CaliforniaVegetation,Second Edition.California Native Plant Society,Sacramento,CA. United States Fish and Wildlife Service.1973.The Endangered Species Actof1973,asamended16 U.S.C 1531 etseq.). United States Fishand Wildlife Service.2000.Guidelines for ConductingandReportingBotanical Inventories for Federally Listed,Proposed,and Candidate Plants.January2000. United StatesFish and Wildlife Service.2015.National Wetlands Inventory website.U.S.Department of the Interior,Washington,D.C.Accessedvia:http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/. 8.j Packet Pg. 384 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n APPENDIX A List of Plants and AnimalsObserved KMA 8.j Packet Pg. 385 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc A - 1 Appendix A List of Plantsand AnimalsObserved Onsite During 2015 Field Surveys. Scientific Name Common Name Plants Achillea millefolium Yarrow Achyrachaena mollis Blow wives Acmispon americanusvar.americanus Spanish lotus Acmispon glaber Lotus scoparius)Deer weed Acmispon wrangelianus Lotus Agrostis pallens Bent grass Aira caryophyllea*Silver hair grass Allium crispum Crinkled onion Ambrosia psilostachys Ragweed Amsinckia intermedia Common fiddleneck Anagallis arvensis Scarlet pimpernel Anthriscus caucalis*Bur chervil Aquilegia eximia Vanhouette’s columbine Artemisia californica California sagebrush Artemisia douglasiana Mugwort Asphodelus fistulosus*Onionweed Astragalus curtipes South coast milkvetch Astragalus gambelianus Gambel’s dwarf locoweed Avena barbata*Slender wild oats Baccharis pilularis Coyote brush Bloomeria crocea Golden stars Brachypodium distachyon*False brome Brassica nigra*Black mustard Brodiaea terrestris Dwarf brodiaea Bromus carinatus California brome Bromus diandrus*Ripgut brome Bromus hordeacous*Soft chess Bromus madritensisssp.rubens*Red brome Calandrinia ciliata Red maids Calochortus argillosus Clay mariposa lily Calochortus clavatusssp.clavatus Club--hair mariposa lilyList4.3) Calochortus obispoensis San Luis mariposa lily List1B.2) Calystegia macrostegiassp.cyclostegia Coast morning glory Calystegia subacaulisssp.episcopalis Cambria morning glory List 4.2) Cardamine californica California toothwort Carduus pycnocephalus*Italian thistle Carex praegracilis Clustered field sedge Carex senta Rough sedge Castilleja densiflorassp.obispoensis San Luis Obispo owl’s cloverList1B.2) Ceanothus cuneatus Buck brush Centaurea solstitialis*Yellow star thistle Centromadia parryi ssp.congdonii Congdon’s tarplant List 1B.1) Chenopodium album*Goosefoot Chlorogallum pomeridianumvar.pomeridianum Soap plant Chorizanthe breweri Brewer’s spineflower List 1B.3) Chorizanthe palmeri Palmer’s spineflower List 4.2) Cirsium fontinale var.obispoense Chorro Creekbog thistle FE,SE,List 1B.2) Cirsium vulgare*Bull thistle 8.j Packet Pg. 386 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc A - 2 Scientific Name Common Name Clarkia bottae Botta’s clarkia Claytonia perfoliata Miner’s lettuce Conium maculatum*Poison hemlock Conyza canadensis Horseweed Corethrogyne filaginifolia Corethrogyne Crassula connata Pygmy weed Cryptantha clevelandii Cryptantha Cynodon dactylon*Bermuda grass Cyperus eragrostis Tall flatsedge Deinandra fasciculata Yellow tarweed Delphinium parryi ssp.eastwoodiae Eastwood’s larkspur List 1B.2) Dichelostemma pulchra Blue dicks Dipsacus fullonum*Fuller’s teasel Distichlis spicata Saltgrass Dodecatheon clevelandii Padre’s shooting star Dudleya abramsiissp.murina San Luis Obispo serpentine dudleyaList1B.2) Dudleya blochmaniae Blochman’s dudleya List 1B.1) Eleocharis macrostachya Spike rush Elymus glaucus Western wildrye Epilobium canum California fuchsia Erigeron philadelphicus Philadelphia fleabane Eriogonum fasciculatum California buckwheat Eriogonum parvifolium Coastal buckwheat Eriophyllum confertiflorum Golden yarrow Erodium botrys*Filaree Erodium cicutarium*Red--stemmed filaree Eschscholzia californica California poppy Eucalyptus globulus*Blue gum eucalyptus Euphorbia peplus*Petty spurge Euphorbia spathulata Spurge Festuca arundinaceae*Tall fescue Festuca microstachys Eastwood fescue Festuca perennis*Italian rye grass Filago californica California filago Filago Logfia)gallica*Narrowleaf cottonrose Foeniculum vulgare*Fennel Fritillaria bifloravar.biflora Chocolate lily Galium aparine Bedstraw Galium porrigens Climbing bedstraw Gastridium ventricosum*Nit grass Genista monspessulana*French broom Geranium dissectum*Cut--leaf geranium Gilia achilleifolia California gilia Gilia capitatum Blue field gilia Gnaphalium californica California everlasting Gnaphalium purpureum Purple everlasting Hazardia squarrosa Saw--tooth golden bush Helminthotheca echioides Prickly ox tongue Hemizonia congestassp.luzulifolia Hayfield tarweed Hesperocyparis Cupressus)macrocarpa Monterey cypress Hesperoyucca whipplei Chaparral yucca 8.j Packet Pg. 387 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc A - 3 Scientific Name Common Name Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon Hirschfeldia incana*Summer mustard Hoita orbicularis Round--leaf leather root Hordeum brachyantherum Meadow barley Hordeum marinumssp.gussoneanum*Mediterranean barley Hordeum murinumssp.leporinum*Foxtail Hypochaeris glabra*Smooth cat’sear Juncus bufonius Toad rush Juncus effusus Spreading rush Juncus patens Common rush Juncus phaeocephalus Brown headed rush Koeleria micrantha June grass Lactuca serriola*Wild lettuce Lamarckia aurea*Goldentop Lasthenia californica Common goldfields Layia jonesii Jones’s layia List 1B.2) Leptosiphon parvifolius Variable linanthus Leymus condensatus Giant wildrye Leymus triticoides Creeping wild rye Lomatium utriculatum Biscuit root Lotus corniculatus Birdsfoot trefoil Lupinus bicolor Miniature lupine Lupinus microcarpus Chick lupine Lupinus nanus Sky lupine Lupinus succulentus Succulent lupine Lythrum hyssopifolium*Grass poly Malva nicaaensis*Bull mallow Matricaria matricarioides*Pineapple weed Medicago polymorpha*Bur clover Melica californica California melic Melica imperfecta Melic grass Melilotus sativa*Sweet cicily Microseris douglasii Douglas’microseris Mimulus aurantiacus Sticky monkey flower Mimulus guttatus Seep monkey flower Muhlenbergia stricta Deer grass Nicotiana glauca Tree tobacco Oenanthe sarmentosa Water parsley Opuntia ficus--indica Prickly pear cactus Oxalis pes--caprae Bermuda buttercup Pellaea mucronata Birdfoot fern Pennisetum setaceum*Fountaingrass Phacelia imbricata Stinging phacelia Plagiobothrys nothofulvus Popcorn flower Plantago erecta California plantain Plantago lanceolata*English plantain Platanus racemosa Sycamore Platystemon californicus Cream cups Polypogon monspeliensis*Rabbitfoot grass Populus fremontii Fremont cottonwood Potentilla anserina Silverweed 8.j Packet Pg. 388 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc A - 4 Scientific Name Common Name Prunus ilicifolia Holly--leaved cherry Psilocarphus tenellus Wooly marbles Quercus agrifolia Coast liveoak Ranunculus californicus California buttercup Raphanus sativa*Wild radish Rhamnus Frangula)californica Coffeeberry Rosa californica California rose Rubus discolor Himalayan blackberry Rubus ursinus California blackberry Rumex acetosella*Sheep sorrel Rumex crispus*Curly dock Rumex pulcher*Fiddle dock Salix lasiolepis Arroyo willow Salvia columbariae Chia sage Salvia mellifera Black sage Salvia spathacea Hummingbird sage Sanicula bipinnatifida Purple sanicle Sanicula crassicaulis Common sanicle Sanicula laciniata Coast sanicle Schinus molle*Peruvian pepper Schoenoplectus acutusvar.occidentalis California tule Schoenoplectus californicus California bulrush Scirpus microcarpus Panicled bulrush Scrophularia californica California bee plant Senecio aphanactis Rayless ragwort List2.2) Sidalcea malviflora Checker bloom Silene californica California catch--fly Silybum marianum*Milk thistle Sisyrinchium bellum Blue--eyed grass Solanum xantii Purple nightshade Sonchus asper*Prickly sow thistle Stachys pycnantha Short spikehedge nettle Stipa Nassella)pulchra Purple needlegrass Symphoricarpos mollis Creeping snowberry Toxicodendron diversilobum Poison oak Trifolium depauperatum var.depauperatum Dwarf sack clover Trifolium fucatum Sour clover Trifolium hirtum*Rose clover Trifolium subterraneum*Subterranean clover Trifolium willdenovii Tomcat clover Triphysaria erianthassp.eriantha Butter and eggs Typha latifolia Cattail Umbellularia californica California bay laurel Urtica dioica ssp.holosericea Stinging nettle Verbena lasiostachys Western vervain Veronica anagallis--aquatica Water speedwell Vicia sativa*Spring vetch Vicia villosassp.villosa*Hairy vetch Viola pedunculata Johnny jumpup Woodwardia fimbriata Giant chainfern Xanthium spinosum Spiny cocklebur 8.j Packet Pg. 389 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc A - 5 Scientific Name Common Name Xanthium strumarium Cocklebur Zeltnera davyi Davy’s centaury Zigadenus fremontii Star lily Animals Accipiter cooperi Cooper’s hawk Agelaius phoenicius Red--winged blackbird Ammodramus savannarum Grasshopper sparrow Aphelocoma corulescens Scrub jay Ardea herodias Great blue heron Bubo virginianus Great hornedowl Buteo jamaicensis Red--tailed hawk Buteo lineatus Red--shouldered hawk Callipepla californica California quail Calypte anna Anna’s hummingbird Canis latrans Coyote Carpodacus mexicanus House finch Cathartes aura Turkey vulture Chamae fasciata wrentit Circus cyaneus Northern harrier Egretta thula Snowy egret Elgaria multicarinata Alligator lizard Euphagus cyanocephalus Brewer’s blackbird Icterus bullockii Bullock’s oriole Melanerpes formicivorus Acorn woodpecker Melazone crissalis California towhee Mimus polyglottos Northern mockingbird Odocoileus hemionus Black--tailed deer Pituophis catenifer catenifer Pacific gopher snake Procyon lotor Raccoon Regalus calendula Ruby crowned kinglet Sayornis nigricans Black phoebe Sceloporis occidentalis Western fence lizard Setophaga townsendi Townsend’s warbler Sialia mexicana Western blue bird Spermophilus beecheyi California ground--squirrel Sturnella neglecta Meadowlark Sturnus vulgaris*European starling Thomomys bottae Botta’s pocket gopher Tyrannus verticalis King bird Zenaida macroura Mourning dove Zonotrichia leucophorys White crowned sparrow Asterisk identifiesnon--native species;species in bold type are special statusspecies. 