HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-19-2017 Item 15 - Public Hearing/Ordinance Introduction - Avila Ranch Development EIR/SPA/Zoning/Tract Map/Development Agreement Meeting Date: 9/19/2017
FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director
Derek Johnson, Assistant City Manager
Prepared By: John Rickenbach, Contract Planner
Tyler Corey, Principal Planner
Lee Johnson, Economic Development Manager
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE AVILA RANCH PROJECT,
INCLUDING 1) RELATED ENTITLEMENTS; 2) THE CERTIFICATION OF
THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR); AND 3)
RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO FORM A COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRICT (CFD). PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS INCLUDE: 1) GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT, 2) SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT, 3) REZONE, 4)
DEVELOPMENT PLAN, 5) VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, AND 6)
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SITE
INCLUDES UP TO 720 RESIDENTIAL UNITS; 15,000 SQUARE FEET OF
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT; AND
APPROXIMATELY 18 ACRES OF PARKS, WITH 53 ACRES OF THE SITE
TO REMAIN IN OPEN SPACE.
RECOMMENDATION
As recommended by the Planning Commission, adopt the attached resolutions and introduce
ordinances (Attachments A, B, C and D), taking the following actions to approve the Avila
Ranch Project and initiate the formation of a Community Facilities District (CFD):
1. Adopt a Resolution certifying the Final EIR for, and approval of, the Avila Ranch
Development Plan, Airport Area Specific Plan Amendment, General Plan Amendment,
and Vesting Tentative Tract Map; and
2. Introduce an Ordinance changing the zoning of the property from Business Park/Specific
Plan (BP-SP) and Conservation/Open Space/Specific Plan (C/OS-SP) to be consistent
with the Avila Ranch Development Plan and with the General Plan and Airport Area
Specific Plan as amended; and
3. Introduce an Ordinance to adopt a Development Agreement between the City of San Luis
Obispo and Avila Ranch, LLC that implements the above entitlements; and
4. Adopt a Resolution of Intention to establish a Community Facilities District (CFD) to
finance facilities and services necessary to implement the above entitlements and to levy
a special tax for that purpose against parcels located in the Avila Ranch Development
Plan.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
The Avila Ranch Project is proposed by Avila Ranch, LLC, to enable the development of 720
residential units and 15,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses on a 150-acre site
Packet Pg 179
15
north of Buckley Road within the boundaries of the Airport Area Specific Plan (“AASP”). The
project would also include 18 acres of parks and 53 acres of designated open space within the
project boundaries. The project as proposed is envisioned to implement the policies and
development parameters as articulated in the recent Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE)
update, other elements of the General Plan, Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP), and the City’s
Community Design Guidelines. The project is the development of a major new City
neighborhood, which will be governed by a Development Plan within the framework of the
existing AASP as amended. The project is required to provide 71 Inclusionary housing units that
will be met through a combination of construction (67 units), dedicated land (1.2 acres for 24
low income units) and payment of in-lieu fees (4 units). In addition, the project includes design
and development strategies that serve to provide lower cost housing by providing for a range of
housing sizes and types, greater number of lower income Inclusionary Housing Units than
required by Ordinance (32 provided; 23 required), larger affordable housing site (1.2 acres
provided; 1 acre required), local preference (none required), owner occupancy restrictions (none
required), workforce housing incentive program (25 units provided; none required) and down
payment assistance ($500,000 provided; none required).
There are six major project components, the key elements of which are described in the Planning
Commission staff report of June 28 & 29, 2017. The Development Agreement is described in
further detail later in this staff report. The independent analysis of the Development Agreement
concluded that the City is receiving approximately $31,000,000 more in extraordinary public
benefits related to the proposed agreement than could otherwise be conditioned upon or required
of the Developer.
The staff reports for the Planning Commission hearings are at the following links:
1. June 28 & 29, 2017 Staff Report:
http://opengov.slocity.org/WebLink/1/doc/65871/Page1.aspx
2. August 9, 2017 Staff Report:
http://opengov.slocity.org/WebLink/1/doc/67120/Page1.aspx
a. General Plan Amendment
b. Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP) Amendment
c. Rezone
d. Development Plan
e. Vesting Tentative Tract Map
f. Development Agreement
Table 1 summarizes the development parameters of the project.
Table 1. Summary of Proposed Development and Residential Product Types
Land Use Acres % of Total Acres Units or SF
Residential 55.30 36.9% 720 units
R-1 Low Density (7 du/acre) 12.80 8.5% 101
R-2 Medium Density (12 du/acre) 27.30 18.2% 297
R-3 Medium-High Density (20 du/acre) 10.80 7.2% 197
Packet Pg 180
15
R-4 High Density (24 du/acre) 4.40 2.9% 125
Neighborhood Commercial 1.86 1.2% 15,000 SF
Roadways 21.71 14.5%
Open Space and Parks 71.04 47.4%
Open Space 53.00 35.4%
Parks 18.00 12.0%
Total
149.91
100.0%
The Avila Ranch Final EIR, Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Airport Area
Specific Plan Legislative Draft are available for review online at the following location:
https://tinyurl.com/ydx3d52r; and hardcopies are available in the City Clerk’s office and the
Community Development Department.
The project has been considered before various City advisory bodies. On June 19, 2017, the
Architectural Review Commission unanimously recommended approval of the project Design
Guidelines to the City Council. On August 9, 2017, the Planning Commission recommended
that the City Council certify the Final EIR and approve all project entitlements, including the
General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment, Rezone, Avila Ranch Development Plan,
Vesting Tentative Tract Map, and Development Agreement. Because the Development
Agreement was considered as a separate item from the other entitlements on August 9th, its
recommended approval was based on a separate Resolution and proposed Ordinance
(Attachment 4 of Public Hearing Item 2 of the August 9th Planning Commission meeting).
The Planning Commission’s recommendation included project modifications discussed and
considered in their public hearings of June 28, June 29 and July 12. Key input gained from the
Planning Commission and other advisory bodies at past hearings is included as Attachment E to
this staff report.
As part of its Resolution, the Planning Commission recommended additional modifications to
the Development Plan and/or Tentative Map, which are included in the City Council Resolution
(Attachment A).
The City Council’s role is to review and consider approval of the Avila Ranch project and related
entitlements, including a Development Agreement, based on project-related input received from
the Planning Commission, other City advisory bodies, and the Airport Land Use Commission.
As a necessary step related to possible project approval, the City Council must certify the Final
EIR for the project, and adopt the CEQA Findings, including a Statement of Overriding
Considerations for impacts determined to be Significant and Unavoidable (“Class 1 impacts”).
The Council is also asked to adopt a Resolution of Intention to form a Community Facilities
District (CFD), which initiates the formation of a CFD. The City Council will need to hold four
subsequent hearings to complete the establishment of a CFD, which will provide needed funding
for municipal services and local area maintenance and provide a source of funding for
reimbursing the Developer for their investments in region-serving infrastructure beyond the
“fair-share” cost allocation.
Packet Pg 181
15
DISCUSSION
Background
1. Project Description Summary
The project is the development of a major new City neighborhood. The project includes a mix of
residential and neighborhood commercial uses, with 18 acres of parks, while preserving
approximately 53 acres as open space on a 150-acre property, as described in the Avila Ranch
Development Plan. The project is designed to be consistent with the development parameters
described in the City’s 2014 Land Use Element.
Overall development will occur in six phases, the timing of which will be guided largely by
market factors. Detailed phasing information is included on pages 34 -36 and 80-81 of the
Development Plan, which is available for review online at the following location:
https://tinyurl.com/ydx3d52r; and a hardcopy is available in the City Clerk’s office and
Community Development Department. Figure 1 shows the location of proposed project phasing
in the context of the Development Plan, while Table 2 summarizes the key proposed circulation
and infrastructure improvements associated with each phase:
Figure 1. Proposed Project Phasing
Packet Pg 182
15
Table 2. Proposed Development and Infrastructure Phasing
Phase Proposed Development Proposed Circulation and Infrastructure
1 1. 179 R-2 units
2. 2.9 acres of parks
1. Buckley Road frontage improvements in phase
boundary
2. Venture Road extension on phase frontage
3. Extension of Earthwood to Suburban (with Class II
bike lane)
4. Roundabout at Venture and Earthwood
5. Signal and turn improvements to Suburban and
Higuera
6. Turn restrictions at the Vachell Lane/S. Higuera
Street intersection, prohibiting left turns into and
out of Vachell Lane
7. Westbound approach to the S. Higuera
Street/Suburban Road intersection would be
restriped to provide a left-turn lane and a shared
left/right turn lane.
8. Class I bike path from Vachell to Octagon Barn (if
possible)
9. Class I bike path from Class II diversion on
Buckley to Vachell
10. Class II bike lane bridge on south side of Buckley at
Tank Farm Creek
11. Ped/bike improvements to Earthwood between
Venture and Suburban
12. Ped/bike improvements to Suburban between
Venture and Earthwood
13. Transit stop on Venture
14. Sewer pump station and force main
15. Potable and recycled water facilities
16. Dry utilities to development phase
2 1. 29 R-2 units
2. 1.3 acres of parks
1. Buckley Road extension from Vachell Lane to
South-Higuera Street
2. Left turns to and from Higuera and Vachell will be
restricted
3. Class I and II bike facilities on Buckley to HIguera
4. Class I bike lane from Earthwood to Venture
5. Wet and dry utilities to development phase
3 1. 89 R-2 units
2. 125 R-4 units
3. 0.8-acre mini park
1. Completion of Horizon Lane (but not the offsite
extension to Suburban)
2. R-4 to include 1-acre dedication to affordable
housing provider for 30 inclusionary housing units
Packet Pg 183
15
Table 2. Proposed Development and Infrastructure Phasing
Phase Proposed Development Proposed Circulation and Infrastructure
3. Wet and dry utilities to development phase
4 1. 197 R-3 units
2. 9.5-acre
neighborhood park
3. 0.9-acre mini park
1. Completion of Jesperson to Buckley Road
2. Horizon Lane north of Venture to Suburban
3. Vehicle/Pedestrian bridge from Venture to
Jesperson
4. Ped/bike improvements on Suburban between
Horizon and Earthwood
5. Class I bike path along Tank Farm Creek
6. Wet and dry utilities to development phase
5 1. 101 R-1 units
2. 2.6 acres of parks
1. Wet and dry utilities to development phase
2. Portion of the open space/buffer in this phase
6 1. Town Center
Commercial
1. Wet and dry utilities to development phase
2. Remaining project frontages
The Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP) as amended will be used as the basis for financing major
infrastructure associated with the project. Please refer to Section 9 of this staff report for
additional details.
2. Planning Commission Review and Recommendation
The Planning Commission has previously considered the project on nine occasions, once to
conduct a public scoping meeting for the EIR, twice to review a preliminary version of the
Development Plan, twice during the Draft EIR public review period, and four times to consider
the project now before the City Council. On August 9, 2017, the Planning Commission
recommended that the City Council certify the Final EIR and approve all project entitlements,
included the Vesting Tentative Tract Map as conditioned. As part of its Resolution, the Planning
Commission recommended additional modifications to the Development Plan and/or Vesting
Tentative Tract Map, which have since been addressed either as project conditions or in the
Development Agreement. In addition to those items first discussed in their hearings of June 28
& 29, the Planning Commission set forth two additional recommendations as follows, which are
discussed further in Section 8 of this staff report:
• Affordable Housing Site. Staff to work with the applicant on the size of the proposed
affordable housing site.
• CFD Tax as It Relates to Affordable Housing Site. Staff to work to minimize the
potential for a CFD tax to be imposed on development within the identified affordable
housing site.
Packet Pg 184
15
As a separate item on that night’s agenda, the Planning Commission also recommended approval
of the Development Agreement through a separate Resolution and Ordinance.
3. Previous Advisory Body Review
The project has been considered before various City advisory bodies that have carefully
reviewed and commented on specific aspects of the project that relate to their purview. On
November 19, 2015, the Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) reviewed the updated bicycle
planning aspects of the Development Plan and conceptually concurred with the Development
Plan as presented. On January 4, 2017, the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) reviewed
the proposed parks and recreation components of the Development Plan and determined that the
proposed park proposal, included related facilities, would be consistent with applicable General
Plan policies. On June 19, 2017, the Architectural Review Commission unanimously
recommended approval of the project Design Guidelines to the City Council.
Finally, the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) has reviewed the project. On December 21,
2016, the ALUC determined that the project was consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan
(ALUP), with conditions related to limiting the development to 720 dwelling units, non-
residential density to 93 persons in the S-1b safety zone, FAA review of tall structures that may
be considered, appropriate noise mitigation, restrictions on uses that may interfere with airport
operations, avigation easements, and appropriate disclosures for future residents.
Attachment E provides a summary of the different advisory bodies that have considered the
project, when these reviews occurred, as well as the purpose and outcome of these meetings.
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Conclusions
Consistent with City Council direction, a Draft EIR was prepared for the project, and distributed
for public review from November 23, 2016, to January 18, 2017. The Planning Commission
held two public hearings to solicit input on the Draft EIR, on December 14, 2016, and January
11, 2017. Portions of the Draft EIR related to the project’s energy impacts were recirculated for
45 days, from February 21 through April 7, 2017. Several mitigation measures in the Draft EIR
were revised in response to comments, in order to clarify or improve their effectiveness.
The Final EIR concludes that the project will result in significant and unavoidable impacts to:
• Agricultural Resources – conversion of historically cultivated farmland to urban
development. (Note that this issue was previously evaluated in the Final EIR for both the
AASP and LUCE. As a result of both actions, the site was designated to non-agricultural
uses, and annexed to the City as such. However, the impact addresses the physical
conversion of the land itself, not the pre-existing regulatory change.)
• Air Quality – short and long-term construction emissions of ROG and NOx, and
operational air pollutant emissions associated with vehicle trips from the project;
consistency with the Clean Air Plan.
• Noise – short-term construction noise.
• Transportation and Traffic – impacts to intersection capacities at Buckley Road/SR
Packet Pg 185
15
227.
The EIR also finds that there will be significant impacts that can be mitigated to less than
significant in the categories of aesthetics and visual resources, agricultural resources, air quality
and greenhouse gas emissions, biological resources, cultural resources, hazards and hazardous
materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, public services, transportation and traffic, and
utilities and service systems. Impacts related to population and housing were found to be less
than significant or beneficial. Some impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, cultural resources,
hazards, hydrology, land use and planning, noise, public services, transportation, utilities, were
also found to be less than significant. Table ES-1 at the beginning of the Final EIR summarizes
the project’s impacts and mitigation measures.
The Final EIR is included in its entirety as a digital attachment to this staff report, available at
the following website: https://tinyurl.com/yae2byxp; and a hardcopy is available for review in
the City Clerk’s office and the Community Development Department.
The Final EIR must be certified before or concurrent with an action to approve the proposed
project entitlements.
1. CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
The Planning Commission determined that the Final EIR adequately described and analyzed the
proposed project, and that the document included appropriate mitigation measures to reduce
potential impacts to the extent feasible. These mitigation measures are included in a Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program within the Final EIR.
Based on this, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council certify th e Final
EIR, and adopt the attached CEQA Findings that support the proposed project, including a
Statement of Overriding Considerations to address the identified significant and unavoidable
impacts described in the Final EIR. These are included as an exhibit attached to the Resolution
approving the bulk of the project entitlements (Attachment A).
General Plan Guidance and Policy Consistency
The project is based on policy direction included in the General Plan, specifically Land Use
Element Policy 8.1.6, which identifies the Avila Ranch area as a Special Focus Area (SP-4),
subject to policies for the development of a specific plan and certain broad development
parameters and principles. For clarity, the entire policy is included within the summary of the
relevant General Plan policies as Attachment F (FEIR Policy Consistency Analysis). In its
Resolution of August 9, 2017, the Planning Commission found that the Avila Ranch project was
consistent with the City’s General Plan and related policies and standards.
Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map
The project includes a Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map, which addresses future
residential development within the Development Plan area. These documents are available for
Packet Pg 186
15
review online at the following location: https://tinyurl.com/ydx3d52r; and hardcopies are
available for review at the City Clerk’s office and the Community Development Department.
The map includes details that go well beyond those included in the Plan area, including
information on lot locations, roadways, drainage, grading, and other information typically
associated with Tentative Maps. The Tentative Map governs development within the areas it
covers. It is consistent with the Development Plan and Specific Plan as amended, implementing
its policies, zoning standards, and Design Guidelines. The Map also includes details regarding
proposed roadways and circulation improvements.
Conditions of Approval for the Tentative Map are included in the attached Resolution
(Attachment A). These conditions cover issues ranging from fire safety; transportation
infrastructure requirements; dedications and easements; utilities; grading, drainage, storm water,
and other infrastructure requirements; air quality; avigation easements; affordable housing; and
natural resource protection. These are separate from, and in addition to, the mitigation measures
and monitoring program that are included in the Final EIR.
Staff’s review of the Tentative Map concludes that, as conditioned, it is consistent with the
Development Plan and Specific Plan as amended, both in terms of development potential and
design. The basic development parameters allowed under the Map are described above, and
previously in more detail in the June 28 & 29 Planning Commission staff report for the project.
Parks
The project would include 18 acres of designated parkland, which exceeds the estimated
parkland requirement per the General Plan of 16.5 acres (assuming 1 acre per 1,000 population).
Proposed facilities include a centrally located 9.5-acre neighborhood park, as well as mini-parks,
pocket parks and community gardens. Designated Park area does not include passive open space
and recreational trails, which are counted as part of the designated Open Space.
This neighborhood park will be linked to surrounding neighborhoods, the Tank Farm Creek
riparian corridor and to the regional bikeway system by separated Class I bike paths and Class II
bike lanes, and special pedestrian/bike bridges over Tank Farm Creek. According to the concept
plan approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission, the neighborhood park will include
group BBQs, basketball courts, tot lots, baseball diamonds, soccer fields, pickleball courts, tennis
courts, a dog park, a skate park, and a community meeting pavilion area.
Eight mini-parks and a pocket park will also serve the neighborhoods. Each will be one-half to
2.5 acres in size and provide facilities such as community gardens, tot lots, passive play areas,
BBQ and picnic areas, basketball courts, community gardens, dog park, and landscaping. These
will serve residents within a two-block radius and fill the few “gaps” in the coverage for the
neighborhood park facilities. The mini-parks will be phased with adjacent residential
development to provide park facilities for future residents near their homes.
Consistent with recent Planning Commission direction, the project will also include an additional
pocket park in the vicinity of Lots 130, 131 and 132, and will be included in the Vesting
Tentative Tract Map.
Packet Pg 187
15
Affordable and Workforce Housing
Affordable and workforce housing (below market-rate) is an important component of the area’s
workforce and other market rate housing. Accordingly, the City’s Municipal Code (Chapter
17.91) and General Plan Housing Element (Goal 2, Appendix N: Table 2 and Table 2A) include
Inclusionary housing requirements for new developments. Further, the City’s Municipal Code
(Chapter 17.90) and General Plan Housing Element (Section 3.30 ) provide incentives for
affordable housing construction.
The Avila Ranch Development Plan proposes 700 residential units per the City’s Land Use and
Circulation Element (LUCE) policies, as well as potentially 20 additional units that might be
obtained through state density bonus law. There is no actual density bonus application on file
with the City, but the added units were included for infrastructure planning and impact analysis
purposes. A total of 720 units are thus being proposed, with the City’s Inclusionary residential
housing requirements being met within the first 700 units. The provision of affordable housing
to meet the Inclusionary housing requirement allows the applicant to request a density bonus
through the City’s Affordable Housing Incentive Ordinance, which is consistent with State law.
The actual number of density bonus units may vary, but based on the applicant’s profile of
inclusionary units, this assumption seems to reasonably cover the additional units.
The project will address housing affordability in several ways, most notably through the design
itself, which includes cluster development and many medium and high density housing units
(197 R-3 units and 125 R-4 units), as well as R-2 units that have floor areas that are well below
the typical average for single-family detached units in the community. In addition, the project’s
affordable and workforce housing plan includes design and development strategies that serve to
provide lower cost housing by providing for a range of housing sizes and types, greater number
of lower income Inclusionary housing units than required by Ordinance, local preference, owner
occupancy restrictions, workforce housing incentive program and down payment assistance. The
affordable and workforce housing plan is included as Exhibit 1-G to Attachment C of the staff
report. In summary, the affordable and workforce housing plan includes the following key
components:
Inclusionary Housing:
• 71 inclusionary housing units required and provided through a combination of
construction (67), dedicated land (1.2 acres) and payment of in-lieu fees (4 units)
• 32 low income units provided where 23 are required by Ordinance
• Majority of units provided in phases 1-3
• Dedicated 1.2 acre site for a 24 unit low income affordable housing development
Workforce Housing:
• 25 workforce housing units (121-160% of area median income)
• 10 year deed restriction that resets with new income qualified buyer upon sale within the
10 year period
• Revolving down payment assistance fund (approximately $500,000)
• Workforce housing program and down payment assistance fund administered by the City
Packet Pg 188
15
As part of its August 9, 2017, Resolution recommending project approval to the City Council,
the Planning Commission included the following recommendations related to affordable
housing:
• Affordable Housing Site. Staff to work with the applicant on the size of the proposed
affordable housing site.
• CFD Tax as It Relates to Affordable Housing Site. Staff to work to minimize the
potential for a CFD tax to be imposed on development within the identified affordable
housing site.
Subsequent to the Planning Commission recommendation of August 9, the affordable and
workforce housing plan was modified to include a larger site (increased from 1 acre to 1.2 acres)
for the affordable housing project, which is shown in an exhibit within Attachment C, Exhibit 1-
G. Relative to the CFD taxation issue, staff recommends a that a reduced special tax on
affordable units, 50% of the lowest tax rate on market rate residential units be levied. This is
discussed in further detail in Section 12 (Community Facilities District) below.
Project Financing for Major Infrastructure
The Avila Ranch Financing Plan identifies the municipal services and infrastructure required to
serve the Avila Ranch Project and describes how these will be funded and/or financed over time
(Attachment C, Exhibit 1-C. In addition to providing a general description of how required
municipal services and infrastructure will be funded, the Financing Plan provides a basis for
financial terms included in the Development Agreement and also for the Community Facilities
District Rate and Method of Apportionment.
• Municipal services include both “Citywide” services and also local area maintenance
services provided by the City within the Project area. Services covered by the Financial Plan
include maintenance responsibilities for bike paths in the County, and fulfillment of airport
noise complaint mitigation agreed to between the Airport Land Use Commission, the project,
and the San Luis Obispo County Airport. The need for special funding for these services is
created, in part, by the Property Tax Sharing Agreement (adopted by the City and the County
in 2008) as a part of the area’s annexation to the City that provides no property tax to the
City. Funding for recurring municipal services will be derived from municipal taxes, service
charges and fees typically levied by the City augmented by a newly created special tax levied
by a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) created for the Project Area.
• Infrastructure needed for the Avila Ranch includes contributions to Citywide, Specific Plan
and other subarea development impact fee programs, mitigating impacts upon regional (off-
site) infrastructure, and funding “backbone” and subdivision-related improvements within the
Project area.
• The key source of infrastructure funding will be “developer equity;” it is estimated that the
developer will invest an estimated $57 million directly in project-related infrastructure,
including paying the City’s development impact fees, which will be updated as part of the
Packet Pg 189
15
City’s development impact fee update.
• Some of the developer’s investment in City or region-serving infrastructure will be subject to
reimbursement from the City because the developer is either “oversizing” the improvement
relative to their nexus-based “fair share” costs, correcting existing deficiencies, or advancing
the improvement prior to its actual need. The City will fund these reimbursement payments
primarily from its development impact fees (Citywide and Airport Area fees) levied on other
new development over time and also a portion of the proposed CFD special taxes levied with
Avila Ranch.
• The developer’s funding commitments are documented in the Tentative Subdivision Map and
also the Development Agreement.
Development Agreement
1. Background and Overview
The City Council authorized City staff to begin a process for the City to enter into a
Development Agreement with the project applicant. A Development Agreement is a legal tool
that allows public agencies to bargain for public improvements beyond what would either be
required through a typical planning process or the CEQA process to address identified impacts
related to a project. A Development Agreement typically includes the payment of fees needed to
help implement such improvements. In exchange, a project applicant is provided assurances
related to future development, often with respect to timing. A Development Agreement cannot
be implemented unless the necessary underlying planning entitlements are first approved, in this
case, a Specific Plan Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Rezone, Development Plan, and
Vesting Tentative Tract Map.
2. Project Approach and Development Agreement Concept
For this project, a draft Development Agreement was prepared, which was reviewed by the
Planning Commission and recommended for approval to the City Council. This Development
Agreement represents the negotiated agreement between the applicant and the City on important
areas related to the phased and orderly development of the property.
The Development Agreement works in parallel to other entitlements, and in the case of Avila
Ranch, the proposed conditions of approval require its approval with a detailed infrastructure
financing plan before certain portions of the entitlement can take effect. The Development
Agreement would not change the development parameters included in the Development Plan, but
would fine-tune their implementation, building on the Conditions of Approval associated with
the Vesting Tentative Tract Map.
3. Legal Basis for the Development Agreement
A Development Agreement is a contract between a developer and a city in which the city
provides the developer with vested development rights, beyond those generally applicable, for a
Packet Pg 190
15
defined period of years in exchange for the developer providing “extraordinary” public or
“community” benefits that exceed what would otherwise be permissible for the City to condition
upon a project by law, i.e. the land use regulation “police powers” reserved to local government
by the California Constitution.
Development Agreements are a unique planning tool authorized by statute pursuant to
Government Code section 65864 – 65869.5. A Development Agreement is an agreement
between the City and a property owner in which the parties agree to “freeze” all rules,
regulations, and policies that are in place as of the execution of the agreement (Gov. Code
Section 65866; Santa Margarita Area Residents Together v San Luis Obispo County Bd. of
Supervisors (2000) 84 CA4th 221). The Development Agreement structure, because it is a
voluntary negotiation process between a developer and city, may also allow a city to negotiate
developer concessions or contributions that it could not otherwise require from a developer
through normal exactions or conditions of approval.
In some circumstances, Development Agreements can provide both greater flexibility and greater
certainty in the development of large or complex projects. However, it should be noted that
Development Agreements are legislative acts and subject to referendum, so the flexibility
afforded by the tool is limited by community values.
The Development Agreement for this project is included as Attachment C, Exhibit 1 to this staff
report.
The Development Agreement between Avila Ranch and the City covers the general terms , as
well as the specific commitments of both the developer and the City. Requirements that are part
of the Conditions of Approval or the FEIR are generally not repeated in the Development
Agreement. The exhibits included with the Development Agreement are intended to ensure that
the entire package can be viewed on a standalone basis as the agreement between the Developer
and the City.
4. Major Deal Points
Major items or “deal points” that are covered in the Development Agreement are summarized
below (the relevant section, exhibit or attachment is included for reference):
a. Term: The length or term of the agreement is 20 years with a possible 10-year
extension. (1.03, page 4)
b. Financing: The Developer has a large investment to make in services and infrastructure.
The plan is to establish a CFD to help finance these costs. The Development Agreement
requires the City to consider in good faith the funding, establishing and forming a
mechanism or mechanisms to fund costs related to the project. If the final funding
mechanism is one that can be repealed or voided in some way that is out of the control of
the City, the Developer will establish a “backstop” funding mechanism to protect the
City. (5.02.2, page 10 and 5.03, page 11)
c. Fees: Normally, AB1600 or Impact Fees are “locked in” at the time of the agreement.
Since the City is currently in the process of updating the AB1600 fee program, the
Packet Pg 191
15
Developer has agreed to pay the new AB1600 fees once the update is completed. (5.04.2
b and c, page 13)
d. Reimbursement: The Development Agreement and the financing plan layout the options
for reimbursement and the possible sources of reimbursement. Two key points are that
the City’s general fund is not at risk for any reimbursement and that the “fair share”
allocations of the infrastructure are based on the percentages identified. Actual
reimbursement will be based on the actual costs not on the estimated costs included in the
financing plan. (5.05.3, page 15)
e. Sustainability: The agreement documents requirements that exceed both existing and
anticipated regulatory requirements related to sustainability. (7.07, page 23 and 7.08,
page 24)
f. Phasing: The expected phasing of the project is included in the financing plan. In order
to ensure that the City is not obligated under the development agreement should the
project not move forward, there is a clause in the agreement that the Developer will
complete phases 1 & 2 of the project within seven years of the effect ive date or the
development agreement is void. (7.02.1.b, page 22)
g. Water: The water rights stipulated in the development agreement allows the use of well
water for irrigation within the agricultural parcel, and is consistent with the municipal
code. During construction, the agreement proposes a twenty-year timeframe for the
developer to construct its project with an option for a 10-year extension. Any mandatory
water conservation measures and water allotment requirements from the Water Shortage
Contingency Plan applied citywide would still apply to the end user or new resident.
(7.08, page 24) The project was analyzed with the cumulative buildout of the City, and is
consistent with the water supply accounting policy A5.2.2 listed in the 2015 General Plan
(EIR).
h. Infrastructure: The agreement lists the sources of reimbursement for improvements
beyond the project’s “fair share”, as well documenting the project’s “fair share” of the
required $67,102,134 (based on current estimates) in infrastructure. The Developer will
build $9,487,540 (based on current estimates) of infrastructure beyond its fair share.
(Attachment G, Avila Ranch Feasibility Memorandum)
i. Affordable and Workforce housing: The project is required to provide 71 Inclusionary
housing units that will be met through a combination of construction (67 units), dedicated
land (1.2 acres for 24 low income units) and payment of in-lieu fees (4 units). In addition,
the project includes design and development strategies that serve to provide lower cost
housing by providing for a range of housing sizes and types, greater number of lower
income Inclusionary housing units than required by Ordinance (32 provided; 23
required), larger affordable housing site (1.2 acres provided; 1 acre required), local
preference (none required), owner occupancy restrictions (none required), workforce
housing incentive program (25 units provided; none required) and down payment
assistance ($500,000 provided; none required). These are contractual requirements that
exceed the City’s regulatory requirements for Inclusionary housing. (Attachment C,
Exhibit 1-G)
j. Public Benefit: The City’s outside consultant, Economic Planning Systems (EPS), has
reviewed the financials of the project and the commitments of the Developer and the City
that are included in the Development Agreement and concluded that the City is receiving
approximately $31,000,000 more in extraordinary public benefits than the Developer is
Packet Pg 192
15
receiving in benefits related to the proposed Development Agreement. (Attachment G,
Avila Ranch Feasibility Memorandum)
Community Facilities District (CFD)
As part of the 2017-2019 Financial Plan, the City Council included new financial policies that
establish a framework for land based financing. For the Avila Ranch project, it is anticipated that
a Communities Facilities District (CFD) will be needed for both services and infrastructure. A
key requirement of the conditions of approval is that the applicant forego any protest rights
regarding the formation of a CFD.
One of the pillar policies1 of the City’s General Plan is that new development should pay its own
way, unless the City chooses to pay certain costs of development to obtain community wide
benefits. City Staff worked with the applicant to prepare a detailed fiscal impact analysis of the
proposed project. In summary, based on current costs, the analysis shows that the project at full
build out will generate about $850,600 per year in general fund revenues and $1.3 million per
year in municipal service costs. The annual average cost revenue deficit is $494,887. The
numbers are based on the current tax sharing agreement with the County and could be impacted
based on a positive outcome of the ongoing negotiations with the County.
CFDs can also be used to fund any gap in infrastructure financing and can be used as either a
source of reimbursement or to fund costs in excess of any fair share requirements. General Plan
and Specific Plan Policies, development standards, mitigation measures and conditions of
approval in combination require a significant amount of both in tract and offsite infrastructure to
facilitate the orderly development of this area. A preliminary analysis concludes that the
development project has the capacity to generate approximately $1.7 million of CFD revenue for
both services and infrastructure per year.
The proposed action for the CFD is to approve a Resolution of Intention (Attachment D) which
essentially begins the process to establish two CFDs for the property. The 1st CFD will be in
perpetuity and will fund services and the 2nd CFD will be a potential source of funding to provide
reimbursement for the outlay of capital for infrastructure that exceeds the fair share requirement
and is eligible for reimbursement pursuant to the terms of the Development Agreement. The
second CFD will be terminated upon satisfaction of the infrastructure reimbursements
As a part of broader actions on the Avila Ranch entitlement documents referenced in this staff
report, the Council is being asked to initiate formation of a Community Facilities District (CFD).
Initiation of the CFD occurs through adoption of a Resolution of Intention, the first step in
formation of the CFD pursuant to the Community Facilities District Act of 1982 (Attachment D).
The City of San Luis Obispo has not, before the Avila Ranch Project proposed CFD, created any
CFDs. However, the City has, in anticipation of Avila Ranch and other development -related
financing requirements, adopted policies and procedures related to CFDs that guide formation of
the Avila Ranch CFD.
1 1.13.9. Costs of Growth: The City shall require the costs of public facilities and services needed for new development be bor ne by the new
development, unless the community chooses to help pay the costs for a certain development to obtain community-wide benefits. The City shall
consider a range of options for financing measures so that new development pays its fair share of costs of new se rvices and facilities which are
required to serve the project and which are reasonably related to the new growth attributable to the development.
Packet Pg 193
15
1. Background
The owners and developers of the Avila Ranch property have requested and the City has agreed
to consider formation of a Community Facilities District (CFD), subject to Council action on the
Avila Ranch entitlement documents. Such a CFD, allows for the levy of a special tax on real
property located within the designated boundary of the CFD for a range of purposes, including
funding municipal services, local area maintenance, and infrastructure. It is common for the
special taxes to be used to service municipal bonds issued for the CFD to fund new development-
related infrastructure. The Avila Ranch CFD, as proposed, will be used to fund Citywide services
necessary to support the new development, maintenance of local area public facilities, and
reimbursement to the Developer for funding advances or construction of key infrastructure items
over and above the Project’s demonstrated “fair share” of such infrastructure costs.
A CFD, as enabled by the Community Facilities District Act of 1982, allows a local jurisdiction
to levy a special tax within a specified area to pay for public services and/or infrastructure
needed within the area. Over the past three decades, CFDs have become a common mechanism
for cities to fund services and finance development-related infrastructure. The levy of any special
tax and any related bond issuance is subject to voter approval, if the area is inhabited approval by
two-thirds of the voters in the area is required. If fewer than 12 voters are located in the area,
approval by the landowners is required (Avila Ranch area currently has no residential uses).
2. Analysis and Recommendations
Funding Capacity. The funding capacity of a CFD is based upon the type and amount of
development in the boundary of the CFD upon which the special tax is levied and the amount of
the tax per parcel. Special taxes levied as part of a CFD must be clearly specified by a “rate and
method of apportionment”, which defines the amount of the tax levied on each parcel and how
the amount may be increased (indexed) over time to account for any inflationary cost increases.
Generally, and as reflected in the City’s adopted policy, CFD special taxes are limited to a
fraction of the 1 percent property tax allowed under Article 13 A of the State Const itution. The
funding capacity of the Avila Ranch Project, taking account of the market value of development
being created, the existing general and special taxes, and the City’s established special tax “cap”
of 1.8 percent is estimated to be approximately $2.9 million annually at full buildout of the
project. Given market conditions and maximum equivalent HOA rates in the community of $200
per month, as well as market considerations, and the significant amount of smaller and
multifamily units, the aggregate tax burden on residential units may limit capacity to an amount
below this maximum. This analysis results in a funding capacity at $1.7 million per year at full
buildout of the project.
Purpose of the Special Tax. The Rate and Method of Apportionment (RMA) specifies the
special tax to be levied as part of the Avila Ranch Community Facilities District (CFD). In this
case, the special tax will fund local area maintenance costs; provide for fiscal mitigation (City
and County) and serve as a source of reimbursement funding if needed. Administrative costs are
also included. Detailed analysis of public service costs, including the need for fiscal mitigation
and local area facilities maintenance has been conducted as part of ongoing staff work and
Packet Pg 194
15
negotiations with the Avila Ranch Developer. The funding components that have resulted from
this analysis include:
a. Citywide Services: $230,000
b. Local Area Maintenance: $1.2 million
c. County Services: $88,000
d. Capital reimbursement: (TBD)
e. CFD Administration: $20,000
Components of the Special Tax. Because there are different reasons for including each of the
two components, there are different instructions in the RMA related to each. The first component
is for local area maintenance services. It will be needed indefinitely and can be adjusted if a new
property tax sharing agreement with the County is achieved that provides a greater share of
property tax to the City. The second component is for reimbursement of capital outlay by the
Developer in excess of fair share costs. The tax will only be levied until reimbursements are
paid back, at which point, the tax will terminate. The City could consider forming two CFDs for
the two components: one limited to services and fiscal mitigation and one limited to reimbursing
the Developer's funding advances; however, staff recommends that a single CFD address all
objectives for administrative efficiency.
Special Tax Rate Structure. Special property taxes are “parcel” taxes (a given rate per parcel).
Varying taxes by use or intensity requires a logical structure, often linked to service demand.
Current special tax calculations determined an "average" special tax for all units in Avila Ranch
of $2,400 per year. There are 4 residential prototypes: R-1 (7 DU/ac); R-2 (12 DU/ac; R-3
townhomes (20 DU/ac); and R-4, stacked flats (24 DU/ac). A "flat tax" rate could be set for all
residential uses based on the special tax revenue calculations; alternatively, a rate sensitive to
unit type (zoning designation or single family/multifamily) and size can be established, based on
a variable that is linked to service demand. Special taxes can be charged on commercial uses to
pay their proportional share of service costs. There is a small amount (15,000 square feet) of
commercial space planned for the Avila Ranch neighborhood. Given its limited scale of the
commercial uses, staff recommends that such uses be exempted from the special tax, unless a
change of use is subsequently approved with an exemption for the commercial uses, but charge a
vacant land tax until parcel is developed. Staff recommends that a tax rate that varies by single
family and multifamily use and size be implemented.
Special Tax on Vacant Land. Special taxes can be levied on land that is designated for
development, but not yet developed. Such taxes are charged to generate cash flow to cover
interim service costs or debt service before the developing area subject to the special tax is fully
developed. The combined cost of services funded by the CFD may exceed the available tax
revenues during the "buildout" period when there will be a growing number of tax producing
parcels. A tax on vacant land (paid by the then-current owner of the vacant developable land) can
be levied to cover such costs. Analysis shows that significant maintenance cost will not emerge
until the related facilities are in place and service demands emerge. Thus, staff recommends that
a vacant land tax be levied at the time the Final Subdivision Map is approved and respective
subdivision parcels are recorded.
Packet Pg 195
15
Special Tax Rate Structure, Prioritization. The RMA will need to specify funding priorities for
special tax revenue. There are three components currently identified as specified below: 1)
"fiscal mitigation" for the lack of property tax from the area (bot h City and some County); 2)
special funding for ongoing local area maintenance and eventual local facilities replacement; and
3) funding for reimbursement of Developer funding advances (e.g., the capital component). The
priority for funding recommended is as follows: 1) funding for reimbursement of Developer
funding advances; 2) special funding for local area maintenance; and 3) "fiscal mitigation" for
the City.
Exemption for Affordable Housing Units. Property owned by non-profit entities or with price
restrictions in the deed are not categorically exempted from special taxes. The key policy
exemption to be considered is an exemption on affordable housing owned by non-profit entities.
There are 67 affordable units proposed to be constructed, 9% of total units (32 for low income at
80% of median income, and 35 for moderate at 120% of median income). Taxing affordable
housing units will increase operating costs and thus may decrease feasibility for the non -profit
entities or the subsidies that they can offer lower income households. Options include: 1) an
exemption for the non-profit owned or deed restricted units; or 2) establishing a discounted
special tax reflecting benefits to the City of providing affordable housing units. Staff
recommends that a reduced special tax on affordable units, 50% of the lowest tax rate on market
rate residential units be levied. This approach is widely used throughout the state and is
considered an equitable distribution of one time and ongoing costs.
Other Exemptions. Certain types of property ownership are categorically exempt from special
taxes), while others may be exempted for policy reasons by the RMA. Little or no cost is
expected from these parcels. Exemptions include government owned property; property-owners’
association property (common areas); assessor’s parcels consisting of public or utility easements;
and property having conservation-oriented deed restrictions. It is recommended that these non-
developed parcels be exempted from the special tax.
Indexing for Cost Increases Over Time. Special taxes are typically “indexed,” increased over
time to reflect inflationary cost increases as permitted by the statute. Without a “cost inflator”
special taxes will diminish in value proportional to the rate of inflation on the costs of providing
municipal services. There are various “cost indices” that track price inflation including the CPI,
the CCI and the ENR construction cost index. The publication American County and City also
publishes a municipal cost index that tracks regional increases in municipal service costs. Staff
recommends that the City apply a composite of these indices as the escalator of special taxes
used for City services from year-to-year. The special tax component for infrastructure purposes
is limited by the Statute to two percent per year, which may result in a limitation of cost recovery
relative to actual inflation and other cost increases
Property Tax Contingency. A portion of the proposed Avila Ranch special tax is for "fiscal
mitigation" linked to the existing property tax agreement that yields no property tax to the City.
In the event that agreement can be renegotiated to provide some portion of the property tax to the
City, the "fiscal mitigation" portion of the special tax could be reduced. The RMA could, but is
not required to, include a clause that provides for a reduction in the overall special tax
proportional to any property tax revenue received by the City. Staff recommends a provision be
Packet Pg 196
15
included to reduce the special taxes proportional to any property tax received as a result of a new
Property Tax Sharing Agreement with the County.
Duration of the Special Tax. The RMA must specify the duration of the special tax. Special
taxes that provide a source of debt service on CFD municipal bonds (or other capital
expenditure) sunset when debt is retired. Staff recommends an “indefinite” duration for the
services portion of the special tax, and that the reimbursement component will be retired when
reimbursement is completed.
Special Tax Accounts and Allocation. The special tax requirement has been calculated based on
three separate cost components: 1) "fiscal mitigation" for the lack of property tax from the area
(both City and some County); 2) special funding for local area maintenance and also ev entual
local facilities replacement; and 3) funding for reimbursement of Developer funding advances
(e.g., the capital component).
3. Formation Process
The CFD formation should be initiated by the City Council by adoption of the Resolution of
Intention for the Avila Ranch CFD at the time the Avila Ranch Entitlement Documents are
considered for adoption by the City Council, or soon afterward. The Resolution of Intention
initiates a statutory formation process that includes the following steps:
a. Adopt Resolution of Intention
b. Prepare legal map of CFD Boundary and conduct voter determination (this has been
completed)
c. Approve Rate and Method of Apportionment
d. Adopt Resolution of Formation (ROF)
e. Conduct election (or obtain landowner approval)
f. Adopt Ordinance to Levy Special Tax
These steps have been scheduled to occur before the end of 2017, assuming adoption of the
Avila Ranch Resolution of Intention.
Next Steps
If the City Council certifies the EIR, and approves the Development Plan and related
entitlements, including the Development Agreement, these are the next steps in the process:
• Adopt the Ordinance to change the zoning of the property to be consistent with the Avila
Ranch Development Plan and with the General Plan and Airport Area Specific Plan, as
amended.
• Adopt the Ordinance approving the Development Agreement.
• Community Facilities District Formation. In a subsequent hearing, the City Council will
consider adopting a Resolution to establish a Community Facilities District (CFD), which
will be necessary to implement development under the Development Plan and Specific
Plan, as amended.
Packet Pg 197
15
• AB 1600 Fee Program Update. After a joint Planning Commission/City Council study
session, the City Council will consider an update of the AB 1600 fee program, which will
be necessary to implement development under the Development Plan and Specific Plan,
as amended.
• Project Development. Once fee structures are in place, the City’s approved project
entitlements will become effective, including Development Agreement provisions.
Project development could then commence, pursuant to required regulatory resource
agency permitting.
CONCURRENCES
The City’s review of the Avila Ranch Development Plan project has involved all City
departments in the development review process. Conditions of approval or mitigation measures
will be implemented to ensure that the project is carried out in a manner that is consistent with
City standards. In addition, the Airport Land Use Commission has determined that the project is
consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT
When the Land Use and Circulation Elements of the General Plan were updated in 2014, they
were accompanied by a fiscal analysis that identified the overall fiscal impact that buildout of the
General Plan would have on the city’s ability to continue to provide the high level of service
expected by the community. This fiscal impact analysis of the City’s land use plan is an essential
aspect of land use planning in California, where property tax growth is statutorily limited. As a
result, communities have to be careful to balance land uses between commercial activities that
produce net revenues to support City operations, and residential uses that cost more to support
than they produce in direct revenues.
Smaller scale, individual projects generally are not accompanied by project-specific fiscal
analyses. In the case of Avila Ranch, a detailed fiscal analysis has been prepared for a few key
reasons:
1. The size of the project warrants a project-specific look.
2. The phasing of the project could result in short term fiscal impacts that would limit the ability
of the City to maintain or deliver public facilities in the earlier phases of the project. This
may result in the need for a Community Facilities District to support project maintenance or
infrastructure costs.
3. Negotiations with the developer regarding the Development Agreement rely on a detailed
understanding of the specific fiscal effects of the project.
4. Discussions with the County regarding the tax exchange agreement are al so informed by a
more detailed understanding of the tax revenue and costs that will be generated by the
project.
The fiscal impact analysis for the Avila Ranch project was prepared by Applied Development
Economics. This is the same firm that prepared the fiscal and economic analysis for the General
Plan update. In summary, the analysis shows that the project at full buildout will generate about
Packet Pg 198
15
$850,600 per year in general fund revenues and $1.3 million per year in municipal service costs.
The average annual cost revenue deficit is $494,887 This analysis also includes Local Revenue
Measure revenues for sales tax. The numbers are based on the current cost estimates and tax
sharing agreement with the County and can be positively impacted based on the outcome of the
ongoing negotiations with the County. The CFD is structured to ensure that the City that at a
minimum the City’s cost are offset by contributions from the CFD.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Continue consideration of the project entitlements. The City Council may continue its
review of the Avila Ranch project to a date certain if additional time or information is needed
to make a decision. If additional information is needed, direction should be provided to staff
so that it can be presented on that date.
2. Direct changes to the project proposal. The City Council may direct staff and the applicant
to make specific changes to the project. Direction on changes should be specific and within
the scope of the environmental document prepared for the project. For example, the Council
could direct the applicant to reduce the number of units proposed for the project because a
smaller project is evaluated in the Final EIR. However, direction to increase the number of
residential units would require additional environmental review causing substantial delay to
the entitlement process.
3. Deny the project. The City Council may deny the project, based on findings that the project
is not consistent with the General Plan, or that the project benefits do not outweigh its
negative effects. This action is not recommended because the project appears to be consistent
with the General Plan, and the Final EIR for the project has identified mitigation measures
that will reduce most project-related impacts to less than significant levels. Proposed
Findings of Overriding Considerations recommended by the Planning Commission illustrate
how the benefits of the project outweigh its negative effects.
Attachments:
a - Entitlement Resolution
b - Map Ordinance
c - DA Ordinance
d - Resolution of Intention for CFD
e - Advisory Body review and responses
f - FEIR Policy Consistency
g - Avila Ranch Feasibility Memorandum
Packet Pg 199
15
RESOLUTION NO. ______ (2017 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE FINAL EIR FOR, AND
APPROVAL OF, THE AVILA RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AIRPORT
AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT, GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT, AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 3089, FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 175 VENTURE DRIVE (GENP 1319-2015;
SPEC/ER-1318-2015; SBDV 2042 2015; OTHR-0455-2017 A.K.A. “AVILA
RANCH”)
WHEREAS, on June 28, 29 and July 12, 2017 and on August 9, 2017, the Planning
Commission held hearings on the underlying entitlements for the Avila Ranch project including
environmental analysis and other related studies; and
WHEREAS on August 9, 2017, the Planning Commission recommended that the City
Council: 1) certify the Environmental Impact Report, adopt appropriate CEQA findings and
Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adopt a Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting
Plan; 2) approve the Airport Area Specific Plan Amendment, General Plan Amendment and
Rezone; 3) approve the Avila Ranch Development Plan based on findings that the project is
consistent with the General Plan and Airport Area Specific Plan, as amended; 4) approve the
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 3089; and 5) approve the Development Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing
on September 19, 2017 in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, for the purpose of considering GENP 1319-2015; SPEC/ER 1318-2015; SBDV 2042-
2015; OTHR-0455-2017, which includes entitlements consistent with the Planning Commission
recommendation of August 9, 2017, including a Development Plan that would allow up to 720
residential units, 15,000 square feet of commercial development, 18 acres of parks, and 53 acres
of open space on a 150-acre site, with a Vesting Tentative Tract Map that would implement said
development; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony
of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at
said hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. CEQA Findings, Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring
Program. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council hereby certifies the Final Environmental
Impact Report (EIR), adopts a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and adopts the
Packet Pg 200
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 2
following CEQA Findings and Mitigation Measures in support of all entitlements related to the
Avila Ranch Project:
1. The Avila Ranch Development Project Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) was
prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State
CEQA Guidelines, adequately addressing impacts associated with the proposed project; and
2. The proposed project is consistent with the requirements of the Avila Ranch Development
Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) based on the attached Findings and Statement
of Overriding Considerations prepared consistent with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and
15093, and this approval incorporates those FEIR mitigation measures as applicable to VTM
#3089, as detailed below, and described more fully in the attached “Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations” document.
3. All potentially significant effects were analyzed adequately in the referenced FEIR, and
reduced to the extent feasible, provided the following mitigation measures are incorporated
into the project and the mitigation monitoring program.
AVILA RANCH FEIR MITIGATION MEASURES
Agricultural Resources Mitigation
AG-1. The Applicant shall establish an offsite agricultural conservation easement or pay in-lieu fees
to a City designated fund dedicated to acquiring and preserving agricultural land. While the City’s
priority is that such agricultural land be acquired in the closest feasible proximity to the City,
mitigation may be implemented using one of the following options:
a. The Applicant shall ensure permanent protection of farmland of equal area and quality, which
does not already have permanent protection, within the City of San Luis Obispo, consistent with
City Policy 8.6.3(C) and AASP Policy 3.2.18. The Applicant shall identify and purchase or
place in a conservation easement a parcel of land of at least 71 acres of equal quality farmland,
or provide in-lieu fees to allow the City to complete such an acquisition.
b. If no suitable parcel exists within the City limits, the Applicant shall identify and purchase or
place in a conservation easement a parcel of farmland, of equal quantity and quality, within the
City’s Sphere of Influence that is threatened by development of nonagricultural uses. The parcel
shall be placed in an agricultural conservation easement (refer to Figure 2 in the Land Use
Element for City Sphere of Influence). The Applicant may also provide in-lieu fees to allow the
City to complete such an acquisition.
c. In the event that no suitable land is available within the City limits or City’s Sphere of Influence,
the Applicant shall identify and purchase or place in a conservation easement a parcel of
farmland, of equal quantity and quality, within the City’s urban reserve or greenbelt that is
threatened by development of nonagricultural uses. This parcel shall be placed in an agricultural
conservation easement (refer to Figure 1 in the Land Use Element for City Planning Area). The
Applicant may also provide in-lieu fees to allow the City to complete such an acquisition.
In the event that no suitable land for an agricultural conservation easement is available for purchase
within the City limits, the City’s Sphere of Influence, or urban reserve or greenbelt Planning Area,
Packet Pg 201
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 3
R ______
the Applicant shall identify and purchase or place in a conservation easement a parcel of farmland,
of equal quantity and quality, within County lands (e.g., agricultural lands north and south of
Buckley Road) that is considered to be threatened by the conversion to nonagricultural use. This
parcel shall be placed in an agricultural conservation easement. The Applicant may also provide in-
lieu fees to allow the City to complete such an acquisition. The Applicant shall demonstrate that
such land is as close in proximity to the City as feasible.
AG-2a. To address potential agricultural land use conflicts, the Applicant shall coordinate with the
City and County to fund installation of fencing and signs along Buckley Road to minimize potential
for increases in trespass and vandalism of adjacent agricultural areas. Along the south side of Buckley
Road, the use of three strand barbwire fencing would be acceptable. Along the north side of the
Buckley Road extension bordering the Class I bike path, spit rail fencing shall be installed or other
fencing acceptable to the County.
AG-2b. To reduce the potential for noise, dust, and pesticide drift to affect future Project residents,
the Applicant shall ensure that Project landscape plans include planting of a windrow of trees and
shrubs along the proposed southern landscape berm and eastern Project site boundary at a sufficient
density to buffer the site from surrounding agricultural operations.
AG-2c. To augment the existing 100-foot agricultural buffer to the Caltrans property to the west of
the Project site, the Applicant shall add a 20-foot hedgerow/windrow of trees and vegetation along
the east side of Vachell Lane.
Air Quality Mitigation
AQ-1a. A Construction Activity Management Plan (CAMP) shall be included as part of Project
grading and building plans and shall be submitted to the APCD and to the City for review and
approval prior to the start of construction. In addition, the contractor or builder shall designate a
person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary,
to prevent transport of dust offsite. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when
work may not be in progress. The name and telephone of such persons shall be provided to the APCD
prior to land use clearance for map recordation and grading. The plan shall include but not be limited
to the following elements:
1. A Dust Control Management Plan that encompasses the following dust control measures:
• Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible;
• Water trucks or sprinkler trucks shall be used during construction to keep all areas of
vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At a minimum, this
would require twice-daily applications. All dirt stock pile areas should be sprayed daily as
needed. Increased watering frequency would be required when wind speeds exceed 15
miles per hour (mph). Reclaimed water or the onsite water well (non-potable) shall be used
when possible. The contractor or builder shall consider the use of an APCD-approved dust
suppressant where feasible to reduce the amount of water used for dust control;
• All dirt stock-pile areas shall be sprayed daily as needed;
• Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved Project revegetation and
landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any
soil disturbing activities;
Packet Pg 202
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 4
R ______
• Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after
initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating native grass seed and watered until
vegetation is established;
• All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved
chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD;
• All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as
possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless
seeding or soil binders are used;
• Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface
at the construction site;
• All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or shall
maintain at least two feet of freeboard in accordance with California Vehicle Code Section
23114;
• Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off
trucks and equipment leaving the site;
• Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved
roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible;
• All of these fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building
plans; and
• The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust
control emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to
minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below 20 percent opacity, and to
prevent transport of dust offsite. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods
when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall
be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork
or demolition.
2. Implementation of the following BACT for diesel-fueled construction equipment, where
feasible. The BACT measures shall include:
• Use of Tier 3 and Tier 4 off-road equipment and 2010 on-road compliant engines;
• Repowering equipment with the cleanest engines available; and
• Installing California Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies.
3. Implementation of the following standard air quality measures to minimize diesel emissions:
• Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer’s
specifications;
• Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment with CARB-certified motor
vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off-road).
• Use diesel construction equipment meeting CARB’s Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off-
road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State off-Road Regulation;
• Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the CARB’s 2007 or cleaner certification standard
for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines and comply with the State On-Road Regulation;
• Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in their fleet that
meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g. captive or NOx
exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative compliance;
• On- and off-road diesel equipment shall not be allowed to idle for more than five minutes.
Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas to remind drivers and operators of
the five-minute idling limit;
Packet Pg 203
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 5
R ______
• Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors in not permitted;
• Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors;
• Electrify equipment when feasible;
• Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible; and,
• Use alternatively fueled construction equipment onsite where feasible, such as compressed
natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel.
4. Tabulation of on- and off-road construction equipment (age, horse-power, and miles and/or
hours of operation);
5. Schedule construction truck trips during non-peak hours (as determined by the Public Works
Director) to reduce peak hour emissions;
6. Limit the length of the construction work-day period; and
7. Phase construction activities, if appropriate.
AQ-1b. To reduce ROG and NOx levels during the architectural coating phase, low or no VOC-
emission paint shall be used with levels of 50 g/L or less, such as Benjamin Moore Natura Paint
(Odorless, Zero VOC Paint). The Applicant or builder shall consider additional measures to reduce
daily and quarterly ROG and NOx levels related to architectural coatings, such as extending coating
applications by limiting daily coating activities.
AQ-1c. In order to further reduce Project air quality impacts, an offsite mitigation strategy shall be
developed and agreed upon by the developer, City, and APCD at least three months prior to the
issuance of grading permits, including added funding for circulation improvem ents and transit
operations. Such funding may be in the form of cash payment or included as part of the obligation of
the Community Facilities District. The Applicant shall provide this funding at least two months prior
to the start of construction to help facilitate emission offsets that are as real-time as possible. Offsite
mitigation strategies shall include one or more of the following:
• Replace/repower San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA) transit buses;
• Purchase VDECs for transit buses; and
• Fund expansion of existing SLORTA transit services.
AQ-2a. The Applicant shall include the following:
• Water Conservation Strategy: The Applicant shall install fixtures with the EPA WaterSense
Label, achieving 20 percent reduction indoor. The Project shall install drip, micro, or fixed
spray irrigation on all plants other than turf, also including the EPA WaterSense Label,
achieving 15 percent reduction in outdoor landscaping.
• Solid Waste: The Applicant shall institute recycling and composting services to achieve a 15
percent reduction in waste disposal, and use waste efficient landscaping.
• Fugitive Dust: The Applicant shall replace ground cover of at least 70 percent of area
disturbed in accordance with CARB Rule 403.
• Energy Conservation Strategy: The Applicant shall install additional solar and alternative
energy features (e.g., solar panels on commercial buildings; solar canopies over commercial
parking areas).
AQ-2b. Consistent with standard mitigation measures set forth by the APCD, Projects generat ing
more than 50 lbs/day of combined ROG + NOx or PM10 shall implement all feasible measures within
Table 3-5 of the Air Quality Handbook.
Packet Pg 204
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 6
R ______
Biological Resources Mitigation
BIO-1a. The Applicant shall prepare and implement a Biological Mitigation Plan that identifies
construction-related staging and maintenance areas and includes Project-specific construction best
management practices (BMPs) to avoid or minimize impacts to biological resources, including all
measures needed to protect riparian woodland along Tank Farm Creek, minimize erosion, and retain
sediment on the Project site. Such BMPs shall include (but not be limited to) the following:
1. Construction equipment and vehicles shall be stored at least 100 feet away from Tank Farm
Creek and adjacent riparian habitat, and all construction vehicle maintenance shall be
performed in a designated offsite vehicle storage and maintenance area.
2. Prior to construction activities adjacent to Tank Farm Creek, the creek shall be fenced with
orange construction fencing and signed to prohibit entry of construction equipment and
personnel unless authorized by the City. Fencing should be located a minimum of 20 feet
from the edge of the riparian canopy or top of bank, whichever is further from the creek, and
shall be maintained throughout the construction period for each phase of development.
3. In the event that construction must occur within the creek or 20 -foot creek setback, a
biological monitor shall be present during all such activities with the authority to stop or
redirect work as needed to protect biological resources.
4. Construction shall occur during daylight hours (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM or sunset, whichever is
sooner) to avoid impacts to nocturnal and crepuscular (dawn and dusk activity period)
species. No construction night lighting shall be permitted within 100 yards of the top of the
creek banks.
5. Construction equipment shall be inspected at the beginning of each work day to ensure that
no wildlife species is residing within any construction equipment (e.g., species have not
climbed into wheel wells, engine compartments, or under tracks since the equipment was last
parked). Any sensitive wildlife species found during inspections shall be gently encouraged
to leave the Project site by a qualified biologist or otherwise trained and City-approved
personnel.
6. Pallets or secondary containment areas for chemicals, drums, or bagged materials shall be
provided. Should material spills occur, materials and/or contaminants shall be cleaned from
the Project site and recycled or disposed of to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB).
7. All trash and construction debris shall be picked up and properly disposed at the end of each
day and waste dumpsters shall be covered with plastic sheeting at the end of each workday
and during storm events. All sheeting shall be carefully secured to withstand weather
conditions.
8. The Applicant shall implement erosion control measures designed to minimize erosion and
retain sediment on the Project site. Such measures shall include installation of silt fencing,
straw waddles, or other acceptable erosion control devices along the perimeter of Tank Farm
Creek and at the perimeter of all cut or fill slopes. All drainage shall be directed to sediment
basins designed to retain all sediment onsite.
9. Concrete truck and tool washout should occur in a designated location such that no runoff
will reach the creek.
10. All open trenches shall be constructed with appropriate exit ramps to allow species that
incidentally fall into a trench to escape. All open trenches shall be inspected at the beginning
of each work day to ensure that no wildlife species is present. Any sensitive wildlife species
Packet Pg 205
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 7
R ______
found during inspections shall be gently encouraged to leave the Project site by a qualified
biologist or otherwise trained and City-approved personnel. Trenches will remain open for
the shortest period necessary to complete required work.
Existing facilities and disturbed areas shall be used to the maximum extent possible to minimize the
amount of disturbance of undeveloped areas and all construction access roads and staging areas shall
be located to avoid high quality habitat and minimize habitat fragmentation.
BIO-1b. The Applicant shall retain a qualified Environmental Monitor, subject to review and
approval by the City and in consultation with CDFW, RWQCB, and USFWS to oversee compliance
of the construction activities with the Biological Monitoring Plan and applicable laws, regulations,
and policies. The Environmental Monitor shall monitor all construction activities, conduct a
biological resources education program for all construction workers prior to the initiation of any
clearing or construction activities, and provide quarterly reports to the City regarding construction
activities, enforcement issues and remedial measures. The Environmental Monitor shall be
responsible for conducting inspections of the work area each work day to ensure that excavation
areas, restored habitats, and open water habitats in the area do not have oil sheen, liquid oil, or any
other potential exposure risk to wildlife. If any exposure risk is identified, the Environmental Monitor
shall implement measures that could include, but are not limited to, hazing, fencing, and wildlife
removals to eliminate the exposure risk.
In addition, a CDFW-approved biologist shall be present during all construction occurring within 50
feet of Tank Farm Creek, riparian habitat, drainages, and seasonal or permanent wetlands. The
biologist shall also conduct sensitive species surveys immediately prior to construction activities
(within the appropriate season) and shall monitor construction activities in the vicinity of habitats to
be avoided (see also, MM BIO-3 and all subparts below).
The work area boundaries and other off-limit areas shall be identified by the biologist and/or
Environmental Monitor on a daily basis. The biologist and/or Environmental Monitor shall inspect
construction and sediment control fencing each work day during construction activities to ensure that
sensitive species are not exposed to hazards. Any vegetation clearing activities shall be monitored by
the biologist and/or Environmental Monitor.
BIO-2b. The Biological Mitigation Plan shall provide details on timing and implementation of
required habitat restoration and shall be prepared in consultation with the City’s Natural Resource
Manager and CDFW. A copy of the final plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval.
The plan shall be implemented by the Project Applicant, under supervision by the City and
Environmental Monitor, and:
1. Characterize the type, species composition, spatial extent, and ecological functions and values
of the wetland and riparian habitat that will be removed, lost, or damaged.
2. Describe the approach that will be used to replace the wetland and riparian habitat removed,
lost, or adversely impacted by the Project, including a list of the soil, plants, and other
materials that will be necessary for successful habitat replacement, and a description of
planting methods, location, spacing, erosion protection, and irrigation measures that will be
needed. Restoration and habitat enhancement shall include use of appropriate native species
and correction of bank stabilization issues. Wetland restoration or enhancement areas shall
Packet Pg 206
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 8
R ______
be designed to facilitate establishment of wetland plants such as willows, cottonwoods,
rushes, and creeping wild rye.
3. Describe the habitat restoration ratio to be used in calculating the acreage of habitat to be
planted, consistent with MM BIO-2c through 2e below and the findings in the Biological
Report (Appendix I).
4. Describe the program that will be used for monitoring the effectiveness and success of the
habitat replacement approach.
5. Describe how the habitat replacement approach will be supplemented or modified if the
monitoring program indicates that the current approach is not effective or successful.
6. Describe the criteria that will be used to evaluate the effectiveness and success of the habitat
replacement approach.
7. Indicate the timing and schedule for the planting of replacement habitat.
8. Habitat restoration or enhancement areas shall be established within the Project boundaries,
adjacent to and contiguous with existing wetlands to the maximum extent possible. Habitats
suitable for Congdon’s tarplant and other native wetland species shall be created onsite. If
Congdon’s tarplant is found in areas proposed for disturbance, the affected individuals shall
be replaced at a 1:1 ratio through seeding in a suitable conserved natural open space area. A
management plan for the species shall be developed consistent with applicable scientific
literature pertinent to this species.
9. Habitat restoration or enhancement sites shall be placed within deed-restricted area(s), and
shall be maintained and monitored for a minimum of five years. If sufficient onsite mitigation
area is not practicable, an offsite mitigation plan shall be prepared as part of the Biological
Mitigation Plan and approved by permitting agencies.
10. The Biological Mitigation Plan shall identify appropriate restoration and enhancement
activities to compensate for impacts to seasonal creek, wetland, and riparian habitat, including
a detailed planting plan and maintenance plans using locally obtained native species and
include habitat enhancement to support native wildlife and plant species.
11. A weed management plan and weed identification list shall be included in the Biological
Mitigation Plan.
12. Habitat restoration or enhancement areas shall be maintained weekly for the first three years
after Phase completion and quarterl y thereafter. Maintenance shall include eradication of
noxious weeds found on California Department of Food and Agriculture Lists (CDFA) A and
B. Noxious weeds on CDFA list C may be eradicated or otherwise managed.
13. Mitigation implementation and success shall be monitored quarterly for the first two years
after completion of each Phase, semi-annually during the third year, and annually the fourth
and fifth years. Annual reports documenting site inspections and site recovery status shall be
prepared and sent to the County and appropriate agencies.
BIO-2c. Within the required Biological Mitigation Plan, all temporary and permanent impacts to
riparian trees, wetlands, and riparian habitat shall be mitigated, as follows:
1. Temporary impacts to wetland and riparian habitat shall be mitigated at a minimum 1:1
mitigation ratio for restoration (area of restored habitat to impacted habitat).
2. Permanent impacts to state jurisdictional areas, including isolated wetlands within
agricultural lands and riparian habitat will be mitigated at a 1.5:1 ratio (area of restored and
enhanced habitat to impacted habitat).
3. Permanent impacts to federal wetlands shall be mitigated at a minimum 3:1 ratio (1:1 area of
created to impacted habitat plus 2:1 area of created/enhanced habitat to impacted habitat).
Packet Pg 207
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 9
R ______
4. Riparian trees four inches or greater measured at diameter-at-breast-height (DBH) shall be
replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 3:1 (replaced: removed). Trees measured at 24 inches
or greater DBH shall be replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 10:1. Willows and
cottonwoods may be planted from live stakes following guidelines provided in the California
Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual for planting dormant cuttings and container
stock (CDFW 2010). Permanent impacts to riparian vegetation shall be mitigated at a 3:1
ratio to ensure no net loss of acreage and individual plants.
5. Replacement trees shall be planted in the fall or winter of the year in which trees were
removed. All replacement trees will be planted no more than one year following the date upon
which the native trees were removed. Replacement plants shall be monitored for 5 years with
a goal of at least 70 percent survival at the end of the 5-year period. Supplemental irrigation
may be provided during years 1 to 3; however, supplemental watering shall not be provided
during the final two years of monitoring.
BIO-2d. Project design shall be modified to preserve at a minimum the southern 275 feet of the
North-South Creek Segment to protect all existing mature riparian woodland, and the proposed
drainage plan shall be altered to convey remaining surface water flows from areas to the north to this
channel.
BIO-2e. To minimize impacts to riparian habitat, the Project shall stockpile sufficient emergent
vegetation (e.g., cattails) for later planting in the realigned reach of Tank Farm Creek. Stockpiled
vegetation shall be placed in earthen basins with the roots covered with moist soil and maintained in
a moist condition during construction operations.
[BIO-2f does not apply to the Mitigated Project.]
BIO-2g. A post-construction landscape and restoration report for each phase shall be prepared by the
Environmental Monitor based on as-built drawings and site inspections to document the final
grading, plantings, and habitat restoration activities. The report shall include as-built plans prepared
after restoration, grading, and mitigation habitat plantings are complete. The as-built plans shall be
prepared by landscape and grading contractors.
BIO-2h. Project activities within Tank Farm Creek and drainage channels, including any tree pruning
or removals, any necessary erosion repairs, or culvert removals, shall be performed when the channel
is dry, planned to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Natural Resource Manager per City
Drainage Manual Standards, and be subject to monitoring by the Environmental Monitor.
BIO-2i. To reduce erosion and runoff from all exposed soils, all bare disturbed soils shall be
hydroseeded at the completion of grading for each construction phase. The seed mix shall contain a
minimum of three locally native grass species and may contain one or two sterile non-native grasses
not to exceed 25 percent of the total seed mix by count. Seeding shall be completed no later than
November 15 of the year in which Project activities occurred. All exposed areas where seeding is
considered unsuccessful after 90 days shall receive a second application or seeding, straw, or mulch
as soon as is practical to reduce erosion.
BIO-2j. The Tank Farm Creek Class I bicycle path bridge footings for creek crossings shall be placed
outside mapped riparian areas and outside the top of the bank of the channel invert. The Class I
Packet Pg 208
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 10
R ______
bridges shall be located within areas that have little to no riparian vegetation. No construction
activities or equipment shall occur in the stream channel. The placement of the bridge and footings
shall be indicated on the Development Plan, VTM, and Biological Mitigation Plan, and shall show
the bridges’ placement in relation to existing vegetation and the creek channel and banks.
BIO-3a. The City-approved qualified biologist shall conduct training to all construction personnel to
familiarize construction crews with sensitive species that have the potential to occur within the
Project site. This may include but is not limited to: California red-legged frog, western pond turtle,
Steelhead trout, bats, migratory birds, and Congdon’s tarplant. The educational program shall include
a description what constitutes take, penalties for take, and the guidelines that would be followed by
all construction personnel to avoid take of species during construction activities. Descriptions of the
California red-legged frog and its habits, Congdon’s tarplant, nesting and migratory birds that may
be encountered, and all other sensitive species that have a potential to occur within the vicinity of
Project construction shall be provided. The construction crew foreman shall be responsible for
ensuring that crew members comply with the guidelines and that all new personnel receive the
training before partaking in construction activities.
BIO-3b. The Biological Mitigation Plan shall address wildlife and special status species movement
as follows:
• Migratory and Nesting Bird Management. Grading and construction activities shall avoid the
breeding season (typically assumed to be from February 15 to August 15) to the extent
practicable, particularly within 50 feet of Tank Farm Creek and riparian or wetland habitat. If
Project activities must be conducted during this period, pre-construction nesting bird surveys
shall take place within one week of habitat disturbance associated with each phase, and if active
nests are located, the following shall be implemented:
o Construction activities within 50 feet of active nests shall be restricted until chicks have
fledged, unless the nest belongs to a raptor, in which case a 200-foot activity restriction
buffer shall be observed.
o A pre-construction survey report shall be submitted to the City immediately upon
completion of the survey. The report shall detail appropriate fencing or flagging of the
buffer zone and make recommendations on additional monitoring requirements. A map of
the Project site and nest locations shall be included with the report.
o The Project biologist conducting the nesting survey shall have the authority to reduce or
increase the recommended buffer depending upon site conditions and the species involved.
A report of findings and recommendations for bird protection shall be submitted to the City
prior to vegetation removal.
• Bat Colony Management. Prior to removal of any trees over 20 inches diameter-at-breast-
height (DBH), a survey shall be conducted by a CDFW -approved qualified biologist to
determine if any tree proposed for removal or trimming harbors sensitive bat species or maternal
bat colonies. Maternal bat colonies shall not be disturbed. If a non-maternal roost is found, the
qualified biologist shall install one-way valves or other appropriate passive relocation method.
For each occupied roost removed, one bat box shall be installed in similar habitat and shall have
similar cavities or crevices to those which are removed, including access, ventilation,
dimensions, height above ground, and thermal conditions. If a bat colony is excluded from the
Project site, appropriate alternate bat habitat shall be installed in the Project site. To the extent
practicable, alternate bat house installation shall be installed near the onsite drainage.
Packet Pg 209
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 11
R ______
• Congdon’s Tarplant Management. Prior to initiation of construction, the Applicant shall fund
a site survey for Congdon’s tarplant, and:
o If Congdon’s tarplant is found in areas proposed for building, the affected individuals shall
be replaced at a 1:1 ratio through seeding in a suitable conserved natural open space area.
o A mitigation and monitoring plan for the species shall be developed consistent with
applicable scientific literature pertinent to this species. The plan shall provide for the annual
success over an area of at least 1,330 square feet with approximately 500-750 individuals
(the current aerial extent) and be implemented to reduce impacts to Congdon’s tarplant to a
less than significant level.
o The mitigation plan shall be incorporated into the Biological Mitigation Plan, wherein
wetland sites shall be created and Congdon’s tarplant seeds from the site shall be
reintroduced.
• Sensitive Species Management. Injury or mortality to the California red-legged frog, western
pond turtle, and steelhead shall be avoided. The plan shall include the following measures: pre-
Project surveys; worker awareness; cessation of work in occupied areas; relocation (if necessary)
of frogs, turtles, and steelhead from the work area by a professional biologist authorized by the
USFWS and/or CDFW; and monitoring by a qualified biologist during construction. Necessary
permits shall be obtained from the state (CDFW) and federal (USACE and USFWS) regulatory
agencies with jurisdiction. Any other sensitive species observed during the pre -construction
surveys shall be relocated out of harm’s way by the qualified biologist into the nearest suitable
habitat as determined in consultation with the jurisdictional resource agency outside the
disturbance area.
BIO-3c. Within 48 hours prior to construction activities within 50 feet of Tank Farm Creek,
drainages, and seasonal wetlands, the Project site shall be surveyed for California red-legged frogs
by a qualified biologist. If any California red-legged frogs are found, work within 25 linear feet in
any direction of the frog shall not start until the frog has been moved from the area. The USFWS
shall be consulted for appropriate action; the Applicant shall obtain a Biological Opinion from the
USFWS and any additional authorization required by other regulatory agencies prior to the
commencement of work. The USFWS-qualified biologist, Environmental Monitor, or USFWS
personnel may determine that frog-exclusion fencing is necessary to prevent overland movement of
frogs if concerns arise that frogs could enter construction areas. Frog-exclusion fencing should
contain no gaps and must extend at least 18 inches above ground; fences may be opened during
periods of no construction (e.g., weekends) to prevent entrapment.
BIO-3d. Within 48 hours prior to construction activities within 50 feet of Tank Farm Creek,
drainages, seasonal wetlands, and riparian habitat, the Project site shall be surveyed for western pond
turtles by a qualified biologist. If any western pond turtles are found, work shall cease until the turtle
is relocated to the nearest suitable habitat. The qualified biologist shall monitor all ground breaking
work conducted within 50 feet of western pond turtle habitat. The City-approved biologist
Environmental Monitor may determine that silt fencing shall be installed adjacent to western pond
turtle habitat if concerns arise that the western pond turtle overland movement could allow them to
access construction areas.
[BIO-3e does not apply to the Mitigated Project.]
Packet Pg 210
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 12
R ______
BIO-4. The required Biological Mitigation Plan shall address bat colonies for the Buckley Road
Extension site. Bat surveys shall be conducted in buildings proposed for demolition. If surveys
determine bats are present, bat exclusion devices shall be installed between August and November,
and building demolition would occur between November and March. If demolition of structures must
occur during the bat breeding season, buildings must be inspected and deemed clear of bat
colonies/roosts within seven days of demolition and an appropriately trained and approved biologist
must conduct a daily site-clearance during demolition. If bats are roosting in a structure in the Project
site during the daytime but are not part of an active maternity colony, then exclusion measures must
include one-way valves that allow bats to get out but are designed so that the bats may not re -enter
the structure.
BIO-5a. All exterior building lights facing Tank Farm Creek shall be hooded to prevent light
spillover into the creek; all residential street lights over 10 feet in height shall be setback a minimum
of 100 feet from the top of the creek bank and hooded and/or directed away from the creek. Any
night lighting adjacent to the creek (e.g., walkway lights) shall be of low voltage and h ooded
downward. Artificial light levels within 20 feet of the top of the creek bank shall not exceed 1 -foot
candle or the lowest level of illumination found to be feasible by the City.
BIO-5b. Tank Farm Creek restoration/enhancement plantings shall include native vegetation, such
as oaks, cottonwoods, willows, and sycamores along the entire length of the Project’s creek frontage
in order to minimize light spillover into the creek.
BIO-6. All work within 100 feet of Tank Farm Creek, including work within the creek setback, shall
occur outside the rainy season (April 15 to October 15, unless approved otherwise by the RWQCB),
during periods when the creek channel is dry and water flows are absent.
Cultural Resources Mitigation
CR-2a. Data recovery through controlled grading of CA-SLO-2798/H shall occur prior to the start
of construction to seek buried features and additional diagnostic artifacts. The Applicant shall retain
a Registered Professional Archaeologist familiar with the types of historic and prehistoric resources
that could be encountered within the Project site and a Native American monitor to supervise the
controlled grading, which shall occur in 10-centimeter lifts to culturally sterile sediments or
maximum construction depth (whichever is reached first).
• Any formed tools exposed during grading shall be collected. If archaeological features are
exposed (including but not limited to hearths, storage pits, midden deposits, or structural
remains), the archaeologist shall temporarily redirect grading to another area so the features can
be exposed, recorded, and sampled according to standard archaeological procedures. Organic
remains shall be dated using the radiocarbon method and the geochemical source and hydration
rim thickness of any obsidian shall be determined. Technical analyses of plant remains, bone
and shell dietary debris, and other important materials shall also be performed.
• Artifacts, features, and other materials recovered through this process shall be described,
illustrated, and analyzed fully in a technical report of findings; the analysis shall include
comparative research with other sites of similar age. In addition to the technical report, the
findings from this research shall be published in an appropriate scientific journal. The Applicant
shall fund all technical reporting and subsequent publication.
Packet Pg 211
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 13
R ______
CR-2b. Following completion of controlled grading of CA-SLO-2798/H, the Applicant shall retain
a Registered Professional Archaeologist and a Native American consultant to monitor all further
earth disturbances within Phase 5 to ensure that previously unidentified buried archaeological
deposits are not inadvertently exposed and damaged. In the event archaeological remains are
encountered during grading or other earth disturbance, work in the vicinity shall be stopped
immediately and redirected to another location until the Project archaeologist evaluates the
significance of the find pursuant to City Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines.
If remains are found to be significant, they shall be subject to a Phase 3 mitigation program consistent
with City Guidelines and funded by the Applicant.
CR-3a. Prior to the issuance of building and grading permits for Phase 1, the Applicant shall retain
a City-approved Registered Professional Archaeologist and a Native American monitor to be present
during all ground disturbing activities within the Project site and Buckley Road Extension site. In the
event of any inadvertent discovery of prehistoric or historic-period archaeological resources during
construction, all work within 50 feet of the discovery shall immediately cease (or greater or lesser
distance as needed to protect the discovery and determined in the field by the Project archaeologist).
The Applicant shall immediately notify the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development
Department. The Project archaeologist shall evaluate the significance of the discovery pursuant to
City Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines prior to resuming any activities that
could impact the site/discovery. If the Project archaeologist determines that the find may qualify for
listing in the CRHR, the site shall be avoided or shall be subject to a Phase 3 mitigation program
consistent with City Guidelines and funded by the Applicant. Work shall not resume until
authorization is received from the City.
CR-3b. Prior to construction, workers shall receive education regarding the recognition of possible
buried cultural remains and protection of all cultural resources, including prehistoric and historic
resources, during construction. Such training shall provide construction personnel with direction
regarding the procedures to be followed in the unlikely event that previously unidentified
archaeological materials, including Native American burials, are discovered during construction.
Training would also inform construction personnel that exclusion zones must be avoided and that
unauthorized collection or disturbance of artifacts or other cultural materials is not allowed. The
training shall be prepared by the Project archaeologist and shall provide a description of the cultural
resources that may be encountered in the Project site, outline steps to follow in the event that a
discovery is made, and provide contact information for the Project archaeologist, Native American
monitor, and appropriate City personnel. The training shall be conducted concurrent with other
environmental or safety awareness and education programs for the Project, provided that the program
elements pertaining to archaeological resources is provided by a qualified instructor meeting
applicable professional qualifications standards.
Geological Resources (from the Initial Study)
GEO-1. Design and construction of the buildings, roadway infrastructure and all subgrades shall be
engineered to withstand the expected ground acceleration that may occur at this site. The design shall
take into consideration the soil type, potential for liquefaction, and the most current and applicable
seismic attenuation methods that are available. All on-site structures shall comply with applicable
provisions of the 2010 California Building Code (CBC), local codes that augment the 2010 CBC, and
applicable California Department of Transportation seismic design standards.
Packet Pg 212
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 14
R ______
GEO-2. For commercial retail stores included in the project, goods for sale may be stacked no higher
than 8 feet from the floor in any area where customers are present, unless provisions are made to
prevent the goods from falling during an earthquake of up to 7.5 magnitude. The stacking or restraint
methods shall be reviewed and approved by the City before approval of occupancy permits, and shall
be a standing condition of occupancy.
GEO-3. A geotechnical study shall be prepared for the project site prior to site development. This
report shall include an analysis of the liquefaction potential of the underlying materials according to
the most current liquefaction analysis procedures. If the site is confirmed to be in an area prone to
seismically-induced liquefaction, appropriate techniques to minimize liquefaction potential shall be
prescribed and implemented. All on-site structures, transportation infrastructure and subgrades shall
comply with applicable methods of State and Local Building Codes and all transportation
infrastructure shall comply with the most current California Department of Transportation design
standards.
Suitable measures to reduce liquefaction impacts could include one or more of the following
techniques, as determined by a registered geotechnical engineer:
• specialized design of foundations by a structural engineer;
• removal or treatment of liquefiable soils to reduce the potential for liquefaction;
• drainage to lower the groundwater table to below the level of liquefiable soil;
• in-situ densification of soils or other alterations to the ground characteristics; or
• other alterations to the ground characteristics.
GEO-4. The Site Geotechnical Investigation shall include an evaluation of the potential for soil
settlement beneath the project site.
If the project site is identified to be in a high potential for settlement zone based on the Site
Geotechnical Investigation, the building foundations, transportation infrastructure and subgrades
shall be designed by a structural engineer to withstand the existing conditions, or the site shall be
graded in such a manner as to address the condition. Suitable measures to reduce settlement impacts
could include one or more of the following techniques, as determined by a qualified geotechnical
engineer:
• excavation and recompaction of on-site or imported soils;
• treatment of existing soils by mixing a chemical grout into the soils prior to recompaction; or
• foundation design that can accommodate certain amounts of differential settlement such as
post tensional slab and/or ribbed foundations designed in accordance with the California
Building Code (CBC).
GEO-5. The Site Geotechnical Investigation shall include an evaluation of the potential for soil
expansion beneath the project site.
If the project site is identified to be in a high expansive soil zone based on the Site Geotechnical
Investigation, the foundations and transportation infrastructure shall be designed by a structural
engineer to withstand the existing conditions, or the site shall be graded in such a manner as to address
Packet Pg 213
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 15
R ______
the condition. Suitable measures to reduce impacts from expansive soils could include one or more
of the following techniques, as determined by a qualified geotechnical engineer:
• excavation of existing soils and importation of non-expansive soils; and
• foundation design to accommodate certain amounts of differential expansion such as post
tensional slab and/or ribbed foundations designed in accordance with the CBC.
GEO-6. The Site Geotechnical Investigation shall include soil parameter analyses to determine the
potential for subsidence at the project site. If the potential for subsidence is found to be significant,
then structural and grading engineering measures shall be implemented to incorporate the results of
the geotechnical study. These measures would be similar to those recommended to mitigate impacts
to soil settlement.
GEO-7. During drought periods, groundwater pumping limitations for the unconsolidated aquifer
underlying the project site shall be assessed and implemented to prevent soil subsidence.
Hazardous and Hazardous Materials Mitigation
HAZ-1. Prior to earthwork and demolition activities, a site-specific Health and Safety Plan shall be
developed per California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) requirements.
The Health and Safety Plan shall include appropriate best management practices (BMPs) related to
the treatment, handling, and disposal of NOA and ACMs. A NOA Construction and Grading Project
Form shall be submitted to the APCD prior to grading activities. All construction employees that
have the potential to come into contact with contaminated building materials and soil/bedrock shall
be briefed on the safety plan, including required proper training and use of personal protective
equipment. During earthwork and demolition activities, procedures shall be followed to eliminate or
minimize construction worker or general public exposure to heavy hydrocarbons and other potential
contaminants in soil and groundwater, and potential ACMs within potential demolished materials.
Procedures shall include efforts to control fugitive dust, contain and cover excavation debris piles,
appropriate laboratory analysis of soil for waste characterization, segregation of contaminated soil
from uncontaminated soil, and demolished materials. The applicable regulations associated with
excavation, removal, transportation, and disposal of contaminated soil shall be followed (e.g., tarping
of trucks and waste manifesting).
Hydrology and Water Quality Mitigation
HYD-1a. Prior to the issuance of any construction/grading permit and/or the commencement of any
clearing, grading, or excavation, the Applicant shall submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) for discharge
from the Project site to the California SWRCB Storm Water Permit Unit.
HYD-1b. The Applicant shall require the building contractor to prepare and submit a Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the City 45 days prior to the start of work for approval. The
contractor is responsible for understanding the State General Permit and instituting the SWPPP
during construction. A SWPPP for site construction shall be developed prior to the initiation of
grading and implemented for all construction activity on the Project site in excess of one (1) acre, or
where the area of disturbance is less than one acre but is part of the Project’s plan of developme nt
that in total disturbs one or more acres. The SWPPP shall identify potential pollutant sources that
may affect the quality of discharges to storm water, and shall include specific BMPs to control the
Packet Pg 214
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 16
R ______
discharge of material from the site. The following BMP methods shall include, but would not be
limited to:
• Temporary detention basins, straw bales, sand bagging, mulching, erosion control blankets, silt
fencing, and soil stabilizers shall be used.
• Soil stockpiles and graded slopes shall be covered after 14 days of inactivity and 24 hours prior
to and during inclement weather conditions.
• Fiber rolls shall be placed along the top of exposed slopes and at the toes of graded areas to
reduce surface soil movement, as necessary.
• A routine monitoring plan shall be implemented to ensure success of all onsite erosion and
sedimentation control measures.
• Dust control measures shall be implemented to ensure success of all onsite activities to control
fugitive dust.
• Streets surrounding the Project site shall be cleaned daily or as necessary.
• BMPs shall be strictly followed to prevent spills and discharges of pollutants onsite (material
and container storage, proper trash disposal, construction entrances, etc.).
• Sandbags, or other equivalent techniques, shall be utilized along graded areas to prevent
siltation transport to the surrounding areas.
Additional BMPs shall be implemented for any fuel storage or fuel handling that could occur onsite
during construction. The SWPPP must be prepared in accordance with the guidelines adopted by the
SWRCB. The SWPPP shall be submitted to the City along with grading/development plans for
review and approval. The Applicant shall file a Notice of Completion for construction of the
development, identifying that pollution sources were controlled during the construction of the Project
and implementing a closure SWPPP for the site.
HYD-1c. Installation of the eight drainage outlets within Tank Farm Creek shall occur within the dry
season (May through October).
HYD-2a. The Applicant shall prepare and submit a Master Drainage Plan. The Master Drainage Plan
shall address cumulative regional drainage and flooding impacts on the Project site, including
construction and stream stability, and set forth measures to coordinate Project drainage with Chevron
Tank Farm remediation and drainage improvements. The Master Drainage Plan shall be implemented
pursuant to the City’s SWMP submitted by the City to the RWQCB under the NPDES Phase II
program and pursuant to the programs developed under the City of San Luis Obispo General Plan
and the City of San Luis Obispo Waterways Management Plan. The Master Drainage Plan shall meet
the following requirements:
• Development of a Construction Drainage Plan that details the control and retention of runoff
for each phase of construction, and clearly displays the location of bioretention facilities, their
retention capacity and relationship to subsurface drainage culverts, alignment of creek and
drainage channels for each phase.
• Ensure that onsite detention facilities, particularly the pocket park/bioswale, are designed to
safely retain flood flows using either gently sloping exterior slopes (e.g., 4:1) or provide safety
fencing around perimeters, consistent with applicable City standards.
• Characterization of drainage from the East-West Channel and conveyance of flows after
removal of this channel.
• Demonstrate peak flows and runoff for each phase of construction.
Packet Pg 215
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 17
R ______
• Be coordinated with habitat restoration efforts, including measures to minimize removal of
riparian and wetland habitats, contouring of creek invert to create pools and removal of trash or
debris as appropriate.
• Location and extent of vegetated Swales designed to reduce sediment and particulate forms of
metals and other pollutants along corridors of planted grasses or native vegetation.
• Location and extent of vegetated Filter Strips, 15-foot wide vegetated buffer strips that also
reduce sediment and particulate forms of metals and nutrients.
The use, location and capacity of Hydrodynamic Separation Products to reduce suspended solids
greater than 240 microns, trash and hydrocarbons. These hydrodynamic separators must be sized to
handle peak flows from the Project site consistent with applicable regulatory standards.
[HYD-2b and HYD-2c do not apply to the Mitigated Project.]
HYD-3a. The Applicant shall prepare a Master Drainage Plan which shall consider cumulative
regional drainage and flooding impacts of the Project, and shall be submitted to the City Public Works
Director for approval and shall meet the following requirements:
• There shall be no significant net increase in upstream or downstream floodwater surface
elevations for the 100-year floodplain as a result of changes in floodplain configuration and
building construction. A significant threshold of a 2.5 -inch increase in floodwater surface
elevations or 0.3 feet per second increase in stream velocities shall be used. This shall be
demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City Engineer or County Public Works Director based
on an Applicant furnished hydraulic analysis.
• There shall be no significant net decrease in floodplain storage volume as a result of a new
development or redevelopment projects. This can be achieved by a zero-net fill grading plan,
which balances all fill placed on the 100-year floodplain with cut taken from other portions of
the floodplain within the Project site of the application, or with cut exported offsite.
Specifically, all fill placed in a floodplain shall be balanced with an equal amount of soil
material removal (cut) and shall not decrease floodplain storage capacity at any stage of a flood
(2, 10, 50, or 100-year event).
A net increase in fill in any floodplain is allowed only when all the conditions listed in the Managed
Fill Criteria of the DDM are also met.
HYD-3b. All bridges, culverts, outfalls, and modifications to the existing creek channels must be
designed and constructed in compliance with the City’s Drainage Design Manual and approved by
the City Engineer, USACE, CDFW, and Central Coast RWQCB, and must meet city standards and
policies.
HYD-4a. A site-specific, geotechnical investigation shall be completed in areas proposed for HDD.
Preliminary geotechnical borings shall be drilled to verify that the proposed depth of HDD is
appropriate to avoid frac-outs (i.e., the depth of finest grained sediments and least fractures) and to
determine appropriate HDD methods (i.e., appropriate drilling mud mixtures for specific types of
sediments). The investigation shall include results from at least three borings, a geologic cross
section, a discussion of drilling conditions, and a history and recommendations to prevent frac-outs.
HYD-4b. A Frac-out Contingency Plan shall be completed and shall include measures for training,
monitoring, worst case scenario evaluation, equipment and materials, agency notification and
Packet Pg 216
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 18
R ______
prevention, containment, clean up, and disposal of released drilling muds. Preventative measures
would include incorporation of the recommendations of the geotechnical investigation to determine
the most appropriate HDD depth and drilling mud mixture. In accordance with the RWQCB, HDD
operations shall occur for non-perennial streams such as Tank Farm Creek only when the stream is
dry, and only during daylight hours. In addition, drilling pressures shall be closely monitored so that
they do not exceed those needed to penetrate the formation. Monitoring by a minimum of two City-
approved monitors (located both upstream and downstream, who will move enough to monitor the
entire area of operations) shall occur throughout drilling operations to ensure swift response in the
event of a frac-out, while containment shall be accomplished through construction of temporary
berms/dikes and use of silt fences, straw bales, absorbent pads, straw wattles, and plastic sheeting.
Clean up shall be accomplished with plastic pails, shovels, portable pumps, and vacuum trucks. The
Frac-out Contingency Plan shall be submitted to the City, and the RWQCB shall review the plan.
HYD-5. A Development Maintenance Manual for the Project shall include detailed procedures for
maintenance and operations of any storm water facilities to ensure long-term operation and
maintenance of post-construction storm water controls. The maintenance manual shall require that
storm water BMP devices be inspected, cleaned and maintained in accordance with the
manufacturer’s maintenance specifications. The manual shall require that devices be cleaned prior to
the onset of the rainy season (i.e., October 15th) and immediately after the end of the rainy season
(i.e., May 15th). The manual shall also require that all devices be checked after major storm events.
The Development Maintenance Manual shall include the following:
• All loading docks and trash storage areas shall be setback a minimum of 150 feet from the top
of the creek bank. No outdoor storage or larger trash receptacles shall be permitted within this
setback area. All trash and outdoor storage areas shall be operated to reduce potential impacts
to riparian areas;
• Runoff shall be directed away from trash and loading dock areas;
• Trash and loading dock areas shall be screened or walled to minimize offsite transport of trash;
• Bins shall be lined or otherwise constructed to reduce leaking of liquid wastes;
• Trash and loading dock areas shall be paved;
• Impermeable berms, drop inlets, trench catch basin, or overflow containment structures around
docks and trash areas shall be installed to minimize the potential for leaks, spills or wash down
water to enter the drainage system and Tank Farm Creek; and,
The developer or acceptable maintenance organization shall complete inspections of the site to ensure
compliance with BMPs and water quality requirements on a semi-annual basis (May 15 and October
15 of each year). A detailed summary report prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer shall be submitted
to the City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department. The requirements for inspection and report
submittal shall be recorded against the property.
Noise Mitigation
NO-1a. Except for emergency repair of public service utilities, or where an exception is issued by
the Community Development Department, no operation of tools or equipment used in construction,
drilling, repair, alteration, or demolition work shall occur daily between the hours of 7:00 PM and
7:00 AM, or any time on Sundays, holidays, or after sunset, such that the sound creates a noise
disturbance that exceeds 75 dBA for single-family residential, 80 dBA for multi-family residential,
Packet Pg 217
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 19
R ______
and 85 dBA for mixed residential/commercial land uses, as shown in Table 3.9-8 and Table 3.9-9 of
the FEIR, across a residential or commercial property line.
NO-1b. For all construction activity at the Project site, noise attenuation techniques shall be
employed to ensure that noise levels are maintained within levels allowed by the City of San Luis
Obispo Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 9.12 (Noise Control). Such techniques shall include:
• Sound blankets on noise-generating equipment.
• Stationary construction equipment that generates noise levels above 65 dBA at the Project
boundaries shall be shielded with a barrier that meets a sound transmission class (a rating of
how well noise barriers attenuate sound) of 25.
• All diesel equipment shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be equipped with
factory-recommended mufflers.
• The movement of construction-related vehicles, with the exception of passenger vehicles, along
roadways adjacent to sensitive receptors shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 AM and
7:00 PM, Monday through Saturday. No movement of heavy equipment shall occur on Sundays
or official holidays (e.g., Thanksgiving, Labor Day).
• Temporary sound barriers shall be constructed between construction sites and affected uses.
NO-1c. The contractor shall inform residents and business operators at properties within 300 feet of
the Project site of proposed construction timelines and noise complaint procedures to minimize
potential annoyance related to construction noise. Noise-related complaints shall be directed to the
City’s Community Development Department.
NO-3a. R-1 and R-2 residential units planned in the area of the Project site within 300 feet of Buckley
Road and R-4 units in the northwest corner of the Project site shall include noise mitigation for any
potential indoor space and outdoor activity areas that are confirmed to be above 60 dBA as indicated
in the Project’s Sound Level Assessment. The following shall be implemented for residential units
with noise levels exceeding 60 dBA:
• Outdoor Activity Area Noise Mitigation. Where exterior sound levels exceed CNEL = 60 dBA,
noise reduction measures shall be implemented, including but not limited to:
• Exterior living spaces of residential units such as yards and patios shall be oriented away from
Project boundaries that are adjacent to noise-producing uses that exceed exterior noise levels of
CNEL = 60 dBA, such as roadways and industrial/commercial activities.
• Construction of additional sound barriers/berms with noise-reducing features for affected
residences.
• Exterior Glazing. Exterior window glazing for residential units exposed to potential noise above
Ldn=60 dBA shall achieve a minimum Outdoor-Indoor Transmission Class (OITC) 24 / Sound
Transmission Class (STC) 30. Glazing systems with dissimilar thickness panes shall be used.
• Exterior Doors Facing Noise Source. According to Section 1207.7 of the California Building
Code, residential unit entry doors from interior spaces shall have a combined STC 28 rating for
any door and frame assemblies. Any balcony and ground floor entry doors located at bedrooms
shall have an STC 30 rating. Balconies shall be oriented away from the northwest property line.
• Exterior Walls. Construction of exterior walls shall consist of a stucco or engineered building
skin system over sheathing, with 4-inch to 6-inch deep metal or wood studs, fiberglass batt
insulation in the stud cavity, and one or two layers of 5/8-inch gypsum board on the interior
face of the wall. If possible, electrical outlets shall not be installed in exterior walls exposed to
Packet Pg 218
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 20
R ______
noise. If not possible, outlet box pads shall be applied to all electrical boxes and sealed with
non-hardening acoustical sealant.
• Supplemental Ventilation. According to the California Building Code, supplemental ventilation
adhering to OITC/STC recommendations shall be provided for residential units with habitable
spaces facing noise levels exceeding Ldn=60 dBA, so that the opening of windows is not
necessary to meet ventilation requirements. Supplemental ventilation can also be provided by
passive or by fan-powered, ducted air inlets that extend from the building’s rooftop into the
units. If installed, ducted air inlets shall be acoustically lined through the top -most 6 feet in
length and incorporate one or more 90-degree bends between openings, so as not to compromise
the noise insulating performance of the residential unit’s exterior envelope.
• Sound Walls. Sound walls shall be built on the north and east property lines of the Project in
Phase 3 that adjoin Suburban Road. The barrier shall consist of mortared masonry. Further,
proposed carports with solar canopies shall be installed around the western and northern
perimeter of the R-4 units, and these units shall be setback a minimum of 100 feet from the
property line.
• Landscaping. Landscaping along the north and east Project site boundaries that adjoin Suburban
Road shall include a line of closely space trees and shrubs with sufficient vegetative density to
help reduce sound transmission.
NO-3b. Buckley Road widening improvements shall include the use of rubberized asphalts or
alternative paving technology to reduce noise levels for sensitive receptors near the roadway
Public Services Mitigation
PS-1. The Applicant shall prepare and implement a brief Security Plan for the Project site. The
Security Plan shall be prepared in consultation with the SLOPD and address public safety concerns
in common or public spaces, parks, bike paths and open space areas, the commercial center, and
parking lots. The Security Plan shall set forth lighting requirements, security recommendations for
parks, open space and trails (e.g., visibility, lighting, etc.), and establish rules for use of the public
areas.
PS-2. Fair Share Contribution. The Applicant shall agree to pay a fair sh are contribution to a future
citywide or area-wide fire protection service development impact fee program. Additionally, the
AASP should be amended to include a fee program to fund the City’s fifth fire station and/or integrate
such fair share fee programs into the proposed Community Facilities District (CFD).
Transportation and Traffic Mitigation
TRANS-1. The Applicant shall prepare a Construction Transportation Management Plan for all
phases of the proposed Project for review and approval by the City prior to issuance of grading or
building permits to address and manage traffic during construction. The Plan shall be designed to:
• Prevent traffic impacts on the surrounding roadway network;
• Restrict construction staging to within the Project site;
• Minimize parking impacts both to public parking and access to private parking to the greatest
extent practicable;
Packet Pg 219
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 21
R ______
• Ensure safety for both those construction vehicles and works and the surrounding community;
and
• Prevent substantial truck traffic through residential neighborhoods.
The Construction Transportation Management Plan shall be subject to review and approval by the
Public Works Director to ensure that the Plan has been designed in accordance with this mitigation
measure. This review shall occur prior to issuance of grading or building permits. It shall, at a
minimum, include the following ongoing Requirements throughout the Duration of Construction:
• A detailed Construction Transportation Management Plan for work zones shall be maintained.
At a minimum, this shall include parking and travel lane configurations; warning, regulatory,
guide, and directional signage; and area sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and parking lanes. The Plan
shall include specific information regarding the Project’s construction activities that may
disrupt normal pedestrian and traffic flow and the measures to address these disruptions. Such
Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department and
implemented in accordance with this approval.
• Work within the public right-of-way shall be reviewed and approved by the City on a case by
case basis based on the magnitude and type of construction activity. Generally, work shall be
performed between 8:30 AM and 4:00 PM. This work includes dirt hauling and construction
material delivery. Work within the public right-of-way outside of these hours shall only be
allowed after the issuance of an after-hours construction permit administered by the Building
and Safety Division. Additionally, restrictions may be put in place by Public Works Department
depending on particular construction activities and conditions.
• Streets and equipment shall be cleaned in accordance with established Public Works
requirements.