8.j Packet Pg. 390 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n APPENDIX B Special Status Biological ResourcesKnown to Occur or Potentially Occurring Onsite KMA 8.j Packet Pg. 391 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. B - 1 Appendix B.Special--Status Biological Resources Present or Potentially OccurringOnsite Species Status* Fed/CA/CRPR Habitat Requirements Project Site Suitability/Observations LICHENS/BRYOPHYTES Firm cup lichen Cladonia firma --/--/-- Lichen known from maritime habitats in Europe and North America on stabilized sand dunes on the coast. Documented in the Morro Bay/Los Osos area on sands of marine origin. No suitable habitat present onsite. Not expected to occur. Splitting yarn lichen Sulcaria isidiifera --/--/-- Known from the Los Osos area growing on branches of coast live oak and maritime chaparral plants in sandy areas. No suitable habitat present onsite. All reported collections are from the Baywood fine sands of Los Osos. Not expected to occur based on the lack of suitable habitat. PLANTS Adobe sanicle Sanicula maritima --/ R/1B.1 Perennial herb; blooms February through March; ranges from 30 to 240 meters; Occurs on clay and serpentine soils in chaparral, coastal prairie, meadows, seeps, and valley and foothill grassland. Potential habitat present in on-site grasslands in proximity to serpentine rock outcrops. Not observed within the study area during floristic surveys. Not expected to occur. Arroyo de la Cruz manzanita Arctostaphylos cruzensis 1B.2 Perennial shrub; blooms from December to March; occurs between 60 and 310 meters in sandy soils; found in broadleaved upland forest, coastal bluff scrub, closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral, coastal scrub and valley and foothill grassland. This perennial shrub would have been easily identifiable during surveys. Not observed during surveys. Not present onsite. Beach spectaclepod Dithyrea maritima --/ T/1B.1 Rhizomatous, perennial herb; blooms March through May; found in sandy soils, usually near shore, in coastal dunes and coastal scrub habitats; ranges from 3 to 50 meters in elevation. Site is too far from the immediate coast for this species to occur. Species only known to occur on sand dunes along the coast. Not observed during surveys. Not present onsite. Betty’s dudleya Dudleya abramsii ssp. bettinae 1B.2 Perennial succulent; blooms May through July and is endemic to coastal San Luis Obispo County west of Cerro Romualdo; found in chaparral, coastal scrub, and valley and foothill grasslands, usually on serpentine outcrops or shallow rocky soils; ranges in elevation from 20 to 180 meters. Suitable serpentine soils present on-site, but this particular subspecies is known to occur further west of the property towards Morro Bay and Cayucos. The Dudleya observed onsite was D. abramsii ssp. murina. Betty’s dudleya was not observed onsite and is not expected to occur. Black-flowered figwort Scrophularia atrata --/--/ 1B.2 Perennial herb; blooms April through July; ranges from 10 to 500 meters in elevation; occurs in closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral, coastal dunes, coastal scrub, and riparian scrub habitats, typically on sandy or diatomaceous shale soils. Marginal habitat present along the edges of coast live oak woodland and riparian habitats on-site. Not observed during surveys, and not expected to occur. S. californica was identified on site. Blochman’s dudleya Dudleya blochmaniae ssp. blochmaniae 1B.1 Perennial herb; blooms April through June; found on rocky, often clay or serpentine soils in coastal bluff scrub, chaparral, coastal scrub, and valley and foothill grassland; ranges from 5 to 450 meters in elevation. This species was observed growing on rock outcrops in select locations in the southwestern part of the study area. Blochman’s leafy daisy Erigeron blochmaniae --/--/ 1B.2 Rhizomatous perennial herb; blooms July through August; ranges from 3 to 45 meters in elevation and occurs in coastal dunes and coastal scrub. This species is restricted to coastal dunes typically along the immediate coastline. No suitable habitat or soils present onsite. Not observed during surveys, and not expected to occur onsite. 8.j Packet Pg. 392 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. B - 2 Appendix B.Special--Status Biological Resources Present or Potentially OccurringOnsite Species Status* Fed/CA/CRPR Habitat Requirements Project Site Suitability/Observations Brewer’s spineflower Chorizanthe breweri --/--/ 1B.3 Occurs in closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral, cismontane woodland, and coastal scrub habitats on serpentine derived soils and rock outcrops, mostly in rocky and gravelly areas; ranges in elevation from 45 to 800 meters; annual herb; blooms May through August. This species was observed growing on serpentine rock outcrops and gravelly soils in the southwestern part of the study area. California seablite Suaeda californica E/--/1B.1 Perennial succulent shrub that grows along the margins of coastal salt marshes in a narrow elevational range from 0 to 5 meters; known to occur in the Morro Bay area Not expected to occur onsite due to the lack of suitable habitat (i.e., no coastal salt marsh habitat present). Cambria (San Luis Obispo County) morning-glory Calystegia subacaulis ssp. episcopalis 4.2 Rhizomatous, perennial herb; blooms from April to May; occurs in chaparral, cismontane woodland, and sparse to dense grassland covering sloped or flat areas in clay-rich soils; ranges from 60-500 meters; restricted to outer South Coast ranges in SLO and Santa Barbara Counties. Observed as a component of onsite serpentine bunchgrass grasslands. Present in varying densities throughout the western part of the study area. Caper-fruited tropidocarpum Tropidocarpum capparideum 1B.1 Annual herb; blooms March through April; ranges from 1 to 455 meters and is found on alkaline clay soils in valley and foothill grassland. Potentially suitable habitat present in onsite grassland habitats. Not observed during surveys when species would have been in flower and identifiable. Not expected to occur onsite. Chorro Creek bog thistle (San Luis Obispo fountain thistle) Cirsium fontinale var. obispoense E/E/1B.2 Perennial herb; blooms February to July; ranges from 35 to 365 meters in elevation; occurs in chaparral and cismontane woodland habitats, often in serpentine seeps. Species was observed in wetland habitat along the upper portions of Drainages 1 and 2. Club-haired mariposa lily Calochortus clavatus ssp. clavatus 4.3 Perennial bulbiferous herb known to occur on serpentine rock outcrops, valley grassland (i.e., perennial bunchgrass), chaparral, and foothill woodland; typically blooms from May to June. Species was observed in the extreme southwestern portion of the study area growing on rocky serpentine soils in coastal scrub and native grasslands. Coast woolly threads Nemacaulis denudata var. denudata 1B.2 Annual herb that grows in coastal sand dunes in open spaces of the coastal strand; known to occur in the Montana de Oro area in sandy soils. No suitable habitat present. Not observed during surveys, and not expected to occur onsite. Coastal goosefoot Chenopodium littoreum --/--/ 1B.2 Annual herb that grows on sandy flats in coastal dunes along wetland and salt marsh habitat. Typically found between 30 and 100 meters, and is known from the Morro Bay estuary. No suitable habitat present onsite for this species. Not observed during surveys, and not expected to occur onsite. Congdon’s tarplant Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii 1B.2 Annual herb; blooms from June to November; occurs in moist alkaline conditions in marshes, swamps, vernal pools, and valley and foothill grassland habitats; ranges from 1 to 230 meters in elevation. Species was observed growing in the temporary stormwater basin in the northern part of the site. 8.j Packet Pg. 393 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. B - 3 Appendix B.Special--Status Biological Resources Present or Potentially OccurringOnsite Species Status* Fed/CA/CRPR Habitat Requirements Project Site Suitability/Observations Coulter’s goldfields Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri 1B.1 Annual herb that grows in coastal salt marshes, playas, valley and foothill grassland, and vernal pools usually on alkaline soils from 1- 1,400 meters. Marginal habitat present in onsite wetlands and seeps. Only Lasthenia californica, a common species, was observed growing in and around the serpentine outcrops. Not observed during surveys, and not expected to occur onsite. Coulter’s saltbush Atriplex coulteri --/--/ 1B.2 Perennial herb grows in coastal bluff scrub, sandy dune habitat as well as in valley grassland and coastal sage scrub. Marginal habitat present onsite. Not observed during surveys, therefore, not expected to occur. Crisp monardella Monardella crispa --/--/ 1B.2 Rhizomatous, perennial herb; blooms April through August; ranges from 10 to 120 meters in elevation and occurs on sandy soils in coastal dunes and coastal scrub. Species typically occurs in coastal dunes in close proximity to the Pacific Ocean, and the site is therefore outside the species range. Not observed during surveys. Not expected to occur onsite. Cuesta Pass checkerbloom Sidalcea hickmanii ssp. anomala R/1B.2 Perennial herb; blooms May through June; ranges from 600 to 800 meters and is found on serpentine soils in closed-cone coniferous forest; known from only three occurrences on Cuesta Ridge in San Luis Obispo County. Project site is outside the known range for this species. Although suitable serpentine soils are present onsite, only the common checkerbloom, Sidalcea malviflora, was observed in bunchgrass grassland on the site. Cuesta Pass checkerbloom was not observed during surveys and is not expected to occur onsite. Cuesta Ridge thistle Cirsium occidentale var. lucianum 1B.2 Perennial herb known to occur along the Cuesta Ridge in openings on steep rocky serpentinite slopes from 500 to 750 meters. Although suitable serpentine-based soils are present onsite, the study area is lower in elevation than areas in the Santa Lucia Mountains where this species has been observed. This species was not observed during field surveys, and is not expected to occur onsite. Dacite manzanita Arctostaphylos tomentosa ssp. daciticola 1B.1 Perennial shrub known to occur in chaparral and cismontane woodland. Only one known occurrence of this species in SLO County on the porphyry buttes Hollister Peak) east of Morro Bay No suitable habitat for this species present onsite. Perennial shrub would have been identifiable if encountered during the surveys. Not expected to occur onsite. Diablo Canyon blue grass Poa diabolic 1B.2 Perennial rhizomatous herb known from highly localized areas along the coast from Montana de Oro south onto Diablo Nuclear Power Plant property. Chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub and closed cone coniferous habitat types on shale. Marginal habitat present onsite. This species was not observed during surveys of the site at times when it would have been identifiable if encountered. Given it is a highly restricted species known to occur on the western flank of the San Luis Range, and there are no shale outcroppings onsite, this species is not expected to occur. Dune larkspur Delphinium parryi ssp. blochmaniae 1B.2 Perennial herb; blooms April through May; occurs in maritime chaparral and coastal dune habitats at elevations ranging from 0 to 200 meters, typically on volcanic soils and/or rocky slopes. No suitable habitat present onsite due to lack of sandy soils. Not observed during spring surveys. Not expected to occur onsite. A closely related species was observed onsite – see below. Dwarf soaproot Chlorogalum pomeridianum var. minus 1B.2 Bulbiferous, perennial herb; blooms May to August; occurs on serpentine soils in chaparral and valley and foothill grassland habitats, ranging from 305 to 1000 meters in elevation. Suitable habitat present at serpentine rock outcrops and thin soils in native bunchgrass grassland. Only the common soaproot, Chlorogalum pomeridianum var. pomeridianum was observed onsite. Dwarf Soaproot was not observed during rare plant surveys. Not expected to occur onsite. 8.j Packet Pg. 394 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. B - 4 Appendix B.Special--Status Biological Resources Present or Potentially OccurringOnsite Species Status* Fed/CA/CRPR Habitat Requirements Project Site Suitability/Observations Eastwood’s larkspur Delphinium parryi ssp. eastwoodiae 1B.2 Perennial herb known to occur on serpentine based soils (clays) and outcrops in the general San Luis Obispo area with collections made on Camp San Luis Obispo. Blooms March to May. Species was observed in the southwestern portion of the study area growing in coastal scrub and native grasslands on rocky serpentine soils. Hardham’s evening- primrose Camissoniopsis hardhamiae 1B.2 Annual herb known to occur in chaparral and foothill woodland habitats; typically blooms from March to May. Only one recorded occurrence in the region from sandy openings in oak woodland in Los Osos. No suitable sandy soils present onsite. Not observed during field surveys, therefore, it is not expected to occur onsite. Hooked popcorn flower Plagiobothrys uncinatus --/--/ 1B.2 Annual herb known to occur in the Santa Lucia Mountains growing in chaparral typically on shale and sandstone soils. No suitable habitat present onsite. Not observed during surveys, and not expected to occur. Hoover’s bent grass Agrostis hooveri --/--/ 1B.2 Stoloniferous, perennial herb; blooms April to July; occurs between 60 and 600 meters on sandy soils in chaparral, cismontane woodland, and valley and foothill grassland habitats. No suitable sandy soils present to support this species. Grassland and oak woodland areas were searched for this species, but it was not observed. Not expected to occur onsite. Hoover’s button-celery Eryngium aristulatum var. hooveri 1B.1 An herb that can occur as either an annual or a perennial; blooms in July and occurs at elevations ranging from 3 to 45 meters; found in vernal pools, seasonally wet grasslands, and often in roadside ditches. Marginal habitat present in wetlands on- site. Seasonally wet areas were searched for this species and it was not observed. Not expected to occur onsite. Indian Knob mountainbalm Eriodictyon altissimum E/E/1B.1 Evergreen shrub; blooms March through June; ranges in elevation from 80 to 270 meters and occurs in maritime chaparral, cismontane woodland, and coastal scrub, usually on sandstone; often found in open disturbed areas. Marginal habitat identified in oak woodland and coastal scrub habitats on-site. No suitable sandstone based soils present. Not observed during surveys. Not expected to occur onsite. Jones’ layia Layia jonesii --/--/ 1B.2 Annual herb; blooms March through May; occurs on clay soils and serpentine outcrops in chaparral and valley and foothill grassland; ranges in elevation from 5 to 400 meters. Species was observed in the southwestern portion of the study area growing in native grasslands on rocky serpentine soils. Leafy tarplant Deinandra increscens ssp. foliosa 1B.2 Annual herb; blooms June through September; typically found in sandy soils in valley and foothill grassland, and ranges from 300 to 500 meters in elevation. No suitable sandy soils present on-site to support this species. Leafy tarplant is known to occur further east on the Arroyo Grande NE quad. Not observed during surveys and not expected to be present onsite. Marsh sandwort Arenaria paludicola E/E/1B.1 Stoloniferous, perennial herb; blooms May to August; occurs in freshwater marshes and swamps, bogs and fens, and some coastal scrub, ranging from 3 to 170 meters in elevation; common associates include Typha, Juncus, and Scirpus. Marginal habitat was identified in Drainage 1. Species was not observed during surveys. Not expected to occur onsite. Mesa horkelia Horkelia cuneata ssp. puberula 1B.1 Sandy or gravelly sites in chaparral, coastal scrub and cismontane woodland; 70 to 700 meter elevation range. Marginal habitat identified in coastal scrub and oak woodland on-site, but this species typically occurs in sandy soils not on clay and serpentine. Not observed during surveys. Not expected to occur onsite. 