• Trucks shall only travel on a City-approved construction route. Limited queuing may occur on
the construction site itself.
• Materials and equipment shall be minimally visible to the public; the preferred location for
materials is to be onsite, with a minimum amount of materials within a work area in the public
right-of-way, subject to a current Use of Public Property Permit.
• Provision of off-street parking for construction workers, which may include the use of a remote
location with shuttle transport to the site, if determined necessary by the City.
• Project Coordination Elements That Shall Be Implemented Prior to Commencement of
Construction:
• The traveling public shall be advised of impending construction activities that may substantially
affect key roadways or other facilities (e.g., information signs, portable message signs, media
listing/notification, and implementation of an approved Construction Impact Mitigation Plan).
• A Use of Public Property Permit, Excavation Permit, Sewer Permit, or Oversize Load Permit,
as well as any Caltrans permits required for any construction work requiring encroachment into
public rights-of-way, detours, or any other work within the public right-of-way shall be
obtained.
• Timely notification of construction schedules shall be provided to all affected agencies (e.g.,
Police Department, Fire Department, Public Works Department, and Community Development
Department) and to all owners and residential and commercial tenants of property within a
radius of ¼ mile.
• Construction work shall be coordinated with affected agencies in advance of start of work.
Approvals may take up to two weeks per each submittal.
Packet Pg 220
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 22
R ______
Public Works Department approval of any haul routes for construction materials and equipment
deliveries shall be obtained.
TRANS-2a. The Applicant shall create and submit a Transportation Improvement Phasing Plan to
the City for review and approval, and shall ensure that construction of the Project follows the
sequential phasing order utilized in the TIS for such improvements. The Plan shall address the timing
and general design of all on and offsite transportation improvements.
[TRANS-2b through TRANS-2f do not apply to the Mitigated Project.]
TRANS-3a. Project roadway and driveway design shall be reviewed and approved by the City to
ensure compliance with City engineering standards and not conflict with intersection functional areas
(e.g., aligning driveways on opposite sides of the roadway, position driveways as far upstream from
intersections as possible).
TRANS-3b. The Applicant shall install traffic calming measures (e.g., speed bumps, pedestrian bulb-
outs, etc.) to control speed levels along internal roadways of the Project site, including the extensions
of Venture Drive, Horizon Lane, and Jespersen Road as required by Policy 8.1.3.
TRANS-4. The Applicant shall prepare an improvement plan for Horizon Lane, Earthwood Lane,
and Suburban Road, including roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian improvements. Improvements shall
be constructed by the Applicant in coordination with the phasing plan required by MM TRANS-2a,
to ensure the Applicant constructs all offsite roadway improvements in a timely manner consistent
with Project phasing. The Project Applicant shall:
• Prepare a detailed improvement plan for Horizon Lane to bring this road into conformance with
City standards for a commercial collector of width between 44 to 60 feet from Suburban Road
to the Project boundary. This plan shall be developed in coordination with adjacent property
owners and the City Public Works Department. Horizon Lane shall not be connected to the
Project site until such a plan has been compl eted and improvements are completed in
accordance with the phasing plan, as part of Phase 4. The section of Horizon Lane/Jespersen
Road from the Project boundary to Buckley Road shall be designated as a residential collector
with a width of roadway between 40 and 60 feet. Construction of the Horizon Road from
Suburban Road to Phase 4 of the Project shall be completed and open to travel prior to the
issuance of any occupancy permit for the 100th residential unit of Phase 4 development.
• Design and improve the intersection of Horizon Lane/Suburban Road to be consistent with City
Uniform Design Criteria and Municipal Code Standards.
• Coordinate with the property owners along Earthwood Lane and City staff to complete the
Earthwood Lane Extension to the Project site as part Phase 1. Earthwood Lane shall be
developed to full City standards for a residential collector. Residential collectors shall be 44 to
60 feet wide as required by the City’s Uniform Design Criteria.
• Coordinate with the property owners along Suburban Road and City staff to prepare a detailed
improvement plan for Suburban Road to bring this road into conformance with City standards.
This plan shall address widening of substandard sections near the east end of this roadway,
completion of missing sidewalk segments, installation of street trees, pedestrian crossings (e.g.,
Suburban Road at Earthwood Lane). In accordance to the City’s Engineering Standards and
Specifications – Uniform Design Criteria, a commercial collector road shall be 44 to 68 feet
Packet Pg 221
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 23
R ______
wide to effectively serve commercial and industrial uses. Improvements from Earthwood Lane
to Higuera Street shall be done as part of Phase 1. Improvements from Earthwood Lane to
Horizon Lane shall be done as part of Phase 4 development, prior to the connection of Horizon
Lane with the Project site.
• Prepare a detailed phasing plan that identifies reasonable timing of such improvements for
Suburban Road, Horizon Lane, and Earthwood Lane. The phasing plan shall be developed in
close coordination with City staff. Construction of the Suburban Road improvements from
Horizon Road from Earthwood shall be completed and open to travel prior to issuance of an
occupancy permit for the 100th residential unit of Phase 4 development. The Suburban Road
improvement from Earthwood to Higuera and the Earthwood improvements on the Project site
and between the Project and Suburban shall be completed prior to issuance of the occupancy
permit for the 1st dwelling unit.
TRANS-5. The Applicant shall pay a pro-rata fair share fee to fund the installation of a roundabout
at the Buckley Road/SR 227 intersection as identified in the SLOCOG SR 227 Operations Study.
The City shall collect the fair share fee and coordinate payment of Project fair share fees to help fund
improvements with the County. Alternatively, the City should consider an amendment of the AASP
impact fee program to establish a new areawide fee to help fund improvements to the intersection to
offset cumulative development impacts. If an amended AASP fee is created by the City it will suffice
as appropriate mitigation for the Project’s participation in these improvements.
TRANS-6. The Applicant shall design and construct the extension of the northbound right turn-lane
at the South Street/Higuera Street intersection, to provide more storage capacity.
TRANS-7a. The Applicant shall design and construct a second northbound left-turn lane at the
intersection of South Higuera Street/Prado Road. The Applicant shall also pay a fair share fee for the
widening of Prado Road Creek Bridge west of South Higuera Street by participating in the citywide
transportation impact fee program.
TRANS-7b. The Applicant shall design and construct a second southbound left-turn lane at the Tank
Farm Road/South Higuera Street intersection.
[TRANS-7c and TRANS-7d do not apply to the Mitigated Project.]
TRANS-8a. The Project is located within the Los Osos Valley Road interchange Sub Area fee
program, and, as such, the Applicant shall pay the Los Osos Valley Road subarea fee, for the cost of
reconstructing the Los Osos Valley Road/U.S. Highway 101 interchange project and improvements
along Los Osos Valley Road. The fee shall be associated with the number of dwelling units and the
square footage of commercial development in the Project site and shall be paid the time of building
permit issuance.
TRANS-8b. In coordination with the Applicant, the City shall retime the traffic signal at Los Osos
Valley Road/South Higuera Street intersection and installation of signage at the South Higuera
Street/Buckley Road intersection (terminus of the Buckley Road Extension) to inform drivers of
additional access to U.S. Highway 101 at Ontario Road. The City Public Works Department shall
ensure the improvements and signage meet safety criteria.
Packet Pg 222
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 24
R ______
TRANS-10a. The Applicant shall design and construct ADA-compliant sidewalks and ADA ramps
on the east side of South Higuera Street to provide continuous paths of travel from the City limit line
to Los Osos Valley Road.
TRANS-10b. The Applicant shall design and construct continuous sidewalks along the east side of
South Higuera Street from Vachell Lane to Los Osos Valley Road including ADA ramps at the
Vachell Lane and South Higuera Street intersection, as illustrated in Figure 3.12-6 in the FEIR.
TRANS-10c. The Applicant shall design and construct continuous ADA-compliant sidewalks and
ADA ramps along the south side of Suburban Road from South Higuera Street to Earthwood Lane.
A receiving ramp shall be installed on the north side of Suburban Road at Earthwood Lane.
TRANS-11. The Applicant shall construct two (2) separated bicycle bridges on each side of Buckley
Road at Tank Farm Creek and provide connections to Buckley Road so as to provide continuous and
safe bicycle routing along Buckley Road. These sections of roadway and creek crossings are under
the jurisdiction of the County and would need to meet both City and County design standards to the
greatest extent feasible and are subject to approval of the City’s Public Works Director.
TRANS-12. The Applicant shall coordinate with SLO Transit to ensure that adequate service would
be provide to the two proposed bus stops and Project area. The bus stops shall be constructed by the
Applicant within the respective phase’s development area. To assure adequate service is provided to
the two new bus stops onsite, the Applicant shall pay for and install any physical improvements to
Earthwood Lane and Suburban Road needed to accommodate future service to the site. In addition,
the proposed transit service onsite shall meet standards stated in Policy 3.1.6, Service Standards.
TRANS-13. The City shall amend the Citywide TIF to include a fee program for the installation of
a second southbound right-turn lane at the Los Osos Valley Road/South Higuera Street intersection,
or create a separate mitigation fee for this purpose. The Applicant shall pay its fair share of the
improvement costs through the payment of the Citywide TIF o r the ad hoc mitigation fees, as
appropriate, to the City prior to issuance of building permits.
TRANS-14. If approved by City Council, the City shall amend the TIF, or some other fee program,
to include a fee program for the installation of a Class I bicycle path from Buckley Road/South
Higuera Street intersection to Los Osos Valley Road/U.S. Highway 101 southbound ramps
intersection, connecting to the Bob Jones Trail. The Applicant shall pay its fair share fee to fund the
improvement through the adopted fee program. Alternatively, the City may establish a special or ad
hoc mitigation fee program to fund the Project’s share of these improvements.
TRANS-15a. The Applicant shall pay its fair share fee to the City to fund the widening of the Prado
Road/South Higuera Street intersection to accommodate a dual left -turn lane, dual thru-lanes, and a
right-turn lane on all approaches. Part of this share may be contained within existing fee programs or
ultimately incorporated into the Citywide TIF program. If amended into the Citywide TIF an impact
fee program, payment of those fees will address project impacts.
TRANS-15b. The Applicant shall pay its fair share mitigation fees to fund improvements to the
intersection of Higuera/Tank Farm Road to provide: 1) extension of the northbound right -turn lane,
2) the installation of a “pork chop” island to assist pedestrian crossings, and 3) widening on the south
Packet Pg 223
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 25
R ______
side of Tank Farm to provide a slip lane for right turning traffic. The City should consider
incorporating this improvement into the AASP Fee program.
TRANS-15c. The City shall review the cross sections for improvements to Tank Farm Road/Horizon
Lane intersection as proposed within AASP to ensure long-term geometrics meet the objectives of
the General Plan. The Applicant shall pay fair share mitigation fees to fund the installation of an
additional northbound right-turn lane or a roundabout at the Tank Farm Road/Horizon Lane
intersection. The City should consider incorporating this improvement into the AASP fee program.
TRANS-15d. The Applicant shall pay its fair share fees to fund the installation of a traffic signal or
a single-lane roundabout at the Buckley Road/Vachell Lane intersection. While not required, this
work may be implemented as part of the Buckley Road extension being installed as part of Phase 2
of the Project. The City should consider incorporating this improvement into the AASP fee program.
Utilities Mitigation
UT-2. The size, location, and alignment of all on- and offsite water, wastewater, and energy
infrastructure offsite shall be subject to review and approval by the City’s Public Works and Utilities
Departments. The Applicant shall be responsible for constructing all required onsite and offsite utility
improvements and well as for repaving of damaged roadways.
Section 2. Specific Plan Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Development Plan,
and Vesting Tentative Tract Map Approval with Findings & Conditions. The City Council
does hereby approve application GENP 1319-2015; SPEC/ER-1318-2015; SBDV 2042-2015, a
Specific Plan Amendment (to reflect maps, policy language and data consistent with the
Development Plan), General Plan Amendment (to update the Land Use Map, Circulation Map, and
relevant statistical data consistent with the Development Plan), Development Plan, and Vesting
Tentative Tract Map, to allow up to 720 dwelling units, including an 20-unit density bonus
consistent with City requirements, based on the following findings and foregoing Mitigation
Measures, and subject to the following conditions being incorporated into the Vesting Tentative
Tract Map:
Findings:
1. The project area was identified as one of four Specific Plan areas designated for development
when the General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements update were adopted by the City
Council in December 2014. The Avila Ranch Development Plan, which encompasses a portion
of the Airport Area Specific Plan, was prepared to implement this aspect of the General Plan.
2. The Avila Ranch Development Plan and Airport Area Specific Plan as amended are consistent
with policy direction for the area included in the General Plan, specifically Land Use Element
Policy 8.1.6, which identifies the Avila Ranch area as a Special Focus Area (SP-4), subject to
policies for the development of a specific plan and certain broad development parameters and
principles. The Development Plan and Airport Area Specific Plan as amended are also
consistent with all other applicable General Plan policies, as described and analyzed in Section
Packet Pg 224
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 26
R ______
7.0 of the June 28, 2017, staff report to the Planning Commission for this project, and as
discussed further within the Final EIR.
3. The Airport Area Specific Plan Amendment, General Plan Amendment and Rezone allow the
implementation of the Avila Ranch Development Plan by:
• Updating the City’s General Plan and Specific Plan land use maps to reflect the
development pattern included in the Avila Ranch Development Plan;
• Updating the City’s General Plan and Specific Plan circulation maps to reflect the
circulation system included in the Specific Plan; and
• Rezoning the site to be consistent with the General Plan, Specific Plan, and Development
Plan.
4. As conditioned, the design of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the General
Plan and Specific Plan because it is consistent with the Avila Ranch Development Plan, it
respects existing environmental site constraints, will add to the City’s residential housing
inventory, allow for appropriate non -residential development, and provides needed
infrastructure and roadway improvements identified in the City’s General Plan and Airport
Area Specific Plan .
5. The Avila Ranch project was reviewed by various City advisory bodies, including the
Architectural Review Commission, Bicycle Advisory Committee, and Parks and Recreation
Commission, and incorporates input consistent with their direction.
6. The Airport Land Use Commission found the Avila Ranch Development Plan project as
proposed to be consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan.
7. Development will occur consistent with the Vesting Tentative Tract Map and the required
architectural review process, which will allow for detailed review of development plans to
assure compliance with City plans, policies, and standards.
8. As conditioned, the design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements for access
through (or use of property within) the proposed subdivision, and the project is consistent
with the pattern of development prescribed in the Avila Ranch Development Plan.
9. The proposed project will provide affordable housing consistent with the intent of California
Government Code §65915, and in compliance with City policies and the Housing Element.
10. The Tentative Map, as conditioned, will comply with all environmental mitigation measures
prescribed herein, and therefore is consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act,
as implemented through the Avila Ranch Final EIR.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map Conditions:
Planning
1. At the time of submittal of a request for approval of a final map, the subdivider shall provide
Packet Pg 225
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 27
R ______
a written report detailing the methods and techniques employed for complying with these
conditions of approval and the mitigation measures imposed upon certification of the EIR
for the Project.
2. All owners, potential purchasers, occupants (whether as owners or renters), and potential
occupants (whether as owners or renters) shall receive full and accurate disclosure
concerning the noise, safety, or overflight impacts associated with airport operations prior
to entering any contractual obligation to purchase, lease, rent, or otherwise occupy any
property or properties within the airport area consistent with the applicable provisions of the
of the Airport Area Specific Plan and Avila Ranch Development Plan.
3. Prior to final map, County of San Luis Obispo Avigation easements shall be recorded for
each parcel within the development.
4. Prior to the recording of any phase of the final map, the applicant shall enter into and record
an Affordable Housing Agreement with the City, detailing the timing of construction of
affordable units on-site, and with guarantees to ensure timely delivery o f all of the required
affordable housing units. The Affordable Housing Agreement must be included as an exhibit
to the Development Agreement, and include appropriate guarantees to ensure the timely
delivery of affordable housing units, dedication of real property, or payment of in-lieu fees,
consistent with the applicable sections of the Airport Area Specific Plan and Avila Ranch
Development Plan.
5. Pursuant to Government Code §66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify and hold
harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or
proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void
or annul, the approval by the City of this map and its related approvals, and all actions
relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review. The City shall promptly
notify the subdivider of any claim, action, or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the
defense. If the city fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action, or proceeding,
or to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not thereafter be responsible to
defend, indemnify, or hold the City harmless.
Engineering Development Review
Dedications and Easements
6. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private utilities,
water wells, access, grading, drainage, agriculture / open space, slope banks, construction,
public and private streets/alleys, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, common driveways, and
maintenance of the same shall be shown on the final map and/or shall be recorded separately
prior to or concurrent with the recordation of the map, unless a deferral is requested by the
subdivider and granted by the City. Said easements may be provided for in part or in total as
blanket easements.
7. The final map and improvement plans shall show the extent of all on-site and known off-site
offers of dedication. Subdivision improvement plans and / or preliminary designs may be
Packet Pg 226
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 28
R ______
required for any deferred improvements so that dedication limits can be established. These
improvements may include but are not limited to road construction and widening, grading
and drainage improvements, stormwater facilities, utility easements, bridges, bike bridges,
transit stops, bikeways, pedestrian paths, signalized intersections, traffic circles, and
roundabouts.
8. The final map and improvement plans shall clearly delineate the City-County limit line along
Vachell Lane and Buckley Road. The subdivision boundary shall consider said limits. The
map or an additional map sheet may be required to clearly delineate the limits and extent of
some or all of the off-site dedications to further clarify how and where the several mitigation
measures and conditions will be satisfied. Future, concurrent and/or prior recordations may
need to be included on the map, additional map sheet, or improvement plans for reference.
9. The subdivider shall dedicate a 10’ wide street tree easement and public utility easement
(P.U.E.) across the frontage of each residential lot. A 10’ wide street tree easement and 15’
P.U.E. shall be provided across the frontage of each commercial or multi -family lot unless
reduced with the approval of the City and of PGE. Said easements shall be adjacent to and
contiguous with all public right-of-way lines bordering each lot.
10. The subdivider shall include a separate offer of dedication for any offsite easements located
outside the tract boundary and/or map phase if needed for orderly development, circulation,
access, and/or utility extensions. The developer may, at the discretion of the City, be
requested to provide a separate offer of dedication for any easements related to a future
map/development phase where said easement(s) may be required for orderly development
and might otherwise sunset with a map offer only.
11. Prior to and at the time of approval of the first final map for the project, a Community
Facilities District (CFD) or other similar financing mechanism acceptable to the City, shall
be fully operational, and all assessments shall be fully authorized and imposed on the project
site which are necessary to fully fund, in perpetuity, the maintenance of the phased public
improvements to the satisfaction of the City. If necessary, the subdivider shall provide start-
up funding for the CFD in an amount to be determined by the City Engineer in the event
there is insufficient funding for City to maintain the public improvements until full build-
out of the project. Avila Ranch shall include within the Covenants, Conditions and
Restrictions (CC&Rs) required for each subdivision of the Property a requirement that the
Master Homeowners’ Association, and or each Homeowners’ Association for a subdivision
within the Property (each, an “HOA”), shall assume responsibilities to maintain, repair and
insure the following items in the event that such financing mechanism is dissolved or in the
event that the fees, assessments, or taxes generated thereby are repealed or reduced other
than by discretionary action by the City Council. In such event the HOA shall assume
responsibility to maintain, repair and insure for the publicly-owned facilities within the
Property (as to a Master HOA) or subdivision (as to another HOA), including but not limited
to, Parks A through F, H and I, and “Stevenson Park”; landscaped parkways and trees; low-
impact-development treatment facilities; riparian open space, but expressly shall not assume
responsibility to maintain, repair and insure streets, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, regional parks
(Park G), farmed agricultural open space, landscape paseos connecting the public parks,
retaining walls adjacent to the open space corridors, bike paths, bike path bridges and bike
Packet Pg 227
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 29
R ______
path facilities (including bike paths and bike path facilities in the County). Avila Ranch shall
include the City as a third-party beneficiary of these CC&Rs in language acceptable to the
City Attorney, which shall grant the City the right to perform the maintenance, repair and
insurance obligations and to impose assessments against the affected parcels in the event an
HOA fails to perform its obligations under this subparagraph (4).
12. All private improvements shall be owned and maintained by the individual property owners,
a property owner association, or the Homeowner’s Association (HOA) as applicable, or by
a Community Facilities District if specifically identified upon the formation of the CFD.
Private improvements may include but are not limited to streets/alleys, parking lots, walks
and paths, sewer mains/laterals, drainage systems, detention basin(s), lighting, landscape,
landscape irrigation, common areas, pocket parks, and linear park improvements.
13. All stormwater treatment facilities shall be owned and maintained by the Homeowners
Association, Property Owner Association, property owner association, and/or by individual
property owners or by a Community Facilities District if specifically identified upon the
formation of the CFD. All stormdrain facilities shall be private property unless the final map
and subdivision improvement plans specifically designates them as offered to the City and
the City, in fact, accepts maintenance responsibility for them. A separate encroachment
agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney, shall be recorded for any private
stormwater systems, piping, BMP’s, and other components of such systems that are
approved for location within the public right-of-way.
14. A notice of requirements or other agreement acceptable to the City of San Luis Obispo shall
be recorded upon the City’s written request in conjunction with recordation of each phase of
the Final Map to clarify development restrictions, fee payments, conditions of development,
and references to any pertinent conditions of approval related to this map, off-site
requirements, and/or the interaction of each map phase with a future map and/or
development phase.
15. Off-site dedication/acquisition of property for public right-of-way purposes will be
necessary to facilitate orderly development, anticipated build-out improvements, and/or to
satisfy mitigation measures, conditions of approval, or compliance with City Standards and
policies. The subdivider shall work with the City, County of San Luis Obispo, and the land
owner(s) to acquire the necessary rights-of-way. In the event the subdivider is unable to
acquire said rights-of-way, the City Council may consider lending the subdivider its powers
of condemnation to acquire the off-site right-of-way dedication, including any necessary
slope and drainage easements. If condemnation is required, the subdivider shall agree to pay
all costs associated with the off-site right-of-way acquisition (including attorney fees and
court costs). The developer shall confer with the County of San Luis Obispo on any
condemnation processes necessary for rights-of-way within the County.
16. With respect to all off-site improvements, prior to filing of the Final Map, the subdivider
shall either:
a. Clearly demonstrate their right to construct the improvements by showing title or
interest in the property in a form acceptable to the City Engineer; or,
Packet Pg 228
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 30
R ______
b. Demonstrate, in writing, that the subdivider has exhausted all reasonable efforts to
acquire interest to the subject property and request that the City assist in acquiring the
property required for the construction of such improvements and exercise its power
of eminent domain in accordance with Government Code Section 66462.5 to do so, if
necessary. Subdivider shall also enter into an agreement with the City to pay all costs
of such acquisition including, but not limited to, all costs associated with
condemnation. Said agreement shall be in a form acceptable to the City Engineer and
the City Attorney. If condemnation proceedings are required, the subdivider shall
submit, in a form acceptable to the City Engineer, the following documents regarding
the property to be acquired:
i. Property legal description and sketch stamped and signed by a Licensed Land
Surveyor or Civil Engineer authorized to practice land surveying in the State
of California;
ii. Preliminary title report including chain of title and litigation guarantee;
iii. Appraisal of the property by a City approved appraiser. In the course of
obtaining such appraisal, the property owner(s) must be given an opportunity
to accompany the appraiser during any inspection of the property or
acknowledge in writing that they knowingly waived the right to do so;
iv. Copies of all written correspondence with off-site property owners including
purchase summary of formal offers and counter offers to purchase at the
appraised price.
v. Prior to submittal of the aforementioned documents for City Engineer
approval, the Subdivider shall deposit with the City all or a portion of the
anticipated costs, as determined by the City Attorney, of the condemnation
proceedings. The City does not and cannot guarantee that the necessary
property rights can be acquired or will, in fact, be acquired. All necessary
procedures of law would apply.
Transportation and Subdivision Improvements
17. Secondary access is required from all portions and/or phases of the subdivision where more
than 30 dwelling units are proposed. The location and development of the proposed
secondary access shall be presented to the City for review and approval prior to the
preparation of the related improvement plans or final map approval for each subsequent map
or construction phase. Any temporary or permanent emergency access location,
construction, and controls shall be in accordance with the Fire Code, City Engineering
Standards, and shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Fire Department and Public Works
Department.
18. Fire Department access shall be provided for each building construction phase to the
satisfaction of the Fire Chief. Phased street construction shall consider and provide suitable
Packet Pg 229
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 31
R ______
Fire Department hydrant access, circulation routes, passing lanes, and turn-around areas in
accordance with current City codes and standards.
19. All public streets shall conform to City Engineering Standards and the specific plan
including curb, gutter, and sidewalk, driveway approaches, and curb ramps as approved by
the City Engineer. Where conflicts occur between the City Engineering Standards and
concepts identified in the specific plan and/or represented on the tentative map, the City
Engineer shall make the final determination of design approval and/or exceptions.
20. All subdivision improvements shall be consistent with the City Engineering Standards
except where the applicant has requested and been granted a formal design exception by the
City Engineer. Design exceptions shall be requested in a format approved by the City an d
shall be accompanied by the required application and review fee. The applicant shall
summarize the need for the request, alternatives, and may be asked to propose final
construction details, specifications, and minimum construction tolerances/testing for review
and approval by the City Engineer in support of the request. The request shall be approved
by the City Engineer prior to submittal of complete public improvement plans.
21. Final street sections shall be approved in conjunction with the review and approval of the
final project drainage report. The final design shall consider drainage, transitions, and
accessibility.
22. Final traffic circle and roundabout geometry shall be consistent with applicable engineering
standards and design guidelines.
23. The developer shall record a Notice of Requirements with each map phase regarding the
designed and installed traffic calming devices and that the subdivision is not eligible for a
future Residential Parking District or Neighborhood Traffic Management program
processing.
24. The improvement plans shall include a line-of-sight analysis at applicable intersections to
the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. Fence heights and plantings in the areas of
control shall be reviewed in conjunction with the analysis. A separate recorded agreement
or Notice of Requirements for private property owner, HOA, or CFD maintenance of sight
lines may be required as a condition of the City Engineer’s approval of the development
plans.
25. The subdivision improvement plans shall include full on-site and any off-site public and
private improvements as required to satisfy all mitigation measures, specific plan
requirements, and conditions of approval. The plans shall comply with the City Engineering
Standards, Bike Plan, Community Design Guidelines, Cal Trans Highway Design Manual,
Specific Plan, City policies, and applicable County of San Luis Obispo Public Improvement
Standards.
26. Separate plans and permits are required from the County of San Luis Obispo for work or
construction staging within County public rights-of-way. Said plans shall be provided to the
City of San Luis Obispo for review and approval of consistency with the project mitigation
Packet Pg 230
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 32
R ______
measures, conditions of approval, Development Plan, Specific Plan, and conformance with
the subdivision improvements.
27. Unless otherwise specifically approved and accepted for over-sight by the City, all
stormwater BMP’s related to the widening and/or extension of Buckley Road shall be subject
to the review and approval of the County of San Luis Obispo. The encroachment permit
issued for this work will establish additional conditions and restrictions that may require
maintenance responsibilities be provided by the CFD or HOA, in perpetuity.
28. Detailed plans shall be provided for any off-site or out-of-phase improvements in
conjunction with the proposed phasing plans unless preliminary or final designs are needed
for orderly development and/or to substantiate the design of an adjoining phase.
29. Any jurisdictional permits from authorities other than the City, including but not limited to,
those from the Army Corps of Engineers, California Fish and Wildlife Service, and the
Regional Water Quality Control Board shall be obtained prior to the City’s approval of
improvement plans and the Developer’s commencing with work for any construction phase
subject to the jurisdiction of such regulatory agencies.
30. Access rights shall be offered for dedication to the City and/or County of San Luis Obispo
along Buckley, South Higuera, Vachell, Earthwood, Venture, and Jespersen except at
approved driveway locations.
31. The subdivider shall install public street lighting and all associated facilities including but
not limited to conduits, sidewalk vaults, fusing, wiring, and luminaires along all existing and
proposed City streets per City Engineering Standards, and each proposed and existing
intersection with Buckley Road per the County of San Luis Obispo Public Improvement
Standards.
32. Private street lighting may be provided along the private streets/alleys/parking areas, pocket
parks, and linear parks per City Engineering Standards and/or as approved in conjunction
with the final ARC approvals.
33. Street trees are required as a condition of development. Street trees shall generally be planted
at the rate of one 15-gallon street tree for each 35 lineal feet of property frontage. Landscape
plans may include grouping of trees to vary this standard to honor site/public improvements,
achieve visual variety, or to honor line-of-sight corridors within the subdivision. Trees and
other landscaping proposed in the County right-of-way must be approved by County Public
Works, and the encroachment permit will establish maintenance and liability conditions, in
perpetuity.
34. The public improvement plans shall provide a final analysis of the trees to be removed and
trees to be retained. The existing trees located along or across the tract boundary, within
areas of utility work, and/or within vacant lots proposed for future development shall be
specifically identified in those plans as removed or retained. The plan/map submittals shall
include a tree preservation plan and/or notice of requirements attached to the final map. Trees
not previously noted and approved for removal shall be retained unless otherwise
Packet Pg 231
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 33
R ______
specifically approved for removal by the City. A tree preservation plan shall be provided by
a Certified Arborist and approved by the City for any trees to remain or to be relocated.
35. Improvement plans for the entire subdivision, including any off-site improvements shall be
approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Utilities Department, and Fire
Department prior to map recordation. Off-site improvements may include but are not limited
to roadways, sewer mains, water mains, recycled water mains, and storm drain
improvements. Off-site improvements may include off-site access roadways, transportation
improvements, and utility system improvements.
36. A separate demolition permit will be required from the Building Division for the removal of
any existing structures and related infrastructure. Building removals are subject to the
Building Demolition Regulations including the additional notification and timing
requirements for any structure over 50 years old.
37. The improvement plans shall clearly show all existing structures, site improvements,
utilities, water wells, septic tanks, leach fields, gas and wire services, etc. The plan shall
include any pertinent off-site water well and private waste disposal systems that are located
within regulated distances to the proposed drainage and utility improvements. The plan shall
include the proposed disposition of the improvements and any proposed phasing of their
demolition and removal.
38. The map and improvement plans shall show and clarify the extent of all existing public and
private easements. The developer shall provide any additional clarification regarding the use
and disposition of any water wells. Any private water well service piping that crosses or is
proposed to cross an existing or future public right-of-way shall be approved by the City and
shall be covered by an Encroachment Agreement to be recorded in a format approved by the
City. The developer shall provide any additional clarifications, amendments, and/or quit-
claims on any outstanding private easement agreements, as necessary.
39. Street paving shall be phased in accordance with City Engineering Standard 7110 unless un-
phased construction is otherwise specifically approved by the City Engineer. Phased
construction of the new street pavement shall provide for the ultimate structural street section
and pavement life per the City's Pavement Management Plan and City Engineering
Standards. The engineer of record shall detail the phased paving requirement in the public
improvement plans to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
40. The improvement plan submittal shall include a complete construction phasing plan in
accordance with the mitigation measures, conditions of approval, City codes, and standards.
A truck circulation plan and construction management and staging plan shall be included
with any demolition, stockpile, grading, or improvement plan submittal. General truck routes
shall be submitted for review and acceptance by the City. The engineer of record shall
provide a summary of the extent of cut and fill with estimates on the yards of import and
export material. The summary shall include rough grading, utility trench construction, road
construction, AC paving, concrete delivery, and vertical construction loading estimates on
the existing City of San Luis Obispo roadways. The developer shall either: 1) complete
roadway deflection testing before and after construction to the satisfaction of the City
Packet Pg 232
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 34
R ______
Engineer and shall complete repairs to the pre-construction condition, or 2) shall pay a
roadway maintenance fee in accordance with City Engineering Standards and guidelines, or
3) shall propose a pavement repair/replacement program satisfactory to the City Engineer.
The roadway impacts analysis and mitigation strategy shall be approved prior to
commencing with grading or construction.
41. The developer shall acquire and provide a copy of the County as-built or record improvement
plans for Venture Lane and the adjoining improved sections of Vachell Lane. The as -built
condition of improvements and pavement design life analysis shall be approved to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. The subdivision improvement plans shall show and note
any upgrades to Venture and Vachell Lane, the City Engineer determines are required to
meet current ADA and City Engineering Standards prior to acceptance of the improvements.
42. Street lighting, signage, striping, and street signage upgrades may be required per City
Engineering Standards for the intersection of Venture and Vachell. Any required
improvements shall be included in the subdivision improvement plans.
43. Retaining wall and/or retaining wall/fence combinations along property lines shall be
approved to the satisfaction of the Planning Division and shall conform with the zoning
regulations for allowed combined heights or shall be approved through the ARC, Specific
Plan, or separate Fence Height exception process.
44. The ARC plans and public improvement plans shall show the location of the proposed mail
receptacles or mail box units (MBU’s) to the satisfaction of the Post Master and the City
Engineer. The subdivider shall provide a mailbox unit or multiple units to serve all dwelling
units within this development as required by the Post Master. MBU’s shall not be located
within the public right-of-way or public sidewalk area unless specifically approved by the
City Engineer. Contact the Post Master at 543-2605 to establish any recommendations
regarding the number, size, location, and placement for any MBU’s to serve the several
neighborhoods and occupancies.
45. Porous concrete, pavers, or other surface treatments as approved by the City Engineer shall
be used for private parking areas, V-gutters, private curb and gutter, etc. to the extent feasible
within the over-all drainage design for water quality treatment/retention in accordance with
the specific plan and General Plan.
46. The subdivision improvement plans shall show that accessibility to all common areas, linear
parkways, and connecting neighborhood paths/trails is achieved per the ADA and the
California Building Code to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Building Official.
Utilities
47. Potable city water shall not be used for major construction activities, such as grading and
dust control, as required under Prohibited Water Uses; Chapter 13.07.070.C of the City’s
Municipal Code. An annual Construction Water Permit is available from the City’s Utilities
Department. Recycled water is readily available near the intersection of South Higuera and
Suburban Road, and shall be stubbed within the project site with a temporary filling station
Packet Pg 233
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 35
R ______
/ recycled water hydrant assembly before grading operations begin.
48. Prior to issuance of a building permit in phase 1, the development’s recycled water system
shall have: an 8-inch recycled water system along Suburban Road from South Higuera to
Earthwood Lane, and along Earthwood Lane from Suburban Road to Venture Drive.
Subsequent phases of the development will need to add an 8-inch recycled water system
along Venture Drive from Earthwood Lane to Jespersen Road, along Jespersen Road from
the south end of Horizon Lane to Buckley Road, and along Buckley Road from Jespersen
Road to the east boundary of the subdivision.
49. Water flow rates and velocities shall comply with the requirements of the 2016 Potable
Water Distribution System Operations Master Plan. The City of San Luis Obispo shall be
the sole water purveyor for water services within the proposed development, which shall
comply with all municipal code requirements. Prior to issuance of a building permit in Phase
1, the development’s water system shall have: a 12-inch water main extending southerly
along Vachell Lane from South Higuera to Earthwood Lane, along Earthwood Lane from
Vachell Lane to Suburban Road. Phase 1 shall also include a pressure reducing valve (PRV)
station at the intersection of Vachell Lane and Venture, and a second PRV at the intersection
of Earthwood Lane and Suburban Road. Each PRV station shall include a primary and a
secondary pressure reducing valve, a radio survey, telemetry radio, control panel, logic, and
all auxiliary infrastructure for creation of a new pressure zone. Subsequent phases of the
development shall add a 12-inch water main extending along Jespersen Road from Hughes
Lane to Buckley Road, and along Buckley Road from Jespersen Road to the ea st boundary
of the subdivision.
50. Sewer flow rates and velocities shall comply with the requirements of the 2016 Wastewater
Collection System Infrastructure Renewal Strategy. Prior to issuance of a building permit in
Phase 1, the development’s sewer system shall have: an 8-inch corrosion resistant gravity
sewer main extending along Tank Farm Road from the Tank Farm Lift Station to Long
Street; a 6-inch sanitary sewer force-main extending from Tank Farm Road along Long
Street continuing through public roads to the Buckley Lift Station. The Buckley Lift Station
shall be designed to collect and transmit the flow rates of each development phase, meet
scour velocities in the force-main, include a duplex station with pre-rotation basins, a natural
gas stand-by generator, surge control valves, and a block wall around the perimeter of the
station. All associated permits, easements, fees, and appurtenances shall be provided for
construction of a functional lift station. Subsequent phases of the development shall add a
sewer collection system that flows by gravity into the Buckley Lift Station without the use
of siphons, and shall provide additional pump capacity needed at Tank Farm Lift Station for
build out conditions.
51. Separate utilities, including water, sewer, gas, electricity, telephone, and cable TV shall be
served to each lot to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department and serving utility
companies. Fiber-optic communication shall be provided from the existing lift station to the
new lift station and proposed park. All public and private sewer mains/laterals shall be shown
on the public improvement plans and shall be constructed per City Engineering Standards
unless a waiver or alternate standard is approved by the City. The plans shall clearly delineate
and distinguish public and private improvements.
Packet Pg 234
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 36
R ______
52. All proposed utility infrastructure shall comply with the latest engineering design standards
effective at the time of improvement plan approval, and shall have alignments for
maintenance of public infrastructure acceptable to the Public Works Department. All public
utilities shall be within the public right of way, and final alignments of all water and sewer
mains shall be approved by the Utilities Engineer.
53. All existing sewer and water infrastructure impacted by the proposed road improvements
located outside of the tract boundary shall be relocated by the development per the
Engineering Design Standards and to the satisfaction of the Utilities Director.
54. City utilities proposed for location/encroachment within the County portions of Buckley
Road, Buckley Road extension, and Vachell Lane shall be approved by the City and County
via an encroachment permit issued by the County to the developer or City, and prior to
approval of the improvement plans. If an encroachment permit is not issued by the County,
the plans shall be revised to omit said encroachment(s).
55. The subdivision grading and improvements plans shall clearly show the horizontal and
vertical alignment of the existing high pressure gas main for reference. The plans shall honor
the existing easement provisions, line location and protections to the satisfaction of the Gas
Company.
56. Final grades and alignments of all public and/or private water, recycled water, sewer and
storm drains shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and Utilities
Department. The final location, configuration, and sizing of on-site service laterals and
meters shall be approved in conjunction with the review of the building plans, fire sprinkler
plans, and/or public improvement plans.
57. The limit, extent, and method of termination for all public utilities shall be approved for each
map/construction phase to the satisfaction of the City Utilities Engineer. Redundant mains
or mainlines located with limited access for maintenance may need to be redesigned prior to
issuance of a building permit and as directed by the Utilities Engineer. The extension of
mainlines along the subdivision boundary/frontage may be required for orderly development
prior to issuance of a building permit and as a directed by the Utilities Engineer.
58. Unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, the gas main shall be located in a joint
trench in accordance with PUC and utility company standards to provide additional
clearances within the pavement section of all streets to accommodate the several City public
utility mains.
59. The improvement plans shall show the location of all domestic and landscape water meters.
The plan shall include service lateral sizes and meter sizes. Sizing calculations shall justify
service and meter sizing prior to issuance of a building permit and to the satisfaction of the
Utilities Director. Water impact fees related to the irrigation water meter(s) shall be paid
prior to approval of the subdivision improvement plans for each map and/or construction
phase depicting that meter or those meters.
Packet Pg 235
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 37
R ______
60. A final sewer report and supporting documentation for the design of the public sewer mains
shall be approved by the Utilities Department prior to approval of the public improvement
plans. The depth of the off-site and on-site sewer mains shall be approved to the satisfaction
of the Utilities Director. Alternatives to extend the sewer collection system along the
Buckley Road extension from Vachell Lane to South Higuera shall be included in the sewer
report, and sewer easements shall be identified by the developer from the county to intercept
existing sewer mains east of Highway 101.
61. The public improvement plan submittal shall show all existing and proposed overhead wire
utilities. Any existing overhead primary and secondary wiring within the tract boundary shall
be undergrounded in conjunction with the subdivision improvements. Unless otherwise
specifically approved, pole relocation in lieu of undergrounding is not permitted. Off-site
service drops shall be eliminated. The new service feeds for the subdivision shall be
completed by underground wiring without a net increase in utility poles. Terminal end utility
poles shall be located off-site unless otherwise approved by the City.
62. Any widening of streets with existing overhead wire utilities shall include the
undergrounding of the existing wiring. The City Engineer may require replacement
streetlights per City Standards where streetlights exist on wood poles.
63. The developer shall exhaust all reasonable efforts to eliminate or underground the existing
overhead wiring located along the tract boundary. The elimination and/or undergrounding
shall consider existing services and/or utilization equipment to remain. The plan to eliminate,
reduce, or underground the existing services shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City,
Cal Trans, PGE, and billboard easement grantee. Undergrounding service to any existing or
proposed water well shall consider standard farming operations and the depth of deep
ripping. Any proposal for partial undergrounding, waiver, or deferral shall be subject to the
approval of the Community Development Director.
64. Preliminary undergrounding plans for the entire subdivision shall be processed through PGE
and any respective wire utility companies in conjunction with public improvement plan
submittal. The preliminary PGE plans/memo shall be provided to the engineer of record and
the City for review and approval prior to commencing with the PGE final handout package.
The final PGE handout package shall be approved by the engineer of record and City prior
to commencing with construction.
65. Irrigation systems using recycled water shall be designed and operated as described in the
City’s Procedures for Recycled Water Use, including the requirement that sites utilizing
recycled water require backflow protection on all potable service connections. Three sets of
irrigation plans shall be submitted for review during the City’s improvement plan and/or
building permit review process. The public neighborhood park within the 11.55-acre parcel
located in the eastern part of the development can have the option of using a groundwater
well for irrigation, in accordance with the municipal code, in addition to the recycled water
service being provided by the vesting tentative map.
66. The project’s Landscape Plan shall be consistent with provisions of the City’s water
conservation efforts in effect at the time of development, requiring an Estimated Total Water
Packet Pg 236
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 38
R ______
Use (ETWU) below the Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA).
Grading, Drainage, & Stormwater
67. Any permit approvals required from the Army Corps of Engineers, California Fish and
Wildlife Service, or the Regional Water Control Board shall be secured and presented to the
City prior to the approval of any subdivision grading and/or improvements related to the
jurisdictional area for each construction phase. The engineer of record shall review the
permit approvals and any specific permit conditions for compliance with the plans,
subdivision improvement designs, drainage system design/report, and soils report. The
engineer of record shall forward the permits to the City with a notation that he or she has
reviewed the plans and determined that the design of the improvements are in general
conformance with the permits.
68. The public improvement plans submittal shall clarify how any wetlands, creek corridors, and
riparian habitat areas will be preserved to the satisfaction of the Natural Resources Manager.
Include any specific details for the proposed creek crossings in accordance with any
preservation strategies, mitigation measures, and other requirements and needed permits
from agencies with jurisdiction or permitting authority. Sensitive areas shall be staked,
fenced, or otherwise delineated and protected prior to commencing with construction,
grading, or grubbing.
69. The developer shall exhaust reasonable efforts to eradicate and control the expansion of any
known non-native invasive plant species to the satisfaction of the Natural Resources
Manager. These plants may require treatment in advance and prior to commencing with
ground disturbing activities and grading.
70. Expansion index testing or other soils analysis may be required on a lot -by-lot basis for all
graded pads and for in-situ soils on natural lots in accordance with the current Building
Codes or as otherwise deemed necessary by the City Engineer or Building Official.
71. Final pad certifications shall include the certification of pad construction and elevations. The
soils engineer shall certify all grading prior to acceptance of the public improvements and/or
prior to building permit issuance. The certification shall indicate that the graded pads are
suitable for their intended use.
72. Cut and fill slopes shall be protected as recommended b y the soils engineer. Brow ditches,
drainage collection devices, and drainage piping may be required. The public improvement
plans and final map shall reflect any additional improvements and private easements
necessary for slope protection and maintenance. Unless otherwise approved for public
maintenance by the City Engineer, brow ditches and drainage collection devices shall be
maintained by private property owners, a property owner association, CFD, Homeowners
Association, or funded by another Funding Mechanism.
73. A separate easement agreement for the existing unnamed channels, drainages, and creek
corridors shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City. The easement agreement shall be
in a format provided by the City. The agreement shall include the CFD, Homeowners
Packet Pg 237
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 39
R ______
Association, or private property owner maintenance responsibilities, limitations in use
within the easement area, and City access rights for maintenance in an emergency or if the
responsible party fails to maintain.
74. The subdivision improvement plans shall include a complete grading plan to show site
accessibility in accordance with State and Federal regulations for all public and/or private
roads, transit stops, trails, paths, walks, bikeways, parks, and bridges where applicable. The
submittal shall provide additional analysis if site accessibility will not be provided and for
any feature or element where accessibility is purportedly not required. The accessibility
regulations or guidelines in effect at the time of subdivision improvement construction will
be applied.
75. The subdivision improvement plans, grading plans, drainage plans, and drainage reports
shall show and note compliance with City Codes, Standards and Ordinances, Floodplain
Management Regulations, specific plan stormwater provisions, Waterways Management
Plan Drainage Design Manual, and the Post Construction Stormwater Regulations as
promulgated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, whichever pertinent sections are
more restrictive.
76. The final grading/retaining wall designs proposed along the creek corridors shall by
approved to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, Community Development Director, and
Natural Resources Manager. The developer shall exhaust all reasonable efforts to provide
natural slopes, planted rock slopes, gravity walls, stacked rock walls, or other approved
materials. Wall designs shall comply with City Engineering Standards, the Waterway
Management Plan, and City policy/design guidelines. The preferred wall design(s) may
require additional encroachment into the channel and/or adjoining developed lands.
77. The improvement plan submittal shall include a complete grading, drainage, and erosion
control plan. The proposed grading, drainage plan, and reports shall consider the proposed
construction phasing. Historic off-site and upslope watersheds tributary to the area of phased
construction shall be considered. Run-on from all adjoining developed or undeveloped
parcels shall be considered.
78. The final drainage report and improvement plans shall consider the drainage impacts from
both the existing phase 1 construction and build-out run-on from Tract 2943 (Earthwood).
79. The final drainage report and improvement plans shall consider run-on from the developed
parcel at 125 Venture. The plans shall clarify the purpose and intent of the existing partially
failed concrete channel located near the toe of slope along the easterly and southerly property
lines of 125 Venture. The developer shall work with the upslope property owner to resolve
any maintenance issues, shall accept the drainage, or shall notify the City of any alternate
strategy to address any current drainage system failures, concentrate drainage, and erosive
outlet(s).
80. The final drainage report and improvement plans shall consider run-on from the undeveloped
parcel located at the northeast corner of Vachell and Venture. The plans shall clarify how
the historic drainage will be collected and conveyed in an approved manner to a non-erosive
Packet Pg 238
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 40
R ______
outlet. Off-site improvements necessary to re-direct, collect, and/or convey the drainage
shall be included in the subdivision improvement plans.
81. The project plan and reports shall show compliance with the City’s Floodplain Management
Regulations and FEMA requirements. Portions of the project are located within an unstudied
A zone. The required Conditional Letter of Map Revisions Based on Fill (CLOMR -F) shall
be processed and approved by FEMA prior to commencement of construction or placement
of fill within the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA). The final LOMR-F shall be submitted
to FEMA, along with the required Community Acknowledgement form, within 6 months of
the completion of the grading for each pertinent phase of construction. The Community
Acknowledgement form may require the signatures of both the City of San Luis Obispo and
County of San Luis Obispo. The LOMR-F shall be approved by FEMA prior to acceptance
of the final building pad and development grades by the City of San Luis Obispo and prior
to building permit issuance.
82. The revised 100-year flood limits shall be shown and noted on the improvement plans and
an additional final map sheet for reference. The drainage report and final plans shall clarify
the 100-year flood elevations, clearances, and freeboard at all new vehicle bridge,
pedestrian/bike bridge, and any pipe bridge crossings of the creek corridors.
83. The improvement plans shall clarify the extent of improvements at each respective water
well site related to the proposed grading, grade lowering, etc. The plan shall include any
alterations to well head and appurtenant electrical service, pumps, and panel boards. The
plans shall show and note compliance with the City’s Floodplain Management Regulations,
adopted Building Code/Electrical Code, and Department of Water Resources requirements
for protection of the service equipment and the well/groundwater.
84. The engineer of record shall provide a digital copy of the final Hydrologic Engineering
Center’s River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) modeling to the City in accordance with
Section 4.0 of the Waterways Management Plan Drainage Design Manual.
85. The final drainage report, Post Construction Stormwater Regulation compliance strategy,
and improvement plans shall include all required design details. The final reports and O &
M Manual shall consider any need for on-going maintenance. The plan shall include
reasonable provisions for the capture of silt, trash, and debris through pre-basins or other
methods to minimize the impacts to the detention basin(s).
86. The final stormwater reports, plan, and program shall include consideration of solid
waste/trash and floating trash removal from the stormdrain system and BMP’s prior to
discharge to the adjoining creeks and/or waterways. The strategy shall consider any City or
State regulations or guidelines regarding trash removal available at the time of public
improvement plan development and shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
87. The developer shall prepare an Operations and Maintenance Manual for review and approval
by the City in conjunction with the development of any stormwater BMP’s that will be
maintained by the Homeowners Association, Property Owner Association, CFD, or by
Packet Pg 239
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 41
R ______
private property owners. A Private Stormwater Conveyance Agreement shall be recorded in
a format provided by the City prior to final inspection approvals and acceptance of
subdivision improvements.
88. The subdivider/developer shall provide notification to private property owners regarding any
individual maintenance responsibility of any parkway or backyard stormwater BMP’s in
accordance with Section E.2 of the RQWCB Resolution R3-2013-0032. The notification
may be by Notice of Requirements or other method acceptable to the City.
89. The stormwater improvements other than City Standard public storm drain infrastructure
shall be maintained by CFD, private property owners, property owner association, and/or an
HOA. A separate encroachment/hold harmless agreement may be required in conjunction
with certain improvements proposed for location within the public rights-of-way.
90. The final details for any proposed bio-retention facilities or other stormwater BMP’s located
within the public right-of-way shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The
project soils engineer shall review and provide recommendations on any proposed site-
constructed and/or proprietary retention systems. Analysis of impacts to the public
improvements, protection of utilities, and methods to minimize piping and protection of
private properties shall be addressed in the final analysis.
91. The proposed detention basins and any pre-basin shall be designed in accordance with the
Waterways Management Plan Drainage Design Manual. The proposed surface runoff and
drainage from the detention basin(s) shall include a non-erosive outlet to an approved point
of discharge. The outlet(s) design and location should replicate the historic drainage where
feasible. Any off-site detention basin, temporary basin, or other drainage improvements shall
be subject to approval by the City. Any required or proposed off-site grading or drainage
improvements shall be completed within recorded easements or under an appropriate license
or other private agreement.
92. If applicable, the CC&R’s shall entitle the owners of the commercial lots, and any parcels
resulting from the further subdivision of those parcels to annex to the HOA to allow a
common stormwater management strategy for the subdivision, at the option of those owners
unless they will otherwise be self-contained in regards to stormwater requirements. The
subsequent development/re-subdivisions may, at the sole discretion of those developers or
subdividers, annex to the HOA, or demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City how they will
provide storm drainage mitigation through their own development strategies and/or
subdivision designs and their own Homeowners Association/property owner associations.
The association or private property owner shall provide for maintenance of all private
common area drainage channels, on-site and/or sub-regional drainage basins, water quality
treatment and conveyance improvements. The CC&R's shall be approved by the City and
shall be recorded prior to or concurrently with recordation of the Final Map. A Notice of
Annexation or other appropriate mechanism to annex future phases of the subdivisions into
the HOA, including but not limited to any shared regional detention basin, shall be recorded
concurrently with the map.
93. Any existing areas of swale, creek and/or channel erosion shall be stabilized to the
Packet Pg 240
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 42
R ______
satisfaction of the City Engineer, Natural Resources Manager, and other permitting agencies.
The existing channel shall be cleared of any illegal dumping, construction debris, grade level
crossings, or other deleterious material to the satisfaction of the City Natural Resources
Manager.
94. The project soils engineer shall review the final grading and drainage plans and Low Impact
Development (LID) improvements. The soils report shall include specific recommendations
related to public improvements, site development, utility, and building pad/foundation
construction related to the proposed LID improvements. The project soils engineering report
shall be referenced on the final map in accordance with the Subdivision Regulations and
City Engineering Standards.
95. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required in accordance with State and
local regulations. A hard copy of the SWPPP shall be provided to the City in conjunction
with the Public Improvement Plan submittal and subsequent building plan submittals. The
Water Discharge Identification (WDID) number shall be included by reference on all
construction plans sets. An erosion control plan shall be included with the improvement
plans and all building plan submittals for demolitions, grading, and new construction.
96. The project development and grading shall comply with all air quality standards and
mitigation measures. The developer shall provide written notification from the County Air
Pollution Control District (APCD) to the City regarding compliance with all local, state, and
federal regulations including but not limited to the National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) regulations related to Naturally Occurring Asbestos
(NOA) prior to plan approval, permits, and commencing with development grading.
Transportation Division - Public Works Department
97. Unless a design exception is approved by the Public Works Director, the final map shall
conform to City adopted Engineering Standards, Engineering Specifications, Policies and
Plans.
98. Project construction and infrastructure shall be completed in the sequential phase order as
evaluated in the Avila Ranch Final EIR and Transportation Impact Study, or as agreed to
between the City and Developer. If phasing is modified, amendments to the Development
Plan and EIR may be required.
99. The applicant shall submit a final Transportation Improvement Phasing Plan for each final
map development phase of the Project for City review and approval prior to recordation of
the first final map.
100. Buckley Road Extension The Buckley Road Extension from Vachell to South Higuera
Street, which includes a Class I bicycle path to the north side of the road, Class II bicycle
lanes on both sides of the road; improvements to the intersection of Buckley Road at Higuera
Street including widening of Higuera Street for dedicated northbound right turn lane and
southbound left turn lane; installation of a traffic signal with pedestrian crossing devices
(including striping and signage) and streetlights; and improvements to the intersection of
Packet Pg 241
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 43
R ______
Buckley Road at Vachel Lane including widening of Vachel Lane for dedicated southbound
right and left turn lanes, widening of Buckely Road for a dedicated eastbound left turn lane,
and installation of street lights, shall be constructed by the subdivider prior to issuance of
the occupancy permit for the first unit of Phase 2 development. Design and construction of
these improvements shall be initiated by the applicant prior to issuance of building permits
for Phase 2. In conjunction with these improvements, the applicant shall be responsible for
submitting improvement plans for retiming of the traffic signal at South Higuera & Los Osos
Valley Road, and for installation of signage at the South Higuera & Buckley intersection to
inform drivers of additional access to Highway 101 at Ontario Road. Prior to recordation of
the Phase 1 final map, the applicant shall complete the design of these improvements and
exhaust all feasible efforts to acquire the necessary off-site dedications, easements and
agreements for construction, all to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. Please refer
to Engineering Development Review condition on dedications and easements.
101. Earthwood Lane Extension The extension of Earthwood Lane from the project site north
to its existing terminus south of Suburban shall be constructed by the subdivider prior to
issuance of building permits for Phase 1 development. This extension shall be constructed
to full City Standards for a residential collector with a width of 44 to 60 feet. The cross
section for the off-site extension of Earthwood shall be modified in the final map to include
eight-foot Class II bike lanes in place of on-street parking. The applicant shall be responsible
for addition of curb markings, striping and signage to prohibit on-street parking on one side
of the street in order to add Class II bike lanes along the existing segment of Earthwood Lane
south of Suburban. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall complete the
design of these improvements and exhaust all feasible efforts to acquire the necessary off-
site dedications, easements and agreements for construction, all to the satisfaction of the
Public Works Director. Please refer to Engineering Development Review conditio n on
dedications and easements.
The existing section of Earthwood lane shall be restriped to add Class II bike lanes by removing
parking on one side of the street. The striping design shall be determined as part of
preparation of the Public Improvement Plans in consultation with surrounding property
owners.
102. Suburban Road Improvements The subdivider shall prepare a detailed improvement plan
for Suburban Road to bring this road into conformance with City Standards for a commercial
collector road with a width of 44 to 68 feet. Improvements include widening of substandard
sections near the east end of the roadway, completion of sidewalk segments, installation of
street trees, pedestrian crossings, addition of Class II bike lanes, and striping improvements
at the South Higuera & Suburban intersection to extend the length of the westbound left- and
right-turn lanes. Improvements from South Higuera to Earthwood shall be designed and
construction shall be initiated prior to issuance of building permits for Phase 1 development.
Improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for the 1st
residential unit of Phase 1 development. Improvements from Earthwood to
Horizon/Jespersen shall be designed and construction shall be initiated prior to issuance of
building permits for Phase 4 development. Improvements shall be completed prior to
issuance of an occupancy permit for the 100th residential unit of Phase 4 development. Prior
to recordation of the final map for each phase, the applicant shall complete the design of
Packet Pg 242
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 44
R ______
these improvements and exhaust all feasible efforts to acquire the necessary off-site
dedications, easements, and agreements for construction all to the satisfaction of the Public
Works Department. Please refer to Engineering Development Review condition on
dedications and easements.
103. Vachell & Venture, Vachell & Earthwood Ingress and egress to the development in Phase
1 at the intersections of Vachell & Venture and Vachell & Earthwood shall be restricted to
emergency vehicles, transit, bicycles and pedestrians only. Construction of access
restrictions shall be completed by the subdivider and operational prior to occupancy of Phase
1 development, but may also need to be completed during construction periods to mitigate
vehicle intrusion to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. These access restrictions
shall be removed upon completion of the Buckley Road Extension in Phase 2.
104. South Higuera & Vachell Measures to restrict left turns into and out of the intersection of
South Higuera & Vachell shall be constructed by the subdivider after the Buckley Road
Extension is completed under Phase 2 of the Development Plan. Improvements shall be
designed and construction shall be initiated prior to issuance of building permits for Phase 2
development. Improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of the occupancy permit
for the first residential unit of Phase 2 development.
105. Vachell Lane Bike Lanes Unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director, prior
to issuance of building permits for Phase 1, the subdivider shall install Class II bicycle lanes
along Vachell Lane between Buckley and South Higuera. Work within the County right-of-
way shall require an encroachment permit by the County Department of Public Works which
may establish additional conditions.
106. Jespersen Road/Horizon Lane Connection to Suburban The subdivider shall prepare a
detailed improvement plan for the Jespersen Road/Horizon Lane connection between
Suburban Road and the project boundary to bring this road into conformance with City
standards for a commercial collector of width between 44 and 60 feet. This shall include
improvements to the intersection of Suburban and Horizon/Jespersen to be consistent with
City Engineering Standards. Construction of these improvements shall be initiated prior to
issuance of building permits for Phase 4 development and improvements shall be completed
by the subdivider and open to travel prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for the 100th
residential unit of Phase 4 development. Prior to recordation of the final map the applicant
shall complete the design of this improvement and exhaust all feasible efforts to acquire the
necessary off-site dedications, easements, and agreements for construction all to the
satisfaction of the Public Works Department. Please refer to Engineering Development
Review condition on dedications and easements.
107. Buckley Road Frontage Improvements Design and construction of all Buckley Road
improvements along the project frontage from the Tank Farm Creek Bridge to the eastern
site boundary, including but not limited to, a Class I path to the north side of the road and
Class II bike lanes, shall be initiated prior to issuance of building permits for Phase 4
development. Improvements shall be completed no later than the issuance of an occupancy
permit for the 50th residential unit of Phase 4 development.
Packet Pg 243
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 45
R ______
108. Buckley Road Intersection Connections All new intersection connections to Buckley Road
shall include, but not be limited to, widening of Buckley Road at each proposed intersection
to the subdivision for a dedicated left turn lane, widening in accordance with HDM 405.7
for high speed intersections, and installation of street lights. All work shall require an
encroachment permit issued by the County.
109. Buckley Road Bicycle Bridges at Tank Farm Creek. A separate bicycle bridge shall be
constructed on each side of the existing Buckley Road–Tank Farm Creek bridge (two total
bicycle bridges). Improvements shall be constructed concurrently with the extension of
Buckley Road to South Higuera prior to Phase 2.
110. Earthwood & Venture, Jespersen & Venture, Jespersen & Wright Brothers. Single lane
roundabouts shall be constructed by the subdivider at the intersections of Earthwood &
Venture (Phase 1), Jespersen & Venture (Phase 4) and Jespersen & Wright Brothers Way.
(Phase 4) prior to the issuance of building permits for the phase in which each is to be
constructed. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall complete the design of
the roundabouts to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. The final map shall reflect
any lot adjustments resulting from final roundabout design.
111. South Higuera Pedestrian Improvements. The subdivider shall design and construct
ADA-compliant sidewalks and pedestrian ramps on the east side of South Higuera to provide
a continuous path of travel from Vachell Lane to the City Limit. Design and construction of
improvements between Vachell Lane and Los Osos Valley Road shall be initiated prior to
issuance of building permits for Phase 1 development. Improvements shall be completed
prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for the first residential unit of Phase 1 development.
Design and construction of improvements between Los Osos Valley Road and the City Limit
shall be initiated prior to issuance building permits for Phase 2 development. Improvements
shall be completed prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for Phase 2 development.
112. South & Higuera. The subdivider shall design and construct the extension of the
northbound right-turn lane from Higuera to South as illustrated in Figure 3.12-4 of the
project EIR. Design and construction of improvements shall be initiated prior to issuance of
building permits for Phase 1 development. Improvements shall be completed and operational
prior to the issuance of occupancy permits for the first residential unit for Phase 1
development. These improvements may be eligible for credits for project payments of the
Citywide TIF program, as determined by the Public Works Director.
113. South Higuera & Prado Near-Term Improvements. The City will undertake widening of
the Prado Road Bridge and installation of a second northbound left -turn lane at the
intersection of South Higuera & Prado as a capital improvement project. The applicant shall
also contribute a fair share fee for widening of the Prado Road Bridge just west of South
Higuera through payment of applicable Citywide transportation impact fees. If the City
amends the Citywide TIF or AASP impact fee program to include installation of a second
northbound left-turn lane at the South Higuera & Prado intersection, payment of these impact
fees shall suffice as appropriate mitigation for the project’s participation in these
improvements. If the Citywide TIF or AASP impact fee programs are not amended to include
this improvement, the City may establish an ad hoc fee program for that purpose. The
Packet Pg 244
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 46
R ______
applicant shall pay its fair share of the improvement by payment of the amended Citywide
TIF or the ad hoc fee.
114. Tank Farm & South Higuera Near-Term Improvements. The subdivider shall design
and construct the extension of the second southbound left-turn lane from Higuera to Tank
Farm. Design and construction of improvements shall be initiated prior to issuance of
building permits for Phase 1 development. Improvements shall be completed and operational
prior to the issuance of occupancy permits for the first residential unit for Phase 1
development. These improvements are part of the AASP financing plan and may be eligible
for credits or reimbursements, as determined by the Public Works Director.
115. Prior to issuance of building permits, the subdivider shall pay applicable Citywide, Los Osos
Valley Road Subarea and AASP Subarea transportation impact fees.
116. Prior to recordation of the final map for each development phase, the subdivider shall pay
its fair share mitigation costs proportional to each phase for the intersection improvements
prescribed in the project EIR (see Table 29 of Appendix P – Transportation Impact Study).
Additional fair share mitigation contributions for cumulative project impacts are required as
follows:
a. Buckley & State Route 227. The applicant shall pay fair share mitigation fees to fund
the installation of a roundabout at the intersection of Buckley & State Route 227. If
the City amends the AASP impact fee program to include this improvement, this fee
will suffice as appropriate mitigation for the project’s participation in the
improvements at this intersection. The applicant shall pay the applicable impact fees
prior to issuance of a building permit for each unit. If the AASP impact fee program
is not amended to include the improvement, the applicant shall pay its fair share
mitigation cost as prescribed in the project EIR prior to recordation of the final map
for Phase 1.
b. South Higuera & Los Osos Valley Road. The applicant shall pay fair share
mitigation fees to fund the installation of a second southbound right-turn lane at the
intersection South Higuera and Los Osos Valley. If the City amends the Citywide TIF
program to include this improvement, this fee will suffice as appropriate mitigation
for the project’s participation in these improvements and shall be paid prior to
issuance of building permits for each phase. If the Citywide TIF is not amended to
include this improvement, the City may establish an ad hoc fee program for that
purpose and the applicant shall pay its fair share mitigation cost prior to final map
recordation for each phase. The applicant shall pay its fair share of the improvement
by payment of the amended Citywide TIF or the ad hoc fee.
c. South Higuera Class I Path. The applicant shall pay fair share mitigation fees to
fund the construction of a Class I bicycle path from the Buckley Road & South
Higuera intersection to the Los Osos Valley & Highway 101 southbound ramps
intersection connecting to the Bob Jones Trail. If the City amends the Citywide TIF
to include this improvement, this fee will suffice as appropriate mitigation for the
project’s participation in these improvements and shall be paid prior to issuance of
Packet Pg 245
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 47
R ______
building permits for each phase. If the Citywide TIF is not amended to include this
improvement, the City may establish an ad hoc fee program for that purpose and the
applicant shall pay its fair share mitigation cost prior to final map recordation for each
phase. The applicant shall pay its fair share of the improvement by payment of the
amended Citywide TIF or the ad hoc fee.
d. South Higuera & Prado Cumulative Improvements. Prior to issuance of building
permits, the applicant shall pay fair share mitigation fee to the City to fund the
widening of the Prado & South Higuera intersection to accommodate a dual left -turn
lane, dual through lanes, and a right-turn lane on all approaches. Part of this share may
be contained within existing fee programs and may ultimately be incorporated in full
into an amended Citywide TIF program. If amended into the Citywide TIF fee
program, payment of those fees will suffice as appropriate mitigation for the project’s
participation in the improvements at this intersection and shall be paid prior to
issuance of building permits for each phase. If not amended into the Citywide TIF
program, the fair share mitigation fee shall be determined by the City prior to
recordation of final maps and will be adjusted annually based on Engineering News-
Record’s Construction Cost Index (CCI) until final building permits are complete.
Alternatively, the applicant could pay the full fee as part of final map recordation for
each phase of development.
e. South Higuera & Tank Farm Cumulative Improvements. The applicant shall pay
fair share mitigation fees to fund improvements to the intersection of South Higuera
& Tank Farm to provide: 1) the extension of the northbound right-turn lane, 2) the
installation of a “pork chop” island to assist pedestrian crossings, and 3) widening on
the south side of Tank Farm to provide a slip lane for right-turning traffic. If the City
amends the AASP program to include this improvement, this fee will suffice as
appropriate mitigation for the project’s participation in these improvements. If the
AASP program is not amended to include this improvement, the fair share mitigation
fee shall be determined by the City prior to recordation of final maps and will be
adjusted annually based on Engineering News-Record’s Construction Cost Index
(CCI) until final building permits are complete. Alternatively, the applicant could pay
the full fee as part of final map recordation for each phase of development.
f. Tank Farm/Horizon. The applicant shall pay fair share mitigation fees to fund the
installation of an additional northbound right-turn lane or roundabout at the
intersection of Tank Farm & Horizon. If the City amends the AASP program to
include this improvement, this fee will suffice as appropriate mitigation for the
project’s participation in these improvements. If the AASP program is not amended
to include this improvement, the fair share mitigation fee shall be determined by the
City prior to recordation of final maps and will be adjusted annually based on
Engineering News-Record’s Construction Cost Index (CCI) until final building
permits are complete. Alternatively, the applicant could pay the full fee as part of final
map recordation for each phase of development.
g. Buckley/Vachell. The applicant shall pay fair share mitigation fees to fund the
installation of a traffic signal or single-lane roundabout at the intersection of Buckley
Packet Pg 246
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 48
R ______
& Vachell. While not required, this work may be implemented as part of the Buckley
Road extension being installed prior to Phase 2 development. If the City amends the
AASP program to include this improvement, this fee will suffice as appropriate
mitigation for the project’s participation in these improvements. If the AASP program
is not amended to include this improvement, the fair share mitigation fee shall be
determined by the City prior to recordation of final maps and will be adjusted annually
based on Engineering News-Record’s Construction Cost Index (CCI) until final
building permits are complete. Alternatively, the applicant could pay the full fee as
part of final map recordation for each phase of development.
117. Transit Service. The applicant shall coordinate with SLO Transit to ensure that adequate
service would be provided to the two proposed bus stops and project area. The bus stops shall
be constructed by the applicant within the respective phase’s development area and shall
include on-street turnouts per City Standards. The applicant shall design and pay for
installation any physical improvements to Earthwood and Suburban needed to accommodate
future service to the site. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant s hall complete
the design of the bus turnouts to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. The final map
shall reflect any lot adjustments resulting from final bus stop/turnout design. Proposed on -
site transit service shall meet standards stated in General Plan Circulation Element Policy
3.1.6 (Service Standards). Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for the 50th residence of
Phase 1 development, the applicant shall ensure that adequate transit facilities would be
available for the project site.
118. Prior to recordation of the final map for each phase, design shall be completed for in-tract
traffic calming to the approval of the Public Works Director, per Final EIR Mitigation
Measures MM TRANS-3b. The final map shall reflect lot adjustments resulting from
completed traffic calming design, where applicable.
119. As part of final map, the subdivider shall dedicate access easements for potential
pedestrian/bicycle connections at the following locations:
a. Between the Tank Farm Creek Class I path and Earthwood Lane (via access easement
between Lots 7-10).
b. Between Earthwood Lane and the Tank Farm Creek Class I path near the Phase 1
bridge crossing Tank Farm Creek (via access easement between Lots 19-22).
c. Between Earthwood Lane and Tango Way (via access easement through Lot 87 and
lots north of park)
d. Between Bravo Court (via easement through Lot 183).
e. Between Foxtrot Court, Earthwood Lane and Tank Farm Creek (via easement through
Lot 230 park).
f. Between Earthwood Lane and Kitty Hawk Court (via easement through Lot 312 or
318)
g. Between Venture Drive and Kitty Hawk Court (via easement through Lot 341/342)
120. With the exception of local streets, on-street parking shall be prohibited on all new streets
within the plan area.
Packet Pg 247
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 49
R ______
121. The improvement plans shall include striped bike lane buffers along applicable streets with
Class II bike lanes to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department.
122. To minimize traffic impacts, a trip reduction plan and implementation program is required.
The plan shall include at a minimum, a) designation of a coordinator to administer the
program, and b) dissemination of carpool, carshare, bicycling and transit information. The
trip reduction plan information shall be provided to all new occupants as part of home sales,
commercial leases/sales or rental agreements. A draft of the plan shall be submitted for
review as part of the building permit application for Phase 1 development. Occupancy shall
not be granted until the plan has been approved by the Public Works Director.
123. Add a roadway classification sheet to the final map that is consistent with the General Plan
classification system and Avila Ranch project EIR recommendations.
124. The developer shall install continuous sidewalk improvements along Vachell Lane from
Venture northerly to conform to the existing sidewalk improvements. The City Council may
consider exercising its powers of eminent domain to acquire any off-site right-of-way
dedication necessary to complete these improvements as provided in Government Code
section 66462.5.
125. The developer shall design and install a southbound left turn lane on Vachell Lane at Venture
per City Engineering Standards if the improvement is determined to be feasible to the
satisfaction of the Public Works director. If determined to be infeasible this condition is
waived. The City Council may consider exercising its powers of eminent domain to acquire
any off-site right-of-way dedication necessary to complete these improvements as provided
in Government Code section 66462.5.
126. Prior to issuance of building permits for Phase 1 the developer shall design a ramp meter for
the SB 101 On-Ramp at Los Osos Valley Road as identified in the US 101 Corridor Mobility
Master Plan and submit the plans to CalTrans for approval and encroachment permit to
construct. The applicant shall construct the ramp meter within 6 months of CalTrans issuance
of the encroachment permit. The ramp meter shall be constructed prior to occupancy of the
75th unit. The applicants share of this cost is established at 3%, costs above and beyond this
fair share proportion are eligible for crediting against Los Osos Valley Road Interchange
Sub Area Impact fees.
Prior to issuance of building permits for Phase 1 the developer shall also design a ramp meter
for the SB 101 On-Ramp at S. Higuera at identified in the US 101 Corridor Mobility Master
Plan, submit the plans to CalTrans, adequately respond to comments, and receive State
concurrence on the design. If Caltrans does not respond to submittals within 60 working days
this requirement specific to 101 at S. Higuera is considered satisfied.
Natural Resources
127. The developer shall provide the potential for water well irrigation to all areas of the Open
Space/Agricultural zoned and mapped lot(s) to help promote a viable agricultural operation.
The potential for irrigated agriculture shall be pursued unless dryland farming is otherwise
Packet Pg 248
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 50
R ______
approved by the City. Well irrigation shall be available to the designated Agricultural land
to remain prior to the physical and/or practical displacement of the existing water well
supply. The three distinct agricultural areas shall be served by existing proven wells or shall
be provided with a new water well or wells. The existing or proposed well development and
basic irrigation services shall be approved by the City. The irrigation well development plan
shall be reviewed by a geologist and agriculturist and shall be submitted with their respective
recommendations to the City for review and approval. The final development shall be
certified as being in general conformance with the plan and recommendations. The well
water quality shall be acceptable for the intended use or shall be treated to achieve the intent.
The well development shall include but is not limited to well construction, development,
testing, electrical supply, panel board, controller equipment, and pumping equipment. Any
private irrigation system crossing of a public street shall be approved by the City Engineer
and shall be accompanied by an encroachment agreement in a format provided by the City.
128. The Agricultural and Open Space areas shall be delineated and protected prior to
commencing with any demolition, stockpile, subdivision grading, and development. The
delineated areas shall be shown and noted in the SWPPP and subdivision improvement plans
and shall not be used for construction staging, stockpile, or borrow areas unless specifically
approved by the City.
129. The subdivision grading and improvement plans shall include details of the interface
between the agricultural fields/access roads and the adjoining open space, creek corridors,
public roadways, and Class 1 bikeways to the satisfaction of the City. The plan shall include
temporary and appropriate permanent delineation fencing. The plan shall include a detailed
grading and drainage strategy to promote the viability of the agricultural operations and to
protect adjoining public improvements. The submittal shall include a detailed operational
plan and strategy for stabilized ag field access, erosion control, worker parking, and access
controls.
130. Pre-construction surveys for the Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp (VPFS) shall be conducted where
appropriate (in wetland habitat that could be disturbed through development) consistent with
the requirements of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). As a result of
such surveys, ensure that direct or indirect effects to individuals and their habitat are avoided,
consistent with the requirements of the Endangered Species Act through appropriate means.
The USFWS shall be consulted for appropriate action. The Applicant shall obtain a
Biological Opinion from the USFWS and any additional authorization required by other
regulatory agencies prior to the commencement of work within or immediately adjacent to
potential suitable habitat.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________, and
on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this _____ day of ____________ 2017.
Packet Pg 249
15
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 51
R ______
____________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of
San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
Packet Pg 250
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
52
Exhibit 1
SECTION 1. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo considers and relies on the Final Environmental Impact
Report (EIR; State Clearinghouse Number 2015081034) for the Avila Ranch Development Plan in
determining to carry out the Project. The Avila Ranch Development Plan includes a General Plan
Amendment, amendments to the Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP), and a Vesting Tract Map (VTM), as
described in the Final EIR Project description for the development of the 150-acre Project site. (“Project”).
The Final EIR consists of the Draft EIR, responses to comments on the Draft EIR, a list of persons and
agencies commenting on the Draft EIR, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and technical
appendices. The City Council has received, reviewed, considered, and relied on the information contained
in the Final EIR, as well as information provided at hearings and submissions of testimony from official
participating agencies, the public, and other agencies and organizations.
Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR]) and Section 21081
of the Public Resources Code require a lead agency to adopt findings for each significant environmental
impact disclosed in an EIR. Specifically, for each significant impact, the lead agency must find that:
• Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR;
• Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency
and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or
can and should be adopted by that agency; or
• Specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations, including provision of
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make the mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible.
The California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15091(b) requires that the City’s findings be
supported by substantial evidence in the record. Accordingly, the Lead Agency’s record consists of the
following, which are located at the City Community Development Department office, San Luis Obispo,
California:
• Documentary and oral evidence, testimony and staff comments and responses received and
reviewed by the Lead Agency during public review and the public hearings on the Avila Ranch
Development Project.
• The City of San Luis Obispo Avila Ranch Development Project Final Environmental Impact Report
(June 2017).
In addition to making a finding for each significant impact, if the lead agency approves a project without
mitigating all of the significant impacts, it must prepare a statement of overriding considerations, in which
it balances the benefits of the project against the unavoidable environmental risks. The statement of
overriding considerations must explain the social, economic, or other reasons for approving the project
despite its environmental impacts (14 CCR 15093, Pub. Res. Code 21081).
This document contains the findings and statement of overriding considerations for the approval of the
Avila Ranch Development Plan and reflects the City’s independent judgment. This document incorporates
by reference the Final EIR. The EIR, specific plan, and other portions of the administrative record are
available for review at:
City of San Luis Obispo
Packet Pg 251
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
53
Exhibit 1
Community Development Department
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Contact: Doug Davidson
(805) 781-7177
Having received, reviewed and considered the foregoing information, as well as any and all information in
the record, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo hereby makes these Findings pursuant to, and
in accordance with, Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code.
SECTION 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
As required by the City General Plan, the Avila Ranch Development Plan is intended to contain policies
and standards that will facilitate appropriate development of land, protection of open space, and provision
of adequate public facilities. The overall objective of the Avila Ranch Development Plan is to adopt a
specific plan for the Avila Ranch project site, pursuant to the City General Plan. The City’s objectives for
the Avila Ranch Development Plan include:
1. Development of an economically feasible specific plan that is consistent with, and implements
policies within the City’s LUCE and AASP;
2. Establishment of a complete “linked” community with the inclusion of amenities such as
neighborhood parks and commercial goods and services that can serve the neighborhood;
3. Provision of a variety of housing opportunities for a wide range of socioeconomic groups and
affordability levels;
4. Provision of a well-connected open space network that includes the addition of community gardens,
neighborhood parks, bicycle paths, pedestrian sidewalks, open space buffers, and spaces for
recreational activities;
5. Establishment of an internal transportation and circulation network of collector and residential
roads, Class I and II bicycle paths, and pedestrian sidewalks that is integrated with, and enhances
the regional transportation system;
6. Restoration of Tank Farm Creek with improvements to the riparian creek corridor and
establishment of open space buffers; and,
7. Model sustainable development practices and design features and achieve compliance with
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Neighborhood Development (LEED-ND) Silver
standards and the County of San Luis Obispo’s Emerald certification rating.
B. PROPOSED PROJECT (MITIGATED PROJECT ALTERNATIVE)
The Applicant intends to seek approval of the version of the Avila Ranch Development Plan studied in the
Mitigated Project Alternative (MPA) (described and analyzed in Section 5.4.2.2 of the EIR) rather than the
original proposed Project. Similar to the proposed Project, the MPA consists of a General Plan Amendment,
and AASP Amendment, and a Vesting Tract Map (VTM) for a 150-acre Project site. A comparison of the
MPA to the original proposed Project is located in Table 5-1 of the FEIR. The MPA would also address a
Development Agreement/Memorandum of Understanding, which provides a mechanism for Project
implementation. The Avila Ranch Development Plan is intended to be consistent with the development
parameters described in the City’s Land Use and Circulation Element (adopted in December 2014). The
MPA includes construction of up to 720 residential units and 15,000 square feet of commercial
Packet Pg 252
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
54
Exhibit 1
development, with a portion of the site preserved for agriculture and open space uses. In addition, the MPA
would include the following features, which were either previously required as mitigation for significant
impacts under the Project or have been included as design features to enhance consistency with applicable
plans and policies; more specifically, the following features have been included as aspects of the MPA to
reduce or avoid impacts attributed to realignment of Tank Farm Creek or phasing of transportation and
circulation improvements:
1. The North-South Tank Farm Creek Segment alignment would be retained and widened to
accommodate flood flows to reduce impacts to riparian habitat, rather than realignment and
extension of Tank Farm Creek through the site under the proposed Project (removes the need for
MM BIO-2f and MM BIO-3e).
2. The East-West Channel alignment would be retained to reduce hydrological impacts and preserve
in-channel wetland habitat, rather than removing the channel under the proposed Project (removes
the need for MM HYD-2c).
3. Creek/riparian buffer setbacks would be established at 35 feet, with a minimum 20-foot buffer
along no more than 700 linear feet to improve habitat and the wildlife corridor, rather than a general
varying 5 – 25-foot setback under the proposed Project.
4. The Tank Farm Creek Class I Bicycle Path would be set back a minimum of 35 feet from the top
of the creek bank/riparian canopy with a 20-foot minimum setback along no more than 700 linear
to improve habitat and the wildlife corridor, rather than allowing the Tank Farm Creek Class I
Bicycle Path within the creek/riparian buffer under the proposed Project.
5. Retaining/flood walls would be setback along the east side of the creek at the toe of the slope along
the creek corridor to improve erosion protection and bio-filtration for runoff, rather than not
including any retaining/flood walls along Tank Farm Creek under the proposed Project.
6. Implement turn restrictions on Vachell Lane/South Higuera Street under Phase 2 after the Buckley
Road Extension is completed (removes the need for MM TRANS-2b).
7. Restricted ingress and egress during Phase 1 at the Project site border on Venture Drive and the
Vachell Lane/Earthwood Lane intersection, which would be removed under Phase 2, concurrent
with the Buckley Road Extension (removes the need for MM TRANS-2c).
8. Construction of an interim bus turn-around location within the Project site or other measures as
deemed appropriate by the City to accommodate this interim transit access due to required site
access limitations during Phase 1 construction; the roundabout at Venture Drive/Earthwood Lane
has been designed to serve this purpose and no interim improvements should be needed (removes
the need for MM TRANS-2c).
9. Construction of Class II bicycle lanes that connect to the regional bicycle network along the entire
stretch of Vachell Lane, between Buckley Road and South Higue ra Street, as part of Phase 1
development (removes the need for MM TRANS-2d).
10. Construction of Buckley Road frontage improvements from Tank Farm Creek to Phase 1
development from Vachell Lane to the Class II bicycle lane to bicycle path diversion, Phase 5 from
the diversion up to and including the Jesperson/Buckley intersection, and the remaining portion
with Phase 6 (removes the need for MM TRANS-2f).
11. Extension of the Jespersen Road/Horizon Lane connection as well as improvements to bring this
road segment to City standards for a residential collector as part of Phase 4 (removes the need for
MM TRANS-2e).
The Avila Ranch Development Plan under the MPA is proposed to be constructed in six phases. Phases 1,
2, and 3 would consist of development of 422 R-2 and R-4 residential units, along with Project site
preparation/grading, and utility and infrastructure improvements, with construction planned to begin in
2020 and anticipated to be completed by 2025. In addition, Phase 3 would include development of the
Interim Fire Station to provide service to the Project site and vicinity pending completion of City Fire
Station 5. Phases 4 and 5 would include development of the remaining 298 R-3 and R-1 residential units,
Packet Pg 253
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
55
Exhibit 1
while Phase 6 would consist primarily of build out of commercial development, with construction planned
to begin in 2026 and anticipated to be completed by 2030. The proposed phasing plan is shown in Figure
2-14 (Project Phasing Plan) of the Final EIR.
These MPA elements are further described in the EIR, specifically Section 5.4.2.2, Mitigated Project
Alternative. The Avila Ranch Development Plan for the MPA is included in the EIR as Appendix Q, and is
available at the following link: http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-
development/planning-zoning/specific-area-plans/avila-ranch. Because the Applicant seeks approval of
the MPA, rather than the Project as originally proposed, the findings below relate to the MPA.
SECTION 3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
A. BACKGROUND
The Final EIR was prepared in compliance with CEQA and State CEQA Guidelines. In accordance with
Section 15121 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the purpose of this Final EIR is to serve as an informational
document for the public and City of San Luis Obispo decision makers.
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15182, “where a public agency has prepared an EIR on a specific
plan after January 1, 1980, no EIR or negative declaration need be prepared for a residential project
undertaken pursuant to and in conformity to that specific plan if the project,” as long as the residential
project is within the scope of the EIR, no new environmental effects are anticipated to occur, and no new
mitigation measures are required for the residential project.
In accordance with Section 15088 of the State CEQA Guidelines, Draft EIR was circulated for a 55 -day
public review period that began November 23, 2016 and concluded on January 18, 2017. The original 45-
day comment period was scheduled to end on January 8, 2017, but was extended 10 days. The City held a
public Planning Commission hearing on December 14, 2016, which was continued on January 11, 2017, to
allow for additional time for the public to review the project and to receive public testimony in the form of
verbal comments on the Draft EIR.
In addition, Section 5.0, Other CEQA-Related Discussions, of the Draft EIR was recirculated for a 45-day
public review period that began February 21, 2017 and concluded on April 7, 2017. This section of the
Draft EIR was revised to include an updated discussion of energy use and conservation related to the project.
This recirculation also included the relevant portions of Appendix H as originally contained in the Draft
EIR. It should be noted that as a result of this new discussion, no new significant impacts or mitigation
measures were identified. Pursuant to Section 15088.5(c) of the State CEQA Guideli nes, if the revisions
subject to recirculation are limited to a few portions of the Draft EIR, the lead agency need only recirculate
the portions that have been modified.
Responses to each written and verbal comment that the City received are included in Section 8.0, Response
to Comments of Final EIR. The Draft EIR and Responses to Comments collectively comprise the Final EIR
for the project.
Packet Pg 254
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
56
Exhibit 1
B. IMPACT ANALYSIS
Five categories of impacts are identified in the Environmental Impact Report:
Significant and Unavoidable (Class I) – a significant impact to the environment that remains significant
even after mitigation measures are applied. To approve a project resulting in significant
and unavoidable impacts, the CEQA Guidelines require decision makers to make findings
of overriding consideration that “specific legal, technological, economic, social, or other
considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the
EIR.”
Significant but Mitigable (Class II) – a significant impact that can be avoided or reduced to a less than
significant level with mitigation. When approving a project with significant but mitigable
impact, the decision makers must make findings that changes, mitigation measures, or
alternatives to the project have been incorporated that reduce the impacts to a less than
significant level.
Less than Significant (Class III) – a potential impact that would not meet or exceed the identified
thresholds of significance for the resource area.
No Impact (Class IV) – no impact would occur for the resource area.
Beneficial Impact (Class IV) – a positive effect on the natural or human environment would occur.
SECTION 4. FINDINGS FOR NON-ADVERSE OR BENEFICIAL
IMPACTS OF THE MITIGATED PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
The findings below are for impacts that would not result in adverse environmental effects or have a
beneficial effect on the natural and human environment (Class IV).
The City Council has concluded that the following impacts would not result in adverse effects on the natural
or human environment.
A. POPULATION AND HOUSING
1. Impact PH-2: The construction of 720 units under the MPA would provide additional housing for the
City of San Luis Obispo, having beneficial impacts related to the jobs/housing imbalance. (Refer to
pages 3.10-24 and 5-66 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have a beneficial effect.
Packet Pg 255
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
57
Exhibit 1
SECTION 5. FINDINGS FOR LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE MITIGATED PROJECT
ALTERNATIVE
The findings below are for impacts that are adverse, but would not result in significant effects on the
natural and human environment.
The City Council concluded that the following impacts would result in adverse, but less than significant
effects on the natural or human environment.
A. AESTHETICS
1. Impact VIS-1: Implementation of the MPA would result in impacts to the existing scenic resources
present at the site, particularly due to conversion of agricultural land to urban development, loss of
mature native trees along Tank Farm Creek, and impairment of distant views of Santa Lucia Mountains,
Islay Hill, and Irish Hills from adjacent public roads. (Refer to pages 3.1-21 and 5-44 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
2. Impact VIS-2: The MPA would result in a change in the existing visual character of the site with the
change of the rural character to a commercial and residential neighborhood. (Refer to pages 3.1-25 and
5-44 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
3. Impact VIS-3: Construction of the MPA would create short-term disruption of the visual
appearance of the site for travelers along Buckley Road, Vachell Lane, and Venture Drive. (Refer
to pages 3.1-27 and 5-44 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following measure was included as mitigation for the Project and is considered an
MPA project design feature to reduce visual disruption of the site and proposed development for
travelers along local roadways. City planning staff will confirm incorpor ation of this feature on
plan sets and submittals.
— Mitigation Measure VIS-3 (Project). The Applicant shall include the development of the entire
landscape and open space buffer outside of the URL within Phase 1 of the construction period.
Vegetation within the buffer would provide partial screening of ongoing construction.
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect. The
MPA includes an open space buffer and landscaped berm along Buckley Road that wou ld be
constructed during Phase 1. This would reduce visual impacts from construction within the MPA
site from viewpoints along Buckley Road.
4. Impact VIS-4: The MPA would introduce a major new source of nighttime light, impacting the quality
of the nighttime sky and increasing ambient light. (Refer to pages 3.1-28 and 5-45 of the Final EIR.)
Packet Pg 256
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
58
Exhibit 1
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
5. Cumulative Aesthetic and Visual Resources Impacts: As determined in the LUCE Update EIR, all
development that adheres to applicable General Plan policies would result in less than significant
aesthetic impacts. Therefore, the overall aesthetic impact of cumulative development in the Project
vicinity would be less than significant. Cumulative effects under the MPA would be similar to those of
the Project as described on page 3.1-28 of the Final EIR.
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
B. AIR QUALITY
1. Impact AQ-3: Release of toxic diesel emissions during initial construction and long-term operation of
the Project could expose nearby sensitive receptors to such emissions. (Refer to pages 3.3-42 and 5-49
of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
2. Cumulative Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact: Due to the cumulative nature of greenhouse gas
emissions and the less than significant effects of the project, cumulative greenhouse gas emissions are
considered adverse, but less than significant. (Refer to pages 3.3-51 and 5-55 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
C. CULTURAL RESOURCES
1. Impact CR-1: The MPA would result in adverse impacts to the octagonal silo foundation, historic
feature P-40-038310. (Refer to pages 3.5-15 and 5-56 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
D. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
1. Impact HAZ-2: The MPA would not create a hazard to the public or the environment through the
routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. (Refer to pages 3.6-26 and 5-58 of the Final
EIR.)
Packet Pg 257
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
59
Exhibit 1
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
2. Impact HAZ-3: The MPA site is located within the LUCE defined AOZs and ALUP Safety Areas and
would potentially result in an airport-related safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project
site. (Refer to pages 3.6-26 and 5-58 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
c. Impact HAZ-4: Implementation of the MPA could expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury, or death involving wildfire. (Refer to pages 3.6-28 and 5-58 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
d. Cumulative Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impacts: As described in the LUCE Update EIR,
adherence to applicable General Plan policies and applicable State and federal regulatory requirements
would reduce any cumulative hazards and hazardous materials impacts resulting from buildout of the
City under the General Plan, including buildout of the Avila Ranch Development Plan, to a less than
significant level. Cumulative effects under the MPA would be similar to those of the Project as
described on page 3.6-28 of the Final EIR.
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
E. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
1. Impact HYD-6: The MPA would potentially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with
groundwater recharge. (Refer to pages 3.7-52 and 5-61 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
2. Cumulative Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts: The MPA, in combination with approved,
pending, and proposed development within the City, would not contribute a substantial increase in
development and associated water quality impacts, or alteration of the existing hydrologic environment,
such that the abundance and natural flow of water resources of the area would be diminished. When
properly implemented, water quality requirements of the Central Coast RWQCB and the City and
County of San Luis Obispo would be expected to mitigate any adverse impacts resulting from new
cumulative development. (Refer to pages 3.7-58 and 5-61 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
Packet Pg 258
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
60
Exhibit 1
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
E. LAND USE AND PLANNING
1. Impact LU-1: MPA development would include residential uses located within the LUCE-defined
Airport Overlay Zones (AOZs) that would be consistent with AOZ density and use restrictions and that
would not interfere with airport operations or create safety impacts under recognized state and federal
guidance for airport operations and safety. (Refer to pages 3.8-53 and 5-62 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
2. Impact LU-2: The proposed MPA would include development within ALUP Safety Areas S-1B, S-
1C, and S-2; however, the Project would be potentially consistent with the ALUP. (Refer to pages 3.8-
55 and 5-63 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
3. Cumulative Land Use and Planning Impacts: The proposed MPA, in combination with
pending/future developments, is aligned with the City’s plans for build-out around the year 2057, as
foreseen in the LUCE. All pending/future projects would be required to adhere to City developments
regulations and General Plan policies in order to retain character of the City and mitigate environmental
impacts where feasible. In addition, all pending and future projects would be reviewed for consistency
with the City General Plan and all other applicable regulatory land use actions prior to approval. As
such, cumulative impacts are considered less than significant (Refer to pages 3.8-55 and 5-65 of the
Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
F. NOISE
1. Impact NO-2: Short-term noise construction activities could result in exposure of persons to or
generation of excessive groundborne vibration. (Refer to pages 3.9-27 and 5-66 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
2. Impact NO-4: Development within the ALUP noise contours could cause persons within the MPA site
to be exposed to unacceptable noise levels. (Refer to pages 3.9-33 and 5-66 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
Packet Pg 259
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
61
Exhibit 1
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
3. Cumulative Noise Impacts: Cumulative projects in the area would increase traffic levels and
subsequent noise levels mainly on arterials and major roadways, and t he noise-related impacts to
residential and local streets would be nominal. Implementation of the LUCE Update could cumulatively
increase stationary source noise levels from new development, but because the City’s Noise Element
contains policies and programs that would address and mitigate potential site-specific impacts for
individual projects in the future, and because the MPA would contribute a marginal increase in
stationary source noise, this cumulative impact would be considered less than significant. Cumulative
effects under the MPA would be similar to those of the Project as described on page 3.9-34 of the Final
EIR.
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
G. POPULATION AND HOUSING
1. Impact PH-1: Residential development and associated population growth resulting from the MPA
would not exceed the adopted annual growth rate threshold. (Refer to pages 3.10-22 and 5-67 of the
Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
2. Impact PH-3: The construction of affordable housing units under the MPA would provide additional
affordable housing for the City of San Luis Obispo. (Refer to pages 3.10-26 and 5-67 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
3. Cumulative Population and Housing Impacts: Cumulative buildout permitted under the LUCE
Update would include development of areas within existing City boundaries, as well as identified
expansion areas. The Land Use Element can accommodate over 98 percent of projected demand for
nonresidential square footage under the MPA, proposed cumulative development projects, and
cumulative buildout under the LUCE Update. Therefore, cumulative impacts are considered less than
significant. Cumulative effects under the MPA would be similar to those of the Project as described on
page 3.10-26 of the Final EIR.
c. Mitigation: None
d. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
Packet Pg 260
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
62
Exhibit 1
H. PUBLIC SERVICES
1. Impact PS-3: Development of 720 new homes as part of the MPA would generate increases in
enrollment at public schools (Los Ranchos Elementary, Laguna Middle, and San Luis High). (Refer to
pages 3.11-19 and 5-68 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
2. Impact PS-4: Implementation of the MPA would potentially increase the demand for public parks
beyond current capacity. (Refer to pages 3.11-21 and 5-69 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
3. Cumulative Public Services Impacts: The proposed project and other cumulative development would
increase demand for public services. However, new demand for these services could be met through
existing service availability, planned service improvements, and development project fee requirements.
Cumulative effects under the MPA would be similar to those of the Project as described on page 3.11-
21 of the Final EIR.
c. Mitigation: None
d. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
I. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
1. Impact TRANS-9: The proposed MPA would generate and attract trips to and from U.S. Highway
101, incrementally increasing congestion of the region’s main highway. (Refer to pages 3.12-67 and 5-
73 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
J. UTILITIES
1. Impact UT-1: MPA generated wastewater would contribute to demand for wastewater collection
facilities and remaining capacity of the City’s Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF). (Refer to
pages 3.13-24 and 5-75 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
Packet Pg 261
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
63
Exhibit 1
2. Impact UT-3: MPA-related increases in water use would incrementally increase demand for the City’s
potable water supply. (Refer to pages 3.13-29 and 5-76 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
3. Impact UT-4: The MPA would generate additional solid waste for disposal at the Cold Canyon
Landfill. (Refer to pages 3.13-32 and 5-78 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
3. Cumulative Utility Impacts: As indicated by the LUCE Update EIR, the MPA and other planned
development would not result in any significant or adverse effects on the supply of water, solid waste,
or energy utilities. Therefore, the cumulative impact of this project and pending cumulative projects
within the vicinity on water supply, solid waste management, and the energy utilities would be less
than significant. Further, the pending WRRF upgrades would also increase capacity to handle both wet-
weather and dry-weather flow, which would reduce the impact of cumulative development on the
WRRF’s capacity to sufficiently treat the City’s wastewater to meet RWQCB standard and avoid
periodic spills into San Luis Obispo Creek. Cumulative effects under the MPA would be similar to
those of the Project as described on page 3.13-32 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact would have an adverse, but less than significant effect.
SECTION 6. FINDINGS FOR SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL
EFFECTS OF THE MITIGATED PROJECT ALTERNATIVE THAT HAVE
BEEN MITIGATED TO A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL
The findings below are for impacts that would result in potentially significant effects on the natural and
human environment, but could be reduced to a less than significant level through feasible changes or
alternations to the project or implementation of mitigation measures. When approving a project with
significant but mitigable impacts, the decision-makers must make findings that changes or alterations to
the project have been incorporated that reduce the impacts to a less than significant level.
This section presents the MPA’s significant environmental impacts and feasible mitigation measures.
Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR]) and Section 21081
of the Public Resources Code require a lead agency to make findings for each significant environmental
impact disclosed in an EIR. Specifically, for each significant impact, the lead agency must find that:
• Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR;
• Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency
and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or
can and should be adopted by that agency; or
Packet Pg 262
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
64
Exhibit 1
• Specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations, including provision of
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make the mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible.
Each of these findings must be supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record. This section
identifies impacts that can be fully avoided or reduced to a less-than-significant level through the
incorporation of feasible mitigation measures into the project, as identified in the Final EIR. The impacts
identified in this section are considered in the same sequence in which they appear in the EIR.
A. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
1. Impact AG-2: Development of the proposed MPA would create potential land use conflicts with
continued agricultural operations to the south and east of the Project site. (Refer to pages 3.2-24 and 4-
45 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required to reduce land use conflicts between
existing agricultural uses and the residential and commercial development proposed for the site.
— Mitigation Measure AG-2a. To address potential agricultural land use conflicts, the Applicant
shall coordinate with the City and county to fund installation of fencing and signs along
Buckley Road to minimize potential for increases in trespass and vandalism of adjacent
agricultural areas. Along the south side of Buckley Road, the use of three strand barbwire
fencing would be acceptable. Along the north side of the Buckley Road extension bordering
the Class I bike path, spit rail fencing shall be installed or other fencing acceptable t o the
County.
— Mitigation Measure AG-2b. To reduce the potential for noise, dust, and pesticide drift to affect
future Project residents, the Applicant shall ensure that Project landscape plans include planting
of a windrow of trees and shrubs along the proposed southern landscape berm and eastern
Project site boundary at a sufficient density to buffer the site from surrounding agricultural
operations.
— Mitigation Measure AG-2c. To augment the existing 100-foot agricultural buffer to the
Caltrans property to the west of the Project site, the Applicant shall add a 20-foot
hedgerow/windrow of trees and vegetation along the east side of Vachell Lane.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. The mitigation measures will reduce land use conflicts by buffering the
site from surrounding land uses.
B. AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
1. Impact AQ-4: Construction and operation of the MPA would result in impacts to global climate change
from the emissions of GHGs and would be potentially inconsistent with the City’s Climate Action Plan.
(Refer to page 5-49 of the Final EIR.)
Packet Pg 263
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
65
Exhibit 1
a. Mitigation: To reduce MPA short-term construction and long-term operational greenhouse gas
emissions to level below adopted Climate Action Plan policies and greenhouse gas emission
reduction targets, the following measures are required:
— Mitigation Measure AQ-2a. The Applicant shall include the following:
• Water Conservation Strategy: The Applicant shall install fixtures with the EPA WaterSense
Label, achieving 20 percent reduction indoor. The Project shall install drip, micro, or fixed
spray irrigation on all plants other than turf, also including the EPA WaterSense Label,
achieving 15 percent reduction in outdoor landscaping.
• Solid Waste: The Applicant shall institute recycling and composting services to achieve a 15
percent reduction in waste disposal, and use waste efficient landscaping.
• Fugitive Dust: The Applicant shall replace ground cover of at least 70 percent of area
disturbed in accordance with CARB Rule 403.
• Energy Conservation Strategy: The Applicant shall install additional solar and alternative
energy features (e.g., solar panels on commercial buildings; solar canopies over commercial
parking areas).