8.j Packet Pg. 395 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. B - 5 Appendix B.Special--Status Biological Resources Present or Potentially OccurringOnsite Species Status* Fed/CA/CRPR Habitat Requirements Project Site Suitability/Observations Miles’ milk-vetch Astragalus didymocarpus var. milesianus 1B.2 Annual herb; blooms March to June; found in coastal scrub habitats, typically occurring on clay soils; ranges in elevation 20 to 90 meters. Suitable habitat identified in coastal scrub and adjacent bunchgrass grassland habitats on-site. Not observed during surveys. Not expected to occur within the site. Morro manzanita Arctostaphylos morroensis T/--/1B.1 Evergreen shrub; blooms December through March; ranges in elevation from 5 to 205 meters; typically found on sandy-loam or Baywood sands in chaparral, woodlands, coastal dunes and coastal scrub. Project site is outside the known range for this species. Not observed during surveys. Not expected to occur onsite. Most beautiful jewel- flower Streptanthus albidus ssp. peramoenus 1B.2 Annual herb; blooms April through June; occurs on serpentine soils in chaparral, valley and foothill grassland, and cismontane woodland, ranging from 120 to 1000 meters in elevation. Suitable serpentine soils and rock outcrops present. Not observed during surveys when this species would have been in identifiable condition. Not expected to occur onsite. Mouse-gray dudleya aka San Luis Obispo dudleya) Dudleya abramsii ssp. murina 1B.3 Perennial succulent herb; blooms May through June; occurs in chaparral and cismontane woodland, usually on serpentine rock outcrops, at elevations ranging from 90 to 300 meters. Species was observed in the western portion of the study area growing in coastal scrub and native grasslands on rocky serpentine soils, and in the northern portion of Froom Creek. Oso manzanita Arctostaphylos osoensis --/--/ 1B.2 Perennial shrub known to occur in chaparral and cismontane woodland on the porphyry buttes east of Morro Bay. No suitable habitat present. Shrub would have been identifiable if encountered during surveys. Not expected to occur. Palmer’s monardella Monardella palmeri --/--/ 1B.2 Rhizomatous, perennial herb; blooms June through August; occurs on serpentine soils in chaparral and cismontane woodland habitats at elevations ranging from 200 to 800 meters. Suitable serpentine soils and habitat present onsite. Not observed during surveys. Not expected to occur onsite. Palmer’s spineflower Chorizanthe palmeri --/--/ List 4.2 Annual herb known to occur on serpentine-based soils in grassland and coastal scrub habitats in the outer coast ranges of Monterey, San Luis Obispo, and Santa Barbara Counties. Blooms from April through August Species was observed in the western portion of the study area growing in native grasslands on thin rocky and clay derived serpentine soils. Pappose tarplant Centromadia parryi ssp. parryi 1B.2 Annual herb known to occur in coastal prairie, meadows and seeps, coastal salt marsh and valley and foothill grasslands typically vernally mesic; elevation ranges from 2 – 420 meters. Only occurrence of this species in the area is known from the Boysen Ranch wetland mitigation area at Foothill Blvd. and Los Osos Valley Road in seasonal wetlands on the valley floor east of Laguna Lake. It is possible that this occurrence was confused with Congdon’s tarplant, which is known from the Boysen Ranch. Not observed during surveys, and not expected to occur. Pecho manzanita Arctostaphylos pechoensis 1B.2 Perennial shrub; blooms November to March; occurs on siliceous shale in closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral, and coastal scrub habitats, ranging from 170 to 1100 meters in elevation. No suitable habitat present. Not observed during surveys. Not expected to occur onsite. 8.j Packet Pg. 396 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. B - 6 Appendix B.Special--Status Biological Resources Present or Potentially OccurringOnsite Species Status* Fed/CA/CRPR Habitat Requirements Project Site Suitability/Observations Pismo clarkia Clarkia speciosa ssp. immaculata E/R/1B.1 Annual herb; blooms May through July; ranges from 25 to 185 meters in elevation and occurs in sandy soils in chaparral (margins, openings), cismontane woodland, and valley and foothill grassland. No suitable habitat present. Not observed during surveys, and not expected to occur onsite. Rayless (chaparral) ragwort Senecio aphanactis 2.2 Annual herb; blooms January through April; ranges from 15 to 800 meters in elevation; typically found on drying alkaline flats, serpentine soils and barren gravelly or sandy slopes in chaparral, cismontane woodland, and coastal scrub habitats. Three plants were observed at one location in the southwestern portion of the study area, growing on rocky serpentine soils. Saline clover Trifolium hydrophilum --/--/ 1B.2 Annual herb; blooms April through June; ranges from 0 to 300 meters in elevation and occurs in mesic and alkaline conditions in marshes and swamps, valley and foothill grasslands, and vernal pools. Marginal habitat identified in wetlands on- site, however not observed during surveys. Not expected to occur onsite. Salt marsh bird’s-beak Chloropyron maritimum ssp. maritimum E/E/1B.2 Annual herb known to occur along margins of salt marsh habitat and coastal dunes. Limited to the higher zones of the Morro Bay estuary. No suitable habitat present onsite. Not observed during surveys. Species not expected to occur onsite. San Benito fritillary Fritillaria viridea --/--/ 1B.2 Bulbiferous, perennial herb; blooms March to May; ranges from 200 to 1525 meters in elevation and occurs in chaparral on serpentine soils. Suitable serpentine soils present. Not observed during surveys. Only Fritillaria biflora observed onsite. Not expected to occur onsite. San Joaquin spearscale Atriplex joaquinana --/--/ 1B.2 Annual herb that grows in seasonal alkali wetlands and alkali sink scrub typically found in the San Joaquin Valley. One recorded occurrence of this species from 1899 in CNDDB was from the vicinity of Morro Bay. Unlikely that this species occurs in the project area. No alkali meadow habitat present, or other indicator species such as Distichlis spicata or Frankenia salina. Not observed during surveys, and not expected to occur onsite. San Luis mariposa-lily Calochortus obispoensis 1B.2 Bulbiferous, perennial herb; blooms May to July; ranges from 75 to 730 meters on sandstone, serpentine and/or sandy soils in chaparral, coastal scrub and valley and foothill grassland; endemic to San Luis Obispo County and is known from localized occurrences in the San Luis Obispo and Arroyo Grande region. Species was observed in the southwestern portion of the study area growing in native grasslands on rocky serpentine soils. San Luis Obispo (La Panza) mariposa-lily Calochortus simulans 1B.3 Bulbiferous, perennial herb; blooms April to May; occurs in sandy, often granitic, sometimes serpentine soils in chaparral, cismontane woodland, lower montane coniferous forest, and valley and foothill grassland; ranges from 395 to 1100 meters in elevation. Suitable serpentine soils present in western portion of site. Not observed during surveys. Not expected to occur onsite. San Luis Obispo County lupine Lupinus ludovicianus 1B.2 Perennial herb; blooms April through July; commonly found on sandstone or sandy soils in chaparral and cismontane woodland, ranging in elevation from 50 to 525 meters. Suitable habitat identified in oak woodlands and adjacent scrub/grasslands on-site, but no suitable soil substrate given the serpentine and clay soils. Not observed during surveys. Not expected to occur onsite. 8.j Packet Pg. 397 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. B - 7 Appendix B.Special--Status Biological Resources Present or Potentially OccurringOnsite Species Status* Fed/CA/CRPR Habitat Requirements Project Site Suitability/Observations San Luis Obispo monardella Monardella frutescens 1B.2 Rhizomatous, perennial herb; blooms May through September; ranges from 10 to 200 meters and occurs on sandy soils in coastal dunes and coastal scrub. Species is known to occur in sand dunes along Pacific Ocean. No suitable habitat present. Not observed during surveys. Not expected to occur onsite. San Luis Obispo owl’s clover Castilleja densiflora ssp. obispoensis 1B.2 Annual herb; blooms in April; ranges from 10 to 400 meters in elevation and occurs in meadows, seeps, and valley and foothill grassland. Occurrences of this species were observed in the southwestern portion of the study area, growing in native grasslands on rocky serpentine and clay soils. San Luis Obispo sedge Carex obispoensis --/--/ 1B.2 Rhizomatous, perennial herb; blooms April to June; ranges from 10 to 790 meters; occurs in closed- cone coniferous forest, chaparral, coastal prairie, coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland (usually near seeps and springs); Usually occurs in transition zone on sand, clay or serpentine. Suitable soils and wetland/seep habitat present on-site. Suitable habitat was searched, but species was not observed during surveys. Not expected to occur onsite. Santa Lucia manzanita Arctostaphylos luciana --/--/ 1B.2 Perennial shrub; blooms February to March; occurs on shale outcrops in chaparral and cismontane woodland habitats; ranges from 350 to 850 meters in elevation. Site lacks shale outcrops and is well outside known range for this species. Perennial shrub would have been identifiable during field surveys. Not observed during surveys. Not expected to occur onsite. Santa Margarita manzanita Arctostaphylos pilosula 1B.2 Perennial shrub; blooms December to March; occurs in Closed cone coniferous forests, cismontane woodland, and chaparral, typically on shale outcrops/soils in San Luis Obispo and Monterey counties; ranges from 170 to 1100 meters in elevation. Potentially suitable habitat identified in oak woodland on-site. Perennial shrub would have been identifiable during field surveys. Not observed during surveys. Not expected to occur onsite. Straight-awned spineflower Chorizanthe rectispina 1B.3 Annual herb; blooms May through July; occurs in chaparral, cismontane woodland, and coastal scrub habitats, ranging in elevation from 200 to 1035 meters; has even been found in vineyards and other frequently disturbed areas. Found in granite sand or disintegrating shale. Marginal habitat present in coastal scrub and oak woodland habitat on-site. Unlikely to occur on serpentine-based soils. Not observed during surveys. Not expected to occur onsite. Surf thistle Cirsium rhothophilum --/ T/1B.2 Perennial herb; blooms April through June; ranges in elevation from 3 to 60 meters; occurs in coastal dune and coastal bluff scrub communities in close proximity to the ocean. No suitable habitat present. Not observed during surveys. Not expected to occur onsite. Woodland woolly threads Monolopia gracilens 1B.2 Annual herb known to occur in chaparral, valley and foothill grasslands and cismontane woodlands growing on serpentine soils. Potentially suitable habitat present in grasslands near serpentine rock outcrops. This species was not observed within the project area. Not expected to occur. INVERTEBRATES Atascadero June beetle Polyphylla nubila --/SA/-- Sand dunes. No suitable habitat. Not expected to occur. 8.j Packet Pg. 398 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. B - 8 Appendix B.Special--Status Biological Resources Present or Potentially OccurringOnsite Species Status* Fed/CA/CRPR Habitat Requirements Project Site Suitability/Observations California linderiella Linderiella occidentalis --/SA/-- Seasonal pools in grasslands underlain by hardpan or in sandstone depressions. Marginal habitat identified in seasonally wet areas. Site does not appear to support necessary habitat attributes to support the species. Further, no vernal pool habitat present onsite or in the immediate vicinity. Unlikely to occur. Globose dune beetle Coelus globosus --/SA/-- Inhabits coastal sand dune habitat in foredunes and sand hummocks most common beneath dune vegetation. No suitable habitat present. Not expected to occur onsite Mimic tryonia California brackishwater snail) Tryonia imitator SA/-- Found only in permanently submerged areas in coastal lagoons. No suitable habitat present. Not expected to occur. Monarch butterfly Danaus plexippus --/SA/-- Wind-protected tree groves of eucalyptus, Monterey pine and cypress with nectar and water sources nearby. No suitable overwintering habitat present on-site. Eucalyptus trees present do not create the necessary microclimate needed for overwintering. Species expected to forage onsite, but is not expected to use the project area for overwintering. Morro Bay blue butterfly Plebejus icarioides moroensis SA/-- Inhabits stabilized dunes and adjacent areas of coastal San Luis Obispo and NW Santa Barbara counties. No suitable habitat present. Not expected to occur. Morro shoulderband snail Helminthoglypta walkeriana E/--/-- Known to occur in coastal sage scrub and dune scrub habitats on Baywood fine sands on the southside of Morro Bay. No suitable habitat present. Not expected to occur. San Luis Obispo pyrg Pyrgulopsis taylori --/SA/-- Freshwater habitats in San Luis Obispo County. Marginal habitat present in lower wetlands of project area, but unlikely since they are man-induced wetlands. Unlikely to occur. Sandy beach tiger beetle Cicindela hirticollis gravida SA/-- Inhabits area adjacent to non- brackish water along the coast of California from San Francisco Bay to Northern Mexico. No suitable habitat present. Not expected to occur. Vernal pool fairy shrimp Branchinecta lynchi T/SA/-- Endemic to grasslands of central coast mountains; opportunistic species inhabits a variety of small clear-water pools including sandstone depressions and grassland swales that contain surface water for approximately 30 days during the winter and spring rain season. Marginal habitat identified in seasonally wet areas at Calle Joaquin wetland. Nearest observation of vernal pool fairy shrimp is on the Chevron Tank Farm near the San Luis Obispo Airport. Past studies for Calle Joaquin improvements did not locate this species. Unlikely that this species would have colonized the site in a short period of time. Unlikely to occur. White sand bear scarab beetle Lichnanthe albipilosa SA/-- Coastal sand dunes of San Luis Obispo County, in the vicinity of dune lakes. No suitable habitat present. Not expected to occur. 8.j Packet Pg. 399 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. B - 9 Appendix B.Special--Status Biological Resources Present or Potentially OccurringOnsite Species Status* Fed/CA/CRPR Habitat Requirements Project Site Suitability/Observations FISH Steelhead – South/Central California ESU Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus T/SSC/-- Fresh water, fast flowing, highly oxygenated, clear, cool stream where riffles tend to predominate pools. Suitable habitat present further upstream offsite in Froom Creek. SLO Creek is identified by USFWS as critical habitat for the species, and Froom Creek is shown as a steelhead stream. Potentially could occur onsite during high rainfall years when flowing water is present. Not expected to spawn onsite, but would use this portion of Froom Creek as a movement corridor to areas of suitable habitat further upstream in the Irish Hills Natural Reserve. Tidewater goby Eucyclogobius newberryi E/SSC/-- Brackish water habitats along the California coast from San Diego county to Del Norte county. No suitable habitat present. Not expected to occur. AMPHIBIANS/REPTILES California red-legged frog Rana draytonii T/SSC/-- Lowland and foothills in or near permanent or semi-permanent sources of deep water (at least 0.5 meter) bordered by emergent wetland and/or riparian vegetation. May use a variety of aquatic and upland habitats during the year for refugia and dispersal. Potential habitat was identified in several locations onsite including a ponded culvert at Calle Joaquin wetland. Onsite portion of Froom Creek does not contain aquatic habitat with any frequency to support this species, which reduces the potential for red-legged frogs to successfully breed onsite. Nearest recorded occurrence is from the wastewater treatment ponds to the east of San Luis Obispo Creek that are separated from the site by Highway 101 and Los Osos Valley Road. No direct surveys were conducted as part of this investigation due to the lack of aquatic habitat greater than 12 inches deep due to the ongoing drought. Unlikely to occur onsite due to the lack of suitable aquatic habitat at least on a seasonal basis. Coast horned lizard Phrynosoma blainvillii --/SSC/-- Frequents a wide variety of habitat including sandy washes with scattered shrubs and open areas for sunning. Loose soils for burial. Marginal habitat present on-site given dense clay soils and rock outcroppings. Even though site does not contain loose friable sandy soils, species could potentially occur in onsite coastal scrub habitat in upper elevations, but appears unlikely. Coast Range newt Taricha torosa torosa --/SSC/-- Coastal drainages from Mendocino County to San Diego County. Lives in terrestrial habitat and breeds in ponds, reservoirs and slow moving streams. No suitable habitat present in this portion of Froom Creek. The onsite tributary drainages are highly ephemeral in nature and lack suitable in channel ponds and vegetative cover to support breeding. Known records of this species are in Santa Lucia Mountains to the north and Arroyo Grande Creek to the south. Not expected to occur based on the lack of suitable habitat. Foothill yellow-legged frog Rana boylii SSC/-- Occurs in partly shaded, shallow streams and riffles with a rocky substrate in a variety of habitats typically in the upper mountainous reaches of drainages in the outer coast ranges. Species needs at least some cobble-sized substrate for egg-laying and 15 weeks of aquatic habitat to attain metamorphosis. No suitable habitat present onsite given the highly ephemeral nature of the drainages. Two old occurrence records in CNDDB from upper San Luis Obispo Creek and upper Lopez Canyon. Unlikely that this species occurs onsite due to lower elevation of the Ranch and lack of typical habitat. 