— Mitigation Measure AQ-2b. Consistent with standard mitigation measures set forth by the APCD,
Projects generating more than 50 lbs/day of combined ROG + NOx or PM10 shall implement all
feasible measures within Table 3-5 of the Air Quality Handbook.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-10a. The Applicant shall design and construct ADA-compliant
sidewalks and ADA ramps on the east side of South Higuera Street to provide continuous paths of
travel from the City limit line to Los Osos Valley Road.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-10b. The Applicant shall design and construct continuous sidewalks
along the east side of South Higuera Street from Vachell Lane to Los Osos Valley Road including
ADA ramps at the Vachell Lane and South Higuera Street intersection, as indicated in Figure 3.12-
6.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-10c. The Applicant shall design and construct continuous ADA-
compliant sidewalks and ADA ramps along the south side segment of Suburban Road from South
Higuera Street to Earthwood Lane. A receiving ramp shall be installed on the north side Suburban
Road at Earthwood Lane.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-11. The Applicant shall construct two (2) separated bicycle bridges
on each side of Buckley Road at Tank Farm Creek and provide connections to Buckley Road so as
to provide continuous and safe bicycle routing along Buckley Road. These sections of roadway and
creek crossings are under the jurisdiction of the County and would need to meet both City and
County design standards to the greatest extent feasible and are subject to approval of the City’s
Public Works Director.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-12. The Applicant shall coordinate with SLO Transit to ensure that
adequate service would be provide to the two proposed bus stops and Project area. The bus stops
shall be constructed by the Applicant within the respective phase’s development area. To assure
adequate service is provided to the two new bus stops onsite, the Applicant shall pay for and install
a fair share to fund any physical improvements needed to accommodate future service to the site.
In addition, the proposed transit service onsite shall meet standards stated in Policy 3.1.6, Service
Standards.
Packet Pg 264
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
66
Exhibit 1
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. The mitigation measure will reduce the MPA’s greenhouse gas impacts
by reducing water usage; ensuring consistency with the Climate Action Plan’s water usage, solid
waste and transportation goals; reducing the Project’s operational energy usage; and improving
bicycle and pedestrian connections to reduce reliance on automobiles.
C. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
1. Impact BIO-1: Construction activities within the MPA site and Buckley Road Extension site, including
extensive grading, excavation, and fill, would result in permanent and temporary impacts to sensitive
habitats and species, particularly in areas within or near Tank Farm Creek. (Refer to pages 3.4-32 and
5-52 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-1a. Prior to the issuance of any construction/grading permit and/or the
commencement of any clearing, grading, or excavation, the Applicant shall submit a Notice of
Intent (NOI) for discharge from the Project site to the California SWRCB Storm Water Permit Unit.
— Plan Requirements and Timing. Prior to issuance of grading permits for Phase 1 the Applicant shall
submit a copy of the NOI to the City.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-1b. The Applicant shall require the building contractor to prepare and
submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the City 45 days prior to the start of
work for approval. The contractor is responsible for understanding the State General Permit and
instituting the SWPPP during construction. A SWPPP for site construction shall be developed prior
to the initiation of grading and implemented for all construction activity on the Project site in excess
of one (1) acre, or where the area of disturbance is less than one acre but is part of the Project’s
plan of development that in total disturbs one or more acres. The SWPPP shall identify potential
pollutant sources that may affect the quality of discharges to storm water, and shall include specific
BMPs to control the discharge of material from the site. The following BMP methods shall include,
but would not be limited to:
• Temporary detention basins, straw bales, sand bagging, mulching, erosion control blankets,
silt fencing, and soil stabilizers shall be used.
• Soil stockpiles and graded slopes shall be covered after 14 days of inactivity and 24 hours
prior to and during inclement weather conditions.
• Fiber rolls shall be placed along the top of exposed slopes and at the toes of graded areas
to reduce surface soil movement, as necessary.
• A routine monitoring plan shall be implemented to ensure success of all onsite erosion and
sedimentation control measures.
• Dust control measures shall be implemented to ensure success of all onsite activities to
control fugitive dust.
• Streets surrounding the Project site shall be cleaned daily or as necessary.
• BMPs shall be strictly followed to prevent spills and discharges of pollutants onsite
(material and container storage, proper trash disposal, construction entrances, etc.).
• Sandbags, or other equivalent techniques, shall be utilized along graded areas to prevent
siltation transport to the surrounding areas.
• Additional BMPs shall be implemented for any fuel storage or fuel handling that could
occur onsite during construction. The SWPPP must be prepared in accordance with the
Packet Pg 265
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
67
Exhibit 1
guidelines adopted by the SWRCB. The SWPPP shall be submitted to the City along with
grading/development plans for review and approval. The Applicant shall file a Notice of
Completion for construction of the development, identifying that pollution sources were
controlled during the construction of the Project and implementing a closure SWPPP for
the site.
• Plan Requirements and Timing. The Applicant shall prepare a SWPPP that includes the
above and any additional required BMPs. The SWPPP and notices shall be submitted for
review and approval by the City prior to the issuance of grading permits for Phase 1
construction. The SWPPP shall be designed to address erosion and sediment control during
all phases of development of the site until all disturbed areas are permanently stabilized.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-1c. Installation of the eight drainage outlets within Tank Farm Creek
shall occur within the dry season (May through October).
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1a. The Applicant shall prepare and implement a Biological Mitigation
Plan that identifies construction-related staging and maintenance areas and includes Project-
specific construction best management practices (BMPs) to avoid or minimize impacts to biological
resources, including all measures needed to protect riparian woodland along Tank Farm Creek,
minimize erosion, and retain sediment on the Project site. Such BMPs shall include (but not be
limited to) the following:
1. Construction equipment and vehicles shall be stored at least 100 feet away from Tank Farm
Creek and adjacent riparian habitat, and all construction vehicle maintenance shall be
performed in a designated offsite vehicle storage and maintenance area.
2. Prior to construction activities adjacent to Tank Farm Creek, the creek shall be fenced with
orange construction fencing and signed to prohibit entry of construction equipment and
personnel unless authorized by the City. Fencing should be located a minimum of 20 feet
from the edge of the riparian canopy or top of bank, whichever is further from the creek,
and shall be maintained throughout the construction period for each phase of development.
3. In the event that construction must occur within the creek or 20 -foot creek setback, a
biological monitor shall be present during all such activities with the authority to stop or
redirect work as needed to protect biological resources.
4. Construction shall occur during daylight hours (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM or sunset, whichever
is sooner) to avoid impacts to nocturnal and crepuscular (dawn and dusk activity period)
species. No construction night lighting shall be permitted within 100 yards of the top of the
creek banks.
5. Construction equipment shall be inspected at the beginning of each work day to ensure that
no wildlife species is residing within any construction equipment (e.g., species have not
climbed into wheel wells, engine compartments, or under tracks since the equipment was
last parked). Any sensitive wildlife species found during inspections shall be gently
encouraged to leave the Project site by a qualified biologist or otherwise trained and City-
approved personnel.
6. Pallets or secondary containment areas for chemicals, drums, or bagged materials shall be
provided. Should material spills occur, materials and/or contaminants shall be cleaned from
the Project site and recycled or disposed of to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB).
7. All trash and construction debris shall be picked up and properly disposed at the end of
each day and waste dumpsters shall be covered with plastic sheeting at the end of each
workday and during storm events. All sheeting shall be carefully secured to withstand
weather conditions.
Packet Pg 266
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
68
Exhibit 1
8. The Applicant shall implement erosion control measures designed to minimize erosion and
retain sediment on the Project site. Such measures shall include installation of silt fencing,
straw waddles, or other acceptable erosion control devices along the perimeter of Tank
Farm Creek and at the perimeter of all cut or fill slopes. All drainage shall be directed to
sediment basins designed to retain all sediment onsite.
9. Concrete truck and tool washout should occur in a designated location such that no runoff
will reach the creek.
10. All open trenches shall be constructed with appropriate exit ramps to allow species that
incidentally fall into a trench to escape. All open trenches shall be inspected at the
beginning of each work day to ensure that no wildlife species is present. Any sensitive
wildlife species found during inspections shall be gently encouraged to leave the Project
site by a qualified biologist or otherwise trained and City-approved personnel. Trenches
will remain open for the shortest period necessary to complete required work.
11. Existing facilities and disturbed areas shall be used to the maximum extent possible to
minimize the amount of disturbance of undeveloped areas and all construction access roads
and staging areas shall be located to avoid high quality habitat and minimize habitat
fragmentation.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1b. The Applicant shall retain a qualified Environmental Monitor,
subject to review and approval by the City and in consultation with CDFW, RWQCB, and USFWS
to oversee compliance of the construction activities with the Biological Monitoring Plan and
applicable laws, regulations, and policies. The Environmental Monitor shall monitor all
construction activities, conduct a biological resources education program for all construction
workers prior to the initiation of any clearing or construction activities, and provide quarterly
reports to the City regarding construction activities, enforcement issues and remedial measures.
The Environmental Monitor shall be responsible for conducting inspections of the work area each
work day to ensure that excavation areas, restored habitats, and open water habitats in the area do
not have oil sheen, liquid oil, or any other potential exposure risk to wildlife. If any exposure risk
is identified, the Environmental Monitor shall implement measures that could include, but are not
limited to, hazing, fencing, and wildlife removals to eliminate the exposure risk.
In addition, a CDFW-approved biologist shall be present during all construction occurring within
50 feet of Tank Farm Creek, riparian habitat, drainages, and seasonal or permanent wetlands. The
biologist shall also conduct sensitive species surveys immediately prior to construction activities
(within the appropriate season) and shall monitor construction activities in the vicinity of habitats
to be avoided (see also, MM BIO-3 and all subparts below).
The work area boundaries and other off-limit areas shall be identified by the biologist and/or
Environmental Monitor on a daily basis. The biologist and/or Environmental Monitor shall inspect
construction and sediment control fencing each work day during construction activities to ensure
that sensitive species are not exposed to hazards. Any vegetation clearing activities shall be
monitored by the biologist and/or Environmental Monitor.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. Implementation of MM HYD-1a through 1c would help reduce
significant impacts to sensitive biological resources within the creek corridor with implementation
of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and noticing to reduce construction impacts
to water quality. In addition, MM BIO-1a would reduce or avoid construction-related impacts to
sensitive habitats and species, and MM BIO-1b would require a qualified Environmental Monitor
and/ or a California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)-approved biologist to oversee
Packet Pg 267
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
69
Exhibit 1
compliance of the construction activities with the Biological Monitoring Plan and applicable laws,
regulations, and policies. With implementation of the aforementioned mitigation measures, impacts
to biological resources during construction would remain potentially significant but mitigable. (See
FEIR pp. 5-54 through 5-55.)
2. Impact BIO-2. Onsite MPA development would result in permanent loss of habitats within the Project
site, including protected wetlands and riparian areas associated with Tank Farm Creek. (Refer to pages
3.4-39 and 5-52 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1a. The Applicant shall prepare and implement a Biological Mitigation
Plan that identifies construction-related staging and maintenance areas and includes Project-
specific construction best management practices (BMPs) to avoid or minimize impacts to biological
resources, including all measures needed to protect riparian woodland along Tank Farm Creek,
minimize erosion, and retain sediment on the Project site. Such BMPs shall include (but not be
limited to) the following:
12. Construction equipment and vehicles shall be stored at least 100 feet away from Tank Farm
Creek and adjacent riparian habitat, and all construction vehicle maintena nce shall be
performed in a designated offsite vehicle storage and maintenance area.
13. Prior to construction activities adjacent to Tank Farm Creek, the creek shall be fenced with
orange construction fencing and signed to prohibit entry of construction equipment and
personnel unless authorized by the City. Fencing should be located a minimum of 20 feet
from the edge of the riparian canopy or top of bank, whichever is further from the creek,
and shall be maintained throughout the construction period for each phase of development.
14. In the event that construction must occur within the creek or 20 -foot creek setback, a
biological monitor shall be present during all such activities with the authority to stop or
redirect work as needed to protect biological resources.
15. Construction shall occur during daylight hours (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM or sunset, whichever
is sooner) to avoid impacts to nocturnal and crepuscular (dawn and dusk activity period)
species. No construction night lighting shall be permitted within 100 yards of the top of the
creek banks.
16. Construction equipment shall be inspected at the beginning of each work day to ensure that
no wildlife species is residing within any construction equipment (e.g., species have not
climbed into wheel wells, engine compartments, or under tracks since the equipment was
last parked). Any sensitive wildlife species found during inspections shall be gently
encouraged to leave the Project site by a qualified biologist or otherwise trained and City-
approved personnel.
17. Pallets or secondary containment areas for chemicals, drums, or bagged materials shall be
provided. Should material spills occur, materials and/or contaminants shall be cleaned from
the Project site and recycled or disposed of to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB).
18. All trash and construction debris shall be picked up and properly disposed at the end of
each day and waste dumpsters shall be covered with plastic sheeting at the end of each
workday and during storm events. All sheeting shall be carefully secured to withstand
weather conditions.
19. The Applicant shall implement erosion control measures designed to minimize erosion and
retain sediment on the Project site. Such measures shall include installation of silt fencing,
straw waddles, or other acceptable erosion control devices along the peri meter of Tank
Packet Pg 268
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
70
Exhibit 1
Farm Creek and at the perimeter of all cut or fill slopes. All drainage shall be directed to
sediment basins designed to retain all sediment onsite.
20. Concrete truck and tool washout should occur in a designated location such that no runoff
will reach the creek.
21. All open trenches shall be constructed with appropriate exit ramps to allow species that
incidentally fall into a trench to escape. All open trenches shall be inspected at the
beginning of each work day to ensure that no wildlife species is present. Any sensitive
wildlife species found during inspections shall be gently encouraged to leave the Project
site by a qualified biologist or otherwise trained and City-approved personnel. Trenches
will remain open for the shortest period necessary to complete required work.
22. Existing facilities and disturbed areas shall be used to the maximum extent possible to
minimize the amount of disturbance of undeveloped areas and all construction access roads
and staging areas shall be located to avoid high quality habitat and minimize habitat
fragmentation.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1b. The Applicant shall retain a qualified Environmental Monitor,
subject to review and approval by the City and in consultation with CDFW, RWQCB, and USFWS
to oversee compliance of the construction activities with the Biological Monitoring Plan and
applicable laws, regulations, and policies. The Environmental Monitor shall monitor all
construction activities, conduct a biological resources education program for all construction
workers prior to the initiation of any clearing or construction activities, and provide quarterly
reports to the City regarding construction activities, enforcement issues and remedial measures.
The Environmental Monitor shall be responsible for conducting inspections of the work area each
work day to ensure that excavation areas, restored habitats, and open water habitats in the area do
not have oil sheen, liquid oil, or any other potential exposure risk to wildlife. If any exposure risk
is identified, the Environmental Monitor shall implement measures that could include, but are not
limited to, hazing, fencing, and wildlife removals to eliminate the exposure risk.
In addition, a CDFW-approved biologist shall be present during all construction occurring within
50 feet of Tank Farm Creek, riparian habitat, drainages, and seasonal or permanent wetlands. The
biologist shall also conduct sensitive species surveys immediately prior to construction activities
(within the appropriate season) and shall monitor construction activities in the vicinity of habitats
to be avoided (see also, MM BIO-3 and all subparts below).
The work area boundaries and other off-limit areas shall be identified by the biologist and/or
Environmental Monitor on a daily basis. The biologist and/or Environmental Monitor shall inspect
construction and sediment control fencing each work day during construction activities to ensure
that sensitive species are not exposed to hazards. Any vegetation clearing activities shall be
monitored by the biologist and/or Environmental Monitor.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2a. Project designs shall be modified to realign the Tank Farm Class I
bicycle path and relocate manufactured slopes for housing pads in order to create a minimum of a
35-foot creek setback from either the top of the bank of Tank Farm Creek or edge of riparian habitat,
whichever is further, for at least 90 percent of corridor length. No more than 10 percent of the
length of the corridor (700 linear feet) shall have a setback of less than 35 feet, but at least 20 feet
from the top of the bank or edge of riparian canopy, whichever is further. However, in any instance
the creek setback shall be no less than 20 feet from the edge of riparian canopy or top of bank,
whichever is further, consistent with Section 17.16.025 of the City of San Luis Obispo Zoning
Regulations.
Packet Pg 269
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
71
Exhibit 1
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2b. The Biological Mitigation Plan shall provide details on timing and
implementation of required habitat restoration and shall be prepared in consultation with the City’s
Natural Resource Manager and CDFW. A copy of the final plan shall be submitted to the City for
review and approval. The plan shall be implemented by the Project Applicant, under supervision
by the City and Environmental Monitor, and:
1. Characterize the type, species composition, spatial extent, and ecological functions and
values of the wetland and riparian habitat that will be removed, lost, or damaged.
2. Describe the approach that will be used to replace the wetland and riparian habitat removed,
lost, or adversely impacted by the Project, including a list of the soil, plants, and other
materials that will be necessary for successful habitat replacement, and a description of
planting methods, location, spacing, erosion protection, and irrigation measures that will
be needed. Restoration and habitat enhancement shall include use of appropriate native
species and correction of bank stabilization issues. Wetland restoration or enhancement
areas shall be designed to facilitate establishment of wetland plants such as willows,
cottonwoods, rushes, and creeping wild rye.
3. Describe the habitat restoration ratio to be used in calculating the acreage of habitat to be
planted, consistent with MM BIO-2c through BIO-2e below and the findings in the
Biological Report (Appendix I).
4. Describe the program that will be used for monitoring the effectiveness and success of the
habitat replacement approach.
5. Describe how the habitat replacement approach will be supplemented or modified if the
monitoring program indicates that the current approach is not effective or successful.
6. Describe the criteria that will be used to evaluate the effectiveness and success of the
habitat replacement approach.
7. Indicate the timing and schedule for the planting of replacement habitat.
8. Habitat restoration or enhancement areas shall be established within the Project boundaries,
adjacent to and contiguous with existing wetlands to the maximum extent possible.
Habitats suitable for Congdon’s tarplant and other native wetland species shall be created
onsite. If Congdon’s tarplant is found in areas proposed for disturbance, the affected
individuals shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio through seeding in a suitable conserved natural
open space area. A management plan for the species shall be developed consistent with
applicable scientific literature pertinent to this species.
9. Habitat restoration or enhancement sites shall be placed within deed-restricted area(s), and
shall be maintained and monitored for a minimum of five years. If sufficient onsite
mitigation area is not practicable, an offsite mitigation plan shall be prepared as part of the
Biological Mitigation Plan and approved by permitting agencies.
10. The Biological Mitigation Plan shall identify appropriate restoration and enhancement
activities to compensate for impacts to seasonal creek, wetland, and riparian habitat,
including a detailed planting plan and maintenance plans using locally obtained native
species and include habitat enhancement to support native wildlife and plant species.
11. A weed management plan and weed identification list shall be included in the Biological
Mitigation Plan.
12. Habitat restoration or enhancement areas shall be maintained weekly for the first three
years after Phase completion and quarterly thereafter. Maintenance shall include
eradication of noxious weeds found on California Department of Food and Agriculture
Lists (CDFA) A and B. Noxious weeds on CDFA list C may be eradicated or otherwise
managed.
13. Mitigation implementation and success shall be monitored quarterly for the first two years
after completion of each Phase, semi-annually during the third year, and annually the fourth
Packet Pg 270
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
72
Exhibit 1
and fifth years. Annual reports documenting site inspections and site recovery status shall
be prepared and sent to the County and appropriate agencies.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2c. Within the required Biological Mitigation Plan, all temporary and
permanent impacts to riparian trees, wetlands, and riparian habitat shall be mitigated, as follows:
1. Temporary impacts to wetland and riparian habitat shall be mitigated at a minimum 1:1
mitigation ratio for restoration (area of restored habitat to impacted habitat).
2. Permanent impacts to state jurisdictional areas, including isolated wetlands within
agricultural lands and riparian habitat will be mitigated at a 1.5:1 ratio (area of restored and
enhanced habitat to impacted habitat).
3. Permanent impacts to federal wetlands shall be mitigated at a minimum 3:1 ratio (1:1 area
of created to impacted habitat plus 2:1 area of created/enhanced habitat to impacted
habitat).
4. Riparian trees four inches or greater measured at diameter-at-breast-height (DBH) shall be
replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 3:1 (replaced: removed). Trees measured at 24
inches or greater DBH shall be replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 10:1. Willows and
cottonwoods may be planted from live stakes following guidelines provided in the
California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual for planting dormant cuttings and
container stock (CDFW 2010). Permanent impacts to riparian vegetation shall be mitigated
at a 3:1 ratio to ensure no net loss of acreage and individual plants.
5. Replacement trees shall be planted in the fall or winter of the year in which trees were
removed. All replacement trees will be planted no more than one year following the date
upon which the native trees were removed. Replacement plants shall be monitored for 5
years with a goal of at least 70 percent survival at the end of the 5 -year period.
Supplemental irrigation may be provided during years 1 to 3; however, supplemental
watering shall not be provided during the final two years of monitoring.
— Mitigation Measures BIO-2d. Project design shall be modified to preserve at a minimum the
southern 275 feet of the North-South Creek Segment to protect all existing mature riparian
woodland, and the proposed drainage plan shall be altered to convey remaining surface water flows
from areas to the north to this channel.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2e. To minimize impacts to riparian habitat, the Project shall stockpile
sufficient emergent vegetation (e.g., cattails) for later planting in the realigned reach of Tank Farm
Creek. Stockpiled vegetation shall be placed in earthen basins with the roots covered with moist
soil and maintained in a moist condition during construction operations.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2g. A post-construction landscape and restoration report for each phase
shall be prepared by the Environmental Monitor based on as-built drawings and site inspections to
document the final grading, plantings, and habitat restoration activities. The report shall include as-
built plans prepared after restoration, grading, and mitigation habitat plantings are complete. The
as-built plans shall be prepared by landscape and grading contractors responsible for realignment
and restoration within Tank Farm Creek.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2h. Project activities within Tank Farm Creek and drainage channels,
including any tree pruning or removals, any necessary erosion repairs, or culvert removals, shall be
performed when the channel is dry, planned to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Natural
Resource Manager per City Drainage Manual Standards, and be subject to monitoring by the
Packet Pg 271
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
73
Exhibit 1
Environmental Monitor. Upon removal of the existing steel culvert currently used for farm ac cess
across Tank Farm Creek, the channel shall be restored to match conditions immediately upstream
and downstream including channel width, gradient, and vegetation.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2i. To reduce erosion and runoff from all exposed soils, all bare disturbed
soils shall be hydroseeded at the completion of grading for each construction phase. The seed mix
shall contain a minimum of three locally native grass species and may contain one or two sterile
non-native grasses not to exceed 25 percent of the total seed mix by count. Seeding shall be
completed no later than November 15 of the year in which Project activities occurred. All exposed
areas where seeding is considered unsuccessful after 90 days shall receive a second application or
seeding, straw, or mulch as soon as is practical to reduce erosion.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2j. The Tank Farm Creek Class I bicycle path bridge footings for creek
crossings shall be placed outside mapped riparian areas and outside the top of the bank of the
channel invert. The Class I bridges shall be located within areas that have little to no riparian
vegetation. No construction activities or equipment shall occur in the stream channel. The
placement of the bridge and footings shall be indicated on the Development Plan, VTM, and
Biological Mitigation Plan, and shall show the bridges’ placement in relation to existing vegetation
and the creek channel and banks.
— Mitigation Measure AG-1. The Applicant shall establish an offsite agricultural conservation
easement or pay in-lieu fees to a City designated fund dedicated to acquiring and preserving
agricultural land. While the City’s priority is that such agricultural land be acquired in the closest
feasible proximity to the City, mitigation may be implemented using one of the following options:
a. The Applicant shall ensure permanent protection of farmland of equal area and quality,
which does not already have permanent protection, within the City of San Luis Obispo,
consistent with City Policy 8.6.3(C) and AASP Policy 3.2.18. The Applicant shall identify
and purchase or place in a conservation easement a parcel of land of at least 71 acres of
equal quality farmland, or provide in-lieu fees to allow the City to complete such an
acquisition.
b. If no suitable parcel exists within the City limits, the Applicant shall identify and purchase
or place in a conservation easement a parcel of farmland, of equal quantity and quality,
within the City’s Sphere of Influence that is threatened by development of nonagricultural
uses. The parcel shall be placed in an agricultural conservation easement (refer to Figure 2
in the Land Use Element for City Sphere of Influence). The Applicant may also provide
in-lieu fees to allow the City to complete such an acquisition.
c. In the event that no suitable land is available within the City limits or City’s Sphere of
Influence, the Applicant shall identify and purchase or place in a conservation easement a
parcel of farmland, of equal quantity and quality, within the City’s urban reserve or
greenbelt that is threatened by development of nonagricultural uses. This parcel shall be
placed in an agricultural conservation easement (refer to Figure 1 in the Land Use Element
for City Planning Area). The Applicant may also provide in-lieu fees to allow the City to
complete such an acquisition.
d. In the event that no suitable land for an agricultural conservation easement is available for
purchase within the City limits, the City’s Sphere of Influence, or urban reserve or
greenbelt Planning Area, the Applicant shall identify and purchase or place in a
conservation easement a parcel of farmland, of equal quantity and quality, within County
lands (e.g., agricultural lands north and south of Buckley Road) that is considered to be
threatened by the conversion to nonagricultural use. This parcel shall be placed in an
Packet Pg 272
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
74
Exhibit 1
agricultural conservation easement. The Applicant may also provide in-lieu fees to allow
the City to complete such an acquisition. The Applicant shall demonstrate that such land is
as close in proximity to the City as feasible.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-4a. A site-specific, geotechnical investigation shall be completed in
areas proposed for HDD. Preliminary geotechnical borings shall be drilled to verify that the
proposed depth of HDD is appropriate to avoid frac-outs (i.e., the depth of finest grained sediments
and least fractures) and to determine appropriate HDD methods (i.e., appropriate drilling mud
mixtures for specific types of sediments). The investigation shall include results from at least three
borings, a geologic cross section, a discussion of drilling conditions, and a history and
recommendations to prevent frac-outs.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-4b. A Frac-out Contingency Plan shall be completed and shall include
measures for training, monitoring, worst case scenario evaluation, equipment and materials, agency
notification and prevention, containment, clean up, and disposal of released drilling muds.
Preventative measures would include incorporation of the recommendations of the geotechnical
investigation to determine the most appropriate HDD depth and drilling mud mixture. In
accordance with the RWQCB, HDD operations shall occur for non-perennial streams such as Tank
Farm Creek only when the stream is dry, and only during daylight hours. In addition, drilling
pressures shall be closely monitored so that they do not exceed those needed to penetrate the
formation. Monitoring by a minimum of two City-approved monitors (located both upstream and
downstream, who will move enough to monitor the entire area of operations) shall occur throughout
drilling operations to ensure swift response in the event of a frac -out, while containment shall be
accomplished through construction of temporary berms/dikes and use of silt fences, straw bales,
absorbent pads, straw wattles, and plastic sheeting. Clean up shall be accomplished with plastic
pails, shovels, portable pumps, and vacuum trucks. The Frac-out Contingency Plan shall be
submitted to the City, and the RWQCB shall review the plan.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. MM BIO-1a will avoid or minimize impacts to biological resources,
minimize erosion and retain sediment by implementing best management practices. MM BIO -2a
would avoid the potential impacts of manufactured slopes and the Class I bicycle path intruding
into the bank of Tank Farm Creek or its riparian habitat by establishing setbacks for a wider wildlife
corridor. This would also protect the creek and riparian habitat from potential impacts associated
with temporary or permanent loss of habitat, construction impacts, siltation and erosion, and
operational impacts associated with increased human activity. Implementation of MM BIO-2b
through 2c would offset the loss of sensitive habitat and trees and compensates at appropriate
replacement ratios onsite consistent with appropriate agencies, to the maximum extent feasible.
Impacts to riparian vegetation would be reduced within implementation of MM BIO-2d and 2e.
MM BIO-2g would ensure appropriate restoration of riparian habitat. MM BIO -2h would reduce
potential erosion and siltation impacts within the creek. Implementation of MM BIO -2i in
combination with MM BIO-1a and 1b and all subparts, would reduce temporary impacts to
jurisdictional aquatic features from construction activities by requiring work to be completed when
water flow in the creek is dry, and appropriate measures are taken to prevent sedimentat ion. MM
BIO-2j would address potential impacts to Tank Farm Creek from the proposed Class I bicycle
path footings placement. MM HYD-4a and b would address potential impacts of frac-outs.
Implementation of MM BIO-2a through MM BIO-2e, MM BIO-2g through BIO-2j, in combination
with MM BIO-1a and b and MM HYD-4a and b, would reduce impacts to sensitive habitats to less
than significant after mitigation.
Packet Pg 273
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
75
Exhibit 1
3. Impact BIO-3. Onsite MPA development would interfere with the movement of common wildlife and
special status species through establishment of confined wildlife corridors within the Project site. (Refer
to pages 3.4-53 and 5-55 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1a. The Applicant shall prepare and implement a Biological Mitigation
Plan that identifies construction-related staging and maintenance areas and includes Project-
specific construction best management practices (BMPs) to avoid or minimize impacts to biological
resources, including all measures needed to protect riparian woodland along Tank Farm Creek,
minimize erosion, and retain sediment on the Project site. Such BMPs shall include (but not be
limited to) the following:
23. Construction equipment and vehicles shall be stored at least 100 feet away from Tank Farm
Creek and adjacent riparian habitat, and all construction vehicle maintenance shall be
performed in a designated offsite vehicle storage and maintenance area.
24. Prior to construction activities adjacent to Tank Farm Creek, the creek shall be fenced with
orange construction fencing and signed to prohibit entry of construction equipment and
personnel unless authorized by the City. Fencing should be located a minimum of 20 feet
from the edge of the riparian canopy or top of bank, whichever is further from the creek,
and shall be maintained throughout the construction period for each phase of development.
25. In the event that construction must occur within the creek or 20 -foot creek setback, a
biological monitor shall be present during all such activities with the authority to stop or
redirect work as needed to protect biological resources.
26. Construction shall occur during daylight hours (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM or sunset, whichever
is sooner) to avoid impacts to nocturnal and crepuscular (dawn and dusk activity period)
species. No construction night lighting shall be permitted within 100 yards of the top of the
creek banks.
27. Construction equipment shall be inspected at the beginning of each work day to ensure that
no wildlife species is residing within any construction equipment (e.g., species have not
climbed into wheel wells, engine compartments, or under tracks since the equipment was
last parked). Any sensitive wildlife species found during inspections shall be gently
encouraged to leave the Project site by a qualified biologist or otherwise trained and City-
approved personnel.
28. Pallets or secondary containment areas for chemicals, drums, or bagged materials shall be
provided. Should material spills occur, materials and/or contaminants shall be cleaned from
the Project site and recycled or disposed of to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB).
29. All trash and construction debris shall be picked up and properly disposed at the end of
each day and waste dumpsters shall be covered with plastic sheeting at the end of each
workday and during storm events. All sheeting shall be carefully secured to withstand
weather conditions.
30. The Applicant shall implement erosion control measures designed to minimize erosion and
retain sediment on the Project site. Such measures shall include installation of silt fencing,
straw waddles, or other acceptable erosion control devices along the peri meter of Tank
Farm Creek and at the perimeter of all cut or fill slopes. All drainage shall be directed to
sediment basins designed to retain all sediment onsite.
31. Concrete truck and tool washout should occur in a designated location such that no runoff
will reach the creek.
Packet Pg 274
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
76
Exhibit 1
32. All open trenches shall be constructed with appropriate exit ramps to allow species that
incidentally fall into a trench to escape. All open trenches shall be inspected at the
beginning of each work day to ensure that no wildlife species is present. Any sensitive
wildlife species found during inspections shall be gently encouraged to leave the Project
site by a qualified biologist or otherwise trained and City-approved personnel. Trenches
will remain open for the shortest period necessary to complete required work.
33. Existing facilities and disturbed areas shall be used to the maximum extent possible to
minimize the amount of disturbance of undeveloped areas and all construction access roads
and staging areas shall be located to avoid high quality habitat and minimize habitat
fragmentation.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1b. The Applicant shall retain a qualified Environmental Monitor,
subject to review and approval by the City and in consultation with CDFW, RWQCB, and USFWS
to oversee compliance of the construction activities with the Biological Monitoring Plan and
applicable laws, regulations, and policies. The Environmental Monitor shall monitor all
construction activities, conduct a biological resources education program for all construction
workers prior to the initiation of any clearing or construction activities, and provide quarterly
reports to the City regarding construction activities, enforcement issues and remedial measures.
The Environmental Monitor shall be responsible for conducting inspections of the work area each
work day to ensure that excavation areas, restored habitats, and open water habitats in the area do
not have oil sheen, liquid oil, or any other potential exposure risk to wildlife. If any exposure risk
is identified, the Environmental Monitor shall implement measures that could include, but are not
limited to, hazing, fencing, and wildlife removals to eliminate the exposure risk.
In addition, a CDFW-approved biologist shall be present during all construction occurring within
50 feet of Tank Farm Creek, riparian habitat, drainages, and seasonal or permanent wetlands. The
biologist shall also conduct sensitive species surveys immediately prior to construction activities
(within the appropriate season) and shall monitor construction activities in the vicinity of habitats
to be avoided (see also, MM BIO-3 and all subparts below).
The work area boundaries and other off-limit areas shall be identified by the biologist and/or
Environmental Monitor on a daily basis. The biologist and/or Environmental Monitor shall inspect
construction and sediment control fencing each work day during construction activities to ensure
that sensitive species are not exposed to hazards. Any vegetation clearing activities shall be
monitored by the biologist and/or Environmental Monitor.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2a. Project designs shall be modified to realign the Tank Farm Class I
bicycle path and relocate manufactured slopes for housing pads in order to create a minimum of a
35-foot creek setback from either the top of the bank of Tank Farm Creek or edge of riparian habitat,
whichever is further, for at least 90 percent of corridor length. No more than 10 percent of the
length of the corridor (700 linear feet) shall have a setback of less than 35 feet, but at least 20 feet
from the top of the bank or edge of riparian canopy, whichever is further. However, in any instance
the creek setback shall be no less than 20 feet from the edge of riparian canopy or top of bank,
whichever is further, consistent with Section 17.16.025 of the City of San Luis Obispo Zoning
Regulations.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2b. The Biological Mitigation Plan shall provide details on timing and
implementation of required habitat restoration and shall be prepared in consultation with the City’s
Natural Resource Manager and CDFW. A copy of the final plan shall be submitted to the City for
Packet Pg 275
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
77
Exhibit 1
review and approval. The plan shall be implemented by the Project Applicant, under supervision
by the City and Environmental Monitor, and:
1. Characterize the type, species composition, spatial extent, and ecological functions and
values of the wetland and riparian habitat that will be removed, lost, or damaged.
2. Describe the approach that will be used to replace the wetland and riparian habitat removed,
lost, or adversely impacted by the Project, including a list of the soil, plants, and other
materials that will be necessary for successful habitat replacement, and a description of
planting methods, location, spacing, erosion protection, and irrigation measures that will
be needed. Restoration and habitat enhancement shall include use of appropriate native
species and correction of bank stabilization issues. Wetland restoration or enhancement
areas shall be designed to facilitate establishment of wetland plants such as willows,
cottonwoods, rushes, and creeping wild rye.
3. Describe the habitat restoration ratio to be used in calculating the acreage of habitat to be
planted, consistent with MM BIO-2c through BIO-2e below and the findings in the
Biological Report (Appendix I).
4. Describe the program that will be used for monitoring the effectiveness and success of the
habitat replacement approach.
5. Describe how the habitat replacement approach will be supplemented or modified if the
monitoring program indicates that the current approach is not effective or successful.
6. Describe the criteria that will be used to evaluate the effectiveness and success of the
habitat replacement approach.
7. Indicate the timing and schedule for the planting of replacement habitat.
8. Habitat restoration or enhancement areas shall be established within the Project boundaries,
adjacent to and contiguous with existing wetlands to the maximum extent possible.
Habitats suitable for Congdon’s tarplant and other native wetland species shall be created
onsite. If Congdon’s tarplant is found in areas proposed for disturbance, the affected
individuals shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio through seeding in a suitable conserved natural
open space area. A management plan for the species shall be developed consistent with
applicable scientific literature pertinent to this species.
9. Habitat restoration or enhancement sites shall be placed within deed-restricted area(s), and
shall be maintained and monitored for a minimum of five years. If sufficient onsite
mitigation area is not practicable, an offsite mitigation plan shall be prepared as part of the
Biological Mitigation Plan and approved by permitting agencies.
10. The Biological Mitigation Plan shall identify appropriate restoration and enhancement
activities to compensate for impacts to seasonal creek, wetland, and riparian habitat,
including a detailed planting plan and maintenance plans using locally obtained native
species and include habitat enhancement to support native wildlife and plant species.
11. A weed management plan and weed identification list shall be included in the Biological
Mitigation Plan.
12. Habitat restoration or enhancement areas shall be maintained weekly for the first three
years after Phase completion and quarterly thereafter. Maintenance shall include
eradication of noxious weeds found on California Department of Food and Agriculture
Lists (CDFA) A and B. Noxious weeds on CDFA list C may be eradicated or otherwise
managed.
13. Mitigation implementation and success shall be monitored quarterly for the first two years
after completion of each Phase, semi-annually during the third year, and annually the fourth
and fifth years. Annual reports documenting site inspections and site recovery status shall
be prepared and sent to the County and appropriate agencies.
Packet Pg 276
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
78
Exhibit 1
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2c. Within the required Biological Mitigation Plan, all temporary and
permanent impacts to riparian trees, wetlands, and riparian habitat shall be mitigated, as follows:
1. Temporary impacts to wetland and riparian habitat shall be mitigated at a minimum 1:1
mitigation ratio for restoration (area of restored habitat to impacted habitat).
2. Permanent impacts to state jurisdictional areas, including isolated wetlands within
agricultural lands and riparian habitat will be mitigated at a 1.5:1 ratio (area of restored and
enhanced habitat to impacted habitat).
3. Permanent impacts to federal wetlands shall be mitigated at a minimum 3:1 ratio (1:1 area
of created to impacted habitat plus 2:1 area of created/enhanced habitat to impacted
habitat).
4. Riparian trees four inches or greater measured at diameter-at-breast-height (DBH) shall be
replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 3:1 (replaced: removed). Trees measured at 24
inches or greater DBH shall be replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 10:1. Willows and
cottonwoods may be planted from live stakes following guidelines provided in the
California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual for planting dormant cuttings and
container stock (CDFW 2010). Permanent impacts to riparian vegetation shall be mitigated
at a 3:1 ratio to ensure no net loss of acreage and individual plants.
5. Replacement trees shall be planted in the fall or winter of the year in which trees were
removed. All replacement trees will be planted no more than one year following the date
upon which the native trees were removed. Replacement plants shall be monitored for 5
years with a goal of at least 70 percent survival at the end of the 5 -year period.
Supplemental irrigation may be provided during years 1 to 3; however, supplemental
watering shall not be provided during the final two years of monitoring.
— Mitigation Measures BIO-2d. Project design shall be modified to preserve at a minimum the
southern 275 feet of the North-South Creek Segment to protect all existing mature riparian
woodland, and the proposed drainage plan shall be altered to convey remaining surface water flows
from areas to the north to this channel.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2e. To minimize impacts to riparian habitat, the Project shall stockpile
sufficient emergent vegetation (e.g., cattails) for later planting in the realigned reach of Tank Farm
Creek. Stockpiled vegetation shall be placed in earthen basins with the roots covered with moist
soil and maintained in a moist condition during construction operations.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2g. A post-construction landscape and restoration report for each phase
shall be prepared by the Environmental Monitor based on as-built drawings and site inspections to
document the final grading, plantings, and habitat restoration activities. The report shall include as-
built plans prepared after restoration, grading, and mitigation habitat plantings are complete. The
as-built plans shall be prepared by landscape and grading contractors responsible for realignment
and restoration within Tank Farm Creek.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2h. Project activities within Tank Farm Creek and drainage channels,
including any tree pruning or removals, any necessary erosion repairs, or culvert removals, shall be
performed when the channel is dry, planned to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Natural
Resource Manager per City Drainage Manual Standards, and be subject to monitoring by the
Environmental Monitor. Upon removal of the existing steel culvert currently used for farm access
across Tank Farm Creek, the channel shall be restored to match conditions immediately upstream
and downstream including channel width, gradient, and vegetation.
Packet Pg 277
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
79
Exhibit 1
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2i. To reduce erosion and runoff from all exposed soils, all bare disturbed
soils shall be hydroseeded at the completion of grading for each construction phase. The seed mix
shall contain a minimum of three locally native grass species and may contain one or two sterile
non-native grasses not to exceed 25 percent of the total seed mix by count. Seeding shall be
completed no later than November 15 of the year in which Project activities occurred. All exposed
areas where seeding is considered unsuccessful after 90 days shall receive a second application or
seeding, straw, or mulch as soon as is practical to reduce erosion.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2j. The Tank Farm Creek Class I bicycle path bridge footings for creek
crossings shall be placed outside mapped riparian areas and outside the top of the bank of the
channel invert. The Class I bridges shall be located within areas that have little to no riparian
vegetation. No construction activities or equipment shall occur in the stream channel. The
placement of the bridge and footings shall be indicated on the Development Plan , VTM, and
Biological Mitigation Plan, and shall show the bridges’ placement in relation to existing vegetation
and the creek channel and banks.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-3a. The City-approved qualified biologist shall conduct training to all
construction personnel to familiarize construction crews with sensitive species that have the
potential to occur within the Project site. This may include but is not limited to: Californi a red-
legged frog, western pond turtle, Steelhead trout, bats, migratory birds, and Congdon’s tarplant.
The educational program shall include a description what constitutes take, penalties for take, and
the guidelines that would be followed by all construction personnel to avoid take of species during
construction activities. Descriptions of the California red-legged frog and its habits, Congdon’s
tarplant, nesting and migratory birds that may be encountered, and all other sensitive species that
have a potential to occur within the vicinity of Project construction shall be provided. The
construction crew foreman shall be responsible for ensuring that crew members comply with the
guidelines and that all new personnel receive the training before partaking in construction activities.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-3b. The Biological Mitigation Plan shall address wildlife and special
status species movement as follows:
• Migratory and Nesting Bird Management. Grading and construction activities shall
avoid the breeding season (typically assumed to be from February 15 to August 15) to the
extent practicable, particularly within 50 feet of Tank Farm Creek and riparian or wetland
habitat. If Project activities must be conducted during this period, pre-construction nesting
bird surveys shall take place within one week of habitat disturbance associated with each
phase, and if active nests are located, the following shall be implemented:
• Construction activities within 50 feet of active nests shall be restricted until chicks have
fledged, unless the nest belongs to a raptor, in which case a 200-foot activity restriction
buffer shall be observed.
• A pre-construction survey report shall be submitted to the City immediately upon
completion of the survey. The report shall detail appropriate fencing or flagging of the
buffer zone and make recommendations on additional monitoring requirements. A map of
the Project site and nest locations shall be included with the report.
• The Project biologist conducting the nesting survey shall have the authority to reduce or
increase the recommended buffer depending upon site conditions and the species involved.
A report of findings and recommendations for bird protection shall be submitted to the City
prior to vegetation removal.
• Bat Colony Management. Prior to removal of any trees over 20 inches diameter-at-breast-
height (DBH), a survey shall be conducted by a CDFW-approved qualified biologist to
Packet Pg 278
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
80
Exhibit 1
determine if any tree proposed for removal or trimming harbors sensitive bat species or
maternal bat colonies. Maternal bat colonies shall not be disturbed. If a non-maternal roost
is found, the qualified biologist shall install one-way valves or other appropriate passive
relocation method. For each occupied roost removed, one bat box shall be installed in
similar habitat and shall have similar cavities or crevices to those which are removed,
including access, ventilation, dimensions, height above ground, and thermal conditions. If
a bat colony is excluded from the Project site, appropriate alternate bat habitat shall be
installed in the Project site. To the extent practicable, alternate bat house installation shall
be installed near the onsite drainage.
• Congdon’s Tarplant Management. Prior to initiation of construction, the Applicant shall
fund a site survey for Congdon’s tarplant, and:
• If Congdon’s tarplant is found in areas proposed for building, the affected individuals shall
be replaced at a 1:1 ratio through seeding in a suitable conserved natural open space area.
• A mitigation and monitoring plan for the species shall be developed consistent with
applicable scientific literature pertinent to this species. The plan shall provide for the
annual success over an area of at least 1,330 square feet with approximately 500-750
individuals (the current aerial extent) and be implemented to reduce impacts to Congdon’s
tarplant to a less than significant level.
• The mitigation plan shall be incorporated into the Biological Mitigation Plan, wherein
wetland sites shall be created and Congdon’s tarplant seeds from the site shall be
reintroduced.
• Sensitive Species Management. Injury or mortality to the California red-legged frog,
western pond turtle, and steelhead shall be avoided. The plan shall include the foll owing
measures: pre-Project surveys; worker awareness; cessation of work in occupied areas;
relocation (if necessary) of frogs, turtles, and steelhead from the work area by a
professional biologist authorized by the USFWS and/or CDFW; and monitoring by a
qualified biologist during construction. Necessary permits shall be obtained from the state
(CDFW) and federal (USACE and USFWS) regulatory agencies with jurisdiction. Any
other sensitive species observed during the pre-construction surveys shall be relocated out
of harm’s way by the qualified biologist into the nearest suitable habitat as determined in
consultation with the jurisdictional resource agency outside the disturbance area.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-3c. Within 48 hours prior to construction activities within 50 feet of Tank
Farm Creek, drainages, and seasonal wetlands, the Project site shall be surveyed for California red-
legged frogs by a qualified biologist. If any California red-legged frogs are found, work within 25
linear feet in any direction of the frog shall not start until the frog has been moved from the area.
The USFWS shall be consulted for appropriate action; the Applicant shall obtain a Biological
Opinion from the USFWS and any additional authorization required by other regulatory agencies
prior to the commencement of work. The USFWS-qualified biologist, Environmental Monitor, or
USFWS personnel may determine that frog-exclusion fencing is necessary to prevent overland
movement of frogs if concerns arise that frogs could enter construction areas. Frog-exclusion
fencing should contain no gaps and must extend at least 18 inches above ground; fences may be
opened during periods of no construction (e.g., weekends) to prevent entrapment.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-3d. Within 48 hours prior to construction activities within 50 feet of Tank
Farm Creek, drainages, seasonal wetlands, and riparian habitat, the Project site shall be surveyed
for western pond turtles by a qualified biologist. If any western pond turtles are found, work shall
cease until the turtle is relocated to the nearest suitable habitat. The qualified biologist shall monitor
all ground breaking work conducted within 50 feet of western pond turtle habitat. The City-
approved biologist Environmental Monitor may determine that silt fencin g shall be installed
Packet Pg 279
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
81
Exhibit 1
adjacent to western pond turtle habitat if concerns arise that the western pond turtle overland
movement could allow them to access construction areas.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. (See FEIR pages 3.4-61 through 3.4-62 and 5-55.) MM BIO-3a through
3d would reduce potential direct permanent impacts to wildlife species from loss of habitat and loss
of species. MM BIO-3a would provide educational training all construction personnel in order for
them to identify sensitive species, take appropriate actions, and avoid “take”. MM BIO-3b through
3d would reduce potential impacts to special status birds and bats to less than significant by
avoiding disturbance during the breeding season and roosting times when these species are most
vulnerable to disturbance and ensuring compliance with appropriate avoidance buffers if
construction during the season cannot be avoided. Mitigation would limit construction in the creek
during nesting season and peak activity periods, thus reducing impacts to migrating species.
Implementation of MM BIO-3b through 3d would also reduce potential impacts to special status
amphibians, reptiles, and fish by requiring plan preparation with requirements for pre-construction
surveys for the species, including development of necessary additional avoidance and minimization
measures, and onsite monitoring during construction to prevent construction runoff from
contaminating aquatic habitats. MM BIO-3b would minimize or avoid impacts to Congdon’s
tarplant. MM BIO-1a will avoid or minimize impacts to biological resources and sensitive species
by implementing best management practices. MM BIO-2a would avoid the potential impacts of
manufactured slopes and the Class I bicycle path intruding into the bank of Tank Farm Creek or its
riparian habitat by establishing setbacks for a wider wildlif e corridor. This would also protect
sensitive species from potential impacts associated with temporary or permanent loss of habitat,
construction impacts, siltation and erosion, and operational impacts associated with increased
human activity. Implementation of MM BIO-2b through 2c would offset the loss of sensitive habitat
and trees and compensates at appropriate replacement ratios onsite consistent with appropriate
agencies, to the maximum extent feasible. Impacts to sensitive species would be reduced wit h
implementation of MM BIO-2d and 2e. MM BIO-2g would ensure appropriate restoration of
riparian habitat. MM BIO-2h would reduce potential erosion and siltation impacts within the creek.
Implementation of MM BIO-2i in combination with MM BIO-1a and 1b and all subparts, would
reduce temporary impacts to sensitive species from construction activities, and appropriate
measures are taken to prevent sedimentation. MM BIO-2j would address potential impacts to Tank
Farm Creek from the proposed Class I bicycle path footings placement. Impacts would be less than
significant after mitigation. .
4. Impact BIO-4. Offsite improvements to and extension of Buckley Road and associated bicycle and
pedestrian paths have the potential to create permanent impacts to special status species through
removal of suitable habitat. (Refer to page 3.4-62 and 5-55 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1a. The Applicant shall prepare and implement a Biological Mitigation
Plan that identifies construction-related staging and maintenance areas and includes Project-
specific construction best management practices (BMPs) to avoid or minimize impacts to biological
resources, including all measures needed to protect riparian woodland along Tank Farm Creek,
minimize erosion, and retain sediment on the Project site. Such BMPs shall include (but not be
limited to) the following:
Packet Pg 280
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
82
Exhibit 1
34. Construction equipment and vehicles shall be stored at least 100 feet away from Tank Farm
Creek and adjacent riparian habitat, and all construction vehicle maintenance shall be
performed in a designated offsite vehicle storage and maintenance area.
35. Prior to construction activities adjacent to Tank Farm Creek, the creek shall be fenced with
orange construction fencing and signed to prohibit entry of construction equipment and
personnel unless authorized by the City. Fencing should be located a minimum of 20 feet
from the edge of the riparian canopy or top of bank, whichever is further from the creek,
and shall be maintained throughout the construction period for each phase of development.
36. In the event that construction must occur within the creek or 20 -foot creek setback, a
biological monitor shall be present during all such activities with the authority to stop or
redirect work as needed to protect biological resources.
37. Construction shall occur during daylight hours (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM or sunset, whichever
is sooner) to avoid impacts to nocturnal and crepuscular (dawn and dusk activity period)
species. No construction night lighting shall be permitted within 100 yards of the top of the
creek banks.
38. Construction equipment shall be inspected at the beginning of each work day to ensure that
no wildlife species is residing within any construction equipment (e.g., species have not
climbed into wheel wells, engine compartments, or under tracks since the equipment was
last parked). Any sensitive wildlife species found during inspections shall be gently
encouraged to leave the Project site by a qualified biologist or otherwise trained and City-
approved personnel.
39. Pallets or secondary containment areas for chemicals, drums, or bagged materials shall be
provided. Should material spills occur, materials and/or contaminants shall be cleaned from
the Project site and recycled or disposed of to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB).
40. All trash and construction debris shall be picked up and properly disposed at the end of
each day and waste dumpsters shall be covered with plastic sheeting at the end of each
workday and during storm events. All sheeting shall be carefully secured to withstand
weather conditions.
41. The Applicant shall implement erosion control measures designed to minimize erosion and
retain sediment on the Project site. Such measures shall include installation of silt fencing,
straw waddles, or other acceptable erosion control devices along the perimeter of Tank
Farm Creek and at the perimeter of all cut or fill slopes. All drainage shall be directed to
sediment basins designed to retain all sediment onsite.
42. Concrete truck and tool washout should occur in a designated location such that no runoff
will reach the creek.
43. All open trenches shall be constructed with appropriate exit ramps to allow species that
incidentally fall into a trench to escape. All open trenches shall be inspected at the
beginning of each work day to ensure that no wildlife species is present. Any sensitive
wildlife species found during inspections shall be gently encouraged to leave the Project
site by a qualified biologist or otherwise trained and City-approved personnel. Trenches
will remain open for the shortest period necessary to complete required work.
44. Existing facilities and disturbed areas shall be used to the maximum extent possible to
minimize the amount of disturbance of undeveloped areas and all construction access roads
and staging areas shall be located to avoid high quality habitat and minimize habitat
fragmentation.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1b. The Applicant shall retain a qualified Environmental Monitor,
subject to review and approval by the City and in consultation with CDFW, RWQCB, and USFWS
to oversee compliance of the construction activities with the Biological Monitoring Plan and
applicable laws, regulations, and policies. The Environmental Monitor shall monitor all
Packet Pg 281
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
83
Exhibit 1
construction activities, conduct a biological resources education program for all construction
workers prior to the initiation of any clearing or construction activities, and provide quarterly
reports to the City regarding construction activities, enforcement issues and remedial measures.
The Environmental Monitor shall be responsible for conducting inspections of the work area each
work day to ensure that excavation areas, restored habitats, and open water habitats in the area d o
not have oil sheen, liquid oil, or any other potential exposure risk to wildlife. If any exposure risk
is identified, the Environmental Monitor shall implement measures that could include, but are not
limited to, hazing, fencing, and wildlife removals to eliminate the exposure risk.
In addition, a CDFW-approved biologist shall be present during all construction occurring within
50 feet of Tank Farm Creek, riparian habitat, drainages, and seasonal or permanent wetlands. The
biologist shall also conduct sensitive species surveys immediately prior to construction activities
(within the appropriate season) and shall monitor construction activities in the vicinity of habitats
to be avoided (see also, MM BIO-3 and all subparts below).
The work area boundaries and other off-limit areas shall be identified by the biologist and/or
Environmental Monitor on a daily basis. The biologist and/or Environmental Monitor shall inspect
construction and sediment control fencing each work day during construction activities t o ensure
that sensitive species are not exposed to hazards. Any vegetation clearing activities shall be
monitored by the biologist and/or Environmental Monitor.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-3a. The City-approved qualified biologist shall conduct training to all
construction personnel to familiarize construction crews with sensitive species that have the
potential to occur within the Project site. This may include but is not limited to: California red -
legged frog, western pond turtle, Steelhead trout, bats, migratory birds, and Congdon’s tarplant.
The educational program shall include a description what constitutes take, penalties for take, and
the guidelines that would be followed by all construction personnel to avoid take of species during
construction activities. Descriptions of the California red-legged frog and its habits, Congdon’s
tarplant, nesting and migratory birds that may be encountered, and all other sensitive species that
have a potential to occur within the vicinity of Project construction shall be provided. The
construction crew foreman shall be responsible for ensuring that crew members comply with the
guidelines and that all new personnel receive the training before partaking in construction activities.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-3b. The Biological Mitigation Plan shall address wildlife and special
status species movement as follows:
o Migratory and Nesting Bird Management. Grading and construction activities shall
avoid the breeding season (typically assumed to be from February 15 to August 15) to the
extent practicable, particularly within 50 feet of Tank Farm Creek and riparian or wetland
habitat. If Project activities must be conducted during this period, pre-construction nesting
bird surveys shall take place within one week of habitat disturbance a ssociated with each
phase, and if active nests are located, the following shall be implemented:
o Construction activities within 50 feet of active nests shall be restricted until chicks have
fledged, unless the nest belongs to a raptor, in which case a 200-foot activity restriction
buffer shall be observed.
o A pre-construction survey report shall be submitted to the City immediately upon
completion of the survey. The report shall detail appropriate fencing or flagging of the
buffer zone and make recommendations on additional monitoring requirements. A map of
the Project site and nest locations shall be included with the report.
o The Project biologist conducting the nesting survey shall have the authority to reduce or
increase the recommended buffer depending upon site conditions and the species involved.
Packet Pg 282
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
84
Exhibit 1
A report of findings and recommendations for bird protection shall be submitted to the City
prior to vegetation removal.
o Bat Colony Management. Prior to removal of any trees over 20 inches diameter-at-breast-
height (DBH), a survey shall be conducted by a CDFW-approved qualified biologist to
determine if any tree proposed for removal or trimming harbors sensitive bat species or
maternal bat colonies. Maternal bat colonies shall not be disturbed. If a non-maternal roost
is found, the qualified biologist shall install one-way valves or other appropriate passive
relocation method. For each occupied roost removed, one bat box shall be installed in
similar habitat and shall have similar cavities or crevices to those which are removed,
including access, ventilation, dimensions, height above ground, and thermal conditions. If
a bat colony is excluded from the Project site, appropriate alternate bat habitat shall be
installed in the Project site. To the extent practicable, alternate bat house installation shall
be installed near the onsite drainage.
o Congdon’s Tarplant Management. Prior to initiation of construction, the Applicant shall
fund a site survey for Congdon’s tarplant, and:
o If Congdon’s tarplant is found in areas proposed for building, the affected individuals shall
be replaced at a 1:1 ratio through seeding in a suitable conserved natural open space area.
o A mitigation and monitoring plan for the species shall be developed consistent with
applicable scientific literature pertinent to this species. The plan shall provide for the
annual success over an area of at least 1,330 square feet with approximately 500-750
individuals (the current aerial extent) and be implemented to reduce impacts to Congdon’s
tarplant to a less than significant level.
o The mitigation plan shall be incorporated into the Biological Mitigation Plan, wherein
wetland sites shall be created and Congdon’s tarplant seeds from the site shall be
reintroduced.
o Sensitive Species Management. Injury or mortality to the California red-legged frog,
western pond turtle, and steelhead shall be avoided. The plan shall include the following
measures: pre-Project surveys; worker awareness; cessation of work in occupied areas;
relocation (if necessary) of frogs, turtles, and steelhead from the work area by a
professional biologist authorized by the USFWS and/or CDFW; and monitoring by a
qualified biologist during construction. Necessary permits shall be obtained from the state
(CDFW) and federal (USACE and USFWS) regulatory agencies with jurisdiction. Any
other sensitive species observed during the pre-construction surveys shall be relocated out
of harm’s way by the qualified biologist into the nearest suitable habitat as determined in
consultation with the jurisdictional resource agency outside the disturbance area.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-4. The required Biological Mitigation Plan shall address bat colonies for
the Buckley Road Extension site. Bat surveys shall be conducted in buildings proposed for
demolition. If surveys determine bats are present, bat exclusion devices shall be installed between
August and November, and building demolition would occur between November and March. If
demolition of structures must occur during the bat breeding seas on, buildings must be inspected
and deemed clear of bat colonies/roosts within seven days of demolition and an appropriately
trained and approved biologist must conduct a daily site-clearance during demolition. If bats are
roosting in a structure in the Project site during the daytime but are not part of an active maternity
colony, then exclusion measures must include one-way valves that allow bats to get out but are
designed so that the bats may not re-enter the structure.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. (See pages 3.4-63 and 5-55 of the Final EIR.) With the implementation
of mitigation measures MM BIO-3a through 3b, as well as MM BIO-4, which require pre-
Packet Pg 283
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
85
Exhibit 1
construction surveys and exclusion measures for sensitive bats and protection or replacement of
the Congdon’s tarplant, impacts to bat colonies and sensitive plant species due to the Buckley Road
Extension would be less than significant after mitigation. Additionally, with MM BIO -1a and 1b,
which provide best management practices during construction, impacts to sensitive species in the
offsite Buckley Road Extension site would be less than significant after mitigation.
5. Impact BIO-5. Long-term operation of the MPA has the potential to create significant impacts to
biological resources as a result of increased light, noise, and increased human presence and other urban
edge effects. (Refer to pages 3.4-64 and 5-55- of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-5a. All exterior building lights facing Tank Farm Creek shall be hooded
to prevent light spillover into the creek; all residential street lights over 10 feet in height shall be
setback a minimum of 100 feet from the top of the creek bank and hooded and/or directed away
from the creek. Any night lighting adjacent to the creek (e.g., walkway lights) shall be of low
voltage and hooded downward. Artificial light levels within 20 feet of the top of the creek bank
shall not exceed 1-foot candle or the lowest level of illumination found to be feasible by the City.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-5b. Tank Farm Creek restoration/enhancement plantings shall include
native vegetation, such as oaks, cottonwoods, willows, and sycamores along the entire length of
the Project’s creek frontage in order to minimize light spillover into the creek.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. Implementation of MM BIO-5a will restrict lighting near Tank Farm
Creek and MM BIO-5b will ensure native vegetation is installed along the creek frontage to
minimize light spillover, reducing the impact to less than significant. (See FEIR pa ges 3.4-65 and
5-55 to 5-56.)
6. Impact BIO-6. MPA development could impact offsite biological resources from sedimentation into
Tank Farm Creek. (Refer to pages 3.4-66 and 5-56 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1a. The Applicant shall prepare and implement a Biological Mitigation
Plan that identifies construction-related staging and maintenance areas and includes Project-
specific construction best management practices (BMPs) to avoid or minimize impacts to biological
resources, including all measures needed to protect riparian woodland along Tank Farm Creek,
minimize erosion, and retain sediment on the Project site. Such BMPs shall include (but not be
limited to) the following:
1. Construction equipment and vehicles shall be stored at least 100 feet away from Tank Farm
Creek and adjacent riparian habitat, and all construction vehicle maintenance shall be
performed in a designated offsite vehicle storage and maintenance area.
2. Prior to construction activities adjacent to Tank Farm Creek, the creek shall be fenced with
orange construction fencing and signed to prohibit entry of construction equipment and
personnel unless authorized by the City. Fencing should be located a minimum of 20 feet
from the edge of the riparian canopy or top of bank, whichever is further from the creek,
and shall be maintained throughout the construction period for each phase of development.
Packet Pg 284
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
86
Exhibit 1
3. In the event that construction must occur within the creek or 20 -foot creek setback, a
biological monitor shall be present during all such activities with the authority to stop or
redirect work as needed to protect biological resources.
4. Construction shall occur during daylight hours (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM or sunset, whichever
is sooner) to avoid impacts to nocturnal and crepuscular (dawn and dusk activity period)
species. No construction night lighting shall be permitted within 100 yards of the top of the
creek banks.
5. Construction equipment shall be inspected at the beginning of each work day to ensure that
no wildlife species is residing within any construction equipment (e.g., species have not
climbed into wheel wells, engine compartments, or under tracks since the equipment was
last parked). Any sensitive wildlife species found during inspections shall be gently
encouraged to leave the Project site by a qualified biologist or otherwise trained and City-
approved personnel.
6. Pallets or secondary containment areas for chemicals, drums, or bagged materials shall be
provided. Should material spills occur, materials and/or contaminants shall be cleaned from
the Project site and recycled or disposed of to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB).
7. All trash and construction debris shall be picked up and properly disposed at the end of
each day and waste dumpsters shall be covered with plastic sheeting at the end of each
workday and during storm events. All sheeting shall be carefully secured to withstand
weather conditions.
8. The Applicant shall implement erosion control measures designed to minimize erosion and
retain sediment on the Project site. Such measures shall include installation of silt fencing,
straw waddles, or other acceptable erosion control devices along the perimeter of Tank
Farm Creek and at the perimeter of all cut or fill slopes. All drainage shall be directed to
sediment basins designed to retain all sediment onsite.
9. Concrete truck and tool washout should occur in a designated location such that no runoff
will reach the creek.
10. All open trenches shall be constructed with appropriate exit ramps to allow species that
incidentally fall into a trench to escape. All open trenches shall be inspected at the
beginning of each work day to ensure that no wildlife species is present. Any sensitive
wildlife species found during inspections shall be gently encouraged to leave the Project
site by a qualified biologist or otherwise trained and City-approved personnel. Trenches
will remain open for the shortest period necessary to complete required work.
11. Existing facilities and disturbed areas shall be used to the maximum extent possible to
minimize the amount of disturbance of undeveloped areas and all construction access roads
and staging areas shall be located to avoid high quality habitat and minimize habitat
fragmentation.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1b. The Applicant shall retain a qualified Environmental Monitor,
subject to review and approval by the City and in consultation with CDFW, RWQCB, and USFWS
to oversee compliance of the construction activities with the Biological Monitoring Plan and
applicable laws, regulations, and policies. The Environmental Monitor shall monitor all
construction activities, conduct a biological resources education program for all construction
workers prior to the initiation of any clearing or construction activities, and provide quarterly
reports to the City regarding construction activities, enforcement issues and remedial measures.
The Environmental Monitor shall be responsible for conducting inspections of the work area each
work day to ensure that excavation areas, restored habitats, and open water habitats in the area do
not have oil sheen, liquid oil, or any other potential exposure risk to wildlife. If any exposure risk
is identified, the Environmental Monitor shall implement measures that could include, but are not
limited to, hazing, fencing, and wildlife removals to eliminate the exposure risk.
Packet Pg 285
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
87
Exhibit 1
In addition, a CDFW-approved biologist shall be present during all construction occurring within
50 feet of Tank Farm Creek, riparian habitat, drainages, and seasonal or permanent wetlands. The
biologist shall also conduct sensitive species surveys immediately prior to construction activities
(within the appropriate season) and shall monitor construction activities in the vicinity of habitats
to be avoided (see also, MM BIO-3 and all subparts below).
The work area boundaries and other off-limit areas shall be identified by the biologist and/or
Environmental Monitor on a daily basis. The biologist and/or Environmental Monitor shall inspect
construction and sediment control fencing each work day during construction activities to ensure
that sensitive species are not exposed to hazards. Any vegetation clearing activities shall be
monitored by the biologist and/or Environmental Monitor.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2a. Project designs shall be modified to realign the Tank Farm Class I
bicycle path and relocate manufactured slopes for housing pads in order to create a minimum of a
35-foot creek setback from either the top of the bank of Tank Farm Creek or edge of riparian habitat,
whichever is further, for at least 90 percent of corridor length. No more than 10 percent of the
length of the corridor (700 linear feet) shall have a setback of less than 35 feet, but at least 20 feet
from the top of the bank or edge of riparian canopy, whichever is further. However, in any instance
the creek setback shall be no less than 20 feet from the edge of riparian canopy or top of bank,
whichever is further, consistent with Section 17.16.025 of the City of San Luis Obispo Zoning
Regulations.
Mitigation Measure BIO-2h. Project activities within Tank Farm Creek and drainage channels,
including any tree pruning or removals, any necessary erosion repairs, or culvert removals, shall be
performed when the channel is dry, planned to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Natural
Resource Manager per City Drainage Manual Standards, and be subject to monitoring by the
Environmental Monitor. Upon removal of the existing steel culvert currently used for farm access
across Tank Farm Creek, the channel shall be restored to match conditions immediately upstream
and downstream including channel width, gradient, and vegetation.
Mitigation Measure BIO-2j. The Tank Farm Creek Class I bicycle path bridge footings for creek
crossings shall be placed outside mapped riparian areas and outside the top of the bank of the
channel invert. The Class I bridges shall be located within areas that have little to no riparian
vegetation. No construction activities or equipment shall occur in the stream channel. The
placement of the bridge and footings shall be indicated on the Development Plan, VTM, and
Biological Mitigation Plan, and shall show the bridges’ placement in relation to existing vegetation
and the creek channel and banks.
Mitigation Measure BIO-6. All work in and within 100 feet of Tank Farm Creek, including work
within the creek setback, shall occur outside the rainy season (April 15 to October 15, unless
approved otherwise by RWQCB), during periods when the creek channel is dry and water flows
are absent.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-1a. Prior to the issuance of any construction/grading permit and/or the
commencement of any clearing, grading, or excavation, the Applicant shall submit a Notice of
Intent (NOI) for discharge from the Project site to the California SWRCB Storm Water Permit Unit.
— Plan Requirements and Timing. Prior to issuance of grading permits for Phase 1 the Applicant shall
submit a copy of the NOI to the City.
Packet Pg 286
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
88
Exhibit 1
— Mitigation Measure HYD-1b. The Applicant shall require the building contractor to prepare and
submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the City 45 days prior to the start of
work for approval. The contractor is responsible for understanding the State General Permit and
instituting the SWPPP during construction. A SWPPP for site construction shall be developed prior
to the initiation of grading and implemented for all construction activity on the Project site in excess
of one (1) acre, or where the area of disturbance is less than one acre but is part of the Project’s
plan of development that in total disturbs one or more acres. The SWPPP shall identify potential
pollutant sources that may affect the quality of discharges to storm water, and shall include specific
BMPs to control the discharge of material from the site. The following BMP methods shall include,
but would not be limited to:
• Temporary detention basins, straw bales, sand bagging, mulching, erosion control blankets,
silt fencing, and soil stabilizers shall be used.
• Soil stockpiles and graded slopes shall be covered after 14 days of inactivity and 24 hours
prior to and during inclement weather conditions.
• Fiber rolls shall be placed along the top of exposed slopes and at the toes of graded areas
to reduce surface soil movement, as necessary.
• A routine monitoring plan shall be implemented to ensure success of all onsite erosion and
sedimentation control measures.
• Dust control measures shall be implemented to ensure success of all onsite activities to
control fugitive dust.
• Streets surrounding the Project site shall be cleaned daily or as necessary.
• BMPs shall be strictly followed to prevent spills and discharges of pollutants onsite
(material and container storage, proper trash disposal, construction entrances, etc.).
• Sandbags, or other equivalent techniques, shall be utilized along graded areas to prevent
siltation transport to the surrounding areas.
• Additional BMPs shall be implemented for any fuel storage or fuel handling that could
occur onsite during construction. The SWPPP must be prepared in accordance with the
guidelines adopted by the SWRCB. The SWPPP shall be submitted to the City along with
grading/development plans for review and approval. The Applicant shall file a Notice of
Completion for construction of the development, identifying that pollution sources were
controlled during the construction of the Project and implementing a closure SWPPP for
the site.
• Plan Requirements and Timing. The Applicant shall prepare a SWPPP that includes the
above and any additional required BMPs. The SWPPP and notices shall be submitted for
review and approval by the City prior to the issuance of grading permits for Phase 1
construction. The SWPPP shall be designed to address erosion and sediment control during
all phases of development of the site until all disturbed areas are permanently stabilized.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-1c. Installation of the eight drainage outlets within Tank Farm Creek
shall occur within the dry season (May through October).
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. Significant impacts to downstream biological resources from
construction related sedimentation would be reduced to less than significant with the
implementation of MM BIO-1a and 1b, MM BIO-6, MM HYD-1a through -1c. (See FEIR pages
3.4-67 and 5-56.)
7. Cumulative Biological Resources Impacts. With retention of open space along the creek corridor and
incorporation of project specific mitigation measures, the project would be consistent with the LUCE’s
Packet Pg 287
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
89
Exhibit 1
determination for a less than significant cumulative effect, and the MPA’s contribution to regional
cumulative impacts to biological resources would be significant but mitigable. (Refer to pages 3.4-67
and 5-56 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required to reduce the Project’s
cumulatively considerable impacts to biological resources to a less than significant level.
— Mitigation Measure AG-1. The Applicant shall establish an offsite agricultural conservation
easement or pay in-lieu fees to a City designated fund dedicated to acquiring and preserving
agricultural land. While the City’s priority is that such agricultural land be acquired in the c losest
feasible proximity to the City, mitigation may be implemented using one of the following options:
e. The Applicant shall ensure permanent protection of farmland of equal area and quality,
which does not already have permanent protection, within the City of San Luis Obispo,
consistent with City Policy 8.6.3(C) and AASP Policy 3.2.18. The Applicant shall identify
and purchase or place in a conservation easement a parcel of land of at least 71 acres of
equal quality farmland, or provide in-lieu fees to allow the City to complete such an
acquisition.
f. If no suitable parcel exists within the City limits, the Applicant shall identify and purchase
or place in a conservation easement a parcel of farmland, of equal quantity and quality,
within the City’s Sphere of Influence that is threatened by development of nonagricultural
uses. The parcel shall be placed in an agricultural conservation easement (refer to Figure 2
in the Land Use Element for City Sphere of Influence). The Applicant may also provide
in-lieu fees to allow the City to complete such an acquisition.
g. In the event that no suitable land is available within the City limits or City’s Sphere of
Influence, the Applicant shall identify and purchase or place in a conservation easement a
parcel of farmland, of equal quantity and quality, within the City’s urban reserve or
greenbelt that is threatened by development of nonagricultural uses. This parcel shall be
placed in an agricultural conservation easement (refer to Figure 1 in the Land Use Element
for City Planning Area). The Applicant may also provide in-lieu fees to allow the City to
complete such an acquisition.
h. In the event that no suitable land for an agricultural conservation easement is available for
purchase within the City limits, the City’s Sphere of Influence, or urban reserve or
greenbelt Planning Area, the Applicant shall identify and purchase or place in a
conservation easement a parcel of farmland, of equal quantity and quality, within County
lands (e.g., agricultural lands north and south of Buckley Road) that is considered to be
threatened by the conversion to nonagricultural use. This parcel shall be placed in an
agricultural conservation easement. The Applicant may also provide in-lieu fees to allow
the City to complete such an acquisition. The Applicant shall demonstrate that such land is
as close in proximity to the City as feasible.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1a. The Applicant shall prepare and implement a Biological Mitigation
Plan that identifies construction-related staging and maintenance areas and includes Project-
specific construction best management practices (BMPs) to avoid or minimize impacts to biological
resources, including all measures needed to protect riparian woodland along Tank Farm Creek,
minimize erosion, and retain sediment on the Project site. Such BMPs shall include (but not be
limited to) the following:
1. Construction equipment and vehicles shall be stored at least 100 feet away from Tank Farm
Creek and adjacent riparian habitat, and all construction vehicle maintenance shall be
performed in a designated offsite vehicle storage and maintenance area.
Packet Pg 288
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
90
Exhibit 1
2. Prior to construction activities adjacent to Tank Farm Creek, the creek shall be fenced with
orange construction fencing and signed to prohibit entry of construction equipment and
personnel unless authorized by the City. Fencing should be located a minimum of 20 feet
from the edge of the riparian canopy or top of bank, whichever is further from the creek,
and shall be maintained throughout the construction period for each phase of development.
3. In the event that construction must occur within the creek or 20 -foot creek setback, a
biological monitor shall be present during all such activities with the authority to stop or
redirect work as needed to protect biological resources.
4. Construction shall occur during daylight hours (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM or sunset, whichever
is sooner) to avoid impacts to nocturnal and crepuscular (dawn and dusk activity period)
species. No construction night lighting shall be permitted within 100 yards of the top of the
creek banks.
5. Construction equipment shall be inspected at the beginning of each work day to ensure that
no wildlife species is residing within any construction equipment (e.g., species have not
climbed into wheel wells, engine compartments, or under tracks since the equipment was
last parked). Any sensitive wildlife species found during inspections shall be gently
encouraged to leave the Project site by a qualified biologist or otherwise trained and City-
approved personnel.
6. Pallets or secondary containment areas for chemicals, drums, or bagged materials shall be
provided. Should material spills occur, materials and/or contaminants shall be cleaned from
the Project site and recycled or disposed of to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB).
7. All trash and construction debris shall be picked up and properly disposed at the end of
each day and waste dumpsters shall be covered with plastic sheeting at the end of each
workday and during storm events. All sheeting shall be carefully secured to withstand
weather conditions.
8. The Applicant shall implement erosion control measures designed to minimize erosion and
retain sediment on the Project site. Such measures shall include installation of silt fencing,
straw waddles, or other acceptable erosion control devices along the perimeter of Tank
Farm Creek and at the perimeter of all cut or fill slopes. All drainage shall be directed to
sediment basins designed to retain all sediment onsite.
9. Concrete truck and tool washout should occur in a designated location such that no runoff
will reach the creek.
10. All open trenches shall be constructed with appropriate exit ramps to allow species that
incidentally fall into a trench to escape. All open trenches shall be inspected at the
beginning of each work day to ensure that no wildlife species is present. Any sensitive
wildlife species found during inspections shall be gently encouraged to leave the Project
site by a qualified biologist or otherwise trained and City-approved personnel. Trenches
will remain open for the shortest period necessary to complete required work.
11. Existing facilities and disturbed areas shall be used to the maximum extent possible to
minimize the amount of disturbance of undeveloped areas and all construction access roads
and staging areas shall be located to avoid high quality habitat and minimize habitat
fragmentation.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1b. The Applicant shall retain a qualified Environmental Monitor,
subject to review and approval by the City and in consultation with CDFW, RWQCB, and USFWS
to oversee compliance of the construction activities with the Biological Monitoring Plan and
applicable laws, regulations, and policies. The Environmental Monitor shall monitor all
construction activities, conduct a biological resources education program for all construction
workers prior to the initiation of any clearing or construction activities, and provide quarterly
reports to the City regarding construction activities, enforcement issues and remedial measures.
Packet Pg 289
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
91
Exhibit 1
The Environmental Monitor shall be responsible for conducting inspections of the work area each
work day to ensure that excavation areas, restored habitats, and open water habitats in the area do
not have oil sheen, liquid oil, or any other potential exposure risk to wildlife. If any exposure risk
is identified, the Environmental Monitor shall implement measures that could include, but are not
limited to, hazing, fencing, and wildlife removals to eliminate the exposure risk.
In addition, a CDFW-approved biologist shall be present during all construction occurring within
50 feet of Tank Farm Creek, riparian habitat, drainages, and seasonal or permanent wetlands. The
biologist shall also conduct sensitive species surveys immediately prior to construction activities
(within the appropriate season) and shall monitor construction activities in the vicinity of habitats
to be avoided (see also, MM BIO-3 and all subparts below).
The work area boundaries and other off-limit areas shall be identified by the biologist and/or
Environmental Monitor on a daily basis. The biologist and/or Environmental Monitor shall inspect
construction and sediment control fencing each work day during construction activities to ensure
that sensitive species are not exposed to hazards. Any vegetation clearing activities shall be
monitored by the biologist and/or Environmental Monitor.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2a. Project designs shall be modified to realign the Tank Farm Class I
bicycle path and relocate manufactured slopes for housing pads in order to create a minimum of a
35-foot creek setback from either the top of the bank of Tank Farm Creek or edge of riparian habitat,
whichever is further, for at least 90 percent of corridor length. No more than 10 percent of the
length of the corridor (700 linear feet) shall have a setback of less than 35 feet, but at least 20 feet
from the top of the bank or edge of riparian canopy, whichever is further. However, in any instance
the creek setback shall be no less than 20 feet from the edge of riparian canopy or t op of bank,
whichever is further, consistent with Section 17.16.025 of the City of San Luis Obispo Zoning
Regulations.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2b. The Biological Mitigation Plan shall provide details on timing and
implementation of required habitat restoration and shall be prepared in consultation with the City’s
Natural Resource Manager and CDFW. A copy of the final plan shall be submitted to the City for
review and approval. The plan shall be implemented by the Project Applicant, under supervision
by the City and Environmental Monitor, and:
1. Characterize the type, species composition, spatial extent, and ecological functions and
values of the wetland and riparian habitat that will be removed, lost, or damaged.
2. Describe the approach that will be used to replace the wetland and riparian habitat removed,
lost, or adversely impacted by the Project, including a list of the soil, plants, and other
materials that will be necessary for successful habitat replacement, and a description of
planting methods, location, spacing, erosion protection, and irrigation measures that will
be needed. Restoration and habitat enhancement shall include use of appropriate native
species and correction of bank stabilization issues. Wetland restoration or enhancement
areas shall be designed to facilitate establishment of wetland plants such as willows,
cottonwoods, rushes, and creeping wild rye.
3. Describe the habitat restoration ratio to be used in calculating the acreage of habitat to be
planted, consistent with MM BIO-2c through BIO-2e below and the findings in the
Biological Report (Appendix I).
4. Describe the program that will be used for monitoring the effectiveness and success of the
habitat replacement approach.
5. Describe how the habitat replacement approach will be supplemented or modified if the
monitoring program indicates that the current approach is not effective or successful.
Packet Pg 290
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
92
Exhibit 1
6. Describe the criteria that will be used to evaluate the effectiveness and success of the
habitat replacement approach.
7. Indicate the timing and schedule for the planting of replacement habitat.
8. Habitat restoration or enhancement areas shall be established within the Project boundaries,
adjacent to and contiguous with existing wetlands to the maximum extent pos sible.
Habitats suitable for Congdon’s tarplant and other native wetland species shall be created
onsite. If Congdon’s tarplant is found in areas proposed for disturbance, the affected
individuals shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio through seeding in a suitable conserved natural
open space area. A management plan for the species shall be developed consistent with
applicable scientific literature pertinent to this species.
9. Habitat restoration or enhancement sites shall be placed within deed-restricted area(s), and
shall be maintained and monitored for a minimum of five years. If sufficient onsite
mitigation area is not practicable, an offsite mitigation plan shall be prepared as part of the
Biological Mitigation Plan and approved by permitting agencies.
10. The Biological Mitigation Plan shall identify appropriate restoration and enhancement
activities to compensate for impacts to seasonal creek, wetland, and riparian habitat,
including a detailed planting plan and maintenance plans using locally obtained native
species and include habitat enhancement to support native wildlife and plant species.
11. A weed management plan and weed identification list shall be included in the Biological
Mitigation Plan.
12. Habitat restoration or enhancement areas shall be maintained weekly for the first three
years after Phase completion and quarterly thereafter. Maintenance shall include
eradication of noxious weeds found on California Department of Food and Agriculture
Lists (CDFA) A and B. Noxious weeds on CDFA list C may be eradicated or otherwise
managed.
13. Mitigation implementation and success shall be monitored quarterly for the first two years
after completion of each Phase, semi-annually during the third year, and annually the fourth
and fifth years. Annual reports documenting site inspections and site recovery status shall
be prepared and sent to the County and appropriate agencies.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2c. Within the required Biological Mitigation Plan, all temporary and
permanent impacts to riparian trees, wetlands, and riparian habitat shall be mitigated, as follows:
6. Temporary impacts to wetland and riparian habitat shall be mitigated at a minimum 1:1
mitigation ratio for restoration (area of restored habitat to impacted habitat).
7. Permanent impacts to state jurisdictional areas, including isolated wetlands within
agricultural lands and riparian habitat will be mitigated at a 1.5:1 ratio (area of restored and
enhanced habitat to impacted habitat).
8. Permanent impacts to federal wetlands shall be mitigated at a minimum 3:1 ratio (1:1 area
of created to impacted habitat plus 2:1 area of created/enhanced habitat to impacted
habitat).
9. Riparian trees four inches or greater measured at diameter-at-breast-height (DBH) shall be
replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 3:1 (replaced: removed). Trees measured at 24
inches or greater DBH shall be replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 10:1. Willows and
cottonwoods may be planted from live stakes following guidelines provided in the
California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual for planting dormant cuttings and
container stock (CDFW 2010). Permanent impacts to riparian vegetation shall be mitigated
at a 3:1 ratio to ensure no net loss of acreage and individual plants.
10. Replacement trees shall be planted in the fall or winter of the year in which trees were
removed. All replacement trees will be planted no more than one year following the date
upon which the native trees were removed. Replacement plants shall be monitored for 5
Packet Pg 291
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
93
Exhibit 1
years with a goal of at least 70 percent survival at the end of the 5-year period.
Supplemental irrigation may be provided during years 1 to 3; however, supplemental
watering shall not be provided during the final two years of monitoring.
— Mitigation Measures BIO-2d. Project design shall be modified to preserve at a minimum the
southern 275 feet of the North-South Creek Segment to protect all existing mature riparian
woodland, and the proposed drainage plan shall be altered to convey remaining surface water flows
from areas to the north to this channel.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2e. To minimize impacts to riparian habitat, the Project shall stockpile
sufficient emergent vegetation (e.g., cattails) for later planting in the realigned reach of Tank Farm
Creek. Stockpiled vegetation shall be placed in earthen basins with the roots covered with moist
soil and maintained in a moist condition during construction operations.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2g. A post-construction landscape and restoration report for each phase
shall be prepared by the Environmental Monitor based on as-built drawings and site inspections to
document the final grading, plantings, and habitat restoration activities. The report shall include as-
built plans prepared after restoration, grading, and mitigation habitat plantings are complete. The
as-built plans shall be prepared by landscape and grading contractors responsible for realignment
and restoration within Tank Farm Creek.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2h. Project activities within Tank Farm Creek and drainage channels,
including any tree pruning or removals, any necessary erosion repairs, or culvert removals, shall be
performed when the channel is dry, planned to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Natural
Resource Manager per City Drainage Manual Standards, and be subject to monitoring by the
Environmental Monitor. Upon removal of the existing steel culvert currently used for farm access
across Tank Farm Creek, the channel shall be restored to match conditions immediately upstream
and downstream including channel width, gradient, and vegetation.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2i. To reduce erosion and runoff from all exposed soils, all bare disturbed
soils shall be hydroseeded at the completion of grading for each construction phase. The seed mix
shall contain a minimum of three locally native grass species and may contain one or two sterile
non-native grasses not to exceed 25 percent of the total seed mix by count. Seeding shall be
completed no later than November 15 of the year in which Project activities occurred. All exposed
areas where seeding is considered unsuccessful after 90 days shall receive a second application or
seeding, straw, or mulch as soon as is practical to reduce erosion.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2j. The Tank Farm Creek Class I bicycle path bridge footings for creek
crossings shall be placed outside mapped riparian areas and outside the top of the bank of the
channel invert. The Class I bridges shall be located within areas that have little to no riparian
vegetation. No construction activities or equipment shall occur in the stream channel. The
placement of the bridge and footings shall be indicated on the Development Plan, VTM, and
Biological Mitigation Plan, and shall show the bridges’ placement in relation to existing vegetation
and the creek channel and banks.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-3a. The City-approved qualified biologist shall conduct training to all
construction personnel to familiarize construction crews with sensitive species that have the
potential to occur within the Project site. This may include but is not limited to: Californi a red-
legged frog, western pond turtle, Steelhead trout, bats, migratory birds, and Congdon’s tarplant.
The educational program shall include a description what constitutes take, penalties for take, and
Packet Pg 292
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
94
Exhibit 1
the guidelines that would be followed by all construction personnel to avoid take of species during
construction activities. Descriptions of the California red-legged frog and its habits, Congdon’s
tarplant, nesting and migratory birds that may be encountered, and all other sensitive species that
have a potential to occur within the vicinity of Project construction shall be provided. The
construction crew foreman shall be responsible for ensuring that crew members comply with the
guidelines and that all new personnel receive the training before partaking in construction activities.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-3b. The Biological Mitigation Plan shall address wildlife and special
status species movement as follows:
• Migratory and Nesting Bird Management. Grading and construction activities shall
avoid the breeding season (typically assumed to be from February 15 to August 15) to the
extent practicable, particularly within 50 feet of Tank Farm Creek and riparian or wetland
habitat. If Project activities must be conducted during this period, pre-construction nesting
bird surveys shall take place within one week of habitat disturbance associated with each
phase, and if active nests are located, the following shall be implemented:
• Construction activities within 50 feet of active nests shall be restricted until chicks have
fledged, unless the nest belongs to a raptor, in which case a 200-foot activity restriction
buffer shall be observed.
• A pre-construction survey report shall be submitted to the City immediately upon
completion of the survey. The report shall detail appropriate fencing or flagging of the
buffer zone and make recommendations on additional monitoring requirements. A map of
the Project site and nest locations shall be included with the report.
• The Project biologist conducting the nesting survey shall have the authority to reduce or
increase the recommended buffer depending upon site conditions and the species involved.
A report of findings and recommendations for bird protection shall be submitted to the City
prior to vegetation removal.
• Bat Colony Management. Prior to removal of any trees over 20 inches diameter-at-breast-
height (DBH), a survey shall be conducted by a CDFW-approved qualified biologist to
determine if any tree proposed for removal or trimming harbors sensitive bat species or
maternal bat colonies. Maternal bat colonies shall not be disturbed. If a non-maternal roost
is found, the qualified biologist shall install one-way valves or other appropriate passive
relocation method. For each occupied roost removed, one bat box shall be installed in
similar habitat and shall have similar cavities or crevices to those which are removed,
including access, ventilation, dimensions, height above ground, and thermal conditions. If
a bat colony is excluded from the Project site, appropriate alternate bat habitat shall be
installed in the Project site. To the extent practicable, alternate bat house installation shall
be installed near the onsite drainage.
• Congdon’s Tarplant Management. Prior to initiation of construction, the Applicant shall
fund a site survey for Congdon’s tarplant, and:
• If Congdon’s tarplant is found in areas proposed for building, the affected individuals shall
be replaced at a 1:1 ratio through seeding in a suitable conserved natural open space area.
• A mitigation and monitoring plan for the species shall be developed consistent with
applicable scientific literature pertinent to this species. The plan shall provide for the
annual success over an area of at least 1,330 square feet with approximately 500-750
individuals (the current aerial extent) and be implemented to reduce impacts to Congdon’s
tarplant to a less than significant level.
• The mitigation plan shall be incorporated into the Biological Mitigation Plan, wherein
wetland sites shall be created and Congdon’s tarplant seeds from the site shall be
reintroduced.
Packet Pg 293
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
95
Exhibit 1
• Sensitive Species Management. Injury or mortality to the California red-legged frog,
western pond turtle, and steelhead shall be avoided. The plan shall include the foll owing
measures: pre-Project surveys; worker awareness; cessation of work in occupied areas;
relocation (if necessary) of frogs, turtles, and steelhead from the work area by a
professional biologist authorized by the USFWS and/or CDFW; and monitoring by a
qualified biologist during construction. Necessary permits shall be obtained from the state
(CDFW) and federal (USACE and USFWS) regulatory agencies with jurisdiction. Any
other sensitive species observed during the pre-construction surveys shall be relocated out
of harm’s way by the qualified biologist into the nearest suitable habitat as determined in
consultation with the jurisdictional resource agency outside the disturbance area.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-3c. Within 48 hours prior to construction activities within 50 feet of Tank
Farm Creek, drainages, and seasonal wetlands, the Project site shall be surveyed for California red-
legged frogs by a qualified biologist. If any California red-legged frogs are found, work within 25
linear feet in any direction of the frog shall not start until the frog has been moved from the area.
The USFWS shall be consulted for appropriate action; the Applicant shall obtain a Biological
Opinion from the USFWS and any additional authorization required by other regulatory agencies
prior to the commencement of work. The USFWS-qualified biologist, Environmental Monitor, or
USFWS personnel may determine that frog-exclusion fencing is necessary to prevent overland
movement of frogs if concerns arise that frogs could enter construction areas. Frog-exclusion
fencing should contain no gaps and must extend at least 18 inches above ground; fences may be
opened during periods of no construction (e.g., weekends) to prevent entrapment.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-3d. Within 48 hours prior to construction activities within 50 feet of Tank
Farm Creek, drainages, seasonal wetlands, and riparian habitat, the Project site shall be surveyed
for western pond turtles by a qualified biologist. If any western pond turtles are found, work shall
cease until the turtle is relocated to the nearest suitable habitat. The qualified biologist shall monitor
all ground breaking work conducted within 50 feet of western pond turtle habitat. The City-
approved biologist Environmental Monitor may determine that silt fencin g shall be installed
adjacent to western pond turtle habitat if concerns arise that the western pond turtle overland
movement could allow them to access construction areas.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-4. The required Biological Mitigation Plan shall address bat colonies for
the Buckley Road Extension site. Bat surveys shall be conducted in buildings proposed for
demolition. If surveys determine bats are present, bat exclusion devices shall be installed between
August and November, and building demolition would occur between November and March. If
demolition of structures must occur during the bat breeding season, buildings must be inspected
and deemed clear of bat colonies/roosts within seven days of demolition and an appropriately
trained and approved biologist must conduct a daily site-clearance during demolition. If bats are
roosting in a structure in the Project site during the daytime but are not part of an active maternity
colony, then exclusion measures must include one-way valves that allow bats to get out but are
designed so that the bats may not re-enter the structure.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-5a. All exterior building lights facing Tank Farm Creek shall be hooded
to prevent light spillover into the creek; all residential street lights over 10 feet in h eight shall be
setback a minimum of 100 feet from the top of the creek bank and hooded and/or directed away
from the creek. Any night lighting adjacent to the creek (e.g., walkway lights) shall be of low
voltage and hooded downward. Artificial light levels within 20 feet of the top of the creek bank
shall not exceed 1-foot candle or the lowest level of illumination found to be feasible by the City.
Packet Pg 294
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
96
Exhibit 1
— Mitigation Measure BIO-5b. Tank Farm Creek restoration/enhancement plantings shall include
native vegetation, such as oaks, cottonwoods, willows, and sycamores along the entire length of
the Project’s creek frontage in order to minimize light spillover into the creek.
—
— Mitigation Measure BIO-6. All work in and within 100 feet of Tank Farm Creek, including work
within the creek setback, shall occur outside the rainy season (April 15 to October 15, unless
approved otherwise by RWQCB), during periods when the creek channel is dry and water flows
are absent.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-1a. Prior to the issuance of any construction/grading permit and/or the
commencement of any clearing, grading, or excavation, the Applicant shall submit a Notice of
Intent (NOI) for discharge from the Project site to the California SWRCB Storm Water Permit Unit.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-1b. The Applicant shall require the building contractor to prepare and
submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the City 45 days prior to the start of
work for approval. The contractor is responsible for understanding the State General Permi t and
instituting the SWPPP during construction. A SWPPP for site construction shall be developed prior
to the initiation of grading and implemented for all construction activity on the Project site in excess
of one (1) acre, or where the area of disturbance is less than one acre but is part of the Project’s
plan of development that in total disturbs one or more acres. The SWPPP shall identify potential
pollutant sources that may affect the quality of discharges to storm water, and shall include specific
BMPs to control the discharge of material from the site. The following BMP methods shall include,
but would not be limited to:
• Temporary detention basins, straw bales, sand bagging, mulching, erosion control blankets,
silt fencing, and soil stabilizers shall be used.
• Soil stockpiles and graded slopes shall be covered after 14 days of inactivity and 24 hours
prior to and during inclement weather conditions.
• Fiber rolls shall be placed along the top of exposed slopes and at the toes of graded areas
to reduce surface soil movement, as necessary.
• A routine monitoring plan shall be implemented to ensure success of all onsite erosion and
sedimentation control measures.
• Dust control measures shall be implemented to ensure success of all onsite activities to
control fugitive dust.
• Streets surrounding the Project site shall be cleaned daily or as necessary.
• BMPs shall be strictly followed to prevent spills and discharges of pollutants onsite
(material and container storage, proper trash disposal, construction entrances, etc.).
• Sandbags, or other equivalent techniques, shall be utilized along graded areas to prevent
siltation transport to the surrounding areas.
• Additional BMPs shall be implemented for any fuel storage or fuel handling that could
occur onsite during construction. The SWPPP must be prepared in accordance with the
guidelines adopted by the SWRCB. The SWPPP shall be submitted to the City along with
grading/development plans for review and approval. The Applicant shall file a Notice of
Completion for construction of the development, identifying that pollution sources were
controlled during the construction of the Project and implementing a closure SWPPP for
the site.
• Plan Requirements and Timing. The Applicant shall prepare a SWPPP that includes the
above and any additional required BMPs. The SWPPP and notices shall be submitted for
review and approval by the City prior to the issuance of grading permits for Phase 1
construction. The SWPPP shall be designed to address erosion and sediment control during
all phases of development of the site until all disturbed areas are permanently stabilized.
Packet Pg 295
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
97
Exhibit 1
— Mitigation Measure HYD-1c. Installation of the eight drainage outlets within Tank Farm Creek
shall occur within the dry season (May through October).
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. Implementation of MM BIO -2a would avoid the potential impacts of
manufactured slopes and the Class I bicycle path intruding into the bank of Tank Farm Creek or its
riparian habitat by establishing setbacks for a wider wildlife corridor. This would also protect the
creek and riparian habitat from potential impacts associated with temporary or permanent loss of
habitat, construction impacts, siltation and erosion, and operational impacts associated with
increased human activity. Implementation of MM BIO-2b and 2c would offset the loss of sensitive
habitat and trees and compensates at appropriate replacement ratios onsite consistent with
appropriate agencies, to the maximum extent feasible. Impacts to riparian vegetation would be
reduced within implementation of MM BIO-2d and 2e. MM BIO-2g would ensure appropriate
restoration of riparian habitat. MM BIO-2h would reduce potential erosion and siltation impacts
within the creek. Implementation of MM BIO-2i in combination with MM BIO-1a and 1b and all
subparts, would reduce temporary impacts to jurisdictional aquatic features from construction
activities by requiring work to be completed when water flow in the creek is dry, and appropriate
measures are taken to prevent sedimentation. MM BIO-2j would address potential impacts to Tank
Farm Creek from the proposed Class I bicycle path footings placement. MM HYD-4a and b would
address potential impacts of frac-outs. MM BIO-3a would provide educational training all
construction personnel in order for them to identify sensitive species, take appropriate actions, and
avoid “take”. MM BIO-3b through 3d would reduce potential impacts to special status birds and
bats to less than significant by avoiding disturbance during the breeding season and roosting times
when these species are most vulnerable to disturbance and ensuring compliance with appropriate
avoidance buffers if construction during the season cannot be avoided. Mitigation would limit
construction in the creek during nesting season and peak activity periods, thus reducing impacts to
migrating species. MM BIO-4, which requires pre-construction surveys and exclusion measures
for sensitive bats and protection or replacement of the Congdon’s tarplant, would minimize
cumulative impacts to bat colonies and sensitive plant species. Implementation of MM BIO-5a and
5b would reduce long-term impacts to the habitat value and wildlife corridor functions associated
with increased disturbance from light and glare in the Project vicinity. MM BIO-6 and MM BIO-
2h and 2j, address measures to avoid degradation of water quality in the creek from sedimentation
and construction. Implementation of these mitigations, would mitigate the Project’s contribution
towards cumulative impacts to biological resources.
Packet Pg 296
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
98
Exhibit 1
D. CULTURAL RESOURCES
1. Impact CR-2. Development and grading would result in direct significant impacts to known prehistoric
resources within the Project site. (Refer to pages 3.5-15 and 5-56 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure CR-2a. Data recovery through controlled grading of CA-SLO-2798/H shall
occur prior to the start of construction to seek buried features and additional diagnostic artifacts.
The Applicant shall retain a Registered Professional Archaeologist familiar with the type s of
historic and prehistoric resources that could be encountered within the Project site and a Native
American monitor to supervise the controlled grading, which shall occur in 10 -centimeter lifts to
culturally sterile sediments or maximum construction depth (whichever is reached first).
• Any formed tools exposed during grading shall be collected. If archaeological features are
exposed (including but not limited to hearths, storage pits, midden deposits, or structural
remains), the archaeologist shall temporarily redirect grading to another area so the features
can be exposed, recorded, and sampled according to standard archaeological procedures.
Organic remains shall be dated using the radiocarbon method and the geochemical source
and hydration rim thickness of any obsidian shall be determined. Technical analyses of
plant remains, bone and shell dietary debris, and other important materials shall also be
performed.
• Artifacts, features, and other materials recovered through this process shall be described,
illustrated, and analyzed fully in a technical report of findings; the analysis shall include
comparative research with other sites of similar age. In addition to the technical report, the
findings from this research shall be published in an appropriate scientific journal. The
Applicant shall fund all technical reporting and subsequent publication.
— Mitigation Measure CR-2b. Following completion of controlled grading of CA-SLO-2798/H,
the Applicant shall retain a Registered Professional Archaeologist and a Native American
consultant to monitor all further earth disturbances within Phase 5 to ensure that previously
unidentified buried archaeological deposits are not inadvertently exposed and damaged. In the
event archaeological remains are encountered during grading or other earth disturbance, work in
the vicinity shall be stopped immediately and redirected to another location until the Project
archaeologist evaluates the significance of the find pursuant to City Archaeological Resource
Preservation Program Guidelines. If remains are found to be significant, they shall be subject to
a Phase 3 mitigation program consistent with City Guidelines and funded by the Applicant.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. (See FEIR pages 3.5-19 and 5-56 to 5-57.) As avoidance of prehistoric
resource site CA-SLO-2798/H would result in conflicts with LUCE goals and Project Objectives,
controlled grading and artifact recovery would take place within the prehistoric site area allowing
for documentation for the site and preservation of recovered artifacts. While prehistoric sites such
as CA-SLO-2798/H are uncommon in the area, monitoring, adherence to the City-approved
archaeological testing and mitigation program, and artifact recovery and documentation would
reduce impacts to a less than significant level after mitigation.
Packet Pg 297
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
99
Exhibit 1
3. Impact CR-3. Earthwork and ground disturbing construction activities for the MPA could potentially
uncover significant unknown prehistoric or historic archaeological resources. If improperly handled,
such resources could be adversely impacted. (Refer to pages 3.5-19 and 5-57 of the Final EIR.)