8.j Packet Pg. 400 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. B - 10 Appendix B.Special--Status Biological Resources Present or Potentially OccurringOnsite Species Status* Fed/CA/CRPR Habitat Requirements Project Site Suitability/Observations Silvery legless lizard Anniella pulchra pulchra --/SSC/-- Sandy or loamy soils in valley and foothill woodlands, chaparral, coastal scrub and coastal dunes. No suitable habitat present onsite due to the heavy clay soils and rocky serpentine outcrops. Not expected to occur. Southern Pacific western) pond turtle Emys marmorata SSC/-- Basking sites such as partially submerged logs, vegetation mats, or open mud banks. No suitable habitat present in onsite drainages, and marginal habitat present seasonally within the Calle Joaquin wetland. Species known to occur in San Luis Obispo Creek where perennial water is present. Unlikely to occur onsite due to barriers such as Highway 101 and LOVR. Two-striped garter snake Thamnophis hammondii SSC/-- Perennial and intermittent streams bordered by dense vegetation; stock ponds bordered by dense emergent riparian vegetation. Small highly ephemeral drainages and wetlands do not provide sufficient habitat for this species. Not expected to occur. Western spadefoot Spea hammondii --/SSC/-- Grassland habitats and vernal pools for breeding/egg-laying with loose friable soils for burrowing. No suitable vernal pool habitat present nor are suitable loose friable soils present to support burrowing during dry summer/fall months. Not expected to occur. BIRDS Burrowing owl Athene cunicularia SSC/-- burrow sites and wintering sites) Grasslands; nests in burrows. They prefer areas with low vegetation on small hills that provide a vantage point of the surrounding areas. Suitable habitat present in grasslands, however extensive burrowing mammal activity was not observed within the project area. Could occur as a seasonal transient overwintering on and around the site, but would not be expected to breed onsite. California black rail Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus T/-- Freshwater marshes, wet meadows and shallow margins of saltwater marshes bordering larger bays. Needs water depths of about 1 inch that does not fluctuate and dense vegetation for nesting. No suitable habitat present. Not expected to occur. California clapper rail Rallus longirostris obsoletus E/E/-- Occurs in salt-water and brackish marshes traversed by tidal sloughs with abundant growths of pickleweed. No suitable habitat present. Not expected to occur. California condor Gymnogyps californianus E/E/-- Roosts in cliffs or ledges; feeds in open areas up to 100 miles from roost. No suitable roosting or nesting habitat on- site, but could forage in grasslands as a very rare transient. Unlikely to occur. California homed lark Eremophila alpestris actia WL/-- Sparse coastal sage scrub and grasslands. Suitable foraging and nesting habitat in grasslands on-site. Could occur. California least tern Sterna antillarum browni E/E/-- Nests along coast from San Francisco Bay to northern Baja California. Nests on sandy beaches, alkali flats, landfills or paved areas. No suitable habitat present. Not expected to occur. Cooper’s hawk Accipiter cooperii WL/-- nesting) Wooded areas. Nests in tall trees and often hunts around human structures. Potentially suitable nesting habitat present in oak/bay woodlands and eucalyptus/sycamore trees on-site. Could also forage across the site. Could occur. Ferruginous hawk Buteo regalis WL/-- nonbreeding/ wintering) Open grasslands, sagebrush flats, desert scrub, low foothills and fringes of pinyon-juniper habitats. Eats mostly lagomorphs, ground squirrels and mice. Suitable foraging habitat present in grasslands on-site, however this species typically does not nest in California. Could occur as a seasonal transient during fall/winter months. Golden eagle Aquila chrysaetos WL, FP/-- nesting & nonbreeding/ wintering) Nests on cliffs and rocks and forages in open country, grasslands. Suitable foraging habitat in grasslands on- site. Unlikely to nest on the property, but rock outcroppings and cliff faces in the upper elevations outside the study area could be used for nesting. 8.j Packet Pg. 401 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. B - 11 Appendix B.Special--Status Biological Resources Present or Potentially OccurringOnsite Species Status* Fed/CA/CRPR Habitat Requirements Project Site Suitability/Observations Loggerhead shrike Lanius ludovicianus SSC/-- nesting) Nests in shrubs in coastal sage scrub and chaparral habitats or in trees that overlook grasslands; preys over semi-open habitats and feeds primarily on large insects and often skewers prey on a barb or thorn to cache for later feeding. Suitable woodland, grassland, and scrub habitat present for foraging and nesting. Could occur. Merlin Falco columbarius WL/-- nonbreeding/ wintering) Nests outside of California; forages in a variety of habitats. Uses clumps of trees or windbreaks for roosting. Suitable foraging habitat present on-site. Could occur. Northern harrier Circus cyaneus SSC/-- nesting) Forages and nests in grasslands and marshes. Requires large expanses of habitat for foraging. Suitable habitat present onsite for this species as the grassland habitat is expansive and connected to large open space. Observed foraging across the site, but no signs of nesting behavior. Could occur. Prairie falcon Falco mexicanus WL/-- nesting) Catches pray in air and in open ground in grasslands. Nests in cliffs overlooking large areas. No nesting habitat present, but rocky outcrops in hills outside study area could potentially support nesting activities. Potential foraging habitat present on-site. Unlikely to occur. Purple martin Progne subis SSC/-- nesting) Nests in cavities of large trees in oak and riparian woodlands, and low elevation coniferous forests; rare; usually found near water. Suitable nesting habitat present in oak woodland and marginal habitat present in riparian habitat along LOVR. Could occur. Sharp-shinned hawk Accipiter striatus WL/-- nesting) Prefers riparian plant communities, but can be found in pine and oak woodlands on north-facing slopes. Potentially suitable foraging and nesting habitat in oak//bay woodland and large trees present onsite. Could occur. Tricolored blackbird Agelaius tricolor nesting colony) C/SSC/-- nesting colony) Found near freshwater habitats where it nests in emergent freshwater or riparian vegetation. This species prefers nesting in dense thickets of cattails and tules. Due to their highly colonial nature, nesting areas must be large enough to support a colony of about 50 pairs. No suitable nesting habitat present in onsite detention basins or along the Froom Creek corridor. While a patch of tules is present along Calle Joaquin the area does not appear to be large enough to support nesting tricolored blackbirds. Not observed during surveys and unlikely to nest within the study area. Could occur as an uncommon transient and potentially nest onsite should the tule patch enlarge. Western snowy plover Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus T/SSC/-- nesting) Sandy beaches, salt pond levees or shores of large alkali lakes. Sandy, gravelly or friable soils required for nesting. Federal listing refers only to the Pacific coastal population. No suitable habitat present. Not expected to occur. Western yellow-billed cuckoo Coccyzus americanus occidentalis C/E/-- nesting) Nests and forages in dense lowland riparian vegetation during summer. Marginal habitat present in onsite riparian habitat along OVR. Last CNDDB record for the County was in 1921, and given the riparian habitat is comprised of a thin band of willows along a busy road, it is unlikely that this species would nest onsite. White-tailed kite Elanus leucurus FP/-- nesting) Riparian woodlands near agricultural fields; forages over open grasslands and scrub. Suitable nesting habitat in oak, bay, eucalyptus and sycamore trees on-site, with good quality foraging habitat in grasslands throughout the Ranch. Not observed during surveys and no stick nests observed that could be used by this species for nesting activities. Known to occur further north of the site in the Los Osos Valley, and could occur onsite during foraging activities. Could also potentially nest onsite in the future. 8.j Packet Pg. 402 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. B - 12 Appendix B.Special--Status Biological Resources Present or Potentially OccurringOnsite Species Status* Fed/CA/CRPR Habitat Requirements Project Site Suitability/Observations Yellow warbler Dendroica petechia brewsteri SSC/-- nesting) Riparian plants, prefers willows, cottonwoods, aspens, sycamores and alders for resting and foraging. Marginal habitat is present in willow riparian area along the LOVR ditch, especially considering the well developed riparian corridor along San Luis Obispo Creek to the east. Could potentially occur in more dense riparian habitat but unlikely to nest onsite given disturbance along LOVR. MAMMALS American badger Taxidea taxus --/SSC/-- Friable soils and open, uncultivated ground for denning. Preys on burrowing rodents such as groundsquirrels. Suitable habitat is present in grassland on- site, but heavy clay soils likely preclude badgers from being regular residents onsite. No dens or large ground squirrel colonies observed within the project area. Could potentially occur as a transient across the site. Big free-tailed bat Nyctinomops macrotis --/SSC/-- Occurs in low lying arid areas of Southern California. Needs high cliffs or rocky outcrops for roosting sites. Feeds primarily on large moths. Could potentially occur onsite, and use the upper rocky ridgelines and rock outcrops outside the study area for roosting sites. Not expected to roost onsite, but could forage over the grasslands, oak woodlands and coastal scrub areas. Hoary bat Lasiurus cinereus --/SA/-- Roosts in dense foliage of large trees. Requires water. Prefers open habitats or habitat mosaics with access to trees for cover and open areas of habitat edge for feeding. Suitable foraging habitat on-site. Potentially suitable roosting habitat present in oak woodland especially in close proximity to confluence of Drainages 1, 2, and 3 with Froom Creek. Could occur. Morro