— Mitigation Measure CR-3a. Prior to the issuance of building and grading permits for Phase 1, the
Applicant shall retain a City-approved Registered Professional Archaeologist and a Native
American monitor to be present during all ground disturbing activities within the Project site and
Buckley Road Extension site. In the event of any inadvertent discovery of prehistoric or historic-
period archaeological resources during construction, all work within 50 feet of the discovery shall
immediately cease (or greater or lesser distance as needed to protect the discovery and determined
in the field by the Project archaeologist). The Applicant shall immediately notif y the City of San
Luis Obispo Community Development Department. The Project archaeologist shall evaluate the
significance of the discovery pursuant to City Archaeological Resource Preservation Program
Guidelines prior to resuming any activities that could impact the site/discovery. If the Project
archaeologist determines that the find may qualify for listing in the CRHR, the site shall be avoided
or shall be subject to a Phase 3 mitigation program consistent with City Guidelines and funded by
the Applicant. Work shall not resume until authorization is received from the City.
— Mitigation Measure CR-3b. Prior to construction, workers shall receive education regarding the
recognition of possible buried cultural remains and protection of all cultural resources, including
prehistoric and historic resources, during construction. Such training shall provide construction
personnel with direction regarding the procedures to be followed in the unlikely event that
previously unidentified archaeological materials, including Native American burials, are
discovered during construction. Training would also inform construction personnel that
unauthorized collection or disturbance of artifacts or other cultural materials is not allowed. The
training shall be prepared by the Project archaeologist and shall provide a description of the cultural
resources that may be encountered in the Project site, outline steps to follow in the event that a
discovery is made, and provide contact information for the Project archaeologist, Native American
monitor, and appropriate City personnel. The training shall be conducted concurrent with other
environmental or safety awareness and education programs for the Project, provided that the
program elements pertaining to archaeological resources is provided by a qualified instructor
meeting applicable professional qualifications standards.
Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. (See FEIR pages 3.5-21 and 5-57.) Implementation of the above
mitigation would ensure that appropriate precautions and protection measures are taken to avoid
potentially significant impacts to unknown or undiscovered archaeological resources during
construction activities on- and offsite. After mitigation, impacts would result less than significant
residual impacts.
4. Cumulative Cultural Resources Impacts. The MPA would mitigate impacts to cultural resources
with implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-2a and 2b, and CR-3a and b, and therefore would not
contribute to cumulatively considerable impacts to cultural resources. Cumulative projects would be
required to comply with General Plan Policies relating to historic and archaeological resources, and
would be subject to review by the City Cultural Heritage Commission for conformance with guidelines
for cultural resources protection. Further, cumulative projects would be subject to environmental review
under CEQA, which requires avoidance of significant historical resources whenever feasibl e; if
avoidance is not feasible, then appropriate mitigation measures would be applied. As such, cumulative
impacts are considered significant but mitigable. Cumulative effects under the MPA would be similar
to those of the Project as described on page 3.5-22 of the Final EIR.)
Packet Pg 298
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
100
Exhibit 1
Mitigation: Mitigation Measures CR-2a and 2b, and CR-3a and 3b would be required to reduce the
project’s contribution to cumulatively considerable impacts to cultural resources to a less than
significant level.
— Mitigation Measure CR-2a. Data recovery through controlled grading of CA-SLO-2798/H shall
occur prior to the start of construction to seek buried features and additional diagnostic artifacts.
The Applicant shall retain a Registered Professional Archaeologist familiar with the types of
historic and prehistoric resources that could be encountered within the Project site and a Native
American monitor to supervise the controlled grading, which shall occur in 10 -centimeter lifts to
culturally sterile sediments or maximum construction depth (whichever is reached first).
• Any formed tools exposed during grading shall be collected. If archaeological features are
exposed (including but not limited to hearths, storage pits, midden deposits, or structural
remains), the archaeologist shall temporarily redirect grading to another area so the features
can be exposed, recorded, and sampled according to standard archaeological procedures.
Organic remains shall be dated using the radiocarbon method and the geochemical source
and hydration rim thickness of any obsidian shall be determined. Technical analyses of
plant remains, bone and shell dietary debris, and other important materials shall also be
performed.
• Artifacts, features, and other materials recovered through this process shall be descr ibed,
illustrated, and analyzed fully in a technical report of findings; the analysis shall include
comparative research with other sites of similar age. In addition to the technical report, the
findings from this research shall be published in an appropriate scientific journal. The
Applicant shall fund all technical reporting and subsequent publication.
— Mitigation Measure CR-2b. Following completion of controlled grading of CA-SLO-2798/H,
the Applicant shall retain a Registered Professional Archaeologist and a Native American
consultant to monitor all further earth disturbances within Phase 5 to ensure that previously
unidentified buried archaeological deposits are not inadvertently exposed and damaged. In the
event archaeological remains are encountered during grading or other earth disturbance, work in
the vicinity shall be stopped immediately and redirected to another location until the Project
archaeologist evaluates the significance of the find pursuant to City Archaeological Resource
Preservation Program Guidelines. If remains are found to be significant, they shall be subject to
a Phase 3 mitigation program consistent with City Guidelines and funded by the Applicant.
— Mitigation Measure CR-3a. Prior to the issuance of building and grading permits for Phase 1, the
Applicant shall retain a City-approved Registered Professional Archaeologist and a Native
American monitor to be present during all ground disturbing activities within the Project site and
Buckley Road Extension site. In the event of any inadvertent discovery of prehistoric or historic-
period archaeological resources during construction, all work within 50 feet of the discovery shall
immediately cease (or greater or lesser distance as needed to protect the discovery and determined
in the field by the Project archaeologist). The Applicant shall immediately notify the City of San
Luis Obispo Community Development Department. The Project archaeologist shall evaluate the
significance of the discovery pursuant to City Archaeological Resource Preserva tion Program
Guidelines prior to resuming any activities that could impact the site/discovery. If the Project
archaeologist determines that the find may qualify for listing in the CRHR, the site shall be avoided
or shall be subject to a Phase 3 mitigation program consistent with City Guidelines and funded by
the Applicant. Work shall not resume until authorization is received from the City.
Packet Pg 299
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
101
Exhibit 1
— Mitigation Measure CR-3b. Prior to construction, workers shall receive education regarding the
recognition of possible buried cultural remains and protection of all cultural resources, including
prehistoric and historic resources, during construction. Such training shall provide construction
personnel with direction regarding the procedures to be followed in the unlikely event that
previously unidentified archaeological materials, including Native American burials, are
discovered during construction. Training would also inform construction personnel that
unauthorized collection or disturbance of artifacts or other cultural materials is not allowed. The
training shall be prepared by the Project archaeologist and shall provide a description of the cultural
resources that may be encountered in the Project site, outline steps to follow in the event that a
discovery is made, and provide contact information for the Project archaeologist, Native American
monitor, and appropriate City personnel. The training shall be conducted concurrent with other
environmental or safety awareness and education programs for the Project, provided that the
program elements pertaining to archaeological resources is provided by a qualified instructor
meeting applicable professional qualifications standards.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. Implementation of the above mitigation would ensure that appropriate
precautions and protection measures are taken to mitigate the MPA’s contribution to cumulative
impacts to unknown or undiscovered archaeological resources. (
E. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
1. Impact HAZ-1: During grading/construction activities and Project operations, the MPA would
potentially expose persons to potentially toxic, hazardous, or otherwise harmful chemicals through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accidental conditions involving the release of hazardous materials
into the environment. (Refer to pages 3.6-22 and 5-57 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measure would be required.
— Mitigation Measure HAZ-1. Prior to earthwork and demolition activities, a site-specific Health
and Safety Plan shall be developed per California Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(Cal/OSHA) requirements. The Health and Safety Plan shall include appropriate best management
practices (BMPs) related to the treatment, handling, and disposal of NOA and ACMs. A NOA
Construction and Grading Project Form shall be submitted to the APCD prior to grading activities.
All construction employees that have the potential to come into contact with contaminated building
materials and soil/bedrock shall be briefed on the safety plan, including required proper training
and use of personal protective equipment. During earthwork and demolition activities, procedures
shall be followed to eliminate or minimize construction worker or general public exposure to heavy
hydrocarbons and other potential contaminants in soil and groundwater, and potential ACMs within
potential demolished materials. Procedures shall include efforts to control fugitive dust, contain
and cover excavation debris piles, appropriate laboratory analysis of soil for waste characterization,
segregation of contaminated soil from uncontaminated soil, and demolished materials. The
applicable regulations associated with excavation, removal, transportation, and disposal of
contaminated soil shall be followed (e.g., tarping of trucks and waste manifesting).
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
Packet Pg 300
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
102
Exhibit 1
identified in the Final EIR. (See FEIR pages 3.6-25 and 5-57 to 5-58.) MM HAZ-1 would facilitate
the safe removal of potentially hazardous building materials and the cleanup of contaminated soils,
thus reducing the level of risk within the MPA site.
F. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
1. Impact HYD-1: The MPA would result in potentially significant impacts to water quality due to
polluted runoff during construction activities. (Refer to pages 3.7-32 and 5-59 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-1a. Prior to the issuance of any construction/grading permit and/or the
commencement of any clearing, grading, or excavation, the Applicant shall submit a Notice of
Intent (NOI) for discharge from the Project site to the California SWRCB Storm Water Permit Unit.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-1b. The Applicant shall require the building contractor to prepare and
submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the City 45 days prior to the start of
work for approval. The contractor is responsible for understanding the State General Permit and
instituting the SWPPP during construction. A SWPPP for site construction shall be developed prior
to the initiation of grading and implemented for all construction activity on the Project site in excess
of one (1) acre, or where the area of disturbance is less than one acre but is part of the Project’s
plan of development that in total disturbs one or more acres. The SWPPP shall identify potential
pollutant sources that may affect the quality of discharges to storm water, and shall include specific
BMPs to control the discharge of material from the site. The following BMP methods shall include,
but would not be limited to:
• Temporary detention basins, straw bales, sand bagging, mulching, erosion control blankets,
silt fencing, and soil stabilizers shall be used.
• Soil stockpiles and graded slopes shall be covered after 14 days of inactivity and 24 hours
prior to and during inclement weather conditions.
• Fiber rolls shall be placed along the top of exposed slopes and at the toes of graded areas
to reduce surface soil movement, as necessary.
• A routine monitoring plan shall be implemented to ensure success of all onsite erosion and
sedimentation control measures.
• Dust control measures shall be implemented to ensure success of all onsite activities to
control fugitive dust.
• Streets surrounding the Project site shall be cleaned daily or as necessary.
• BMPs shall be strictly followed to prevent spills and discharges of pollutants onsi te
(material and container storage, proper trash disposal, construction entrances, etc.).
• Sandbags, or other equivalent techniques, shall be utilized along graded areas to prevent
siltation transport to the surrounding areas.
• Additional BMPs shall be implemented for any fuel storage or fuel handling that could
occur onsite during construction. The SWPPP must be prepared in accordance with the
guidelines adopted by the SWRCB. The SWPPP shall be submitted to the City along with
grading/development plans for review and approval. The Applicant shall file a Notice of
Completion for construction of the development, identifying that pollution sources were
controlled during the construction of the Project and implementing a closure SWPPP for
the site.
Packet Pg 301
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
103
Exhibit 1
— Mitigation Measure HYD-1c. Installation of the eight drainage outlets within Tank Farm Creek
shall occur within the dry season (May through October).
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would reduce the
potentially significant construction runoff and erosion, reducing the impact to less than significant.
(See FEIR pages 3.7-36 and 5-59.)
2. Impact HYD-2: MPA development would substantially alter existing drainage patterns on the Project
site and Buckley Road Extension property, which could potentially result in substantial flooding,
erosion, or siltation onsite and offsite. (Refer to pages 3.7-36 and 5-59 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures shall be required.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-2a. The Applicant shall prepare and submit a Master Drainage Plan.
The Master Drainage Plan shall address cumulative regional drainage and flooding impacts on the
Project site, including construction and stream stability, and set forth measures to coordinate Project
drainage with Chevron Tank Farm remediation and drainage improvements. The Master Drainage
Plan shall be implemented pursuant to the City’s SWMP submitted by the City to the RWQCB
under the NPDES Phase II program and pursuant to the programs developed under the City of San
Luis Obispo General Plan and the City of San Luis Obispo Waterways Management Plan. The
Master Drainage Plan shall meet the following requirements:
• Development of a Construction Drainage Plan that details the control and retention of
runoff for each phase of construction, and clearly displays the location of bioretention
facilities, their retention capacity and relationship to subsurface drainage culverts,
alignment of creek and drainage channels for each phase.
• Ensure that onsite detention facilities, particularly the pocket park/bioswale, are designed
to safely retain flood flows using either gently sloping exterior slopes (e.g., 4:1) or provide
safety fencing around perimeters, consistent with applicable City standards.
• Characterization of drainage from the East-West Channel and conveyance of flows after
removal of this channel.
• Demonstrate peak flows and runoff for each phase of construction.
• Be coordinated with habitat restoration efforts, including measures to minimize removal of
riparian and wetland habitats, contouring of creek invert to create pools and removal of
trash or debris as appropriate.
• Location and extent of vegetated Swales designed to reduce sediment and particulate forms
of metals and other pollutants along corridors of planted grasses or native vegetation.
• Location and extent of vegetated Filter Strips, 15-foot wide vegetated buffer strips that also
reduce sediment and particulate forms of metals and nutrients.
• The use, location and capacity of Hydrodynamic Separation Products to reduce suspended
solids greater than 240 microns, trash and hydrocarbons. These hydrodynamic separators
must be sized to handle peak flows from the Project site consistent with applicable
regulatory standards.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2a. Project designs shall be modified to realign the Tank Farm Class I
bicycle path and relocate manufactured slopes for housing pads in order to create a minimum of a
35-foot creek setback from either the top of the bank of Tank Farm Creek or edge of riparian habitat,
whichever is further, for at least 90 percent of corridor length. No more than 10 percent of the
Packet Pg 302
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
104
Exhibit 1
length of the corridor (700 linear feet) shall have a setback of less than 35 feet, but at least 20 feet
from the top of the bank or edge of riparian canopy, whichever is further. However, in any instance
the creek setback shall be no less than 20 feet from the edge of riparian canopy or top of bank,
whichever is further, consistent with Section 17.16.025 of the City of San Luis Obispo Zoning
Regulations.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. (See FEIR pages 3.7 -44 through 3.7-45 and 5-59.) Preparation of the
Master Drainage Plan and would ensure coordination of drainage improvements with the Chevron
Tank Farm property to the north, and establish the schedule and timing of onsite improvements.
MM BIO-2a, relocation of the Class I path outside of the 35-foot creek buffe, would reduce erosion
and siltation.
3. Impact HYD-3: The MPA could potentially result in flooding, including increased flood water
surface elevations across the Project site, adjacent properties, and within Tank Farm Creek. (Refer
to pages 3.7-45 and 5-60 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-3a. The Applicant shall prepare a Master Drainage Plan which shall
consider cumulative regional drainage and flooding impacts of the Project, and shall be submitted
to the City Public Works Director for approval and shall meet the following requirements:
• There shall be no significant net increase in upstream or downstream floodwater surface
elevations for the 100-year floodplain as a result of changes in floodplain configuration
and building construction. A significant threshold of a 2.5-inch increase in floodwater
surface elevations or 0.3 feet per second increase in stream velocities shall be used. This
shall be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City Engineer or County Public Works
Director based on an Applicant furnished hydraulic analysis.
• There shall be no significant net decrease in floodplain storage volume as a result of a new
development or redevelopment projects. This can be achieved by a zero-net fill grading
plan, which balances all fill placed on the 100-year floodplain with cut taken from other
portions of the floodplain within the Project site of the application, or with cut exported
offsite. Specifically, all fill placed in a floodplain shall be balanced with an equal amount
of soil material removal (cut) and shall not decrease floodplain storage capacity at any
stage of a flood (2, 10, 50, or 100-year event).
• A net increase in fill in any floodplain is allowed only when all the conditions listed in the
Managed Fill Criteria of the Drainage Design Manual (DDM) are also met.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-3b. All bridges, culverts, outfalls, and modifications to the existing
creek channels must be designed and constructed in compliance with the City’s Drainage Design
Manual and approved by the City Engineer, USACE, CDFW, and Central Coast RWQCB, and
must meet city standards and policies.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures above would
reduce the potentially significant flooding impact to less than significant by ensuring floodplain
storage within the MPA site is not substantially decreased. (See FEIR p. 3.7-48 and 5-60.)
Packet Pg 303
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
105
Exhibit 1
4. Impact HYD-4: Installation of at least two utility lines using horizontal directional drilling would
bisect Tank Farm Creek and has the potential to impact water quality. (Refer to pages 3.7 -48 and 5-60
of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-4a. A site-specific, geotechnical investigation shall be completed in
areas proposed for HDD. Preliminary geotechnical borings shall be drilled to verify that the
proposed depth of HDD is appropriate to avoid frac-outs (i.e., the depth of finest grained sediments
and least fractures) and to determine appropriate HDD methods (i.e., appropriate drilling mud
mixtures for specific types of sediments). The investigation shall include results from at least three
borings, a geologic cross section, a discussion of drilling conditions, and a history and
recommendations to prevent frac-outs.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-4b. A Frac-out Contingency Plan shall be completed and shall include
measures for training, monitoring, worst case scenario evaluation, equipment and materials, agency
notification and prevention, containment, clean up, and disposal of released drilling muds.
Preventative measures would include incorporation of the recommendations of the geotechnical
investigation to determine the most appropriate HDD depth and drilling mud mixture. In
accordance with the RWQCB, HDD operations shall occur for non-perennial streams such as Tank
Farm Creek only when the stream is dry, and only during daylight ho urs. In addition, drilling
pressures shall be closely monitored so that they do not exceed those needed to penetrate the
formation. Monitoring by a minimum of two City-approved monitors (located both upstream and
downstream, who will move enough to monitor the entire area of operations) shall occur throughout
drilling operations to ensure swift response in the event of a frac -out, while containment shall be
accomplished through construction of temporary berms/dikes and use of silt fences, straw bales,
absorbent pads, straw wattles, and plastic sheeting. Clean up shall be accomplished with plastic
pails, shovels, portable pumps, and vacuum trucks. The Frac-out Contingency Plan shall be
submitted to the City, and the RWQCB shall review the plan.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. Implementation of mitigation measures MM HYD -4a and b would
ensure that water quality within Tank Farm Creek is not adversely impacted by HDD drilling
activities. (See FEIR pages 3.7-50 and 5-60 to 5-61.)
5. Impact HYD-5: Operation of the Project would result in potentially significant impacts to water quality
of Tank Farm and San Luis Obispo Creeks due to polluted urban runoff and sedimentation. (Refer to
page 3.7-50 and 5-61 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-2a. The Applicant shall prepare and submit a Master Drainage Plan.
The Master Drainage Plan shall address cumulative regional drainage and flooding impacts on the
Project site, including construction and stream stability, and set forth measures to coordinate Project
drainage with Chevron Tank Farm remediation and drainage improvements. The Master Drainage
Plan shall be implemented pursuant to the City’s SWMP submitted by the City to the RWQCB
under the NPDES Phase II program and pursuant to the programs developed under the City of San
Packet Pg 304
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
106
Exhibit 1
Luis Obispo General Plan and the City of San Luis Obispo Waterways Management Plan. The
Master Drainage Plan shall meet the following requirements:
• Development of a Construction Drainage Plan that details the control and retention of
runoff for each phase of construction, and clearly displays the location of bioretention
facilities, their retention capacity and relationship to subsurface drainage culverts,
alignment of creek and drainage channels for each phase.
• Ensure that onsite detention facilities, particularly the pocket park/bioswale, are designed
to safely retain flood flows using either gently sloping exterior slopes (e.g., 4:1) or provide
safety fencing around perimeters, consistent with applicable City standards.
• Characterization of drainage from the East-West Channel and conveyance of flows after
removal of this channel.
• Demonstrate peak flows and runoff for each phase of construction.
• Be coordinated with habitat restoration efforts, including measures to minimize removal of
riparian and wetland habitats, contouring of creek invert to create pools and removal of
trash or debris as appropriate.
• Location and extent of vegetated Swales designed to reduce sediment and particulate forms
of metals and other pollutants along corridors of planted grasses or native vegetation.
• Location and extent of vegetated Filter Strips, 15-foot wide vegetated buffer strips that also
reduce sediment and particulate forms of metals and nutrients.
• The use, location and capacity of Hydrodynamic Separation Products to reduce suspended
solids greater than 240 microns, trash and hydrocarbons. These hydrodynamic separators
must be sized to handle peak flows from the Project site consistent with applicable
regulatory standards.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-5. A Development Maintenance Manual for the Project shall include
detailed procedures for maintenance and operations of any storm water facilities to ensure long-
term operation and maintenance of post-construction storm water controls. The maintenance
manual shall require that storm water BMP devices be inspected, cleaned and maintained in
accordance with the manufacturer’s maintenance specifications. The manual shall require that
devices be cleaned prior to the onset of the rainy season (i.e., October 15th) and immediately after
the end of the rainy season (i.e., May 15th). The manual shall also require that all devices be
checked after major storm events. The Development Maintenance Manual shall include the
following:
• All loading docks and trash storage areas shall be setback a minimum of 150 feet from the
top of the creek bank. No outdoor storage or larger trash receptacles shall be permitted
within this setback area. All trash and outdoor storage areas shall be operated to reduce
potential impacts to riparian areas;
• Runoff shall be directed away from trash and loading dock areas;
• Trash and loading dock areas shall be screened or walled to minimize offsite transport of
trash;
• Bins shall be lined or otherwise constructed to reduce leaking of liquid wastes;
• Trash and loading dock areas shall be paved;
• Impermeable berms, drop inlets, trench catch basin, or overflow containment structures
around docks and trash areas shall be installed to minimize the potential for leaks, spills or
wash down water to enter the drainage system and Tank Farm Creek; and,
• The developer or acceptable maintenance organization shall complete inspections of the
site to ensure compliance with BMPs and water quality requirements on a semi -annual
basis (May 15 and October 15 of each year). A detailed summary report prepared by a
Packet Pg 305
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
107
Exhibit 1
licensed Civil Engineer shall be submitted to the City of San Luis Obispo Public Works
Department. The requirements for inspection and report submittal shall be recorded against
the property.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures listed above would
reduce runoff entering Tank Farm Creek and reduce the impacts to less than significant. (See FIER
page 3.7-52 and 5-61.)
G. LAND USE AND PLANNING
1. Impact LU-3: The proposed Project would be potentially inconsistent with adopted City policies in
the General Plan designed to protect biological resources and agricultural resources and ensure
provision of adequate utilities and public services. (Refer to pages 3.8-57 and 5-63of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required to ensure Project consistency
with applicable City General Plan policies.
— Mitigation Measure AG-1. The Applicant shall establish an offsite agricultural conservation
easement or pay in-lieu fees to a City designated fund dedicated to acquiring and preserving
agricultural land. While the City’s priority is that such agricultural land be acquired in the closest
feasible proximity to the City, mitigation may be implemented using one of the following options:
i. The Applicant shall ensure permanent protection of farmland of equal area and quality,
which does not already have permanent protection, within the City of San Luis Obispo,
consistent with City Policy 8.6.3(C) and AASP Policy 3.2.18. The Applicant shall identify
and purchase or place in a conservation easement a parcel of land of at least 71 acres of
equal quality farmland, or provide in-lieu fees to allow the City to complete such an
acquisition.
j. If no suitable parcel exists within the City limits, the Applicant shall identify and purchase
or place in a conservation easement a parcel of farmland, of equal quantity and quality,
within the City’s Sphere of Influence that is threatened by development of nonagricultural
uses. The parcel shall be placed in an agricultural conservation easement (refer to Figure 2
in the Land Use Element for City Sphere of Influence). The Applicant may also provide
in-lieu fees to allow the City to complete such an acquisition.
k. In the event that no suitable land is available within the City limits or City’s Sphere of
Influence, the Applicant shall identify and purchase or place in a conservation easement a
parcel of farmland, of equal quantity and quality, within the City’s urban reserve or
greenbelt that is threatened by development of nonagricultural uses. This parcel shall be
placed in an agricultural conservation easement (refer to Figure 1 in the Land Use Element
for City Planning Area). The Applicant may also provide in-lieu fees to allow the City to
complete such an acquisition.
l. In the event that no suitable land for an agricultural conservation easement is available for
purchase within the City limits, the City’s Sphere of Influence, or urban reserve or
greenbelt Planning Area, the Applicant shall identify and purchase or place in a
conservation easement a parcel of farmland, of equal quantity and quality, within County
lands (e.g., agricultural lands north and south of Buckley Road) that is considered to be
threatened by the conversion to nonagricultural use. This parcel shall be placed in an
Packet Pg 306
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
108
Exhibit 1
agricultural conservation easement. The Applicant may also provide in-lieu fees to allow
the City to complete such an acquisition. The Applicant shall demonstrate that such land is
as close in proximity to the City as feasible.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2a. Project designs shall be modified to realign the Tank Farm Class I
bicycle path and relocate manufactured slopes for housing pads in order to create a minimum of a
35-foot creek setback from either the top of the bank of Tank Farm Creek or edge of riparian habitat,
whichever is further, for at least 90 percent of corridor length. No more than 10 percent of the
length of the corridor (700 linear feet) shall have a setback of less than 35 feet, but at least 20 feet
from the top of the bank or edge of riparian canopy, whichever is further. However, in any instance
the creek setback shall be no less than 20 feet from the edge of riparian canopy or top of bank,
whichever is further, consistent with Section 17.16.025 of the City of San Luis Obispo Zoning
Regulations.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2b. The Biological Mitigation Plan shall provide details on timing and
implementation of required habitat restoration and shall be prepared in consultation with the City’s
Natural Resource Manager and CDFW. A copy of the final plan shall be submitted to the City for
review and approval. The plan shall be implemented by the Project Applicant, under supervision
by the City and Environmental Monitor, and:
14. Characterize the type, species composition, spatial extent, and ecological functions and
values of the wetland and riparian habitat that will be removed, lost, or damaged.
15. Describe the approach that will be used to replace the wetland and riparian habitat removed,
lost, or adversely impacted by the Project, including a list of the soil, plants, and other
materials that will be necessary for successful habitat replacement, and a description of
planting methods, location, spacing, erosion protection, and irrigation measures that will
be needed. Restoration and habitat enhancement shall include use of appropriate native
species and correction of bank stabilization issues. Wetland restoration or enhancement
areas shall be designed to facilitate establishment of wetland plants such as willows,
cottonwoods, rushes, and creeping wild rye.
16. Describe the habitat restoration ratio to be used in calculating the acreage of habitat to be
planted, consistent with MM BIO-2c through BIO-2e below and the findings in the
Biological Report (Appendix I).
17. Describe the program that will be used for monitoring the effectiveness and success of the
habitat replacement approach.
18. Describe how the habitat replacement approach will be supplemented or modified if the
monitoring program indicates that the current approach is not effective or successful.
19. Describe the criteria that will be used to evaluate the effectiveness and success of the
habitat replacement approach.
20. Indicate the timing and schedule for the planting of replacement habitat.
21. Habitat restoration or enhancement areas shall be established within the Project boundaries,
adjacent to and contiguous with existing wetlands to the maximum extent possible.
Habitats suitable for Congdon’s tarplant and other native wetland species shall be created
onsite. If Congdon’s tarplant is found in areas proposed for disturbance, the affected
individuals shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio through seeding in a suitable conserved natural
open space area. A management plan for the species shall be developed consistent with
applicable scientific literature pertinent to this species.
22. Habitat restoration or enhancement sites shall be placed within deed-restricted area(s), and
shall be maintained and monitored for a minimum of five years. If sufficient onsite
mitigation area is not practicable, an offsite mitigation plan shall be prepared as part of the
Biological Mitigation Plan and approved by permitting agencies.
Packet Pg 307
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
109
Exhibit 1
23. The Biological Mitigation Plan shall identify appropriate restoration and enhancement
activities to compensate for impacts to seasonal creek, wetland, and riparian habitat,
including a detailed planting plan and maintenance plans using locally obtained native
species and include habitat enhancement to support native wildlife and plant species.
24. A weed management plan and weed identification list shall be included in the Biological
Mitigation Plan.
25. Habitat restoration or enhancement areas shall be maintained weekly for the first three
years after Phase completion and quarterly thereafter. Maintenance shall include
eradication of noxious weeds found on California Department of Food and Agriculture
Lists (CDFA) A and B. Noxious weeds on CDFA list C may be eradicated or otherwise
managed.
26. Mitigation implementation and success shall be monitored quarterly for the first two years
after completion of each Phase, semi-annually during the third year, and annually the fourth
and fifth years. Annual reports documenting site inspections and site recovery status shall
be prepared and sent to the County and appropriate agencies.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2c. Within the required Biological Mitigation Plan, all temporary and
permanent impacts to riparian trees, wetlands, and riparian habitat shall be mitigated, as follows:
11. Temporary impacts to wetland and riparian habitat shall be mitigated at a minimum 1:1
mitigation ratio for restoration (area of restored habitat to impacted habitat).
12. Permanent impacts to state jurisdictional areas, including isolated wetlands within
agricultural lands and riparian habitat will be mitigated at a 1.5:1 ratio (area of restored and
enhanced habitat to impacted habitat).
13. Permanent impacts to federal wetlands shall be mitigated at a minimum 3:1 ratio (1:1 area
of created to impacted habitat plus 2:1 area of created/enhanced habitat to impacted
habitat).
14. Riparian trees four inches or greater measured at diameter-at-breast-height (DBH) shall be
replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 3:1 (replaced: removed). Trees measured at 24
inches or greater DBH shall be replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 10:1. Willows and
cottonwoods may be planted from live stakes following guidelines provided in the
California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual for planting dormant cuttings and
container stock (CDFW 2010). Permanent impacts to riparian vegetation shall be mitigated
at a 3:1 ratio to ensure no net loss of acreage and individual plants.
15. Replacement trees shall be planted in the fall or winter of the year in which trees were
removed. All replacement trees will be planted no more than one year following the date
upon which the native trees were removed. Replacement plants shall be monitored for 5
years with a goal of at least 70 percent survival at the end of the 5-year period.
Supplemental irrigation may be provided during years 1 to 3; however, supplemental
watering shall not be provided during the final two years of monitoring.
— Mitigation Measures BIO-2d. Project design shall be modified to preserve at a minimum the
southern 275 feet of the North-South Creek Segment to protect all existing mature riparian
woodland, and the proposed drainage plan shall be altered to convey remaining surface water flows
from areas to the north to this channel.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2e. To minimize impacts to riparian habitat, the Project shall stockpile
sufficient emergent vegetation (e.g., cattails) for later planting in the realigned reach of Tank Farm
Creek. Stockpiled vegetation shall be placed in earthen basins with the roots covered with moist
soil and maintained in a moist condition during construction operations.
Packet Pg 308
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
110
Exhibit 1
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2g. A post-construction landscape and restoration report for each phase
shall be prepared by the Environmental Monitor based on as-built drawings and site inspections to
document the final grading, plantings, and habitat restoration activities. The report shall include as-
built plans prepared after restoration, grading, and mitigation h abitat plantings are complete. The
as-built plans shall be prepared by landscape and grading contractors responsible for realignment
and restoration within Tank Farm Creek.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2h. Project activities within Tank Farm Creek and drainage channels,
including any tree pruning or removals, any necessary erosion repairs, or culvert removals, shall be
performed when the channel is dry, planned to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Natural
Resource Manager per City Drainage Manual Standards, and be subject to monitoring by the
Environmental Monitor. Upon removal of the existing steel culvert currently used for farm access
across Tank Farm Creek, the channel shall be restored to match conditions immediately upstream
and downstream including channel width, gradient, and vegetation.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2i. To reduce erosion and runoff from all exposed soils, all bare disturbed
soils shall be hydroseeded at the completion of grading for each construction phase. The seed mix
shall contain a minimum of three locally native grass species and may contain one or two sterile
non-native grasses not to exceed 25 percent of the total seed mix by count. Seeding shall be
completed no later than November 15 of the year in which Project activities occurred. All exposed
areas where seeding is considered unsuccessful after 90 days shall receive a second application or
seeding, straw, or mulch as soon as is practical to reduce erosion.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2j. The Tank Farm Creek Class I bicycle path bridge footings for creek
crossings shall be placed outside mapped riparian areas and outside the top of the bank of the
channel invert. The Class I bridges shall be located within areas that have little to no riparian
vegetation. No construction activities or equipment shall occur in the stream channel. The
placement of the bridge and footings shall be indicated on the Development Plan, VTM, and
Biological Mitigation Plan, and shall show the bridges’ placement in relation to existing vegetation
and the creek channel and banks.
— Mitigation Measure PS-2. Fair Share Contribution. The Applicant shall agree to pay a fair share
contribution to a future citywide or area-wide fire protection service protection development impact
fee program. Additionally, the AASP should be amended to include a fee program to fund the
City’s fifth fire station and/or integrate such fair share fee programs into the proposed Community
Facilities District (CFD).
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-4. The Applicant shall prepare an improvement plan for Horizon
Lane, Earthwood Lane, and Suburban Road, including roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian
improvements. Improvements shall be constructed by the Applicant in coordination with the
phasing plan required by MM TRANS-2a, to ensure the Applicant constructs all offsite roadway
improvements in a timely manner consistent with Project phasing. The Project Applicant shall:
• Prepare a detailed improvement plan for Horizon Lane to bring this road into conformance
with City standards for a commercial collector of width between 44 to 60 feet from
Suburban Road to the Project boundary. This plan shall be developed in coordination with
adjacent property owners and the City Public Works Department. Horizon Lane shall not
be connected to the Project site until such a plan has been completed and improvements
are completed in accordance with the phasing plan, as part of Phase 4. The section of
Packet Pg 309
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
111
Exhibit 1
Horizon Lane/Jespersen Road from the Project boundary to Buckley Road shall be
designated as a residential collector with a width of roadway between 40 and 60 feet. Per
MM TRANS-2e, construction of the Horizon Road from Suburban Road to Phase 4 of the
Project shall be completed and open to travel prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit
for the 100th residential unit of Phase 4 development.
• Design and improve the intersection of Horizon Lane/Suburban Road to be consistent with
City Engineering Standards and Specifications – Uniform Design Criteria and Municipal
Code Standards.
• Coordinate with the property owners along Earthwood Lane and City staff to complete the
Earthwood Lane Extension to the Project site as part Phase 1. Earthwood Lane shall be
developed to full City standards for a residential collector. Residential collectors shall be
44 to 60 feet wide as required by the City’s Uniform Design Criteria.
• Coordinate with the property owners along Suburban Road and City staff to prepare a
detailed improvement plan for Suburban Road to bring this road into conformance with
City standards. This plan shall address widening of substandard sections near the east end
of this roadway, completion of missing sidewalk segments, installation of street trees,
pedestrian crossings (e.g., Suburban Road at Earthwood Lane). In accordance to the City’s
Engineering Standards and Specifications – Uniform Design Criteria, a commercial
collector road shall be 44 to 68 feet wide to effectively serve commercial and industrial
uses. Improvements from Earthwood Lane to Higuera Street shall be done as part of Phase
1. Improvements from Earthwood Lane to Horizon Lane shall be done as part of Phase 4
development, prior to the connection of Horizon Lane with the Project site.
• Prepare a detailed phasing plan that identifies reasonable timing of such improvements for
Suburban Road, Horizon Lane, and Earthwood Lane. The phasing plan shall be developed
in close coordination with City staff. Per MM TRANS 2e, construction of the Suburban
Road improvements from Horizon Road from Earthwood shall be completed and open to
travel prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for the 100th residential unit of Phase 4
development. The Suburban Road improvement from Earthwood to Higuera and the
Earthwood improvements on the Project site and between the Project and Suburban shall
be completed prior to issuance of the occupancy permit for the 1st dwelling unit.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-10a. The Applicant shall design and construct ADA-compliant
sidewalks and ADA ramps on the east side of South Higuera Street to provide continuous paths of
travel from the City limit line to Los Osos Valley Road.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-10b. The Applicant shall design and construct continuous sidewalks
along the east side of South Higuera Street from Vachell Lane to Los Osos Valley Road including
ADA ramps at the Vachell Lane and South Higuera Street intersection, as illustrated in Figure 3.12-
6.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-10c. The Applicant shall design and construct continuous ADA-
compliant sidewalks and ADA ramps along the south side of Suburban Road from South Higuera
Street to Earthwood Lane. A receiving ramp shall be installed on the north side of Suburban Road
at Earthwood Lane.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-11. The Applicant shall construct two (2) separated bicycle bridges
on each side of Buckley Road at Tank Farm Creek and provide connections to Buckley Road so as
to provide continuous and safe bicycle routing along Buckley Road. These sections of roadway and
creek crossings are under the jurisdiction of the County and would need to meet both City and
Packet Pg 310
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
112
Exhibit 1
County design standards to the greatest extent feasible and are subject to approval of the City’s
Public Works Director.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-12. The Applicant shall coordinate with SLO Transit to ensure that
adequate service would be provided to the two proposed bus stops and Project area. The bus stops
shall be constructed by the Applicant within the respective phase’s development area. To assure
adequate service is provided to the two new bus stops onsite, the Applicant shall pay for and
install any physical improvements to Earthwood Lane and Suburban Road needed to
accommodate future service to the site. In addition, the proposed transit service onsite shall meet
standards stated in Policy 3.1.6, Service Standards.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. Implementation of mitigation measure MM AG-1 would protect
agricultural lands consistent with LU Policies 1.8.1 and 1.9.2. Implementation of Mitigation
Measures BIO-2a through 2e, and BIO-2g through 2j, would achieve consistency with policies that
protect wildlife corridors and Tank Farm Creek. Implementation of Mitigation Measure PS-2 would
offset the MPA’s contribution to increased demand on fire protection services. Implementation of
mitigation measures within Section 3.12, Transportation and Traffic would result in Project
consistency with General Plan Circulation policies and standards, and would result in less than
significant impacts. (See FEIR pages 3.8-61 through 3.8-60 and FEIR page 5-63.)
H. NOISE
1. Impact NO-3: Long-term operational noise impacts would include higher roadway noise levels from
increased vehicle traffic generated by the MPA, MPA operational noise, and exposure of future
residents to high noise levels that could result in the exceedance of threshol ds in the City’s General
Plan Noise Element and Noise Guidebook. (Refer to pages 3.9-28 and 5-66 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure NO-3a. R-1 and R-2 residential units planned in the area of the Project site
within 300 feet of Buckley Road and R-4 units in the northwest corner of the Project site shall
include noise mitigation for any potential indoor space and outdoor activity areas that are confirmed
to be above 60 dBA as indicated in the Project’s Sound Level Assessment. The following shall be
implemented for residential units with noise levels exceeding 60 dBA:
• Outdoor Activity Area Noise Mitigation. Where exterior sound levels exceed CNEL = 60
dBA, noise reduction measures shall be implemented, including but not limited to:
• Exterior living spaces of residential units such as yards and patios shall be oriented
away from Project boundaries that are adjacent to noise-producing uses that exceed
exterior noise levels of CNEL = 60 dBA, such as roadways and
industrial/commercial activities.
• Construction of additional sound barriers/berms with noise-reducing features for
affected residences.
• Exterior Glazing. Exterior window glazing for residential units exposed to potential noise
above Ldn=60 dBA shall achieve a minimum Outdoor-Indoor Transmission Class (OITC)
Packet Pg 311
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
113
Exhibit 1
24 / Sound Transmission Class (STC) 30. Glazing systems with dissimilar thickness panes
shall be used.
• Exterior Doors Facing Noise Source. According to Section 1207.7 of the California
Building Code, residential unit entry doors from interior spaces shall have a combined STC
28 rating for any door and frame assemblies. Any balcony and ground floor entry doors
located at bedrooms shall have an STC 30 rating. Balconies shall be oriented away from
the northwest property line.
• Exterior Walls. Construction of exterior walls shall consist of a stucco or engineered
building skin system over sheathing, with 4-inch to 6-inch deep metal or wood studs,
fiberglass batt insulation in the stud cavity, and one or two layers of 5/8-inch gypsum board
on the interior face of the wall. If possible, electrical outlets shall not be installed in exterior
walls exposed to noise. If not possible, outlet box pads shall be applied to all electrical
boxes and sealed with non-hardening acoustical sealant.
• Supplemental Ventilation. According to the California Building Code, supplemental
ventilation adhering to OITC/STC recommendations shall be provided for residential units
with habitable spaces facing noise levels exceeding Ldn=60 dBA, so that the opening of
windows is not necessary to meet ventilation requirements. Supplemental ventilation can
also be provided by passive or by fan-powered, ducted air inlets that extend from the
building’s rooftop into the units. If installed, ducted air inlets shall be acoustically lined
through the top-most 6 feet in length and incorporate one or more 90-degree bends between
openings, so as not to compromise the noise insulating performance of the residential unit’s
exterior envelope.
• Sound Walls. Sound walls shall be built on the north and east property lines of the Project
in Phase 3 that adjoin Suburban Road. The barrier shall consist of mortared masonry.
Further, proposed carports with solar canopies shall be installed around the western and
northern perimeter of the R-4 units, and these units shall be setback a minimum of 100 feet
from the property line.
• Landscaping. Landscaping along the north and east Project site boundaries that adjoin
Suburban Road shall include a line of closely space trees and shrubs with sufficient
vegetative density to help reduce sound transmission.
— Mitigation Measure NO-3b. Buckley Road widening improvements shall include the use of
rubberized asphalts or alternative paving technology to reduce noise levels for sensitive receptors
near the roadway.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. (See FEIR pages 3.9-33 and 5-66.) The mitigation above would ensure
that lower indoor space noise levels would not exceed the threshold of 45 dBA.
I. PUBLIC SERVICES
1. Impact PS-1: Implementation of the MPA would potentially increase demand on the SLOPD for police
protection services. (Refer to pages 3.11-14 and 5-67 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure PS-1. The Applicant shall prepare and implement a brief Security Plan for the
Project site. The Security Plan shall be prepared in consultation with the SLOPD and address public
Packet Pg 312
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
114
Exhibit 1
safety concerns in common or public spaces, parks, bike paths and open space areas, the
commercial center, and parking lots. The Security Plan shall set forth lighting requirements,
security recommendations for parks, open space and trails (e.g., visibility, lighting, etc.), and
establish rules for use of the public areas.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. (See FEIR pages 3.11-16 and 5-68.) Implementation of the above
mitigation measure, in combination with the ability to consider increases in future police staffing,
would reduce demand on SLOPD police protection services.
2. Impact PS-2: MPA implementation would increase the demand for SLOFD fire protection services,
create potential declines in firefighter to resident ratios, be located outside of accepted response time
performance area and necessitate construction of an additional fire protection facility, with potential
for secondary environmental impacts. (Refer to pages 3.11-16 and 5-68 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure PS-2. Fair Share Contribution. The Applicant shall agree to pay a fair share
contribution to a future citywide or area-wide fire protection service protection development impact
fee program. Additionally, the AASP should be amended to include a fee program to fund the
City’s fifth fire station and/or integrate such fair share fee programs into the proposed Community
Facilities District (CFD).
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. (See FEIR pages 3.11-19 and 5-67.)
J. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
1. Impact TRANS-1: Project construction activities would potentially create traffic impacts due to
congestion from construction vehicles (e.g., construction trucks, construction worker vehicles,
equipment, etc.) as well as temporary traffic lane and sidewalk closures. (Refer to pages 3.12-38 and
5-71 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measure would be required.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-1. The Applicant shall prepare a Construction Transportation
Management Plan for all phases of the proposed Project for review and approval by the City prior
to issuance of grading or building permits to address and manage traffic during construction. The
Plan shall be designed to:
• Prevent traffic impacts on the surrounding roadway network;
• Restrict construction staging to within the Project site;
• Minimize parking impacts both to public parking and access to private parking to
the greatest extent practicable;
• Ensure safety for both those construction vehicles and works and the surrounding
community; and
Packet Pg 313
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
115
Exhibit 1
• Prevent substantial truck traffic through residential neighborhoods.
• The Construction Transportation Management Plan shall be subject to review and approval
by the Public Works Director to ensure that the Plan has been designed in accordance with
this mitigation measure. This review shall occur prior to issuance of grading or building
permits. It shall, at a minimum, include the following:
Ongoing Requirements throughout the Duration of Construction:
• A detailed Construction Transportation Management Plan for work zones shall be
maintained. At a minimum, this shall include parking and travel lane
configurations; warning, regulatory, guide, and directional signage; and area
sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and parking lanes. The Plan shall include specific
information regarding the Project’s construction activities that may disrupt normal
pedestrian and traffic flow and the measures to address these disruptions. Such
Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department
and implemented in accordance with this approval.
• Work within the public right-of-way shall be reviewed and approved by the City
on a case by case basis based on the magnitude and type of construction activity.
Generally work shall be performed between 8:30 AM and 4:00 PM. This work
includes dirt hauling and construction material delivery. Work within the public
right-of-way outside of these hours shall only be allowed after the issuance of an
after-hours construction permit administered by the Building and Safety Division.
Additionally restrictions may be put in place by Public Works Department
depending on particular construction activities and conditions.
• Streets and equipment shall be cleaned in accordance with established Public
Works requirements.
• Trucks shall only travel on a City-approved construction route. Limited queuing
may occur on the construction site itself.
• Materials and equipment shall be minimally visible to the public; the preferred
location for materials is to be onsite, with a minimum amount of materials within
a work area in the public right-of-way, subject to a current Use of Public Property
Permit.
• Provision of off-street parking for construction workers, which may include the
use of a remote location with shuttle transport to the site, if determined necessary
by the City.
Project Coordination Elements That Shall Be Implemented Prior to Commencement of
Construction:
• The traveling public shall be advised of impending construction activities that may
substantially affect key roadways or other facilities (e.g., information signs,
portable message signs, media listing/notification, and implementation of an
approved Construction Impact Mitigation Plan).
• A Use of Public Property Permit, Excavation Permit, Sewer Permit, or Oversize
Load Permit, as well as any Caltrans permits required for any construction work
requiring encroachment into public rights-of-way, detours, or any other work
within the public right-of-way shall be obtained.
• Timely notification of construction schedules shall be provided to all affected
agencies (e.g., Police Department, Fire Department, Public Works Department,
Packet Pg 314
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
116
Exhibit 1
and Community Development Department) and to all owners and residential and
commercial tenants of property within a radius of ¼ mile.
• Construction work shall be coordinated with affected agencies in advance of start
of work. Approvals may take up to two weeks per each submittal.
• Public Works Department approval of any haul routes for construction materials
and equipment deliveries shall be obtained
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. Preparation of a Construction
Transportation Management Plan as part of MM TRANS-1 would reduce construction-
related traffic impacts to the maximum extent feasible by establishing truck routes and
parking locations for construction workers. (See FEIR page 3.12-41 and 5-71.)
2. Impact TRANS-2: Phased MPA development combined with limited site access and related increases
in congestion on surrounding roadways would have the potential to cause transportation deficiencies
throughout the Project vicinity. (Refer to pages 3.12-41 and 5-71 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-2a. The Applicant shall create and submit a Transportation
Improvement Phasing Plan to the City for review and approval, and shall ensure that construction
of the Project follows the sequential phasing order utilized in the TIS for such improvements. The
Plan shall address the timing and general design of all on and offsite transportation improvements.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. Implementation of MM TRANS-2a would require the Applicant to
follow the sequencing of the approved phasing construction plan, which would ensure that any
potential impacts during Phase 1, 2, and 4 are mitigated.
3. Impact TRANS-3: MPA-generated traffic would potentially create turning movement conflicts at
driveways and intersections on the Project site. (Refer to pages 3.12-49 and 5-71 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-3a. Project roadway and driveway design shall be reviewed and
approved by the City to ensure compliance with City engineering standards and not conflict with
intersection functional areas (e.g., aligning driveways on opposite sides of the roadway, position
driveways as far upstream from intersections as possible).
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-3b. The Applicant shall install traffic calming measures (e.g., speed
bumps, pedestrian bulb-outs, etc.) to control speed levels along internal roadways of the Project
site, including the extensions of Venture Drive, Horizon Lane, and Jespersen Road as required by
Policy 8.1.3.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. Implementation of MM TRANS-3a and -3b, would ensure that the
Packet Pg 315
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
117
Exhibit 1
design and operation of these roads are consistent with safety regulations on residential roads and
this impact would be less than significant.
4. Impact TRANS-4: MPA-generated traffic would exceed Circulation Element maximum volume
thresholds at Vachell Lane, Earthwood Lane, Horizon Lane, and Suburban Road. (Refer to pages 3.12-
51 and 5-72 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-2a. The Applicant shall create and submit a Transportation
Improvement Phasing Plan to the City for review and approval, and shall ensure that construction
of the Project follows the sequential phasing order utilized in the TIS for such improvements. The
Plan shall address the timing and general design of all on and offsite transportation improvements.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-3b. The Applicant shall install traffic calming measures (e.g., speed
bumps, pedestrian bulb-outs, etc.) to control speed levels along internal roadways of the Project
site, including the extensions of Venture Drive, Horizon Lane, and Jespersen Road as required by
Policy 8.1.3.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-4. The Applicant shall prepare an improvement plan for Horizon
Lane, Earthwood Lane, and Suburban Road, including roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian
improvements. Improvements shall be constructed by the Applicant in coordination with the
phasing plan required by MM TRANS-2a, to ensure the Applicant constructs all offsite roadway
improvements in a timely manner consistent with Project phasing. The Project Applicant shall:
• Prepare a detailed improvement plan for Horizon Lane to bring this road into conformance
with City standards for a commercial collector of width between 44 to 60 feet from
Suburban Road to the Project boundary. This plan shall be developed in coordination with
adjacent property owners and the City Public Works Department. Horizon Lane shall not
be connected to the Project site until such a plan has been completed and improvements
are completed in accordance with the phasing plan, as part of Phase 4. The section of
Horizon Lane/Jespersen Road from the Project boundary to Buckley Road shall be
designated as a residential collector with a width of roadway between 40 and 60 feet. Per
MM TRANS-2e, construction of the Horizon Road from Suburban Road to Phase 4 of the
Project shall be completed and open to travel prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit
for the 100th residential unit of Phase 4 development.
• Design and improve the intersection of Horizon Lane/Suburban Road to be consistent with
City Engineering Standards and Specifications – Uniform Design Criteria and Municipal
Code Standards.
• Coordinate with the property owners along Earthwood Lane and City staff to complete the
Earthwood Lane Extension to the Project site as part Phase 1. Earthwood Lane shall be
developed to full City standards for a residential collector. Residential collectors shall be
44 to 60 feet wide as required by the City’s Uniform Design Criteria.
• Coordinate with the property owners along Suburban Road and City staff to prepare a
detailed improvement plan for Suburban Road to bring this road into conformance with
City standards. This plan shall address widening of substandard sections near the east end
of this roadway, completion of missing sidewalk segments, installation of street trees,
pedestrian crossings (e.g., Suburban Road at Earthwood Lane). In accordance to the City’s
Engineering Standards and Specifications – Uniform Design Criteria, a commercial
Packet Pg 316
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
118
Exhibit 1
collector road shall be 44 to 68 feet wide to effectively serve commercial and industrial
uses. Improvements from Earthwood Lane to Higuera Street shall be done as part of Phase
1. Improvements from Earthwood Lane to Horizon Lane shall be done as part of Phase 4
development, prior to the connection of Horizon Lane with the Project site.
• Prepare a detailed phasing plan that identifies reasonable timing of such improvements for
Suburban Road, Horizon Lane, and Earthwood Lane. The phasing plan shall be developed
in close coordination with City staff. Per MM TRANS 2e, construction of the Suburban
Road improvements from Horizon Road from Earthwood shall be completed and open to
travel prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for the 100th residential unit of Phase 4
development. The Suburban Road improvement from Earthwood to Higuera and the
Earthwood improvements on the Project site and between the Project and Suburban shall
be completed prior to issuance of the occupancy permit for the 1st dwelling unit.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. MM TRANS-3b would require speed
calming measures on internal roadways to ensure speed limits do not exceed thresholds.
The construction of these roadways is described in Impact TRANS-2 and associated
mitigation measures address phasing impacts on these roadways. To assure Suburban Road
operates at acceptable levels, MM TRANS-4 would require widening of the roadway.
5. Impact TRANS-6: MPA-generated traffic would exacerbate existing queuing at the South
Street/Higuera Street intersection northbound right-turn lane, resulting in significant impacts. (Refer to
pages 3.12-58 and 5-72 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measure would be required.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-6. The Applicant shall design and construct the extension of the
northbound right turn-lane at the South Street/Higuera Street intersection, to provide more storage
capacity.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. MM TRANS-6 would require the Applicant to construct the extension
of the northbound turn-lane at South Street/Higuera Street, providing more storage capacity and
reducing the impact to less than significant. (See FEIR pages 3.12-58 to -59 and 5-72.)
6. Impact TRANS-7: MPA-generated traffic would cause exceedance of storage capacities at several
intersections along South Higuera Street. (Refer to pages 3.12-59 and 5-72 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-7a. The Applicant shall design and construct a second northbound
left-turn lane at the intersection of South Higuera Street/Prado Road. The Applicant shall also pay
a fair share fee for the widening of Prado Road Creek Bridge west of South Higuera Street by
participating in the citywide transportation impact fee program.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-7b. The Applicant shall design and construct a second southbound
left-turn lane at the Tank Farm Road/South Higuera Street intersection.
Packet Pg 317
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
119
Exhibit 1
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. Implementation of MM TRANS-7a, and 7b, would require the
Applicant to install roadway improvements at multiple intersections along South Higuera Street to
avoid traffic impacts at these intersections.
7. Impact TRANS-8: MPA-generated traffic would cause delays and exceedance of intersection
capacities at several intersections along Los Osos Valley Road. (Refer to pages 3.12-64 and 5-73 of the
Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-8a. The Project is located within the Los Osos Valley Road
interchange Sub Area fee program, and, as such, the Applicant shall pay the Los Osos Valley Road
subarea fee, for the cost of reconstructing the Los Osos Valley Road/U.S. Highway 101 interchange
project and improvements along Los Osos Valley Road. The fee shall be associated with the
number of dwelling units and the square footage of commercial development in the Project site and
shall be paid the time of building permit issuance.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-8b. In coordination with the Applicant, the City shall retime the
traffic signal at Los Osos Valley Road/South Higuera Street intersection and installation of signage
at the South Higuera Street/Buckley Road intersection (terminus of the Buckley Road Extension)
to inform drivers of additional access to U.S. Highway 101 at Ontario Road. The City Public Works
Department shall ensure the improvements and signage meet safety criteria.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. The recently completed Los Osos Valley Road/U.S. Highway 101
interchange project has improved interchange operations to an acceptable LOS that the Project is
substantially benefitting from and residual impacts associated with Project traffic would be less
than significant. Retiming of the traffic signal at the intersection of South Higuera Street/Buckley
Road and installing directional signage to inform drivers of additional U.S. Highway 101 access at
Ontario Road, as part of the Buckley Road Extension, would alleviate existing queues by diverting
traffic away from this intersection. All improvements would mitigate impacts to acceptable levels,
resulting in a less than significant impact.
8. Impact TRANS-10: The proposed MPA would potentially degrade level of service for various
pedestrian facilities serving the Project vicinity. (Refer to page 5-73 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-3b. The Applicant shall install traffic calming measures (e.g., speed
bumps, pedestrian bulb-outs, etc.) to control speed levels along internal roadways of the Project
site, including the extensions of Venture Drive, Horizon Lane, and Jespersen Road as required by
Policy 8.1.3.
Packet Pg 318
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
120
Exhibit 1
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-4. The Applicant shall prepare an improvement plan for Horizon
Lane, Earthwood Lane, and Suburban Road, including roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian
improvements. Improvements shall be constructed by the Applicant in coordination with the
phasing plan required by MM TRANS-2a, to ensure the Applicant constructs all offsite roadway
improvements in a timely manner consistent with Project phasing. The Project Applicant shall:
• Prepare a detailed improvement plan for Horizon Lane to bring this road into conformance
with City standards for a commercial collector of width between 44 to 60 feet from
Suburban Road to the Project boundary. This plan shall be developed in coordination with
adjacent property owners and the City Public Works Department. Horizon Lane shall not
be connected to the Project site until such a plan has been completed and improvements
are completed in accordance with the phasing plan, as part of Phase 4. The section of
Horizon Lane/Jespersen Road from the Project boundary to Buckley Road shall be
designated as a residential collector with a width of roadway between 40 and 60 feet. Per
MM TRANS-2e, construction of the Horizon Road from Suburban Road to Phase 4 of the
Project shall be completed and open to travel prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit
for the 100th residential unit of Phase 4 development.
• Design and improve the intersection of Horizon Lane/Suburban Road to be consistent with
City Engineering Standards and Specifications – Uniform Design Criteria and Municipal
Code Standards.
• Coordinate with the property owners along Earthwood Lane and City staff to complete the
Earthwood Lane Extension to the Project site as part Phase 1. Earthwood Lane shall be
developed to full City standards for a residential collector. Residential collectors shall be
44 to 60 feet wide as required by the City’s Uniform Design Criteria.
• Coordinate with the property owners along Suburban Road and City staff to prepare a
detailed improvement plan for Suburban Road to bring this road into conformance with
City standards. This plan shall address widening of substandard sections near the east end
of this roadway, completion of missing sidewalk segments, installation of street trees,
pedestrian crossings (e.g., Suburban Road at Earthwood Lane). In accordance to the City’s
Engineering Standards and Specifications – Uniform Design Criteria, a commercial
collector road shall be 44 to 68 feet wide to effectively serve commercial and industrial
uses. Improvements from Earthwood Lane to Higuera Street shall be done as part of Phase
1. Improvements from Earthwood Lane to Horizon Lane shall be done as part of Phase 4
development, prior to the connection of Horizon Lane with the Project site.
• Prepare a detailed phasing plan that identifies reasonable timing of such improvements for
Suburban Road, Horizon Lane, and Earthwood Lane. The phasing plan shall be developed
in close coordination with City staff. Per MM TRANS 2e, construction of the Suburban
Road improvements from Horizon Road from Earthwood shall be completed and open to
travel prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for the 100th residential unit of Phase 4
development. The Suburban Road improvement from Earthwood to Higuera and the
Earthwood improvements on the Project site and between the Project and Suburban shall
be completed prior to issuance of the occupancy permit for the 1st dwelling unit.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-8a. The Project is located within the Los Osos Valley Road
interchange Sub Area fee program, and, as such, the Applicant shall pay the Los Osos Valley Road
subarea fee, for the cost of reconstructing the Los Osos Valley Road/U.S. Highway 101 interchange
project and improvements along Los Osos Valley Road. The fee shall be associated with the
number of dwelling units and the square footage of commercial development in the Project site and
shall be paid the time of building permit issuance.
Packet Pg 319
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
121
Exhibit 1
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-10a. The Applicant shall design and construct ADA-compliant
sidewalks and ADA ramps on the east side of South Higuera Street to provide continuous paths of
travel from the City limit line to Los Osos Valley Road.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-10b. The Applicant shall design and construct continuous sidewalks
along the east side of South Higuera Street from Vachell Lane to Los Osos Valley Road including
ADA ramps at the Vachell Lane and South Higuera Street intersection, as illustrated in Figure 3.12-
6.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-10c. The Applicant shall design and construct continuous ADA-
compliant sidewalks and ADA ramps along the south side of Suburban Road from South Higuera
Street to Earthwood Lane. A receiving ramp shall be installed on the north side of Suburban Road
at Earthwood Lane.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would require
installation of pedestrian facilities, continuous sidewalks and ADA ramps, where needed, ensuring
that pedestrian facilities in the Project vicinity operate at acceptable levels and reducing the impact
to less than significant. (See FEIR pages 3.12-70 and 5-73.)
9. Impact TRANS-11: MPA development would increase demand for bicycle facilities in an underserved
area and would potentially conflict with the City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan regulations and General
Plan thresholds. (Refer to page 5-73 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-8a. The Project is located within the Los Osos Valley Road
interchange Sub Area fee program, and, as such, the Applicant shall pay the Los Osos Valley Road
subarea fee, for the cost of reconstructing the Los Osos Valley Road/U.S. Highway 101 interchange
project and improvements along Los Osos Valley Road. The fee shall be associated with the
number of dwelling units and the square footage of commercial development in the Project site and
shall be paid the time of building permit issuance.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-11. The Applicant shall construct two (2) separated bicycle bridges
on each side of Buckley Road at Tank Farm Creek and provide connections to Buckley Road so as
to provide continuous and safe bicycle routing along Buckley Road. These sections of roadway and
creek crossings are under the jurisdiction of the County and would need to meet both City and
County design standards to the greatest extent feasible and are subject to approval of the City’s
Public Works Director.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. Implementation of MM TRANS-8a and -11 would require that all
proposed bicycle lanes are design to meet BTP requirements and ensure consistency with General
Plan thresholds and the BTP goals and guidelines.
10. Impact TRANS-12. The proposed MPA would increase demand for transit services in an
underserved area, presenting a barrier to both transit dependent and non-transit dependent households
for using transit. (Refer to page 3.12-74 of the Final EIR.)
Packet Pg 320
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
122
Exhibit 1
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required to reduce the project’s impacts from
increases in demand for transit services.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-12. The Applicant shall coordinate with SLO Transit to ensure that
adequate service would be provided to the two proposed bus stops and Project area. The bus stops
shall be constructed by the Applicant within the respective phase’s development area. To assure
adequate service is provided to the two new bus stops onsite, the Applicant shall pay for and
install any physical improvements to Earthwood Lane and Suburban Road needed to
accommodate future service to the site. In addition, the proposed transit service onsite shall meet
standards stated in Policy 3.1.6, Service Standards.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. Implementation of the proposed mitigation measure will meet the
increased demand for transit service and reduce the impact to less than significant. (See FEIR page
3.12-75 and 5-73.)
11. Cumulative Impact TRANS-14: Under near-term conditions, the proposed MPA would cumulatively
contribute incrementally to increased demand for bicycle and pedestrian facilities, potentially
conflicting with the City’s BTP regulations and General Plan thresholds. (Refer to page 5-74 of the
Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-10b. The Applicant shall design and construct continuous sidewalks
along the east side of South Higuera Street from Vachell Lane to Los Osos Valley Road including
ADA ramps at the Vachell Lane and South Higuera Street intersection, as illustrated in Figure 3.12-
6.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-14. If approved by City Council, the City shall amend the TIF, or
some other fee program, to include a fee program for the installation of a Class I bicycle path from
Buckley Road/South Higuera Street intersection to Los Osos Valley Road/U.S. Highway 101
southbound ramps intersection, connecting to the Bob Jones Trail. The Applicant shall pay its fair
share fee to fund the improvement through the adopted fee program. Alternatively, the City may
establish a special or ad hoc mitigation fee program to fund the Project’s share of these
improvements.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the cumulatively significant environmental
effects identified in the Final EIR. Implementation of MM-TRANS-10b would require the
Applicant to install continuous sidewalks to improve pedestrian LOS on Higuera Street from LOVR
to Vachell Lane. In addition, MM TRANS-14 would require the Applicant to pay its fair share fee
to fund the design and installation of a Class I bike path connection from Buckley Road/South
Higuera Street intersection to the Los Osos Valley Road/U.S. Highway 101 southbound ramps
intersection if approved by Council. The Class I bicycle path would provide a parallel route to
South Higuera Street and avoid intersections along that segment. Therefore, with the installation of
Class I bicycle paths and continuous pedestrian facilities, cumulative impacts would be less than
significant.
Packet Pg 321
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
123
Exhibit 1
12. Cumulative Impact TRANS-15: Under long-term cumulative plus Project conditions, MPA-
generated traffic would result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to potentially significant
impacts to the operational conditions at four intersections. (Refer to page 5-74 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-5. The Applicant shall pay a pro-rata fair share fee to fund the
installation a roundabout at the Buckley Road/SR 227 intersection as identified in the SLOCOG
SR 227 Operations Study. The City shall collect the fair share fee and coordinate payment of Project
fair share fees to help fund improvements with the County. Alternatively, the City should consider
an amendment of the AASP impact fee program to establish a new areawide fee to help fund
improvements to the intersection to offset cumulative development impacts. If an amended AASP
fee is created by the City it will suffice as appropriate mitigation for the Project’s participation in
these improvements.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-15a. The Applicant shall pay its fair share fee to the City to fund the
widening of the Prado Road/South Higuera Street intersection to accommodate a dual left-turn lane,
dual thru-lanes, and a right-turn lane on all approaches. Part of this share may be contained within
existing fee programs or ultimately incorporated into the Citywide TIF program. If amended into
the Citywide TIF fee program, payment of those fees will address project impacts.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-15b. The Applicant shall pay its fair share mitigation fees to fund
improvements to the intersection of Higuera/Tank Farm Road to provide: 1) extension of the
northbound right-turn lane, 2) the installation of a “pork cop” island to assist pedestrian crossings,
and 3) widening on the south side of Tank Farm to provide a slip lane for right turning traffic. The
City should consider incorporating this improvement into the AASP Fee program.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-15c. The City shall review the cross sections for improvements to
Tank Farm Road/Horizon Lane intersection as proposed within AASP to ensure long-term
geometrics meet the objectives of the General Plan. The Applicant shall pay its fair share mitigation
fees to fund the installation of an additional northbound right-turn lane or a roundabout at the Tank
Farm Road/Horizon Lane intersection. The City should consider incorporating this improvement
into the AASP fee program.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-15d. The Applicant shall pay fair share mitigation fees to fund the
installation of a traffic signal or a single-lane roundabout at the Buckley Road/Vachell Lane
intersection. While not required, this work may be implemented as part of the Buckley Road
extension being installed as part of Phase 2 of the Project. T he City should consider incorporating
this improvement into the AASP fee program.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
MPA to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the cumulatively significant environmental
effects identified in the Final EIR. The above measures would ensure that study intersections
continue to operate at acceptable levels. Therefore, impacts to roadways under the cumulative plus
Project conditions for Tank Farm Road/South Higuera Street, Tank Farm Road/Horizon Lane, and
Buckley Road/Vachell Lane would be less than significant after mitigation.
K. UTILITIES
Packet Pg 322
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
124
Exhibit 1
1. Impact UT-2: The MPA would require the expansion of utility infrastructure to serve new
development, including water, sewer, gas and electricity into the site; the construction of which could
cause environmental effects. (Refer to page 5-75 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required.
— Mitigation Measure UT-2. The size, location, and alignment of all on- and offsite water,
wastewater, and energy infrastructure offsite shall be subject to review and approval by the City’s
Public Works and Utilities Departments. The Applicant shall be responsible for constructing all
required onsite and offsite utility improvements and well as for repaving of damaged roadways.
— Mitigation Measure AQ-1a. A Construction Activity Management Plan (CAMP) shall be included
as part of Project grading and building plans and shall be submitted to the APCD and to the City
for review and approval prior to the start of construction. In addition, the contractor or builder shall
designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering,
as necessary, to prevent transport of dust offsite. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend
periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone of such persons shall be
provided to the APCD prior to land use clearance for map recordation and grading. The plan shall
include but not be limited to the following elements:
1. A Dust Control Management Plan that encompasses the following dust control measures:
• Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible;
• Water trucks or sprinkler trucks shall be used during construction to keep all areas
of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At a
minimum, this would require twice-daily applications. All dirt stock pile areas
should be sprayed daily as needed. Increased watering frequency would be
required when wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour (mph). Reclaimed water or
the onsite water well (non-potable) shall be used when possible. The contractor or
builder shall consider the use of an APCD-approved dust suppressant where
feasible to reduce the amount of water used for dust control;
• All dirt stock-pile areas shall be sprayed daily as needed;
• Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved Project revegetation
and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible following
completion of any soil disturbing activities;
• Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one
month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating native grass seed
and watered until vegetation is established;
• All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using
approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance
by the APCD;
• All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon
as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after
grading unless seeding or soil binders are used;
• Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any
unpaved surface at the construction site;
• All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or shall
maintain at least two feet of freeboard in accordance with California Vehicle Code
Section 23114;
Packet Pg 323
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
125
Exhibit 1
• Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or
wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site;
• Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent
paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible;
• All of these fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and
building plans; and
• The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive
dust control emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as
necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below 20 percent
opacity, and to prevent transport of dust offsite. Their duties shall include holiday
and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone
number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior
to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition.
2. Implementation of the following BACT for diesel-fueled construction equipment, where
feasible. The BACT measures shall include:
• Use of Tier 3 and Tier 4 off-road equipment and 2010 on-road compliant engines;
• Repowering equipment with the cleanest engines available; and
• Installing California Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies.
3. Implementation of the following standard air quality measures to minimize diesel
emissions:
• Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer’s
specifications;
• Fuel all offroad and portable diesel powered equipment with CARB-certified
motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off-road).
• Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the CARB’s 2007 or cleaner certification
standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines and comply with the State On-Road
Regulation;
• Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in their
fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g.
captive or NOx exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative
compliance;
• On- and off-road diesel equipment shall not be allowed to idle for more than five
minutes. Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas to remind drivers
and operators of the five-minute idling limit;
• Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors in not permitted;
• Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive
receptors;
• Electrify equipment when feasible;
• Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where
feasible; and,
• Use alternatively fueled construction equipment onsite where feasible, such as
compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel.
4. Tabulation of on- and off-road construction equipment (age, horse-power, and miles and/or
hours of operation);
Packet Pg 324
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
126
Exhibit 1
5. Schedule construction truck trips during non-peak hours (as determined by the Public
Works Director) to reduce peak hour emissions;
6. Limit the length of the construction work-day period; and
7. Phase construction activities, if appropriate.
— Mitigation Measure AQ-1b. To reduce ROG and NOx levels during the architectural coating phase,
low or no VOC-emission paint shall be used with levels of 50 g/L or less, such as Benjamin Moore
Natura Paint (Odorless, Zero VOC Paint). The Applicant or builder shall implement additional
measures to reduce daily and quarterly ROG and NOx levels related to architectural coatings to the
extent determined feasible by the City and APCD, such as extending coating applications by
limiting daily coating activities.
— Mitigation Measure AQ-1c. In order to further reduce Project air quality impacts, an offsite
mitigation strategy shall be developed and agreed upon by the developer, City, and APCD at least
three months prior to the issuance of grading permits, including added funding for circulation
improvements and transit operations. Such funding may be in the form of cash payment or included
as part of the obligation of the Community Facilities District. The Applicant shall provide this
funding at least two months prior to the start of construction to help facilitate emission offsets that
are as real-time as possible. Offsite mitigation strategies shall include one or more of the following:
• Replace/repower San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA) transit buses;
• Purchase VDECs for transit buses; and
• Fund expansion of existing SLORTA transit services.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1a. The Applicant shall prepare and implement a Biological Mitigation
Plan that identifies construction-related staging and maintenance areas and includes Project-
specific construction best management practices (BMPs) to avoid or minimize impacts to biological
resources, including all measures needed to protect riparian woodland along Tank Farm Creek,
minimize erosion, and retain sediment on the Project site. Such BMPs shall include (but not be
limited to) the following:
12. Construction equipment and vehicles shall be stored at least 100 feet away from Tank Farm
Creek and adjacent riparian habitat, and all construction vehicle maintenance shall be
performed in a designated offsite vehicle storage and maintenance area.
13. Prior to construction activities adjacent to Tank Farm Creek, the creek shall be fenced with
orange construction fencing and signed to prohibit entry of construction equipment and
personnel unless authorized by the City. Fencing should be located a minimum of 20 feet
from the edge of the riparian canopy or top of bank, whichever is further from the creek,
and shall be maintained throughout the construction period for each phase of development.
14. In the event that construction must occur within the creek or 20 -foot creek setback, a
biological monitor shall be present during all such activities with the authority to stop or
redirect work as needed to protect biological resources.
15. Construction shall occur during daylight hours (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM or sunset, whichever
is sooner) to avoid impacts to nocturnal and crepuscular (dawn and dusk activity period)
species. No construction night lighting shall be permitted within 100 yards of the top of the
creek banks.
16. Construction equipment shall be inspected at the beginning of each work day to ensure that
no wildlife species is residing within any construction equipment (e.g., species have not
climbed into wheel wells, engine compartments, or under tracks since the equipment was
last parked). Any sensitive wildlife species found during inspections shall be gently
Packet Pg 325
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
127
Exhibit 1
encouraged to leave the Project site by a qualified biologist or otherwise trained and City-
approved personnel.
17. Pallets or secondary containment areas for chemicals, drums, or bagged materials shall be
provided. Should material spills occur, materials and/or contaminants shall be cleaned from
the Project site and recycled or disposed of to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB).
18. All trash and construction debris shall be picked up and properly disposed at the end of
each day and waste dumpsters shall be covered with plastic sheeting at the end of each
workday and during storm events. All sheeting shall be carefully secured to withstand
weather conditions.
19. The Applicant shall implement erosion control measures designed to minimize erosion and
retain sediment on the Project site. Such measures shall include installation of silt fencing,
straw waddles, or other acceptable erosion control devices along the perimeter of Tank
Farm Creek and at the perimeter of all cut or fill slopes. All drainage shall be directed to
sediment basins designed to retain all sediment onsite.
20. Concrete truck and tool washout should occur in a designated location such that no runoff
will reach the creek.
21. All open trenches shall be constructed with appropriate exit ramps to allow species that
incidentally fall into a trench to escape. All open trenches shall be inspected at the
beginning of each work day to ensure that no wildlife species is present. Any sensitive
wildlife species found during inspections shall be gently encouraged to leave the Project
site by a qualified biologist or otherwise trained and City-approved personnel. Trenches
will remain open for the shortest period necessary to complete required work.
22. Existing facilities and disturbed areas shall be used to the maximum extent possible to
minimize the amount of disturbance of undeveloped areas and all construction access roads
and staging areas shall be located to avoid high quality habitat and minimize habitat
fragmentation.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1b. The Applicant shall retain a qualified Environmental Monitor,
subject to review and approval by the City and in consultation with CDFW, RWQCB, and USFWS
to oversee compliance of the construction activities with the Biological Monitoring Plan and
applicable laws, regulations, and policies. The Environmental Monitor shall monitor all
construction activities, conduct a biological resources education program for all construction
workers prior to the initiation of any clearing or construction activities, and provide quarterly
reports to the City regarding construction activities, enforcement issues and remedial measures.
The Environmental Monitor shall be responsible for conducting inspections of the work area each
work day to ensure that excavation areas, restored habitats, and open water habitats in the area do
not have oil sheen, liquid oil, or any other potential exposure risk to wildlife. If any exposure risk
is identified, the Environmental Monitor shall implement measures that could include, but are not
limited to, hazing, fencing, and wildlife removals to eliminate the exposure risk.
In addition, a CDFW-approved biologist shall be present during all construction occurring within
50 feet of Tank Farm Creek, riparian habitat, drainages, and seasonal or permanent wetlands. The
biologist shall also conduct sensitive species surveys immediately prior to construction activities
(within the appropriate season) and shall monitor construction activities in the vicinity of habitats
to be avoided (see also, MM BIO-3 and all subparts below).
The work area boundaries and other off-limit areas shall be identified by the biologist and/or
Environmental Monitor on a daily basis. The biologist and/or Environmental Monitor shall inspect
construction and sediment control fencing each work day during construction activities to ensure
Packet Pg 326
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
128
Exhibit 1
that sensitive species are not exposed to hazards. Any vegetation clearing activities shall be
monitored by the biologist and/or Environmental Monitor.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2a. Project designs shall be modified to realign the Tank Farm Class I
bicycle path and relocate manufactured slopes for housing pads in order to create a minimum of a
35-foot creek setback from either the top of the bank of Tank Farm Creek or edge of riparian habitat,
whichever is further, for at least 90 percent of corridor length. No more than 10 perce nt of the
length of the corridor (700 linear feet) shall have a setback of less than 35 feet, but at least 20 feet
from the top of the bank or edge of riparian canopy, whichever is further. However, in any instance
the creek setback shall be no less than 20 feet from the edge of riparian canopy or top of bank,
whichever is further, consistent with Section 17.16.025 of the City of San Luis Obispo Zoning
Regulations.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2b. The Biological Mitigation Plan shall provide details on timing and
implementation of required habitat restoration and shall be prepared in consultation with the City’s
Natural Resource Manager and CDFW. A copy of the final plan shall be submitted to the City for
review and approval. The plan shall be implemented by the Project Applicant, under supervision
by the City and Environmental Monitor, and:
27. Characterize the type, species composition, spatial extent, and ecological functions and
values of the wetland and riparian habitat that will be removed, lost, or damaged.
28. Describe the approach that will be used to replace the wetland and riparian habitat removed,
lost, or adversely impacted by the Project, including a list of the soil, plants, and other
materials that will be necessary for successful habitat replacement, and a description of
planting methods, location, spacing, erosion protection, and irrigation measures that will
be needed. Restoration and habitat enhancement shall include use of appropriate native
species and correction of bank stabilization issues. Wetland restoration or enhancement
areas shall be designed to facilitate establishment of wetland plants such as willows,
cottonwoods, rushes, and creeping wild rye.
29. Describe the habitat restoration ratio to be used in calculating the acreage of habitat to be
planted, consistent with MM BIO-2c through BIO-2e below and the findings in the
Biological Report (Appendix I).
30. Describe the program that will be used for monitoring the effectiveness and success of the
habitat replacement approach.
31. Describe how the habitat replacement approach will be supplemented or modified if the
monitoring program indicates that the current approach is not effective or successful.
32. Describe the criteria that will be used to evaluate the effectiveness and success of the
habitat replacement approach.
33. Indicate the timing and schedule for the planting of replacement habitat.
34. Habitat restoration or enhancement areas shall be established within the Project boundaries,
adjacent to and contiguous with existing wetlands to the maximum ex tent possible.
Habitats suitable for Congdon’s tarplant and other native wetland species shall be created
onsite. If Congdon’s tarplant is found in areas proposed for disturbance, the affected
individuals shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio through seeding in a suitable conserved natural
open space area. A management plan for the species shall be developed consistent with
applicable scientific literature pertinent to this species.
35. Habitat restoration or enhancement sites shall be placed within deed-restricted area(s), and
shall be maintained and monitored for a minimum of five years. If sufficient onsite
mitigation area is not practicable, an offsite mitigation plan shall be prepared as part of the
Biological Mitigation Plan and approved by permitting agencies.
Packet Pg 327
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
129
Exhibit 1
36. The Biological Mitigation Plan shall identify appropriate restoration and enhancement
activities to compensate for impacts to seasonal creek, wetland, and riparian habitat,
including a detailed planting plan and maintenance plans using locally obtained native
species and include habitat enhancement to support native wildlife and plant species.
37. A weed management plan and weed identification list shall be included in the Biological
Mitigation Plan.
38. Habitat restoration or enhancement areas shall be maintained weekly for the first three
years after Phase completion and quarterly thereafter. Maintenance shall include
eradication of noxious weeds found on California Department of Food and Agriculture
Lists (CDFA) A and B. Noxious weeds on CDFA list C may be er adicated or otherwise
managed.
39. Mitigation implementation and success shall be monitored quarterly for the first two years
after completion of each Phase, semi-annually during the third year, and annually the fourth
and fifth years. Annual reports documenting site inspections and site recovery status shall
be prepared and sent to the County and appropriate agencies.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2c. Within the required Biological Mitigation Plan, all temporary and
permanent impacts to riparian trees, wetlands, and riparian habitat shall be mitigated, as follows:
16. Temporary impacts to wetland and riparian habitat shall be mitigated at a minimum 1:1
mitigation ratio for restoration (area of restored habitat to impacted habitat).
17. Permanent impacts to state jurisdictional areas, including isolated wetlands within
agricultural lands and riparian habitat will be mitigated at a 1.5:1 ratio (area of restored and
enhanced habitat to impacted habitat).
18. Permanent impacts to federal wetlands shall be mitigated at a minimum 3:1 ratio (1:1 area
of created to impacted habitat plus 2:1 area of created/enhanced habitat to impacted
habitat).
19. Riparian trees four inches or greater measured at diameter-at-breast-height (DBH) shall be
replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 3:1 (replaced: removed). Trees measured at 24
inches or greater DBH shall be replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 10:1. Willows and
cottonwoods may be planted from live stakes following guidelines provided in the
California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual for planting dormant cuttings and
container stock (CDFW 2010). Permanent impacts to riparian vegetation shall be mitigated
at a 3:1 ratio to ensure no net loss of acreage and individual plants.
20. Replacement trees shall be planted in the fall or winter of the year in which trees were
removed. All replacement trees will be planted no more than one year following the date
upon which the native trees were removed. Replacement plants shall be monitored for 5
years with a goal of at least 70 percent survival at t he end of the 5-year period.
Supplemental irrigation may be provided during years 1 to 3; however, supplemental
watering shall not be provided during the final two years of monitoring.
— Mitigation Measures BIO-2d. Project design shall be modified to preserve at a minimum the
southern 275 feet of the North-South Creek Segment to protect all existing mature riparian
woodland, and the proposed drainage plan shall be altered to convey remaining surface water flows
from areas to the north to this channel.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2e. To minimize impacts to riparian habitat, the Project shall stockpile
sufficient emergent vegetation (e.g., cattails) for later planting in the realigned reach of Tank Farm
Creek. Stockpiled vegetation shall be placed in earthen basins with the roots covered with moist
soil and maintained in a moist condition during construction operations.
Packet Pg 328
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
130
Exhibit 1
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2g. A post-construction landscape and restoration report for each phase
shall be prepared by the Environmental Monitor based on as-built drawings and site inspections to
document the final grading, plantings, and habitat restoration activities. The report shall include as-
built plans prepared after restoration, grading, and mitigation habitat plantings are complete. The
as-built plans shall be prepared by landscape and grading contractors responsible for realignment
and restoration within Tank Farm Creek.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2h. Project activities within Tank Farm Creek and drainage channels,
including any tree pruning or removals, any necessary erosion repairs, or culvert removals, shall be
performed when the channel is dry, planned to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Natural
Resource Manager per City Drainage Manual Standards, and be subject to monitoring by the
Environmental Monitor. Upon removal of the existing steel culvert currently used for farm access
across Tank Farm Creek, the channel shall be restored to match conditions immediately upstream
and downstream including channel width, gradient, and vegetation.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2i. To reduce erosion and runoff from all exposed soils, all bare disturbed
soils shall be hydroseeded at the completion of grading for each construction phase. The seed mix
shall contain a minimum of three locally native grass species and may contain one or two sterile
non-native grasses not to exceed 25 percent of the total seed mix by count. Seeding shall be
completed no later than November 15 of the year in which Project activities occurred. All exposed
areas where seeding is considered unsuccessful after 90 days shall receive a second application or
seeding, straw, or mulch as soon as is practical to reduce erosion.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2j. The Tank Farm Creek Class I bicycle path bridge footings for creek
crossings shall be placed outside mapped riparian areas and outside the top of the bank of the
channel invert. The Class I bridges shall be located within areas that have little to no riparian
vegetation. No construction activities or equipment shall occur in the stream channel. The
placement of the bridge and footings shall be indicated on the Development Plan, VTM, and
Biological Mitigation Plan, and shall show the bridges’ placement in relation to existing vegetation
and the creek channel and banks.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-3a. The City-approved qualified biologist shall conduct training to all
construction personnel to familiarize construction crews with sensitive species that have the
potential to occur within the Project site. This may include but is not limited to: C alifornia red-
legged frog, western pond turtle, Steelhead trout, bats, migratory birds, and Congdon’s tarplant.
The educational program shall include a description what constitutes take, penalties for take, and
the guidelines that would be followed by all construction personnel to avoid take of species during
construction activities. Descriptions of the California red-legged frog and its habits, Congdon’s
tarplant, nesting and migratory birds that may be encountered, and all other sensitive species that
have a potential to occur within the vicinity of Project construction shall be provided. The
construction crew foreman shall be responsible for ensuring that crew members comply with the
guidelines and that all new personnel receive the training before partaking in construction activities.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-3b. The Biological Mitigation Plan shall address wildlife and special
status species movement as follows:
• Migratory and Nesting Bird Management. Grading and construction activities shall
avoid the breeding season (typically assumed to be from February 15 to August 15) to the
extent practicable, particularly within 50 feet of Tank Farm Creek and riparian or wetland
Packet Pg 329
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
131
Exhibit 1
habitat. If Project activities must be conducted during this period, pre-construction nesting
bird surveys shall take place within one week of habitat disturbance associated with each
phase, and if active nests are located, the following shall be implemented:
• Construction activities within 50 feet of active nests shall be restricted until chi cks have
fledged, unless the nest belongs to a raptor, in which case a 200-foot activity restriction
buffer shall be observed.
• A pre-construction survey report shall be submitted to the City immediately upon
completion of the survey. The report shall detail appropriate fencing or flagging of the
buffer zone and make recommendations on additional monitoring requirements. A map of
the Project site and nest locations shall be included with the report.
• The Project biologist conducting the nesting survey shall have the authority to reduce or
increase the recommended buffer depending upon site conditions and the species involved.
A report of findings and recommendations for bird protection shall be submitted to the City
prior to vegetation removal.
• Bat Colony Management. Prior to removal of any trees over 20 inches diameter-at-breast-
height (DBH), a survey shall be conducted by a CDFW-approved qualified biologist to
determine if any tree proposed for removal or trimming harbors sensitive bat species or
maternal bat colonies. Maternal bat colonies shall not be disturbed. If a non-maternal roost
is found, the qualified biologist shall install one-way valves or other appropriate passive
relocation method. For each occupied roost removed, one bat box shall be instal led in
similar habitat and shall have similar cavities or crevices to those which are removed,
including access, ventilation, dimensions, height above ground, and thermal conditions. If
a bat colony is excluded from the Project site, appropriate alternate bat habitat shall be
installed in the Project site. To the extent practicable, alternate bat house installation shall
be installed near the onsite drainage.
• Congdon’s Tarplant Management. Prior to initiation of construction, the Applicant shall
fund a site survey for Congdon’s tarplant, and:
• If Congdon’s tarplant is found in areas proposed for building, the affected individuals shall
be replaced at a 1:1 ratio through seeding in a suitable conserved natural open space area.
• A mitigation and monitoring plan for the species shall be developed consistent with
applicable scientific literature pertinent to this species. The plan shall provide for the
annual success over an area of at least 1,330 square feet with approximately 500-750
individuals (the current aerial extent) and be implemented to reduce impacts to Congdon’s
tarplant to a less than significant level.
• The mitigation plan shall be incorporated into the Biological Mitigation Plan, wherein
wetland sites shall be created and Congdon’s tarplant seeds from the site shall be
reintroduced.
• Sensitive Species Management. Injury or mortality to the California red-legged frog,
western pond turtle, and steelhead shall be avoided. The plan shall include the following
measures: pre-Project surveys; worker awareness; cessation of work in occupied areas;
relocation (if necessary) of frogs, turtles, and steelhead from the work area by a
professional biologist authorized by the USFWS and/or CDFW; and monitoring by a
qualified biologist during construction. Necessary permits shall be obtained from the state
(CDFW) and federal (USACE and USFWS) regulatory agencies with jurisdiction. Any
other sensitive species observed during the pre-construction surveys shall be relocated out
of harm’s way by the qualified biologist into the nearest suitable habitat as determined in
consultation with the jurisdictional resource agency outside the disturbance area.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-3c. Within 48 hours prior to construction activities within 50 feet of Tank
Farm Creek, drainages, and seasonal wetlands, the Project site shall be surveyed for California red-
Packet Pg 330
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
132
Exhibit 1
legged frogs by a qualified biologist. If any California red-legged frogs are found, work within 25
linear feet in any direction of the frog shall not start until the frog has been moved from the area.
The USFWS shall be consulted for appropriate action; the Applicant shall obtain a Biological
Opinion from the USFWS and any additional authorization required by other regulatory agencies
prior to the commencement of work. The USFWS-qualified biologist, Environmental Monitor, or
USFWS personnel may determine that frog-exclusion fencing is necessary to prevent overland
movement of frogs if concerns arise that frogs could enter construction areas. Frog-exclusion
fencing should contain no gaps and must extend at least 18 inches above ground; fences may be
opened during periods of no construction (e.g., weekends) to prevent entrapment.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-3d. Within 48 hours prior to construction activities within 50 feet of Tank
Farm Creek, drainages, seasonal wetlands, and riparian habitat, the Project site shall be surveyed
for western pond turtles by a qualified biologist. If any western pond turtles are found, work shall
cease until the turtle is relocated to the nearest suitable habitat. The qualified biologist shall monitor
all ground breaking work conducted within 50 feet of western pond turtle habitat. The City-
approved biologist Environmental Monitor may determine that silt fencing shall be installed
adjacent to western pond turtle habitat if concerns arise that the western pond turtle overland
movement could allow them to access construction areas.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-6. All work in and within 100 feet of Tank Farm Creek, including work
within the creek setback, shall occur outside the rainy season (April 15 to October 15, unless
approved otherwise by RWQCB), during periods when the creek channel is dry and water flows
are absent.
— Mitigation Measure CR-2a. Data recovery through controlled grading of CA-SLO-2798/H shall
occur prior to the start of construction to seek buried features and additional diagnostic artifacts.
The Applicant shall retain a Registered Professional Archaeologist familiar with the type s of
historic and prehistoric resources that could be encountered within the Project site and a Native
American monitor to supervise the controlled grading, which shall occur in 10 -centimeter lifts to
culturally sterile sediments or maximum construction depth (whichever is reached first).
• Any formed tools exposed during grading shall be collected. If archaeological features are
exposed (including but not limited to hearths, storage pits, midden deposits, or structural
remains), the archaeologist shall temporarily redirect grading to another area so the features
can be exposed, recorded, and sampled according to standard archaeological procedures.
Organic remains shall be dated using the radiocarbon method and the geochemical source
and hydration rim thickness of any obsidian shall be determined. Technical analyses of
plant remains, bone and shell dietary debris, and other important materials shall also be
performed.
• Artifacts, features, and other materials recovered through this process shall be described,
illustrated, and analyzed fully in a technical report of findings; the analysis shall include
comparative research with other sites of similar age. In addition to the technical report, the
findings from this research shall be published in an appropriate scientific journal. The
Applicant shall fund all technical reporting and subsequent publication.
— Mitigation Measure CR-2b. Following completion of controlled grading of CA-SLO-2798/H,
the Applicant shall retain a Registered Professional Archaeologist and a Native American
consultant to monitor all further earth disturbances within Phase 5 to ensure that previously
unidentified buried archaeological deposits are not inadvertently exposed and damaged. In the
event archaeological remains are encountered during grading or other earth disturbance, work in
Packet Pg 331
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
133
Exhibit 1
the vicinity shall be stopped immediately and redirected to another location until the Project
archaeologist evaluates the significance of the find pursuant to City Archaeological Resource
Preservation Program Guidelines. If remains are found to be significant, they shall be subject to
a Phase 3 mitigation program consistent with City Guidelines and funded by the Applicant.
— Mitigation Measure CR-3a. Prior to the issuance of building and grading permits for Phase 1, the
Applicant shall retain a City-approved Registered Professional Archaeologist and a Native
American monitor to be present during all ground disturbing activities within the Project site and
Buckley Road Extension site. In the event of any inadvertent discovery of prehistoric or histori c-
period archaeological resources during construction, all work within 50 feet of the discovery shall
immediately cease (or greater or lesser distance as needed to protect the discovery and determined
in the field by the Project archaeologist). The Applicant shall immediately notify the City of San
Luis Obispo Community Development Department. The Project archaeologist shall evaluate the
significance of the discovery pursuant to City Archaeological Resource Preservation Program
Guidelines prior to resuming any activities that could impact the site/discovery. If the Project
archaeologist determines that the find may qualify for listing in the CRHR, the site shall be avoided
or shall be subject to a Phase 3 mitigation program consistent with City Guidelines an d funded by
the Applicant. Work shall not resume until authorization is received from the City.
— Mitigation Measure CR-3b. Prior to construction, workers shall receive education regarding the
recognition of possible buried cultural remains and protection of all cultural resources, including
prehistoric and historic resources, during construction. Such training shall provide construction
personnel with direction regarding the procedures to be followed in the unlikely event that
previously unidentified archaeological materials, including Native American burials, are
discovered during construction. Training would also inform construction personnel that
unauthorized collection or disturbance of artifacts or other cultural materials is not allowed. The
training shall be prepared by the Project archaeologist and shall provide a description of the cultural
resources that may be encountered in the Project site, outline steps to follow in the event that a
discovery is made, and provide contact information for the Proj ect archaeologist, Native American
monitor, and appropriate City personnel. The training shall be conducted concurrent with other
environmental or safety awareness and education programs for the Project, provided that the
program elements pertaining to archaeological resources is provided by a qualified instructor
meeting applicable professional qualifications standards.
— Mitigation Measure HAZ-1. Prior to earthwork and demolition activities, a site-specific Health
and Safety Plan shall be developed per California Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(Cal/OSHA) requirements. The Health and Safety Plan shall include appropriate best management
practices (BMPs) related to the treatment, handling, and disposal of NOA and ACMs. A NOA
Construction and Grading Project Form shall be submitted to the APCD prior to grading activities.
All construction employees that have the potential to come into contact with contaminated building
materials and soil/bedrock shall be briefed on the safety plan, including required proper training
and use of personal protective equipment. During earthwork and demolition activities, procedures
shall be followed to eliminate or minimize construction worker or general public exposure to heavy
hydrocarbons and other potential contaminants in soil and groundwater, and potential ACMs within
potential demolished materials. Procedures shall include efforts to control fugitive dust, contain
and cover excavation debris piles, appropriate laboratory analysis of soil for waste characterization,
segregation of contaminated soil from uncontaminated soil, and demolished materials. The
applicable regulations associated with excavation, removal, transportation, and disposal of
contaminated soil shall be followed (e.g., tarping of trucks and waste manifesting).
Packet Pg 332
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
134
Exhibit 1
— Mitigation Measure HYD-1a. Prior to the issuance of any construction/grading permit and/or the
commencement of any clearing, grading, or excavation, the Applicant shall submit a Notice of
Intent (NOI) for discharge from the Project site to the California SWRCB Storm Water Permit Unit.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-1b. The Applicant shall require the building contractor to prepare and
submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the City 45 days prior to the start of
work for approval. The contractor is responsible for understanding the State General Permit and
instituting the SWPPP during construction. A SWPPP for site construction shall be developed prior
to the initiation of grading and implemented for all construction activity on the Project site in excess
of one (1) acre, or where the area of disturbance is less than one acre but is part of the Project’s
plan of development that in total disturbs one or more acres. The SWPPP shall identify potential
pollutant sources that may affect the quality of discharges to storm water, and shall include specific
BMPs to control the discharge of material from the site. The following BMP methods shall include,
but would not be limited to:
• Temporary detention basins, straw bales, sand bagging, mulching, erosion control blankets,
silt fencing, and soil stabilizers shall be used.
• Soil stockpiles and graded slopes shall be covered after 14 days of inactivity and 24 hours
prior to and during inclement weather conditions.
• Fiber rolls shall be placed along the top of exposed slopes and at the toes of graded areas
to reduce surface soil movement, as necessary.
• A routine monitoring plan shall be implemented to ensure success of all onsite erosion and
sedimentation control measures.
• Dust control measures shall be implemented to ensure success of all onsite activities to
control fugitive dust.
• Streets surrounding the Project site shall be cleaned daily or as necessary.
• BMPs shall be strictly followed to prevent spills and discharges of pollutants onsite
(material and container storage, proper trash disposal, construction entrances, etc.).
• Sandbags, or other equivalent techniques, shall be utilized along graded areas to prevent
siltation transport to the surrounding areas.
• Additional BMPs shall be implemented for any fuel storage or fuel handling that could
occur onsite during construction. The SWPPP must be prepared in accordance with the
guidelines adopted by the SWRCB. The SWPPP shall be submitted to the City along with
grading/development plans for review and approval. The Applicant shall file a Notice of
Completion for construction of the development, identifying that pollution sources were
controlled during the construction of the Project and implementing a closure SWPPP for
the site.
— Mitigation Measure HYD-1c. Installation of the eight drainage outlets within Tank Farm Creek
shall occur within the dry season (May through October).
— Mitigation Measure HYD-4a. A site-specific, geotechnical investigation shall be completed in
areas proposed for HDD. Preliminary geotechnical borings shall be drilled to verify that the
proposed depth of HDD is appropriate to avoid frac-outs (i.e., the depth of finest grained sediments
and least fractures) and to determine appropriate HDD methods (i.e., appropriate drilling mud
mixtures for specific types of sediments). The investigation shall include results from at least three
borings, a geologic cross section, a discussion of drilling conditions, and a history and
recommendations to prevent frac-outs.
Packet Pg 333
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
135
Exhibit 1
— Mitigation Measure HYD-4b. A Frac-out Contingency Plan shall be completed and shall include
measures for training, monitoring, worst case scenario evaluation, equipment and materials, agency
notification and prevention, containment, clean up, and disposal of released drilling muds.
Preventative measures would include incorporation of the recommendations of the geotechnical
investigation to determine the most appropriate HDD depth and drilling mud mixture. In
accordance with the RWQCB, HDD operations shall occur for non-perennial streams such as Tank
Farm Creek only when the stream is dry, and only during daylight hours. In addition, drilling
pressures shall be closely monitored so that they do not exceed those needed to penetrate the
formation. Monitoring by a minimum of two City-approved monitors (located both upstream and
downstream, who will move enough to monitor the entire area of operations) shall occur throughout
drilling operations to ensure swift response in the event of a frac -out, while containment shall be
accomplished through construction of temporary berms/dikes and use of silt fences, straw bales,
absorbent pads, straw wattles, and plastic sheeting. Clean up shall be accomplished with plastic
pails, shovels, portable pumps, and vacuum trucks. The Frac-out Contingency Plan shall be
submitted to the City, and the RWQCB shall review the plan.
— Mitigation Measure NO-1a. Except for emergency repair of public service utilities, or where an
exception is issued by the Community Development Department, no operation of tools or
equipment used in construction, drilling, repair, alteration, or demolition work shall occur daily
between the hours of 7:00 PM and 7:00 AM, or any time on Sundays, holidays, or after sunset,
such that the sound creates a noise disturbance that exceeds 75 dBA for single-family residential,
80 dBA for multi-family residential, and 85 dBA for mixed residential/commercial land uses, as
shown in Table 3.9-8 and Table 3.9-9, across a residential or commercial property line.
— Mitigation Measure NO-1b. For all construction activity at the Project site, noise attenuation
techniques shall be employed to ensure that noise levels are maintained within levels allowed by
the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 9.12 (Noise Control). Such
techniques shall include:
• Sound blankets on noise-generating equipment.
• Stationary construction equipment that generates noise levels above 65 dBA at the Project
boundaries shall be shielded with a barrier that meets a sound transmission class (a rating
of how well noise barriers attenuate sound) of 25.
• All diesel equipment shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be equipped with
factory-recommended mufflers.
• The movement of construction-related vehicles, with the exception of passenger vehicles,
along roadways adjacent to sensitive receptors shall be limited to the hours between 7:00
AM and 7:00 PM, Monday through Saturday. No movement of heavy equipment shall
occur on Sundays or official holidays (e.g., Thanksgiving, Labor Day).
• Temporary sound barriers shall be constructed between construction sites and affected
uses.
— Mitigation Measure NO-1c. The contractor shall inform residents and business operators at
properties within 300 feet of the Project site of proposed construction timelines and noise complaint
procedures to minimize potential annoyance related to construction noise. Noise-related complaints
shall be directed to the City’s Community Development Department.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-1. The Applicant shall prepare a Construction Transportation
Management Plan for all phases of the proposed Project for review and approval by the City prior
Packet Pg 334
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
136
Exhibit 1
to issuance of grading or building permits to address and manage traffic during construction. The
Plan shall be designed to:
• Prevent traffic impacts on the surrounding roadway network;
• Restrict construction staging to within the Project site;
• Minimize parking impacts both to public parking and access to private parking to
the greatest extent practicable;
• Ensure safety for both those construction vehicles and works and the surrounding
community; and
• Prevent substantial truck traffic through residential neighborhoods.
• The Construction Transportation Management Plan shall be subject to review and approval
by the Public Works Director to ensure that the Plan has been designed in accordance with
this mitigation measure. This review shall occur prior to issuance of grading or building
permits. It shall, at a minimum, include the following:
Ongoing Requirements throughout the Duration of Construction:
• A detailed Construction Transportation Management Plan for work zones shall be
maintained. At a minimum, this shall include parking and travel lane
configurations; warning, regulatory, guide, and directional signage; and area
sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and parking lanes. The Plan shall include specific
information regarding the Project’s construction activities that may disrupt normal
pedestrian and traffic flow and the measures to address these disruptions. Such
Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department
and implemented in accordance with this approval.
• Work within the public right-of-way shall be reviewed and approved by the City
on a case by case basis based on the magnitude and type of construction activity.
Generally work shall be performed between 8:30 AM and 4:00 PM. This work
includes dirt hauling and construction material delivery. Work within the public
right-of-way outside of these hours shall only be allowed after the issuance of an
after-hours construction permit administered by the Building and Safety Division.
Additionally restrictions may be put in place by Public Works Department
depending on particular construction activities and conditions.
• Streets and equipment shall be cleaned in accordance with established Public
Works requirements.
• Trucks shall only travel on a City-approved construction route. Limited queuing
may occur on the construction site itself.
• Materials and equipment shall be minimally visible to the public; the preferred
location for materials is to be onsite, with a minimum amount of materials within
a work area in the public right-of-way, subject to a current Use of Public Property
Permit.
• Provision of off-street parking for construction workers, which may include the
use of a remote location with shuttle transport to the site, if determined necessary
by the City.
Project Coordination Elements That Shall Be Implemented Prior to Commencement of
Construction:
Packet Pg 335
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
137
Exhibit 1
• The traveling public shall be advised of impending construction activities that may
substantially affect key roadways or other facilities (e.g., information signs,
portable message signs, media listing/notification, and implementation of an
approved Construction Impact Mitigation Plan).
• A Use of Public Property Permit, Excavation Permit, Sewer Permit, or Oversize
Load Permit, as well as any Caltrans permits required for any construction work
requiring encroachment into public rights-of-way, detours, or any other work
within the public right-of-way shall be obtained.
• Timely notification of construction schedules shall be provided to all affected
agencies (e.g., Police Department, Fire Department, Public Works Department,
and Community Development Department) and to all owners and residential and
commercial tenants of property within a radius of ¼ mile.
• Construction work shall be coordinated with affected agencies in advance of start
of work. Approvals may take up to two weeks per each submittal.
• Public Works Department approval of any haul routes for construction materials
and equipment deliveries shall be obtained.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR. Implementation of mitigation measure MM UT-2, as well as
construction-related mitigation measures for air quality, biological resources, cultural resources,
hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, and transportation and traffic,
would ensure that installation of utility lines does not result in the exceedance of environmental
thresholds.
SECTION 7. SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL
EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED MITIGATED PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
FOR WHICH SUFFICIENT MITIGATION IS NOT AVAILABLE
The findings below are for impacts that would result in potentially significant effects on the natural or
human environment that could not be lessened to a less than significant level through changes or
alternations in the project or implementation of mitigation measures. To approve a project resulting in
significant and unavoidable impacts, the CEQA Guidelines require decision makers to make findings of
overriding consideration that "... specific legal, technological, economic, social, or other considerations
make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR...".
This section presents the project’s significant environmental impacts and feasible mitigation measures.
Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR]) and Section 21081
of the Public Resources Code require a lead agency to make findings for each significant environmental
impact disclosed in an EIR. Specifically, for each significant impact, the lead agency must find that:
• Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR;
• Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency
and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or
can and should be adopted by that agency; or
Packet Pg 336
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
138
Exhibit 1
• Specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations, including provision of
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make the mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible.
Each of these findings must be supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record. This section
identifies impacts that can be reduced, but not to a less-than-significant level, through the incorporation of
feasible mitigation measures into the project, and which therefore, remain significant and unavoidable, as
identified in the Final EIR. The impacts identified in this section are considered in the same sequence in
which they appear in the EIR. Where adoption of feasible mitigation measures is not effective in avoiding
an impact or reducing it to a less-than-significant level, the feasibility of adopting alternatives to the
proposed project is considered in Section 7 of this document.
A. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
1. Impact AG-1: The proposed Project would impact agricultural land within the Project site and offsite
Buckley Road Extension with the direct conversion of historically cul tivated farmland to urban
development. (Refer to page 5-45 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The incorporation of the following mitigation measure is required to ensure the
Project’s consistency with policies of the City General Plan Land Use Element and Conservation
and Open Space Element, which require the acquisition and conservation of an equ ivalent area of
prime farmland soils offsite to offset land that would be converted from agricultural use with
development of the Project site:
— Mitigation Measure AG-1. The Applicant shall establish an offsite agricultural conservation
easement or pay in-lieu fees to a City designated fund dedicated to acquiring and preserving
agricultural land. While the City’s priority is that such agricultural land be acquired in the closest
feasible proximity to the City, mitigation may be implemented using one of the following options:
m. The Applicant shall ensure permanent protection of farmland of equal area and quality,
which does not already have permanent protection, within the City of San Luis Obispo,
consistent with City Policy 8.6.3(C) and AASP Policy 3.2.18. The Applicant shall identify
and purchase or place in a conservation easement a parcel of land of at least 71 acres of
equal quality farmland, or provide in-lieu fees to allow the City to complete such an
acquisition.
n. If no suitable parcel exists within the City limits, the Applicant shall identify and purchase
or place in a conservation easement a parcel of farmland, of equal quantity and quality,
within the City’s Sphere of Influence that is threatened by development of nonagricultural
uses. The parcel shall be placed in an agricultural conservation easement (refer to Figure 2
in the Land Use Element for City Sphere of Influence). The Applicant may also provide
in-lieu fees to allow the City to complete such an acquisition.
o. In the event that no suitable land is available within the City limits or City’s Sphere of
Influence, the Applicant shall identify and purchase or place in a conservation easement a
parcel of farmland, of equal quantity and quality, within the City’s urban reserve or
greenbelt that is threatened by development of nonagricultural uses. This parcel shall be
placed in an agricultural conservation easement (refer to Figure 1 in the Land Use Element
for City Planning Area). The Applicant may also provide in-lieu fees to allow the City to
complete such an acquisition.
p. In the event that no suitable land for an agricultural conservation easement is available for
purchase within the City limits, the City’s Sphere of Influence, or urban reserve or
Packet Pg 337
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
139
Exhibit 1
greenbelt Planning Area, the Applicant shall identify and purchase or place in a
conservation easement a parcel of farmland, of equal quantity and quality, within County
lands (e.g., agricultural lands north and south of Buckley Road) that is considered to be
threatened by the conversion to nonagricultural use. This parcel shall be placed in an
agricultural conservation easement. The Applicant may also provide in-lieu fees to allow
the City to complete such an acquisition. The Applicant shall demonstrate that such land is
as close in proximity to the City as feasible.
b. Finding: The City finds that while implementation of Mitigation Measure AG-1 would ensure the
MPA is consistent with adopted policies of the City General Plan, the irreversible conversion or
loss of prime farmland soils for non-agricultural use through development of the Project would
result in significant effects to agricultural resources, as these lost soils could not be replaced or
recreated. Therefore, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding
considerations for this impact is made in Section 9.
2. Cumulative Agricultural Resources Impacts: The MPA, and other cumulative development, is
subject to adopted policies of the City General Plan and AASP relating to the protecti on and
conservation of agricultural resources. However, cumulative development would continue to result in
the irreversible loss of agricultural land and important agricultural soils. Cumulative effects under the
MPA would be similar to those of the Project as described on page 3.2-28 of the Final EIR.
a. Mitigation: No other feasible mitigation is available that would result in the replacement or
recreation of prime farmland soils and other important agricultural resources.
b. Finding: The City finds that cumulative development would continue to result in the irreversible
loss or conversion of agricultural resources. However, no feasible mitigation is available for
cumulative impacts to agricultural resources, and impacts would remain significant and
unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 9.
B. AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
1. Impact AQ-1: The MPA would result in potentially significant construction-related air quality impacts
from dust and air pollutant emissions generated by grading and construction equipment operation.
(Refer to page 3.3-22 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required by the San Luis Obispo APCD to
reduce project construction ROG and NOX and DPM and recommended to improve consistency
with the Clean Air Plan (CAP).
— Mitigation Measure AQ-1a. A Construction Activity Management Plan (CAMP) shall be included
as part of Project grading and building plans and shall be submitted to the APCD and to the Cit y
for review and approval prior to the start of construction. In addition, the contractor or builder shall
designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering,
as necessary, to prevent transport of dust offsite. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend
periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone of such persons shall be
provided to the APCD prior to land use clearance for map recordation and grading. The plan shall
include but not be limited to the following elements:
8. A Dust Control Management Plan that encompasses the following dust control measures:
Packet Pg 338
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
140
Exhibit 1
• Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible;
• Water trucks or sprinkler trucks shall be used during construction to keep all areas
of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At a
minimum, this would require twice-daily applications. All dirt stock pile areas
should be sprayed daily as needed. Increased watering frequency would be
required when wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour (mph). Reclaimed water or
the onsite water well (non-potable) shall be used when possible. The contractor or
builder shall consider the use of an APCD-approved dust suppressant where
feasible to reduce the amount of water used for dust control;
• All dirt stock-pile areas shall be sprayed daily as needed;
• Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved Project revegetation
and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as possible following
completion of any soil disturbing activities;
• Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one
month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating native grass seed
and watered until vegetation is established;
• All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using
approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance
by the APCD;
• All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon
as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after
grading unless seeding or soil binders are used;
• Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any
unpaved surface at the construction site;
• All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or shall
maintain at least two feet of freeboard in accordance with California Vehicle Code
Section 23114;
• Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or
wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site;
• Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent
paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible;
• All of these fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be sh own on grading and
building plans; and
• The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive
dust control emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as
necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below 20 percent
opacity, and to prevent transport of dust offsite. Their duties shall include holiday
and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone
number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior
to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition.
9. Implementation of the following BACT for diesel-fueled construction equipment, where
feasible. The BACT measures shall include:
• Use of Tier 3 and Tier 4 off-road equipment and 2010 on-road compliant engines;
• Repowering equipment with the cleanest engines available; and
• Installing California Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies.
10. Implementation of the following standard air quality measures to minimize diesel
emissions:
Packet Pg 339
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
141
Exhibit 1
• Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer’s
specifications;
• Fuel all offroad and portable diesel powered equipment with CARB-certified
motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off-road).
• Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the CARB’s 2007 or cleaner certification
standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines and comply with the State On-Road
Regulation;
• Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in their
fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g.
captive or NOx exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative
compliance;
• On- and off-road diesel equipment shall not be allowed to idle for more than five
minutes. Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas to remind drivers
and operators of the five-minute idling limit;
• Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors in not permitted;
• Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive
receptors;
• Electrify equipment when feasible;
• Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where
feasible; and,
• Use alternatively fueled construction equipment onsite where feasible, such as
compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel.
11. Tabulation of on- and off-road construction equipment (age, horse-power, and miles and/or
hours of operation);
12. Schedule construction truck trips during non-peak hours (as determined by the Public
Works Director) to reduce peak hour emissions;
13. Limit the length of the construction work-day period; and
14. Phase construction activities, if appropriate.
— Mitigation Measure AQ-1b. To reduce ROG and NOx levels during the architectural coating phase,
low or no VOC-emission paint shall be used with levels of 50 g/L or less, such as Benjamin Moore
Natura Paint (Odorless, Zero VOC Paint). The Applicant or builder shall implement additional
measures to reduce daily and quarterly ROG and NOx levels related to architectural coatings to the
extent determined feasible by the City and APCD, such as extending coating applications by
limiting daily coating activities.
— Mitigation Measure AQ-1c. In order to further reduce Project air quality impacts, an offsite
mitigation strategy shall be developed and agreed upon by the developer, City, and APCD at least
three months prior to the issuance of grading permits, including added funding for circulation
improvements and transit operations. Such funding may be in the form of cash payment or included
as part of the obligation of the Community Facilities District. The Applicant shall provide this
funding at least two months prior to the start of construction to help facilitate emission offsets that
are as real-time as possible. Offsite mitigation strategies shall include one or more of the following:
• Replace/repower San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA) transit buses;
• Purchase VDECs for transit buses; and
• Fund expansion of existing SLORTA transit services.
Packet Pg 340
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
142
Exhibit 1
b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations
make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible.
Mitigation Measures AQ-1a through 1c are feasible and have been adopted. However, no additional
mitigation is available that would reduce the project’s anticipated construction emissions below
established APCD Tier 1 Quarterly Thresholds. Therefore, impacts related to project construction
emissions are significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact
is made in Section 9.
2. Impact AQ-2. The MPA would result in significant long-term operation-related air quality impacts
generated by area, energy, and mobile emissions. (Refer to page 5-48 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required by the San Luis Obispo APCD to
reduce project operational emissions.
— Mitigation Measure AQ-2a. The Applicant shall include the following:
• Water Conservation Strategy: The Applicant shall install fixtures with the EPA WaterSense
Label, achieving 20 percent reduction indoor. The Project shall install drip, micro, or fixed
spray irrigation on all plants other than turf, also including the EPA WaterSense Label,
achieving 15 percent reduction in outdoor landscaping.
• Solid Waste: The Applicant shall institute recycling and composting services to achieve a
15 percent reduction in waste disposal, and use waste efficient landscaping.
• Fugitive Dust: The Applicant shall replace ground cover of at least 70 percent of area
disturbed in accordance with CARB Rule 403.
• Energy Conservation Strategy: The Applicant shall install additional solar and alternative
energy features (e.g., solar panels on commercial buildings; solar canopies over
commercial parking areas).
— Mitigation Measure AQ-2b. Consistent with standard mitigation measures set forth by the APCD,
Projects generating more than 50 lbs/day of combined ROG + NOx or PM10 shall implement all
feasible measures within Table 3-5 of the Air Quality Handbook.
b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations
make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible.
Mitigation Measures AQ-2a and 2b are feasible and have been adopted. However, no additional
mitigation is available that would reduce the project’s anticipated operational long-term emissions
below established APCD maximum daily emissions thresholds. Therefore, impacts related to
project construction emissions are significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding
considerations for this impact is made in Section 9.
3. Impact AQ-5. The MPA is potentially inconsistent with the County of San Luis Obispo APCD’s 2001
Clean Air Plan. (Refer to page 5-52 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required to improve consistency with the CAP.
— Mitigation Measure AQ-2b. Consistent with standard mitigation measures set forth by the APCD,
Projects generating more than 50 lbs/day of combined ROG + NOx or PM10 shall implement all
feasible measures within Table 3-5 of the Air Quality Handbook.
Packet Pg 341
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
143
Exhibit 1
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-12. The Applicant shall coordinate with SLO Transit to ensure that
adequate service would be provide to the two proposed bus stops an d Project area. The bus stops
shall be constructed by the Applicant within the respective phase’s development area. To assure
adequate service is provided to the two new bus stops onsite, the Applicant shall pay for and install
a fair share to fund any physical improvements needed to accommodate future service to the site.
In addition, the proposed transit service onsite shall meet standards stated in Policy 3.1.6, Service
Standards.
b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations
make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible.
Mitigation Measure AQ-2b and TRANS-12 are feasible and has been adopted. However, mitigation
is not available that would reduce projected population growth such that the project’s increase in
vehicle trips rate would be consistent with overall land use planning principles contained in the
2001 CAP. Therefore, impacts related to consistency with the 2001 CAP would remain significant
and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 9.
4. Cumulative Air Quality Impacts: As analyzed in the LUCE Update EIR, full buildout under the
LUCE would not be consistent with the 2001 Clean Air Plan. Mitigation Measure AQ-2b and
Mitigation Measure TRANS-12 would reduce the project’s contribution to this cumulative impact to
the maximum extent feasible. However, no additional mitigation is available to address cumulative air
quality impacts. As such, cumulative impacts on air quality would remain significant and unavoidable.
(Refer to page 3.3-50 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would be required to reduce the project’s
cumulative impact to the maximum extent feasible.
— Mitigation Measure AQ-2b. Consistent with standard mitigation measures set forth by the APCD,
Projects generating more than 50 lbs/day of combined ROG + NOx or PM10 shall implement all
feasible measures within Table 3-5 of the Air Quality Handbook.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-12. The Applicant shall coordinate with SLO Transit to ensure that
adequate service would be provide to the two proposed bus stops and Project area. The bus stops
shall be constructed by the Applicant within the respective phase’s development area. To assure
adequate service is provided to the two new bus stops onsite, the Applicant shall pay for and install
a fair share to fund any physical improvements needed to accommodate future service to the site.
In addition, the proposed transit service onsite shall meet standards stated in Policy 3.1.6, Service
Standards.
b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations
make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Fin al EIR infeasible, as
analyzed in the FEIR. Mitigation Measure AQ-2b and Mitigation Measure TRANS-12 are feasible
and has been adopted. However, no additional feasible mitigation is available for cumulative air
quality impacts, which would remain significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding
considerations for this impact is made in Section 9.
C. NOISE
1. Impact NO-1: Short-term construction activities would generate noise levels that would exceed
thresholds established in the City’s General Plan Noise Element and Noise Guidebook, with potential
impacts to sensitive receptors. (Refer to page 5-65 of the Final EIR.)
Packet Pg 342
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
144
Exhibit 1
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required to reduce project construction -related
noise to the maximum extent feasible:
— Mitigation Measure NO-1a. Except for emergency repair of public service utilities, or where an
exception is issued by the Community Development Department, no operation of tools or
equipment used in construction, drilling, repair, alteration, or demolition work shall occur daily
between the hours of 7:00 PM and 7:00 AM, or any time on Sundays, holidays, or after sunset,
such that the sound creates a noise disturbance that exceeds 75 dBA for single-family residential,
80 dBA for multi-family residential, and 85 dBA for mixed residential/commercial land uses, as
shown in Table 3.9-8 and Table 3.9-9, across a residential or commercial property line.
— Mitigation Measure NO-1b. For all construction activity at the Project site, noise attenuation
techniques shall be employed to ensure that noise levels are maintained within levels allowed by
the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 9.12 (Noise Control). Such
techniques shall include:
• Sound blankets on noise-generating equipment.
• Stationary construction equipment that generates noise levels above 65 dBA at the Project
boundaries shall be shielded with a barrier that meets a sound transmission class (a rating
of how well noise barriers attenuate sound) of 25.
• All diesel equipment shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be equipped with
factory-recommended mufflers.
• The movement of construction-related vehicles, with the exception of passenger vehicles,
along roadways adjacent to sensitive receptors shall be limited to the hours between 7:00
AM and 7:00 PM, Monday through Saturday. No movement of heavy equipment shall
occur on Sundays or official holidays (e.g., Thanksgiving, Labor Day).
• Temporary sound barriers shall be constructed between construction sites and affected
uses.
— Mitigation Measure NO-1c. The contractor shall inform residents and business operators at
properties within 300 feet of the Project site of proposed construction timelines and noise complaint
procedures to minimize potential annoyance related to construction noise. Noise-related complaints
shall be directed to the City’s Community Development Department.
b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations
make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible.
Mitigation Measures NO-1a through NO-1c are feasible and have been adopted. Available
mitigation would not reduce periodic construction-noise below the applicable City standards over
the 10-year MPA construction period. Therefore temporary noise impacts associated with on -site
construction activity would be significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding
considerations for this impact is made in Section 9.
D. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
1. Impact TRANS-5: MPA-generated traffic would cause increase delays and cause exceedance of
intersection capacity at the Buckley Road/SR 227 intersection in both the AM and PM peak hours.
(Refer to page 5-72 of the Final EIR.)
Packet Pg 343
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
145
Exhibit 1
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measure is required to reduce project impacts to traffic
operations at the Buckley Road/SR 227 intersection to the maximum extent feasible.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-5. The Applicant shall pay a pro-rata fair share fee to fund the
installation a roundabout at the Buckley Road/SR 227 intersection as identified in the SLOCOG
SR 227 Operations Study. The City shall collect the fair share fee and coordinate payment of Project
fair share fees to help fund improvements with the County. Alternatively, the City should consider
an amendment of the AASP impact fee program to establish a new areawide fee to help fund
improvements to the intersection to offset cumulative development impacts. If an amended AASP
fee is created by the City it will suffice as appropriate mitigation for the Project’s participation in
these improvements.
b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations
make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible.
Mitigation Measure TRANS-5 is feasible and has been adopted. However, because improvements
to this intersection have not yet been funded or planned, the MPA would continue to contribute to
exceedance of thresholds at this intersection until such improvements are completed. A statement
of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 9.
2. Cumulative Impact TRANS-13. Under near-term plus Project conditions, MPA-generated traffic
would cause contribute to delays and exceedance of storage capacities at Buckley/SR 227. The Project
would also contribute to exceedance of storage capacities along Los Osos Valley Road/South Higuera
Street and contribute to road segment congestion; however, impacts to Los Osos Valley Road would
be mitigated to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 5-74 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measure is required to reduce project impacts to the maximum
extent feasible.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-5. The Applicant shall pay a pro-rata fair share fee to fund the
installation a roundabout at the Buckley Road/SR 227 intersection as identified in the SLOCOG
SR 227 Operations Study. The City shall collect the fair share fee and coordinate payment of Project
fair share fees to help fund improvements with the County. Alternatively, the City should consider
an amendment of the AASP impact fee program to establish a new areawide fee to help fund
improvements to the intersection to offset cumulative development impacts. If an amended AASP
fee is created by the City it will suffice as appropriate mitigation for the Project’s participation in
these improvements.
— Mitigation Measure TRANS-13. The City shall amend the Citywide TIF to include a fee program
for the installation of a second southbound right-turn lane at the Los Osos Valley Road/South
Higuera Street intersection, or create a separate mitigation fee for this purpose. The Applicant shall
pay its fair share of the improvement costs through the payment of the Citywide TIF of the ad hoc
mitigation fees, as appropriate, to the City prior to issuance of building permits.
b. Findings: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations
make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible.
Mitigation Measure TRANS-5 and TRANS-13 are feasible and have been adopted. However,
because improvements to Buckley Road/SR 227 Intersection have not yet been funded or planned,
the project would continue to contribute to exceedance of thresholds at this intersection until such
improvements are completed. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in
Section 9.
Packet Pg 344
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
146
Exhibit 1
SECTION 8. FINDINGS FOR ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED
MITIGATED PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
A. INTRODUCTION
As identified in Section 7 of this document, the proposed project will cause the following significant and
unavoidable environmental impacts to occur:
• Impact AG-1: Irreversible conversion of prime farmland soils
• Cumulative Agricultural Resources Impacts
• Impact AQ-1: Exceedance of APCD construction-emissions thresholds
• Impact AQ-2: Exceedance of APCD operational-emissions thresholds
• Impact AQ-5: Inconsistency with the 2001 CAP
• Cumulative Air Quality Impacts: Cumulative inconsistencies in the 2001 CAP from buildout of the
LUCE
• Impact NO-1: Unacceptable short-term construction noise
• Impact TRANS-5: Exceedance of capacity at Buckley Road/SR 227 intersection
• Cumulative Impact TRANS-13: Exceedance of capacity at Buckley Road/SR 227 intersection
under Cumulative conditions
Because the proposed project will cause significant and unavoidable environmental impacts to occur as
identified above, the City must consider the feasibility of any environmentally superior alternatives to the
project, as proposed. The City must evaluate whether one or more of these alternatives could substantially
lessen or avoid the unavoidable significant environmental effects.
As such, the environmental superiority and feasibility of each alternative to the project is considered in this
section. Specifically, this section evaluates the effectiveness of these alternatives in reduci ng the significant
and unavoidable impacts of the proposed project.
B. DESCRIPTION OF THE ALTERNATIVES
The Final EIR for the project evaluates the following three alternatives to the MPA: (1) the original
Proposed Project (2); a No Project Alternative, which could result in one of two scenarios; and (3) a
Residential Plus Business Park Land Use Alternative.
1. Originally Proposed Project: Under the originally proposed project, which is the basis of the Project
Description in the Final EIR, the Avila Ranch Development Plan dated December 18, 2015 would be
adopted, including an amendment to the AASP, a rezone, and related actions to permit a mix of
residential uses (68.23 acres), neighborhood commercial (3.34 acres), and open space/park uses (71.30
acres) with construction of 720 units and 15,000 sf commercial space. In addition the Project would
include realignment of the North-South Segment of Tank Farm Creek, burial of 600 feet of the northern
creek segment, restoration of disturbed areas, and enhancement of existing retained habitats. Key
drainage improvements would include installation of a culvert through the existing 15 - to 20-foot high
berm along the Project site/Chevron Tank Farm property boundary to convey runoff water via Tank
Farm Creek to San Luis Obispo Creek.
Packet Pg 345
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
147
Exhibit 1
2. Alternative 1: No Project Alternative. As required by CEQA, this EIR evaluates the environmental
consequences of not proceeding with the project. This alternative assumes that the Avila Ranch
Development Plan is not adopted and that none of the proposed entitlements are implemented. This
alternative could result in one of two scenarios: a No Development scenario (Alternative 1A); and, a
General Plan Development Alternative (Alternative 1B).
Under the No Project Alternative A, ongoing agricultural production would continue, with associated
water use, application of pesticides and herbicides and other ongoing impacts (e.g., dust generation).
Tank Farm Creek would not be restored and no substantial new source of new automobile trips would
be generated with associated impacts to congestion, air pollutant and GHG emissions. Development of
the site would not contribute to the City’s housing supply, the potential for displacement of City
residents would increase, and a greater jobs/housing imbalance would result.
Under the No Project Alternative B, the project site would be developed in-line with the 2014 LUCE
identification of the site as a Special Focus Area – SP-4, which contains guidelines for development of
the site with between 500 and 700 residential units, along with requirements for the provision of 15,000
to 25,000 square feet of commercial space and retention of large areas of open space for agricultural
buffers, provision of parks and creek restoration. The Buckley Road Extension, as envisioned in the
updated LUCE, would occur under this alternative. Lastly, it is assumed the realignment of the North-
South Creek Segment of Tank Farm Creek would not occur.
3. Alternative 3: Residential Plus Business Park Land Use Alternativ e. This alternative would
combine development of the site as a residential area with development of the site as a business park
with supporting commercial development. This alternative would provide for development of a
business area, following the site’s current zoning for “BP-SP”, or Business Park – Specific Plan,
encouraging employment growth in the eastern region of the Project site. The residential component of
the alternative would allow up to 700 units, located in the western and northeastern regions of the
Project site, contained within the Airport Land Use Plan Safety Areas S-1C and S-2.
C. EFFECTIVENESS OF ALTERNATIVES IN AVOIDING SIGNIFICANT PROJECT
IMPACTS
This section evaluates the effectiveness of the alternatives in reducing the significant and unavoidable
impacts of the proposed project.
1. Significant and Unavoidable Agricultural Resources Impacts. The MPA would result in significant
and unavoidable project-level impacts related to the permanent conversion and loss of agricultural land
and prime farmland soils. Under Alternative 1A, no development would occur and the site would
continue to support agricultural uses; therefore, agricultural resource impacts would be substantially
reduced. Under Alternative 1B, the Proposed Project, and Alternative 3, the site would be developed
and would no longer be available to support agricultural uses, resulting in the conversion or loss of
agricultural resources at a similar level; therefore resulting in similar significant and unavoidable
impacts.
2. Significant and Unavoidable Air Quality Impacts. The MPA would result in significant and
unavoidable project-level impacts related to construction emissions, operational emissions, and project-
level and cumulative impacts related to Clean Air Plan (CAP) inconsistency. Under Alternative 1A, no
development would occur, and no additional vehicle trips would be generated; therefore, air quality
impacts would be substantially reduced. Under Alternative 1B, the site would be developed with
Packet Pg 346
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
148
Exhibit 1
residential and commercial uses at a slightly smaller scale than the proposed project, resulting in
negligible decreases in construction and operational emission; therefore, air quality impacts would
remain significant and unavoidable. Under the Proposed Project, constructi on and operation would
result in a similar level of air quality emissions; therefore, air quality impacts would remain significant
and unavoidable. Alternative 3 would result in a similar amount of residential development and a
greater amount of Neighborhood Commercial development in addition to development of a 120,000
square-foot Business Park, increasing vehicle trips to and from the site and associated vehicle miles
traveled, resulting in greater amounts of air pollutant emissions; therefore resulting in greater significant
and unavoidable impacts.
3. Significant and Unavoidable Noise Impacts. The MPA would result in significant and unavoidable
impacts to the noise environment from the generation of construction-related noise which could exceed
established noise standards periodically over the 10-year construction period. Under Alternative 1A,
no development would occur and the site would continue to support agricultural uses and associated
activities which generate a minor amount of noise which would be consistent with the rural agricultural
nature of the surrounding vicinity; therefore, impacts from noise would be substantially reduced.
Alternative 1B, the Proposed Project, and Alternative 3 would result in a similar degree of construction
activity on the project site. Development of the site under these alternatives would result in similar
construction schedules and associated noise-generated activities, and would therefore result in similar
significant and unavoidable impacts associated with temporary construction activity.
4. Significant and Unavoidable Transportation Impacts. The MPA would result in project-level and
cumulative transportation impacts associated with exceedances of capacity at the Buckley Road/SR
227 intersection. Under Alternative 1A, no development would occur; therefore, the significant and
unavoidable transportation impacts would be avoided. Alternative 1B would result in a similar number
of vehicle trips to and from the project site; therefore, this alternative would result in similar
transportation impacts that would remain significant and unavoidable. The Proposed Project would
include all mitigation measures identified in the EIR; however, this alternative would result in similar
significant and unavoidable impacts to Buckley Road/SR 227 intersection. Therefore, impacts are less,
but are considered similar and remain significant and unavoidable. Alternative 3 would result in a
greater amount of development and a substantial number of estimated net new ADT whic h would
greatly increase the potential significant and unavoidable impacts of the project; therefore, impacts to
transportation under these alternatives would greater and would remain significant and unavoidable.
D. ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE AND FEASIBILITY OF
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
1. Finding: The original Proposed Project would result in similar physical environmental impacts when
compared to the MPA. With a similar level of residential and commercial development, the original
Proposed Project results in the same amount of disturbed area, resulting in similar physical impacts to
the environment. However, the original Proposed Project includes realignment of Tank Farm Creek
which would result in several significant impacts. The original Proposed Project would not reduce or
avoid any of the significant and unavoidable impacts of the MPA; however, the original Proposed
Project would meet all of the Project objectives. As a result, the City finds that the original Proposed
Project is feasible, and would satisfy all of the Project objectives, but would result in greater
environmental impacts.
Packet Pg 347
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
149
Exhibit 1
2. Finding: Alternative 1A (No Development) is environmentally superior overall, since no development
would occur under the City jurisdiction. However, Alternative 1A fails to meet the City’s objectives
for the Project area as well as any of the Project objectives. As a result, the City finds that Alternative
1 would be infeasible to implement.
3. Finding: Alternative 1B (General Plan Development) would result in similar physical environmental
impacts when compared to the MPA. With a similar degree of residential and commercial development,
this alternative could have environmental effects but would likely result in similar significant and
unavoidable impacts associated with construction and operational air quality emissions, construction-
related noise levels, and transportation and traffic. However, this alternative would not fully meet the
objectives and goals of the Project. As a result, the City finds that Alternative 1B would not satisfy the
Project objectives.
4. Finding: Alternative 2 (Mitigated Project Alternative) would result in similar physical environmental
impacts when compared to the originally proposed Project. With a similar level of residential and
commercial development, this alternative results in the same amount of disturbed area, resulting in
similar physical impacts to the environment. However, this alternative would include several
development features which would reduce or eliminate several significant impacts of the Project,
including impacts resulting from realignment of Tank Farm Creek under the proposed Project, as the
current alignment of Tank Farm Creek would remain in place under this alternative. Alternative 2 would
not reduce or avoid any of the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed Project; however,
Alternative 2 would meet all of the objectives of the Project and would reduce the degree of impacts
associated with biological resources, hydrology and water quality, transportation and traffic, and
utilities. As a result, the City finds that Alternative 2 is feasible, environmentally superior to the
proposed Project, and would satisfy all of the project objectives.
5. Finding: Alternative 3 (Residential Plus Business Park Land Use) would result in greater physical
environmental impacts when compared to the MPA. With a greater amount of Neighborhood
Commercial and Business Park development, this alternative results in a greater amount of disturbed
area, resulting in greater physical impacts to the environment. However, this alternative would avoid
or reduce potentially significant impacts to hydrologic and biological resources by retaining much of
the existing alignment of Tank Farm Creek. Alternative 3 would not reduce or avoid any of the
significant and unavoidable impacts of the project and would result in greater impacts to aesthetics and
visual resources, air quality, cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, land use and planning,
noise, transportation and traffic, and utilities. Alternative 3 would meet all of the objectives o f the
project and would reduce the degree of impacts associated with biological resources and hydrology and
water quality. As a result, the City finds that Alternative 3 is environmentally superior to the Project,
but is not environmentally superior to the MPA.
SECTION 9. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
A. INTRODUCTION
The Final EIR for the MPA identifies the following significant and unavoidable impacts of the MPA:
1. The MPA would result in the irreversible conversion and loss of prime farmland soils which could
not be replaced or recreated.
2. The MPA, in addition to other cumulative projects within the City, would result in the irreversible
loss of agricultural land and important agricultural soils.
Packet Pg 348
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
150
Exhibit 1
3. Construction of the MPA would exceed established SLO APCD Tier 1 Quarterly thresholds for
ROG, NOX, and DPM construction vehicle exhaust.
4. Operation of the MPA would exceed established SLO APCD thresholds for operational ROG, NOX,
PM10, and DPM air pollutants.
5. The MPA would be inconsistent with the SLO APCD 2001 Clean Air Plan because it would result
in an increase in projected population growth, resulting in an increase in vehicle trips and vehicle
miles traveled, which would conflict with overall land use planning principles contained in the
2001 Clean Air Plan.
6. The MPA is inconsistent with the 2001 Clean Air Plan, which SLO APCD guidance states is a
cumulative air quality impact.
7. Temporary construction activity would create noise that could exceed City of San Luis Obispo
Municipal Code regulations, and mitigation may not be feasible to reduce the impact to less than
the applicable threshold.
8. The MPA would result in the generation of new vehicle trips which would contribute to exceedance
of storage capacity at the Buckley Road/SR 227 intersection during both the AM and PM peak
hour. Mitigation is required to reduce the project contribution to exceedances at this intersection.
However, Project traffic could be generated and result in exceedance of capacity at this intersection
prior to the planning or installation of necessary intersection improvements.
9. Under Near-Term Cumulative conditions, the volume of traffic at the Buckley Road/SR 227
intersection would exceed storage capacities. Mitigation would reduce impacts the MPA
contribution to exceedances at this intersection. However, exceedances could occur prior to the
planning or installation of necessary intersection improvements and impacts would be significant
and unavoidable.
For projects which would result in significant environmental impacts that cannot be avoided, CEQA
requires that the lead agency balance the benefits of these projects against the unavoidable environmental
risks in determining whether to approve the projects. If the benefits of these projects outweigh the
unavoidable impacts, those impacts may be considered acceptable (CEQA Guidelines Section 15093[a]).
CEQA requires that, before adopting such projects, the public agency adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations setting forth the reasons why the agency finds that the benefits of the project outweigh the
significant environmental effects caused by the project. This statement is provided below.
B. REQUIRED FINDINGS
The City has incorporated all feasible mitigation measures into the Project. Although these measures will
lessen the unavoidable impacts listed above, the measures will not fully avoid these impacts.
The City has also examined a reasonable range of alternatives to the project and has determined that
Alternative 2 (Mitigated Project Alternative) is feasible, environmentally superior, and would satisfy the
all of the Project objectives to the same or greater extent as the original Proposed Project.
The MPA would reduce the effects of several of the significant impacts of the project, would achieve all of
the City’s objectives for the project, and is considered feasible. The MPA is therefore considered to be
environmentally superior to the Proposed Project. Alternative 3 would allow a greater amount of
development and physical environmental effects, resulting in greater impacts to aesthetics and visual
resources, air quality, cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, land use and planning, noise,
transportation and traffic, and utilities than Alternative 2. However, Alternative 3 would achieve the City’s
objectives for the Project, including establishment of a “linked” community with a variety of housing
opportunities and a well-connected vehicle, bicyclist, and pedestrian network, as well as a number of
Packet Pg 349
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
151
Exhibit 1
amenities such as neighborhood parks and commercial goods and services that can serve the neighborhood.
Nevertheless, this alternative does not satisfy project objectives or mitigate potential impacts to the same
extent as Alternative 2.
In preparing this Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has balanced the benefits of the proposed
project against its unavoidable environmental risks. For the reasons specified below, the City fi nds that the
considerations below outweigh the proposed MPA’s unavoidable environmental risks. The City further
finds that each of these findings is individually sufficient to support the approval of the MPA. A
determination that one of more of these findings is not supported by substantial evidence shall not affect
the validity of the remaining findings.
1. Provision of new Residential and Commercial Uses. The MPA will develop a new residential
neighborhood that fulfills a portion of the City’s unmet housing needs and that designates sufficient
land for neighborhood serving commercial uses and recreational opportunities to provide for the
convenience and enjoyment of area residents, consistent with City General Plan Land Use Element
Policies 3.3.1, and 8.1.6 and Airport Area Specific Plan policy 7.10.1.
2. Provision of a Variety of Housing Types for all Income Levels. The MPA provides a variety of
housing types and costs to meet the needs of renters and buyers with a variety of income-levels,
including inclusionary affordable housing for residents with moderate, low, and very-low income
levels, consistent with General Plan Land Use Element Goal 2, Affordability.
3. Open Space and Agricultural Protection: Implementation of the MPA would preserve approximately
27 acres of the site for irrigated agriculture under the MPA, and a total of 55.3 acres of land as open -
space.
4. Protection and Restoration of Tank Farm Creek. The MPA will protect and restore sensitive
biological resources within Tank Farm Creek, improving the overall quality of this habitat over the long
term.
5. Provision of Park and Recreational Facilities. The MPA will provide a variety of park and
recreational facilities for residents of the City, such as parks, trails, pathways and other recreational
facilities, and passive recreational opportunities within open space, both by constructing facilities on
site and providing needed funding for enhancement of existing offsite City park and recreational
facilities.
6. Well-Planned Neighborhood Would Reduce Per-Capita Vehicle Trips: The MPA would develop a
new residential neighborhood to meet the City’s housing needs and that designates sufficient land for
neighborhood serving commercial uses to reduce vehicle trips and provide for the convenience of area
residents. In addition, the MPA encourages the use of bicycles and walking within the project site by
including specific policies and development standards that will result in subdivision and building
designs that facilitate bike use and pedestrian access and incorporating multiple classes of bike lanes
which provide critical connections in the existing bicycle network and including bike and pedestrian
paths through the parks and open space areas.
7. Provision of New Jobs: The MPA would create new construction-related and permanent jobs in the
project area. Planned Neighborhood Commercial development would provide jobs in close proximity
to housing, consistent with Community Goal 34 in the General Plan Land Use Element and Land Use
Element Policy 1.5, which states that the gap between housing demand and supply should not increase.
Packet Pg 350
15
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Avila Ranch Development Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
152
Exhibit 1
8. Sales Tax: Development of Neighborhood Commercial development would contribute sales tax
revenues that help fund needed City services.
9. Implementation of the General Plan: As required by the City General Plan, the MPA contains
policies and standards that will facilitate appropriate development of land, protection of open space,
and provision of adequate public facilities consistent with the City’s recent LUCE update and the
housing and transportation objectives.
10. Local Preference for Housing: Through its affordable housing plan, the MPA would include a
preference for those who are employed in businesses that are located in geographic areas that are
customarily included in the City’s annual jobs-housing balance analysis in its General Plan Status
Report, which will not only have local economic and housing benefits, but by improving the local
balance of housing and jobs will reduce commute distances, and thus reduce air emissions and address
potential traffic impacts.
11. Owner Occupancy: Through its affordable housing plan, the MPA will require owner occupancy for
many of the housing units, which will discourage outside speculative investment that tends to drive
housing prices higher than the market would otherwise indicate. In this way, the project will help the
local economy by keeping housing as affordable as possible for local employees, and encourage them
to remain within the community, which will help support and retain skilled employees f or local
businesses and provide local economic stability.
Accordingly, the City finds that the MPA’s adverse, unavoidable environmental impacts are outweighed
by these considerable benefits.
Dated: ___________, 2017
Heidi Harmon
Mayor, City of San Luis Obispo
Packet Pg 351
15
O ______
ORDINANCE NO. _____ (2017 SERIES)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, REZONING PROPERTY AT 175 VENTURE
DRIVE FROM BUSINESS PARK/SPECIFIC PLAN AREA (BP-SP) AND
CONSERVATION/OPEN SPACE/SPECIFIC PLAN AREA (C/OS-SP) TO BE
CONSISTENT WITH THE AVILA RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND
WITH THE GENERAL PLAN AND AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AS
AMENDED, COLLECTIVELY KNOWN AS THE “AVILA RANCH” AREA,
IDENTIFIED IN THE GENERAL PLAN AS SPECIAL FOCUS AREA 4
(“SP-4”)
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
August 9, 2017, and recommended approval of the amendment to the City’s Zoning Map consistent
with the Avila Ranch Development Plan (Exhibit 1, attached) as part of the entitlement process for
the Avila Ranch project (GENP 1319-2015; SPEC/ER-1318-2015; SBDV 2042 2015; OTHR-
0455-2017; 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 September 19,
2017, for the purpose of approving the Rezone; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed revision is co nsistent with the
General Plan and Airport Area Specific Plan as amended (related to the Avila Ranch project), the
purposes of the Zoning Regulations, and other applicable City ordinances; and
WHEREAS, the City Council certified an Environmental Impact Report for the project
(SCH #2015081034) that addressed impacts related to the Rezone at its public hearing of
September 19, 2017; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of
the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at
said hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
Packet Pg 352
15
Ordinance No. ______ (2017 Series) Page 2
O ______
SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. The City Council hereby finds that this
action has been environmentally reviewed pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq. (“CEQA”), the State
CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000, et seq.) and the
City’s local standards. The City prepared an Initial Study and, based on information contained in
the initial study, concluded that there was substantial evidence that the Project might have a
significant environmental impact on certain resources. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15064 and 15081, and based upon the information contained in the Initial Study, the City ordered
the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) for the Project to analyze potential
impacts on the environment. The City Council certified the EIR on _________, pursuant to
Resolution No._____ (2017 Series) made certain CEQA findings and determinations and adopted a
Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation and Monitoring Program . Resolution No.
_____ (2017 Series) is incorporated herein by this reference, and made a part hereof as if fully set
forth herein.
SECTION 2. Findings. Based upon all evidence, the City Council makes the following
findings:
a) The Rezone allows the implementation of the Avila Ranch Development Plan by
rezoning the site to be consistent with the General Plan and Airport Area Specific Plan as
amended, and the Avila Ranch Development Plan.
b) The proposed Rezone is consistent with General Plan Land Use Element policies
and map as amended related to Avila Ranch, including the land uses and development
pattern envisioned for the area for following reasons: 1) The proposed Rezone would
facilitate the General Plan Land Use map as amended; 2) The Airport Area Specific Plan
land use map was amended to reflect the General Plan development parameters and map
for the area.
c) A certified Final EIR for the project considered and provided appropriate mitigation
measures for the project as envisioned that is consistent with the Rezone.
d) The proposed Rezone will not create non-conforming uses at the site because the
site is currently undeveloped.
SECTION 3. Action. The City Council of San Luis Obispo hereby approves the Rezone
as shown in attached “Exhibit 1”, which is consistent with the land use designations included in
the Airport Area Specific Plan as amended, to facilitate future development consistent with the
Avila Ranch Development Plan and related Vesting Tentative Tract Map as conditioned, with
said conditions described fully in City Council Resolution No. ______.
SECTION 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this
Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of
any competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions
of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance,
and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or
Packet Pg 353
15
Ordinance No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 3
O ______
unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the Ordinance would be subsequently
declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 5. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council
members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage,
in The Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into
effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage.
INTRODUCED on the ____ day of ____________, 2017, AND FINALLY ADOPTED
by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the _______ day of __________, 2017, on the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
____________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
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 ______________, _________.
______________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
Packet Pg 354
15
Ordinance No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 4
O ______
Exhibit 1. Avila Ranch Area Zoning Map
Packet Pg 355
15
O ______
ORDINANCE NO. _____ (2017 SERIES)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, A
CHARTER CITY, AND AVILA RANCH LLC
WHEREAS, on May 4, 2015, Avila Ranch, LLC (“Applicant”) submitted a development
plan proposal for a new, primarily residential development with up to 720 dwelling units ("the
Project") on a 150-acre site north of Buckley Road, located within the Airport Area Specific Plan
(“AASP”) boundaries. The Project also includes 15,000 square feet of neighborhood-serving retail
and office uses next to a neighborhood park, as well as the preservation of agricultural uses and
open space. The development plan contains the specific development proposal for the site,
including a land use framework, design guidelines and concepts, circulation plan, and
infrastructure plan. The Project as proposed is envisioned to implement the policies and
development parameters as articulated in the recent Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE)
update, other elements of the General Plan, the AASP, and the City’s Community Design
Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, on May 16, 2017, the City Council authorized the City Manager to initiate
discussions with the Applicant for a Development Agreement and to execute a third-party
reimbursement Agreement for the Applicant to reimburse the City for the costs of any outside legal
or technical consultants the City may require to assist with the negotiation or review of the Avila
Ranch application for a Development Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the City retained both outside legal and financial consultants to assist with
negotiations and analysis of the proposed development agreement at the Applicant’s expense; and
WHEREAS, the financial analysis prepared for this project concludes that extraordinary
public benefits that the City will receive from the Development Agreement exceed the value to the
Applicant by approximately $30 million; and
WHEREAS, a Draft Environmental Impact Report dated November 2016 and a Final
Environmental Impact Report dated June 2017 have been prepared analyzing the environmental
effects of the proposed development Project; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Development Agreement provides for the orderly development
of the Project and outlines financing mechanisms to construct infrastructure, identifies funds for
potential reimbursement for certain infrastructure costs, requires sustainable building features and
technology that have the potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, establishes an offsite
agricultural mitigation strategy, requires funds for transit improvements to offset air quality
emissions, and incorporates affordable housing requirements that exceed those standards as set
forth in the City’s applicable housing policies, ordinances and programs; and
WHEREAS, the Development Agreement for the Project implements the Avila Ranch
Development Plan and related entitlements as evaluated in the Final Environmental Impact Report
and does not introduce any new potential environmental impacts; and
Packet Pg 356
15
Ordinance No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 2
O ______
WHEREAS, the Development Agreement does authorize the project to accelerate
buildout of the project above the phasing schedule so long as there is outstanding indebtedness
owed to Avila Ranch for offsite improvements as determined by findings by the Community
Development Director and that the phasing will not exceed the City’s Growth Management
Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, an acceleration in the buildout of the project schedule will not introduce any
environmental impacts because: 1) the acreage and boundaries of each phase of development will
remain the same as that analyzed in the EIR; 2) the sequence of development will remain the same
as that analyzed in the EIR; 3) project components such as road improvements that serve to
mitigate impacts as well as mitigation measures identified in the EIR will continue to apply to
each phase of development; 4) the cumulative buildout of the project was analyzed in combination
with other projects under development and analyzed with the full buildout of the City as forecasted
in the 2014 LUCE General Plan Update and related Final Environmental Impact Report for the
project; and 5) all applicable mitigation measures for each phase of development would also be
accelerated to coincide with any phased portion of development under construction; and
WHEREAS, on June 28, June 29, July 12, and August 9, 2017, the City's Planning
Commission held duly noticed public hearings on the Project and the Development Agreement.
On August 9, 2017, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council: 1) certify the
Environmental Impact Report, adopt appropriate CEQA findings and Statement of Overriding
Considerations, and adopt a Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting Plan; 2) approve the Airport
Area Specific Plan Amendment, General Plan Amendment and Rezone; 3) approve the Avila
Ranch Development Plan based on findings that the project is consistent with the General Plan and
Airport Area Specific Plan, as amended; 4) approve the Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 3089;
and 5) approve the Development Agreement; and
WHEREAS, on September 19, 2017, the City Council adopted a resolution certifying the
Final Environmental Report for the Project and adopting CEQA findings and a statement of
overriding considerations and a mitigation monitoring plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Development Agreement is consistent with
the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan of the C ity
of San Luis Obispo, as described below, and as further detailed in the accompanying City Council
staff report prepared for this project and the exhibits thereto:
a) The proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general
land uses and programs specified in the general plan and any applicable specific plan, in
that Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) Policy 8.1.6. SP-4, Avila Ranch Specific
Plan Area. Specifically, the project:
i.) incorporates a variety of housing types and affordability levels;
ii.) 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.
iii.) Provision of buffers along Buckley Road and along eastern edge of property from
adjacent agricultural uses.
Packet Pg 357
15
Ordinance No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 3
O ______
iv.) Provision of open space buffers along northern and western boundaries to separate
this development from adjacent service and manufacturing uses.
v.) Provision of open space buffers and protections for creek and wildlife corridor that
runs through property.
vi.) 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.
vii.) Fully funding Buckley Road and the connection of Buckley Road to South Higuera
Street.
viii.) Appropriate internal and external pedestrian, bicycle, and transit connections to the
City’s circulation network.
ix.) Implementation of the City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan including connections to
the Bob Jones Trail.
x.) Water and wastewater infrastructure needs as detailed in the City’s Water and
Wastewater Master Plans.
xi.) Provides funding for fire protection and impacts to emergency response times.
xii.) Includes architectural design that relates to the pastoral character of the area and
preserves view of agrarian landscapes.
xiii.) Provision of neighborhood parks that exceed applicable General Plan Policies.
b) Furthermore, the Project is consistent with LUCE's overall land use policies by providing
community benefits for the area, including but not limited to, affordable and workforce
housing, and contributions that would support transportation, parks and recreation, multi
modal infrastructure, and recycled water infrastructure programs in the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. In addition to the findings set forth in the recitals, which are
incorporated herein by this reference, the City Council hereby finds based on evidence described
above, as follows:
a) The proposed Development Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit “1” is consistent
with the general plan and the Airport Area Specific Plan;
b) The proposed Development Agreement complies with zoning, subdivision and other
applicable ordinances and regulations;
c) As described in the recitals above, the proposed Development Agreement promotes
the general welfare, allows more comprehensive land use planning within the airport
area, and provides substantial public benefits and necessary public improvements for
the region, making it in the city’s interest to enter into the Development Agreement
with the applicant; and
d) The proposed Avila Ranch project and Development Agreement:
i.) Will not adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of persons living or working
Packet Pg 358
15
Ordinance No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 4
O ______
in the surrounding area; and
ii.) Will be appropriate at the proposed location and will be compatible with adjacent
land uses.
SECTION 2. Action. The Development Agreement is hereby approved subject to such
minor, confirming and clarifying changes consistent with the terms thereof as may be approved by
the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, prior to the execution thereof.
SECTION 3. Upon the effective date of this Ordinance as provided in Section 7 hereof,
the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute the Development
Agreement and, upon full execution, record the Development Agreement in the Official Records
of San Luis Obispo County.
SECTION 4. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to perform all acts
authorized to be performed by the City Manager in the administration of the Development
Agreement pursuant to the terms of the Development Agreement.
SECTION 5. CEQA determination. The City Council hereby finds that the Development
Agreement has been environmentally reviewed pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq. (“CEQA”), the State
CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000, et seq.) and th e
City’s local standards. The City prepared an Initial Study and, based on information contained in
the initial study, concluded that there was substantial evidence that the Project might have a
significant environmental impact on certain resources. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15064 and 15081, and based upon the information contained in the Initial Study, the City ordered
the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) for the Project to analyze potential
impacts on the environment. The City Council certified the EIR on September 19, 2017, pursuant
to Resolution No._____ (2017 Series) made certain CEQA findings and determinations and
adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation and Monitoring Program.
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) is incorporated herein by this reference, and made a part
hereof as if fully set forth herein. The City Council finds that accelerated buildout of the project
as authorized by the Development Agreement will not cause any new significant environmental
effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects because, among
other things: 1) the acreage and boundaries of each phase of development will remain the same as
that analyzed in the EIR; 2) the sequence of development will remain the same as that analyzed
in the EIR; 3) project components such as road improvements that serve to mitigate impacts as
well as mitigation measures identified in the EIR will continue to apply to each phase of
development; 4) the cumulative buildout of the project was analyzed in combination with other
projects under development and analyzed with the full buildout of the City as forecasted in the
2014 LUCE General Plan Update and related Final Environmental Impact Report for the project;
and 5) all applicable mitigation measures for each phase of development would also be accelerated
to coincide with any phased portion of development under construction. The documents and other
material that constitute the record on which this determination is made are located in the
Community Development Department located at 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
The City Council hereby directs staff to file a Notice of Determination with the San Luis Obispo
County Clerk Recorder’s Office.
Packet Pg 359
15
Ordinance No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 5
O ______
SECTION 6. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is
for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of any competent
jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance.
The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance, and each and every
section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without
regard to whether any portion of the Ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
SECTION 7. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members
voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in The
Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at
the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage.
INTRODUCED on the _____ day of September, 2017, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by
the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the _____ day of October, 2017, on the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
____________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
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 ______________, _________.
Packet Pg 360
15
Ordinance No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 6
O ______
______________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
Packet Pg 361
15
Recording Fees Exempt Pursuant to
Government Code § 27383.
Recording Requested By And
When Recorded Mail to:
City of San Luis Obispo
c/o City Clerk
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BY AND BETWEEN
THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
AND
AVILA RANCH, LLC
RELATING TO
THE AVILA RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN
(The “AVILA RANCH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT”)
As Adopted by the San Luis Obispo City Council
on __________ by Ordinance No. -________
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 362
15
TABLE OF CONTENTS
RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS .................................................................................................. 1
AGREEMENT ................................................................................................................................ 4
ARTICLE 1. GENERALLY .......................................................................................................... 4
Section 1.01. Definition of “Avila Ranch” ............................................................ 4
Section 1.02. Effective Date .................................................................................. 4
Section 1.03. Term ................................................................................................. 4
Section 1.04. Execution and Recordation of Agreement ....................................... 5
ARTICLE 2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT ........................................................... 6
Section 2.01. In General......................................................................................... 6
Section 2.02. Project Approvals ............................................................................. 6
Section 2.03. Subsequent Approvals ..................................................................... 6
Section 2.04. Subsequent Approval Documents .................................................... 6
Section 2.05. Approvals ......................................................................................... 6
ARTICLE 3. DEVELOPMENT OF PROJECT IN GENERAL ....................................... 6
Section 3.01. Consideration to Avila Ranch .......................................................... 6
Section 3.02. Consideration to City ....................................................................... 7
Section 3.03. Rights of Avila Ranch Generally ..................................................... 7
Section 3.04. Rights of City Generally .................................................................. 7
Section 3.05. Project Parameters ........................................................................... 8
ARTICLE 4. APPLICABLE LAW ................................................................................... 8
Section 4.01. In General......................................................................................... 8
Section 4.02. Application of Other City Laws ....................................................... 8
Section 4.04. State and Federal Law ...................................................................... 9
ARTICLE 5. FINANCIAL COMMITMENTS OF CITY AND AVILA RANCH........... 9
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 363
15
Section 5.01. In General.......................................................................................... 9
Section 5.02.Basic Principles .................................................................................. 9
Section 5.02.2. Financing of Infrastructure; Operation and Maintenance ........... 10
Section 5.03. Establishment of Financing Mechanisms ...................................... 11
Section 5.04. Imposition of and Increases in Fees, Taxes, Assessments
and Other Charges..................................................................................... 12
Section 5.05. Other Commitments of City and Avila Ranch Related to
Financing................................................................................................... 15
Section 5.05.4. Other Shortfalls of City ............................................................... 17
ARTICLE 6. COMMITMENTS OF CITY AND AVILA RANCH RELATED TO
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ............................................................................................ 18
Section 6.01. Backbone Infrastructure Phasing Plan ............................................ 18
Section 6.02. Construction and Dedication of Project Facilities and
Infrastructure ............................................................................................. 19
Section 6.03. Dedications .................................................................................... 20
Section 6.04. Cooperation with Respect to Project Facilities and
Infrastructure ............................................................................................. 20
ARTICLE 7. OTHER COMMITMENTS OF CITY AND AVILA RANCH ................. 21
Section 7.01. Mutual Cooperation for Other Governmental Permits .................. 21
Section 7.02. Timing of Development ................................................................. 21
Section 7.03. Dedication of Park Lands................................................................ 23
Section 7.04. Dedication of Open Space and Agricultural Lands ........................ 23
Section 7.05. Affordable Housing and Workforce Housing ................................ 23
Section 7.07. Energy ............................................................................................. 23
Section 7.08. Water. .............................................................................................. 24
Section 7.09. Storm Drain Facilities ..................................................................... 24
Section 7.10. Interim Fire Station ......................................................................... 25
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 364
15
Section 7.11. Traffic and Circulation Improvements........................................... 25
Section 7.12. Bicycle and Multimodal Transportation Improvements ................ 25
Section 7.13. Miscellaneous ................................................................................. 26
ARTICLE 8. CONSIDERATION OF PERMITS AND APPROVALS .......................... 27
Section 8.01. In General................................................................................................... 27
Section 8.02. General Plan and AASP Amendments .......................................... 27
Section 8.03. CEQA Compliance. .................................................................................... 27
Section 8.04. Life of Approvals ........................................................................... 27
Section 8.05. Vesting Maps ................................................................................. 28
Section 8.06. Need for Flexibility ........................................................................ 28
ARTICLE 9. AMENDMENTS ....................................................................................... 28
Section 9.01. Amendments of Agreement. ...................................................................... 28
ARTICLE 10. ANNUAL REVIEW ................................................................................ 29
Section 10.01. Annual Review............................................................................. 29
ARTICLE 11. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
EVALUATION; DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT REVIEW ........................... 29
Section 11.01. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Evaluation. .................... 29
Section 11.02. Development Agreement Review ................................................ 30
ARTICLE 12. DEFAULT, REMEDIES, TERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT ...................................................................................................... 30
Section 12.01. Defaults. ....................................................................................... 30
Section 12.01.1. Notice and Cure. ....................................................................... 30
Section 12.01.2. Actions during Cure Period. ..................................................... 31
Section 12.02. Remedies of Non-Defaulting Party. ............................................. 31
Section 12.03. Termination Due to Default. ........................................................ 32
Section 12.03.2. Procedures for Termination. ..................................................... 33
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 365
15
ARTICLE 13. ASSIGNMENT, TRANSFER AND NOTICE ........................................ 33
Section 13.02. Transfers In General. ................................................................... 33
Section 13.02.02. City Review of Release Provisions. ........................................ 34
ARTICLE 14. MORTGAGEE PROTECTION ............................................................... 35
ARTICLE 15. GENERAL PROVISIONS ...................................................................... 36
Section 15.01. Incorporation of Recitals and Exhibits ........................................ 36
Section 15.02. Project is a Private Undertaking .................................................. 36
Section 15.03. Cooperation in the Event of Legal Challenge. ......................................... 36
Section 15.04. Defense and Indemnity ................................................................ 37
Section 15.05. Governing Law; Attorneys’ Fees ................................................. 37
Section 15.06. Force Majeure .............................................................................. 37
Section 15.07. Waiver .......................................................................................... 38
Section 15.08. Notices ......................................................................................... 38
Section 15.09. No Joint Venture or Partnership .................................................. 39
Section 15.10. Severability .................................................................................. 39
Section 15.11. Estoppel Certificate ...................................................................... 39
Section 15.12. Further Assurances....................................................................... 40
Section 15.13. Construction. ............................................................................................ 40
Section 15.14. Other Miscellaneous Terms ......................................................... 40
Section 15.15. Counterpart Execution ................................................................. 40
Section 15.16. Time ............................................................................................. 40
Section 15.17. Good Faith/Fair Dealing .............................................................. 41
Section 15.18. Exhibits. ................................................................................................... 41
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 366
15
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND AVILA RANCH, LLC
RELATING TO THE AVILA RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLAN
THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT is entered into this ___ day of ________, 2017
(“Execution Date”), by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation
and charter city (“City”), and AVILA RANCH, LLC, a California limited liability company
(“Avila Ranch” or “Developer”), hereinafter referred to in this Development Agreement
individually as a “Party” and collectively as the “Parties,” as appropriate.
RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS
A. The “Project,” as referenced in this Development Agreement, consists of the
development of housing, neighborhood commercial buildings, parks, agricultural and open space
uses, and various public infrastructure facilities located within the Avila Ranch subarea of the
Airport Area Specific Plan area on the southwestern boundary of the City, as more particularly
described and defined in Section 2.01 below.
B. The “Property,” as referenced in this Development Agreement, consists of
approximately 150 acres of land that has been designated for development as part of the Airport
Area Specific Plan (the “AASP Area”). The property comprising the Property is more fully
shown on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Exhibit B
attached hereto sets forth the legal description for the Property. Avila Ranch represents and
warrants to City that as of the Execution Date, Avila Ranch has a legal or equitable interest in the
Property.
C. Upon the effective date of the City ordinance approving this Development
Agreement, this Development Agreement becomes Effective, as defined in Section 1.02 below,
as to the Property and the City will record it against the Property.
D. On December 9, 2014, City adopted an update to the Land Use and Circulation
Elements of the City’s General Plan that included the AASP Area. The City’s General Plan
designates the Property for a variety of land uses including residential, neighborhood
commercial, open space, and agricultural, and provides for the development of these uses so as to
benefit the City and its residents
E. City and Avila Ranch have engaged in a cooperative and successful relationship
to establish a development plan for the Property (the “Development Plan”). These efforts have
culminated in the City’s adoption and approval of the following entitlements:
(1) The Final Environmental Impact Report and associated Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Plan (including all mitigation measures therein) for the project
certified and adopted, respectively, by Resolution No. ___, on DATE.
(2) The Amendment to Airport Area Specific Plan as amended by Resolution No.
____, adopted DATE .
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 367
15
(3) The City’s zoning map as amended by Ordinance No. ___, adopted DATE .
(4) The Development Plan approved by Resolution No. ___, on DATE .
(5) Vesting Tentative Tract Map #3089 (Avila Ranch _____) approved [DATE ].
(6) Ordinance No. ____ dated _____, 2017 adopting this Development Agreement
(“the Adopting Ordinance”).
(7) The amendment to the City General Plan, as amended by Resolution No. ___,
adopted [DATE ].
(8) The conditions of approval of each of the foregoing.
These approvals described in this Recital E, together with the Environmental Impact Report and
related Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Plan described in Recital F below, are referred to herein, collectively, as the
“Entitlements” or “Project Entitlements.”
F. Before approving the Entitlements described in Recital E above, the City Council
of the City of San Luis Obispo: (i) reviewed and considered the significant environmental
impacts of the Project and several alternatives to the Project, as described in that certain Final
Environmental Impact Report (the “Project EIR”) and (ii) adopted Resolution No. __-____ on
_____, 2017 to certify the Project EIR, making Findings Concerning Mitigation Measures and
Alternatives (the “Findings”), adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adopting a
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (the “MMRP”), all in accordance with the provisions
of the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code section 21000 et
seq. (“CEQA”).
G. One of the principal purposes of this Development Agreement is to further the
cooperative relationship between City and Avila Ranch for the benefit of all residents of San
Luis Obispo during the implementation of the Project. The City and Avila Ranch join as Parties
to this Development Agreement to ensure the requirements of the Development Agreement
Statute (California Government Code section 65864 et. seq.) are satisfied. As more fully set forth
below, this Development Agreement contains both covenants of a personal nature and covenants
and/or servitudes that run with title to the Property.
H. This Development Agreement is based upon and was written to achieve these
purposes:
(1) that the City shall be kept and/or made “whole” by Avila Ranch as to the Property
and by other property owners with respect to their respective properties with
respect to all aspects (e.g., fiscal impacts, etc.) of the planning, development,
maintenance and operation of the AASP Area including, among other things, the
costs to the City of providing the Project with public services and facilities, the
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 368
15
payment of City’s costs associated with the implementation of the Development
Agreement, the Entitlements, all other planning and environmental efforts
described and envisioned by the Development Agreement, the Subsequent
Approvals (as defined in Section 2.04 below) and the Project, and the mitigation
of the Project’s environmental impacts.
(2) that once this Development Agreement has taken legal effect, Avila Ranch shall
have a full and vested right, throughout the term of this Development Agreement,
to the Rights and Obligations as to the Property;
(3) that this Development Agreement is intended to reduce the uncertainty in
planning and implementation for and, and to secure the orderly development of,
the Project, ensure a desirable and functional community environment, provide
effective and efficient development of public facilities, infrastructure and services
appropriate for the development of the Project, ensure maximum effective
utilization of resources within the City, and provide other significant benefits to
the City and its residents;
(4) to secure Project features and Development conditions above and beyond those
that may be levied by the City under existing zoning and development regulations
and the FEIR;
(5) to provide Developer with a reliable and definitive form of reimbursement for
offsite and onsite infrastructure beyond its fair share;
(6) that this Development Agreement is intended to be consistent with and to
implement the City’s General Plan, and more particularly the achievement of the
community’s development objectives for the Property as set forth in Policy 8.1.6
of the Land Use Element;
(7) that the development of the Project will enable the City to capture sales taxes that
are being leaked to other communities because of the jobs-housing imbalance;
(8) that the development of the Project would result in the capture of an estimated
540 households that commute to jobs in San Luis Obispo, resulting in the
reduction of Countywide vehicle miles traveled for those trips by approximately
4.0 million miles per year; and
(9) that the value of the obligations of the Developer pursuant to this Development
Agreement are anticipated to be above and beyond those necessary to serve the
Project.
The Rights and Obligations of the Parties to this Development Agreement shall be construed and
interpreted so as shall give full effect to each and all of these purposes.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 369
15
I. As used in this Development Agreement, “Rights” shall mean all of the vested
and other rights and benefits of the Development Agreement, and the term “Obligations” shall
mean all of the duties, obligations, responsibilities and other burdens of the Development
Agreement. References to lot numbers in this Development Agreement refer to lots as numbered
in Vesting Tentative Tract Map. No. 3089 dated April 26, 2017.
J. As used in this Development Agreement, the terms, phrases and words shall have
the meanings and be interpreted as set forth in this Development Agreement (the meaning given
the term in the singular shall include the term in the plural and vice versa) unless the context
clearly indicates the Parties intended another meaning. To the extent that any capitalized terms
contained in this Development Agreement are not defined within it, then such terms shall have
the meaning ascribed to them in the City Laws, other applicable law or, if no meaning is given a
term in any of those sources, the common understanding of the term shall control.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises, covenants and provisions set
forth in this Development Agreement, the Parties hereby agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1. GENERALLY
Section 1.01. Definition of “Avila Ranch.” As used herein, “Avila Ranch” means Avila Ranch,
LLC, as that business entity existed on the Effective Date and any permitted successor, assign, or
transferee of Avila Ranch, LLC.
Section 1.02. Effective Date. This Development Agreement is entered into by and between the
City and Avila Ranch and takes legal effect on ______, 2017, the date that Ordinance No.__-___
approving the Development Agreement takes legal effect (“Effective Date”). The terms and
conditions of this Development Agreement shall be for the benefit of or a burden upon the
Property, shall run with title to the Property, and shall be binding upon Avila Ranch and its
permitted successors, assigns and transferees during their respective ownerships of any portion
of the Property.
Section 1.03. Term.
Section 1.03.1. In General.
(a) The term of this Development Agreement shall commence upon the Effective
Date and shall continue until, and terminate upon, the earliest of the following
dates (“Termination Date”):
(1) 12:01 a.m. on the anniversary of the Effective Date, 2037, unless Avila Ranch
requests, and the City approves, an extension of the Term for an additional 10-
year period, in which case the Termination Date shall be 12:01 on the anniversary
of the Effective Date, 2047. Such request for extension shall be submitted, in
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 370
15
writing, to the City Manager at least 180 days, but no earlier than 365 days, before
the 2037 Termination Date. The City may deny the request if Avila Ranch is not in
compliance with all of its Obligations under this Development Agreement;
(2) 12:01 a.m. on the anniversary of the Effective Date, 2024, should Avila Ranch fail
to substantially complete the Backbone Infrastructure for Phases 1 and 2 of the
Project in accordance with the Project’s Phasing Plan as set forth in Section 6.01,
below. As used herein, “substantially complete” means that all of the Backbone
Infrastructure required for Phases 1 and 2 listed in the phasing schedule is actively
under construction and is being diligently prosecuted to completion, with all
bonds in place.
(3) This Development Agreement may be terminated with respect to the property
included in a recorded final subdivision map creating residential lots on any
portion of the Property, provided that no further on-site or off-site infrastructure is
required and no conditions remain to be satisfied before building permits can be
issued for the development of lots depicted on that map. Concurrently with or
following recordation of such a subdivision map as to any portion of the Property,
Avila Ranch may request in writing and the Community Development Director
shall not unreasonably withhold a certificate of termination of this Development
Agreement, in recordable form, solely as to the property included in such a final
recorded map which meets the foregoing requirements; provided that no such
certificate need issue if obligations to the City under this Development Agreement
remain unfulfilled which are not made conditions of the approval of the
subdivision map. Upon the Community Development Director’s recordation of
such a certificate, this Development Agreement shall terminate as to the land
covered by such final map. If Avila Ranch does not request or the Community
Development Director does not issue such a certificate, this Development
Agreement shall continue to apply to any lot depicted on such a subdivision map
until this Development Agreement otherwise expires or terminates according to its
terms.
(b) This Development Agreement shall be of no further force, effect or operation
upon the Termination Date. Subject to the provisions of Section 8.04 below, in no
event shall the expiration or termination of this Development Agreement result in
expiration or termination of any Approval without further action of City.
Section 1.04. Execution and Recordation of Agreement.
Section 1.04.1. Execution and Recordation. Avila Ranch shall execute this Development
Agreement, in conformance with Section 15.15 of this Development Agreement, within five
business days of date of adoption of the Adopting Ordinance referenced in Recital E above.
Provided Avila Ranch has so executed this Development Agreement, City shall execute this
Agreement, in conformance with Section 15.15 of this Agreement, within five business days of
execution of this Development Agreement by Avila Ranch.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 371
15
Section 1.04.2. Recordation. City shall deliver this Development Agreement to the
County Recorder for recordation within 10 days following its execution.
ARTICLE 2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT
Section 2.01. In General. As used herein, “Project” means the development of the
Property as described in the “Project Approvals” (defined in Section 2.02 below), including all
on-site and off-site “Project Facilities and Infrastructure” (defined in Section 5.02.1 below).
Section 2.02. Project Approvals. As used herein, “Project Approvals” include, but are not
limited to: (i) those provisions of City’s General Plan that relate to or affect the Property, as the
General Plan existed on the Effective Date and as it may be amended from time to time
consistently with this Development Agreement (the “General Plan”), (ii) those provisions of the
Development Plan (including the Design Guidelines) that relate to or affect the Property, as
incorporated into the Specific Plan, as the Development Plan existed on the Effective Date and as
it may be amended from time to time consistently with this Development Agreement (the
“Development Plan”), (iii) the zoning of the Property, as it existed on the Effective Date and as it
may be amended from time to time consistently with this Development Agreement thereafter
(the “Zoning”) and (iv) the other entitlements listed in Recital E above; provided that “Project
Approvals” shall not mean or include amendments to the General Plan, AASP or Zoning of the
Property that conflict with the Project Approvals as they existed on the Effective Date unless
Avila Ranch consents in writing to such conflicting amendments.
Section 2.03. Subsequent Approvals. As used herein, “Subsequent Approvals” mean
those permits and approvals (other than the Project Approvals and amendments thereto)
necessary or desirable for the development of the Project including, without limitation, those
identified in Section 2.04 below.
Section 2.04. Subsequent Approval Documents. The “Subsequent Approvals” defined in
Section 2.03 above include, but are not limited to: (i) subdivision maps and related or similar
approvals issued under the California Subdivision Map Act, (ii) development permits (including
Site Plan Reviews and Conditional Use Permits as described in the Specific Plan), (iii)
architectural review and design review approvals (as described in the Specific Plan), (iv) any
other discretionary or ministerial permits or approvals of City necessary or appropriate for build-
out of the Project and Property, and (vi) any amendments to any of the foregoing necessary or
appropriate for the development of the Project.
Section 2.05. Approvals. Project Approvals, amendments to Project Approvals, and
Subsequent Approvals are sometimes referred to in this Development Agreement collectively as
the “Approvals” and each individually as an “Approval.”
ARTICLE 3. DEVELOPMENT OF PROJECT IN GENERAL
Section 3.01. Consideration to Avila Ranch. The Parties acknowledge and agree that
City’s agreement to perform and abide by the covenants and Obligations of City set forth herein
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 372
15
is material consideration for Avila Ranch’s agreement to perform and abide by the covenants and
Obligations of Avila Ranch set forth herein.
Section 3.02. Consideration to City. The Parties acknowledge and agree that Avila
Ranch’s agreement to perform and abide by the covenants and Obligations of Avila Ranch set
forth herein is material consideration for City’s agreement to perform and abide by the covenants
and Obligations of City set forth herein.
Section 3.03. Rights of Avila Ranch Generally. Avila Ranch shall have a fully vested right to
develop the Project and to use the Property consistently with this Development Agreement and
Applicable Law.
(a) During the Term of this Development Agreement, the Developer shall have a
vested right to develop the Property to the full extent permitted by the
Entitlements and this Development Agreement. Except as provided within this
Development Agreement, the Entitlements shall exclusively control the
development of the Property, including the uses of the Property, the density or
intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, the
provisions for reservations or dedications of land for public purposes and the
design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to
the Project. The maximum number of residential units authorized to be
constructed hereunder and the approximate acreage of commercial development is
720 residential units and approximately 15,000 square feet of commercial
development. In furtherance of the foregoing, the Developer retains the right to
apportion the uses, intensities and densities, between itself and any other owners
of the Property, upon the sale, transfer or assignment of any portion of the
Property, so long as such apportionment is consistent with the Entitlements and
this Development Agreement.
(b) Subject to the City’s exercise of its police power authority the Developer shall
have a vested right to: (i) receive from the City all future development approvals
for the Property that are consistent with and implement the Entitlements and this
Development Agreement; (ii) not have such approvals be conditioned or delayed
for reasons which are inconsistent with the Entitlements or this Development
Agreement; and (iii) develop the Property in a manner consistent with such
approvals in accordance with the Entitlements and this Development Agreement.
All future development approvals for the Property, including without limitation
general plan amendments, zoning changes, or parcel maps or tract maps, shall
upon approval of the City be vested in the same manner as provided in this
Development Agreement as for the Entitlements.
Section 3.04. Rights of City Generally. City shall have a right to regulate development of
the Project and use of the Property consistently with this Development Agreement and
Applicable Law.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 373
15
Section 3.05. Project Parameters. The permitted uses of the Property, the density and
intensity of use of the Property, the maximum height and size of buildings included in the
Project, and provisions for the reservation and dedication of land shall be as set forth herein and
in the Project Approvals.
ARTICLE 4. APPLICABLE LAW
Section 4.01. In General.
Section 4.01.1. Applicable Law Defined. Except as the Parties may otherwise agree, the
rules, regulations and official policies applicable to the Project and the Property during the Term
of this Development Agreement shall be those set forth in this Development Agreement and,
except as otherwise set forth herein, the rules, regulations and official policies of City (including
the plans, municipal codes, ordinances, resolutions and other local laws, regulations, capital
facilities fees and policies of City) in force and effect on the Effective Date (collectively,
“Applicable Law”).
Section 4.01.2. Approvals as Applicable Law. Applicable Law shall include, without
limitation, Approvals as they may be issued from time to time consistently with this Agreement.
Section 4.02. Application of Other City Laws.
Section 4.02.1. No Conflicting City Laws.
(a) City may apply to the Project and the Property any rule, regulation or official
policy of City (including any plan, municipal code, ordinance, resolution or other
local law, regulation, capital facility fee or policy of City) (each a “City Law”)
that does not conflict with Applicable Law or this Agreement. City shall not,
however, without the written consent of Avila Ranch apply to the Project or the
Property (whether by initiative, referendum, imposition of mitigation measures
under CEQA or otherwise) any City Law that is in conflict with Applicable Law
or this Agreement.
(b) If City attempts to apply to the Project a City Law which Avila Ranch believes to
conflict with Applicable Law or this Agreement, Avila Ranch shall give City
written notice describing the legal and factual basis for Avila Ranch’s position.
The Parties shall meet and confer within 30 days of City’s receipt of such written
notice to seek to resolve any disagreement. If no mutually acceptable solution can
be reached, either Party may take such action as may be permitted under
Article 12 below.
Section 4.03. Uniform Codes and Standard Specifications.
(a) Nothing herein shall prevent City from applying to the Project standards
contained in uniform building, construction, fire or other uniform codes, as the
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 374
15
same may be adopted or amended from time to time by City, provided that the
provisions of any such uniform code shall:
(1) Apply to the Project only to the extent that such code is in effect on a City-
wide basis; and
(2) With respect to those portions of any such uniform code that have been
adopted by City without amendment, be interpreted and applied consistently
with the generally prevailing interpretation and application of such code in
California.
(b) Nothing herein shall prevent City from applying to the Project standards and
specifications for public improvements (e.g., streets, storm drainage, parking lots,
and driveway widths) adopted or amended from time to time by City, provided
that such standards and specifications shall apply to the Project and the Property
only to the extent that they are in effect on a City-wide basis.
Section 4.04. State and Federal Law.
(a) Nothing herein shall prevent City from applying to the Project or the Property any
change in City Law required by: (i) state or federal law; or (ii) any governmental
agency that, due to the operation of state law (and not the act of City through a
memorandum of understanding, joint exercise of powers or other agreement entered
into after the Effective Date), has binding legal authority on City.
(b) If the application of such changes prevents or precludes performance of one or more
provisions of this Development Agreement, City and Avila Ranch shall take any and
all such actions as may be necessary or appropriate to ensure the provisions of this
Development Agreement shall be implemented to the maximum extent practicable.
ARTICLE 5. FINANCIAL COMMITMENTS OF CITY AND AVILA RANCH
Section 5.01. In General. This Article 5 establishes a framework for the imposition and
allocation to the extent permitted by law of fees, taxes, assessments and other revenues to be
generated and/or paid by the Project and/or the Property. The provisions of this Article 5 are
intended to prevent the Project from resulting in negative fiscal impacts on City as determined by
the fiscal impact analysis prepared for the Project; to facilitate the construction, operation and
maintenance of infrastructure and facilities to avoid or limit the physical impacts of
development; and to assist in the development of the Project so as to provide long-term fiscal and
other benefits to City, including increased employment opportunities, an increased tax base and
revenues to City, and an enhanced quality of life for the City’s residents.
Section 5.02. Basic Principles.
Section 5.02.1. General.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 375
15
(a) This Article 5 is intended to serve two basic purposes: first, that there shall be no
cost to City for the construction of the fair share allocation of public facilities and
infrastructure needed to serve the Project or the Property or for the provision of
municipal services to the Project or the Property, including the operation and
maintenance of facilities and infrastructure to serve the Project (collectively, the
“Project Facilities and Infrastructure”); and second, that all costs associated with
the construction of Project Facilities and Infrastructure, and the provision of
municipal services to the Project and the Property (including the operation and
maintenance of Project Facilities and Infrastructure) shall be borne by the Project
alone.
(b) The cost of providing Project Facilities and Infrastructure to the Project or the
Property shall be consistent with the following principles: Except as otherwise
specifically permitted by this Development Agreement and not in limitation of
any other provisions hereof, (i) there shall be a reasonable relationship between
any municipal cost required to be borne by the Project and the type of
development within the Project to which such cost is attributable; (ii) there shall
be a reasonable relationship between the need to incur any such municipal cost
and the type of development within the Project to which such cost is attributable;
(iii) no municipal cost required to be borne by the Project shall exceed the
estimated reasonable cost of providing the service or facility to which such
municipal cost relates; and (iv) with respect to any fee required to finance Project
Facilities and Infrastructure, there shall be a reasonable relationship between the
amount of the fee and the cost of the Project Facilities and Infrastructure funded
by such fee. Wherever this Development Agreement requires a “reasonable
relationship” between the Project and any requirement imposed thereon, there
shall be required an essential nexus between the Project and such requirement and
rough proportionality in the allocation of a municipal cost or fee both internally to
various portions of the Property and as between the Project and other projects
within the City.
(c) As used herein, the term “Project Facilities and Infrastructure” shall include
public facilities and infrastructure only to the extent they serve the Project, and
shall not include public facilities or infrastructure to the extent such facilities or
infrastructure serve projects or areas other than the Project or the Property, unless
the public facilities and infrastructure serving the Project or Property are required
to be oversized to serve other projects or areas in accordance with the provisions
of Section 6.02.2 below.
Section 5.02.2. Financing of Infrastructure; Operation and Maintenance. Prior to or
concurrent with the adoption of this Development Agreement City shall consider in good faith
establishing and forming a mechanism or mechanisms to finance Project Facilities and
Infrastructure and Project-related municipal services or the operation and maintenance portion of
the Project Facilities and Infrastructure, such as a Mello-Roos District, Landscaping and Lighting
Districts, or other Maintenance Assessment Districts, in accordance with the following
principles:
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 376
15
(1) The level of municipal services provided to the Project, including the level of
operation and maintenance of Project Facilities and Infrastructure, shall be at least
equal or superior to the level of service provided elsewhere in the City.
(2) Any costs associated with such mechanism shall be borne by the Project, which
may be reimbursed by the financing mechanism.
(3) The City may require as a condition of approval of a tentative subdivision or
parcel map a financing mechanism or mechanisms to finance the operation and
maintenance of Project Facilities and Infrastructure.
(4) In accordance with and subject to Section 7.13.1 below, Avila Ranch shall include
within the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) required for each
subdivision of the Property a requirement that the Master Homeowners’
Association, and or each Homeowners’ Association for a subdivision within the
Property (each, an “HOA”), shall assume responsibilities to maintain, repair and
insure the following items in the event that such financing mechanism is dissolved
or in the event that the fees, assessments, or taxes generated thereby are repealed
or reduced other than by discretionary action by the City Council. In such event
the HOA shall assume responsibility to maintain, repair and insure for the
publiclyowned facilities within the Property (as to a Master HOA) or subdivision
(as to another HOA), including but not limited to, Parks A through F, H and I, and
“Stevenson Park”; landscaped parkways and trees; low-impact-development
treatment facilities; and riparian open space, but expressly shall not assume
responsibility to maintain, repair and insure streets, curbs, gutters, sidewalks,
regional park (Park G), farmed agricultural open space, landscape paseos
connecting the public parks, retaining walls adjacent to the open space corridors,
bike paths, bike path bridges and bike path facilities (including bike paths and
bike path facilities in the County). Avila Ranch shall include the City as a third-
party beneficiary of these CC&Rs in language acceptable to the City Attorney,
which shall grant the City the right to perform the maintenance, repair and
insurance obligations and to impose assessments against the affected parcels in
the event an HOA fails to perform its obligations under this subparagraph (4).
Section 5.03. Establishment of Financing Mechanisms.
Section 5.03.1. Procedures for Establishment. The establishment of any mechanism to
finance the operation or maintenance of Project Facilities and Infrastructure (each a “Financing
Mechanism”) shall be initiated upon Avila Ranch’s written request to the City’s Finance
Director. Such request shall outline the purposes for which the Financing Mechanism is to be
established and the general terms and conditions upon which the establishment of the Financing
Mechanism will be based. City’s consideration of Avila Ranch’s request shall be consistent with
the criteria set forth in Section 5.02 above. If Avila Ranch requests the City form a Mello-Roos
Community Facilities District to finance the operation or maintenance of Project Facilities and
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 377
15
Infrastructure, City shall use its best efforts to cause such district to be formed and special taxes
to be levied to the extent permitted by Applicable Law.
Section 5.03.2. Nature of City Participation. City’s participation in the formation of any
Financing Mechanism approved by City (and its operation thereafter) and in the issuance of any
Project Debt approved by the City shall include all of the usual and customary municipal
functions associated with such tasks including, without limitation, the formation and
administration of special districts; the issuance of Project Debt; the monitoring and collection of
fees, taxes, assessments and charges such as utility charges; the creation and administration of
enterprise funds; the enforcement of debt obligations and other functions or duties authorized or
mandated by Applicable Law.
Section 5.04. Imposition of and Increases in Fees, Taxes, Assessments and Other Charges.
Section 5.04.1. Taxes and Assessments.
(a) During the Term of this Development Agreement, Avila Ranch shall be bound to
and shall not protest, challenge, or cause to be protested or challenged, any City
tax in effect on the Effective Date.
(b) City may apply to the Project or the Property any tax not in effect on the Effective
Date only if such tax is:
(1) A tax, assessment or fee levied on developed property only (and not on properties
for which no final map has been recorded) in connection with the establishment or
implementation of a Financing Mechanism in accordance with the provisions of
Sections 5.02 or 5.03 above;
(2) A tax, assessment or fee to which Avila Ranch agrees; or
(3) A tax, assessment or fee levied on a City-wide basis that does not have a
disproportionate impact on the Project (e.g., taxes levied to support general
obligation bonds, business license taxes).
(c) City may increase any tax applicable to the Project or the Property (whether in
force and effect as of the Effective Date or not in force and effect as of the
Effective Date but imposed against the Project in accordance with subsection (b)
above); provided, however, that any taxes or assessments levied or imposed by or
through any Financing Mechanism shall be imposed only to the extent necessary
to ensure the adequate operation, maintenance, depreciation and replacement of
Project Facilities and Infrastructure.
(d) No assessment shall be imposed on the Project or the Property other than through
a Financing Mechanism as set forth above.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 378
15
(e) No new debt shall be issued that affects the Project or the Property without Avila
Ranch’s approval, unless such debt otherwise conforms with the requirements of
Articles XIII C and D of the California Constitution and any requisite voter
approval is achieved, in which case the City may issue debt even if Avila Ranch
votes against the matter.
Section 5.04.2. Other Fees and Charges; Credits and Reimbursements.
(a) City shall impose against or apply to the Project or the Property only those
financial obligations (other than taxes and assessments) described in this Section
5.04.2. Except as otherwise specifically stated below, any financial obligation
imposed against or applied to the Project under this Section 5.04.2 shall be
consistent with the provisions of controlling California law, including California
Government Code section 66000 et seq. and California Constitution, article XIII
A and its implementing statutes.
(b) The Developer shall be required to pay all City-wide, Airport Area Specific Plan,
Los Osos Valley Road (“L.O.V.R.”) Interchange Impact Fees, and Project-specific
development impact fees, excluding sewer and water impact fees addressed in
section 5.04.2(c) immediately below, for the Project’s fair share of the cost to
mitigate Project impacts as identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report
(FEIR), Specific Plan, conditions of approval or otherwise specified in the
Development Agreement in effect when each final map is recorded in accordance
with AB1600 analysis. City may adjust development impact fees not more than
once a year with changes no greater than the inflation index identified upon
imposition of the fee.
(c) The Developer shall be required to pay sewer and water impact fees in accordance
with the AB1600 analysis in effect when each Final Map is recorded plus any
adjustments based on CPI until issuance of each building permit. Subsequent
payments shall be adjusted annually by the inflation index identified upon
imposition of the fee as determined by the City.
(d) Fees imposed by City, including but not limited to planning, engineering, building
permit, fire plan check and development impact fees, but excluding sewer and
water impact fees governed by section 5.04.2(c) immediately above, shall be in
accordance with the fees in effect as of the date of when the Final Map is recorded
plus any adjustments based on the inflation index identified upon imposition of
the fee until issuance of each building permit.
(e) If the City amends any existing Development Impact Fee (DIF) program to
include additional projects or costs for the benefit of the Project (either new
projects or increased costs for projects included in the analysis supporting existing
fees) for improvements necessary to satisfy Project requirements, Developer will
be required to pay the amended fees. Credits applied towards infrastructure costs
advanced by Developer shall apply when building permits are issued or fees are
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 379
15
otherwise due and shall arise only from Developer-funded construction of
infrastructure or community facilities included in the project list on which a
particular fee was based. Credits applied when building permits are issued or fees
are otherwise due pursuant to this section shall be adjusted for inflation
consistently with such adjustments of the fees against which credits are allowed.
(f) The Developer shall pay all then-current processing fees for any subsequent
planning applications and permits as adopted by the City Council.
(g) City acknowledges that Developer may dedicate property and install
infrastructure improvements beyond its “fair share” cost. The City agrees to grant
fee credits and reimbursements, funded by Development Impact Fees paid by
Developer and other developers, and traffic impact fees, where eligible, but
excluding sewer and water impact fees. If and to the extent that the Developer
constructs or installs any infrastructure and/or facilities that have a capacity or
size in excess of that required to serve the Project or mitigate its impacts, and one
or more undeveloped properties will be benefitted by such infrastructure and
facilities, the City shall enter into a reimbursement agreement with the Developer,
in a form mutually acceptable to City and Developer, which provides for the
reimbursement of all excess costs and expenses incurred by the Developer in
constructing such improvements in accordance with California Government Code
section 66485 et seq. and section 16.20.110 of the City’s municipal code, the
City’s zoning ordinance, and in accordance with Section 5.05.3 below.
(h) The City’s rates for monthly retail utility service (e.g., water and sewer) may be
applied to the Project and increased from time to time during the term of this
Development Agreement; provided, however, that any such increase shall be
imposed only to the extent permitted by law.
(i) Avila Ranch shall pay City reasonable staff and consultant time and other
reasonable costs (including reasonable consultant costs) associated with: (i) the
MMRP Evaluation and the Development Agreement Review, (ii) the
establishment of any Financing Mechanism (to the extent such costs are not
included in the Financing Mechanism), including any necessary election costs,
and (iii) all other administrative tasks associated with City’s adoption and
implementation of this Development Agreement and the Project.
(j) Avila Ranch shall pay all required fees of the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife (“CDFW”). CDFW fees shall be submitted to the City’s Planning
Division before filing of any required Notice of Determination under CEQA,
along with any fee required by the County Clerk/Recorder. The City may require
proof of payment of such fees before issuing building permits or filing of a Final
Subdivision Map.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 380
15
(k) During the term of this Development Agreement, fees and charges other than
those specifically described in subsections (a) through (j) above may be imposed
against or apply to the Project or the Property only as City and Avila Ranch agree.
Section 5.05. Other Commitments of City and Avila Ranch Related to Financing.
Section 5.05.1. Arrangements with Other Governmental Agencies. City and Avila Ranch
acknowledge and agree that City may from time to time enter into joint exercise of power
agreements, memoranda of understanding or other agreements with other governmental agencies
consistent with and to further the purposes of this Development Agreement.
Section 5.05.2. Other Funding Sources.
(a) City and Avila Ranch agree to pursue outside sources of funding for the
construction, operation and maintenance of Project Facilities and Infrastructure
including, in particular, facilities and infrastructure which serve the region. City
shall not be obligated, however, to apply for county, state or federal funds if the
use of such funds for the Project would reduce the availability of that resource for
other City projects.
(b) Any obligation of Avila Ranch under this Development Agreement to fund or
otherwise bear the costs of the construction of improvements, the provision of
services or any other item, whether or not the sole obligation of Avila Ranch, may
be satisfied through the use of funds provided by, from or through any third party
(including other non-City, governmental) sources.
Section 5.05.3. Reimbursement.
(a) City shall reimburse, or provide for the reimbursement by other landowners or
developers, the actual hard and soft costs associated with Avila Ranch’s funding
or construction of that portion of any oversized or accelerated improvements or
facilities that is attributable to a project or area other than the Project or Property
as required by this section. Hard and soft costs eligible for reimbursement shall
include, without limitation: reasonable direct costs of construction and materials,
soft costs including bonds, architecture and engineering fees, and professional
fees. Such reimbursement shall be based on a fair share allocation of costs
determined by calculating the pro rata share of the capacity in such improvements
that is attributable to other projects or properties as reflected in the allocation
percentages in Exhibit C, which reimbursement shall be timely provided in
accordance with Applicable Law, following City’s collection of funds from the
sources identified in subsection 5.05.3(a)(1)–(4) below. Avila Ranch and City
acknowledge that the amounts specified in Exhibit C for each improvement are
estimates only and that total reimbursable costs shall be based on Avila Ranch’s
actual costs as set forth in this Section 5.05.3.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 381
15
(1) Development Impact Fees paid by the Project for the improvements specified
from the AASP impact fees, L.O.V.R. Interchange impact fees, or the Citywide
transportation impact fees, as applicable;
(2) Development Impact Fees paid to the City on behalf of other development in the
AASP area that are not committed to repayment obligations under prior
Reimbursement Agreements;
(3) Development Impact Fees paid to City from developers who contribute to the
impact associated with the improvements installed by Avila Ranch; and
(4) Taxes or assessments in a Community Facilities District.
(5) Separate reimbursement agreement. For purposes of such agreement, backbone
infrastructure that is larger than the minimum size or standard as identified in the
Standard Specifications and Engineering Design Standards may be considered to
be oversized and shall be subject to prior review and approval by the City prior to
being included in a separate reimbursement agreement.
(b) Under no circumstances shall the City be obligated to fund reimbursement from
its own resources, from funds it does not yet possess, or from funds which may
not be lawfully used for that purpose.
(c) Failure or error by the City to collect funds from the sources identified in
subsection 5.05.3(a) above shall not subject the City to any liability, obligation, or
debt to Avila Ranch. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City shall reimburse
Avila Ranch pursuant to the terms of this Agreement with respect to all such funds
actually collected by the City. Failure by the City to reimburse Avila Ranch after
the City collects such funds shall entitle Avila Ranch to exercise its remedies in
accordance with Article 12.
(d) For any improvement subject to reimbursement under this section, Avila Ranch
shall provide City with evidence of the actual hard and soft costs of each of the
improvements in the form of receipted bills, canceled checks, and contracts.
Approval of reimbursement may occur in phases as projects are accepted by City.
Regardless of Avila Ranch's claimed costs incurred in constructing the
reimbursable improvements, City has the authority, through its Director or
designee, in the exercise of his or her reasonable discretion, to determine the
amount subject to possible reimbursement for each improvement.
(e) In the event any owner or developer pays all or a portion of the fees or
assessments identified in subsection 5.05.3(a)(1)–(4) above under protest, the City
shall not be required to make reimbursements under this Development Agreement
until the limitation period for instituting court action to seek a refund of such
funds paid under protest has passed, and no court action (“Action”) has been
instituted. If an Action is instituted seeking refund of funds paid under protest, or
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 382
15
to prevent the City from collecting such funds, or challenging any provision of
this Development Agreement, the City shall not pay over such funds to Avila
Ranch until the Action has been finalized and the authority of the City to collect
such funds and reimburse the Developer has been sustained. The City shall
promptly notify Avila Ranch in writing of the Action. The City shall reasonably
support Developer’s efforts to participate as a party to the Action, to defend the
Action or settle the Action. Furthermore, the City shall have the right to tender
defense of the Action to Avila Ranch. If, within 15 days of the City’s mailing a
notice in compliance with Section 15.08 below requesting that Avila Ranch
defend the Action, should Avila Ranch thereafter fail to undertake the defense of
the Action at Avila Ranch’s sole cost and expense, the City may stipulate to return
of the funds collected under protest, to cease collecting such funds, or enter into
any other settlement of the Action acceptable to the City, and Avila Ranch shall
lose any right to reimbursement under this Development Agreement of the
amount contested in the Action. Avila Ranch shall further reimburse the City for
its costs and attorneys’ fees incurred in defense of the Action, including
reasonable payment for legal services performed by the City’s City Attorney, and
for any liability the City incurred in the Action. In addition, if the City fails to
impose a requirement upon development projects to pay their respective prorated
share of the improvements specified in Exhibit C or fails to collect such funds,
Avila Ranch may exercise all of its legal rights to attempt to collect such funds
from the owners or developers of the benefitted properties, which legal rights
shall not be interpreted to include an action against the City. In the event Avila
Ranch attempts to collect such funds from such owners or developers, the City
shall assign to Avila Ranch all of its rights to collect such funds under this
Development Agreement.
(f) The City reserves the right to offset any funds it collects from the sources
identified in this Section 5.03.3 against any unpaid fees, debts or obligations of
Avila Ranch owed to the City. The City shall provide Avila Ranch with notice, in
accordance with Section 15.08 and Article 12, of its intent to offset any collected
funds against unpaid fees, debts or obligations described in the notice, and
provide Avila Ranch with a reasonable opportunity to cure such unpaid fees,
debts, or obligations.
(g) Avila Ranch’s rights to reimbursement under this Section 5.05.3 shall survive
termination of this Development Agreement for a period of 15 years from the date
of termination or until Developer has been fully reimbursed, whichever occurs
first.
Section 5.05.4. Other Shortfalls of City.
(a) Avila Ranch understands and acknowledges that the costs to City of serving the
Project and the Property and otherwise carrying out its Obligations under this
Development Agreement may exceed the fees, charges and revenues generated by
or as a result of the Project. Accordingly, prior to or concurrently with this
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 383
15
Development Agreement, the City shall establish a Financing Mechanism to
mitigate potential annual shortfalls to the City’s General Fund resulting from the
provision of municipal services to the Project, the costs of which exceed the
General Fund revenues generated by development within the Property (the
“General Fund Shortfalls”). The Funding Mechanism shall be designed to remain
in place until annual General Fund revenues generated by development within the
Property are at least equal to the annual General Fund costs incurred by City in
providing municipal services to the Project.
(b) A Financing Mechanism shall be established to generate revenues sufficient to
offset such potential shortfall, if requested by the City, and shall only be effective
if a fiscal impact analysis shows a General Fund Shortfall. The shortfall Financing
Mechanism may consist of a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (“CFD”).
(c) City may annually monitor the fiscal impacts of development within the Property
to determine the extent to which development generates sufficient General Fund
Revenues to eliminate the General Fund Shortfall. When and if the City
determines as a result of annual monitoring that sufficient development has
occurred within the Property to generate General Fund revenues to cover the
annual costs to the City’s General Fund of providing municipal services to the
Project (the “Break-Even Point”), the shortfall Financing Mechanism shall be
discontinued and all revenues that have been collected to fund the projected
General Fund Shortfall but have not been used for such purpose shall be refunded
to Avila Ranch, if permissible pursuant to Applicable Law, or otherwise used to
defray Project Costs in the City’s reasonable discretion and pursuant to law.
(d) Avila Ranch’s obligation to fund projected General Fund Shortfalls under Section
5.05.4 above shall be limited by the provisions of Section 5.02.1 above and, in
any event, shall not survive the expiration or termination of this Development
Agreement. If Developer requests, and City grants, an extension of this
Development Agreement as set forth in Section 1.03.1(a)(1) above, Avila Ranch’s
obligation to fund projected General Fund Shortfalls shall be extended
accordingly.
ARTICLE 6. COMMITMENTS OF CITY AND AVILA RANCH RELATED TO PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS
Section 6.01. Backbone Infrastructure Phasing Plan. The Project Backbone Infrastructure is
planned to be designed and constructed in six (6) phases.
Section 6.01.1. Development Plan Phasing Plan. The improvements described in the
Avila Ranch Development Plan and Exhibits E-1 through E-4 and J to this Development
Agreement constitute the Project “Backbone Infrastructure.” The Parties acknowledge that
further analysis may result in a more cost-effective approach to the provision of such
infrastructure to adequately serve development within the Project Area, and that Exhibits E-1
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 384
15
through E-4 and J may be revised accordingly by agreement of the Parties and that such
revisions shall not require amendment to this Development Agreement.
Section 6.01.2. Phasing Plan. The phasing plan for the project is attached to this
Agreement as Exhibit D.
Section 6.01.3. Phasing Plan Amendments. The Phasing Plan may be amended by
agreement of the Parties to take advantage of new technologies, to respond to changes in the
underlying land use assumptions upon which the plan is based, or for such other reasons as the
Parties may agree.
Section 6.02. Construction and Dedication of Project Facilities and Infrastructure.
Section 6.02.1. Construction and Funding of Project Facilities and Infrastructure by
Avila Ranch. The City may, in any manner consistent with the terms and provisions of this
Development Agreement, require Avila Ranch to construct or fund the construction of any
Project Facilities and Infrastructure when needed to satisfy the Backbone Infrastructure Phasing
Plan.
Section 6.02.2. Oversizing of Project Facilities and Infrastructure.
(a) In addition to requiring Avila Ranch to construct or fund the construction of
Project Facilities and Infrastructure, City may require any Project Facilities and
Infrastructure constructed or funded by Avila Ranch under Section 6.01 above to
be oversized to serve projects or areas other than the Project or the Property;
provided that:
(i) City shall consider in good faith the establishment of a Financing Mechanism to
provide such additional funding;
(ii) City shall reimburse the costs associated with Avila Ranch’s funding or
construction of that portion of any such oversized improvements that is
attributable to projects or areas other than the Project or the Property, pursuant to
section 5.05.3 of this Agreement above.
(b) If the phasing or incremental construction of facilities would involve significant
inefficiencies that are unacceptable to City for a sub-phase implemented by Avila
Ranch, Avila Ranch may be required to construct or provide advance funding for
the construction of oversized improvements. For example, if the Project generates
a need for an 18-inch sanitary sewer line, but other projects reasonably may be
expected to use that sewer line and thereby increase the required capacity of such
line to 24 inches, City may require Avila Ranch to construct or fund the
construction of a 24-inch sewer line (but shall provide reimbursement as
described in section 5.05.3 above). Notwithstanding the foregoing, City shall
exercise its best good faith efforts to reasonably limit Avila Ranch’s obligation to
construct or provide advance funding of oversized improvements and may in
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 385
15
certain instances, in the interest of fairness to Avila Ranch, tolerate certain
inefficiencies.