Bay kangaroo rat Dipodomys heermanii morroensis E/E/-- Coastal sage scrub on the south side of Morro Bay. Needs sandy soil on stabilized dunes with vegetation. No suitable habitat present. Not expected to occur. Pallid bat Antrozous pallidus --/SSC/-- Occurs in deserts, grasslands, shrublands, woodlands, and forests. Most common in open, dry habitats with rocky areas for roosting. Roosts under bridges and in some areas in old structures such as barns. Potentially suitable roosting habitat present in oak/bay woodland. Suitable foraging habitat in on-site grasslands and coastal scrub. Could occur. San Diego woodrat Neotoma lepida intermedia SSC/-- Coastal scrub, oak woodlands with moderate to dense canopies. Abundant in and around rock outcrops and rocky cliffs and slopes with shrub and tree cover. Suitable habitat present in oak woodlands and coastal scrub throughout the southwestern part of the site. Wood rat nests observed in upper reaches of the property in coastal scrub habitat. Could potentially occur. Townsend’s western big-eared bat Corynorhinus townsendii townsendii SSC/-- Requires caves, tunnels, mines, or similar man-made structures for roosting. This bat feeds primarily on moths, but will eat a variety of soft- bodied insects. Suitable foraging habitat present throughout the site. Potential roosting habitat located at existing buildings. Could occur. Western mastiff bat Eumops perotis californicus SSC/-- Open, arid habitats including conifer and deciduous woodlands, coastal scrub, grassland, and chaparral. Roosts in crevices in cliffs faces high buildings, trees and tunnels. Suitable foraging habitat in grasslands on- site. Potentially suitable roosting habitat present in oak woodland and large eucalyptus and sycamore trees. Could occur. Western red bat Lasiurus blossevilli --/SSC/-- Roosts in trees near open areas for foraging. Potentially suitable roosting habitat present in oak/bay woodland and foraging habitat consists of onsite grasslands. Could occur. Yuma myotis Myotis yumanensis --/SA/-- Riparian, arid scrublands, deserts, and forests near permanent sources of water. Roosts in trees, rock crevices, trees hollows, mines, caves and a variety of manmade structures. Potentially suitable roosting and foraging habitat on-site. Could occur. 8.j Packet Pg. 403 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. B - 13 Appendix B.Special--Status Biological Resources Present or Potentially OccurringOnsite Species Status* Fed/CA/CRPR Habitat Requirements Project Site Suitability/Observations Plant/Natural Communities Central Dune Scrub Not present Central Foredunes Not present Central Maritime Chaparral Not present Coastal Brackish Marsh Not present Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh Present. In select areas in Drainages 1, 2, and 3 and along LOVR and Calle Joaquin Northern Coastal Salt Marsh Not present Northern Interior Cypress Forest Not present Serpentine Bunchgrass Grassland Present. Identified on the habitat map as Native Bunchgrass habitat. Valley Needlegrass Grassland Present. Synonymous with the above Serpentine Bunchgrass Grassland habitat. E = Endangered; T = Threatened; R = Rare CL = Candidate for Listing Status; SSC = California Species of Special Concern; FP = Fully Protected; WL = Watch List; SA – Special Animal; ‘—‘ = no status; List 1B – Rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere; List 2 – Rare, threatened or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere; List 4 – Limited distribution (Watch List). Source: California Natural Diversity Database (CDFW 2015); California Native Plant Society Online Inventory of Rare Plants, accessed April and November 2015 (online at www.cnps.org); and background literature review. 8.j Packet Pg. 404 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n APPENDIX C Photo Plate KMA 8.j Packet Pg. 405 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. 1 PHOTO PLATE Photo 1.Northwesterly view of annual grassland in the flat areas adjacent totheCalleJoaquinwetland.In the distance is the large detention basin and spreading occurrenceofreedfescue. Photo 2.Representative viewofserpentine bunchgrass grassland with Eastwood’s larkspur infloweronthe slopes in the southwest partofthesite. 8.j Packet Pg. 406 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. 2 Photo 3.Northerly view of the Calle Joaquin wetland area showing tulesgrowinginshallowsurfacewater. Photo 4.Overview of annual grasslandand serpentine bunchgrass grassland in the southwestpartofthe site.Oak/bay woodland can beseennear the confluence of Drainages 1,2 and 3.Coastalscrub/chaparral habitat is in the foreground with black sage,buck brush andCaliforniasagebrushpresent. 8.j Packet Pg. 407 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. 3 Photo 5.View of wetland habitat at seep dominated by sedges and rushes adjacenttoDrainage2. Photo 6.Wetland habitat in the upper reach of Drainage 2 with young ChorroCreekbogthistleplants present.Steep hillside in the distanceiscomposed of coastal scrub/chaparralhabitat. 8.j Packet Pg. 408 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. 4 Photo 7.View of oak/baywoodland with large eucalyptus present near confluence ofDrainages 1 and 2. Native serpentine bunchgrass grassland with associated wildlfowers isintheforeground. Photo 8.Westerlyview of the upper reach of Drainage 1 showing purpleneedlegrassinflower beige color) on opposite sides of the drainage.Oak/bay woodland and coastal scrub/chaparralisvisibleonthehillsidein the distance. 8.j Packet Pg. 409 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. 5 Photo 9.Southerly view of Froom Creek traversing the center of the site.Channeliscomposedofserpentine cobble and gravel substrate with verylittlein--channel vegetation. Photo 10.Northerly view of the Los Osos ValleyRoadRoadsideChannelshowing arroyo willows growingin the constructed channel.Wetland vegetation was also present with poison hemlockvisibleinthelowerright. 8.j Packet Pg. 410 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. 6 Photo 11.Calochortus obispoensis observed growing in the upper elevations of the southwesternpartofthe study area in thin rocky serpentinesoils. Photo 12.Castilleja densiflora ssp.obsipoensis growing in serpentine bunchgrass grasslandinthe southwestern part of thesite.Photo to theright shows stigma extendingbeyond corolla lip. 8.j Packet Pg. 411 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. 7 Photo 13.Centromadia parryi ssp.congdonii observed in theconstructed Home Depot detention basininthe northeastern part of thesite. Photo 14.Chorizanthe breweri growing in serpentine gravelly soils alongFroomCreek. 8.j Packet Pg. 412 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. 8 Photo 15.Cirsium fontinale var.obispoense growing in wetland habitat alongDrainage2. Photo 16.Delphinium parryi ssp.eastwoodiae growing in serpentine bunchgrass grassland insouthwestpart of the site. 8.j Packet Pg. 413 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. 9 Photo 17.Serpentine rock outcropwithDudleya abramsii ssp.murina. Photo 18.Young Dudleya blochmaniae plants observedinsmall occurrences in the southwest partofthesite. 8.j Packet Pg. 414 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n KMA Froom Ranch Project Biological Resources Inventory John Madonna Construction, Inc. 10 Photo 19.Layia jonesii growing in the southwest part ofthesite. Photo 20.Senecio aphanactis growing along top ofserpentine rock outcrop north of Drainage3. 8.j Packet Pg. 415 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n APPENDIX D Tree Inventory DataForm KMA 8.j Packet Pg. 416 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Froom Ranch Tree Survey 1 Tree Survey Monitoring Form Date______2/10/15_____Surveyor__________Sloan,Block_______ Tag Scientific Name Common Name Vigor Rating DBH inches) GPS Point Notes Observations 1 Umbellularia californica California Bay H 16,11, 12 154 large healthy tree 2 Umbellularia californica California Bay M 12,12, 11,10 153 one 12”isdead 3 Umbellularia californica California Bay H 13 155 young healthy tree 4 Umbellularia californica California Bay H 9 156 young healthy tree 5 Umbellularia californica California Bay H 8,8,11, 7,12 157 large healthy tree 6 Umbellularia californica California Bay M 14,10,9, 14 158 old tree,large burl,poorcondition 7 Umbellularia californica California Bay H 12 159 young healthy,edge of channel 8 Umbellularia californica California Bay H 9 160 young healthy,edge of channel 9 Umbellularia californica California Bay M 7,9,14,8 161 some splitting at base,old,large burl 10 Umbellularia californica California Bay H 19,12 162 old tree 11 Umbellularia californica California Bay H 15 163 young tree 12 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 6,7 164 young tree 13 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 4,7,7,7 165 young tree 8.j Packet Pg. 417 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Froom Ranch Tree Survey 2 Tag Scientific Name Common Name Vigor Rating DBH inches) GPS Point Notes Observations 14 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 10,8 166 young healthy tree 15 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak M 11,11 167 weak crotch on one trunk,main trunk splitting at base 16 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 21,22, 28 168 very old large tree 17 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak L 26 169 old,low vigor,smallcanopy 18 Umbellularia californica California Bay H 7 170 young healthy tree 19 Umbellularia californica California Bay H 5 171 young healthy tree,numerous trunks under 4” 20 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak L 10 172 Spanish moss,thin canopy,unhealthy 21 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 13 173 healthy tree 22 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 13,5 174 healthy tree 23 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 14,7,11, 9 175 healthy tree 24 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak M 6,4,5 176 Spanish moss on base,stunted,small 25 Umbellularia californica California Bay L 6,5,4 177 Spanish moss,2trunks under 4” 26 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak M 13 178 old tree,rotten bark on main trunk 27 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 20 179 old tree,leaning,lichens on bark 28 Umbellularia californica California Bay H 10,13 180 healthy tree 29 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 12 181 very large burl,in lower creekbank 30 Umbellularia californica California Bay M 22,23 182 very large burl,old tree 8.j Packet Pg. 418 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Froom Ranch Tree Survey 3 Tag Scientific Name Common Name Vigor Rating DBH inches) GPS Point Notes Observations 31 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak L 12 183 small,splitat base 32 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak L 22 184 hollow,large cavity at base 33 Umbellularia californica California Bay H 18,23, 22 185 large healthy tree 34 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 27 186 large healthy tree 35 Umbellularia californica California Bay L 9 187 small,sparse canopy 36 Umbellularia californica California Bay H 8 188 small healthy tree 37 Umbellularia californica California Bay M 9,10,8 189 sparse canopy 38 Quercus agrifolia Coast Live Oak M 32 190 splits in bark,old,large tree 39 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 14,16 191 large healthy tree 40 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 6 192 small tree,2stems under 4”dbh 41 Prunus ilicifolia Hollyleaf Cherry M 7 193 very large old specimen 42 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak M 28 194 large old tree 43 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak M 31 195 large old tree 44 Umbellularia californica California Bay H 37,16 196 large old tree 45 Umbellularia californica California Bay M 5,4,6,5 197 one dead trunk,moderate health 46 Umbellularia californica California Bay H 45 198 very large tree,leaning over channel 47 Eucalyptus globulus Blue Gum H 23 199 tall,straight,on bank 8.j Packet Pg. 419 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Froom Ranch Tree Survey 4 Tag Scientific Name Common Name Vigor Rating DBH inches) GPS Point Notes Observations 48 Umbellularia californica California Bay M 5,5,4 200 hollow base,split trunk 49 Umbellularia californica California Bay H 16,22, 21 201 large,within thechannel bank 50 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 23,34 202 big,old,pruned up from ground 51 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak L 15,27, 22 203 big,old,leaning,hollowbase 52 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 8 204 young healthy tree 53 Umbellularia californica California Bay M 24,13,5 205 largest trunk hollow,others healthy 54 Umbellularia californica California Bay M 16,4,15, 21,28 206 bark damage/cuts from campers 55 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 24 208 large,healthy tree 56 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 24,15 209 large tree,in channel 57 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 12,23 210 lower branches pruned up fromground 58 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak M 17 211 large broken branch,on bank 59 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 39,30 212 big,old,onbank of channel 60 Umbellularia californica California Bay H 20,10,10, 12,14,6, 22 213 old,healthy,largeburl 61 Eucalyptus globulus Blue Gum H 97 215 very large oldtree,upland area 62 Eucalyptus globulus Blue Gum H 83 216 very large oldtree,upland area 63 Eucalyptus globulus Blue Gum H 22 217 young tree,upland area 8.j Packet Pg. 420 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Froom Ranch Tree Survey 5 Tag Scientific Name Common Name Vigor Rating DBH inches) GPS Point Notes Observations 64 Eucalyptus globulus Blue Gum H 16,16, 8,13 218 upland area 65 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak M 32,36 214 old,large,thincanopy 66 Umbellularia californica California Bay M 25 219 old,thin canopy,many burlsprouts 67 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak M 21 220 thin canopy,hill top 68 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak M 26 221 thin canopy,hilltop 69 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak M 48 222 thin canopy,hilltop 70 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak L 42 223 hollow trunk,sparsecanopy 71 Umbellularia californica California Bay M 8,10,15, 8,21,26 224 large burl,lichen on trunk,hollow 72 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak M 20 225 small,sparse canopy 73 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 21 231 lichen on trunk 74 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak M 5 232 hilltop,young,sparse canopy 75 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak L 7 233 hilltop,moss,fewleaves 76 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak H 19 234 in channel,thickcanopy 77 Quercus agrifolia Coast LiveOak M 30 in channel,sparsecanopy 78 Schinus molle Peruvian Pepper M 34 235 very old,hollow,manynew sprouts 79 Eucalyptus globulus Blue Gum H 35 236 very large,uplandarea 80 Eucalyptus globulus Blue Gum H 12 236 upland area 81 Eucalyptus globulus Blue Gum H 32 237 upland area 8.j Packet Pg. 421 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Froom Ranch Tree Survey 6 Tag Scientific Name Common Name Vigor Rating DBH inches) GPS Point Notes Observations 82 Eucalyptus globulus Blue Gum H 51 237 upland area 83 Eucalyptus globulus Blue Gum H 22 238 upland area 84 Eucalyptus globulus Blue Gum H 36 238 upland area 85 Eucalyptus globulus Blue Gum H 53 238 upland area 86 Schinus molle Peruvian Pepper M 12,12,8, 9 239 old,moss/lichens,young sprouts atbase 87 Populus fremontii Fremont Cottonwood H 14,10 277 young,healthy,dormant 88 Populus fremontii Fremont Cottonwood H 9,9,8,6 278 young,healthy,starting to leafout 89 Salix lasiolepis Arroyo Willow H many,4-- 12 inches 279 large base,10 to12trunks 90 Salix lasiolepis Arroyo Willow H many,4-- 10 inches 280 at culvert,8trunks observed 91 Populus fremontii Fremont Cottonwood H 11 281 starting to leafout 92 Salix lasiolepis Arroyo Willow H 11 282 at culvert 93 Umbellularia californica California Bay H 49,32,27, 14,12 303 rock outcrop on hillside,verylargetree 94 Platanus racemosa Western Sycamore H 18,6 304 upland area near road basemining storage activity 95 Platanus racemosa Western Sycamore H 16,14 305 upland area near road basemining storage activity 96 Platanus racemosa Western Sycamore H 16 306 upland area near road basemining storage activity 8.j Packet Pg. 422 At t a c h m e n t j B i o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n v e n t o r y 1 2 9 5 M a d o n n a o n L O V R S p e c i f i c P l a n I n i t i a t i o n Ci t y C o u n c i l H e a r i n g Ap r i l 5 2 0 1 6 04 0 5 2 0 1 6 Ite m 8 P r e se n t a tio n St a r t e d w o r k e v a l u a t i n g t h e si t e a f t e r L U C E a d o p t i o n To p o g r a p h i c a l m a p p i n g We t l a n d s m o n i t o r i n g r e p o r t ju r i s d i c t i o n a l d e t e r m i n a t i o n an d m a p p i n g Bi o l o g i c a l m a p p i n g Tr a f f i c a n a l y s i s Hi s t o r i c A r c h a e o l o g i c a l an a l y s i s Dr a i n a g e f l o o d i n g s t u d i e s Ai r p o r t L a n d U s e P l a n Ci t y p o l i c i e s s t a n d a r d s Mu l t i a g e n c y m e e t i n g re g a r d i n g c r e e k r e a l i g n m e n t R W Q C B U S A C E N F W S CD F W a n d C i t y Ho m e De p o t Mo u n t a i n b r o o k Ch u r c h 04 0 5 2 0 1 6 Ite m 8 P r e se n t a tio n Ho m e De p o t Mo u n t a i n b r o o k Ch u r c h En t i r e S i t e 11 1 a c r e s Be l o w 1 5 0 E l e v a t i o n 61 a c r e s Ab o v e 1 5 0 E l e v a t i o n 50 a c r e s Ho m e De p o t Mo u n t a i n Ch u r c h Co s t c o PR O J E C T SI T E Ci t y Li m i t s 15 0 04 0 5 2 0 1 6 Ite m 8 P r e se n t a tio n 04 0 5 2 0 1 6 Ite m 8 P r e se n t a tio n 04 0 5 2 0 1 6 Ite m 8 P re se n t a t io n 04 0 5 2 0 1 6 Ite m 8 P r e se n t a tio n LU C E M i n i m u m M i x Co m m e r c i a l 5 0 0 0 0 s f 3 a c r e s Co m m e r c i a l 5 0 0 0 0 s f 3 a c r e s Re s i d e n t i a l 2 0 0 d u @ 1 2 d u a c 1 7 a c r e s TO T A L 2 0 a c r e s Re s i d e n t i a l 2 0 0 d u @ 12 d u a c 1 7 a c r e s 04 0 5 2 0 1 6 Ite m 8 P r e se n t a tio n