Section 6.03. Dedications.
(a) To the extent rights-of-way or other interests in real property owned by Avila
Ranch within the Property are needed for the construction, operation or
maintenance of Project Facilities and Infrastructure, Avila Ranch shall dedicate or
otherwise convey such rights-of-way or other interest in real property to City, or
as necessary to the County of San Luis Obispo. Such rights-of-way shall be
dedicated or otherwise conveyed in the widths set forth in the AASP or in the
Avila Ranch Development Plan.
(b) Any public improvements constructed by Avila Ranch and conveyed to City, and
any right-of-way or other real property conveyed to City, shall be dedicated or
otherwise conveyed (i) free and clear of any liens unacceptable to the City and
(ii) except as otherwise agreed to by City, in a condition free of any toxic
materials. Nothing herein shall prevent City’s right to pursue third parties under
applicable law.
Section 6.04. Cooperation with Respect to Project Facilities and Infrastructure.
Section 6.04.1 Off-Site Improvements. Avila Ranch acknowledges that certain off-site
improvements are required as part of the project’s conditions of approval and mitigation
measures which include, but may not be limited to:(i) a right-of-way along Buckley Road and/or
the Buckley Extension; (ii) a right-of-way necessary to implement the Horizon Extension from
the project to Suburban Road: (iii) the Earthwood Extension to Suburban; (iv) improvements to
Suburban Road between Earthwood and Horizon; (v) improvement of the intersection of Vachell
and Venture; (vi) pedestrian improvements along Higuera and Vachell; (vii) intersection
improvements at Higuera/Buckley, L.O.V.R./Higuera, Suburban/Higuera, Tank Farm/Higuera,
Prado/ Higuera and South/Higuera; and (viii) bicycle improvements required by the City and
consistent with the City Bicycle Master Plan, all of which are more particularly described in the
Project’s approved plans (the “Off-Site Improvements”). A schedule of all Off-Site
Improvements for which Avila Ranch is responsible is attached as Exhibit C to this Agreement.
Avila Ranch shall exhaust all reasonable efforts and diligently pursue acquisition of all necessary
easements and/or rights of way not currently owned or controlled by City or Avila Ranch which
are required to construct the Off-Site Improvements. For purposes of this Section 6.04.1, the
term “reasonable efforts” shall include proof that the Avila Ranch has made a commercially
reasonable written offer to purchase the property interest at fair market value, in accordance with
an appraisal conducted by an MAI appraiser.
If after exercising reasonable efforts Avila Ranch is unable to acquire the necessary easements
and/or rights of way, City, upon written request of Avila Ranch, may either: (1) require Avila
Ranch to construct functionally equivalent alternative improvements to those previously
approved, provided that such alternative improvements are equally or more effective in
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 386
15
addressing the impact; or (2) pursue acquisition of the real property interests by means of
eminent domain. City and Avila Ranch acknowledge that eminent domain is a discretionary
process and that City cannot commit to its use unless and until all appropriate notifications,
hearings and proceedings have been undertaken. If City chooses to pursue acquisition of the real
property interests by means of eminent domain, City shall take all reasonable steps necessary
towards that endeavor, including undertaking appraisals, noticing property owners, noticing and
holding required public hearings and meetings, and following any other procedures required for
pre-judgment possession and Avila Ranch shall pay all costs reasonably incurred by City related
to, arising from, or associated with such acquisition or condemnation proceedings, including but
not limited to, attorneys' fees, expert witness fees, settlement costs, and jury awards of any kind.
In addition, Avila Ranch shall indemnify, defend and hold City harmless from and against any
and all claims, liabilities or causes of action of any kind associated with City’s acquisition of
such real property interests, excluding therefrom any claims, liabilities or causes of action arising
from City’s gross negligence or willful misconduct.
If and to the extent this Section 6.04.1 demands more of Avila Ranch than does Section 66462.5
of the Subdivision Map Act, this section shall apply in addition to the Developer’s obligations
under that statute.
Upon acquisition of the necessary interest in land, or upon obtaining right of entry, either by
agreement or court order, Avila Ranch shall commence and complete the public improvements.
This requirement shall be included, and, if necessary, detailed, in any subdivision improvement
agreement entered between the Developer and the City pursuant to Government Code
section 66462.
ARTICLE 7. OTHER COMMITMENTS OF CITY AND AVILA RANCH
Section 7.01. Mutual Cooperation for Other Governmental Permits. City and Avila Ranch, as
appropriate, shall each be responsible to apply to other governmental or quasi-governmental
agencies for necessary permits and approvals for development and use of the Property (e.g.,
agencies having jurisdiction over water supply; wastewater treatment, reuse and disposal; access
to the Property; wetlands-related and other biological issues). City and Avila Ranch each shall
take any and all actions as may be necessary or appropriate to process successfully such permits
and approvals, provided such permits and approvals are consistent with the Development Plan
and AASP and agreed by the City and Avila Ranch to be reasonably necessary or desirable for
the construction, maintenance or operation of the Project.
Section 7.02. Timing of Development.
Section 7.02.1. Timing Requirements.
(a) Avila Ranch shall be obligated to comply with the terms and conditions of the
Project Approvals, the Development Plan, the AASP, and this Development
Agreement when specified in each. The Parties acknowledge that the rate at which
phases of the Project develop depends upon numerous factors and market
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 387
15
conditions that are not entirely within Avila Ranch’s or the City’s control such as
market demand, interest rates, absorption rates, completion schedules, availability
of labor, and other factors. The Parties wish to avoid the result of Pardee
Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cal. 3d 465 (1984), where the failure of
the parties therein to consider and expressly provide for the timing of
development resulted in the court’s determination that a later-adopted initiative
restricting the timing of development prevailed over the parties’ agreement.
Accordingly, the Parties acknowledge that Avila Ranch shall have the right to
develop the Project at such time Avila Ranch deems appropriate in the exercise of
its subjective business judgment except as provided in this section below and the
City shall not attempt to limit or restrict the timing of development of the Project
except in accordance with the terms of this Development Agreement.
(b) Avila Ranch shall complete the first two phases of development depicted in
Exhibit D to this Agreement, including the installation of those certain
improvements required under either the Development Plan or FEIR, by seven
years after the Effective Date. Otherwise, Avila Ranch may proceed with the
development of any portion of the Project, or make any financial commitment
associated with any such development when, in Avila Ranch’s sole and absolute
discretion, Avila Ranch determines that it is in Avila Ranch’s best financial or
other interest to do so. The foregoing sentence shall not, however, limit any
obligation of Avila Ranch under this Development Agreement with respect to any
development activities that Avila Ranch chooses to undertake hereunder.
(c) Avila Ranch shall pursue buildout of the project in conformance with the phasing
schedule below. The Parties acknowledge that, except as expressly required by
Section 1.03.1(a)(2), the actual timing of buildout will vary from year to year due
to a variety of factors such as market demand, economic conditions, etc. Avila
Ranch may accelerate buildout of the Project ahead of the schedule so long as
there is outstanding indebtedness owed to Avila Ranch for Off -Site Improvements
under section 5.05.3 of this Agreement. The Project shall be permitted to develop
at a rate up to the cumulative total of 150% of the annual number of dwelling
units shown in the phasing schedule immediately below. The Project shall not
exceed the cumulative maximum shown for each year in the phasing schedule
below, unless authorized by the Community Development Director upon a finding
that there is outstanding debt owed to Avila Ranch and that such development
and/or rate of development will not exceed the City’s Growth Management
Ordinance.
Phase 1 Phase 3
Phase 2
Phase 4 Phase 5
Year >>> 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
R-1 101 50 51
R-2 Standard 221 44 44 45 44 44
R-2 Pocket Cottage 76 16 16 15 16 13
R-3-Duplex 38 38
R-3 Town Home 159 52 52 55
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 388
15
R-4 Apartments 125 65 60
Total Subject to Limit 720 60 60 60 125 117 90 52 55 50 51
Maximum
Cumulative Limit
90 180 270 458 633 720
Section 7.03. Dedication of Park Lands. Avila Ranch shall dedicate land in excess of that
ordinarily required by the City to construct public parks in South San Luis Obispo, an area that
presently has a deficiency of park area. In particular, Avila Ranch shall provide 18.25 acres of
public park land, 1.76 acres in excess of City requirements, to bring the total park acreage for
South San Luis Obispo to five and a-half acres per 1,000 persons. Said parks shall be reviewed
and approved by the City’s Parks and Recreation Commission before dedication. Ongoing
maintenance and operation of these park facilities shall be funded by the Project residents
pursuant to a Financing Mechanism established pursuant to Sections 5.03 or 5.04 above and shall
not be payable from the General Fund or other community-wide resources.
Section 7.04. Dedication of Open Space and Agricultural Lands. To compensate for the loss of
onsite agricultural lands and to meet the open space objectives of the General Plan, Avila Ranch
shall dedicate at least 50 acres of on-site open space and/or agricultural land and shall preserve at
least 50 acres of off-site open space and/or agricultural land. Said lands shall be dedicated within
the City’s “Greenbelt” area depicted in Figure 5 of the Conservation and Open Space Element, a
copy of which figure is attached here as Exhibit F. The land to be dedicated or reserved may be
comprised of multiple properties, and may be located in the City or unincorporated County
territory. Avila Ranch may satisfy a portion of this requirement through the payment of an in lieu
fee to the City or, with the City’s approval, to a land conservation organization. If land is
dedicated in the form of a Conservation Easement, the terms and conditions shall be approved by
the City, together with a correspondent and contemporaneous baseline conditions report. If land
is to be dedicated in fee simple title, the City shall have the opportunity to conduct due diligence
inspections, including but not limited to, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (and subsequent
assessment as may be necessary), title review, and physical site inspections; the City may reject
any such dedications based on its due diligence inspections, which shall not be construed as a
waiver of the dedication requirements herein.
Section 7.05. Affordable Housing and Workforce Housing and Related Programs. Avila Ranch
shall provide affordable housing for the Project as described in Exhibit G. Avila Ranch shall also
provide workforce housing and shall implement the local preference “SLO Workers First”
program, owner occupancy restrictions and down payment assistance program as described in
Exhibit G.
Section 7.07. Energy.
(a) Avila Ranch shall provide for accelerated compliance with the City’s Energy
Conservation Goals and its Climate Action Plan by implementing energy
conservation measures significantly above City standards and norms by providing
for solar PV energy generation for 100 percent of onsite electrical demand as
described in Section 13 of the Design Framework of the Development Plan. The
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 389
15
Project shall also include energy efficiency standards in excess of the current
Building Code.
(b) Developer shall provide sustainability features as described in Section 13 of the
Design Framework of the Development Plan, including: (i) housing that meets the
2019 net zero building and energy codes or, if the 2019 building and energy codes
are not yet adopted upon building permit application, the equivalent to the
satisfaction of the Community Development Director, (ii) implementing any
future city-wide policy regarding zero carbon emissions, (iii) solar electric panels,
(iv) integrated power outlets for electric vehicles and electric bicycles, (v)
building design that maximizes grey water usage, and (vi) work-at-home options
with high-speed internet connectivity.
Section 7.08. Water.
(a) Avila Ranch shall provide for accelerated compliance with the Climate Action
Plan through by implementing special water conservation measures to reduce the
usage of potable water by Avila Ranch households to 35 percent below the
current City-wide average as described in Section 13 of the Development Plan.
(b) Avila Ranch shall comply with the California Water Code and the regulations
imposed by the City before or after the Effective Date in its capacity as the
Groundwater Sustainability Agency pursuant to the Sustainable Groundwater
Management Act (“SGMA”).
(c) Avila Ranch shall install water improvements necessary to serve the Project and
future annexation areas of the AASP and County fringe areas in and around
Buckley and Broad Streets as shown in Exhibit H.
(d) Avila Ranch shall offer to dedicate to the City a well site for future municipal use
on Lot 594, 406 or 398, with area buffers acceptable to the City and consistent
with drinking water standards. If the water well is located in a public park, the
design shall be consistent with the project’s Parks Plan, and may be subject to
review and approval by the City Parks and Recreation Commission. The well site
shall have a footprint with an area measuring 20’ x 40’, plus a buffer as shown
more particularly in Exhibit I.
(e) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section above, Avila Ranch reserves
all groundwater or other water rights with respect to the Property and shall be
entitled to irrigate agricultural or open space land with ground or well water, to
the extent that such reservation and action does not violate Applicable Law and so
long as such water meets or exceeds all applicable water quality standards. Avila
Ranch shall have the option, but shall not be required, to connect to the City’s
water system to irrigate agricultural/open space land with reclaimed water.
Section 7.09. Storm Drain Facilities. Before approval of a Final Subdivision Map or building
permit for a use that does not require a map, Avila Ranch shall cause to be provided storm drain
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 390
15
facilities adequate to accommodate the storm water runoff from the area subject to the Final
Subdivision Map or building permit.
Section 7.10. Interim Fire Station. Avila Ranch shall construct, and dedicate to the City, an
interim fire station on Lot 302 to serve all property in South San Luis Obispo. Per the
requirements of the Fire Station Master Plan, the interim fire station shall be provided at the
buildout of the 361st dwelling unit. After the interim fire station has been constructed, the site
shall be dedicated to the City for use as a City park or affordable housing site, as deemed
appropriate by the City. Avila Ranch shall be entitled to credits against fire development impact
fees in an amount reasonably determined by the City’s fiscal impact consultant to reflect (i) the
value of the land donated to the City under this section and (ii) the lesser of (a) Avila Ranch’s
actual cost to improve the interim fire station and (b) the reasonable cost of that construction.
Section 7.11. Traffic and Circulation Improvements. Avila Ranch shall construct or fund the traffic
and circulation improvements as established in the FEIR and Development Plan as further
described in Exhibit C. City and Avila Ranch acknowledge that these improvements are necessary
to mitigate project impacts, improve access to and from the project, relieve existing or future traffic
deficiencies, and bring such intersections into compliance with the General Plan in advance of
impacts associated with the Project. In addition, Avila Ranch shall construct or fund the following
improvements:
a. Buckley/227 Intersection Improvements. Avila Ranch shall commit $200,000 above its fair share
allocation of costs to facilitate design of the roundabout improvements for the Buckley Road/227
intersection called for in the 227 corridor study.
b. Operational Improvements to the Davenport Creek and Buckley Road Intersection. The Project’s
fair share of these improvements is 2.7 percent, based on the Project’s share of additional traffic on
Buckley Road. Avila Ranch shall provide funding to the City in the amount of $230,000 for these
improvements (90 percent of projected costs), including the costs for initial design, construction
documents, and right-of-way acquisition. In the event actual costs are less than what has been
projected, Avila Ranch may apply the remaining funds ($230,000 less 90 percent of actual costs of
construction) to the Buckley/227 intersection improvements. The City shall work with the County
of San Luis Obispo and enter into any necessary agreements to act as a conduit for the Avila Ranch
funding contribution to the Davenport Creek and Buckley Road intersection improvements.
Section 7.12. Bicycle and Multimodal Transportation Improvements. Avila Ranch shall
construct or fund the construction of bicycle and multimodal transportation improvements as
established in the FEIR and Development Plan as further described in Exhibit J. City and Avila
Ranch acknowledge that these improvements are necessary to mitigate Project impacts, improve
access to and from the Project, encourage multimodal transportation, relieve existing or future
traffic deficiencies, and bring such intersections into compliance with the General Plan in
advance of impacts associated with the Project. In addition, if prior to the termination of this
Development Agreement, City acquires all or a portion of right of way through the Chevron site
immediately adjacent to the Property as contemplated in the City’s Circulation element, Avila
Ranch agrees to improve, at its sole cost and expense, subject to reimbursement, such right of
way as a Class 1 bicycle facility and pedestrian walkway. Avila Ranch shall be obligated to
construct such improvements upon written notice by City that it has acquired all or a portion of
the right of way through the Chevron property and such obligation shall survive termination of
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 391
15
this Development Agreement. Actual construction of the bicycle and pedestrian improvements
shall be coordinated with build-out of the Project, but in no event shall it be later than one year
after completion of phase 4 of the Project or City’s written notice to Avila Ranch of its
acquisition of such right-of-way, whichever is later.
Section 7.13. Miscellaneous.
Section 7.13.1. Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions. CC&Rs for each subdivision
within the Property shall state substantially the following: “This project is within the boundaries
of the San Luis Obispo Airport Area Specific Plan, and as such, is subject to design guidelines
and development standards which have been incorporated into the Airport Area Specific Plan and
the Avila Ranch Development Plan Design Guidelines, both on file with the Community
Development Department of the City of San Luis Obispo.” Before the City approves a Final
Subdivision Map or issues a building permit for a land use that does not require a Map, the
CC&R disclosure statement referenced above shall be provided to the City Attorney for review
and approval.
Section 7.13.2. Ownership and Maintenance of Public Improvements. Unless otherwise
mutually agreed, the City shall own and maintain, or cause to be maintained, the following
public improvements:
(a) Potable water system and water tank within public properties or public easements;
(b) Sanitary sewer system within public properties or public easements;
(c) Recycled water system within public properties or public easements;
(d) Storm drain system, including continuous deflective separation (CDS) vaults or
other BMP facilities, within public properties or public easements;
(e) Public roadways;
(f) Public parks; and,
(g) Public access, landscape, and utility easements.
Section 7.13.3. Public Utilities Easements. All land subject to public utilities easements
(PUEs); public water, sewer, or storm drain easements; and public access easements shall be
open and accessible to the City at all times.
Section 7.13.4. Design Review of Major Surface Facilities. Design Review shall be
completed for all major surface public facilities for which it is required before construction.
Section 7.13.5. Design and Construction Standards for Sewer and Water Facilities. All
sewer, water and recycled water facilities shall conform to the Design and Construction
Standards in effect for the Project when improvement plans are submitted. The submittal shall
include all pertinent engineering analysis and design calculations. The plans shall be subject to
the Director of Public Works’ review and approval.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 392
15
Section 7.13.6. Communications Requirements. Developer shall provide cable or suitable
conduit to each City facility, public park, or other lot designated for City or public use for high
speed internet connectivity. The cable or suitable conduit shall be shown on the joint trench
improvement plans and constructed before the final lift of asphalt is placed on the adjacent street.
ARTICLE 8. CONSIDERATION OF PERMITS AND APPROVALS
Section 8.01. In General.
Section 8.01.1 Review and Action Generally. Upon Avila Ranch’s submission of any complete
application for an Approval together with any fees permitted under Article 5 and required by
City in accordance with Applicable Law, City shall use its best efforts to commence and
complete promptly and diligently all steps necessary to act on the application. Avila Ranch
promptly shall provide to City all information reasonably requested by City for its consideration
of any such application.
Section 8.01.2. Applicable Law. Except as otherwise specifically provided in this Article 8, all
applications for Approvals submitted by Avila Ranch shall be considered by City in accordance
with Applicable Law. To the extent an approval would amend Applicable Law as set forth in
Section 4.01.1, the aspect of Applicable Law to be amended by the approval shall not apply to
the City’s consideration of the application.
Section 8.02. General Plan and AASP Amendments. The parties anticipate that Avila Ranch may
request amendments to the General Plan or the AASP to respond to changing circumstances and
conditions. City is not obligated to approve any such application and may, in the exercise of its
legislative discretion, approve, deny or propose conditions or modifications thereto, including
conditions or modifications that might otherwise be prohibited by the vested rights provided by
this Development Agreement. Avila Ranch shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity to review
any such proposed conditions and modifications and to withdraw its application for a General
Plan amendment or AASP amendment (in which case neither Avila Ranch’s proposed
amendments nor the City’s proposed modifications shall become effective).
Section 8.03. CEQA Compliance.
Section 8.03.01. MMRP Application. When conducting an environmental review of any
application for an Approval, City shall review the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
adopted in connection with the Development Plan and Avila Ranch EIR (the “MMRP”) to
determine if any mitigation measure contained in the MMRP as to the portion of the Property
subject to this Development Agreement should be incorporated into the design of, or added as a
condition of approval to, such Approval.
Section 8.04. Life of Approvals. Any Approval issued by City, including vesting maps as
defined in Section 8.05 below, shall continue in effect without expiration until the later of: (i) the
expiration or earlier termination of this Development Agreement or (ii) the date upon which such
Approval would otherwise expire under the laws of the State of California.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 393
15
Section 8.05. Vesting Maps. The ordinances, standards and policies applicable to any vesting
tentative map, vesting parcel map, vesting subdivision map or any other type of vesting map
(“Vesting Map”) under California Government Code section 66474.2, and the ordinances,
policies and standards vested under any Vesting Map pursuant to California Government Code
section 66498.1(b) shall be those established as Applicable Law under this Agreement. If this
Development Agreement terminates before the expiration of any Vesting Map or the vested rights
provided thereby, such termination of this Development Agreement shall not affect Avila Ranch’s
right to proceed with development under such Vesting Map in accordance with the ordinances,
policies and standards so vested under the Vesting Map. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no
Vesting Map shall extend Applicable Law beyond the stated term of this Development
Agreement (and the rules, regulations and official policies of City applicable to that portion of
the Property covered by such Vesting Map shall become those in effect as of the expiration of
such term) except as otherwise agreed by City and Avila Ranch; provided, however, that City and
Avila Ranch may agree to an extension of the term of this Development Agreement with respect
to the area covered by any such Vesting Map.
Section 8.06. Need for Flexibility. The provisions of this Development Agreement require a
close degree of cooperation between the City and Developer. Implementation of the Project may
require minor modifications of the details of the Development Plan and affect the performance of
the Parties to this Development Agreement. The anticipated refinements of the Project and the
development of the Property may require that appropriate clarifications and refinements are
made to this Development Agreement and the Entitlements with respect to the details of the
performance of the City and the Developer. The Parties desire to retain a certain degree of
flexibility with respect to those items covered in general terms under this Development
Agreement.
ARTICLE 9. AMENDMENTS
Section 9.01. Amendments of Agreement.
Section 9.01.1. General. This Development Agreement may be amended from time to time only
upon the mutual written consent of City and Avila Ranch and in compliance with section
17.94.190 of the City’s zoning ordinance; provided, however, that in connection with the transfer
of any portion of Avila Ranch’s Rights and/or Obligations under this Development Agreement to
another person, entity, or organization pursuant to the provisions of Article 13 below, Avila
Ranch, such transferee and City may agree that the signature of such transferee may be required
to amend this Development Agreement insofar as such amendment would materially alter the
Rights and/or Obligations of such transferee hereunder. In no event shall the signature or consent
of any “Non-Assuming Transferee” (as defined in Section 13.03 below) be required to amend
this Agreement.
Section 9.01.2. Future Approvals Do Not Require Amendments to Agreement. Except as the
Parties may otherwise agree, no amendment of this Development Agreement shall be required in
connection with the issuance of any Approval, or an amendment to the MMRP. Any Approval
issued after the Effective Date as to a portion of the Property shall be incorporated automatically
into this Development Agreement and vested hereby. City shall not, however, amend or issue
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 394
15
any Approval unless Avila Ranch requests such an amendment or issuance from City unless
otherwise permitted by this Agreement.
ARTICLE 10. ANNUAL REVIEW
Section 10.01. Annual Review
(a) The Community Development Director shall annually and concurrently conduct
(i) the MMRP Evaluation as set forth in Section 11.01; and (ii) the Development
Agreement Review as set forth in Section 11.02 (collectively, the “Annual
Review”). With respect to the MMRP Evaluation, if the Community Development
Director determines that mitigation measures adopted by City in connection with
its approval of the AASP and the Zoning are not being implemented as set forth in
the MMRP, the Community Development Director shall take any appropriate
remedial action as described in Section 11.01 below. Further, the Community
Development Director shall incorporate the results of the MMRP Evaluation into
the review of any applications for Approvals that are submitted following
completion of an Annual Review.
(b) Other Investigations and Evaluations. City may from time to time, whether or not
as a part of an Annual Review, investigate or evaluate any matter that is properly
the subject of an Annual Review.
ARTICLE 11 . MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
EVALUATION; DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT REVIEW
Section 11.01. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Evaluation.
Section 11.01.1. In General. During its Annual Review, City shall evaluate (the “MMRP
Evaluation”) whether the mitigation measures adopted by City in connection with its approval of
the AASP and the Zoning are being implemented as set forth in the MMRP as to the Property.
Section 11.01.2. MMRP Implementation. As set forth in the MMRP, City shall consider
in connection with any application for an Approval the extent to which mitigation measures
described in the MMRP should be incorporated into the design of the project under consideration
or set forth in conditions to the City’s approval of the application. During an MMRP Evaluation,
the City shall evaluate its overall success over the prior year in implementing such mitigation
measures, as set forth above, and consider any additional steps that may be appropriate to ensure,
as Approvals are considered over the following year, successful implementation of such
mitigation measures (including, in particular, mitigation measures that are the responsibility of
City or other agencies with regulatory authority over the Project).
Section 11.01.03. Enforcement. Avila Ranch shall be responsible only for those
mitigation measures the City requires to be incorporated into the design of the Project, including
those that are attached as conditions to any Approval. Failure to comply with any such design
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 395
15
requirement or any condition of approval shall be enforced in any manner authorized by
Applicable Law.
Section 11.02. Development Agreement Review
Section 11.02.01. In General. The Community Development Director shall review this
Development Agreement annually as required by section 17.94.200 of the City’s zoning
ordinance (the “Development Agreement Review”). The Development Agreement Review shall
be conducted concurrently with MMRP Evaluation, pursuant to Article 10 above and this Section
11.02. In connection with the Development Agreement Review, Avila Ranch shall provide
information as reasonably requested by City.
Section 11.02.02. Director’s Findings of Compliance. If the Community Development
Director finds good faith compliance by Avila Ranch with this Agreement, the Community
Development Director shall issue a “Finding of Development Agreement Compliance,” which
shall be in recordable form and may be recorded by Avila Ranch or any “Mortgagee” (as defined
in Section 14.01 below). Issuance of a Finding of Development Agreement Compliance and
expiration of the appeal period specified below without appeal, or confirmation by the City
Council of the issuance of the Finding of Development Agreement Compliance upon such
appeal, shall finally determine the Development Agreement Review for the applicable period.
Section 11.02.03. Finding of Development Agreement Noncompliance. If the
Community Development Director finds that Avila Ranch and/or a Transferee has not complied
in good faith with this Agreement, the Community Development Director shall proceed as
specified in section 17.94.200 of the City’s zoning ordinance.
ARTICLE 12. DEFAULT, REMEDIES, TERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT
Section 12.01. Defaults.
Section 12.01.1. Notice and Cure.
(a) Any failure by a Party to perform any term or provision of this Development
Agreement, which failure continues uncured for 60 days following written notice
of such failure from the other Party (unless such period is extended by written
mutual consent), shall constitute a default under this Development Agreement.
Any such notice shall specify the nature of the alleged failure and, where
appropriate, how such alleged failure may be cured. If the nature of the alleged
failure is such that it cannot reasonably be cured within 60 days, then
commencement of the cure within that time, and diligent prosecution to
completion of the cure thereafter, shall be timely. If the alleged failure is cured,
then no default shall exist and the noticing Party shall take no further action and
acknowledge the cure in writing to the other Party. If the alleged failure is not
cured, then a default shall exist under this Development Agreement and the
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 396
15
noticing Party may exercise any of the remedies available under Sections 12.02
through 12.04 below.
(b) No failure or delay in giving notice of default shall constitute a waiver of default;
provided, however, that the provision of notice and opportunity to cure is a
prerequisite to the enforcement or correction of any default.
Section 12.01.2. Actions during Cure Period.
(a) During any cure period specified under Section 12.01.1 and before delivery of a
notice of failure or default, the Party charged shall not be considered in default of
this Development Agreement. If there is a dispute as to the existence of a default,
the Parties shall otherwise continue to perform their obligations hereunder, to the
maximum extent practicable in light of the disputed matter, pending its resolution
or formal termination of the Development Agreement.
(b) City shall continue to process in good faith applications for Approvals during any
cure period, but need not approve any such application if it relates to a
development project as to which there is an alleged default hereunder.
Section 12.02. Remedies of Non-Defaulting Party.
Section 12.02.01. In General. If any Party is in default under the terms of this
Development Agreement, the non-defaulting Party may elect, in its sole and absolute discretion,
to pursue any of the following courses of action: (i) waive such default; (ii) in City’s case, pursue
administrative remedies as provided in Section 12.02.3 below, (iii) pursue judicial remedies as
provided for in Section 12.02.4 below; and/or (iii) terminate this Development Agreement as and
to the extent permitted by Section 12.04 below and consistently with section 17.94.210 and
17.94.220 of the City’s zoning ordinance. In no event shall City modify this Development
Agreement as a result of a default by a defaulting Party except in accordance with the provisions
of Section 9.01 above.
Section 12.02.2. Severability of Default. City acknowledges that the development of the
Project may be carried out by more than one person, entity or organization under this
Development Agreement (e.g., portions of Avila Ranch’s interest in the Property and this
Development Agreement may be transferred to another person, entity or organization, a
“Transferee” under Article 13 below). Accordingly, (i) if City determines to terminate or
exercise any other remedy under this Development Agreement due to a default by Avila Ranch
or any Transferee (hereinafter “Defaulting Developer”), such termination or other remedy shall
apply only with respect to the Rights and Obligations of such Defaulting Developer, (ii) City
shall, to the extent possible, refrain from seeking any termination of this Development
Agreement or other remedy if such remedy would affect materially the ability of a non-
defaulting Developer and / or a Transferee (hereinafter “Non-Defaulting Developer”) to realize
the Rights provided hereunder, and (iii) any termination of this Development Agreement as to
any Defaulting Developer shall be deemed to terminate only those Rights and Obligations arising
hereunder between City and such Defaulting Developer. The Parties acknowledge and agree that,
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 397
15
in accordance with Article 13 below, more than one Transferee may be responsible for certain
actions required or forbidden by this Development Agreement, and that more than one
Transferee therefore may be in default with respect thereto. The Parties further acknowledge and
agree that, notwithstanding the provisions of (ii) in this Section above, in certain instances it may
not be possible for City to exercise remedies against the Defaulting Developer of one portion of
the Project without affecting in some way a Non-Defaulting Developer of the same or of some
other portion of the Project.
Section 12.02.3. Administrative Remedies. Except as otherwise specifically stated in this
Development Agreement, City may exercise any and all administrative remedies to the extent
necessary or appropriate to secure compliance with this Development Agreement. Such
administrative remedies may include, among others, withholding building permits, certificates of
occupancy or other Approvals relating to that portion of the Project in default of this
Development Agreement.
Section 12.02.04. Judicial Remedies. Except as otherwise specifically stated in this
Development Agreement, either Party may, in addition to any other rights or remedies, institute
legal action to cure, correct, or remedy any default, enforce any covenant or agreement herein,
enjoin any threatened or attempted violation hereof, enforce by specific performance the
Obligations and Rights of the Parties hereto or obtain any other remedy consistent with this
Development Agreement; provided, however, that in no event shall any person be entitled
hereunder to monetary damages for any cause, including breach of contract by a Party to this
Development Agreement provided, however, that City may enforce payment obligations under
Applicable Law, including this Development Agreement. Nothing in this section shall be deemed
to limit either Party’s rights under the Government Claims Act, California Government Code
section 810 et seq. For purposes of instituting a legal action under this Agreement, any City
Council determination under this Development Agreement shall be deemed final agency action
unless expressly stated otherwise.
Section 12.03. Termination Due to Default.
Section 12.03.1. In General. Either Party may terminate this Development Agreement
pursuant to Section 12.03.2 below and sections 17.94.190–17.94.220 of the City’s zoning
ordinance in the event of a default by the other Party, provided: (i) such default is prejudicial to
the interests of the non-defaulting Party and is neither minor nor technical and (ii) in the case of
any termination by City, City first shall have exercised any and all administrative or other
remedies short of filing suit available to secure Avila Ranch’s compliance with this Development
Agreement. Notwithstanding clause (ii) of this Section 12.03.1, City shall not be required, as a
prerequisite to initiating the termination of this Development Agreement, to exercise its
administrative and other non-judicial remedies for more than 180 days or, if the Parties are
making reasonable progress towards resolution of the matter claimed to be a default hereunder,
such longer period to which the Parties may agree. Termination of this Development Agreement
by Avila Ranch or a Transferee as to any portion or portions of the Property shall not affect the
Rights or Obligations of Avila Ranch or any other Transferee as to any other portion or portions
of the Property.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 398
15
Section 12.03.2. Procedures for Termination.
(a) Before any proposed termination of this Development Agreement pursuant to this
Section 12.03, and following the 180-day period specified in Section 12.03.1
above to the extent applicable, a non-defaulting Party intending to seek
termination of this Development Agreement shall deliver to the defaulting Party
(or Parties) a written “Preliminary Notice of Intent to Terminate” this
Development Agreement, and all Parties shall meet and confer in good faith effort
to agree upon an alternative to termination that will afford the non-defaulting
Party the benefit of its bargain in this Development Agreement. If those
discussions are not successful in resolving the dispute, the non-defaulting Party
desiring to terminate this Development Agreement shall deliver to the defaulting
Party a written “Final Notice of Intent to Terminate” this Development
Agreement.
(b) Within 60 days after the City delivers a Final Notice of Intent to Terminate to a
defaulting Party, the City Council shall review the matter as set forth in California
Government Code sections 65865, 65867, and 65868 and sections 17.94.210–
17.94.220 of the City’s zoning ordinance. Termination shall be effective 30 days
after such City Council review, unless the default is sooner resolved to the mutual
satisfaction of the Parties.
(c) Within 60 days after Avila Ranch delivers a Final Notice of Intent to Terminate to
City, the City Council shall consider whether City should take any further
curative action. Termination shall be effective 30 days following such City
Council consideration (or 90 days following delivery by Avila Ranch of a Final
Notice of Intent to Terminate if the City Council fails to complete its
consideration by that date), unless the default is sooner resolved to the mutual
satisfaction of the Parties.
ARTICLE 13. ASSIGNMENT, TRANSFER AND NOTICE
Section 13.01. Assignment of Interests, Rights and Obligations. Avila Ranch may transfer or
assign (“Transfer”) all or any portion of its Rights and Obligations under this Development
Agreement as to any portion of the Property (the “Transferred Property”) to any person acquiring
an interest in such Transferred Property, including, without limitation, purchasers or ground
lessees of lots, parcels or facilities on such portion of the Property (a “Transferee”). Any such
Transfer shall relieve the transferring party (a “Transferor”) of any and all Rights and
Obligations under this Development Agreement insofar as they pertain to the Transferred
Property, as provided in this Article 13.
Section 13.02. Transfers In General.
Section 13.02.1. In General. In connection with any Transfer of all or any portion of the
Project or the Property, other than a transfer or assignment to a “Non-Assuming Transferee” as
described in Section 13.03 below, or a “Mortgagee” as defined in Section 14.01 below, the
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 399
15
Transferor and the Transferee may enter into a written agreement regarding their respective
Rights and Obligations in and under this Development Agreement (a “Transfer Agreement”).
Any such Transfer Agreement may contain provisions: (i) releasing the Transferor from any
Rights and Obligations under this Development Agreement that relate to the Transferred
Property, provided the Transferee expressly assumes all such Rights and Obligations,
(ii) transferring to the Transferee rights to improve the portion of the Property transferred and
any other Rights and Obligations of the Transferor arising under this Agreement, and
(iii) addressing any other matter deemed necessary or appropriate in connection with the
Transfer.
Section 13.02.02. City Review of Release Provisions.
(a) A Transferor shall have the right, but not the obligation, to seek City’s consent to
those provisions of any Transfer Agreement purporting to release such Transferor
from any Rights and Obligations arising under this Development Agreement (the
“Release Provisions”). If a Transferor fails to seek City’s consent or City does not
consent to any such Release Provisions, then such Transferor may nevertheless
transfer to the Transferee any and all Rights and Obligations of such Transferor
arising under this Development Agreement (as described in Section 13.02.1,
clauses (i) and (ii) above) but, with respect to City, shall not be released from
those Rights and Obligations described in the Release Provisions to which City
has not consented. If City consents to any Release Provisions, then: (i) the
Transferor shall be free from any and all Rights and Obligations accruing on or
after the date of the Transfer with respect to those Rights and Obligations
described in such Release Provisions and (ii) no default hereunder by Transferee
with respect to any Rights and Obligations from which the Transferor has been
released shall be attributed to the Transferor. City may consent, or conditionally
consent, to all, none, or some of the Release Provisions.
(b) City shall review and consider promptly, reasonably and in good faith any request
by a Transferor for City’s consent to any Release Provisions. City’s consent to
any such Release Provisions may be withheld only if: (i) reliable evidence
supports a conclusion that the Transferee will be unable to perform the Rights and
Obligations proposed to be assumed by the Transferee pursuant to the Transfer
Agreement, (ii) the Rights and Obligations are not reasonably allocable among
particular portions of the Project and Property, such as the Transferred Property,
(iii) the Transferor or Transferee fails to provide acceptable security, as and if
reasonably requested by City, to ensure the performance of the Rights and
Obligations proposed to be assumed by the Transferee pursuant to the Transfer
Agreement, or (iv) the Transferor or Transferee fail to provide information
reasonably requested by the City to assist it in making the determinations
described in this paragraph. In no event shall City unreasonably withhold consent
to any Release Provisions. City shall respond within 30 days to any request by a
Transferor for consent to any Release Provisions.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 400
15
(c) Subject to the provisions of subsection (b) above, because and to the extent
certain obligations arising under this Development Agreement may not
reasonably be allocable among portions of the Project, City may refuse to release
the Transferor of one portion of the Project from such Rights and Obligations
under this Development Agreement even though the Rights and Obligations are
being or have been assumed by the Transferee of some other portion of the
Project.
Section 13.03. Non-Assuming Transferees. Except as otherwise required by a Transferor, the
Obligations of a Transferor shall not apply to any purchaser of any property that has been
established as a single legal parcel for nonresidential use that does not require any further on-site
or off-site infrastructure. The Transferee in such a transaction and the successors and assigns of
such a Transferee (“Non-Assuming Transferees”) shall be deemed to have no Obligations under
this Agreement, but shall continue to benefit from the Rights provided by this Development
Agreement for the duration of its term. Nothing in this section shall exempt any Non-Assuming
Transferee from the payment of applicable fees, taxes and assessments or from having to comply
with applicable conditions of an Approval or with Applicable Law.
ARTICLE 14. MORTGAGEE PROTECTION
Section 14.01. In General. The provisions of this Development Agreement shall not limit Avila
Ranch’s right to encumber the Property or any portion thereof, or any improvement thereon by
any mortgage, deed of trust or other device securing financing with respect to such portion. City
acknowledges that lenders providing such financing and other “Mortgagees” (defined below)
may require certain interpretations and modifications of this Development Agreement and agrees
upon request, from time to time, to meet with Avila Ranch and representatives of such lenders to
negotiate in good faith any such request for an interpretation or modification. City shall not
unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification provided
such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purposes of this Agreement.
Any person holding a mortgage, deed of trust or other security instrument on all or any portion of
the Property made in good faith and for value (each, a “Mortgagee”), shall be entitled to the
rights and privileges of this Article 14.
Section 14.02. Impairment of Mortgage or Deed of Trust. Except as otherwise specifically stated
in the terms of any security instrument held by a Mortgagee, no default under this Development
Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of any mortgage or deed of
trust on the Property made, or other interest in the Property acquired, by any Mortgagee in good
faith and for value.
Section 14.03. Notice of Default to Mortgagee. If a Mortgagee has submitted a written request
to City as specified herein for notice, City shall use its best efforts to provide to such Mortgagee
written notification of any failure or default by Avila Ranch in the performance of Avila Ranch’s
obligations under this Agreement, which notification shall be provided to such Mortgagee when
such notification is delivered to Avila Ranch.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 401
15
Section 14.04. Right of Mortgagee to Cure. Any Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the
obligation, to cure any failure or default by Avila Ranch during the cure period allowed Avila
Ranch under this Agreement, plus an additional 90 days if, to cure such failure or default, the
Mortgagee must obtain possession of the property as by seeking appointment of a receiver or
other legal process. Any Mortgagee that undertakes to cure any such failure or default shall
provide written notice to City of that fact; provided that no initiation of any such efforts by a
Mortgagee shall obligate such Mortgagee to complete or succeed in any such curative efforts.
Section 14.05. Liability for Past Defaults or Obligations. Subject to the foregoing, any
Mortgagee, including the successful bidder at a foreclosure sale, who comes into possession of
the Project or the Property or any part thereof, shall take such property subject to the Rights and
Obligations of this Development Agreement and in no event shall any such property be released
from any Obligations. Nothing in this Article 14 shall prevent City from exercising any remedy it
may have for a default under this Development Agreement; provided, however, that in no event
shall such Mortgagee be liable personally for any defaults or monetary obligations of Avila
Ranch arising before such Mortgagee acquires or possesses such property.
ARTICLE 15. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 15.01. Incorporation of Recitals and Exhibits. The Recitals set forth above and the
Exhibits A–J attached hereto are incorporated herein as though set forth in full.
Section 15.02. Project is a Private Undertaking. The development Avila Ranch proposes to
undertake is a private development, and Avila Ranch shall exercise full dominion and control
over the Project subject only to Avila Ranch’s limitations and Obligations contained in this
Agreement.
Section 15.03. Cooperation in the Event of Legal Challenge.
Section 15.03.1. In General. If any person not party to this Development Agreement
institutes any administrative, legal or equitable action or other proceeding challenging the
validity of any provision of this Agreement, any Approval or the sufficiency of any review of
this Development Agreement or any Approval under CEQA (each a “Third Party Challenge”),
the Parties promptly shall meet and confer as to the most appropriate response to such Third
Party Challenge; provided, however, that any such response shall be consistent with Sections
15.03.2 and 15.03.3 below.
Section 15.03.2. Tender to and Conduct of Defense by Avila Ranch. City s hall tender the
complete defense of any Third Party Challenge to Avila Ranch, and upon acceptance of such
tender by Avila Ranch: (i) Avila Ranch shall indemnify City against any and all fees and costs
arising out of the defense of such Third Party Challenge; and (ii) Avila Ranch shall control the
defense and/or settlement of such Third Party Challenge and may take any and all actions it
deems necessary and appropriate in its sole discretion in connection therewith; provided,
however, that Avila Ranch shall seek and secure City’s consent to any settlement of such Third
Party Challenge, which consent shall not unreasonably be withheld or delayed.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 402
15
Section 15.03.03. Defense by City. If Avila Ranch should fail to accept City’s tender of
defense as set forth in Section 15.03.2 above, City shall defend such Third Party Challenge and
control the defense and/or settlement of such Third Party Challenge as City decides (in its sole
discretion), and City may take any and all actions it deems necessary and appropriate (in its sole
discretion) in connection therewith; provided, however, that City shall seek and secure Avila
Ranch’s consent to any settlement of such Third Party Challenge, which consent shall not
unreasonably be withheld or delayed. Avila Ranch shall indemnify City against any and all fees
and costs arising out of the City’s defense of such Third Party Challenge. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, if Avila Ranch determines for any reason that it no longer intends to develop the
Project, then it may deliver notice of such determination to City and shall not be liable for any
defense costs incurred by City more than 90 days following the delivery of such notice.
Section 15.04. Defense and Indemnity. Avila Ranch shall defend and indemnify City from and
against any and all damages, claims, costs and liabilities arising out of the personal injury or
death of any person, or damage to the property of any person, to the extent such damages,
claims, costs or liabilities result from the construction of the Project by Avila Ranch or by Avila
Ranch’s contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees, except as caused by the negligence or
willful misconduct of City, its officers, employees, contractors, consultants or agents. Nothing in
this Section 15.04 shall be construed to mean that Avila Ranch shall defend or indemnify City
from or against any damages, claims, costs or liabilities arising from, or alleged to arise from,
activities associated with the maintenance or repair by City or any other public agency of
improvements that have been offered for dedication and accepted by City or such other public
agency. City and Avila Ranch may from time to time enter into subdivision improvement
agreements, as authorized by the Subdivision Map Act, which agreements may include defense
and indemnity provisions different from those contained in this Section 15.04. If any conflict
appears between such provisions in any such subdivision improvement agreement and the
provisions set forth above, the provisions of such subdivision improvement agreement shall
prevail.
Section 15.05. Governing Law; Attorneys’ Fees. This Development Agreement shall be
construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Venue for any
dispute arising under this Agreement lies in the county of San Luis Obispo and Avila Ranch
hereby consents to personal jurisdiction there for that purpose. The Parties will cooperate to
facilitate venue for any Third Party Challenge set forth in Section 15.03 above in San Luis
Obispo County. Should any legal action be brought by either Party because of any default under
this Development Agreement, to enforce any provision of this Development Agreement, or to
obtain a declaration of rights hereunder, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to such reasonable
and actual attorneys’ fees, and costs as may be fixed by the Court. The standard of review for
determining whether a default has occurred under this Development Agreement shall be the
standard generally applicable to contractual obligations in California. The terms and provisions
of this Section 15.05 shall survive any termination of this Agreement.
Section 15.06. Force Majeure. Performance by any Party of its Obligations hereunder shall be
excused during any period of “Permitted Delay” as hereinafter defined. For purposes hereof,
Permitted Delay shall include delay beyond the reasonable control of the Party claiming the
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 403
15
delay (and despite the good faith efforts of such Party) including, but not limited to: (i) acts of
God, (ii) civil commotion and acts of terrorism, (iii) riots, (iv) strikes, picketing or other labor
disputes, (v) shortages of materials or supplies, (vi) damage to work in progress by reason of fire,
floods, earthquake or other casualties, (vii) failure, delay or inability of the other Party to act,
(viii) as to Avila Ranch only, the failure, delay or inability of City to provide adequate levels of
public services, facilities or infrastructure to the Property, (ix) as to City only, with respect to
completion of the Annual Review or processing applications for Approvals, the failure, delay or
inability of Avila Ranch to provide adequate information or substantiation as reasonably required
to complete the Annual Review or process applications for Approvals; (x) delay caused by
restrictions imposed or mandated by governmental entities other than the City; (xi) enactment of
conflicting state or federal laws or regulations, (xii) judicial decisions or similar legal incapacity
to perform, and (xiii) litigation brought by a third party attacking the validity of this
Development Agreement. Any Party claiming a Permitted Delay shall notify the other Party (or
Parties) in writing of such delay within 30 days after the commencement of the delay, which
notice (“Permitted Delay Notice”) shall include the estimated length of the Permitted Delay. A
Permitted Delay shall be deemed to occur for the time set forth in the Permitted Delay Notice
unless a Party receiving the Permitted Delay Notice objects in writing within 10 days after
receiving the Permitted Delay Notice. Upon such an objection, the Parties shall meet and confer
within 30 days after the date of the objection in a good faith effort to resolve their disagreement
as to the existence and length of the Permitted Delay. If no mutually acceptable solution can be
reached, either Party may take action as may be permitted under Article 12 above.
Section 15.07. Waiver
Section 15.07.1. Legal Rights. Avila Ranch acknowledges and agrees that the terms and
provisions of this Development Agreement specifically permit City in some instances to impose
requirements upon the Project that City would not otherwise be able to impose due to a lack of
nexus, rough proportionality or reasonable relationship between the Project and such requirement
or other reasons. To the extent any such requirement is imposed by City upon the Project
consistently with the terms and provisions of this Agreement, Avila Ranch waives any right to
challenge judicially the imposition of such requirement by City. Except as otherwise provided in
this Section 15.07.1, City shall comply with Applicable Law.
Section 15.07.2. Other Rights. While Section 15.07.1 prohibits Avila Ranch from
challenging judicially certain City requirements imposed consistently with this Agreement,
nothing in this Development Agreement shall be deemed to abrogate or limit, nor be deemed to
be a waiver by Avila Ranch of, any right of Avila Ranch (whether arising under the United States
Constitution, the California Constitution or otherwise) to request City to refrain from imposing
upon Avila Ranch, the Project or the Property any requirement that this Development Agreement
permits City so to impose or otherwise petition City with respect to any matter related to the
Project or the Property.
Section 15.08. Notices. Any notice or communication required hereunder between the Parties
must be in writing, and may be given either personally, by facsimile (with original forwarded
promptly by regular U.S. Mail) or by Federal Express or other similar courier promising
overnight delivery. If personally delivered, a notice or communication shall be deemed to be
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 404
15
given and received when delivered to the Party to whom it is addressed. If given by facsimile
transmission, a notice or communication shall be deemed to be given and received upon receipt
of the entire document by the receiving Party’s facsimile machine. Notices transmitted by
facsimile after 5:00 p.m. on a business day or on a Saturday, Sunday or holiday shall be deemed
to have been given and received on the next business day. If given by Federal Express or similar
courier, a notice or communication shall be deemed to be given and received when delivered as
shown on a receipt issued by the courier. Such notices or communications shall be given to the
Parties at their addresses set forth below:
If to City to: City Manager
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Telecopy/Facsimile: (805) 781-7109
With a courtesy copy to: City Attorney
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 95330
If to Avila Ranch to: Avila Ranch, LLC
C/O Andy Mangano, Managing Member
3596 South Broad Street, Suite 140
With a courtesy copy to: Meyers Nave
Attn: Jon Goetz
707 Wilshire Blvd., 24th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Telecopy/Facsimile: (213) 626-2906
Any Party may at any time, change its address or facsimile number for notice by giving 10 days’
written notice to the other.
Section 15.09. No Joint Venture or Partnership. Nothing in this Development Agreement or in
any document executed in connection with it shall be construed as creating a joint venture,
partnership or any agency relationship between City and Avila Ranch. City shall have no
responsibility for public improvements unless and until they are accepted by City in the manner
required by law.
Section 15.10. Severability. If any provision of this Development Agreement is held invalid,
void or unenforceable but the remainder of this Development Agreement can be enforced
without failure of material consideration to any Party, then this Development Agreement shall
not be affected and shall remain in full force and effect, unless amended by mutual consent of the
Parties.
Section 15.11. Estoppel Certificate. Any Party and any Mortgagee may, at any time, and from
time to time, deliver written notice to the other Party or Parties requesting such Party or Parties
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 405
15
to certify in writing that, to the knowledge of the certifying Party: (i) this Development
Agreement is in full force and effect and a binding obligation of the Parties, (ii) this
Development Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing, and if so
amended, identifying the amendments, and (iii) as of the date of the last Annual Review, the
requesting Party (or any Party specified by a Mortgagee) is not in default in the performance of
its obligations under this Agreement, or if in default, to describe therein the nature and amount of
any such defaults. A Party receiving a request hereunder shall execute and return such certificate
or give a written, detailed response explaining why it will not do so within 30 days of receipt of a
request. Each Party acknowledges that such a certificate may be relied upon by third parties
acting in good faith. A certificate provided by City establishing the status of this Development
Agreement shall be in recordable form and may be recorded at the expense of the recording
Party.
Section 15.12. Further Assurances. Each Party shall execute and deliver to the other Party or
Parties all such other further instruments and documents and take all such further actions as may
be reasonably necessary to carry out this Development Agreement and the Approvals and to
provide and secure to the other Party or Parties the full and complete enjoyment of its Rights
hereunder.
Section 15.13. Construction.
(a) All Parties have been represented by counsel in the preparation of this
Development Agreement and no presumption or rule that ambiguity shall be
construed against a drafting party shall apply to its interpretation or enforcement.
Captions on sections and subsections are provided for convenience only and shall
not be deemed to limit, amend or affect the meaning of the provision to which
they pertain. If any conflict appears between this Development Agreement and the
rules, regulations or official policies of City, the provisions of this Development
Agreement shall prevail and be deemed to have amended any such conflicting
rules, regulation or official policy as of the Effective Date.
(b) The Parties intend this Development Agreement to be consistent with the
requirements of Chapter 17.94 of the City’s zoning ordinance and it shall be
construed consistently with that intent. Should any conflict arise between this
Agreement and that Chapter 17.94 as it exists on the Effective Date, that Chapter
17.94 shall control.
Section 15.14. Other Miscellaneous Terms. In construing this Agreement, the singular includes
the plural; the masculine gender includes the feminine and the neuter; “shall” is mandatory;
“may” is permissive.
Section 15.15. Counterpart Execution. This Development Agreement may be executed in any
number of counterparts and shall be deemed duly executed when each of the Parties has executed
such a counterpart.
Section 15.16. Time. Time is of the essence of each and every provision of this Agreement.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 406
15
Section 15.17. Good Faith/Fair Dealing. The Parties agree that a covenant of good faith and fair
dealing shall apply to all actions of the Parties. As used herein, this covenant shall mean that the
Parties shall act reasonably, and no Party shall do anything which shall have the effect of
destroying or injuring the rights of any other Party to receive the benefit of its bargain in this
Agreement. Nothing in this Section 15.17 shall detract from the principle of Section 12.02.4 that
neither Party shall be entitled to damages for breach of this Agreement.
Section 15.18. Exhibits.
List of Exhibits:
A – Avila Ranch SP Site Plan
B – Legal Description
C – Financing Plan
D – Phasing Plan
E-1 – Backbone Water Infrastructure
E-2 – Backbone Sewer Infrastructure
E-3 – Backbone Recycled Water Infrastructure
E-4 –Backbone Drainage Infrastructure
F – Figure 5 of Conservation & Open Space Element
G – Affordable/Workforce Housing Plan
H – Water Improvements
I – Water Well Site Plan
J – Bicycle Improvements
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Development Agreement as
of the Execution Date above.
CITY:
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal
corporation
By: ______________________________________
Heidi Harmon, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: ______________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick, City Attorney
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 407
15
AVILA RANCH:
[Avila Ranch signature block]
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 408
15
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 409
15
Exhibit A
Avila Ranch Site Plan
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 410
15
AVILA RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLANMay 2, 2017#1011023A3Composite Site Plan0 75 150300SCALE: 1”=150’ (24”x36” sheet)REFER TO A6 FORADDITIONAL DETAILREFER TO A9 FORADDITIONAL DETAILREFER TO A8 FORADDITIONAL DETAILREFER TO A7 FORADDITIONAL DETAILREFER TO A5 FORADDITIONAL DETAILREFER TO A4 FORADDITIONAL DETAILExhibit 1Packet Pg 41115
AVILA RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLANMay 2, 2017#1011023A3Composite Site Plan0 75 150300SCALE: 1”=150’ (24”x36” sheet)REFER TO A6 FORADDITIONAL DETAILREFER TO A9 FORADDITIONAL DETAILREFER TO A8 FORADDITIONAL DETAILREFER TO A7 FORADDITIONAL DETAILREFER TO A5 FORADDITIONAL DETAILREFER TO A4 FORADDITIONAL DETAILExhibit 1Packet Pg 41215
Exhibit B
Legal Description
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 413
15
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 41415
Order Number: 4001-4978499 (LI)
Page Number: 7
First American Title
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Real property in the City of San Luis Obispo, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California,
described as follows:
PARCEL A: (A.P.N.: 053-259-004)
PARCEL 2 OF THAT CERTAIN CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE NO. COAL 01-0097, RECORDED
APRIL 9, 2003 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2003-035673 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
ALL THE REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, BEING A PORTION OF THE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-070932
AND A PORTION OF THE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-070933 SHOWN ON THE
MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 81 OF RECORD OF SURVEYS, PAGE 32 IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWESTERN CORNER OF THE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT
NO. 2000-070931 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, SAID CORNER ALSO BEING
A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF VACHELL LANE AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP;
THENCE IN A SOUTHERN DIRECTION ALONG THE WESTERN LINE OF SAID PARCEL AND SAID
CENTERLINE, SOUTH 00° 00' 11" WEST, 666.37 FEET TO THE MOST WESTERN CORNER
COMMON TO SAID PARCEL AND THE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-070930 OF
OFFICIAL RECORDS AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, SAID COMMON CORNER ALSO BEING ON SAID
CENTERLINE OF VACHELL LANE;
THENCE LEAVING SAID COMMON CORNER AND SAID POINT ON SAID CENTERLINE IN AN
EASTERN DIRECTION ALONG THE LINE COMMON TO SAID PARCELS AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP,
NORTH 89° 56' 56" EAST, 662.06 FEET TO THE MOST EASTERN CORNER COMMON TO SAID
PARCELS, SAID COMMON CORNER ALSO BEING ON A LINE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND
DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-070932 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AND WITNESSED BY A
5/8" REBAR AND CAP RCE 12545 AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, SAID COMMON CORNER ON SAID
LINE ALSO BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE CONTINUING IN AN EASTERN DIRECTION NORTH 89° 58' 55" EAST, 660.52 FEET TO A
POINT ON A LINE COMMON TO SAID PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-070932 OF
OFFICIAL RECORDS AND THE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2002-070933 OF
OFFICIAL RECORDS AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, SAID POINT BEING SOUTH 0° 08' 06" WEST,
666.27 FEET FROM THE MOST NORTHERN CORNER COMMON TO SAID PARCELS AND BEING
WITNESSED BY 5/8" REBAR AND CAP RCE 12545 AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP;
THENCE CONTINUING IN AN EASTERN DIRECTION NORTH 89° 56' 56" EAST, 183.40 FEET;
THENCE IN A SOUTHERN DIRECTION THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES:
SOUTH 00° 00' 00" EAST, 470.92 FEET;
SOUTH 41° 55' 49" WEST, 63.87 FEET;
THENCE IN A WESTERN DIRECTION NORTH 90° 00' 00" WEST, 801.27 FEET TO POINT ON A
LINE COMMON TO SAID PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-070930 OF OFFICIAL
RECORDS AND SAID PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-070932 OF OFFICIAL
RECORDS AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP;
THENCE IN A NORTHERN DIRECTION ALONG SAID COMMON LINE, NORTH 00° 00' 11" EAST,
518.07 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL A-1:
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 415
15
Order Number: 4001-4978499 (LI)
Page Number: 8
First American Title
AN EASEMENT FOR ACCESS OVER THE NORTHERLY 30 FEET OF PARCEL 1, AS SAID PARCELS
ARE SHOWN DESCRIBED IN CERTIFICATES OF COMPLIANCE'S RECORDED NOVEMBER 29, 2000
AS INSTRUMENT NOS. 2000-070930 AND 070931 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
PARCEL B:(APN: 053-259-005)
PARCEL 1 OF THAT CERTAIN CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE NO. COAL 01-0097, RECORDED
APRIL 9, 2003 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2003-035672 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
ALL THE REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, BEING A PORTION OF THE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-070932
AND A PORTION OF THE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-070933 OF OFFICIAL
RECORDS SHOWN ON THE MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 81 OF RECORD OF SURVEYS, PAGE 32, IN
THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWESTERN CORNER OF THE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT
NO. 2000-070931 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, SAID CORNER ALSO BEING
A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF VACHELL LANE AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP;
THENCE IN A SOUTHERN DIRECTION ALONG THE WESTERN LINE OF SAID PARCEL AND SAID
CENTERLINE, SOUTH 00° 00' 11" WEST, 666.37 FEET TO THE MOST WESTERN CORNER
COMMON TO SAID PARCEL AND THE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-070930 OF
OFFICIAL RECORDS AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, SAID COMMON CORNER ALSO BEING ON SAID
CENTERLINE OF VACHELL LANE;
THENCE LEAVING SAID COMMON CORNER AND SAID POINT ON SAID CENTERLINE IN AN
EASTERN DIRECTION ALONG THE LINE COMMON TO SAID PARCELS AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP,
NORTH 89° 56' 56" EAST, 662.06 FEET TO THE MOST EASTERN CORNER COMMON TO SAID
PARCELS, SAID COMMON CORNER ALSO BEING ON A LINE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND
DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-070932 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AND WITNESSED BY A
5/8" REBAR AND CAP RCE 12545 AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP;
THENCE CONTINUING IN AN EASTERN DIRECTION NORTH 89° 58' 55" EAST, 660.52 FEET TO A
POINT ON THE LINE COMMON TO SAID PARCEL OF LAND AND THE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN
DOCUMENT NO. 2000-070933 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, SAID POINT
BEING SOUTH 0° 08' 06" WEST, 666.27 FEET FROM THE MOST NORTHERN CORNER COMMON
TO SAID PARCELS AND BEING WITNESSED BY 5/8" REBAR AND CAP RCE 12545 AS SHOWN ON
SAID MAP;
THENCE CONTINUING IN AN EASTERN DIRECTION NORTH 89° 56' 56" EAST, 183.40 FEET;
THENCE IN A SOUTHERN DIRECTION THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES:
SOUTH 00° 00' 00" EAST, 470.92 FEET;
SOUTH 41° 55' 49" WEST, 63.87 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE CONTINUING IN A SOUTHERN DIRECTION THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND
DISTANCES:
SOUTH 10° 13' 54" WEST, 296.48 FEET;
SOUTH 51° 47' 47" WEST, 246.34 FEET;
SOUTH 37° 32' 27" WEST, 206.28 FEET;
SOUTH 55° 33' 57" WEST, 321.08 FEET;
SOUTH 75° 54' 21" WEST, 103.88 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERN LINE OF PARCEL
DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-070932 AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, SAID POINT ALSO
BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF BUCKLEY ROAD;
THENCE IN A WESTERN DIRECTION ALONG SAID SOUTHERN LINE AND SAID CENTERLINE,
SOUTH 89° 56' 32" WEST, 725.86 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERN CORNER OF SAID PARCEL,
SAID CORNER ALSO BEING THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION POINT OF SAID VACHELL LANE
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 416
15
Order Number: 4001-4978499 (LI)
Page Number: 9
First American Title
AND BUCKLEY ROAD AND WITNESSED BY A 5/8" REBAR AND CAP RCE 12545 AS SHOWN ON
SAID MAP;
THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERN LINE AND SAID CENTERLINE INTERSECTION POINT IN A
NORTHERN DIRECTION ALONG THE WESTERN LINE OF SAID PARCEL AND SAID CENTERLINE
OF VACHELL LANE, NORTH 00° 00' 10" EAST, 666.37 FEET TO THE MOST WESTERN CORNER
COMMON WITH SAID PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-070930 AS SHOWN ON
SAID MAP, SAID COMMON CORNER ALSO BEING ON SAID CENTERLINE OF VACHELL LANE;
THENCE LEAVING SAID COMMON CORNER ON SAID CENTERLINE IN AN EASTERN DIRECTION
ALONG A LINE COMMON TO SAID PARCELS, NORTH 89° 55' 51" EAST, 662.06 FEET TO THE
SOUTHEASTERN CORNER OF SAID PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-070930 AS
SHOWN ON SAID MAP, SAID CORNER BEING COMMON WITH A CORNER OF THE PARCEL OF
LAND DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-070932 AND WITNESSED BY A 5/8" REBAR AND
CAP RCE 12545 AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP;
THENCE LEAVING SAID COMMON CORNER IN A NORTHERN DIRECTION ALONG A LINE
COMMON TO SAID PARCELS, NORTH 00° 00' 11" EAST, 148.09 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT
BEING SOUTH 00° 00' 11" WEST, 518.07 FEET FROM THE MOST EASTERN CORNER COMMON
TO SAID PARCELS DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-070930 AND DOCUMENT NO. 2000-
070931 AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, SAID COMMON CORNER ALSO BEING ON A LINE OF THE
PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-070932 AND WITNESSED BY A 5/8"
REBAR AND CAP RCE 12545 AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP;
THENCE LEAVING SAID COMMON LINE OF SAID PARCELS, NORTH 90° 00' 00" EAST, 801.27
FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL C:(APN: 053-259-006)
PARCEL 4 OF THAT CERTAIN CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE NO. COAL 01-0097, RECORDED
APRIL 9, 2003 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2003-035675 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
ALL THE REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA BEING A PORTION OF THE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN INSTRUMENT NO. 2000-70932
AND A PORTION OF THE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-70933 AS SHOWN ON A
MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 81 OF RECORDS OF SURVEY AT PAGE 32 IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY CLERK/RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, AND LOT 27 AND LOT 28 OF THE HARFORD'S
AND CHAPMAN'S SUBDIVISION AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 76 OF RECORDS OF
SURVEY PAGE 06 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY CLERK/RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY; BEING
MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWESTERN CORNER OF THE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT
NO. 2000-70931 AS SHOWN ON THE MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 81 OF RECORDS OF SURVEY AT
PAGE 32 IN THE OFFICE OF COUNTY CLERK/RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, SAID CORNER ALSO
BEING A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF VACHELL LANE AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP; THENCE IN
AN EASTERN DIRECTION ALONG THE NORTHERN LINE OF SAID PARCEL THE FOLLOWING
COURSES AND DISTANCES: N89°58'01"E, 562.91 FEET; N89°58'01"E, 99.15 FEET TO THE MOST
NORTHERN CORNER COMMON TO SAID PARCEL AND THE PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN
DOCUMENT NO. 2000-70932 AND WITNESSED BY A 5/8" REBAR AND CAP RCE 12545 AS
SHOWN ON SAID MAP; THENCE CONTINUING IN AN EASTERN DIRECTION ALONG THE
NORTHERN LINE OF SAID PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-70932 AS SHOWN ON
SAID MAP THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES: N89°58'01"E, 422.12 FEET;
N89°59'00"E, 239.94 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHERN CORNER COMMON TO SAID PARCEL AND
THE PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-70933 AND WITNESSED BY A 5/8"
REBAR AND CAP RCE 12545 AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, SAID COMMON POINT ALSO BEING THE
TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERN LINE IN A SOUTHERN
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 417
15
Order Number: 4001-4978499 (LI)
Page Number: 10
First American Title
DIRECTION ALONG A LINE COMMON TO SAID PARCELS, S00°08'06"W, 666.27 FEET TO A
POINT, THENCE LEAVING SAID COMMON LINE IN AN EASTERN DIRECTION N89°56'56"E 183.40
FEET; THENCE IN A SOUTHERN DIRECTION THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES:
S00°00'00"E, 470.92 FEET; S41°55'49"W, 63.87 FEET; S10°13'54"W, 296.48 FEET;
S51°47'47"W, 246.34 FEET; S37°32'27"W, 206.28 FEET; S55°33'57"W, 321.08 FEET;
S75°54'21"W, 103.88 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERN LINE OF THE PARCEL DESCRIBED
IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-70932 AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE
CENTERLINE OF BUCKLEY ROAD; THENCE IN A EASTERN DIRECTION ALONG SAID SOUTHERN
LINE AND SAID CENTERLINE N89°56'32"E, 1913.13 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERN CORNER OF
SAID PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-70933 AND WITNESSED BY A 5/8" REBAR
AND CAP RCE 12545 AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, SAID CORNER ALSO BEING COMMON WITH THE
SOUTHWESTERN CORNER OF LOT 28 OF THE HARFORD'S AND CHAPMAN'S SUBDIVISION AND
ON THE CENTERLINE OF BUCKLEY ROAD AS SHOWN ON THE MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 76 OF
RECORDS OF SURVEY AT PAGE 06 IN THE OFFICE OF COUNTY CLERK/RECORDER; THENCE
CONTINUING IN AN EASTERN DIRECTION ALONG THE SOUTHERN LINE OF SAID LOT 28 AND
SAID CENTERLINE OF BUCKLEY ROAD, N89°56'15"E, 1338.18 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERN
CORNER OF SAID LOT 28 ON SAID CENTERLINE OF BUCKLEY ROAD AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP;
THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERN LINE OF LOT 28 AND SAID CENTERLINE OF BUCKLEY ROAD
IN A NORTHERN DIRECTION ALONG THE EASTERN LINE OF LOT 28 AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP
THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES: N00°07'52"W, 679.75 FEET; N00°07'50"W, 659.36
FEET TO THE MOST EASTERN CORNER COMMON TO SAID LOT 28 AND LOT 27 OF HARFORD'S
AND CHAPMAN'S SUBDIVISION AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP; THENCE CONTINUING IN A
NORTHERN DIRECTION ALONG THE EASTERN LINE OF LOT 27 AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP
N00°08'28"W, 659.15 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERN CORNER OF LOT 27 AND WITNESSED BY
1-1/4" IRON PIPE LS 3877 AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERN LINE OF
LOT 27 IN WESTERN DIRECTION ALONG THE NORTHERN LINE OF LOT 27 AND THE NORTHERN
LINE OF SAID PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2000-70933 AS SHOWN ON
THE MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 81 OF RECORDS OF SURVEY AT PAGE 32 IN THE OFFICE OF
COUNTY CLERK/RECORDED OF SAID COUNTY THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES:
S89°57'07"W, 908.62 FEET; S89°56'55"W, 54.74 FEET; S89°56'55"W, 268.94 FEET;
S89°55'27"W, 323.68 FEET; S89°54'15"W, 323.27 FEET; S89°59'01"W, 324.32 FEET;
S89°55'42"W, 323.55 FEET; S89°59'00"W, 84.04 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
APN: 053-259-004 and 053-259-005 and 053-259-006
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 418
15
Exhibit C
Financing Plan
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 419
15
Draft Report
Avila Ranch Financing Plan
Prepared for:
City of San Luis Obispo
Prepared by:
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
September 1, 2017
EPS #161181
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 420
15
Table of Contents
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................ 1
2. AVILA RANCH PROJECT OVERVIEW ............................................................................. 4
Avila Ranch Development Plan ................................................................................. 4
Project Planning and Regulation ............................................................................... 6
3. SERVICES AND IMPROVEMENTS TO BE FUNDED ................................................................ 7
Municipal Services .................................................................................................. 7
Infrastructure Improvements ................................................................................... 9
4. FUNDING AND FINANCING SOURCES ......................................................................... 11
Avila Ranch Funding Sources ................................................................................. 11
Economic Considerations ....................................................................................... 13
5. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES AND RELATED ACTIONS ...................................................... 14
Appendices
APPENDIX A Avila Ranch Services CFD Preliminary Rate Allocation, Local Area
Maintenance and Fiscal Mitigation Combined
APPENDIX B Avila Ranch Infrastructure Cost and Allocation Analysis
List of Tables
Table 1 Sources and Uses of Avila Ranch Infrastructure Financing ...................................... 2
Table 2 Summary of Avila Ranch Services CFD, Preliminary Rate Allocation
at Development Stabilization .............................................................................. 7
Table 3 Infrastructure Costs by Type of Infrastructure ...................................................... 9
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 421
15
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1 P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Financing Plan\Avila Ranch Draft Financing Plan_09-01-17.docx
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Avila Ranch Financing Plan (Financing Plan) identifies the municipal services and
infrastructure required to serve the Avila Ranch Project and describes how these will be funded
and/or financed over time. In addition to providing a general description of how required
municipal services and infrastructure will be funded, the Financing Plan provides a basis for
financial terms included in the Development Agreement and also for the Community Facilities
District Rate and Method of Apportionment.
The Avila Ranch Project will create a new City neighborhood located at the northeast corner of
Buckley Road and Vachell Lane. The Avila Ranch Development Plan allows up to 720 dwelling
units; a “Town Center” with 15,000 square feet of local-serving retail and office uses; 18 acres of
pocket parks, mini-parks and neighborhood parks; and 53 acres of open space, including riparian
corridors and farmed agricultural land. The Financing Plan addresses how the Avila Ranch Project
will pay for both municipal services and the infrastructure needed as the new neighborhood is
constructed and occupied by new residents and businesses.
Municipal services include both “Citywide” services and also local area maintenance services
provide by the City within the Project area. Services covered by the Financial Plan include
maintenance responsibilities for bike paths in the County, and fulfillment of airport noise
complaint mitigation agreed to between the Airport Land Use Commission, the project, and
the San Luis Obispo County Airport. The need for special funding for these services is
created, in part, by the Property Tax Sharing Agreement (adopted by the City and the
County in 2008) as a part of the area’s annexation to the City that provides no property tax
to the City.
Infrastructure needed for the Avila Ranch includes contributions to Citywide, Specific Plan
and other subarea development impact fee programs, mitigating impacts upon regional (off-
site) infrastructure, and funding “backbone” and subdivision-related improvements within the
Project area.
Funding for recurring municipal services will be derived from municipal taxes, service charges
and fees typically levied by the City augmented by a newly created special tax levied by a Mello-
Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) created for the Project Area.
Funding for infrastructure improvements will be derived from a variety of sources including
direct developer equity investment to build or contribute to building needed infrastructure
improvements. Table 1 presents the “sources and uses” of funding for the range of
infrastructure required.
The key source of infrastructure funding will be “developer equity;” it is estimated that the
developer will invest an estimated $57.0 million directly in project-related infrastructure,
including paying the City’s development impact fees, which will be updated as part of the
City’s development impact fee update.
Some of the developer’s investment in City or region-serving infrastructure will be subject to
private reimbursement from other benefitting properties or potential impact fee crediting
from the City because the developer is either “oversizing” the improvement relative to their
nexus-based “fair share” costs, correcting existing deficiencies, or advancing the
improvement before its actual need. Because Avila Ranch is located on the periphery of the
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 422
15
Draft Avila Ranch Financing Plan
September 1, 2017
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 2 P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Financing Plan\Avila Ranch Draft Financing Plan_09-01-17.docx
City, and timing of development is in advance of other development projects in the area,
existing infrastructure in both the City and County needs significant upgrading to serve the
needs of the Avila Ranch development.
Additionally, Avila Ranch is required to participate in the cost of future cumulative, regional
facilities that the development impacts. Participation in these projects will be through
mitigation fee payments or participation in City impact fee programs.
Table 1 Sources and Uses of Avila Ranch Infrastructure Financing
The City’s (or other development’s) share of City or region-serving infrastructure will be
funded by the City’s development impact fees, exactions on other developers, and other City
or regional funding sources.
The Avila Ranch CFD may provide an additional source for developer reimbursement and will
provide for capital replacement over time, while also providing funding for City services.
The preparation of the Financing Plan occurred through a cooperative effort between the
Developer team and City staff and their respective consultants, concurrently with preparation of
the Avila Ranch Development Plan and related entitlement documents including the Project
Environmental Impact Report, the Fiscal Impact Report, the Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map,
Development Plan and the Development Agreement.
As part of the preparation of the Financing Plan, care has been taken to assure that the financial
burdens upon the developer are consistent with the developer’s need for a reasonable return on
its equity investment, that CFD special taxes fall within the City’s related property tax burden
policy, and that the City has identified sources for its (or other development’s share of
infrastructure costs).
Type Description Developer or
Builder Equity
Developer Equity
subject to Credits or
Reimbursement
Community
Facilities District
Special Taxes
City or Regional
Sources
In‐tract Infrastructure Developer builds neighborhood
streets and facilities shown in
Subdivision Map
Backbone Infrastructure Developer builds major
infrastructure serving Specific
Plan Area shown in Subdivision
Map
Regional Infrastructure Nexus‐based share of major
infrastructure (EIR Mitigation,
etc.)
Regional Infrastructure Oversizing of major
infrastructure
Citywide or Areawide
Infrastructure included in
Development Impact Fee
Programs
Fees paid when building permits
issued
Infrastructure Item Funding Source
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 423
15
Draft Avila Ranch Financing Plan
September 1, 2017
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 3 P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Financing Plan\Avila Ranch Draft Financing Plan_09-01-17.docx
Finally, the specific actions required to implement and administer the financing mechanisms are
identified in Chapter 5, providing guidance as to how the City will proceed with implementation
following action on the Entitlement Documents.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 424
15
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4 P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Financing Plan\Avila Ranch Draft Financing Plan_09-01-17.docx
2. AVILA RANCH PROJECT OVERVIEW
The Avila Ranch Project will create a new City neighborhood within the boundaries of the Airport
Area Specific Plan (AASP), and will be regulated by the Development Plan and Specific Plan
adopted by the City. The Project site is approximately 150 contiguous acres located at the
northeast corner of Buckley Road and Vachell Lane, and includes three separate parcels: APN
053-259-006, APN 053-259-004, and APN 053-259-005.
Avila Ranch Development Plan
The Avila Ranch Development Plan (Development Plan) allows up to 720 dwelling units; a “Town
Center” with 15,000 square feet of local-serving retail and office uses; 18 acres of pocket parks,
mini-parks and neighborhood parks; and 53 acres of open space, including riparian corridors and
farmed agricultural land. These features are described in the Development Plan text and
appendices, and on pages 25-89 of the Development Plan. The Development Plan also calls for
community gardens, a bicycle and pedestrian pathway along the Tank Farm Creek riparian
corridor, and bike connections to the Chevron Project to the north and the Octagon Barn bike
facilities to the southwest. Another key improvement specified in the Development Plan is the
extension of Buckley Road to South Higuera Street, consistent with the City’s Circulation
Element.
Residential Uses
The Development Plan includes up to 720 residential units of varied density and type. The R-1
units are proposed to be typical single-family homes with front-loaded and alley-loaded garages.
The R-2 portions of the development obtain access from alleys and common driveways limiting
direct vehicular access points to residential streets. This circulation design allows many of these
R-2 units to front on open space areas or the internal residential collector streets, resulting in
attractive landscaped setbacks rather than a series of driveways. These project circulation
features along with attention to enhancing streetscapes and corridors with landscaping, utilizing
interesting architectural features such as front porches, and maintaining tree-covered sidewalks,
and unobstructed views of surrounding open spaces provide the underlying framework for
creating a walkable and interconnected neighborhood. The R-3 and R-4 units are included at
locations that take advantage of adjacent open spaces, and/or proximity to local jobs, transit,
and shopping.
Table 2 Avila Ranch Development Plan Residential Use Summary
Residential Category Quantity
Single Family R-1 101
Single Family R-2 297
Single Family R-3 197
Single Family R-4 125
Total Residential Units 720
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 425
15
Draft Avila Ranch Financing Plan
September 1, 2017
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 5 P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Financing Plan\Avila Ranch Draft Financing Plan_09-01-17.docx
Neighborhood Commercial Uses
The Neighborhood Commercial area will allow for 15,000 square feet of building area. It will
serve as a focal point and activity center for the project, and will provide shared parking for
nearby open space and parks uses, bicycle parking and storage facilities, public plazas for
gatherings and special events, and transit connections. Because of the nearby retail shopping
center on South Higuera Street, this neighborhood center will focus on small-scale convenience
items, and possibly provide some professional service office space.
Parks and Recreation Uses
The Development Plan designates 18 acres of parkland, which exceeds the General Plan parkland
requirement of 16.5 acres (10 acres per 1,000 population per the Parks and Recreation element)
by 1.5 acres. Proposed facilities include a centrally located 9.5-acre neighborhood park as well as
mini-parks, pocket parks, and community gardens. The “Designated Park” area does not include
passive open space and recreational trails, which are counted as part of the “designated Open
Space.” The neighborhood park will be linked to surrounding neighborhoods, the Tank Farm
Creek riparian corridor and to the regional bikeway system by separated Class I bike paths and
Class II bike lanes, and special pedestrian/bike bridges over Tank Farm Creek.
According to the concept plan approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission, the
neighborhood park will include group BBQs, basketball courts, tot lots, baseball diamonds, soccer
fields, pickle ball courts, tennis courts, a dog park, a skate park, and a community meeting
pavilion area. Eight mini-parks and a pocket park will also serve the neighborhoods. Each will be
one-half to 2.5 acres in size and provide facilities such as community gardens, tot lots, passive
play areas, BBQ and picnic areas, basketball courts, community gardens, dog park, and PC1 - 15
landscaping. These mini- and pocket parks will serve residents within a two-block radius and fill
the few “gaps” in the coverage for the neighborhood park facilities. The mini-parks will be
phased with adjacent residential development to provide park facilities for future residents near
their homes.
Open Space Uses
The Open Space designation is intended to preserve undeveloped or minimally developed land
for preservation of natural resources, production agriculture and public safety. The Land Use and
Circulation Element (“LUCE”) requires 50 percent of the site area to be dedicated as open space,
with up to one-third of that amount allowed to be provided offsite. For this 150-acre project site,
there would be a minimum requirement of 50 acres of onsite open space, with the remainder to
be provided offsite. As proposed, there are 53 acres of open space proposed onsite, which does
not include parks and recreational facilities. The balance of the required open space, 22 acres,
will be provided offsite through open space or agricultural conservation easements, or through
the development impact fee established by the AASP. The Avila Ranch Development Plan
designates the following specific areas for open space:
Planning area creeks, to protect and enhance habitat and recreational values;
Agricultural buffer areas outside of the URL along the Buckley Road frontage and the easterly
project boundary;
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 426
15
Draft Avila Ranch Financing Plan
September 1, 2017
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 6 P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Financing Plan\Avila Ranch Draft Financing Plan_09-01-17.docx
The ACOS Reservation Space in conformance with the ALUP; and
Tank Farm Creek corridor as a linear park, bikeway and passive recreation areas.
Project Planning and Regulation
The Avila Ranch Project has been designed to be consistent with the City’s General Plan policy
framework. The Project, however, will require amendment to the Airport Area Specific Plan, to
convert the area from its present commercial designation to a primarily residential area. The
foundational and parallel entitlement documents include the following:
General Plan
Zoning Ordinance
Airport Area Specific Plan
Avila Ranch Development Plan
Avila Ranch Environmental Impact Report
Avila Ranch Fiscal Impact Report
Avila Ranch Development Agreement
Tentative Vesting Subdivision Map and Conditions
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 427
15
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 7 P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Financing Plan\Avila Ranch Draft Financing Plan_09-01-17.docx
3. SERVICES AND IMPROVEMENTS TO BE FUNDED
The Financing Plan addresses how the Avila Ranch Project will pay for both municipal services
and the infrastructure needed as the new neighborhood is constructed and occupied by new
residents and businesses.
Municipal Services
Municipal services include both “Citywide” services and also local area maintenance services
provide by the City within the Project area. The need for special funding for these services is
created, in part, by the Property Tax Sharing Agreement (adopted by the City and the County in
February 2008 as a part of a larger annexation of Airport Area Specific Plan properties) that
provides no property tax to the City. The anticipated future municipal services costs have been
calculated based on a fiscal impact analysis of the Avila Ranch Project and also a detailed
assessment of local area maintenance requirements prepared by City staff in collaboration with
the Developer team. Table 2 provides a summary of these municipal services costs which are
further documented in Appendix A – Municipal Services Cost Worksheet.
Table 2 Summary of Avila Ranch Services CFD, Preliminary Rate Allocation at
Development Stabilization
Citywide Services
The Avila Ranch Project is unique from a fiscal perspective given the fact that the Property Tax
Sharing Agreement (with San Luis Obispo County pursuant to Revenue and Tax Code Section 99)
adopted when the area was annexed to the City provides no transfer of property taxes to the
City. This Agreement was adopted by the City because the area at that time was designated in
the City’s General Plan for commercial and industrial uses and these uses were assumed to
generate other taxes (sales and use taxes, etc.) that would offset the cost of providing municipal
services.
The Tax Sharing Agreement follows the framework established in the 1998 Master Agreement
and provides that within the AASP annexation area, no annual property tax increment shall be
transferred from the County to the City, and all existing and future sales tax accruing from
annexed area within the Airport Area are to accrue to the City.
Item Local Area
Maintenance [1]
Fiscal
Mitigation
City CFD
Admin [2]
Contract CFD
Admin [2]Total
Annual Costs in CFD at Buildout $1,168,813 $414,156 $97,500 $33,609 $1,714,079
Annual Cost per Unit at Buildout [3]$1,623 $575 $135 $47 $2,381
Avg. Cost per Unit per Month at Buildout $135 $48 $11 $4 $198
Average Annual Tax Burden 0.28% 0.10% 0.02% 0.01% 0.41%
[1] Includes City and County direct costs, and Transportation and Leisure, Cultural & Social Services operating costs.
[3] Reflects development of 720 units. Does not currently include commercial.
[2] City CFD Admin reflects an FTE to oversee CFD. Contract CFD Admin reflects a 2% charge; to be confirmed.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 428
15
Draft Avila Ranch Financing Plan
September 1, 2017
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 8 P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Financing Plan\Avila Ranch Draft Financing Plan_09-01-17.docx
Also, there was a presumption that, in the aggregate and after factoring in existing and
projected sales tax revenues, the 2008 620-acre annexation would be fiscally positive. For
example, the City and County analysis showed that annexation of the Airport Area would be
fiscally beneficial to the City and result in an immediate fiscal "net" revenue (operating revenues
less operating costs) of approximately $450,000 upon annexation of the area (largely due to the
existing sales base in the area), increasing to $750,000 upon build-out. At the time of
annexation in 2008, there were existing sales tax revenues of $300,000 annually in the annexed
area, according to the February 2008 Staff Report. Nevertheless, the City and EPS deemed it
prudent to evaluate the Avila Ranch project on its own to guard against any future volatility in
the sales tax revenues and in light of the fact that a significant shift in land use was being
considered related to the rezoning of the Avila Ranch property from business park to residential
uses.
The Fiscal Impact Analysis prepared for the Avila Ranch Project documented municipal service
costs and also the municipal revenues that the Project area is expected to generate as it is
constructed and occupied.1 Key citywide services include the following:
General Government
Police protection
Fire protection
Transportation
Leisure, Cultural and Social Services (includes Park and Landscape Maintenance)
Community Development
Citywide services provided to the Avila Ranch area are estimated to cost some $1.5 million
annually when the Project area is fully developed, before accounting for offsetting municipal
revenue. The net expenditures, after accounting for revenues and off-setting local area
maintenance services, are estimated to cost the City approximately $414,000 per year.2
Local Area Maintenance
The Avila Ranch Specific Plan includes a high standard of infrastructure and public facilities that
will require maintenance. City staff and the Developer team have collaborated to develop a
detailed assessment of the maintenance requirements of the infrastructure facilities, as
documented in Appendix A.
Local area maintenance services provided to the Avila Ranch area are estimated to cost
approximately $1.1 million annually when the Project area is fully developed. Key services
include the following:
Maintenance of parks and greenbelts
Maintenance of residential collectors and arterials, including lighting
Maintenance of the Venture Drive bridge over Tank Farm Creek
1 Avila Ranch Fiscal Impact Analysis, ADE, April 2017
2 Fiscal expenditures reflect the revised fire costs and Avila Ranch’s share. The fire costs were revised
subsequent to the ADE analysis referenced above.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 429
15
Draft Avila Ranch Financing Plan
September 1, 2017
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 9 P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Financing Plan\Avila Ranch Draft Financing Plan_09-01-17.docx
Maintenance of storm drains
The Buckley Road bike path (County) and County Airport Sound Abatement services
Infrastructure Improvements
Infrastructure and municipal facilities required to serve the Project include “Backbone” and “In-
tract” Infrastructure as well as “City-serving or regional infrastructure” which is generally located
beyond the Project boundary but require improvement (at least in part) due to development of
the Project area. These future municipal services costs were estimated by conducting a fiscal
impact analysis of the Avila Ranch Project and also a detailed assessment of local area
maintenance requirements prepared by City staff in collaboration with the Developer team.
Table 3 provides a summary of these infrastructure costs which are further documented in
Appendix B – Project Infrastructure Cost Worksheet.
Table 3 Infrastructure Costs by Type of Infrastructure
Backbone and In-tract Infrastructure
The Avila Ranch Project, proposed for a largely undeveloped area, will require the full
complement of local infrastructure to serve the Project area including streets and in-street
utilities, drainage, parks and trails, and bikeways. These improvements are typically divided into
“in-tract” improvements, such as neighborhood streets and utilities, and “backbone”
improvements, including collector streets and public facilities (such as parks) that serve the
whole project area.
Key Backbone Improvements include the following:
Buckley Road Extension from Vachell Lane to South Higuera Street
Venture Road Residential Collector
Tank Farm Creek and Buckley Frontage Bike Path
Type of Infrastructure Total Project
Costs [1]
Transportation $37,234,884
Parks $6,645,500
Water and Sewer $427,500
Public Safety $1,346,250
Intract Improvements $20,896,000
Offsite Improvements $552,000
Total Infrastructure Expenses $67,102,134
Sources: Avila Ranch LLC; City of San Luis Obispo.
[1] Total Project Infrastructure costs whether Avila Ranch is building or
paying fees.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 430
15
Draft Avila Ranch Financing Plan
September 1, 2017
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 10 P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Financing Plan\Avila Ranch Draft Financing Plan_09-01-17.docx
Horizon Lane Collector south of Suburban
Earthwood Collector
Various Transit Stops
Improvements to City-serving and Regional Infrastructure
The Avila Ranch project, as it develops, will contribute to the demand for City-serving and
region-serving infrastructure improvements, including the following:
Improvements related to Buckley Road along the Project’s frontage
Vachell Lane improvements
Various sidewalk improvements
Intersection improvements at Tank Farm Road/South Higuera and South Street/South
Higuera
Horizon Lane south of Tank Farm
Bob Jones Trail Bike Path
Vachell Lane Widening
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 431
15
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 11 P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Financing Plan\Avila Ranch Draft Financing Plan_09-01-17.docx
4. FUNDING AND FINANCING SOURCES
Avila Ranch Funding Sources
Developer Equity
Developer equity will be the primary source of funding for infrastructure improvements needed
to serve the Avila Ranch area. Developer (or builder) equity will pay impact and mitigation fees,
fund construction of all “in-tract” and “backbone” improvements located within the Avila Ranch
area, fund the Project’s “fair share” allocation of off-site “regional” improvements, of which some
will be subject to fee credits, and advance funding over and above the “fair share” costs, a
portion of which will be subject to reimbursement by the City. It is estimated that total developer
equity necessary to fund the backbone and in-tract infrastructure and region-serving
infrastructure (including the amount beyond the nexus-based “fair share” amount) is $57.0
million.
Participation in Area and Citywide Development Impact Fee Programs
The Avila Ranch Project will be subject to the City’s various development impact fee programs,
including the existing Airport Area Specific Plan fees, the Citywide Traffic Impact fee, LOVR
interchange reimbursement fee, special ad hoc fees for environmental mitigation, and water and
sewer connection fees as levied at the time building permits are issued. This obligation typically
involves paying the impact fees at the time individual building permits are issued. Additional fees
are charged by regional agencies including the local school districts. It is important to note that
the current AASP does not include fee categories for residential or retail land uses. During 2017
the City engaged in a comprehensive effort to update and reorganize its impact fees. This update
includes the recalculation of existing impact fees (excluding the water and sewer connection
charges), the consideration of fees for public safety and other community facilities, and the
consolidation and redistribution of cost items included in the City’s area impact fee programs.
The AASP impact fee program will need to be revised or replaced to incorporate appropriate fee
levels for the Avila Ranch project.
Construction and dedication of “in-tract” improvements
As is common practice, the developer of Avila Ranch will build in-tract and backbone
infrastructure within, and on the periphery of, the Avila Ranch area to the specification of the
City as documented in the Tentative Subdivision Map and subsequently dedicate these
improvements and underlying lands to the City.
“Fair Share” allocation of other improvement costs
The development of the Avila Ranch Project will increase traffic on existing roadways and create
demand for other City/County infrastructure. Many of these improvements are facilities located
beyond the project boundary. This additional demand was studied in detail as part of the
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and the mitigation measures identified to maintain policy-
based levels of service on these facilities. The mitigation program includes Avila Ranch
completing improvements along Higuera Road, extending Buckley Road from Vachell to Higuera,
as well as improving Buckley as it fronts the development, among others. The EIR requires these
improvements to be installed ahead of need and improved to the 2035 General Plan buildout
configuration to the extent feasible. Consequently, the project will construct improvements that
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 432
15
Draft Avila Ranch Financing Plan
September 1, 2017
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 12 P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Financing Plan\Avila Ranch Draft Financing Plan_09-01-17.docx
are necessary to correct existing deficiencies and to accommodate traffic and other impacts
above and beyond its own impacts.
Funding regional improvements above the “Fair Share” allocation
The Avila Ranch developer has offered to provide funding for regional improvements beyond the
Project boundary, and beyond its fair share to build out the improvement to their ultimate
configuration to maximum extent feasible. While not expressly obligated to do so, such additional
contribution assures that the regional improvements will be built in a timely and efficient
manner, benefiting the developer, the City, and the County. Consequently, there are no
improvements that are being funded directly by the City or others. Funding for the costs above
the project’s fair share will come from future development impact fees generated by the project
itself in the form of AASP, citywide and LOVR impact fees, direct contribution from other projects
benefiting from those improvements, and fees generated elsewhere in the City and AASP. In
some cases, although a project is eligible for reimbursement, Avila Ranch will carry the full cost
burden because a facility is not included in one of the funding mechanisms mentioned above.
Development Impact Fee or Exaction Revenue
Insofar as other developers/builders are obligated to pay their “fair share” of infrastructure
improvements by paying the Citywide and area development impact fees or additional nexus-
based “exactions,” a portion of this revenue will be used for reimbursement for investments
above “fair share” made by the Avila Ranch developer (or other nearby developers that may
advance funding for construction of fee-funded facilities and improvements).
Community Facilities District
The owners of the property have requested and the City has tentatively agreed to form a
Community Facilities District (CFD) subject to Council action for the Avila Ranch area. Such a
CFD, pursuant to the Community Facilities District Act of 1982, allows for the levy of a special
tax on real property located within the designated boundary of the CFD for a range of purposes
including providing funding for municipal services, local area maintenance, and infrastructure. It
is common for the special taxes to be used to service municipal bonds issued for the CFD to fund
new development-related infrastructure; however, the CFD for Avila Ranch will be used to fund
ongoing City services and infrastructure maintenance as described below. Usage of this
financing mechanism is warranted for a number of reasons, including that the project provides
significantly greater amount of parks space, open space, bike trails, and other amenities than
typical of other developments in the City.
The Avila Ranch CFD, as currently envisioned, will provide funding for City service costs not
covered by existing taxes (i.e., “fiscal mitigation”) and also for funding maintenance of municipal
improvements located within the Avila Ranch area. The CFD may also be used as a source of
funding to meet the City’s obligation to reimburse developer funding of regional improvements
above “fair share” and also as a source for repair and replacement of local area serving facilities
(e.g., local streets, drainage and flood protection facilities, and landscaping).
Other Funding Sources
Funding for the City’s share of regional improvement costs may be derived from a variety of
sources typically used by the City to fund infrastructure, including proceeds from federal, State,
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 433
15
Draft Avila Ranch Financing Plan
September 1, 2017
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 13 P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Financing Plan\Avila Ranch Draft Financing Plan_09-01-17.docx
and regional grants. However, no grants are currently identified and use of grant funding require
prevailing wage.
Economic Considerations
Project Feasibility
As a part of achieving new development as envisioned in the City’s General Plan and specified in
specific plans or other zoning actions, it is in the interest of the City to cooperate with developers
and builders to promote feasibility of new development, i.e., that new development generates
economic returns sufficient to attract necessary private equity investment and commercial
lending. While market conditions can constrain investment at low points in the business cycle,
over the longer terms the type and amount of development authorized by the City and the costs
imposed for needed infrastructure and facilities should balance so as not to unnecessarily impede
desired development.
Financial Burden Measures
A variety of methods are used to determine the cost burden placed upon new development
associated with providing the necessary infrastructure including in-tract and backbone
infrastructure improvements and contributions to City-serving infrastructure through payment of
impact fees or other mechanisms. The Avila Ranch Project, given the real estate values created
and the total cost of infrastructure improvements, is shown to fall within reasonable levels of
financial burden.
Incidence of Burdens
Depending upon the type of funding relied upon to develop a project, the “incidence” of the
burden (who pays?) varies. Equity provided by the developer for project costs including
contributions to public infrastructure and facilities is a burden on the equity investors in the
project. Special taxes or assessments on real property are a burden on the local homeowners or
businesses subject to these taxes or assessments. Excise taxes (e.g., sales taxes, utility taxes,
transient occupancy taxes) are a burden on those engaging in purchases of these goods. The
City has established CFD policies which place a 1.8 percent “cap” on property tax burdens. The
Avila Ranch project is located in County Tax Rate Area (TRA) 003-022 which has a total current
tax rate of 1.07225 percent,3 including the basic 1 percent rate plus “overrides” related to voter-
approved general obligation bonds and special taxes or assessments. Future additional tax
overrides may also be approved in the future.
In addition to this policy “cap,” market conditions also influence the amount of tax levied. For
example, an increase in the amount of taxes levied on real property will affect a home buyers’
ability to qualify for mortgage financing and in turn, the price they are willing to pay for the new
home. In the City of San Luis Obispo, Home Owners Associations’ burdens range from
approximately $100 per month (peak phases of Serra Meadows, Toscana, Trillium) to a high of
$239 per month at Avivo, a full service condominium project that provides structural
replacement, common open space, and community buildings.
3 San Luis Obispo County Auditor-Controller.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 434
15
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 14 P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Financing Plan\Avila Ranch Draft Financing Plan_09-01-17.docx
5. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES AND RELATED ACTIONS
The Financing Plan will be implemented concurrent with approval and subsequent development
of the Avila Ranch area. Key components of implementation will include the following.
Development Agreement
The Entitlement Documents for the Avila Ranch Project will include a Development Agreement, a
contract between the Developer and the City that vests the entitlement over a long term (15 or
20 years) as consideration for extraordinary benefits to be received by the City for granting the
vesting. The Avila Ranch Development Agreement largely provides a framework and security for
funding the regional infrastructure improvements and the related reimbursement to the
Developer for investments that exceed the “fair share” cost allocation for these improvements.
Development Impact Fees and Exactions
The Avila Ranch Project development will be subject to the City’s development impact fees as
they will exist at the time building permits are issued. At the present time, the Project is subject
to the City’s water and wastewater connection fees, transportation impact fee, Airport Area
Impact Fees, Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Fee, parks fees, and public art in lieu fees.
Concurrent with consideration of the Avila Ranch Project, the City is engaged in an effort to
update its development impact fees, potentially resulting in the inclusion of new facilities in the
Citywide fees and also reallocation of infrastructure items among the area impact fees and the
Citywide fees. The Project will also be responsible for building or funding improvements, termed
“exactions,” as specified in the Final Environmental Impact Report. The Development Agreement
will include further specification regarding the Project’s development impact fee and exaction
obligations.
Fee Obligations
Subject to the terms included in the Development Agreement, new development in the Avila
Ranch Project will pay the fees existing at the time building permits are issued, i.e., be subject to
the fees that result from the Development Impact Fee Update.
Reimbursement Agreement(s)
The Avila Ranch Development Agreement will enable and specify the terms and security for
reimbursement agreements that will be created for each of the individual regional improvements.
Presently, reimbursement agreements are expected for the following off-site, Citywide or
regional facilities:
Suburban Widening east of Earthwood
Horizon Collector south of Suburban to Avila Ranch with right-of-way
Source of Reimbursement Agreement funding
A number of infrastructure improvements are specified in the City’s development impact fee
programs and Environmental Impact Fee mitigation measures that the Avila Ranch Developer will
fund or build beyond its “fair share” allocation of cost. These contributions will be eligible for
reimbursement from fees paid by other developers benefiting from these improvements or from
other sources.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 435
15
Draft Avila Ranch Financing Plan
September 1, 2017
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 15 P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Financing Plan\Avila Ranch Draft Financing Plan_09-01-17.docx
Projects Eligible for Private Reimbursement
Two projects have been identified that may be eligible for private reimbursement. Alternatively,
these improvement may be incorporated into the updated Impact Fee Program.
Buckley Road Extension Bike Path
Vachell/Buckley Intersection Control (if installed)
Projects Eligible for Impact Fee Credits
Insofar as the Developer builds or directly funds infrastructure improvements that are included in
one of the City’s development impact fees (e.g., Airport Area, Traffic Impact Fee, etc.), the
Developer is eligible to receive a dollar-for-dollar credit against its fee obligations for these
improvements. The Development Agreement will specify the precise terms of these fee credits.
South Higuera/South Street NB RT Lane (may occur as a private reimbursement)
Tank Farm/Higuera SB LT and WB LT
South Higuera Sidewalk
Tank Farm Creek Bike Path and Bridges
Community Facilities District
A CFD, as enabled by the Community Facilities District Act of 1982, allows a local jurisdiction to
levy a special tax within a specified area to pay for public services and/or infrastructure needed
within the area. Over the past three decades, CFDs have become a common mechanism for
cities to fund services and finance development-related infrastructure. The levy of any special tax
and any related bond issuance is subject to voter approval, if the area is inhabited approval by
two-thirds of the voters in the area is required. If fewer than 12 voters are located in the area,
approval by the landowners is required (Avila Ranch area currently has no residential uses).
City Policy and Approach
The City of San Luis Obispo has not, before this Avila Ranch Project, created any CFDs. The City
has, in anticipation of Avila Ranch and other development-related financing requirements,
adopted policies and procedures related to CFDs that guide formation of the Avila Ranch CFD. A
key policy adopted by the City is that “aggregate” property tax burden within the City should not
exceed 1.8 percent of assessed value annually.
Funding Capacity
The funding capacity of a CFD is based upon the type and amount of development within the
bounds of the CFD and the amount of the special tax levied against each parcel. Special taxes
levied as part of a CFD must clearly specify a “rate and method of apportionment” which defines
the amount of the tax levied on each parcel and how the amount may be increased (indexed)
over time to account for inflationary cost increases. Generally, CFD special taxes are limited to a
fraction of the 1 percent property tax allowed under Article 13 A of the State Constitution.
The funding capacity of the Avila Ranch Project, taking account of the market value of
development being created, the existing general and special taxes, and the City’s established
special tax “cap” of 1.8 percent, is estimated to be approximately $2.9 million annually. Given
market conditions and maximum equivalent HOA rates in the community of $200 per month, and
the significant amount of smaller multifamily units, the aggregate tax burden on residential units
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 436
15
Draft Avila Ranch Financing Plan
September 1, 2017
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 16 P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Financing Plan\Avila Ranch Draft Financing Plan_09-01-17.docx
may limit this capacity to below this maximum, resulting in a funding capacity of approximately
$1.7 million per year.
Special Tax Components
The Avila Ranch CFD is primarily being formed to provide a source for funding Citywide services
and the maintenance and replacement of public facilities and infrastructure within the Project
area. The “Rate and Method of Apportionment” that will be developed as part of CFD adoption
will specify how the Avila Ranch special taxes shall be allocated to these uses. Based upon
current cost analysis, the allocation of CFD special tax funding at full development of the Avila
Ranch Project area would be as follows:
Citywide Services $414,000
Local Area Maintenance (City) $1.1 million
County Services $66,000
Capital Reimbursement (TBD)
CFD Administration (City) $97,500
CFD Administration (Contract) $33,500
CFD Administration
The City will be required to administer the CFD from year to year. Given the nature of the special
tax (a fixed tax rate plus an index-based inflator), this administration is quite simple, involving
sending documentation to the County Tax Collector as the annual property tax bills are prepared.
This service is typically provided by consultants to the City and costs approximately $10,000 to
$20,000 per year depending upon the size of the CFD and complexity of the special tax. There
will be some additional administration required by the Finance Department to control CFD funds
consistent with the terms of the Rate and Method of Apportionment and related financial
reporting (in the CAFR, etc.).
Formation Process
It is anticipated that the CFD formation will be initiated at the time the Avila Ranch Entitlement
Documents are considered for adoption by the City Council. The following steps must be
accomplished as part of the CFD formation process:
Develop CFD concept and document costs to be funded
Map CFD Boundary and conduct voter determination (occupied area or unoccupied?)
Prepare Rate and Method of Apportionment
Adopt Resolution of Intention
Adopt Resolution of Formation
Conduct election (or obtain landowner approval)
Adopt Ordinance to Levy Special Tax
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 437
15
APPENDIX A:
Avila Ranch Services CFD Preliminary Rate Allocation,
Local Area Maintenance, and Fiscal Mitigation Combined
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 438
15
Table A-1Summary of Avila Ranch Services CFD Preliminary Rate Allocation at Development StabilizationItemLocal Area Maintenance [1]Fiscal MitigationCity CFD Admin [2]Contract CFD Admin [2]TotalAnnual Costs in CFD at Buildout$1,168,813 $414,156 $97,500 $33,609 $1,714,079Annual Cost per Unit at Buildout [3]$1,623$575$135$47 $2,381Avg. Cost per Unit per Month at Buildout$135$48$11$4$198Average Annual Tax Burden0.28% 0.10% 0.02% 0.01%0.41%[1] Includes City and County direct costs, and Transportation and Leisure, Cultural & Social Services operating costs.[3] Reflects development of 720 units. Does not currently include commercial.[2] City CFD Admin reflects an FTE to oversee CFD. Contract CFD Admin reflects a 2% charge; to be confirmed. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 9/1/2017P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\CFD\Avila Ranch CFD Cost Review 8-01-2017.xlsxExhibit 1Packet Pg 43915
Table A-2Avila Ranch Services CFD Preliminary Rate Allocation, Local Area Maintenance and Fiscal Mitigation CombinedAnnual Revenue/ExpenditureTotal 1 2 3 4 5 6Per Unit (720 Units)Units179292141971010Cumulative Units 179208422619720720Duration/Years30.5222City ComponentLocal Area MaintenanceAnnual Local Area Maintenance Costs($1,103,267) ($319,764) ($100,763) ($77,667) ($365,700) ($239,373)$0($1,532)CFD Project Delivery (Admin. Costs)($97,500)($45,000)($6,752)($5,204)($24,504)($16,040)$0($135)Total LAM Component($1,200,767) ($364,764) ($107,515) ($82,871) ($390,204) ($255,412)$0($1,668)Fiscal MitigationAnnual Fiscal Revenues $850,605 $226,093 $37,043 $226,790 $212,760 $141,120 $6,797 $1,181Annual Fiscal Expenditures $1,529,825 $377,472 $61,155 $451,280 $415,430 $212,987 $11,500 $2,125less Park and Landscape Maintenance$213,528 $42,706 $0 $40,037 $130,786 $0 $0 $297less Transportation$51,536$12,565$2,059$15,334$13,985$7,170$423$72Revised Subtotal, Fiscal Expenditures$1,264,761 $322,201 $59,096 $395,909 $270,659 $205,817 $11,077 $1,757Net Fiscal Impact($414,156) ($96,108) ($22,053) ($169,119) ($57,899) ($64,697) ($4,280) ($575)CFD CalculationsTotal City Costs in CFD (LAM and Fiscal)$1,614,923 $460,872 $129,568 $251,990 $448,104 $320,109$4,280 $2,243Administrative Charge (at 2%)$32,298$9,217$2,591$5,040$8,962$6,402$86$45Total CFD Costs (Annual)$1,647,221 $470,090 $132,159 $257,030 $457,066 $326,512$4,366 $2,288Cumulative CFD Costs$470,090 $602,249 $859,279 $1,316,344 $1,642,856 $1,647,222Cumulative Annual CFD Cost per DU$2,626$2,895$2,036$2,127$2,282$2,288Cumulative Monthly CFD Cost per DU$219$241$170$177$190$191 $191Development Value by Phase$414,360,200 $118,050,500 $19,125,500 $99,320,500 $100,174,500 $77,689,200 $4,500,000Cumulative Development Value$118,050,500 $137,176,000 $236,496,500 $336,671,000 $414,360,200 $418,860,200 $581,750Average Annual CFD Tax Burden by Phase0.40%0.44%0.36%0.39%0.40%0.39% 0.39%County ComponentLocal Area Maintenance($65,546) ($13,425) ($13,721) ($16,050) ($14,775) ($7,575)$0($91)Combined CFD CalculationsTotal Costs (with County) in CFD$1,680,469 $474,297 $143,289 $268,040 $462,879 $327,684$4,280 $2,334Administrative Charge (at 2%)$33,609$9,486$2,866$5,361$9,258$6,554$86$47Total CFD Costs (Annual)$1,714,079 $483,783 $146,155 $273,401 $472,136 $334,238$4,366 $2,381Cumulative CFD Costs$483,783 $629,938 $903,339 $1,375,475 $1,709,713 $1,714,079Cumulative Annual CFD Cost per DU$2,702.70 $3,028.55$2,141$2,222$2,375$2,381Cumulative Monthly CFD Cost per DU$225$252$178$185$198$198 $198Development Value by Phase$414,360,200 $118,050,500 $19,125,500 $99,320,500 $100,174,500 $77,689,200 $4,500,000Cumulative Development Value$118,050,500 $137,176,000 $236,496,500 $336,671,000 $414,360,200 $418,860,200 $581,750Average Annual CFD Tax Burden by Phase0.41%0.46%0.38%0.41%0.41%0.41% 0.41%Cost Allocation per Unit per Month$225.23 $252.38 $178.38 $185.17 $197.88 $198.39Recommended Rate per Unit per Month$225.00 $225.00 $200.00 $200.00 $200.00 $200.00Annual CFD Revenue by Phase$483,300 $561,600 $1,012,800 $1,485,600 $1,728,000 $1,728,000Cost$483,783 $629,938 $903,339 $1,375,475 $1,709,713 $1,714,079Phase Cash Flow($483) ($68,338)$109,461 $110,125 $18,287 $13,921Cumulative Operating Reserve($483) ($68,821)$40,640 $150,765 $169,052 $182,973Sources: City of San Luis Obispo; Avila Ranch LLC; ADE; Kosmont; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.Phase/Revenue and ExpensesEconomic & Planning Systems, Inc. 9/1/2017P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\CFD\Avila Ranch CFD Cost Review 8-01-2017.xlsxExhibit 1Packet Pg 44015
Table A-3Local Area Maintenance Annual Cost AssumptionsAvila Ranch CategoryAsset ActivityCost Interval (years)Cost Unit Unit Cost Annual Cost/Unit 1 2 3 4 5 6179292141971010City Maintained AssetsParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Infrastructure & TransportationBridgePed/Bike Bridges100 Each100,000.00$ 1,000.00$ 1 1 Parks and GreenbeltsTransportationNeighborhood WellnessLandscape Maintenance Medians0.083 SF0.04$ 0.48$ 00000Parks and GreenbeltsTransportationNeighborhood WellnessLandscape Maintenance Parkway0.083 SF0.02$ 0.24$ 60,540 9,100 7,000 29,820 41,900 Parks and GreenbeltsTransportationNeighborhood WellnessLandscape Parkway Water (1.21 AF/Ac per WSA)1.000 Acre-Foot3,560.00$ 3,560.00$ 1.68 0.25 0.19 0.83 1.16 - Parks and GreenbeltsTransportationNeighborhood WellnessLandscape Maintenance RAB0.083 SF0.04$ 0.48$ 2,289 4,578 Parks and GreenbeltsTransportationCommunity SafetyLandscape Drainage Basin Inspection1 Each600600.00$ 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parks and GreenbeltsTransportationCommunity SafetyLandscape Maintain Water Quality BMPs Monthly0.083 SF0.030.36$ 19,368.00 4,248.00 2,520.00 15,480.00 12,564.00 Parks and GreenbeltsTransportationCommunity SafetyLandscape Inspect Water Quality BMPs per rain0.333 SF0.010.03$ 19,368.00 4,248.00 2,520.00 15,480.00 12,564.00 Parks and GreenbeltsTransportationInfrastructure & TransportationLandscape Retaining50 SF38.00$ 0.76$ 7,250 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessLandscape Sound Berm0.083 SF0.02$ 0.20$ 29,131 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Environmental Health and Open Space Open Space Ongoing Open Space Maintenance1 Acre19.48$ 19.48$ 5.30 2.40 1.70 10.50 14.00 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Environmental Health and Open Space Open Space Operating - Natural Resources Protection1 Acre89.61$ 89.61$ 5.30 2.40 1.70 10.50 14.00 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Environmental Health and Open Space Open SpaceOperational--Ranger Services1 Acre73.04$ 73.04$ 5.30 2.40 1.70 10.50 14.00 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Environmental Health and Open Space Open SpaceRanger Vehicle1 Acre5.00$ 5.00$ 5.30 2.40 1.70 10.50 14.00 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Infrastructure & TransportationBike PathClass I Bike Path Rehabilitation50 SF14.50$ 0.29$ 24,480 12,840 5,760 10,080 19,200 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Infrastructure & TransportationBike PathClass I Bike Path Sealing8 SF0.80$ 0.10$ 24,480 12,840 5,760 10,080 19,200 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Infrastructure & TransportationBike Path Class I Light Energy (1/75 LF)1 Each13.00$ 13.00$ 27 14 6 11 21 - Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Infrastructure & TransportationBike Path Class I Light Maintenance1 Each12.00$ 12.00$ 27 14 6 11 21 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Infrastructure & TransportationBike Path Class I Light Pole Replacement75 Each3,000.00$ 40.00$ 27 14 6 11 21 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Infrastructure & TransportationBike Path Class I Light Replacement25 Each2,500.00$ 100.00$ 27 14 6 11 21 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Infrastructure & TransportationBike PathClass I Vegetation Removal0.25 SF0.05$ 0.20$ 32,640 17,120 7,680 13,440 25,600 - Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkRecreation Structures (Shelters/Pergolas)50 SF150.00$ 3.00$ 400 600 2,900 4,000 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkRecreation Structures (Coatings)10 SF1.67$ 0.17$ 400 600 2,900 4,000 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social ServicesNeighborhood WellnessParkOperating - Parks Maintenance1 Acre10,162.47$ 10,162.47$ 3.14 1.34 0.81 10.38 2.58 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkPark Energy Costs1 Acre360.00$ 360.00$ 3.14 1.34 0.81 10.38 2.58 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkPark Water Cost (Avg 1.49 AF/Ac per Parks Plan)1 Acre-Foot3,560.00$ 3,560.00$ 4.68 2.00 1.21 3.84 - Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkPark Water Well Replacement75 Each60,000.00$ 800.00$ 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkPark Water Well Pump and Booster10 Each4,000.00$ 400.00$ 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkPark Water Well Energy Cost0.083 Acre-Foot133.33$ 1,600.00$ 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkParking Lot Rehabilitation40 SF14.50$ 0.36$ 17,200 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkParking Lot Sealing10 SF0.80$ 0.08$ 17,200 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkParks Major Maintenance1 Each Park8,448.28$ 8,448.28$ 2 2 1 2 2 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkPlay Equipment Maintenance15 Each Site100,000.00$ 6,666.67$ 2 2 1 2 2 Parks and GreenbeltsTransportationCommunity SafetyStorm DrainCapital Creek Maintenance15 Each100,000.00$ 6,666.67$ 1.00 Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessTreePark Tree8 Each300.00$ 37.50$ 154 26 25 234 131 - Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Community SafetyTreeRiparian Tree Removal - Storm Event20 Acre150.00$ 7.50$ 5.74 2.37 1.65 2.16 6.16 Residential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationBridgeBridge Deck Maintenance20 SF50.00$ 2.50$ 3,360 Residential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationBridgeBridge Replacement100 SF1,700.00$ 17.00$ 3,360 Residential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationLighting Street Light Energy1Each15.00$ 15.00$ 24 5 10 11 14 - Residential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationLighting Street Light Maintenance1 Each12.00$ 12.00$ 24 5 10 11 14 Residential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationLighting Street Light Pole Replacement75 Each5,000.00$ 66.67$ 24 5 10 11 14 Residential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationLighting Street Light Replacement25 Each2,500.00$ 100.00$ 24 5 10 11 14 Residential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationStreets Operating - Street Maintenance1 SF0.06$ 0.06$ 193,680 42,480 25,200 154,800 125,640 - Residential Collectors and Arterials TransportationCommunity SafetyStorm Drain Drainage Inlets100 Each13,500.00$ 135.00$ 16 4 8 8 4 Residential Collectors and Arterials TransportationCommunity SafetyStorm Drain Manholes100 Each9,500.00$ 95.00$ 21 4 5 11 4 Residential Collectors and Arterials TransportationCommunity SafetyStorm Drain Operating - Flood Control1 LF3.25$ 3.25$ 6,800 550 2,075 2,380 5,500 Residential Collectors and Arterials TransportationCommunity SafetyStorm Drain Pipeline100 LF350.00$ 3.50$ 6,800 550 2,075 2,380 5,500 Residential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationStreetsAccess Roadway Rehabilitation (Private--Maintained by Homeowners)Residential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationStreetsAccess Roadway Sealing (Private--Maintained by Homeowners)Residential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationStreetsCurb and Gutter75 LF35.00$ 0.47$ 10,700 2,400 5,000 6,460 9,100 Residential Collectors and ArterialsTransportationInfrastructure & TransportationStreets Roadway Rehabilitation75 SF15.00$ 0.20$ 193,680 42,480 25,200 154,800 125,640 Residential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationStreets Roadway Sealing10 SF1.25$ 0.13$ 193,680 42,480 25,200 154,800 125,640 Residential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationStreetsReplace Sidewalk100 SF25.00$ 0.25$ 62,700 12,900 29,000 47,100 41,900 Residential Collectors and Arterials Leisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessTreeStreet Tree (25 LF/Each Side)10 Each300.00$ 30.00$ 600 104 80 365 56 319,764$ 100,763$ 77,667$ 365,700$ 239,373$ -$ County Maintained AssetsParks and GreenbeltsParkClass I Bike Path Rehabilitation40 SF 14.50$ 0.36$ 18,096 Parks and GreenbeltsParkClass I Bike Path Sealing8 SF 0.80$ 0.10$ 18,096 Parks and GreenbeltsPark Class I Light Energy 1 Each 13.00$ 13.00$ 20 Parks and GreenbeltsPark Class I Light Maintenance 1 Each 12.00$ 12.00$ 20 Parks and GreenbeltsPark Class I Light Pole Replacement 75 Each 3,000.00$ 40.00$ 20 Parks and GreenbeltsPark Class I Light Replacement 20 Each 1,500.00$ 75.00$ 20 Parks and GreenbeltsParkClass I Vegetation Removal0.25 SF 0.05$ 0.0200$ 18,096 Parks and GreenbeltsBridge Ped/Bike Bridges 100 Each 100,000.00$ 1,000.00$ - County NoiseDU 75.00$ 179 29 214 197 101 Subtotal--County13,425$ 13,721$ 16,050$ 14,775$ 7,575$ -$ Quantity by PhaseSubtotal--City Maintained Assets w/CFD AllocationEconomic & Planning Systems, Inc. 9/1/2017P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\CFD\Avila Ranch CFD Cost Review 8‐01‐2017.xlsxExhibit 1Packet Pg 44115
Table A-3Local Area Maintenance Annual Cost AssumptionsAvila Ranch CategoryAsset ActivityCity Maintained AssetsParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Infrastructure & TransportationBridgePed/Bike BridgesParks and GreenbeltsTransportationNeighborhood WellnessLandscape Maintenance MediansParks and GreenbeltsTransportationNeighborhood WellnessLandscape Maintenance ParkwayParks and GreenbeltsTransportationNeighborhood WellnessLandscape Parkway Water (1.21 AF/Ac per WSA)Parks and GreenbeltsTransportationNeighborhood WellnessLandscape Maintenance RABParks and GreenbeltsTransportationCommunity SafetyLandscape Drainage Basin InspectionParks and GreenbeltsTransportationCommunity SafetyLandscape Maintain Water Quality BMPs MonthlyParks and GreenbeltsTransportationCommunity SafetyLandscape Inspect Water Quality BMPs per rainParks and GreenbeltsTransportationInfrastructure & TransportationLandscape RetainingParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessLandscape Sound BermParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Environmental Health and Open Space Open Space Ongoing Open Space MaintenanceParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Environmental Health and Open Space Open Space Operating - Natural Resources ProtectionParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Environmental Health and Open Space Open SpaceOperational--Ranger ServicesParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Environmental Health and Open Space Open SpaceRanger VehicleParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Infrastructure & TransportationBike PathClass I Bike Path RehabilitationParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Infrastructure & TransportationBike PathClass I Bike Path SealingParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Infrastructure & TransportationBike Path Class I Light Energy (1/75 LF)Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Infrastructure & TransportationBike Path Class I Light MaintenanceParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Infrastructure & TransportationBike Path Class I Light Pole ReplacementParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Infrastructure & TransportationBike Path Class I Light ReplacementParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Infrastructure & TransportationBike PathClass I Vegetation RemovalParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkRecreation Structures (Shelters/Pergolas)Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkRecreation Structures (Coatings)Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkOperating - Parks MaintenanceParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkPark Energy CostsParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkPark Water Cost (Avg 1.49 AF/Ac per Parks Plan)Parks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkPark Water Well ReplacementParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkPark Water Well Pump and BoosterParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkPark Water Well Energy CostParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkParking Lot RehabilitationParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkParking Lot SealingParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkParks Major MaintenanceParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessParkPlay Equipment MaintenanceParks and GreenbeltsTransportationCommunity SafetyStorm DrainCapital Creek MaintenanceParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood WellnessTreePark TreeParks and GreenbeltsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services Community SafetyTreeRiparian Tree Removal - Storm EventResidential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationBridgeBridge Deck MaintenanceResidential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationBridgeBridge ReplacementResidential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationLighting Street Light EnergyResidential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationLighting Street Light MaintenanceResidential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationLighting Street Light Pole ReplacementResidential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationLighting Street Light ReplacementResidential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationStreets Operating - Street MaintenanceResidential Collectors and Arterials TransportationCommunity SafetyStorm Drain Drainage InletsResidential Collectors and Arterials TransportationCommunity SafetyStorm Drain ManholesResidential Collectors and Arterials TransportationCommunity SafetyStorm Drain Operating - Flood ControlResidential Collectors and Arterials TransportationCommunity SafetyStorm Drain PipelineResidential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationStreetsAccess Roadway Rehabilitation (Private--MaintainResidential Collectors and Arterials TransportationInfrastructure & TransportationStreetsAccess Roadway Sealing (Private--Maintained by Residential Collectors and Arterials Transportation Infrastructure & Transportation StreetsCurb and GutterResidential Collectors and Arterials Transportation Infrastructure & Transportation Streets Roadway RehabilitationResidential Collectors and Arterials Transportation Infrastructure & Transportation Streets Roadway SealingResidential Collectors and Arterials Transportation Infrastructure & Transportation StreetsReplace SidewalkResidential Collectors and Arterials Leisure, Cultural & Social Services Neighborhood Wellness Tree Street Tree (25 LF/Each Side)County Maintained AssetsParks and GreenbeltsParkClass I Bike Path RehabilitationParks and GreenbeltsParkClass I Bike Path SealingParks and GreenbeltsPark Class I Light EnergyParks and GreenbeltsPark Class I Light MaintenanceParks and GreenbeltsPark Class I Light Pole ReplacementParks and GreenbeltsPark Class I Light ReplacementParks and GreenbeltsParkClass I Vegetation RemovalParks and GreenbeltsBridge Ped/Bike BridgesCounty NoiseSubtotal--CountySubtotal--City Maintained Assets w/CFD AllocationTotal Units Annual Cost/Item CFD Allocation Allocation to CFD Allocation Comment/Rationale Comment 720 2.00 2,000$ 2,000$ 100% Normal HOA Cost, but general community benefit- -$ -$ 100% Normal HOA Cost, and primarily local benefit 148,360.00 35,606$ 35,606$ 100% Normal HOA Cost, and primarily local benefit 4.12 14,671$ 14,671$ 100% Normal HOA Cost, and primarily local benefit Acre-Ft price provide by City6,867.00 3,296$ 3,296$ 100% Normal HOA Cost, and primarily local benefit 5.00 3,000$ 3,000$ 100% Inspect and Report on Basin 54,180.00 19,505$ 19,505$ 100%yqygroadway surface 54,180.00 1,625$ 1,625$ 100% Inspect BMPs per significant rain event 7,250.00 5,510$ 5,510$ 100% Normal HOA Cost, and primarily local benefit 29,131.00 5,826$ 5,826$ 100% Normal HOA Cost, and primarily local benefit 33.90 660$ 660$ 100% Normal City Responsibility33.90 3,038$ 3,038$ 100% Normal City Responsibility33.90 2,476$ 2,476$ 100% Normal City Responsibility33.90 170$ 170$ 100% Normal City Responsibility72,360.00 20,984$ 20,984$ 100% Normal HOA Cost, but primarily general community benefit72,360.00 7,236$ 7,236$ 100% Normal HOA Cost, but primarily general community benefit80.40 1,045$ 1,045$ 100% Normal HOA Cost, but primarily general community benefit80.40 965$ 965$ 100% Normal HOA Cost, but primarily general community benefit80.40 3,216$ 3,216$ 100% Normal HOA Cost, but primarily general community benefit80.40 8,040$ 8,040$ 100% Normal HOA Cost, but primarily general community benefit96,480.00 19,296$ 19,296$ 100% Normal HOA Cost, but primarily general community benefit7,900.00 23,700$ 23,700$ 100% Difference between Project Parks/1,000 and City Parks/1,0007,900.00 1,319$ 1,319$ 100%18.25 185,465$ 185,465$ 100% Difference between Project Parks/1,000 and City Parks/1,000 Not sure what this covers; direct maintenance 18.25 6,570$ 6,570$ 100% Difference between Project Parks/1,000 and City Parks/1,00011.73 41,746$ 41,746$ 100% Difference between Project Parks/1,000 and City Parks/1,000yy@ (of $9.98 CCF 2017 Base Water 1.00 800$ 800$ 100%1.00 400$ 400$ 100%1.00 1,600$ 1,600$ 100%gFT17,200.00 6,235$ 6,235$ 100% Difference between Project Parks/1,000 and City Parks/1,00017,200.00 1,376$ 1,376$ 100% Difference between Project Parks/1,000 and City Parks/1,0009.00 76,034$ 76,034$ 100% Difference between Project Parks/1,000 and City Parks/1,000 Break down by Acre? 9.00 60,000$ 60,000$ 100% Difference between Project Parks/1,000 and City Parks/1,000yequipment/improvements replaced every 15 years 1.00 6,667$ 6,667$ 100% Normal City Responsibility570.00 21,375$ 21,375$ 100% Difference between Project Parks/1,000 and City Parks/1,00018.08 136$ 136$ 100% Normal City Responsibility3,360.00 8,400$ 8,400$ 100% Normal City Responsibility3,360.00 57,120$ 57,120$ 100% Normal City Responsibility64.00 960$ 960$ 100% Normal City Responsibility64.00 768$ 768$ 100% Normal City Responsibility64.00 4,267$ 4,267$ 100% Normal City Responsibility64.00 6,400$ 6,400$ 100% Normal City Responsibility541,800.00 30,929$ 30,929$ 100% Normal City Responsibility Not sure what this covers; R&R covered elsewhere40.00 5,400$ 5,400$ 100% Normal City Responsibility45.00 4,275$ 4,275$ 100% Normal City Responsibility17,305.00 56,248$ 56,248$ 100% Normal City Responsibility17,305.00 60,568$ 60,568$ 100% Normal City Responsibility- -$ -$ 0% Maintained by homeowners - -$ -$ 0% Maintained by homeowners 33,660.00 15,708$ 15,708$ 100% Normal City Responsibility Full replacement ever 70 years 541,800.00 108,360$ 108,360$ 100% Normal City Responsibility total city currently spends on this item) 541,800.00 67,725$ 67,725$ 100% Normal City Responsibility Every 8 years. What is the current city schedule? 193,600.00 48,400$ 48,400$ 100%1,205.00 36,150$ 36,150$ 100% Normal City Responsibility, primarily local benefitSame as Park Tree; BRE is $35 1,103,267$ 1,103,267$ 1,103,267$ 18,096 6,560$ 6,560$ 100% County to Maintain Buckley; Avila to Maintain Class I 18,096 1,810$ 1,810$ 100% County to Maintain Buckley; Avila to Maintain Class I 20 261$ 261$ 100% County to Maintain Buckley; Avila to Maintain Class I Not sure County will want lights/lighting 20 241$ 241$ 100%County to Maintain Buckley; Avila to Maintain Class I Not sure County will want lights/lighting 20 804$ 804$ 100% County to Maintain Buckley; Avila to Maintain Class I Not sure County will want lights/lighting 20 1,508$ 1,508$ 100% County to Maintain Buckley; Avila to Maintain Class I Not sure County will want lights/lighting 18,096 362$ 362$ 100% County to Maintain Buckley; Avila to Maintain Class I - -$ -$ 100% County to Maintain Buckley; Avila to Maintain Class I 720 54,000$ 54,000$ 100% Per ALUC Approval Condition65,546$ 65,546$ 65,546$ CFD AllocationEconomic & Planning Systems, Inc. 9/1/2017P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\CFD\Avila Ranch CFD Cost Review 8‐01‐2017.xlsxExhibit 1Packet Pg 44215
Table A-4
Fiscal Mitigation Assumptions
Budget Category Total
General Fund Revenues
Taxes
Property Tax $0
Property Tax in lieu of VLF $297,169
Sales Tax: General $129,987
Sales Tax: Measure G $64,994
Sales Tax: Public Safety $3,220
Utility Users Tax $122,980
Franchise Fees $34,435
Business Tax Certificates $1,463
Real Property Transfer Tax $22,963
Service Charges
Recreation Fees $58,856
Other Charges for Services $38,704
Other Revenue
Fines and Forfeitures $3,449
Interest Earnings and Rents $4,263
Other Revenues $2,331
Transfers In
Gas Tax/TDA $35,971
Other $29,820
Total Revenues $850,605
General Fund Expenditures
General Government $294,029
Police $332,799
Fire [1]$398,463
Transportation [2]$51,536
Leisure, Cultural and Social Services $130,497
Park and Landscape Maintenance [3]$213,528
Community Development $106,747
Transfers Out $2,226
Total Expenditures $1,529,825
Net Fiscal Impact ($679,220)
Reduce Parks and Landscape Maintenance [4] $213,528
Reduce for Transportation [4] $51,536
REVISED Net Fiscal Impact ($414,156)
[1]
[2] Included in LAM; exclude for Fiscal Mitigation.
[3] Included in LAM; exclude for Fiscal Mitigation.
[4] Included in LAM.
Increased per City allocation 7-28-2017; reflects cost of operating station
and Avila Ranch's share (25% of 590 acres).
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 9/1/2017 P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\CFD\Avila Ranch CFD Cost Review 8‐01‐2017.xlsx
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 443
15
APPENDIX B:
Avila Ranch Infrastructure Cost and Allocation Analysis
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 444
15
Table B-1Summary of Infrastructure FundingType of InfrastructureTotal Project Costs [1] Avila Ranch Pro Rata Share Total Cost of Projects Built by Avila Ranch Additional Mitigation or Impact Fees Being Paid Amount of Potential Private Reimbursement Amount of Potential Impact Fee Credit for Built Projects Final Out of Pocket for Avila Ranch Transportation $37,234,884 $17,622,154 $21,226,500 $5,883,194 ($561,350) ($3,759,000) $22,789,344 Parks $6,645,500 $6,645,500 $6,645,500 $6,645,500 Water and Sewer $427,500 $427,500 $427,500 $427,500 Public Safety$1,346,250 $1,346,250 $1,346,250 $1,346,250 Intract Improvements$20,896,000 $20,896,000 $20,896,000 $20,896,000 Offsite Improvements$552,000 $552,000 $552,000 $552,000 Total Infrastructure Expenses$67,102,134 $47,489,404 $51,093,750 $5,883,194 ($561,350)($3,759,000) $52,656,594 [1] Total Project Infrastructure costs whether Avila Ranch is building or paying fees.Sources: Avila Ranch LLC; City of San Luis Obispo; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 9/1/2017P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Capital Costs&Fees\Avila Ranch Infrastructure Cost Analysis_09-01-2017.xlsxExhibit 1Packet Pg 44515
Table B-2
Avila Ranch Infrastructure Cost and Allocation Analysis
Item Total Project
Cost Estimate
Implementation/
Participation by
Avila Ranch
Nexus
Allocation to
Avila Ranch
Allocation to Avila
Ranch (Absent Credits
or Reimbursements)
Percent Up-Front
Amount
Reimbursement
Agreement
Requested/
Recommended?
If Yes, Amount
Subject to Private
Reimbursement
T1 Transit Stops $75,000 Build 100.0%$75,000 100% $75,000 No
T2 Buckley Road Widening - Vachell to Avila PL $2,294,500 Build Ph 1 & 4 50.0%$1,147,250 100% $2,294,500 No
T3 Suburban Sidewalk Sidewalks W/O Earthwood (Existing
Deficiency)$125,000 Build Phase 1 100.0%$125,000 100% $125,000 No
T4 Suburban Signal Modifications $125,000 Build Phase 1 100.0%$125,000 100% $125,000 No
T5 Venture Residential Collector $2,612,000 Build Phase 1,2,3 100.0%$2,612,000 100% $2,612,000 No
T6 Buckley Frontage Bike Path $655,000 Build Phase 1, 4 100.0%$655,000 100% $655,000 No
T7 Horizon/Jesperson Collector Avila Ranch $2,163,000 Build Phase 4 75.0%$1,622,250 100% $2,163,000 No
T8 US 101/S. Higuera Interchange - Prepare PS&E for SB
Ramp Metering $50,000 Complete Phase 1-
2 100.0%$50,000 100% $50,000 No
T9 County Offsite Improvements related to Buckley Road
Intersections (at HWY 227 and Davenport Creek) (T34)$430,000 Payment to County N/A N/A 100% $430,000 No
T10 Vachell Lane Widening, LTL @ Venture, misc sidewalks
and Class II Bike Lanes $650,000 Build Phase 1 50.0%$325,000 100% $650,000 No
T11 Earthwood Collector Suburban to Venture $418,000 Build Phase 1 75.0%$313,500 100% $418,000 No
T12 Buckley Road Extension - Vachell to South Higuera $6,000,000 Build Phase 2 25.0%$1,500,000 100% $6,000,000 No
T13 Suburban Widening E/O Earthwood $450,000 Build Phase 4 34.7%$156,150 100% $450,000 Yes $293,850
T14 Horizon Collector South of Suburban to Avila Ranch
w/ROW $770,000 Build Phase 4 75.0%$577,500 100% $770,000 Yes $192,500
T15 South Higuera/Vachell Lane $150,000 Build Phase 2 50.0%$75,000 100% $150,000 Yes $75,000
T16 Tank Farm/Higuera SB Dual LT $470,000 Build Phase 1 13.4%$62,980 100% $470,000 No $0
T17 Tank Farm Creek Bike Path $860,000 Build Phase 1,2,3 75.0%$645,000 100% $860,000 No
T18 Tank farm Creek Bikepath - Chevron s/o TFR $934,000 Build phase 4 if
ROW 100.0%$934,000 100% $934,000 No
T19 Tank Farm/Higuera WB Dual RT $670,000 Build Phase 4 13.4%$89,780 100% $670,000 No $0
T20 Buckley Extension Bike Path $500,000 Build Phase 2 25.0%$125,000 100% $500,000 No
T21 US 101/LOVR Interchange - Install SB Ramp Metering $250,000 Build Phase 1 100.0%
$250,000 100% $250,000 No $0
T22 South Higuera/South Street NB RT Lane $370,000 Build Phase 1 30.8%$113,960 100% $370,000 Yes 1 $0
T23 South Higuera Sidewalk - Vachell to LOVR $125,000 Build Phase 1 100.0%
$125,000 100% $125,000 No
T24 South Higuera Sidewalk - City Limit to LOVR $80,000 Build Phase 2 24.3%$19,440 100% $80,000 No
Subtotal:$21,226,500 $11,723,810 $21,226,500 $561,350
T25 LOVR Interchange (Impact Fees remaining after
crediting from above)$3,172,464 Pay Impact Fees 100.0%$3,172,464 100% $3,172,464 No
T26 Citywide TIF Impact Fees (Remaining to be paid -
reduced for potential TIF Credit shown above) $ 1,501,920 Pay Impact Fees $1,501,920 100% $ 1,501,920 No
T27 Horizon Lane S/O Tank Farm to Suburban $594,000 Pay Impact Fees 25.0%$148,500 0%$0 No
T28 Prado/Higuera NB Dual LT $750,000 Pay Impact Fees 8.5%$63,750 0%$0 No
T29 Prado/Higuera Cumulative Improvements (Dual LT, RT, 2 Thru) $2,000,000 Pay Impact Fees 0.0%$0 0%$0 No
T30 AASP Impact Fees (Remaining to be paid - reduced for
potential AASP Credit shown above)$0 Pay Impact Fees $0 100%$0 No
T31 LOVR/Higuera Intersection Improvements $2,540,000 Pay MIT Fees 25.4%$645,160 25.4% $645,160 No
T32 Bob Jones Trail Bike Path $1,250,000 Pay MIT Fees 5.8%$72,500 5.8% $72,500 No
T33 Buckley/Vachell Intersection $650,000 Pay MIT Fees 16.5%$107,250 16.5% $107,250 No
T34 Buckley/HWY 227 Intersection $2,700,000 Pay MIT Fees 2.7%$72,900 10.0% $270,000 No
T35 Tank Farm/Higuera NB RT extension $850,000 Pay MIT Fees 13.4%
$113,900 13.4% $113,900 No
Subtotal:$16,008,384 $5,898,344 $5,883,194 $0
Total All Transportation:$37,234,884 $17,622,154 $27,109,694 $561,350
Parks - Land and Improvements (18 acres) $6,645,500 100.0%$6,645,500 100% $6,645,500 No
Water and Sewer $427,500 100.0%$427,500 100% $427,500 No
Public Safety - Interim Fire Station $1,346,250 100.0%$1,346,250 100% $1,346,250 No
Intract Improvements - Not Specified Above $20,896,000 100.0%$20,896,000 100% $20,896,000 No
Offsite Improvements - Not Specified Above $552,000 100.0%$552,000 100% $552,000 No
Subtotal:$29,867,250 $29,867,250 $29,867,250
Grand Total:$67,102,134 $47,489,404 $56,976,944 $561,350
Pay Mitigation Fee - Pro Rata or AASP If Amended into P
Build Project (Eligible for City TIF Fee Credits/Reimburs
Pay Fee - LOVR
Pay Fee - Citywide TIF
Pay AASP Fee (or Mitigation Fee as Identified)
Pay Mitigation Fee - Pro Rata
Build Project (Potential Private Reimbursement)
Build Project (No Reimbursement)
Build Project (Eligible for AASP Fee Credits/Reimbursem
Build Project (Eligible for AASP Fee Credits/Reimbursem
Build Project (Eligible for LOVR Credits)
Allocation to Avila Ranch Developer Equity
Projects to be Built by Avila RanchAvila Ranch Pay Impact Fees/Mitigation FeeOther Costs
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 9/1/2017 P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Capital Costs&Fees\Avila Ranch Infrastructure Cost Analysis_09-01-2017.xlsx
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 446
15
Table B-2
Avila Ranch Infrastructure Cost and Allocation Analysis
Item Total Project
Cost Estimate
T1 Transit Stops $75,000
T2 Buckley Road Widening - Vachell to Avila PL $2,294,500
T3 Suburban Sidewalk Sidewalks W/O Earthwood (Existing
Deficiency)$125,000
T4 Suburban Signal Modifications $125,000
T5 Venture Residential Collector $2,612,000
T6 Buckley Frontage Bike Path $655,000
T7 Horizon/Jesperson Collector Avila Ranch $2,163,000
T8 US 101/S. Higuera Interchange - Prepare PS&E for SB
Ramp Metering $50,000
T9 County Offsite Improvements related to Buckley Road
Intersections (at HWY 227 and Davenport Creek) (T34)$430,000
T10 Vachell Lane Widening, LTL @ Venture, misc sidewalks
and Class II Bike Lanes $650,000
T11 Earthwood Collector Suburban to Venture $418,000
T12 Buckley Road Extension - Vachell to South Higuera $6,000,000
T13 Suburban Widening E/O Earthwood $450,000
T14 Horizon Collector South of Suburban to Avila Ranch
w/ROW $770,000
T15 South Higuera/Vachell Lane $150,000
T16 Tank Farm/Higuera SB Dual LT $470,000
T17 Tank Farm Creek Bike Path $860,000
T18 Tank farm Creek Bikepath - Chevron s/o TFR $934,000
T19 Tank Farm/Higuera WB Dual RT $670,000
T20 Buckley Extension Bike Path $500,000
T21 US 101/LOVR Interchange - Install SB Ramp Metering $250,000
T22 South Higuera/South Street NB RT Lane $370,000
T23 South Higuera Sidewalk - Vachell to LOVR $125,000
T24 South Higuera Sidewalk - City Limit to LOVR $80,000
Subtotal:$21,226,500
T25 LOVR Interchange (Impact Fees remaining after
crediting from above)$3,172,464
T26 Citywide TIF Impact Fees (Remaining to be paid -
reduced for potential TIF Credit shown above) $ 1,501,920
T27 Horizon Lane S/O Tank Farm to Suburban $594,000
T28 Prado/Higuera NB Dual LT $750,000
T29 Prado/Higuera Cumulative Improvements (Dual LT, RT, 2 Thru) $2,000,000
T30 AASP Impact Fees (Remaining to be paid - reduced for
potential AASP Credit shown above)$0
T31 LOVR/Higuera Intersection Improvements $2,540,000
T32 Bob Jones Trail Bike Path $1,250,000
T33 Buckley/Vachell Intersection $650,000
T34 Buckley/HWY 227 Intersection $2,700,000
T35 Tank Farm/Higuera NB RT extension $850,000
Subtotal:$16,008,384
Total All Transportation:$37,234,884
Parks - Land and Improvements (18 acres) $6,645,500
Water and Sewer $427,500
Public Safety - Interim Fire Station $1,346,250
Intract Improvements - Not Specified Above $20,896,000
Offsite Improvements - Not Specified Above $552,000
Subtotal:$29,867,250
Grand Total:$67,102,134
Pay Mitigation Fee - Pro Rata or AASP If Amended into P
Build Project (Eligible for City TIF Fee Credits/Reimburs
Pay Fee - LOVR
Pay Fee - Citywide TIF
Pay AASP Fee (or Mitigation Fee as Identified)
Pay Mitigation Fee - Pro Rata
Build Project (Potential Private Reimbursement)
Build Project (No Reimbursement)
Build Project (Eligible for AASP Fee Credits/Reimbursem
Build Project (Eligible for AASP Fee Credits/Reimbursem
Build Project (Eligible for LOVR Credits)
Developer Final Equity
(Not Subject to Credit
or Reimbursement)
If No and If
Developer Equity
is 100%,
Value to City
If No and If
Developer Equity
is 100%,
Value to County
TIF AASP AASP (Future) LOVR
$75,000
$2,294,500 $1,147,250
$125,000
$125,000
$2,612,000
$655,000
$2,163,000 $540,750
$50,000
$430,000 $430,000
$650,000 $214,500 $110,500
$418,000 $104,500
$6,000,000 $1,125,000 $3,375,000
$156,150
$577,500
$75,000
$470,000 $0
$815,000 $45,000 $0
$934,000 $0
$670,000 $0
TBD $500,000 $93,750 $281,250
$250,000 $0 $0
$ 370,000 $0
$ 125,000 $0
$ 80,000 $0
$ 575,000 $2,889,000 $45,000 $250,000 $16,906,150 $2,078,500 $5,344,000
$3,172,464 $0
$1,501,920
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0
$645,160
$72,500 $72,500
TBD $107,250 $542,750
TBD $270,000 $270,000
TBD $113,900 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $5,883,194 $615,250 $270,000
$575,000 $2,889,000 $45,000 $250,000 $22,789,344 $2,693,750 $5,614,000
$6,645,500 $0
$427,500
$1,346,250 $0
$20,896,000
$552,000
$29,867,250
$575,000 $2,889,000 $45,000 $250,000 $52,656,594 $2,693,750 $5,614,000
Amount Subject to Fee Credit
Fee Credit and Reimbursement
Agreement Status
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 9/1/2017 P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Capital Costs&Fees\Avila Ranch Infrastructure Cost Analysis_09-01-2017.xlsx
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 447
15
Exhibit D
Phasing Plan
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 448
15
AVILA RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLANMay 2, 2017#1011023A24Phasing PlanPhase 3Phase 4Phase 1Phase 6Phase 5Phase 20 75 150300SCALE: 1”=150’ (24”x36” sheet)Ph 6Exhibit 1Packet Pg 44915
Exhibit E-1
Backbone Water Infrastructure
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 450
15
AVILA RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLANMay 2, 2017#1011023A25Recycled Water: ProposedDomestic Water: ProposedUTILITIES LEGENDWater Supply PlanExhibit 1Packet Pg 45115
Exhibit E-2
Backbone Wastewater Infrastructure
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 452
15
AVILA RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLANMay 2, 2017#1011023A26Wastewater PlanPump Station Force Main Gravity SewerTO TANK FARM LIFT STATIONExhibit 1Packet Pg 45315
Exhibit E-3
Backbone Recycled Water Infrastructure
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 454
15
AVILA RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLANMay 2, 2017#1011023A25Recycled Water: ProposedDomestic Water: ProposedUTILITIES LEGENDWater Supply PlanExhibit 1Packet Pg 45515
Exhibit E-4
Backbone Drainage Infrastructure
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 456
15
AVILA RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLANMay 2, 2017#1011023A27Storm DrainsOutfallsBasinSwaleStorm DrainageExhibit 1Packet Pg 45715
Exhibit F
Figure 5 of Conservation & Open Space Element
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 458
15
Conservation and Open Space Element
FOOTHILLSANTA ROSATANK FARMLOS
O
S
O
S
V
AL
L
E
Y MADONNASOUTHBROA
D
CALI
F
O
R
NI
A
HIGUERAFigure 5:Greenbelt Boundaries01230.5MilesCity LimitGreenbelt BoundaryPrevious Greenbelt Boundary
Exhibit 1 Packet Pg 45915
Exhibit G
Affordable/Workforce Housing Plan
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 460
15
Exhibit G
Affordable & Workforce Housing Plan
Affordable Housing Plan
The Avila Ranch project will encourage long term housing affordability by including design and develop-
ment strategies that serve to provide lower cost housing, by including a range of housing sizes and types
that are not typically provided in the community, and by providing a greater number of lower income
inclusionary units than required by the City Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Since the price of houses
over time is most closely related to the size of the dwelling unit, the size of the lot, and costs of mainte-
nance, the project has concentrated on lowering the overall size of market rate dwelling units, and reduc-
ing lot size for market rate units.
Within each of the residential zones there will be dwelling unit sizes ranging from 550 square foot studios
to 1,150 square foot family apartments in the R-4 area, to 2,500 square foot single family detached units
in the R-1 development area. A predominant individual share of the project is in small lot single family R-
2 units (297 out of 720) and attached single family ownership and rental R-3 units (197 units out of 720).
Consequently, the average size of the units across the development is approximately 1,525 square feet.
Maintenance expenses, to the extent feasible, will be included in a Community Facilities District to reduce
the necessity for Homeowner’s Associations, and the higher costs associated with that maintenance and
governance structure. Landscape maintenance and cost of water and utilities will also be reduced because
of the drought tolerant landscaping, smaller lots and other sustainable and cost reducing features.
The City’s Housing Element provides incentives to develop housing in a denser pattern (R3/R4), and with
smaller unit sizes to encourage affordability across the low, mod and workforce income ranges. These
incentives include reduced inclusionary housing requirements for denser projects and for projects with
lower dwelling unit square footages. Conversely, more inclusionary housing is required for projects with
dwelling units that exceed unit sizes of 2,000 square feet. Table 2A of the Housing Element contains these
adjustment factors.
According to the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and Table 2A, the inclusionary housing require-
ment for the residential component of the project is a total of 67 units, with 22 low and 45 moderate
income units. The project proposes to meet and exceed the residential component requirement by
providing 32 lower income units and 35 moderate income units as show in Table 1 below, which will pro-
vide for deeper affordability and more lower income units than required. In addition, the commercial
component of the project requires a total of 4 units, with 1 low and 3 moderate income units. The project
proposes to meet commercial component requirement by either constructing the units in the project or
by paying an affordable housing in-lieu fee.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 461
15
Table 1
Inclusionary Housing Requirements
Units Required and Units Provided
Units Avg Size Total Floor
Area
Net
Acres
Net Den-
sity
Density
Units
Density
Units/Acre
R-1 Alley 33 2,250 74.250 4.7 7.02 33 7.02
R-1 Front 68 2,250 153,000 8.07 8.43 68 8.43
R-2 Pocket Cottage 76 1,200 91,200 5.67 13.40 76 13.40
R-2 Standard 221 1,750 386,750 21.62 10.22 221 10.22
R-3 Duplex 38 1,750 66,500 4.13 9.20 57 13.80
R-3 Townhome 159 1,375 218,625 6.49 24.50 173 26.66
R-4 Apartments 125 850 106,250 4.39 28.47 115 26.20
Neighborhood Commercial 15,000 1.85
Total 720 1,525 1,096,575 55.07 13.07 743 13.49
Nominal Requirement 108
HE Table 2A Adjustment -41
Constructed Fee Total
Commercial 4
Requirement: 71 Provided: 67
71
Low 23
32 1 33
Moderate 48 35 3 38
The Avila Ranch project will address housing affordability in several ways, most notably through the design
itself, which includes cluster development and many medium and high-density housing units (197 R-3
units and 125 R-4 units), as well as R-2 units that have floor areas that are well below the typical average
for single-family detached units in the community.
The City’s Inclusionary Housing Requirement will be addressed through deed restrictions on some low
income and moderate-income units to be constructed by Avila Ranch, while others will be provided by
dedicating and donating improved land to a non-profit affordable housing provider. However, should an
affordable housing provider fail to construct the units, the obligation to provide for the 24 deed-restricted
low-income affordable housing units remains with Avila Ranch to complete. The following highlights are
summarized from the Development Plan:
• Mix of Residential Densities and Small Lots. There is an intentional mix of residential densities in the
Avila Ranch project that includes a range of R-1 lot sizes, R-2 “four-packs”, “six-packs”, and “eight-
pack” cluster units, and R-3 and R-4 multifamily dwellings, with an emphasis on smaller lot, higher
density units. R-2 small lot single family detached units comprise over forty percent of the residential
units (with building living areas ranging from 1,050 SF for a 2B/1B unit to 2,200 SF 3B/2B unit), and
medium density and above units will comprise over 85 percent of the units in the project. The average
unit size across the entire project is less than 1,550 square feet.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 462
15
• Pocket Cottage Units. The Plan includes 76 “Pocket Cottage” units, which are intended to meet the
needs of young professionals, empty nesters and young families. These units have floor plans ranging
from 1,050 to 1,300 square feet in 2BR/1B, 2BR/2B and 3BR/2B configurations. These units, like the
other cluster units, are arranged around a common landscaped courtyard, and will have access from
a common driveway. These smaller units also have a one-car garage and an adjacent uncovered guest
parking space. This parking reduction is justified by the lower expected occupancy for these smaller
units and the multimodal features of the overall development. A portion of these units will be re-
served for income-qualified workforce households through the Workforce Housing Incentive Program
(WHIP) described below. Nine of the Pocket Cottage units (5 2-bedroom and 4 3-bedroom units)
would be dedicated for Moderate Income, and 13 of these units (6 2-bedroom/1-bath units and 7 3-
bedroom/2-bath units) will be dedicated for the project’s Workforce Housing Incentive Program
(WHIP) program described below. The nine inclusionary moderate-income units will be provided on
in Phases 1 and 3 of the project on Lots 37, 51, 65, 76, 91, 121, 364, 378 and 392. The Workforce units
in the Pocket Cottage series will be provided on Lots 32, 46, 60, 74, 79, 89, 90, 117, 365, 379, 393, 315
or 316.
• R-3 Units and Inclusionary Housing Requirements. The project includes 197 R-3 multifamily units on
11 acres that range in size from 700 square foot for-sale and for-rent studios to 1,750 square foot
duplexes. The R-3 portion will include eighteen (18) for-sale moderate-income units (10 2-bedroom/1-
bath units and 8 3-bedroom, 2-bath units) and twelve (12) WHIP units (6 2-bedroom/1-bath units and
6 3-bedroom/2-bath units). The inclusionary units will be provided on Lot 405 as part of the first 80
R-3 townhomes (and the first 116 R-3 units overall), and the 12 Workforce units will be provided on
Lot 407.
• R-4 Housing and Affordable Housing Development. Finally, the project will include a substantial
number of apartment units that are near employment and shopping at Suburban and Higuera. The R-
4 apartment portion of the project will be directly served by an on-street transit stop and will be within
walking distance of nearby shopping. A 1.2 acre portion of R-4 project will be dedicated to an afford-
able housing provider (Lot 300 of the VTM) at the time that the final map for Phase 1 is recorded to
address the local need for lower income housing and to satisfy, in part, the project’s inclusionary
housing requirements. The lot shall include 24 lower income units. However, should an affordable
housing provider fail to construct the units, the obligation to provide for the 24 deed-restricted low-
income affordable housing units on the lot remains with Avila Ranch to complete. Unit sizes in the R-
4 apartment portion will range from 550 square foot studios to 1,150 square foot units for larger
families. The site to be dedicated is adequate to meet the affordable housing requirement, plus addi-
tional potential units. This site will be improved as part of Phase 1 of the project since it is served by
Earthwood, and can be conveyed to the affordable housing provider during Phase 1. Its development
is not dependent on the completion of improvements in Phase 3 of the project (where it is located),
and construction can start on it after the Buckley Road Extension improvements are completed. This
will allow completion of these low income inclusionary units early in the project, rather than leaving
them to the end. In addition, eight (8) Low Income 2-bedroom/1-bath and eight (8) Moderate Income
2-bedroom/1-bath units will be provided on Lot 301, a market rate apartment development.
• Neighborhood Commercial. The 1.8-acre Neighborhood Commercial portion of the project will gen-
erate a requirement for four additional inclusionary units (1 lower income and 3 moderate income).
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 463
15
Development of this site is anticipated 10+ years, and will be based on market demand. Most of the
NC site is currently located in ALUP Safety Zone S-1-B that precludes residential development; how-
ever, there is a 0.25-acre portion of Lot 603 that is outside and that can accommodate residential
development. The project will include the four inclusionary units in its design, if possible, and subject
to the restrictions of the Specific Plan. If that is infeasible, the project will pay an affordable housing
in-lieu fee per the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and Table 2 of the Housing Element.
Overall, the project will provide a total of thirty-two (32) low and thirty-five (35) Moderate Income inclu-
sionary units compared to the city’s requirement for twenty-two (22) Low Income units and forty-five (45)
Moderate Income units. The inclusionary housing product mix has been intentionally skewed toward the
low-income units to ensure that this income group is adequately represented in the project, and to rec-
ognize that the moderate-income groups have adequate market rate opportunities in the R-3, R-2 Pocket
Cottage and R-4 rental portions of the project. Table 2 shows the phasing of the affordable units, and
Exhibit 1 shows the location of these units.
Table 2
Assisted Affordable Housing Phasing Plan
Phase
Program 1 2 3 4 5 6* Total
Low Income Rentals 24
8
1 33
Mod Income Rentals
8
3 11
Moderate Income For-Sale 6
3 18
27
Workforce For-Sale-WHIP 13
12
25
Other Market Rate Work-
force
For Sale 36
18 70
124
Rental
83 86
169
Total 79 - 120 186 - 385
Units in Phase 179 29 214 197 101 4 724
Total-Inclusionary Low 33
Total-Inclusionary Mod 38
Total-Workforce WHIP 25
Total--Market Rate Work-
force
293
Total
389
*Phase 6 represents the Commercial Development and associated Inclusionary Housing Requirement. This will be
met either by development of units within the commercial project or by payment of affordable housing in -lieu fee.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 464
15
Workforce Housing Plan
A special four-point program will be provided to create workforce housing and increase the supply of
housing available to local employees. This program will include providing local preferences for individuals
who work within the City of San Luis Obispo and immediately surrounding area the priority to purchase
or rent a residence within the Project, owner-occupancy restrictions in the single-family detached units,
and a special Workforce Housing Incentive Program which will provide deed-restricted units for workforce
housing eligible households (households earning 121-160% of the Area Median income). This workforce
housing program seeks to target the Project to local employees, reduce the influence of investors in the
limitation of housing choice and availability, provide a down payment assistance program for Workforce
Income families, and provide a certain number of units that will be deed-restricted. The elements of the
program are as follows:
• Local Preference (“SLO Workers First”). Program 10.4 of the City’s Housing Element encourages res-
idential developers to “…sell or rent their projects to those residing or employed in the City first before
outside markets.” Further, the City and project applicants recognize that one of the principal reasons
for the designation of additional residential land in the community in the 2014 Land Use and Circula-
tion Element update was to address the current jobs-housing imbalance. One direct and effective
way of achieving this is to provide priority for existing employees to rent or purchase residences within
the Project. To that end, an interest list has been developed for the Project. Currently, seventy per-
cent (70%) of those on the interest list work in the San Luis Obispo area. Avila Ranch agrees to give
first preference to rent or purchase a residence within the Project to local employees identified on
the interest list. For purposes of this program, the term “local employees” shall include individuals
who are employed in business that are located in geographic areas that are customarily included in
the City’s annual jobs-housing balance analysis in its General Plan Status Report. These areas include
the City’s corporate limits and areas outside the City limits such as Cal Poly, California Men’s Colony,
Cuesta College, agricultural lands within the Edna Valley area and business parks on South Broad
Street. New employees to businesses in these geographic areas with bonafide employment offers will
be considered “local employees” as well. Avila Ranch agrees to maintain and update the interest list
through full build-out of the Project. City and Avila Ranch agree that, operationally, this program will
be administered as follows:
a. Avila Ranch shall maintain the interest list and shall separate and prioritize names of local
employees based on interest in product type.
b. When product becomes available, usually 270-360 days prior to certificate of occupancy
(assuming a 180-day construction period), Avila Ranch shall notify those individuals of the
opportunity to purchase a residence starting with the “top of the list.” Those individuals
shall have approximately 60 days to get pre-qualified to purchase the residence and to
provide Avila Ranch with proof that the individual is a local employee and the time notice
(i.e. paycheck or bonafide offer of employment from a local employer.)
c. If an individual fails to get pre-qualified or fails to provide Avila Ranch with proof of local
employment within the time periods above, then Avila Ranch may remove or put that
name at the end of the interest list.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 465
15
d. Except for the multi-family apartments, Avila Ranch agrees not to sell any units within the
Project to any individual without first offering the unit to a local employee who is on the
interest list for that product type. Upon exhausting all local employees on the interest list
for a product type, Avila Ranch agrees to give priority in the sale of such units to individ-
uals residing in the County (but within Fair Housing constraints and state and local regu-
lations), and finally to individuals from outside the county.
Nothing herein shall preclude Avila Ranch from notifying multiple individuals with the opportunity to
purchase a residence and prioritizing the purchase and sale based on “first in line” principles. Nothing
herein shall preclude Avila Ranch from taking all reasonable actions necessary in order to facilitate
the sale of units within the Project provided such actions are consistent with the “SLO Workers First”
program described herein. Avila Ranch shall, upon request, update the City on its implementation of
this program and provide City with the interest list and proof of employment for all sales made under
this program.
City and Avila Ranch acknowledge that this program described above will accomplish three important
objectives: 1) use new housing to address the current imbalance between existing jobs and housing;
2) ensure that, to the maximum extent practicable, that the increased housing in San Luis Obispo
results in a decline in the current commute traffic; and, 3) reduce competition from outside buyers in
the initial offering and sales.
• Owner-Occupancy Restrictions. Avila Ranch agrees to include restrictions in the purchase agreement
and Covenants Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for the single family detached units (R-1 and R-2)
substantially in the form as set forth in Attachment “A” requiring these units to be restricted to owner-
occupants only for the first five years after sale. In the case of units with Accessory Dwelling Units
(ADUs), the Principal Dwelling or the ADU will need to be occupied by the property owner. The final
form of these agreements will be determined at the time of development of the first final map, and
will provide for appropriate monitoring and enforcement. This component of the CC&Rs may not be
modified without the City’s written consent. The City of San Luis Obispo shall be a designated third
party beneficiary to these contractual rights and shall have the right to enforce the owner occupancy
requirement. Enforcement and monitoring of the owner occupancy requirement on all single-family
dwellings however, Avila Ranch and/ or in coordination with a qualified housing non-profit. Upon re-
quest, Avila Ranch shall provide City with any information related to Avila Ranch’s implementation
and enforcement of this program.
Workforce Housing Incentive Program (WHIP). Avila Ranch agrees to provide 25 deed restricted
units, including thirteen (13) Pocket Cottage units and twelve (12) R-3 Townhomes, to families in the
Workforce Housing category, defined by the City of San Luis Obispo as household incomes of 121% to
160% of Area Median Income (AMI). This program would require that eligible households have in-
comes no greater than 160% of the then-current Area Median Income (AMI) (Currently estimated at
$133,000 per year) and are income-certified by the Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo or other
qualified housing non-profit. For these units, prices would be limited to no more than that required
to achieve an Index of Affordability (“Index”) of 31 percent (cost of housing including mortgage prin-
cipal, mortgage interest, taxes and insurance divided by 140% of AMI). The Housing Element does
not specify an Index of Affordability for Above Moderate household; however, the proposed index is
consistent with the requirements of Policy 2.2 of the Housing Element which specifies a 30% Index for
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 466
15
Moderate Income units, with FHA guidelines, and recognizes the energy and occupancy costs savings
proposed as part of the “Net Zero” features of the project. The maximum purchase price would be
equal to 5.65 times (140% of 4.05 multiplier) the median income for each household size. For exam-
ple, the current 4-person (3 bedroom) median household is $83,200 and the associated maximum
price of a 3-bedroom unit would be $470,200, and the maximum purchase price for a two-bedroom
unit would be $423,200. These units would have to be occupied by an income qualifying Workforce
Housing household for a minimum of ten (10) years; if resold within this ten-year period, the units
would need to be sold to another income-qualifying Workforce Housing buyer, and the ten-year af-
fordability period would reset. Thirteen (13) of these Workforce units (6 2-bedroom/1-bath units and
7 3-bedroom/2-bath units) will be provided in the R-2 Pocket Cottage portion of the development and
twelve (12) units will be provided in the R-3 Townhome portion of the project (6 2-bedroom/1-bath
units and 6 3-bedroom/2-bath units). The Workforce units in the Pocket Cottage series will be pro-
vided on Lots 32, 46, 60, 74, 79, 89, 90, 117, 365, 379, 393, 315 or 316, and the 12 Workforce units
will be provided as on Lot 407 (see Exhibit 1).
The deed restrictions and enforcement would be administered in the same manner that the City does
the inclusionary housing requirements. More specifically, prior to recordation of any final map for the
Project, Avila Ranch shall enter into and record an Affordable Housing Agreement and Declaration of
Restrictive Covenants on title for the Property per City form incorporating the affordability provisions
set forth herein. Avila Ranch and City acknowledge that as each workforce housing unit is constructed,
a note and deed of trust would be recorded against title to the unit per City form. Avila Ranch acknowl-
edges that the note will be in the amount of the difference between the fair market value of the unit
and the restricted sale price and will be in favor of City. The City of San Luis Obispo Community Devel-
opment Department shall monitor all deed-restricted WHIP units.
Down Payment Assistance Program. Avila Ranch agrees to provide a matching down payment assistance
(DPA) of five percent of the purchase price up to $20,000 as a “silent second” on the initial sale of the 25
Workforce homes. These units would have to be occupied by an income qualifying Workforce Housing
household for a minimum of ten (10) years; if resold within this ten-year period, the units would need to
be sold to another income qualifying Workforce Housing buyer and the 10-year deed restriction would
reset to 10 more years with the new buyer of the home. The DPA loan would be repaid upon sale of the
unit or refinancing, and the proceeds would be placed in a revolving loan fund to assist future workforce,
moderate, or lower income home buyers in Avila Ranch. Unlike a reduction in price that would be cap-
tured by a future seller at the end of the affordability term, this assistance would continue throughout
the life of the funds to assist buyers in the development. The intent is that these funds will be used in
conjunction with the initial 25 Workforce units, but these funds could be used for any income qualifying
household who purchases a home in Avila Ranch after the initial ten-year workforce affordability period.
This will establish a revolving loan fund of approximately $500,000 to be administered by the City of San
Luis Obispo.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 467
15
Attachment A
Sample Owner Occupancy Limitation in
Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CCRs)
Leases: No agreement for the leasing or rental (a "Lease") of a Principal Dwelling Unit or an Ac-
cessory Dwelling Unit shall be permitted except as provided herein. Within five years of the date of first
occupancy of the Principal Dwelling Unit, there shall be no Lease of the Principal Dwelling Unit without
the prior and express approval of the Board based on the determination of the Board that the Lease is
reasonably necessary to avoid substantial hardship to the Owner (e.g., ownership and leasing of a Princi-
pal Dwelling - Unit for normal investment income purposes would not be permitted). Such hardship may
include temporary reassignment of employment to another location, extended requirements for out of
state personal commitments, and other factors. A Lease of a Principal Dwelling Unit or an Accessory
Dwelling Unit shall be permitted so long as the owner also occupies either the Principal Dwelling Unit or
the Accessory Dwelling Unit and the Accessory Dwelling units meets all of the City’s requirements.
Any Owner who leases a Principal Dwelling Unit or an Accessory Dwelling Unit (after receiving approval
to do so) shall promptly notify the Association and shall advise the Association of the term of the Lease
and the name of each tenant. Any Lease shall be subject in all respects to the provisions of this Declaration,
the Articles, the Bylaws, the Association Rules, the Architectural Rules and applicable agreements be-
tween the Association and any state, local municipal agency; and any Lease shall expressly provide that
the Lease is subject to all such instruments and matters. Said Lease shall further provide that any failure
by the tenant thereunder to comply with the terms of the foregoing documents shall be a default under
the Lease. All Leases shall be in writing.
Any Owner who shall lease or rent his Dwelling Unit shall be responsible for assuring compliance by such
Owner's tenant with this Declaration, the Articles, the Bylaws, the Association Rules and the Architectural
Rules, and shall be jointly and severally responsible for any violation thereof by his tenant. No Dwelling
Unit shall be leased for transient or hotel purposes, for short term vacation rentals, which shall be defined
as rental for any period less than thirty (30) days, or any rental whatsoever. No Dwelling Unit shall be
leased or rented to more than a single family at any time. Tenants under Leases shall not have voting
rights in the Association, but may utilize Common Areas in the same manner as Owners.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 468
15
Attachment B
Sample Purchase Agreement Occupancy Addendum
ADDENDUM “__” to
CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE AND SALE OF REAL PROPERTY
(_______________)
OCCUPANCY PERIOD AND USE AS PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE addendum
PROPERTY: Lot ___ of Tract No.
Address: _____________________________________________________ ________
This is an addendum (the “Addendum”) to the Contract for Purchase and Sale of Real Property (the “Con-
tract”) dated , 20______, between __________________, as “Seller,” and the
undersigned, as “Buyer,” concerning the property described above (the “Property”). This Addendum
modifies the Contract as set forth below. All terms used as defined terms below shall have the same
meaning as when used in the Contract unless expressly stated otherwise in this Addendum.
Seller desires to sell the Property only to a Buyer only if Buyer will occupy the Property as Buyer’s principal
residence for at least five (5) years. Buyer acknowledges that imposition of the minimum occupancy pe-
riod contained in this Addendum, and Seller’s limitation of selling only to owner-occupants is a material
consideration, and that Seller is forfeiting potential additional profits by selling to Buyer and other owner-
occupants. Therefore, to induce Seller to agree to sell the Property to Buyer, Buyer represents and agrees
as follows:
1. Use as Principal Residence for five years. Buyer represents and warrants to Seller : (a) that Buyer
is purchasing the Property for use as Buyer’s principal residence; and, (b) that Buyer will occupy
the Property as Buyer’s principal residence upon the Close of Escrow; and, (c) that Buyer shall not
attempt to transfer Buyer’s rights under the Contract nor enter into any agreement for the lease,
sale or other transfer of the Property which would result in Buyer’s failure to occupy the Property
as Buyer’s principal residence and hold title thereto in fee simple for a period of five (5) years
from the Close of Escrow of Buyer’s purchase of the Property (the “Occupancy Period”). The
provisions this Paragraph and the accuracy of the above representations and warranties consti-
tute a covenant of Buyer and a condition precedent to Seller’s performance under the Contract.
In the case of Property with a Principal Residence and an Accessory Dwelling Unit, the Buyer shall
occupy either the Principal Residence or the Accessory Dwelling Unit. Failure of Buyer to occupy
the Principal Residence shall not constitute a breach of this Addendum.
2. Transfer Prior to Close of Escrow. Any attempt by Buyer to assign Buyer’s rights under the Con-
tract and/or to lease, sell or otherwise transfer the Property prior to the Close of Escrow for the
sale of the Property without Seller’s prior written consent shall constitute both of the following:
(1) Buyer’s default under the Contract, entitling Seller, at its sole election, to terminate the Con-
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 469
15
tract and retain Buyer’s deposit pursuant to Paragraph the Contract; and, (ii) the failure of a con-
dition precedent to Seller’s obligation to sell the Property to Buyer. Seller’s remedies may occur
prior to or after the Close of Escrow for the sale of the Property to Buyer. If the Buyer breaches
the provisions of this Addendum and the Escrow for the sale of the Property to Buyer has closed,
Seller shall be entitled to damages as set forth in Paragraph 4 of this Addendum.
3. Seller’s Right to Terminate CONTRACT. Buyer understands and agrees that Seller has the unilat-
eral right, in its sole discretion, to terminate the Contract and cancel the Escrow in accordance
with Paragraph 2 above, if Buyer takes or has taken any of the following actions: (a) assigns the
Contract to another person prior to the Close of Escrow; or, (b) advertises, lists or otherwise offers
the Property for sale or rent to others at a time or manner which would result in the failure or
inability of the Buyer to reside in the Property for the full Occupancy Period; or,, (c) enters an
agreement to sell or rent the Property which would cause Buyer to move from the Property prior
to the expiration of the Occupancy Period; or, (d) takes any other action which indicates to Seller
that Buyer does not have a bona fide intention of residing in the Property as Buyer’s principal
residence for the full Occupancy Period.
4. Transfer Subsequent to Close of Escrow. Except for “hardship” situations as described in Exhibit
“A” to this Addendum, attached hereto, any sale, lease or other transfer by Buyer under which
Buyer either fails to occupy the Property for the Occupancy Period or transfers fee simple title to
the Property prior to the expiration of the Occupancy Period shall constitute Buyer’s default under
the Contract. Any such default shall entitle Seller to any of the following remedies: (a) in the case
of a sale or other transfer of fee title to the Property, Seller shall be entitled to the amount of the
appreciation of the Property which has occurred after the Close of Escrow; or, (b) in the case of
a lease or other occupancy agreement, the greater of (i) the actual rent and/or other economic
consideration or (ii) the fair market rental value of the Property (collectively, “Rent”) payable to
or for the benefit of Buyer during the Occupancy Period in connection with such lease or other
occupancy agreement. For purposes of this Addendum, “appreciation” shall be mean the differ-
ence between (i) the fair market value of the Property at the time of Buyer’s sal e thereof, less
Buyer’s customary costs of resale such as broker’s commission, escrow fees and title costs, and
(ii) the Total Purchase Price of the Property plus Buyer’s actual cost paid for any improvements
made by Buyer to the Property, as evidenced by paid unrelated third-party invoices. Buyer shall
pay appreciation to Seller concurrently with the sale or other transfer of fee title to the Property
by Buyer. Buyer shall pay Rent to Seller within the first five (5) days of each calendar month during
the Occupancy Period.
5. No Unreasonable Restraint. Buyer acknowledges that the purpose of this Addendum is to comply
with Seller’s intention to sell homes only to persons who will occupy them as a principal residence,
to obtain a stabilized community of owner-occupied homes, to prevent a shortage of available
homes to the local workforce, and to prevent a shortage of homes to permanent residents of San
Luis Obispo. Buyer agrees that the provisions and restrictions set forth in this Addendum do not
constitute an unreasonable restraint upon alienation of the Property.
6. Survival: severability grant. All of the covenants contained herein shall survive the delivery and
recordation of the deed conveying the Property from Seller to Buyer and the Close of Escrow. The
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 470
15
provisions of this Addendum shall be independent and severable, and a determination of invalid-
ity or partial invalidity or enforceability of any one provision or portion hereof shall not affect the
validity or enforceability of any other provision of this Addendum or the Contract.
7. Subordination. Buyer hereby acknowledges and agrees that a violation of this Addendum by
Buyer shall not defeat or render invalid the lien of any first mortgage or deed of trust made in
good faith and for value by Buyer, and that the covenants and provisions of this Addendum shall
be inferior and subordinate to the lien of any such first mortgage or deed of trust recorded con-
currently with the deed conveying the Property to Buyer.
8. Entire Agreement. This Addendum and Exhibit “A” hereto contain the entire agreement between
Buyer and Seller concerning the matters set forth herein. All prior discussions, negotiations and
agreements, if any, whether oral or written, are hereby superseded by these documents. No
addition or modification of this Addendum or the Contract shall be effective unless set forth in
writing and signed by Buyer and an authorized officer of Seller.
9. Attorney’s Fees. In the event of controversy, claim or dispute relating to breach of the terms of
this Addendum, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the losing party reasonable
expenses, including attorneys’ fees and costs.
10. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. There are no third-party beneficiaries to this Addendum.
11. Capitalized Terms. Various capitalized terms used in this Addendum are defined in the Agree-
ments and shall have the same meaning as set forth herein, unless otherwise indicated herein.
Buyer acknowledges that Buyer has read the provisions of this Addendum and that Buyer understands
the provisions and finds them to be reasonable.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Addendum and make if effective as of the date of
Seller’s acceptance indicated below.
“SELLER”
By: ______________________
Its: ______________________
Seller’s Acceptance
Date: , 20_
“BUYER”
_____________________
(Signature)
____________________
(Signature)
____________________
(Signature)
Buyer’s Acceptance
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 471
15
Date: , 20_
EXHIBIT “A” TO ADDENDUM “__”
The following events shall be deemed to constitute “hardship” situations under which Buyer may transfer,
sell, assign, convey or lease (each of which is “a Transfer”) its right, title and interest in the Property prior
to either (a) Close of Escrow, or (b) occupying and holding title to the property for a period of five y (5)
years from Close of Escrow:
A Transfer resulting from the death of Buyer;
Transfer by Buyer where the spouse of Buyer becomes the only co-owner of the Property with Buyer;
A Transfer resulting from a decree of dissolution of marriage or legal separation or from a property set-
tlement agreement incident to such decree;
A Transfer by Buyer into a revocable inter vivos trust in which Buyer is a beneficiary;
A Transfer, conveyance, pledge, assignment or other hypothecation of the Property to secure the perfor-
mance of an obligation, which transfer, conveyance, pledge, assignment or hypothecation will be released
or re-conveyed upon the completion of such performance;
A Transfer by Buyer where necessary to accommodate a mandatory job transfer required by Buyer’s em-
ployer (not including Buyer, if Buyer is self-employed);
A Transfer necessitated by a medical or financial emergency, proof of which emergency has been deliv-
ered to Seller, and has been approved by Seller in its reasonable discretion;
A Transfer which, in the reasonable judgment of Seller, constitutes a “hardship” situation consistent with
the intentions of this Addendum and this Exhibit “A” thereto.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 472
15
Exhibit 1
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 473
15
Exhibit H
Water Improvements
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 474
15
AVILA RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLANMay 2, 2017#1011023A25Recycled Water: ProposedDomestic Water: ProposedUTILITIES LEGENDWater Supply PlanExhibit 1Packet Pg 47515
Exhibit I
Water Well Site Plan
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 476
15
AVILA RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLANMay 2, 2017#1011023A3Composite Site Plan0 75 150300SCALE: 1”=150’ (24”x36” sheet)REFER TO A6 FORADDITIONAL DETAILREFER TO A9 FORADDITIONAL DETAILREFER TO A8 FORADDITIONAL DETAILREFER TO A7 FORADDITIONAL DETAILREFER TO A5 FORADDITIONAL DETAILREFER TO A4 FORADDITIONAL DETAILExhibit 1Packet Pg 47715
Exhibit J
Bicycle and Multimodal Improvements
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 478
15
Exhibit J
Bicycle and Multimodal Improvements
Development Plan Features
Pedestrian and Bicycles:
1. Class I Bike Paths. Construct Class I multi-use paths in accordance with the project site plan and
connect them to the off-site transportation network consistent with the City’s Bicycle
Transportation Plan. The Buckley Extension Class I bike lane will be provided ahead of the street
improvements, such to availability of right of way.
2. Class II Bike Lanes. Construct 8-foot Class II “buffered” bike lanes on all Residential Collectors and
Commercial Collectors in the Project (Earthwood, Venture, Jesperson and Horizon), and on offsite
roads including Vachell and Buckley along the project frontages. The Buckley Extension shall
include a 8’ buffered bike lane in addition to the Class I. Offsite Earthwood to Suburban shall be
minimum 6’ bike lane width if parking is removed subject to approval of the Director of Public
Works. Buffered bike lane shall use appropriate separation devices, subject to approval of the
Director of Public Works, that will assist in providing positive separation between vehicles and
bicyclists.
3. Bike Bridges. Construct three bike bridges across Tank Farm Creek, one for eastbound traffic on
the south side of Buckley to provide east-west connectivity on Buckley Road, and the other along
the north side of Buckley on the southern side of Phase 1. An additional bike bridge across Tank
Farm Creek will be constructed between Phase 2 area and Phase 5 area as part of phase 5
development or when the offsite Chevron Class I facility is constructed, whichever occurs sooner.
4. Tank Farm Creek Bike Path Connectivity. The Chevron portion of the Tank Farm Creek Class I
bike path will be constructed by the project to improve connectivity subject to the following: 1)
city provides the right of way; 2) connection is made in conjunction with Phase 4 (onsite Tank
Farm Creek bike path will be completed in Phase 3; 3) any right of way expense should be paid for
by the City and any bike and ped improvement should be included within the reimbursement
agreement; and, 4) City will ensure that the cost of the improvements will be completely
reimbursed by the end of the buildout.
5. Octagon Barn/Buckley Road Connectivity. The Land Conservancy and SLO Bike Club have noted
that the portion of the Bob Jones Trail between the Octagon Barn and the Buckley Extension is a
missing link. The County currently has a ROW reservation (but not an irrevocable offer) for this
area. The project will construct this subject to ROW being provided. ROW should/could be
acquired at the time Buckley Extension ROW is secured from the same property owner.)
6. Bikes and E-Bikes. E-bikes have been identified as a potential asset to increasing the range and
frequency of bike usage, including work trips and weekly shopping trips. The project will provide
a $750 voucher to each R-1, R-2 and R-3 Duplex household. Each separate R-3 Townhome and R-
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 479
15
4 development shall provide a pool of bikes and e-bikes, at an initial rate of one bike per seven
units (28 e-bikes for the R-3, and 18 e-bikes for the R-4), with at least half of the pool being e-
bikes. The R-4 and R-3 owners/HOAs would be responsible for operation of this pool and it shall
be maintained in perpetuity.
7. Pedestrian Improvements. Pedestrian improvements will be provided along Suburban, Vachell
and Higuera to eliminate the missing links of sidewalks and/or elimination of non-ADA compliant
crossings. Appendix F shows the scope of these improvements.
8. Enhanced Pedestrian and Bicycle Connectivity. These changes include narrower vehicle lanes
and wider bike lanes on internal streets. Vehicle lanes have been narrowed to 10 feet while
bicycle lanes have been widened to a full 8-foot buffered bike lane standard. These buffered bike
lanes occur on all internal major streets, including Earthwood, Venture, Jesperson and Horizon.
Special at-grade “speed table” pedestrian street crossings per Sheets A15 and A16 have also been
included to provide for the traffic calming and a continuous walking experience. Finally,
pedestrian through connections have been specified along and between residential blocks. This
results in a pedestrian intersection density of over 500 intersections per square mile, well in
excess of the standard established by LEED and the Smart Growth Coalition.
Car Sharing:
1. Shared Mobility strategies will be included to reduce the necessity for additional vehicles for
each family. Car sharing would be provided in the development at an initial rate of one car per
50 residences, with at least 50 percent of that fleet in the form of electric vehicles. Vehicles
would be stored onsite in guest parking spaces, near public parks and on where approved by the
City on public streets.
Transit:
1. Provision of transit stops on the project site. Phase 1 will include a transit stop on Earthwood
north of Venture, and Phase 4 will include a transit stop at the Town Center.
2. The project site will also be served by bus service from the San Luis Coastal Unified School District.
Transit stops will be provided throughout the project in accordance with their requirements.
3. The project shall ensure adequate transit services are provided to the project by the 50th unit of
Phase I development.
Mitigation Measures & Conditions of Approval:
1. All Mitigation Measures and Conditions of approval as identified in final Council resolution for the
project shall be implemented.
Exhibit 1
Packet Pg 480
15
Exhibit 1 Packet Pg 48115
Exhibit 1 Packet Pg 48215
R -
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2017 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ESTABLISH
AVILA RANCH COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2017-1
(SERVICES) PURSUANT TO THE MELLO-ROOS COMMUNITY
FACILITIES ACT OF 1982 AND TO LEVY A SPECIAL TAX IN
CONNECTION THEREWITH
WHEREAS, the development of the territory commonly known as Avila Ranch will
necessitate the provision of additional City facilities and services; and
WHEREAS, the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (Section 53311 et. seq.
of the California Government Code) (the “Act”) authorizes the City to establish a community
facilities district to finance such facilities and services; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to its own initiative and as authorized by Section 53318 of the
Act, the City Council desires to institute proceedings to establish a community facilities district
to finance such facilities and services and to levy a special tax for that purpose against parcels
located in Avila Ranch.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The recitals stated above are true and correct.
SECTION 2. The City Council proposes to establish a community facilities district
under the terms of the Act designated as the Avila Ranch Community Facilities District No.
2017-1 (Services) (the “District”).
SECTION 3. The boundaries of the territory proposed for inclusion in the District are
shown on the map that is on file in the office of the City Clerk.
SECTION 4. The facilities and services proposed to be financed by the District are
described in Exhibit 2 to this Resolution, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference
(the “Facilities and Services”).
SECTION 5. Except where funds are otherwise available, a special tax sufficient to pay
for all the Facilities and Services, along with the incidental expenses for the Facilities and
Services described in Exhibit B, will be annually levied within the District (the “Special Tax”).
The Special Tax will be secured by recordation of a continuing lien against all nonexempt real
property in the District. The rate, method of apportionment, and manner of collection of the
Special Tax are described in Exhibit A to this resolution, attached hereto and incorporated herein
by reference (the “Rate and Method of Apportionment”). The Rate and Method of
Packet Pg 483
15
Resolution No. _______ (2017 Series) Page 2
R -
Apportionment contains sufficient detail to allow each landowner or resident within the District
to estimate the maximum Special Tax that he or she will be required to pay.
SECTION 6. The Special Tax will be levied annually, for an indefinite period with no
expiration or sunset. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no Special Tax to pay for public facilities
will be levied against any parcel after Fiscal Year 2035-2036. For the purposes of this Section,
“public facilities” does not include services described in section 53313 of the Act.
SECTION 7. Under no circumstances may the Special tax on a residential parcel in the
District be increased in any fiscal year as a consequence of delinquency or default in payment of
the Special Tax levied on another parcel or parcels by more than ten percent (10%) above the
amount that would have been levied in that fiscal year had there never been any such
delinquency or default.
SECTION 8. The Special Tax, if levied, will be subject to the following accountability
measures:
a) Proceeds of the Special Tax will be deposited in a special account (the “Special
Account”) and used only for the purpose of financing the Facilities and Services
and incidental expenses relating to the Facilities and Services; and
b) An annual report will be filed by the Finance Officer of the City at least once a
year including a description of the amount of funds and the status of any project
included in the Facilities and Services.
The provisions of this section are a limitation on the expenditure of Special Tax proceeds. The
City does not, solely by virtue of this section or this resolution, or solely by virtue of the levy or
collection of the Special Tax, assume any obligation to provide any particular service or to
purchase, construct, expand, improve, or rehabilitate any property of any particular kind.
SECTION 9. A public hearing (“Hearing”) will be held on September 19, 2017 at 4:00
PM, or as soon thereafter as practicable, in the City Council Chambers at 990 Palm Street, San
Luis Obispo, CA on the establishment of the District. At the Hearing, protests against the
establishment of the District, the extent of the District, or the furnishing of specified types of
public facilities or services within the District may be made in writing by any interested person
or taxpayer.
SECTION 10. Concurrently with, or subsequently to, the establishment of the District,
the City Council may submit the levy of the Special Tax to the qualified electors of the District.
The election will be conducted by the City Clerk, as elections official. The vote will be by the
landowners of the District, and each landowner of the District who is the owner of record at the
close of the election, or is the authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre
or portion of an acre of land that he or she owns within the District. The number of votes to be
voted by a particular landowner will be specified on the ballot provided to that landowner. The
election will be conducted by mail ballot.
Packet Pg 484
15
Resolution No. _______ (2017 Series) Page 3
R -
SECTION 11. The City Council directs the City Manager to file a report with the City
Council at or before the time of the Hearing containing: (i) a brief description of the public
facilities and services which will, in his or her opinion, be required to adequately meet the needs
of the District; (ii) his or her estimate of the cost of providing those public facilities and services ;
and (iii) his or her estimate of the fair and reasonable cost of the incidental expenses for
Facilities and Services described in Exhibit 2.
SECTION 12. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this
resolution is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent
jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder of the resolution. The
City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this resolution, and each section,
subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion hereof, irrespective of that fact that any one or
more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases or portions be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
SECTION 13. The City Clerk is directed to give notice of the Hearing as required by
law. The notice shall be substantially in the form specified in section 53322 of the Act.
SECTION 14. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
Upon motion made by Council Member ________ and seconded by Council Member _______
and the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOS:
ABSENT:
The foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted on ______day of _____________, 2017.
_________________________________
Heidi Harmon
Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
Packet Pg 485
15
Resolution No. _______ (2017 Series) Page 4
R -
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 ________, 2017.
_________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
Packet Pg 486
15
Exhibit A
Rate and Method of Apportionment
Packet Pg 487
15
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) A-1 P:\162000\161181 Avila Ranch CFD Tecgnical Support\Rate and Method\161181 rm03.docx
EXHIBIT A
City of San Luis Obispo
Avila Ranch Community Facilities District No. 2017-1 (Services)
San Luis Obispo County, California
AMENDED RATE, METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT, AND
MANNER OF COLLECTION OF SPECIAL TAX
1. Basis of Special Tax Levy
A Special Tax authorized under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (Act) applicable
to the land in the Avila Ranch Community Facilities District No. 2017-1 (Services) (CFD) of the
City of San Luis Obispo (City) shall be levied and collected according to the tax liability
determined by the City through the application of the appropriate amount or rate, as described
below.
2. Definitions
“Act” means the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, Sections 53311 and
following of the California Government Code.
“Administrative Expenses” means the actual or estimated costs incurred by the City to form
the CFD and to determine, levy, and collect the Special Taxes, including compensation of City
employees for administrative work performed in relation to the CFD, the fees of consultants and
legal counsel, the costs of collecting installments of the Special Taxes on the general tax rolls,
preparation of required reports, and any other costs required to administer the CFD as
determined by the City.
“Administrator” means the City Manager of the City, or his or her designee.
“Affordable Unit” means a Unit built on a Parcel or Single-Family Parcel for which an Affordable
Housing Agreement has been entered into for the property designating the Unit as affordable.
The City Manager, or their designee, shall determine which Units are designated as Affordable
Units and maintain an Affordable Unit Listing, which shall contain all designated buildable Parcels
by tract and lot number, and in the case of Large Lots Parcels remaining before May 1 of the
preceding Fiscal Year, the number of designated Affordable Units for each such Large Lot Parcel;
all entries shall indicate the effective date of designation. The Affordable Unit Listing also shall
be updated to reflect those Units no longer qualifying as Affordable Units, also known as Market-
Rate Units. The Affordable Unit Listing, which shall contain all qualifying Affordable Units as of
April 30, shall be made available to the Administrator by July 1 of each year for purposes of
determining the Maximum Special Tax for Parcels pursuant to Section 4.
Packet Pg 488
15
Avila Ranch CFD No. 2017-1 (Services)
Amended Rate, Method of Apportionment, and Manner of Collection of Special Tax August 30, 2017
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) A-2 P:\162000\161181 Avila Ranch CFD Tecgnical Support\Rate and Method\161181 rm03.docx
“Annual Infrastructure Costs” means, for each Fiscal Year, the total cost of (1) Authorized
Facilities and (2) any amounts needed to cure actual or estimated delinquencies in Special Taxes
for the current or previous Fiscal Year.
“Annual Services Costs” means for each Fiscal Year, the total cost of (1) Authorized Services,
(2) Administrative Expenses, and (3) any amounts needed to cure actual or estimated
delinquencies in Special Taxes for the current or previous Fiscal Year.
“Assessor’s Parcel Map” means an official map of the County Assessor designating parcels by
Assessor’s Parcel Number.
“Assessor's Parcel Number” means the Parcel and Parcel Number as recorded by the County
Assessor on the equalized tax roll.
“Authorized Facilities” means those facilities, as listed in the resolution forming the CFD.
“Authorized Services” means those services, as listed in the resolution forming the CFD.
“Base Year” means the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2018, and ending June 30, 2019.
“Building Permit” means a permit issued by the City for the construction of a Residential Use
structure.
“Building Square Foot(age)” has the same meaning as that defined for the School Mitigation
Fee by California Government Code Section 65995 for “Assessable Space,” which is “all of the
square footage within the perimeter of a residential structure, not including any carport,
walkway, garage, overhang, patio, enclosed patio, detached accessory structure, or similar area”
as determined upon issuance of the initial Building Permit.
“CFD” means the Avila Ranch Community Facilities District No. 2017-1 (Services) of the City of
San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California.
“City” means the City of San Luis Obispo in San Luis Obispo County, California.
“Council” means the City Council of the City acting for the CFD under the Act.
“County” means the County of San Luis Obispo, California.
“County Assessor’s Parcel” means a lot or Parcel with an assigned Assessor’s Parcel Number
in the maps used by the County Assessor in the preparation of the tax roll.
“Developed Parcel” means any Taxable Parcel with a Building Permit issued for Residential
Uses.
“Development Plan” means a condominium plan, apartment plan, site plan, or other
development plan that identifies such information as the type of structure, acreage, square
footage, or number of Units that are approved to be developed on Single-Family Parcels and
Multifamily Residential Use Parcels.
“Final Map Parcel” means a Parcel designated for development of a single-family residence,
which is part of a Final Subdivision Map.
Packet Pg 489
15
Avila Ranch CFD No. 2017-1 (Services)
Amended Rate, Method of Apportionment, and Manner of Collection of Special Tax August 30, 2017
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) A-3 P:\162000\161181 Avila Ranch CFD Tecgnical Support\Rate and Method\161181 rm03.docx
“Final Subdivision Map” means a recorded map designating the final Parcel Subdivision for
individual Single-Family Parcels.
“Fiscal Year” means the period starting July 1 and ending the following June 30.
“Infrastructure Special Tax” means the Special Tax identified in Attachment 1 for each Land
Use Category identified to fund the costs of Authorized Facilities. The Infrastructure Special Tax
is increased by the Infrastructure Special Tax Escalation Factor in each Fiscal Year following the
Base Year.
“Infrastructure Special Tax Escalation Factor” means a factor of 2 percent in any Fiscal Year
following the Base Year by which the Special Tax for the previous Fiscal Year will be increased for
the current Fiscal Year.
“Land Use Category” means the categories of taxable land uses shown in Attachment 1.
“Large Lot Parcel” means a Parcel created by a Large Lot Subdivision Map.
“Large Lot Subdivision Map” means a recorded subdivision map creating Parcels by land use.
However, the Large Lot Subdivision Map does not delineate Single-Family Parcels. A Final
Subdivision Map will create individual Single-Family Parcels.
“Market-Rate Unit” means a Unit that is not an Affordable Unit.
“Maximum Annual Special Tax” means the greatest amount of Special Tax that can be levied
against a Parcel in a given Fiscal Year. The Maximum Annual Special Tax is the sum of the Fiscal
Services Special Tax and Infrastructure Special Tax assigned to each Taxable Parcel.
“Maximum Annual Special Tax Revenue” means the greatest amount of revenue that can be
collected in total from a group of Parcels (such as Developed Parcels) by levying the Special Tax.
“Multifamily” or “Multifamily Residential Use” means any Parcel or Development Project
designated or developed for more than one residential dwelling Unit per Parcel. Such uses may
consist of apartments, condominiums, townhomes, time-share units, row houses, duplexes, or
triplexes.
“Municipal Costs Index” means the index published by American City & County.
“Other Land Uses” means Parcels with land uses other than Residential Uses. Such Parcels are
Tax-Exempt Parcels.
“Parcel” means any County Assessor’s Parcel in the CFD based on the equalized tax rolls of the
County.
“Public Parcel” means any Parcel that is or is intended to be publicly owned, as designated in
any final map that is normally exempt from the levy of general ad valorem property taxes under
California law, including public streets, schools, parks, public drainageways, landscaping,
wetlands, greenbelts, and open space.
“Remainder Parcel” means a Parcel that is created as the result of the recordation of a Large
Lot Parcel Map or Final Small Lot Subdivision Map, which results in a Parcel within the boundaries
of a Large Lot Parcel that has not been mapped for final development approval. Such a
Packet Pg 490
15
Avila Ranch CFD No. 2017-1 (Services)
Amended Rate, Method of Apportionment, and Manner of Collection of Special Tax August 30, 2017
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) A-4 P:\162000\161181 Avila Ranch CFD Tecgnical Support\Rate and Method\161181 rm03.docx
Remainder Parcel may contain taxable and tax-exempt uses, such as Residential Uses, and Public
Parcels, such as school or park sites. Once designated as a Remainder Parcel, such Parcel will be
considered a Large Lot Parcel for the purposes of future Subdivisions and for the provisions of
Sections 4 through 6.
“Residential Use” means a Parcel designated for residential use, such as single-family
residential units, residential condominiums, townhouses, Multifamily Residential Uses, or
apartments.
“RMA” means the Rate, Method of Apportionment, and Manner of Collection of Special Tax.
“Services Special Tax” means the Special Tax identified in Attachment 1 for each Land Use
Category identified to fund the costs of Authorized Services. The Services Special Tax is
increased by the Services Special Tax Escalation Factor in each Fiscal Year following the Base
Year.
“Services Special Tax Escalation Factor” means an annual percentage increase in the Fiscal
Mitigation Special Tax and Local Area Special Tax based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI)
(prior calendar year annual average, San Francisco, All Urban Consumers [CPI-U] Index), the
CPI (prior calendar year annual average, Pacific West Cities, All Urban Wage Earners and Clerical
Workers), or the Municipal Cost Index annual average, whichever is greater, but not exceeding
4 percent.
“Single-Family Parcel” means, in any Fiscal Year, all Parcels in the CFD for which a building
permit was issued or may be issued for construction of a Unit that is a single-family residential,
residential condominium, or townhouse Unit.
“Special Tax(es)” mean(s) any tax levy under the Act in the CFD.
“Subdivision” or “Subdivided” means a division of a Parcel into two or more Parcels through
the Subdivision Map Act process. A Subdivision also may include the merging of two or more
Parcels to create new Parcels.
“Tax Collection Schedule” means the document prepared by the Administrator for the County
Auditor-Controller to use in levying and collecting the Special Taxes each Fiscal Year.
“Taxable Parcel” means any Parcel that is not a Tax-Exempt Parcel.
“Tax-Exempt Parcel” means a Parcel not subject to the annual Special Tax. Tax-Exempt
Parcels include Public Parcels, Undeveloped Parcels, and Other Use Parcels.
Certain privately owned Parcels also may be exempt from the levy of annual Special Taxes,
including common areas owned by homeowners’ associations or property owner associations,
wetlands, detention basins, water quality ponds, and open space, as determined by the
Administrator.
“Undeveloped Parcel” means a Parcel that is a Large Lot Parcel or a Remainder Parcel.
“Unit” means (1) a Single-Family Parcel dwelling Unit; and means (2) for a Multifamily
Residential Use Parcel, an individual residential Unit in an apartment building.
Packet Pg 491
15
Avila Ranch CFD No. 2017-1 (Services)
Amended Rate, Method of Apportionment, and Manner of Collection of Special Tax August 30, 2017
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) A-5 P:\162000\161181 Avila Ranch CFD Tecgnical Support\Rate and Method\161181 rm03.docx
3. Duration of the Special Tax
Parcels in the CFD will remain subject to the Services Special Tax in perpetuity.
Parcels in the CFD will be subject to the Infrastructure Special Tax through Fiscal Year 2035-36.
If the Special Tax ceases to be levied, the City will direct the County Recorder to record a Notice
of Cessation of Special Tax. Such notice will state that the obligation to pay the Special Tax has
ceased, and the lien imposed by the Notice of Special Tax Lien is extinguished. The Notice of
Cessation of Special Tax, in addition, will identify the book and page of the Book of Maps of
Assessment and Community Facilities Districts where the map of the boundaries of the CFD is
recorded.
4. Administrative Tasks
Administrative tasks required of the Administrator are discussed below:
A. Annual Special Tax Escalation. The Administrator shall increase the Fiscal Mitigation Special
Tax and Local Area Special Tax by the Services Special Tax Escalation Factor in each Fiscal
Year following the Base Year. The Administrator shall increase the Infrastructure Special Tax
Escalation Factor in each Fiscal Year following the Base Year.
B. Assignment of the Maximum Annual Special Tax to Taxable Parcels. As Taxable Parcels are
Subdivided or combined, the Administrator will assign the Maximum Annual Special Tax to
each new Taxable Parcel based on the records of the City:
1. Assignment of the Maximum Annual Special Tax to Developed Parcels. The Services
Special Tax and Infrastructure Special Tax are assigned to Developed Parcels using the
following procedures:
a. Identify the Building Square Footage for the Residential Use for the Taxable Parcel, as
identified in the Building Permit.
b. Identify the Land Use Category for the Taxable Parcel based on the Residential Use
type and Building Square Footage in Attachment 1.
c. Assign the Services Special Tax for the Taxable Parcel based on the Land Use
Category using the criteria identified in Sections 4.B.1.a and 4.B.1.b, and as
increased by the Services Special Tax Escalation Factor and Infrastructure Special Tax
Escalation Factor.
d. Assign the Infrastructure Special Tax for the Taxable Parcel based on the Land Use
Category using the criteria identified in Sections 4.B.1.a and 4.B.1.b, and as
increased by the Infrastructure Special Tax Escalation Factor.
e. Sum the Services Special Tax and Infrastructure Special Tax to determine the
Maximum Annual Special Tax for the Taxable Parcel.
Packet Pg 492
15
Avila Ranch CFD No. 2017-1 (Services)
Amended Rate, Method of Apportionment, and Manner of Collection of Special Tax August 30, 2017
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) A-6 P:\162000\161181 Avila Ranch CFD Tecgnical Support\Rate and Method\161181 rm03.docx
2. Assignment of the Maximum Annual Special Tax to Final Map Parcels. The Services
Special Tax and Infrastructure Special Tax are assigned to Final Map Parcels using the
following procedures:
a. Assign the Services Special Tax for the Final Map Parcel, as shown in Attachment 1,
and as increased by the Services Special Tax Escalation Factor.
b. Assign the Infrastructure Special Tax for the Final Map Parcel, as shown in
Attachment 1, and as increased by the Infrastructure Special Tax Escalation Factor.
c. Sum the Services Special Tax and Infrastructure Special Tax to determine the
Maximum Annual Special Tax for the Taxable Parcel.
3. Assignment of the Maximum Annual Special Tax to Undeveloped Parcels. Undeveloped
Parcels are not subject to the Maximum Annual Special Tax.
C. Affordable Units that Become Market-Rate Units. If, in any Fiscal Year, a Unit that previously
had been designated as an Affordable Unit no longer qualifies as such, the City shall update
the Affordable Unit Listing by denoting the change in status of the Unit, together with the
effective date thereof. The Maximum Annual Special Tax on the Unit that no longer qualifies
as an Affordable Unit shall be increased to double the amount that would have applied in that
Fiscal Year if the Unit had remained as an Affordable Unit. In subsequent Fiscal Years, this
increased Maximum Annual Special Tax shall continue to escalate by the Tax Escalation
Factor.
D. Conversion of a Tax-Exempt Parcel to a Taxable Parcel. If a Tax-Exempt Parcel is not needed
for public use and is converted to a taxable use or transferred to a private owner, it shall
become subject to the Special Tax. The Maximum Annual Special Tax for such a Parcel will
be assigned according to the provisions of Sections 4.A and 4.B.
E. Taxable Parcel Acquired by a Public Agency. A Taxable Parcel acquired by a public agency
shall be reclassified as a Tax-Exempt Parcel and is no longer subject to the Special Tax levy.
F. Maintenance of Parcel Records. The Administrator will maintain a development status for
each Parcel in the CFD as Parcels are Subdivided and developed. The record will contain the
Assessor’s Parcel Number, Land Use Category, number of Units per Taxable Parcel, the Fiscal
Mitigation Special Tax, Local Area Special Tax, Infrastructure Special Tax, and Maximum
Annual Special Tax for each Taxable Parcel.
5. Assignment of the Maximum Annual Special Tax
A. Classification of Parcels. By June 30 of each Fiscal Year, using the Definitions in Section 2,
the Administrator shall cause:
1. Each Parcel to be classified as a Taxable Parcel or a Tax-Exempt Parcel.
2. Each Parcel to be classified as a Developed Parcel, Final Map Parcel, or an Undeveloped
Parcel.
Packet Pg 493
15
Avila Ranch CFD No. 2017-1 (Services)
Amended Rate, Method of Apportionment, and Manner of Collection of Special Tax August 30, 2017
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) A-7 P:\162000\161181 Avila Ranch CFD Tecgnical Support\Rate and Method\161181 rm03.docx
B. Assignment of the Maximum Annual Special Tax to Taxable Parcels. The Maximum Annual
Special Tax will be assigned to each Taxable Parcel each Fiscal Year using the procedures
(not all steps may be applicable for each such Parcel) in Section 4.
6. Calculating Annual Special Taxes
The Administrator will compute the Annual Costs and determine the annual Special Tax levy for
each Taxable Parcel based on the assignment of the Special Tax in Section 5. The Administrator
then will determine the tax levy for each Taxable Parcel using the following process:
A. Compute the Annual Services Costs using the definition of Annual Services Costs in
Section 2.
B. Calculate the Services Special Tax levy for each Taxable Parcel by the following steps:
Step 1: Compute 100 percent of the Services Special Tax revenue for all Developed Parcels.
Step 2: Compare the Annual Services Costs with the amount calculated in the previous
step.
Step 3: If the Annual Services Costs are lower than the amount calculated in Step 1,
decrease proportionately the Services Special Tax levy for each Developed Parcel
until the revenue from the Special Tax levy equals the Annual Services Costs.
Step 4: If the Annual Services Costs are greater than the amount calculated in Step 1,
increase proportionately the Services Special Tax levy for each Final Map Parcel
until the revenue from the Special Tax levy equals the Annual Services Costs, or
100 percent of the Services Special Tax for all Final Map Parcels, if needed to fund
Annual Services Costs.
C. Compute the Annual Infrastructure Costs using the definition of Annual Infrastructure Costs
in Section 2.
D. Calculate the Infrastructure Special Tax levy for each Taxable Parcel by the following steps:
Step 1: Compute 100 percent of the Infrastructure Special Tax revenue for all Developed
Parcels.
Step 2: Compare the Annual Infrastructure Costs with the amount calculated in the previous
step.
Step 3: If the Annual Infrastructure Costs are lower than the amount calculated in Step 1,
decrease proportionately the Infrastructure Special Tax levy for each Developed
Parcel until the revenue from the Special Tax levy equals the Annual Infrastructure
Costs.
Step 4: If the Annual Infrastructure Costs are greater than the amount calculated in Step 1,
increase proportionately the Infrastructure Special Tax levy for each Final Map
Parcel until the revenue from the Special Tax levy equals the Annual Services Costs,
or 100 percent of the Services Special Tax for all Final Map Parcels, if needed to
fund Annual Infrastructure Costs.
Packet Pg 494
15
Avila Ranch CFD No. 2017-1 (Services)
Amended Rate, Method of Apportionment, and Manner of Collection of Special Tax August 30, 2017
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) A-8 P:\162000\161181 Avila Ranch CFD Tecgnical Support\Rate and Method\161181 rm03.docx
E. Sum the amount determined in Sections 6.B and 6.D above.
F. Levy on each Taxable Parcel the amount calculated in Section 6.E above.
G. Prepare the Tax Collection Schedule and, unless an alternative method of collection has been
selected pursuant to Section 9, send it to the County Auditor requesting that it be placed on
the general, secured property tax roll for the Fiscal Year. The Tax Collection Schedule will
not be sent later than the date required by the Auditor for such inclusion.
The Administrator will make every effort to correctly calculate the Special Tax for each
Parcel. It will be the burden of the taxpayer to correct any errors in the determination of the
Parcels subject to the tax and their Special Tax assignments.
7. Interpretation, Application and Appeal of Special
Tax Formula and Procedures
Any taxpayer who feels the amount of the Special Tax assigned to a Parcel is in error may file a
notice with the Administrator appealing the levy of the Special Tax. The Administrator then will
promptly review the appeal and, if necessary, meet with the applicant. If the Administrator
verifies the tax should be modified or changed, the Special Tax levy will be corrected and, if
applicable in any case, a refund will be granted.
Interpretations may be made by Resolution of the Council for purposes of clarifying any
vagueness or ambiguity as it relates to the Special Tax rate, the method of apportionment, the
classification of properties, or any definition applicable to the CFD.
Without Council approval, the Administrator may make minor, non-substantive administrative
and technical changes to the provisions of this Exhibit that do not materially affect the rate,
method of apportionment, and manner of collection of the Special Tax for purposes of the
administrative efficiency or convenience or to comply with new applicable federal, state, or local
law.
8. Prepayment of the Special Tax Obligation
The Special Tax for a Taxable Parcel may not be prepaid. The Special Tax is collected to fund
Authorized Services in perpetuity, or until the Council determines the Special Tax no longer
should be collected.
9. Manner of Collection
The Special Tax will be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ad valorem
property taxes, provided, however, that the Administrator or their designee may bill the Special
Tax directly and may collect the Special Tax at a different time, such as on a monthly or other
periodic basis, or in a different manner, if necessary, to meet the City’s financial obligations.
Packet Pg 495
15
Avila Ranch CFD No. 2017-1 (Services)
Amended Rate, Method of Apportionment, and Manner of Collection of Special Tax August 30, 2017
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) A-9 P:\162000\161181 Avila Ranch CFD Tecgnical Support\Rate and Method\161181 rm03.docx
Attachment 1
Avila Ranch CFD No. 2017-1 (Services)
Maximum Annual Special Tax - Base Year of FY 2018-19
No. of Services Infrastructure Maximum Annual
Land Use Category Units Special Tax Special Tax Special Tax
[1] [2] [3] [4]
Single Family Residential - ≥ 1,500 Sq. Ft. 322 $2,749.80 $300.00 $3,049.80
Single Family Residential - <1,500 Sq. Ft. 76 $1,832.86 $200.00 $2,032.86
Multifamily Residential - ≥ 1,500 Sq. Ft. 38 $2,749.80 $300.00 $3,049.80
Multifamily Residential - < 1,500 Sq. Ft. 252 $1,832.86 $200.00 $2,032.86
Affordable Multifamily Residential 32 $916.43 $100.00 $1,016.43
Undeveloped Parcels [5]
Other Land Uses $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Public and Deed Restricted Land $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
"att1"
[1] This Special Tax rate will be increased by the Services Special Tax Escalator in each Fiscal Year following the Base
Year of FY 2018-19.
[2] This Special Tax rate will be increased by the Infrastructure Special Tax Escalator in each Fiscal Year following the Base
Year of FY 2018-19.
[3] This Special Tax may be collected in each Fiscal Year through FY 2035-36. This Special Tax will no longer be collected
following FY 2035-36.
[4] Beginning with FY 2035-39, the Maximum Annual Special Tax will be equal to the Services Special Tax as the
Infrastructure Special Tax will no longer be collected beyond FY 2035-36..
[5] Undeveloped Parcels are Final Map Parcels without a Building Permit.
Packet Pg 496
15
Exhibit B
Facilities and Services
Packet Pg 497
15
1F:\Active Projects\162000\161181 Avila Ranch CFD Tecgnical
Support\Rate and Method\161181 list of services.docx
Exhibit B
Avila Ranch CFD No. 2017-1 (Services)
List of Authorized Services
The authorized services to be funded from the levy and collection of annual special taxes include
those set forth below in addition to the costs associated with collecting and administering the
special taxes, annually administering the District, and costs associated with forming the District.
The authorized services to be funded include:
1. Maintenance and lighting of parks, parkways, streets, roads, and open space.
2. Flood and storm protection services, including, but not limited to, the operation and
maintenance of storm drainage systems.
3. Police protection services, including, but not limited to, criminal justice services.
However, criminal justice services shall be limited to providing services for jails, detention
facilities, and juvenile halls.
4. Fire protection and suppression services, and ambulance and paramedic services.
5. Maintenance and operation of any real property or other tangible property with an
estimated useful life of five or more years that is owned by the local agency or by
another local agency pursuant to an agreement entered into under Section 53316.2.
List of Authorized Facilities
The authorized facilities to be funded from the levy and collection of annual special taxes include
those set forth below. The authorized services to be funded include:
1. Local park, recreation, parkway, and open-space facilities.
2. The district may also finance the construction or undergrounding of water transmission
and distribution facilities, natural gas pipeline facilities, telephone lines, facilities for the
transmission or distribution of electrical energy, and cable television lines to provide
access to those services to customers who do not have access to those services or to
mitigate existing visual blight.
3. The district may also finance the acquisition, improvement, rehabilitation, or maintenance
of any real or other tangible property, whether privately or publicly owned, for flood and
storm protection services, including, but not limited to, storm drainage and treatment
systems and sandstorm protection systems.
4. A community facilities district may also finance the purchase, construction, expansion,
improvement, or rehabilitation of any real or other tangible property with an estimated
useful life of five years or longer or may finance planning and design work that is directly
related to the purchase, construction, expansion, or rehabilitation of any real or tangible
property. The facilities need not be physically located within the district.
Packet Pg 498
15
Exhibit C
CFD Boundary Map
Packet Pg 499
15
Exhibit
C.
CFD
Boundaries
Packet Pg 500
15
Advisory Body Review Summary and Project Responses
1. Previous Planning Commission Review
The Planning Commission has previously considered the project on nine occasions, once
to conduct a public scoping meeting for the EIR, twice to review a preliminary version of
the Development Plan, twice during the Draft EIR public review period, and four times to
consider the project now before the City Council. On August 9, 2017, the Planning
Commission recommended that the City Council certify the Final EIR and approve all
project entitlements, included the Vesting Tentative Tract Map as conditioned.
These meetings, hearings, and workshops are summarized below:
Planning Commission
• August 26, 2015. The Planning Commission held a public scoping meeting to
take input on the scope of the Draft EIR to be prepared for the project.
• February 24, 2016. The Planning Commission received a presentation regarding
an overview of the Development Plan, and provided conceptual input to the
applicant regarding a portion of the Plan, focusing on land use, airport safety,
agricultural buffers, and design. No formal action was taken at that time.
• March 9, 2016. The Planning Commission continued reviewing the Development
Plan, providing conceptual input to the applicant regarding the remaining portions
of the plan, focusing on circulation and infrastructure issues. No formal action
was taken at that time.
• December 14, 2016. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the
Draft EIR, taking public testimony on the document, and providing input for
consideration in the Final EIR.
• January 11, 2017. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Draft
EIR, taking public testimony on the document, and providing input for
consideration in the Final EIR.
• June 28, 2017. The Planning Commission held a public hearing considering
potential project approval, taking public input and providing input to staff and the
applicant, continuing the hearing to June 29.
• June 29, 2017. The Planning Commission completed its review of June 28,
providing additional input on the project.
• July 12, 2017. The Planning Commission completed its review, providing
additional input on the project.
• August 9, 2017. The Planning Commission recommended project approval to the
City Council.
Packet Pg 501
15
2. Previous Advisory Body Review
The project had been considered before various City advisory bodies to review specific
aspects of the proposed project that relate to their purview. The following summarizes
the different advisory bodies that have considered the project, when these reviews
occurred, as well as the purpose and outcome of these meetings:
Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC)
• September 17, 2015. The BAC reviewed a preliminary version of the
Development Plan, and provided comments on the bicycle planning provisions
included in the document.
• November 19, 2015. The BAC provided comments on the updated bicycle
planning aspects of the Development Plan that responded to previous input
received in September 2015. The BAC conceptually concurred with the
Development Plan as presented.
Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC)
• September 2, 2015. The PRC reviewed the proposed parks and recreation
components of the draft Plan, and provided comments on these aspects of the
project. As a result of this review, the Plan was modified to address PRC
concerns related to park functionality, bike connectivity, parking and
landscaping.
• November 4, 2015. The PRC reviewed the revised proposed parks and recreation
components of the draft Plan, based on comments from September 2, 2015. The
PRC concurred that the revised park and recreation concepts were appropriate for
inclusion in the Development Plan.
• January 4, 2017. The PRC reviewed the proposed parks and recreation
components of the Development Plan as revised, for the purpose of determining
conformity with applicable General Plan policies. The PRC determined that the
proposed park proposal, included related facilities, would be consistent with
applicable General Plan policies.
Architectural Review Commission (ARC)
• February 1, 2016. ARC reviewed the draft Design Guidelines in the
Development Plan. At that time, the ARC provided the applicant team direction
on the structure and content of the Design Guidelines, architectural styles, and
neighborhood form.
Packet Pg 502
15
• June 19, 2017. The applicant team addressed ARC concerns raised in February
2016 in an updated version of the Design Guidelines. The ARC recommended
approval of the Design Guidelines to the City Council.
Airport Land Use Commission
Because the project site is within the airport review area, it required Airport Land Use
Commission (ALUC) review, and a determination of consistency with applicable Airport
Land Use Plan (ALUP) policies. To that end, the ALUC considered the project as
follows:
• December 21, 2016. The ALUC reviewed the project, and determined that the
project was consistent with the ALUP, with conditions related to limiting the
development to 720 dwelling units, non-residential density to 93 persons in the
S-1b safety zone, FAA review of tall structures that may be considered,
appropriate noise mitigation, restrictions on uses that may interfere with airport
operations, avigation easements, and appropriate disclosures for future residents.
3. Project Modifications from Advisory Body Review or the EIR
The Avila Ranch Development Plan is substantially modified from the original version of
the Plan submitted in December 2015, which formed the basis of the Project Description
in the Draft EIR. The updated Plan includes a greater level of detail than the original
version, including additional environmental protections, provisions and regulations to
reduce environmental impacts identified in the EIR for the Project, and additional
provision to address anticipated changes in environmental regulations. It also responds
directly to direction received from the Planning Commission and other advisory bodies
described above.
The updated Plan is described and analyzed in detail as the “Mitigated Project
Alternative” in Section 5.4.2.2 of the Final EIR, which identifies it as environmentally
superior to the originally proposed project.
These changes associated with the updated Plan, and comparison to the original
December 2015 plan, are described in greater detail on pages 1-5 of the Development
Plan. The following summarizes the major modifications and key improvements to the
Development Plan based on direction from the Planning Commission, various advisory
bodies, input received from the public, and mitigation measures included in the Final
EIR:
• Improved Flexibility and Affordability in Residential Design. In the R-2 medium
density area, a “Pocket Cottage” setting would be introduced for up to 76 units.
The Pocket Cottage units would have smaller floor plans to address affordability,
and would have wider open spaces in the front yards. The planned R-3 medium-
high density residential area would now include a centralized park, and a
“duplex” configuration that would offer larger unit sizes to provide for a wider
Packet Pg 503
15
range of unit sizes, which could result in increased affordability to a wider range
of prospective buyers.
• Commercial Design to Minimize Traffic and Parking Impacts. The updated
Development Plan would allow a broader mix of uses in the Town Center to
potentially reduce the number of offsite trips that may be generated. General retail
store square footage would be limited to 7,500 sf, and individual stores would not
be allowed to exceed 1,800 sf. The Town Center would be limited to
neighborhood serving uses only. It would also provide parking for the
Neighborhood Park, and for the Tank Farm Creek Bike Path (as a trailhead), as
well as for special events in the adjoining parks and park structures such as
weekly farmers markets, neighborhood movies and other neighborhood
gatherings.
• More Contiguous Open Space. The size and configuration of open space areas
would change, resulting in more contiguous open space with open space
concentrated in and adjacent to the 300-foot wide buffer along Buckley Road,
along the creek, and in the northeast and southeast corners of the site.
• Improved and More Detailed Parks Plan. More specific designs were prepared
for the parks and recreation areas of the project and the number and size of the
parks was increased. Park distribution and layout would change and park acreage
has increased from 16 to approximately 18 acres in a total of nine parks. The Plan
now reflects the park facilities approved by the Parks and Recreation
Commission. The project has received approval for the design of the public parks
and open space in Phases 1-3 and has received conceptual approval for the public
parks and open spaces in development phases 4-6. Based on Planning
Commission input, the Plan was further modified to include an additional pocket
park in the vicinity of Lots 130, 131 and 132 in the proposed Vesting Tentative
Tract Map.
• Enhanced Pedestrian and Bicycle Connectivity. These changes include narrower
vehicle lanes and wider bike lanes on internal streets. Vehicle lanes have been
narrowed to 10 feet while bicycle lanes have been widened to a full 8-foot
buffered bike lane standard. These buffered bike lanes occur on all internal major
streets, including Earthwood, Venture, Jesperson and Horizon. Special at-grade
“speed table” pedestrian street crossings have also been included. These provide
for traffic calming and a continuous walking experience. Finally, pedestrian
through connections have been specified along and between residential blocks.
This results in a pedestrian intersection density of over 500 intersections per
square mile, which exceeds the standard established by LEED and the Smart
Growth Coalition.
• Vehicular Circulation Modifications. Primary internal circulation has not
changed but neighborhood street layout in Phases 3 and 4 has changed
substantially in response to the new land use plan and drainage modifications.
Packet Pg 504
15
Phase 5 streets would be modified to reflect the inclusion of alley units with
common open space. Minor changes have been made to comply with the City’s
adopted street design criteria. Additional circulation improvements have been
included in the project to address EIR issues, including the extension of Horizon
Road to Suburban Road as part of Phase 4 (and the improvement of pedestrian
and vehicle improvements).
• Energy Efficiency. Many “green” modifications have been added to the project to
address impacts identified in the Final EIR, and to address prospective changes in
the State and local building codes. These include:
o Building energy efficiency standards that will enable the project to comply
with the “net zero” energy requirements that are anticipated in the 2019
building code.
o Shared Mobility strategies would be included to reduce the necessity for
additional vehicles for each family.
o Transit usage would be encouraged by extension of Route 2 to the project
site as provided in the plan, plus information and/or incentive packages for
transit ridership.
o To comply with the anticipated 2019 building code changes, there are
special energy-saving design requirements.
• Tank Farm Creek Alignment. The previous version of the plan relied upon
expected drainage improvements by Chevron, and the timing of those
improvements is now uncertain. Connecting to the Chevron open space also
resulted in the loss of federal and state wetlands. The revision avoids those
impacts while maintaining adequate flood control.
• Tank Farm Creek Increased Setbacks. Setbacks have been increased along Tank
Farm Creek so that they are a minimum of 35 feet along at least 90 percent of the
corridor, and no less than 25 feet, the minimum City Zoning Ordinance and
Conservation and Open Space Element standard.
• Airport Safety. The project was modified to provide for more contiguous open
space, a longer and wider Reservation Area along the Buckley frontage, an
expanded S-1b Safety Zone to accommodate extension of Runway 7-25, and the
elimination of all residential uses from the expanded S-1b Safety Zone. The
project received its final Conformity Finding from the San Luis Obispo Airport
Land Use Commission on December 21, 2016.
• Affordable Housing Provisions. Based on Planning Commission input, the
project now includes expanded affordable housing provisions, including more
units targeted as affordable, and a 1.2-acre site dedicated for an affordable
housing development. Staff is working to minimize the potential for a CFD tax to
be imposed on development within the identified affordable housing site.
Packet Pg 505
15
• Infrastructure Timing and Connectivity. Include an estimated housing absorption
schedule, and relate it to projected citywide capital improvements, including
roadways and bike facilities, showing this information on a map, in order to better
understand long-range connectivity and potential gaps.
• Modal Split and Impact Fees. Transportation impact fees are connected to modal
split objectives.
• Sustainable Farming. The plan now includes provisions to encourage sustainable
farming practices within designated open space areas wherever appropriate.
• Greywater Use. Consistent with the adopted Climate Action Plan, the
Development Plan includes provisions to encourage the use of greywater
wherever appropriate.
• Buckley Road Safety. City staff is working to include provisions in the design of
Buckley Road improvements that enhance public safety.
Packet Pg 506
15
Land
Use
Element
Policy
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
affordabilities.
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.
Packet Pg 507
15
Performance
Standards:
The
specific
plan
shall
meet
the
following
performance
standards.
Type
Designations
Allowed
%
of
Site
Minimum
1
Maximum
Residential
LDR
MDR
MHDR
HDR
500
units
700
units
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
through
in
lieu
fees
consistent
with
the
Airport
Area
Specific
Plan.
Packet Pg 508
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING (POLICY CONSISTENCY PORTION)
Avila Ranch Development Project 1
Final EIR
Consistency with Plans and Policies (from FEIR)
This section summarizes relevant adopted goals and policies, and evaluates the proposed
Project’s consistency with guidelines and requirements established therein. The following
discussion of General Plan policies and preliminary determinations regarding Project
consistency with these policies is presented for informational purposes. Section 15125(d)
of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR “shall discuss any inconsistencies
between the proposed Project and applicable general plans and regional plans.” In this
case, the adopted plans most relevant to the proposed Project include the City’s General
Plan and the ALUC’s ALUP. Table 3.8-7 discusses preliminary determination of the
Project’s consistency with applicable policies from the General Plan and standards from
the ALUP. Detailed analysis of the consistency of the Project with the ALUP is provided
in Appendix N. Where potential policy inconsistencies are identified, to the extent
feasible, the EIR identifies mitigation measures to improve Project consistency with these
policies. The City will make the final decision regarding Project consistency.
General Plan Consistency
Table 3.8-7 summarizes the proposed Project’s consistency with policies established
under the City’s General Plan. For reference, the Applicant also prepared a separate
General Plan conformity analysis containing additional policies, located in Appendix N.
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
Land Use Element
1.4 – Urban Edges
Character
The City shall maintain a clear
boundary between San Luis
Obispo's urban development
and surrounding open land.
Development just inside the
boundary shall provide
measures to avoid a stark-
appearing edge between
buildings in the City and
adjacent open land.
Consistent Although development of the
site would result in creation of
residential development at the
edge of the City’s urban area,
the Project would include a
300-foot wide open space
buffer, including a landscaped
berm, along Buckley Road to
soften the transition from urban
to rural area. The urban edges
for the Project are outside of
the URL and will be preserved
with conservation easements.
Along the Buckley Road
frontage, the western third of
the Project is buffered by Tank
Farm Creek. The middle third
between Tank Farm Creek and
Packet Pg 509
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING
2 Avila Ranch Development Project
Final EIR
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
Jesperson will be buffered by
landscaping and a terra-formed
sound wall berm and fence, and
the eastern third will have
substantial open space inside
the URL.
1.5 – Jobs/Housing
Relationship
The gap between housing
demand (due to more jobs and
college enrollment) and supply
should not increase.
Consistent The proposed Project would
create 720 residential dwelling
units and would help maintain
the current jobs/housing ratio of
1.5. Currently, the City is job
rich and lacks adequate housing
for the local labor force. The
Project would help to meet this
housing demand.
1.7.1 – Urban
Reserve
The City shall maintain an
urban reserve line containing
the area around the city where
urban development might occur
Consistent Development of all residential
and commercial units exists
within the URL as envisioned
by this policy.
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
1.8.1 – Open Space
Protection
Within the City's planning area
and outside the urban reserve
line, undeveloped land should
be kept open. Prime agricultural
land, productive agricultural
land, and potentially productive
agricultural land should be
protected for farming. Scenic
lands, sensitive wildlife habitat,
and undeveloped prime
agricultural land should be
permanently protected as open
space.
Consistent
with
Mitigation
In accordance with the LUCE
EIR, the Applicant must
dedicate open space land or, in
lieu of fees for newly annexed
land at a ratio of no less than
1:1.
The Project will dedicate 15
acres of open space within in
the URL and would be required
to provide for permanent
conservation of approximately
71 acres of offsite agricultural
lands.
1.8.3 – Commercial
uses in the
Greenbelt
The City shall not allow
commercial development
within the greenbelt area unless
it is clearly incidental to and
supportive of agriculture or
other open space uses.
Consistent The Project is within the URL
and therefore supportive of
agriculture and open space use
as a greenbelt.
1.8.5 – Building
Design and Siting
All new buildings and
structures should be
subordinate to and in harmony
with the surrounding landscape.
The City should encourage
County adoption of regulations
prohibiting new structures on
Consistent The proposed Project site
design provides setbacks for the
riparian corridors and the
Buckley frontage. Buildings do
not back on to these facilities
except where necessary for
noise mitigation requirements.
Packet Pg 510
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING (POLICY CONSISTENCY PORTION)
Avila Ranch Development Project 3
Final EIR
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
ridge lines or in other visually
prominent or environmentally
sensitive locations, and
allowing transfer of
development rights from one
parcel to another in order to
facilitate this policy.
1.8.6 – Wildlife
Habitat
The City shall ensure that
continuous wildlife habitat-
including corridors free of
human disruption are
preserved, and, where
necessary, created.
Consistent
with
Mitigation
Project development would
result in elimination of portions
of the Tank Farm Creek
riparian corridor. However, the
proposed Project would include
overall restoration of Tank
Farm Creek’s riparian corridor
subject to further design review
by the City. The realignment of
Tank Farm Creek will re-
connect the wildlife corridors
from the East Fork of San Luis
Creek to the Chevron open
space. The area will be re-
vegetated where necessary to
provide added foraging habitat
and protection. MM BIO-2a
would require creek setbacks of
at least 35 feet to protect
riparian habitat and preserve the
existing corridor. See Section
3.4, Biological Resources, and
Section 3.7, Hydrology and
Water Quality.
1.9.1 – Agricultural
Protection
The City shall support
preservation of economically
viable agricultural operations
and land within the urban
reserve and city limits. The
City should provide for the
continuation of farming through
steps such as provision of
appropriate general plan
designations and zoning.
Consistent
with
Mitigation
The City has considered the
viability of agricultural
operations on the Project site
through past planning efforts,
such as the LUCE Update and
AASP. Though the site has
historically been cultivated with
barley, wheat, safflower, and
beans, agricultural productivity
is limited by availability of
irrigation water and soil type.
By acknowledging the Project
site’s limited productivity, the
LUCE Update and AASP
designated the area for urban
development with requirements
for conservation and
replacement of prime
agricultural land. Accordingly,
Packet Pg 511
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING
4 Avila Ranch Development Project
Final EIR
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
the Project would result in the
conversion of 81.2 acres of
prime agricultural land to non-
agricultural use (78.2 acres
within the Project site and 3
acres within the Buckley Road
Extension site). As required
under LUCE Policy 8.6.3, the
Applicant must dedicate open
space land or, pay in lieu of
fees for acquisition of
agricultural land at a ratio of no
less than 1:1. The Project will
dedicate 10 acres of prime soils
onsite for agricultural
operations and would be
required to conserve an
additional 71 acres of farmland
for offsite agricultural
conservation. See Section 3.2,
Agricultural Resources for
additional information
regarding the viability of
agriculture onsite.
1.9.2 – Prime
Agricultural Land
The City may allow
development on prime
agricultural land if the
development contributes to the
protection of agricultural land
in the urban reserve or
greenbelt.
Consistent
with
Mitigation
The City has considered the
protection of agricultural
resources on the Project site
through past planning efforts,
such as the LUCE Update and
AASP. Though the site has
historically been cultivated with
barley, wheat, safflower, and
beans, agricultural productivity
is limited by availability of
irrigation water and soil type.
By acknowledging the Project
site’s limited productivity, the
LUCE Update and AASP
designated the area for urban
development with requirements
for conservation and
replacement of prime
agricultural land. Accordingly,
the Project would result in the
conversion of 78.2 acres of
prime agricultural land to non-
agricultural use (78.2 acres
within the Project site and 3
acres within the Buckley Road
Extension property). As
required under LUCE Policy
Packet Pg 512
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING (POLICY CONSISTENCY PORTION)
Avila Ranch Development Project 5
Final EIR
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
8.6.3, the Applicant must
dedicate open space land or,
pay in lieu of fees for
acquisition of agricultural land
at a ratio of no less than 1:1.
The Project will dedicate 10
acres of prime soils onsite and
would be required to conserve
an additional 71 acres of
farmland for offsite agricultural
conservation. See Section 3.2,
Agricultural Resources for
additional information
regarding agricultural land
protection in the urban
reserve/greenbelt.
1.10.2 – Means of
Protection
The City shall require that open
space is to be preserved either
by dedication of permanent
easements or transfer of fee
ownership to the City, the
County, or a responsible,
nonprofit conservation
organization.
Consistent The urban edges for the Project
are outside of the URL and will
be preserved with conservation
easements or restrictive
covenants, which will be held
by conservation groups.
1.10.3 – Public
Access
Areas preserved for open space
should include public trail
access, controlled to protect the
natural resources, to assure
reasonable security and privacy
of dwellings, and to allow
continuing agricultural
operations. Public access
through production agricultural
land will not be considered,
unless the owner agrees.
Consistent The Project’s land use plan and
circulation plan includes public
streets that side onto the Tank
Farm Creek open space, and
connect to a multi-use trail that
provides public access along
the entire reach of Tank Farm
Creek. See Policy 3.3.2.
1.10.4 – Design
Standards
The City shall require cluster
development to:
A. Be screened from public
views by land forms or
vegetation, but not at the
expense of habitat. If the
visually screened locations
contain sensitive habitats or
unique resources as defined in
the Conservation and Open
Space Element, development
should be avoided in those
areas and instead designed to
cluster in the form of
vernacular farm building
Consistent
with
Mitigation
The City has considered
clustered development to
conserve resources on the
Project site through past
planning efforts, such as the
LUCE Update and AASP.
Though the site has historically
been cultivated with barley,
wheat, safflower, and beans,
agricultural productivity is
limited by availability of
irrigation water and soil type.
By acknowledging the Project
site’s limited productivity, the
LUCE Update and AASP
Packet Pg 513
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING
6 Avila Ranch Development Project
Final EIR
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
complexes, to blend into the
traditional agricultural working
landscape.
B. Be located on other than
prime agricultural/and be
situated to allow continued
agricultural use.
C. Prohibit building sites and
roads within stream corridors
and other wetlands, on ridge
lines, rock outcrops, or visually
prominent or steep hillsides, or
other sensitive habitats or
unique resources as defined in
the Conservation and Open
Space Element.
D. Preserve historic or
archaeological resources.
designated the area for urban
development with requirements
for clustering development to
preserve open spaces and
agricultural resources. The
Project would result in the
conversion of 78.2 acres of
prime agricultural land to non-
agricultural use (78.2 acres
within the Project site and 3
acres within the Buckley Road
Extension property). As
required under LUCE Policy
8.6.3, the Applicant must
dedicate open space land or,
pay in lieu of fees for
acquisition of agricultural land
at a ratio of no less than 1:1.
The Project will dedicate 10
acres of prime soils onsite and
would be required to conserve
an additional 71 acres of
farmland for offsite agricultural
conservation. See Section 3.2,
Agricultural Resources.
Additionally, the Tank Farm
Creek riparian corridor will
contain wetland setbacks per
amended AASP Program 6.3.7
and Policy 3.3.3 (see Section
3.4, Biological Resources).
There are no known historic or
archeological resources on the
Project site (see Section 3.5,
Cultural Resources).
1.13.8 A – Open
Space
The City shall require that each
annexation help secure
permanent protection for areas
designated open space, and for
the habitat types and wildlife
corridors within the annexation
area that are identified in the
COS Element.
Consistent The Project is already located
within the City and does not
include an annexation. The
Project would include provision
of 55.3 acres of open space,
including lands along Tank
Farm Creek.
1.13.10 – Solid
Waste Capacity
The City shall require that
adequate solid waste disposal
capacity exists before granting
any discretionary land use
approval which would increase
solid waste generation.
Consistent There is adequate capacity at
the Cold Canyon Landfill to
support the Project. See Section
3.13, Utilities.
2.3.7 – Natural The City shall require Consistent Project development would
Packet Pg 514
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING (POLICY CONSISTENCY PORTION)
Avila Ranch Development Project 7
Final EIR
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
Features residential developments to
preserve and incorporate as
amenities natural site features,
such as land forms, views,
creeks, wetlands, wildlife
habitats, wildlife corridors, and
plants.
with
Mitigation
result in substantial changes to
onsite natural drainage patterns
and elimination of portions of
the Tank Farm Creek riparian
corridor. In addition, areas of
Project development would
occur within designation City
creek setbacks. However, the
proposed Project would include
overall restoration and
enhancement of Tank Farm
Creek’s riparian corridor
subject to further design review
by the City. See Section 3.4,
Biological Resources, and
Section 3.7, Hydrology and
Water Quality.
2.3.8 – Parking The City shall discourage the
development of large parking
lots and require parking lots be
screened from street views. In
general, parking should not be
located between buildings and
public streets.
Consistent The Project includes a 75-space
parking lot to accommodate
Town Center parking. Design
guidelines would ensure proper
screening of residential parking
places (see Project Appendix
F).
2.3.11 – Residential
Project Objectives
Residential projects should
provide:
-Privacy, for occupants and
neighbors of the project.
-Pleasant views from and
toward the project.
-Security and safety.
-Noise and visual separation
from adjacent roads and
commercial uses.
-Buffers from hazardous
materials transport routes, as
recommended by the City Fire
Department.
Consistent The Project would comply with
providing Residential Project
Objectives via adherence and
implementation of policies and
design guidelines. Refer to
Section 3.1, Aesthetics and
Visual Resources, 3.9, Noise,
and 3.7, Hazards and
Hazardous Materials.
3.3.1 – New or
expanded areas of
Neighborhood
Commercial use
The City shall provide for new
or expanded areas of
neighborhood commercial uses
that:
A. Are created within, or
extended into, nonresidential
areas adjacent to residential
neighborhoods.
B. Provide uses to serve nearby
residents, not the whole City.
Consistent The Project would include
15,000 sf of neighborhood
commercial in the form of a
“Town Center”. The Town
Center may serve as a place for
a convenience store,
community gathering place, a
transit hub, and a location for
occasional community events
and gatherings.
Packet Pg 515
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING
8 Avila Ranch Development Project
Final EIR
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
C. Have access from arterial
streets, and not increase traffic
on residential streets.
D. Have safe and pleasant
pedestrian access from the
surrounding service area, as
well as good internal
circulation.
E. Are designed to be
pedestrian-oriented, and
architecturally compatible with
the adjacent neighborhoods
being served.
Community members would be
able to access the Town Center
via community and regional
roadways, bicycle paths,
pedestrian linkages, and transit.
6.6.1 – Creek and
Wetlands
Management
Objectives
Maintain and restore natural
conditions and habitats;
minimize flooding damage;
recognize sections of creeks
which are in largely natural
areas and manage for maximum
ecological value.
Potentially
Consistent
with
Mitigation
Project development would
result in substantial changes to
onsite natural drainage patterns
and elimination of portions of
the Tank Farm creek riparian
corridor. In addition, areas of
Project development would
occur within designated City
creek setbacks. However, the
Project would include overall
restoration and enhancement of
Tank Farm Creek’s riparian
corridor subject to further
design review by the City.
Refer to Section 3.4, Biological
Resources and Section 3.7,
Hydrology and Water Quality.
6.6.3 – Amenities
and Access
New development adjacent to
creeks must respect the natural
environment and incorporate
the natural features as project
amenities, providing doing so
does not diminish natural
values.
Consistent
with
Mitigation
Project development would
result in substantial changes to
onsite natural drainage patterns
and elimination of portions of
the Tank Farm Creek riparian
corridor. In addition, areas of
Project development would
occur within designated City
creek setbacks. However, the
proposed Project would include
overall restoration and
enhancement of Tank Farm
Creek’s riparian corridor
subject to further design review
by the City.
The proposed Project would
include a Class I
pedestrian/bicycle path along
the west bank of Tank Farm
Creek that connects to the
Packet Pg 516
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING (POLICY CONSISTENCY PORTION)
Avila Ranch Development Project 9
Final EIR
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
Town Center and other
roadway linkages.
6.7 – Creeks and
Flooding Programs
Requires drainage
improvements and other Project
enhancements to reduce
potential flooding of creek
channels.
*Maybe not applicable with
undeveloped parcel.
Consistent
with
Mitigation
The proposed Project would
include major drainage
improvements and substantial
alteration to the existing Tank
Farm Creek floodplain and
associated changes to on- and
offsite drainage patterns. Refer
to Section 3.4, Biological
Resources, and Section 3.7,
Hydrology and Water Quality.
7.3 – Airport Land
Use Plan
Land use density and intensity
shall carefully balance noise
impacts and the progression in
the degree of reduced safety
risk further away from the
runways.
Consistent Project land use and
development densities would be
consistent with the 55 dB
CNEL noise contour and City
AOZ designed to reduce safety
risks, with development located
from 3,500 feet to over 6,000
feet from the end of the airport
runway.
7.4 – Airport
Overlay Zones
Density and allowed uses
within the ALUP Safety Areas
shall be consistent with the
ALUP unless the City overrides
a determination of
inconsistency where all land
uses are consistent with the
AOZs.
Consistent Project land use densities would
be consistent with the LUCE
policies, ALUP policies and
regulations and City AOZs, as
well
7.5 – Airport Noise
Compatibility
The City shall use the 60 dB
CNEL aircraft noise contour
(FAA and State aircraft noise
planning standard) as the
threshold for new urban
residential areas. Interiors of
new residential structures shall
be constructed to meet a
maximum 45 dB CNEL.
Consistent Project development would be
located outside of the 60 dB
noise contour and interior noise
levels would be reduced to less
than 45 dB through application
of standard California Building
Code requirements. See Section
3.9, Noise.
8.1.6 – SP-4, Avila
Ranch Specific Plan
Area
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
Consistent The Project would consist
primarily of new residential
neighborhoods with a variety of
housing types and affordability
levels along with supporting
open space, park and
commercial areas. See Section
3.10, Population and Housing.
Packet Pg 517
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING
10 Avila Ranch Development Project
Final EIR
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
types and afford abilities.
Conservation and Open Space Element
2.2.1 – Atmospheric
Change
City actions shall seek to
minimize undesirable climate
changes and deterioration of the
atmosphere’s protective
functions that result from the
release of carbon dioxide and
other substances.
Consistent
with
Mitigation
Development of 720 new
residential units near the
southern edge of the City would
result in substantial GHG
generation during construction
and operation. Although bicycle
and pedestrian amenities and
local-serving commercial uses
would be provided, the site’s
distance from Downtown and
lack of high frequency transit
routes would present challenges
for minimization of long-term
GHG generation. See Section
3.3, Air Quality and
Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
2.2.4 – Promote
walking, biking, and
use of public transit
use to reduce
dependency on
motor vehicles
City actions shall seek to
reduce dependency on gasoline-
or diesel-powered motor
vehicles and to encourage
walking, biking, and public
transit use.
Consistent Although the Project would
provide bicycle and pedestrian
facilities and new development
would be located in close
proximity to commercial and
industrial employment centers
in the City’s southern reaches,
The site’s distance from
Downtown and lack of high
frequency transit routes may
present challenges for
minimization of long-term
GHG generation. However, the
Project would provide bicycle
and pedestrian facilities, as well
as transit improvements that
would promote the use of
alternative methods of
transportation, therefore
reducing future GHG
emissions. Further, new
development would be located
in close proximity to
commercial and industrial
employment centers within the
City’s southern reaches,
promoting walkability and
reducing motor vehicle use.
9.2.1 – Views to and
from public places,
including scenic
Preserve and improve views of
important scenic resources from
public places...including streets
Consistent Project development would
substantially alter and
potentially adversely impact
Packet Pg 518
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING (POLICY CONSISTENCY PORTION)
Avila Ranch Development Project 11
Final EIR
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
roadways and roads. views along Buckley Road.
However, inclusion of a 300-
foot wide open space buffer and
landscape berm would help
minimize visual intrusion. This
change would not be significant
and would therefore be
consistent with City policy. See
Section 3.1, Aesthetics and
Visual Resources.
9.3.6 – View
blockage along
scenic highways
Determine that view blockage
along scenic roadways is a
significant impact.
Consistent Although Buckley Road is
identified as a scenic corridor,
inclusion of a 300-foot wide
open space buffer along
Buckley Road would prevent
view blockage. See Section 3.1,
Aesthetics and Visual
Resources.
4.3.4 – Use of
Energy Efficient,
Renewable Energy
Resources
4.3.6 – Energy
Efficiency and
Green Building in
New Development
4.6.8 – Energy
Efficient Project
Design
Promotes use of cost effective,
renewable, non-depleting
energy sources, wherever
possible, in new construction
projects; encourages energy-
efficient LEED-certified “green
buildings”; emphasize use of
solar exposure and shading.
Consistent The Project is proposed to be
compliant with the U.S. Green
Building Council’s Leadership
in Energy and Environmental
Design for Neighborhood
Development (“LEED-ND”)
“Silver” certification and San
Luis Obispo County’s Green
Build “Emerald” certification
rating.
5.5.8 – Recycling
Facilities in New
Development
Requires facilities in new
developments to accommodate
and encourage recycling.
Consistent The Project would create
additional sources for
generation of solid waste.
Project Design Guidelines
would ensure recycling
facilities are provided.
7.3.1 – Protect
Listed Species
City will comply with State and
Federal requirements for listed
species; City will protect listed
species through its actions
on…development applications.
Potentially
Consistent
with
Mitigation
The Project would potentially
impact several listed species
through habitat development
and/or habitat degradation, but
would be subject to feasible
mitigation. See Section 3.4
Biological Resources.
7.3.3 – Wildlife
Habitat and
Corridors
Continuous wildlife habitat,
including corridors free of
human disruption, shall be
preserved and where necessary,
created by interconnecting open
spaces, wildlife habitat, and
Consistent
with
Mitigation
The Project would convert 81.2
acres of open agricultural (78.2
acres within the Project site and
3 acres within the Buckley
Road Extension property),
which currently permit
Packet Pg 519
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING
12 Avila Ranch Development Project
Final EIR
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
corridors. relatively free wildlife passage
to urban development.
Development of the Project
would inhibit or eliminate such
passage. While the Project
would dedicate 55.3 acres as
open space, including the Tank
Farm Creek riparian corridor,
the Tank Farm creek corridor
would be relatively narrow,
particularly through the central
reaches of the site (e.g., 125
feet wide). This corridor would
be bordered by adjacent homes
and roads, traversed by a Class
I paved bicycle path, and
crossed by two bike bridges,
with associated noise, light, and
disturbances. The relatively
narrow width of this corridor
and proximity of development
would potentially interfere with
wildlife passage and limit its
value as a wildlife corridor.
Mitigation proposed in Section
3.4, Biological Resources
would address this policy.
7.7.6 – Replace
Invasive, Non-
Native Vegetation
with Native
Vegetation
The City and private
development will protect and
enhance habitat by removing
invasive, non-native vegetation
and by replanting it with native
California plant species.
Consistent The Project would include
habitat restoration efforts that
would involve removal of non-
native species and planting of
native vegetation. See Section
3.4, Biological Resources.
7.7.7 – Preserve
Ecotones
Ensure that “ecotones,” or
natural transitions along the
edges of different habitat types,
are preserved and enhanced.
Consistent The Project site currently
supports limited ecotones as it
primarily consists of open
agricultural fields, which border
native habitats along Tank
Farm Creek. While the Project
includes general proposals for
habitat restoration along the
creek corridor, it is unclear if
these would include creation of
different habitat types to meet
the intent of this policy.
Mitigation proposed in Section
3.4, Biological Resources,
would address this policy.
7.7.8 – Protect
Wildlife Corridors
Condition development permits
in accordance with applicable
Consistent While the Project would
dedicate 55.3 acres as open
Packet Pg 520
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING (POLICY CONSISTENCY PORTION)
Avila Ranch Development Project 13
Final EIR
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
mitigation measures to ensure
that important corridors for
wildlife movement and
dispersal are protected.
space, including the Tank Farm
Creek riparian corridor, the
Tank Farm Creek corridor
would be relatively narrow,
particularly through the central
reaches of the site (e.g., 125
feet wide). This corridor would
be bordered by adjacent homes
and roads, traversed by a Class
I paved bicycle path, and
crossed by two bike bridges,
with associated noise, light, and
disturbances. The relatively
narrow width of this corridor
and proximity of development
would potentially interfere with
wildlife passage and limit its
value as a wildlife corridor.
Mitigation proposed in Section
3.4, Biological Resources,
would address this policy.
7.7.9 – Creek
Setbacks
Maintain creek setbacks to
include appropriate separation
from the physical top of bank,
the appropriate floodway,
native riparian plants, or
wildlife habitat and space for
paths.
Consistent
with
Mitigation
Project development including
the proposed Class I bicycle
path, fill associated with
development pads, and new
roads would intrude into the
minimum required creek
setbacks with secondary
consequences for protection of
habitats, water quality, and
wildlife movement. City policy
requires a minimum setback of
20 feet from the top of bank or
from the edge of the
predominant pattern of riparian
vegetation, whichever is farther
from the creek flow line.
Mitigation proposed in Section
3.4, Biological Resources,
would address this policy.
8.2.2A – Open
Space within the
Urban Area
Identifies creek corridors as a
valuable resource for dedication
as Permanent Open Space.
Consistent The Project would dedicate
55.3 acres as open space, a
limited portion of which would
include open space along the
Tank Farm Creek riparian
corridor.
8.2.2D – Open
Space within the
Urban Area
Identifies undeveloped land not
intended for urban uses as a
valuable resource for dedication
as Permanent Open Space.
Consistent The Project would dedicate
55.3 acres as open space,
including the Tank Farm Creek
riparian corridor, and 35 acres
Packet Pg 521
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING
14 Avila Ranch Development Project
Final EIR
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
outside the URL as open space.
8.2.2H – Open
Space within the
Urban Area
Identifies prime agricultural
soils as a valuable resource for
dedication as Permanent Open
Space.
Potentially
Consistent
The Project would dedicate
55.3 acres as open space,
including the Tank Farm Creek
riparian corridor, and 35 acres
outside the URL as open space.
There are 14 acres of Prime
Farmland, 12 acres of which
run along the Buckley Road
frontage outside the URL. See
Section 3.2, Agricultural
Resources.
8.3.2A – Open
Space Buffers
Requires buffers between urban
development and creek
corridors.
Consistent Project development, including
the proposed Class I bicycle
path, fill associated with
building pads and new roads
would intrude into the
minimum City required creek
setbacks, with secondary
consequences for protection of
habitats, water quality, and
wildlife movements. Mitigation
required in Section 3.4,
Biological Resources, would
address this policy.
8.6.3 – Required
Mitigation
Farmland requires mitigation to
permanently protect an equal
area of equal quality.
Consistent In accordance with the AASP
EIR and LUCE Update EIR, the
Applicant must dedicate open
space land or in lieu of fees for
newly annexed land at a ratio
no less than 1:1. The Project
would dedicate 71 acres as
conserved agricultural lands.
See Section 3.2, Agricultural
Resources.
8.7.2 – Enhance and
Restore Open Space
Enhance and restore open space
by removing invasive, non-
native species, re-establishing
native riparian vegetation,
eliminating sources of water
pollutants, removing trash and
debris contaminants, and
securing alternative funding.
Consistent The Project would include
habitat restoration efforts that
would involve significant
removal of non-native species
and planting of native
vegetation. See Section 3.4,
Biological Resources.
10.2.2 H –
Ahwahnee Water
Principles
Encourages principles/policies
for reduced water demand,
runoff, and flooding.
Consistent While the Project would create
an additional long-term demand
on City water supplies, the
Project would include state of
the art water conservation
measures that would meet
Packet Pg 522
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING (POLICY CONSISTENCY PORTION)
Avila Ranch Development Project 15
Final EIR
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
LEED-ND Silver and San Luis
Obispo Emerald Green
standards, including use of
recycled water and onsite flood
water retention. See Section
3.13, Utilities.
Housing Element
3.2 – Goal 2:
Affordability
Requires that affordable
housing production shall be
accommodated to meet the
City’s new housing
construction objectives.
Consistent The Project would result in 720
residential units, 105 units of
which qualify as affordable.
Project-proposed housing
would accommodate residents
that live and work in the City as
well as residents of very low-
income levels.
3.2 – Goal 4: Mixed
Income Housing
Preserve and accommodate
existing and new mixed-income
neighborhoods and seek to
prevent neighborhoods or
housing types that are
segregated by economic status.
Consistent The Project would result in 720
residential units, 105 units of
which qualify as affordable.
Project-proposed housing
would accommodate residents
that live and work in the City as
well as residents of very low-
income levels.
3.2 – Goal 6:
Housing Production
Outlines strategies for the City
to plan for new housing to meet
a full range of community
housing needs.
Consistent The Project would result in 720
residential units, 105 units of
which qualify as affordable.
Project proposed housing
would accommodate residents
that live and work in the City as
well as residents of very-low
income levels.
3.2 – Goal 10: Local
Preference
Maximize affordable housing
opportunities for those who
work in the City of San Luis
Obispo.
Consistent The Project would result in 720
residential units, 105 units of
which qualify as affordable.
Project-proposed housing
would accommodate residents
that live and work in the City.
3.2 – Goal 11:
Suitability
Develop and retain housing on
sites that are suitable for that
purpose.
Consistent The Project site is considered a
Special Plan Area established in
the LUCE to accommodate new
housing.
Noise Element
1.4 – New
Transportation
Noise Sources
Noise created by new
transportation noise sources
shall be mitigated to not exceed
City-specified indoor and
outdoor maximum noise
Consistent The Project would not increase
transportation noise beyond
acceptable levels. See Section
3.9, Noise.
Packet Pg 523
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING
16 Avila Ranch Development Project
Final EIR
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
exposure levels.
1.3 – New
Development
Design and
Transportation
Noise Sources
New noise-sensitive
development shall be located
and designed to meet the
maximum outdoor and indoor
noise exposure to city specified
levels.
Consistent Project exterior and interior
noise levels would remain
acceptable. See Section 3.9,
Noise.
1.10 – Existing and
Cumulative Impacts
The City shall consider
mitigation where existing or
cumulative increases in noise
levels significantly impact
noise-sensitive land uses,
including rerouting traffic,
noise barriers, reducing traffic
speed, retrofitting buildings,
and exaction of fees.
Consistent While the Project would
contribute to short-term
construction noise impacts and
long-term operational noise
impacts, the Project would not
significantly contribute to
existing and cumulative noise
impacts. See Section 3.9, Noise.
Safety Element
2.1 – Flood Hazard
Avoidance and
Reduction
C. No new building or fill
should encroach beyond, or
extend over, the top-of-bank of
any creek.
E. Within new development
areas, such as the potential
expansion areas shown in
Figure 2 of the Land Use
Element, substantial
displacement of flood waters
should be avoided by:
1. Keeping a substantial amount
of flood-prone land in the
vicinity as open space;
2. Enlarging man-made
bottlenecks, such as culverts,
which contribute to flood
waters backing up from them;
3. Accommodating in such
places uses which have
relatively low ratios of building
coverage to site area, for which
shallow flooding of parking and
landscape areas would cause
minimum damage.
4. Requiring new buildings to
be constructed above the 100-
year flood level.
F. Creek alterations shall be
considered only if there is no
practical alternative, consistent
Consistent
with
Mitigation
The proposed Project would
include substantial alteration to
the existing Tank Farm Creek
floodplain and associated
changes to on- and offsite
drainage patterns. Refer to
Section 3.4, Biological
Resources, and Section 3.7,
Hydrology and Water Quality.
Packet Pg 524
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING (POLICY CONSISTENCY PORTION)
Avila Ranch Development Project 17
Final EIR
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
with the Conservation and
Open Space Element.
G. Development close to creeks
shall be designed to avoid
damage due to future creek
bank erosion. Property owners
shall be responsible for
protecting their developments
from damage caused by future
bank loss due to flood flows.
3.0 – Adequate Fire
Service
Development shall be approved
only when adequate fire
suppression services and
facilities are available or will be
made available concurrent with
development, considering the
setting, type, intensity, and
form of the proposed
development.
Consistent The Project site is marginally
outside the acceptable 4-minute
response time for fire protection
services. However, installation
of the Project’s proposed
Interim Fire Station would
provide coverage to the Project
site, until the City’s fifth fire
station is constructed and
operational, ensuring that the
Project is consistent with City
policy for adequate fire service.
See Section 3.11, Public
Services.
5.2 – Minimizing
Hazardous Materials
People’s exposure to hazardous
substances should be
minimized.
Consistent
with
Mitigation
The Project would implement
standard good housekeeping
measures, best management
practices (BMPs), site
maintenance, and security
precautions, as well as
compliance with standards and
regulations. See Section 3.6,
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials.
7.0 – Policy S:
Airport Land Use
Plan
Development should be
permitted only if it is consistent
with the San Luis Obispo
County Airport ALUP.
Potentially
Consistent
The Project is in conformance
with the ALUP, Handbook,
AOZ standards, and LUCE
airport safety policies, and
further evaluated below in
Impacts LU 1 and LU 2.
9.3 A – Response
Performance
Standards
The City will evaluate fire-flow
capacities and identify
deficiencies through testing and
modeling of the water system.
For identified deficiencies, the
Utilities Department will
propose remedies to meet
recommended service levels
based on Insurance Service
Consistent The Project will provide
adequate water flow per
adopted City standards. See
Section 3.13, Utilities, and
Impact LU-3 below.
Packet Pg 525
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING
18 Avila Ranch Development Project
Final EIR
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
Organization ratings and other
objective criteria.
Water and Wastewater Management Element (WWME)
2.1.7 – Annexation
Criteria
Allows annexation of areas
outside City limits if they are
infill areas with access to
existing City wastewater
service.
Consistent The Project would be located
within City limits and the
City’s URL with access to
existing City services.
Wastewater disposal is
evaluated in Section 3.13,
Utilities.
B 2.2.2 – Service
Capacity
The City's wastewater
collection system and Water
Reclamation Facility shall
support population and related
service demands consistent
with the General Plan.
Potentially
Consistent
There is adequate capacity at
the City’s Water Resource
Recovery Facility (WRRF) to
accommodate dry-weather
wastewater flows generated by
the Project; however, under
wet-weather conditions, peak
wastewater flows may exceed
the WRRF capacity. See
Section 3.13, Utilities, and
Impact LU-3 below.
B 2.2.3 –
Wastewater Service
for New
Development
New development will only be
permitted if adequate capacity
is available within the
wastewater collection system
and/or Water Reclamation
Facility.
Potentially
Consistent
There is adequate capacity at
the City’s WRRF to
accommodate dry-weather
wastewater flows generated by
the Project; however, under
wet-weather conditions, peak
wastewater flows may exceed
the WRRF capacity. See
Section 3.13, Utilities, and
Impact LU-3 below.
Circulation Element
3.1.7 – Transit
Service Access
New development should be
designed to facilitate access to
transit service.
Potentially
Consistent
The Project would include
installation of bus stops and
facilitation of the extension of
bus service the Project site.
However, the site is outside of
areas that receive high
frequency transit service. Issue
evaluated in Section 3.12,
Transportation and Traffic.
4.1.4 – New
Development
The City shall require that new
development provide bikeways,
secure bicycle storage, parking
facilities and showers
consistent with City plans and
development standards. When
evaluating transportation
Potentially
Inconsistent
Consistent
with
Mitigation
The Project would provide
dedicated bikeways and would
be required to provide bicycle
parking per City of San Luis
Obispo Municipal Code Section
17.16.060, which mandates that
bicycle parking be equal to 15
Packet Pg 526
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING (POLICY CONSISTENCY PORTION)
Avila Ranch Development Project 19
Final EIR
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
impacts, the City shall use a
Multimodal Level of Service
analysis.
percent of vehicle parking
provided. However, an
important gap in the planed
regional Class II bicycle lane
along west bound Buckley
Road could cause impacts to
cyclists and inconsistencies
with the BTP. See Section 3.12,
Transportation and Traffic.
5.1.2 – Sidewalks
and Paths
The City should complete a
continuous pedestrian network
connecting residential areas
with major activity centers as
well as trails leading into City
and County open spaces.
Consistent
with
Mitigation
The Project would include fully
developed pedestrian facilities
within the Project site;
however, access to the
shopping center to the north
would be along roadways that
may not be fully developed
with pedestrian amenities. This
issue would be addressed with
required mitigation. See Section
3.12, Transportation and
Traffic.
5.1.4 – Pedestrian
Access
New or renovated commercial
and government public
buildings shall provide
convenient pedestrian access
from nearby sidewalks and
pedestrian paths, separate from
driveways and vehicle
entrances.
Consistent Sidewalks and pedestrian
pathways separate from
driveways and/or vehicle
entrances are provided to the
proposed Town Center. See
Section 3.12, Transportation
and Traffic.
15.1.2 –
Development along
Scenic Routes
The City will preserve and
improve views of important
scenic resources from streets
and roads. Development along
scenic roadways should not
block views or detract from the
quality of views.
Consistent While the Project would change
visual character of the area, the
Project would preserve
important views through
inclusion of a 300-foot setback
for new development from
Buckley Road. See Section 3.1,
Aesthetics and Visual
Resources.
Parks and Recreation Element
3.13.1 – Parks
System
The City shall develop and
maintain a park system at a rate
of 10 acres of parkland per
1,000 residents. Five acres shall
be dedicated as a neighborhood
park. The remaining five acres
required under the 10 acres per
1,000 residents in the
residential annexation policy
may be located anywhere
Consistent A 9.80-acre neighborhood park
would be located to the east of
the Town Center, and within
0.5 mile from most proposed
residential neighborhoods.
Additionally, seven mini-parks
and one pocket park would be
created on irregular-shaped
tracts of land near residential
areas to serve the local
Packet Pg 527
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING
20 Avila Ranch Development Project
Final EIR
Table 3.8-7. General Plan Policy Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Summary Consistency
Finding Discussion
within the City’s park system as
deemed appropriate.
population. These parks would
serve residential areas farther
from the neighborhood park.
Community gardens would be
located on 1.30 acres of the
planned open space east of the
neighborhood park.
3.15 –
Neighborhood Parks
- San Luis Obispo residents
shall have access to a
neighborhood park within 0.5
to 1.0 mile walking distance of
their residence.
-All residential annexation
areas shall provide developed
neighborhood parks at the rate
of five acres per 1,000
residents.
-In neighborhoods where
existing parks do not
adequately serve residents,
mini-parks may be considered.
Consistent A 9.80-acre neighborhood park
would be located to the east of
the Town Center, and within
0.5 mile from most proposed
residential neighborhoods.
Additionally, seven mini-parks
and one pocket park would be
created on irregular-shaped
tracks of land near residential
areas to serve the local
population. These parks would
serve residential areas farther
from the neighborhood park.
Community gardens would be
located on 1.30 acres of the
planned open space east of the
neighborhood park.
Sources: City of San Luis Obispo 1996, 2006, 2014b, 2015.
Packet Pg 528
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING (POLICY CONSISTENCY PORTION)
Avila Ranch Development Project 21
Final EIR
ALUP Consistency
Table 3.8-8 summarizes Project consistency with the ALUP. ALUP consistency is also
further discussed in Impact LU-2.
Table 3.8-8. ALUP Consistency Summary
Project Component Consistency Finding Discussion
55 dB CNEL Aviation Noise Contour
Open Space Consistent Dedicated open space area is an acceptable use under the
ALUP 55 dB CNEL Aviation Noise Contour. Issue
evaluated in Section 3.9, Noise. Proposed uses in the 55
dB CNEL contour are open space, agriculture and
community gardens.
Safety Area S-1B
Neighborhood Park Consistent Park space is an acceptable land use under ALUP Safety
Area S-1B.
Residential Consistent Up to seven residential units are permitted in the 35-acre
S-1B area. These will be clustered in the northwest
portion of the zone. This is consistent.
Town Center Consistent Retail and commercial uses are allowed under ALUP
Safety Area S-1B.
Open Space Consistent Dedicated open space area and agricultural operations
are acceptable land uses under ALUP Safety Area S-1B.
Safety Area S-1C
Open Space Consistent Dedicated open space area is an acceptable land use
under ALUP Safety Area S-1C.
Safety Area S-2
Residential Uses Consistent There are 713 residential units proposed within this
Safety Area; however, there are no density restrictions
within Safety Area S-2. See Impact LU-2 for further
discussion.
Park and Open Space Consistent Dedicated open space area is an acceptable land use
under ALUP Safety Area S-2.
Packet Pg 529
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING
22 Avila Ranch Development Project
Final EIR
AASP Consistency
Table 3.8-9 summarizes Project consistency with the AASP. AASP consistency is also
further discussed in Impact LU-2.
Table 3.8-9. AASP Consistency Summary
Policy/Goal Consistency
Finding Discussion
Policy 3.2.1 Riparian Vegetation.
Establish healthy, continuous riparian
vegetation along (1) East Branch of San Luis
Obispo Creek from Broad Street to Santa Fe
Road, (2) Acacia Creek from the northern
planning area boundary to the confluence with
East Branch of San Luis Obispo Creek, (3)
Orcutt Creek from the planning area northern
boundary to its confluence with Acacia Creek,
and (4) Tank Farm Creek from the planning
area’s northern boundary to its southern
boundary.
Potentially
Consistent
A continuous riparian corridor would be
established under the Project from the
northeastern boundary to the southwestern
corner, establishing a consistent riparian
zone. However, the proposed limited
setbacks of development from the riparian
corridor would be inconstant with City
policy. Increased setbacks and development
reconfiguration would ensure consistency. .
Policy 3.2.4 Wetlands and Buffer Areas.
Designate for open space use wetlands and
their associated buffer areas.
Consistent The Project includes open space buffers
between wetland areas and proposed
development areas, primarily on either side
of Tank Farm Creek and in the southeast
region of the Project site. However, Project
development would also result in the
permanent loss of habitats within the Project
site including protected wetlands and riparian
areas associated with Tank Farm Creek.
These impacts would be mitigated by MM
AG-1a, MM HYD-4a, MM HYD-4b, MM
BIO-1a, MM BIO-1b, MM BIO-2a through -
2j, and MM BIO-6 implementing a
Biological Mitigation Plan, Best
Management Practices, and Environmental
Monitor to oversee, replace, restore, create,
and protect, among other actions, existing
and future wetlands associated with the
Project site and maintain high-quality
wildlife habitat. Coordination with the
Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB), City Fire Department (SLOFD),
and CDFW is included.
Policy 3.2.5 Restoring Marginal or
Degraded Wetlands.
When reviewing plans to restore marginal or
degraded wetlands, require (1) techniques for
isolation, stabilizing, or removing petroleum
contamination of soil and groundwater that
minimize disturbance of existing wetland and
other surface resource values, (2)
configuration of the ground surface to retain
Consistent Please refer to Policy 3.2.4 discussion above.
Packet Pg 530
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING (POLICY CONSISTENCY PORTION)
Avila Ranch Development Project 23
Final EIR
Table 3.8-9. AASP Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Consistency
Finding Discussion
wetland characteristics, (3) removal of
invasive, non-native plants, (4) introduction
of native plants, (5) methods approved by
the RWQCB, and the SLOFD and (6) will
not create a significant attraction for large
birds in consideration of airport safety.
Policy 3.2.6 Expansion of Wetlands.
Where suitable buffers can be provided,
expand wetlands into areas within the
wetlands complex that are conducive to
wetlands, but that do not initially meet the
definition of wetlands. However, any
expansion or changes to wetlands must take
into account the potential increase in airport
safety hazards as a result of bird strikes.
Consistent Please refer to Policy 3.2.4 discussion
above.
Policy 3.2.8 Professional Direction of
Wetland Work.
Assure that all wetlands restoration,
enhancement, and creation will be under the
direction of qualified professionals. Seek
the cooperation of trustee agencies, such as
the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife (CDFW), and obtain any necessary
approvals from these agencies.
Consistent Please refer to Policy 3.2.4 discussion
above.
Policy 3.2.9 Design of Detention Areas.
Design onsite drainage detention areas
within the Airport Area to support wetlands
characteristics, so they will be visually
attractive elements of the landscape and
components in a system of wildlife habitat,
in addition to flood control facilities.
Consistent Please refer to Policy 3.2.4 discussion
above.
Policy 3.2.10: Recreational Use of
Wetlands Complex.
Recreational use of the wetlands complex
and buffer areas should be limited to non-
intrusive observation and study. The type
and extent of public access should be
restricted in order to maintain high-quality
wildlife habitat.
Consistent Please refer to Policy 3.2.4 discussion
above.
Policy 3.2.11 Impacts from Run-Off.
Minimize the water-quality impacts
associated with run-off from rooftops and
paved areas, due to contaminants,
temperature changes, velocity changes, and
sediment by providing dispersed surface
drainage across areas with suitable soil and
Consistent Please refer to Policy 3.2.4 discussion
above.
Packet Pg 531
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING
24 Avila Ranch Development Project
Final EIR
Table 3.8-9. AASP Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Consistency
Finding Discussion
vegetation whenever feasible, instead of
piped or other concentrated drainage from
roofs and paved areas directly to creeks.
Policy 3.2.15 Continuous Open Space
Corridors.
Provide continuous open space corridors
linking open space resources within the
Airport Area to resources outside of the
Airport Area.
Consistent Please refer to Policy 3.2.4 discussion
above.
Policy 3.2.16 Continuous Wetlands.
Development in the Airport Area should not
isolate or further fragment wetlands,
uplands or their associated habitat areas.
Partially
Consistent
with
Mitigation
Wetland and open space areas are
primarily retained along Tank Farm Creek
and created in the northeastern and
southern regions of the Project site.
Wetlands may be affected by the proposed
Jespersen Road extension resulting in
fragmentation of the existing wetland. MM
BIO-2B, Biological Mitigation Plan,
would mitigate the Congdon Tarplant and
impacts to isolated wetlands by requiring a
Bio Mitigation Plan which requires habitat
replacement. Impacts and proposed
mitigation measures for wetlands are
detailed further in Section 3.4, Biological
Resources.
Policy 3.2.18 Mitigate Loss of Ag and
Open Space Land.
To mitigate the loss of agricultural and open
land in the Airport Area, development shall
help protect agricultural and open space
lands to the south and east by securing
protected areas at least equal to the area of
new development, where on-site protection
is not available.
Partially
Consistent
with
Mitigation
The Project would result in the conversion
of 71 acres of prime farmland and is
therefore subject to mitigation under
Policy 1.9.2. Proposed mitigation measure
MM AG-1 would satisfy the criteria of
Policy 1.9.2, therefore making the Project
consistent with this policy after mitigation.
However, implementation of MM AG-1
would not fully mitigate such impacts
since the lost agricultural land could not be
replaced or recreated. Further discussion of
these impacts and their determination can
be found under the discussion of Impact
AG-1 in Section 3.2, Agricultural
Resources.
Policy 3.2.20 Acquire Land South of
Airport.
Utilize locally-generated acquisition
funding, as well as outside grant support, to
acquire fee or easement interest in lands
south of the airport in the following order of
priority:
Buckley Road Area. Agricultural lands on
Partially
Consistent
Please refer to Policy 3.2.18 discussion
above. Acquisition of agricultural lands
south of the airport would be permitted
under proposed mitigation.
Packet Pg 532
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING (POLICY CONSISTENCY PORTION)
Avila Ranch Development Project 25
Final EIR
Table 3.8-9. AASP Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Consistency
Finding Discussion
either side of Buckley Road between
Vachell Lane and Broad Street should
receive the highest priority in conservation
funding. There is ongoing, incremental
conversion of lands from agriculture to
other uses, as well as ongoing small-scale
subdivision of rural properties. There are
relatively few large properties in this area.
Easements to secure development rights
and maintain scenic character would be
the primary focus of this effort, and
easement acquisition is the preferred
strategy.
Other Lands. Areas such as the ranches and
woodland areas south of the Airport may
also be targeted for fee or easement
acquisition; however, these areas are not
considered as vulnerable to land use
changes as the aforementioned areas.
Program 3.3.7. Creek Restoration
Standards.
The City will work with CDFW and
responsible federal agencies to establish
standards for grading, stabilization, and
revegetation of all creek channels in the
Airport Area. The standards will cover plant
species, planting densities, and long-term
maintenance requirements and
responsibilities.
Consistent Please refer to Policy 3.2.4 discussion
above.
Goal 4.1.9 Airport Operations.
Airport Area land uses and development,
including Airport Compatible Open Space
(ACOS), should be compatible with the
long-term operation of the airport, and
enhancing the viability of the airport as a
regional transportation facility.
Consistent Due to the location and density allotments
designed by the Project, implementation of
the Project would be consistent with
airport standards for established airport
safety areas and noise buffers. Impacts to
safety, noise, and hazards are further
discussed within Sections 3.6, Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, 3.9, Noise, 3.12,
Transportation and Traffic.
Policy 4.3.3 Airport Land Use Plan
Consistency.
Airport Area development must be
consistent with the standards and
requirements of the ALUP and/or Public
Utilities Code Sections 21670-21679.5.
Consistent The Project would be consistent with all
ALUP noise contour and safety area
policies, as detailed above in Table 3.8-8.
Program 6.3.G Development Review
Requirements.
In order to mitigate air, noise and traffic
Consistent The Project includes on-street bicycle
lanes, off-street paths, bus stops,
intersections, and other street and transit
Packet Pg 533
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING
26 Avila Ranch Development Project
Final EIR
Table 3.8-9. AASP Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Consistency
Finding Discussion
impacts associated with development of the
AASP, ensure private development
participation in the implementation of the
plan by requiring the construction of on-
street bicycle lanes as part of development
street frontage improvements, and require
development to dedicate and construct off-
street paths where their alignments are
within private property. Require
development adjacent to bus stops to
construct turnouts and bus stops (including
shelters) conforming to the bus stop
standards in SLO Transit’s Short Range
Transit Plan. Project may be required to
construct intersection and other street
improvements in proportion to their
development size and location.
facility improvements throughout the
Project site consistent with City standards
and standards within the AASP. Specific
impacts to air, noise, and traffic are further
discussed in Sections 3.3, Air Quality and
Greenhouse Gas Emissions, 3.9, Noise,
and 3.12, Transportation and Traffic.
Program 6.3.I Class I and Class II Bicycle
Lanes.
Class I bicycle paths and Class II bicycle
lanes shall be constructed, signed and
marked to meet or exceed the minimum
standards established by the Caltrans
Highway Design Manual and the City of
San Luis Obispo design standards. Class I
paths should be a minimum of 12 feet in
width with 2-foot shoulders, except in
hillside areas where grading would cause
visual impacts or along creeks where space
is limited. Class II bicycle lanes shall be
designed in accordance with the City
Bicycle Plan and should be 6 to 7 feet in
width.
Consistent The Project includes Class I and II bicycle
facilities that meet the design standards
within the Caltrans Highway Design
Manual as well as City standards. Further,
with implementation of MM TRANS-11,
the Project would be consistent with the
City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP).
See Section 3.12, Transportation and
Traffic.
Program 6.3.L Transit Facility
Requirements.
As part of the development review process,
the City will require new development to
provide for transit facilities along or
adjacent to the project frontage.
Consistent Please refer to Program 6.3.G discussion
above.
Goal 6.4.3.
Improve Buckley Road to arterial standards
while maintaining a street character
consistent with the area’s rural setting.
Consistent Please refer to Program 6.3.G discussion
above.
Standard 6.4.3.1.
Buckley Road shall be extended as a two-
lane rural arterial from its currently western
terminus at Vachell Lane to South Higuera
Consistent The Project includes extending Buckley
Road from the intersection with Vachell
Lane west to South Higuera Street, per
Standard 6.4.3.1 recommendations. Traffic
Packet Pg 534
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING (POLICY CONSISTENCY PORTION)
Avila Ranch Development Project 27
Final EIR
Table 3.8-9. AASP Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Consistency
Finding Discussion
Street. Timing of extension will be based on
achieving traffic volumes and conditions
that justify the improvements or when the
intervening properties between Vachell
Lane and South Higuera Street are
redeveloped. Setbacks shall be provided on
both sides of the road to allow for
expansion to a four-lane roadway if future
traffic volumes and conditions justify
additional lanes.
volume and use impacts of this extension
are detailed in Section 3.12,
Transportation and Traffic.
Standard 6.4.3.2.
Buckley Road shall be design to minimize
impact to adjacent creeks and open space
where possible. Setbacks shall be provided
on both sides of the road to allow for
expansion to a four-lane roadway if future
traffic volumes and conditions justify
additional lanes.
Consistent Setbacks from Tank Farm Creek and
preserved wetland areas are included in the
Project. Additionally, traffic volume and
circulation impacts of the extension are
detailed in Section 3.12, Transportation
and Traffic.
Standard 6.4.3.3.
On the north side of Buckley Road in
undeveloped areas, outside of the 20-foot
graded shoulder, there shall be a 12-foot
wide multi-use path.
Consistent The Project includes a multi-use path on
the north side of Buckley Road in
undeveloped areas.
Standard 6.4.4.1.
Commercial and industrial collectors
without center turn lanes shall have a
minimum of two 13-foot travel lanes and
two 6-foot bicycle lanes. Each side of the
road will have 7-foot tree-lined parkways
between the curb and a 5-foot wide
sidewalk unless an alternative cross section
is approved by the Director of Public
Works.
Consistent The Project would include parkway, curb,
tree, and sidewalk minimums and
adherence to standards as approved by the
City Department of Public Works.
Policy 7.1.1. Encourage BMPs.
The City will encourage Best Management
Practices for drainage when reviewing all
development proposals. The use of bio-
swales for conveying storm water on-site
through open channels is particularly
encouraged for their efficacy and natural,
aesthetic quality.
Consistent Please refer to Policy 3.2.4 discussion
above.
Policy 7.1.2. Creek Corridor
Enhancement.
As part of the development review process
for sites that are crossed by one or more
creek corridors, the City will require creek
Consistent Please refer to Policy 3.2.4 discussion
above.
Packet Pg 535
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING
28 Avila Ranch Development Project
Final EIR
Table 3.8-9. AASP Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Consistency
Finding Discussion
corridor enhancement consisting of:
• Removal of non-native vegetation.
• Removal of obstructions that impede
storm flows and that are detrimental to
aquatic species.
• Establish additional riparian
vegetation.
Policy 7.1.3. Offsite Improvements
Permissible.
When detention requirements cannot be
fully met onsite, offsite improvements of
creek corridors is permissible, consistent
with the requirements of the City’s
Waterways Management Plan and Drainage
Design Manual.
Consistent Please refer to Policy 3.2.4 discussion
above.
Policy 7.1.4. Porous Paving Encouraged.
The use of porous paving to facilitate
rainwater percolation is encouraged. As a
condition of project approval, the City will
require parking lots and paved outdoor
storage areas, where practical, to use one or
more of the following measures to reduce
surface water runoff and aid in groundwater
recharge: porous paving; ample landscaped
areas that receive surface drainage and that
are maintained to facilitate percolation;
drainage detention basins with soils that
facilitate percolation.
Consistent The Project would result in adverse
impacts to water quality due to polluted
runoff during construction activities,
however implementation of MM BIO-2a
and MM HYD-2a through -2c would limit
these impacts. Further discussion is
contained in Impact HYD-2 of Section 3.7,
Hydrology and Water Quality.
Policy 7.1.5. Onsite Detention Basins and
Creek Corridors.
Detention basins will be owned by the
subdivider, a property owners’ association,
or a major nonresidential parcel owner, and
will be maintained by an owners’
association or a special district. Ownership
and maintenance of minor waterways will
be the same, with a City easement for open
space and, where trails occur, public access.
Consistent Please refer to Policy 3.2.4 discussion
above.
Policy 7.9.1: Adequate Fire Suppression
Services and Facilities.
The City shall provide adequate fire
suppression services and facilities to the
Airport Area, consistent with the Safety
Element of the General Plan, by completing
area transportation improvements, co-
locating City fire services with existing
Consistent An Interim Fire Station would be
implemented by the Project at the
intersection of Earthwood Lane and
Venture Drive within the Airport Area
during Phase 3, and would be subject to
the City’s approval and consistent with the
General Plan’s Safety Element and San
Luis Obispo Fire Department Master Plan
Packet Pg 536
15
3.8 LAND USE AND PLANNING (POLICY CONSISTENCY PORTION)
Avila Ranch Development Project 29
Final EIR
Table 3.8-9. AASP Consistency Summary (Continued)
Policy/Goal Consistency
Finding Discussion
CALFIRE facilities located on Broad Street,
and/or establishing a permanent facility
within the Airport Area.
(2016). This fire station would remain
operational until establishment of the
City’s fifth fire station to serve the
southern region of the City. Additional
discussion of this item is contained within
Section 3.11, Public Services.
Policy 7.9.3 Interim Safety Improvements.
Until a permanent facility is developed that
enables the City to achieve its response
travel time objectives, new development in
the Airport Area may be required to finance
other improvements that will contribute to
alleviating current deficiencies, as identified
in the San Luis Obispo Fire Department
Master Plan (2009). This policy will be
implemented on a case by case basis
through conditions of approval when project
specific fire and life safety impacts are
identified. The Avila Ranch Project may
provide an interim fire and/or emergency
response substation at the intersection of
Earthwood Lane and Venture Drive. Such
facilities shall be to the satisfaction of the
City Fire Chief.
Consistent Please refer to Policy 7.9.1 discussion
above.
Packet Pg 537
15
P:\161000s\161181AvilaRanch\Feasibility Analysis\Draft Avila Ranch Feasibility Memorandum_09-01-17.docx
D RAFT M EMORANDUM
To: Katie Lichtig, City Manager
Derek Johnson, Assistant City Manager
From: Walter Kieser and Ashleigh Kanat
Subject: Avila Ranch Financial Feasibility and Community Benefits
Program; EPS #161181
Date: September 1, 2017
As a part of our broader scope of financial services related to the Avila
Ranch Project, Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) has been asked
to evaluate the financial feasibility of the Project from a private sector
“developer” perspective, document how infrastructure will be funded,
and also explore the community benefits deriving from the development
of the Project, including the general benefits expected to occur and also
the “extraordinary” benefits offered by the Developer in connection with
the City’s willingness to enter into a development agreement. It is
important to document feasibility to assure that the Project, as planned,
can meet its infrastructure financing obligations while remaining
competitive and feasible in the marketplace. Regarding the
extraordinary community benefits offered, it is necessary to find that
these benefits to the community equal or exceed the value of the
Development Agreement to the Developer.
Findings
1. Avila Ranch Project has the potential to achieve the financial
returns necessary to attract the needed equity and
commercial credit.
Based upon our review of the Developer’s pro forma financial
analysis it is our opinion that the Avila Ranch Project can be
financially feasible as indicated by the measures of financial return
applied. This finding is sensitive to the market pricing ultimately
achieved and absorption rates, the actual project costs, and the
Project’s “fair share” allocation of region-serving infrastructure and
how these costs are financed. It is noted that the Developer is not
providing a “guarantee” on the pricing of the homes (other than
deed restrictions on the affordable (inclusionary) units and the
Workforce units being offered).
Packet Pg 538
15
Draft Memorandum September 1, 2017
Avila Ranch Financial Feasibility and Community Benefits Program Page 2
2. In addition to Developer funding provided, the City has a range of options for
funding region-serving infrastructure.
As a part of the broader environmental impact and traffic analysis for the Avila Ranch Project
the City has identified some $67.1 million of improvements that are needed to serve the
Project along with alleviating existing traffic congestion and serving other future development
in the southern area of the City and the County as it develops over the coming decade.
Table 1 provides a summary of how this infrastructure will be funded, including costs that
are attributable to the Avila Ranch Project based upon the City’s “fair share” cost allocation
and the amount over this “fair share” the Developer has agreed to fund as per the
Development Agreement. The City has a range of funding options for reimbursing the
Developer for a portion of the costs above the “fair share” allocation of the remaining cost
above the “fair share” allocation, including proceeds of its development impact fees, working
with the County to ensure the County pays its “fair share” allocation of infrastructure costs,
and possibly a portion of the proposed CFD special tax revenue.
Table 1 Summary of Avila Ranch Infrastructure Funding
3. The Avila Ranch Project will create a range of community benefits and offers
extraordinary community benefits exceeding the value of the Development
Agreement to the Developer.
The Avila Ranch Project has been designed to a high development standard and as such will
confer a range of community benefits to the City including implementation of General Plan
policies, creation of construction and permanent employment, providing park area in an area
of town that is deficient of public parks, and funding needed improvements to region-serving
infrastructure. Additionally, extraordinary community benefits (beyond those items that occur
naturally or are required) are being offered including funding infrastructure beyond the
Developer’s “fair share” cost allocation, providing home sales preferences for local workers
and owner occupants, exceeding State and City’s energy efficiency standards, accelerating
compliance with the City’s Climate Action Plan, and exceeding the City’s multimodal goals
and objectives. Based upon our analysis, the extraordinary community benefits are estimated
to be $34.9 million and the value of the Development Agreement to the Developer is
estimated to be $4 million, thus the benefits to the community far outweigh the Developer’s
benefits.
Item Amount Notes
a. Total Infrastructure Cost Estimate $67,102,134 City and Developer estimates
b. Avila Ranch “Fair Share” $47,489,404 City TDM, EIR, and Conditions of Approval
c. Development Agreement Funding Commitment $56,976,944 As referenced in Development Agreement
d. Developer Funding above “Fair Share” $9,487,540 (c – b) Adds to Project's community benefits
e. Balance of Costs to be Funded $10,125,190
(a – c) Funding sources include City development
impact fees, grants, County funding and CFD
Sources: Avila Ranch LLC; City of San Luis Obispo; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
Packet Pg 539
15
Draft Memorandum September 1, 2017
Avila Ranch Financial Feasibility and Community Benefits Program Page 3
Project Revenues
The Avila Ranch Project revenue will be derived primarily from building and selling homes.
Additional revenue will be derived from sale of the sale of the two small commercial parcels to
other builders. The residential pricing assumptions used in the pro forma financial analysis reflect
a market range of average prices from $450,500 for a small market rate R-2 “Pocket Cottage”
unit, to $739,000 for the largest single-family home prototype. These prices will be discounted
by several of the programs being offered by the Developer including the owner-occupant
restriction and the local worker priority program. The pro forma financial analysis shows closing
sales (of housing and the commercial parcels occurring (following a construction period that
begins in 2020) from 2020 through 2029. Pricing (as cited above) and absorption assumptions
(i.e., an average of seven rentals per month and 5 sales per month) are consistent with current
and expected future market conditions, and considered conservative for purposes of the pro
forma analysis. The Project’s affordable (inclusionary) housing program and Workforce Housing
program are reflected (as a discount) on Project revenues and beyond these price-restricted
units, as noted above, no other price restrictions will occur.
Project Costs
Project costs shown in the pro forma financial analysis include the full range of costs required to
develop the Avila Ranch:
Land Acquisition
Pre-Development Costs
Site Improvements
City Development Impact Fees and Permitting Fees
Offsite Improvements
Vertical Construction Costs and Contingency
These costs as reflected in the pro forma financial analysis all fall in a range typical for such
development projects. Financing (construction loan interest) is also included.
Rate of Return to Equity Investment
The Avila Ranch Project, as is the case for all major development projects, requires substantial
equity investment as well as commercial credit for both site development and vertical
construction costs. Real estate finance became considerably more difficult as the result of the
Great Recession due to increased standards and costs for commercial credit including higher
equity requirements to obtain credit. These higher equity requirements increase the need for
equity investment and also contribute to overall costs due to the greater risks involved in equity
investment.
The “threshold” “cash on cash” returns identified in the Avila Ranch pro forma financial analysis
meet typical real estate industry standards for development projects at this predevelopment
stage of development.
Avila Ranch Infrastructure Financing Strategy
In cooperation with City staff and the Project Developer Team, EPS has been documenting
infrastructure needs and costs and options for funding this infrastructure. In the case of Avila
Ranch there are two components of this Strategy: 1) assuring that the Avila Ranch Project
Packet Pg 540
15
Draft Memorandum September 1, 2017
Avila Ranch Financial Feasibility and Community Benefits Program Page 4
commits developer equity to funding infrastructure costs within the Project and also their “fair
share” of offsite regional improvements; and 2) funding the portion of offsite regional
improvements not allocated to Avila Ranch through a reimbursement agreement with the
Developer. Our review of infrastructure costs and funding options has determined that the
project related costs and the “fair share” allocation of regional costs and the City share can be
secured.
Community Benefits
The Avila Ranch Project, by virtue of its development and conforming to City planning policies,
regulatory standards, and mitigating potential environmental impacts will confer a range of
community benefits in the City of San Luis Obispo including:
Creating a new residential neighborhood consistent with General Plan policies
Providing a range of housing prototypes that include small, higher density units that will be
“affordable by design”
Providing new housing targeted at the City’s working families and including 67 contractually
price-restricted affordable (inclusionary) housing units, and 25 price-restricted Workforce
Housing Units.
Achieving “net-zero” energy consumption and other energy efficiency standards
Generating employment for the City’s construction-related companies and workers
Financing infrastructure that in addition to meeting travel demands created by the Project
relieves existing congestion and provides additional capacity for other future development
Providing 53 acres of open space including land set aside for continued agricultural use
preserving a bit of the area agricultural heritage.
Extraordinary Community Benefits
Extraordinary community benefits of a development project are specific public improvements
that could not be required by the City following normal City code requirements that must meet
Constitutional standards and statutory standards to achieve the “rational nexus” test.
Additionally, positive effects of the project including community development objectives or social,
economic and/or fiscal benefits, while a precondition for a development agreement, should not
be considered as extraordinary community benefits. There are two categories of extraordinary
community benefit being offered by Avila Ranch:
Community Benefits: Public Improvements or Contributions Exceeding Code or EIR
Mitigation Requirements
The developer has committed to constructing or funding improvements or mitigating impacts
that exceed the mitigation measures specified in the project environmental impact report or
other City-determined requirements. The developer has also agreed to build a public
improvement in advance of when it might otherwise be required. For example, an intersection
improvement that may not be required to mitigate project-induced congestion until five years in
the future could be built in advance, assuring that the improvement is constructed and
conferring congestion reduction immediately. These improvements are summarized below in
Table 2.
Packet Pg 541
15
Draft Memorandum September 1, 2017
Avila Ranch Financial Feasibility and Community Benefits Program Page 5
Table 2 Summary of Community Benefits in Development Agreement
Taken as a whole these cited community benefits total $34.9 million. The estimates were
prepared by the Developer’s financial consultant, Kosmont Companies and have been reviewed
for assumption and computational accuracy by EPS.
Comparing the Cost of Community Benefits with Value Created
The community benefits offered by the developer or sought by the City will ultimately bear some
relationship to the value of the project; the developer will need to rationalize the additional cost
of these community benefits into its overall project economics. However, as a general measure
the community benefits offered should meet or exceed the estimated value of the vested
entitlement to the developer combined with the additional benefit to the developer from other
special terms granted by the City (e.g., infrastructure financing contributions, formation of
financing districts, etc.).
Value of Vesting the Entitlement
The value of vesting the entitlement (and related assurances provided by the Development
Agreement) involves the guarantee that no discretionary changes (rezoning, etc.) can occur for
the duration of the Development Agreement and that the rate of development will be
unimpeded. This entitlement guarantee is typically measured in terms of reduced risk to the
Developer. This reduction in risk and related costs can be calculated in any given case by
determining the reduction of the threshold internal rate of return (IRR) applied to the duration of
the agreement associated with reduced entitlement risk.
Value of Terms Offered Conferring Additional Benefit to the Developer
As noted, the developer has requested other considerations intended to lower costs or improve
project revenues. In this instance, the allocation of housing units under the City’s Growth
Management Program and also the commitment by the City to complete reimbursement of the
Development Agreement Contributions
Total Net
Contribution by Avila
Ranch above Fair
Share
Creating parkland in excess of the City’s General Plan standard $1,177,000
Funding traffic and circulation improvements above the “fair-share” allocation $11,799,000
Providing car and bike sharing programs $730,000
Providing 10 additional “low income” units replacing “moderate income units”$1,694,000
Sponsoring a Workforce Housing Incentive Program $810,000
Sponsoring an “Owner Occupancy Restriction” on R-1 and R-2 units $5,006,000
Sponsoring a local worker (San Luis Obispo) priority program $5,006,000
Applying water conservation measures in excess of code requirements $1,019,000
Applying energy conservation measures, including solar PV and “net-zero” building efficiency $5,836,000
Building interim fire station $1,815,000
Developing water and sewer improvements in excess of code requirements $55,000
Total Extraordinary Community Benefits (Rounded)$34,947,000
Sources: Avila Ranch LLC; Kosmont Companies; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
Packet Pg 542
15
Draft Memorandum September 1, 2017
Avila Ranch Financial Feasibility and Community Benefits Program Page 6
Developer’s investment in capital facilities above the “fair share” amount in a fixed time period
confer additional benefits to the Developer. Assuming these considerations are acceptable to the
City, they should also be offset by the value of community benefits offered.
As a part of this effort a review of the Developer’s pro forma financial analysis was conducted by
EPS, subject to the terms of a non-disclosure agreement. Applying the standard method of
measuring a reduction in the “threshold IRR” associated with lower risks and costs to the Avila
Ranch Project associated with three entitlement assurances (elimination of future regulatory
discretion, compression of the buildout schedule associated with the fixed allocation of housing
units and establishing a fixed period for reimbursement of the Developer’s oversizing
investments), a value of the Development Agreement to the Developer of approximately $4
million is estimated.
Given this analysis, it is concluded that the Development Agreement extraordinary community
benefits conveyed to the City and the Community from the Avila Ranch Project, estimated to be
in the range of $34.9 million, substantially outweigh the estimated $4 million benefit of the
Development Agreement to the Avila Ranch Developer.
Packet Pg 543
15
Page intentionally left
blank.
Packet Pg 544
15
Carrie, Gallagher
City Clerk
City of San Luis Obispo
September 9, 2017 3267696
ix'-'.EIVED
!
S t P 1 2017
,'to cuy z_1_.i_ 1C
.
THENewspaper of the Central Coast
OfteFffOF
SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL
MBUNE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The San Luis Obispo City Council invites
all interested persons to attend a public
3825 South Higuera • Post Office Box 112 • San Luis Obispo, Californi
hearing on Tuesday, September 19,
2017, at 6:00 p.m. In the City Hall Coun-
cil Chamber, 990 Palm'Street, San Luis
In The Su
Superior Court of The State of California
p
Obispo, California, relative to the follow-
Ing:
In and for the County of San Luis Obispo
BCH DE)t9LOPhAEHT
PROJECT
AD #3267896
Public hearing to consider the Avila Ranch
project, including 1) Related Entitlements,
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
2) The certification of the Final Environmen-
tal Impact Report (EICand Resolution
of Intention to form a Coo mmunity Facilities
District (CFC]). Project entitlements include:
1) General Plan Amendment, 2) Specific
Plan Amendment, 3) Rezone, 4) Develop -
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
meet Plan; 5) Vesting Tentative Tract
Map, and 6) Development Agreement. Ds-
ss.
veiopment plan for the site includes up to
County of San Luis Obispo
720 residential units; 15,000 square feet of
neighborhood commercial development;
and approximately 18 acres of parks, with
53 acres of the site to remaln in open
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the
space. Project Address: 175 Venture Drive
Countyaforesaid- I am over the age of eighteen and not
� g g
case 0 ; SBDENP 1319-2015, 042-215 SPEC/ ER
13111-2015; SBDV 2042-2015; OTHR 0465
interested in the above entitled matter; I am now, and at
2017; Special Focus Area SP-4; Avil
all times embraced in the publication herein mentioned
Ranch, LLC, app Iloan L Prior recommends-
tions: The Planning Commission has rec-
was, the principal clerk of the printers and publishers of
ommShe Council approve the
projecctl eencntitlemenntsts including certification
THE TRIBUNE, a newspaper of general Circulation,
of the EIR.
printed and published daily at the City of San Luis
Obispo in the above named county and state; that notice
at which the annexed clippings is a true copy, was
published in the above-named newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof — on the following dates to wit;
r .. .
SEPTEMBER 9, 2017 that said newspaper was duly and
regularly ascertained and established a newspaper of
general circulation by Decree entered in the Superior
Court of San Luis Obispo County, State of California, on
June 9, 1952, Case #19139 under the Government Code
of the State of California.
For more information on this item, you are
invited to contact Tyler Corey of the City's
I certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the
Community Development Department at
(805) 781-7169 or by email attcorev®slo
foregoing is true and correct.ig
yr. r
n�
The City Council may also discuss other
p
(V�
hearings or business items before or after
the items listed above. If you challenge the
re of Principal Clerk
(Sf n g p )
proposed project in court, you may be limit-
DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2017
ed to raising only those issues you or
someone else raised at the public hearing
AD COST: $250.56
described in this notice, or in written corre-
spondence delivered to the City Council at,
or prior to, the public hearing.
Reports for this meeting will be available
for review in the City Clerk's Office and on-
line at www.slocity.org on Wednesday,
Sspteirrber 13, 2017. Please call the City
Clark's Office at (805) 781-7100 for more
Information. The City Council meeting will
be televised live on Charter Cable Chan-
nel 20 and live streaming on www.slocity.
Carrie, Gallagher
City Clerk
City of San Luis Obispo
September 9, 2017 3267696
Avila Ranch Project175 Venture DriveGENP 1319-2015SPEC/ER-1318-2015SBDV 2042-2015OTHR 0455-2017Public Hearing for the Avila Ranch ProjectSeptember 19, 2017Applicant: Avila Ranch, LLCRepresentative: Stephen Peck09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Recommendation1. Adopt a Resolution certifying the Final EIR for, and approval of, the Avila Ranch Development Plan, Airport Area Specific Plan Amendment, General Plan Amendment, and Vesting Tentative Tract Map; and2. Introduce an Ordinance changing the zoning of the property from Business Park/Specific Plan (BP-SP) and Conservation/Open Space/Specific Plan (C/OS-SP) to be consistent with the Avila Ranch Development Plan and with the General Plan and Airport Area Specific Plan as amended; and3. Introduce an Ordinance to adopt a Development Agreement, as amended, between the City of San Luis Obispo and Avila Ranch, LLC that implements the above entitlements; and 4. Adopt a Resolution of Intention to establish a Community Facilities District (CFD) to finance facilities and services necessary to implement the above entitlements and to levy a special tax for that purpose against parcels located in the Avila Ranch Development Plan. 209-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
3Project Summary09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Project Description4General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment, Rezone, Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Development Agreement for the 150-acre project siteDevelopment of the property would include: Up to 720 low, medium, and higher density residences15,000 square feet of commercial useRoughly 50% of site would remain in open space & parksTank Farm Creek would be restoredExtension of Buckley Road, Venture Drive, and Horizon and Earthwood (Jespersen) Lanes Specific Plan and Development Plan will guide land use, circulation, parks and open space, design, and infrastructureDevelopment Agreement09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Airport Area: Proposed Land Use Designations509-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Development Plan (Mitigated Project Alternative)6“Mitigated Project Alternative” is the projectRevises the originally proposed project Incorporates key EIR mitigation measuresIncludes advisory body input09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
7Advisory Body Review and Recommendations09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Planning Commission Review 8Considered on nine occasions from 2015-17Twice to review preliminary draft version of the projectThree times during the EIR processFour times to consider the current project (6-28, 6-29, 7-12, and 8-9-17) Recommendation of approval on August 9, 2017Includes all entitlements, including map as conditionedIncludes additional recommendations to modify the project (related to affordable housing and application of CFD tax; in staff report)09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Previous City Advisory Body Review9Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC)September 17, 2015. Preliminary Draft Plan reviewNovember 19, 2015. Conceptual concurrence with Draft Plan as revised December 1, 2016. BAC reviewed the project during the Draft EIR public comment period (Condition 109 requires Buckley bike bridge over creek)Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC)February 3, 2016. Preliminary Draft SP Review; input reflected in EIR and revised SPNovember 4, 2016. PRC reviews revised PlanJanuary 4, 2017. PRC determines revised Plan consistent with General Plan policiesArchitectural Review Commission (ARC)February 1, 2016. Initial Review of Draft Design Guidelines June 19, 2017. Recommended approval of revised Design Guidelines to City Council09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Airport Land Use Commission Review10December 21, 2016Found project as consistent with ALUP, subject to conditionsThese conditions are now included in updated Development Plan09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
11Final Environmental Impact Report and Resulting Project Modifications09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
CEQA Process12August 8, 2015. Notice of Preparation/Initial StudyAugust 26, 2015. EIR Scoping MeetingNovember 23, 2016. Draft EIR released (45-day review period; subsequently extended to 52 days)January 18, 2017. 52-day public review period ends 09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
CEQA Process13February 21, 2017. Portion of DEIR (Energy Demand Impacts section) recirculated for 45 days April 7, 2017. Recirculation public review period endsMarch through May 2017. Responses to comments lead to modification of some analysis and mitigation measures. No new impacts introduced, or changes in the level of severity of previously-identified impacts. June 13, 2017. Final EIR released, including responses to comments and changes from Draft EIR09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
CEQA Environmental Resources Analyzed in Final EIRAesthetics & Visual ResourcesAgricultural ResourcesAir Quality & Greenhouse Gas EmissionsBiological ResourcesCultural ResourcesHazards & Hazardous MaterialsHydrology & Water QualityLand Use & PlanningNoisePopulation & HousingPublic ServicesTransportation & TrafficUtilities1409-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Final EIR Conclusions15No new impacts or change in level of severity of previously identified impactsPrimary change to Draft EIR –Refinement of Mitigation MeasuresSignificant and Unavoidable (Class I) Impacts remain the same as in Draft EIRSpecific Plan incorporates mitigation measures 09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Significant and Unavoidable (Class I) Impacts16Agricultural ResourcesAG-1. Conversion of historically cultivated farmland.Cumulative loss of agricultural soilsAir QualityAQ-1. Construction-related air quality impacts.AQ-2. Long-term air quality impactsAQ-5. Potential inconsistency with the Clean Air PlanCumulative air quality impacts09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Significant and Unavoidable (Class I) Impacts17NoiseNO-1. Short-term construction noise impacts. Transportation and TrafficTRANS-5. Operation at the intersection of Buckley/SR 227.TRANS-13. Cumulative impacts at Buckley/SR 227. 09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Project Modifications from Advisory Review/EIR18“Mitigated Project Alternative” is now the project under considerationRevises the originally proposed project Incorporates key EIR mitigation measuresIncludes advisory body input09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Project Modifications from Advisory Review/EIR19Increased affordability“Pocket Cottage” (in R-2); “duplex” approach (in R-3)Inclusionary Housing71 units32 low income units provided (23 required)Majority of units in phases 1-3Dedicated 1.2 acre site (1 acre required) for 24 unit low income projectWorkforce Housing25 units provided (none required) (121-160% of area median income)10 year deed restriction that resets$500,000 revolving down payment assistance fund09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Project Modifications from Advisory Review/EIR20Revised commercial minimizes traffic and parking impactsMore contiguous Open SpaceStreet layout modificationsEnergy efficiency provisionsTank Farm CreekNot re-aligning the creekIncreased setbacksAirport Safety (more open space; no homes in S-1b zone)09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Project Modifications from Advisory Review/EIR21Now includes key offsite phased transportation improvementsHorizon Lane extension in Phase 4Left turn restrictions at Vachell Lane/South Higuera Street in Phase 2Temporary restrictions to vehicle site access from Venture Drive/Vachell Lane and Earthwood Lane during Phase 1South Higuera Street/Suburban Road intersection improvementsImprovements to Horizon Lane as residential collectorImprovements to Suburban Road as commercial collector09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Final EIR Certification and CEQA Findings 22Final EIR must be certified to allow project approvalIncludes Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ProgramCEQA Findings must be adoptedFindings are the link between the FEIR and the projectDescribes how the mitigation measures are carried forward in the projectIncludes a Statement of Overriding Considerations for Significant Unavoidable (Class I) impactsIncluded as part of Resolution09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Statement of Overriding Considerations 23Provision of new Residential and Commercial UsesProvision of a Variety of Housing Types for all Income LevelsOpen Space and Agricultural ProtectionProtection and Restoration of Tank Farm CreekProvision of Park and Recreational FacilitiesWell-Planned Neighborhood Would Reduce Per-Capita Vehicle TripsProvision of New JobsSales TaxImplementation of the General Plan09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
24General Plan Guidance andPolicy Consistency09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Land Use Element Policy 8.1.62509-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Land Use Element Policy 8.1.626This 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 affordabilities. 09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Policy Consistency27Key General Plan PoliciesDiscussed and Analyzed in Section 3.8 of the Final EIRAlso included as an attachment to the staff reportFEIR Consistency AnalysisProject is Consistentwith all City policies with prescribed mitigation measures09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
28Development Agreement09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Development Agreement – General29The Development Agreement:-Is a Contract between the City and the Developer-Provides certainty in the development process -Protects both the City and the Developer-Covers the general terms and conditions of the agreement-Generally does not include requirements that are part of the Conditions of Approval or the FEIR-Allows the City to secure “Extraordinary” public benefit that the City would not be able to otherwise secure 09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Development Agreement – Deal Points30The length or term of the agreement is 20 years with a possible 10-year extensionCity to establish a CFD to help finance the project.Developer will establish a “backstop” funding mechanism to protect the City Developer has agreed to pay the new AB1600 fees Developer is required to exceed both existing and anticipated regulatory requirements related to sustainabilityDeveloper will complete phases 1 & 2 of the project within seven years of the effective date 09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Development Agreement – Deal Points31Water conservation and allotment requirements from the Water Shortage Contingency Plan applied citywide will apply to the new residentsDefines the sources of reimbursement as well as the “fair share” of the required $66,672,134 in infrastructure. Developer will build $11,369,000 of infrastructure beyond their fair shareDeveloper is providing housing and incentives for Affordable and Workforce housing beyond what is required by the CityCity is receiving approximately $30,000,000 more in extraordinary public benefits than the Developer is receiving in benefits from the Development Agreement09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Extraordinary Public Benefit3209-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
33Community Facilities District09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Definition34Community Facility District (CFD) was enabled by Community Facilities Act of 1982Allows local jurisdictions to levy special tax to fund specified municipal services and infrastructure improvementsSpecial tax subject to Proposition 218 (two-thirds voter approval or, in unoccupied areas, landowner approval)Widely used by local jurisdictions during past 30 years in California No CFD previously formed in San Luis Obispo09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
City Policy and Approach35City has adopted CFD Policies and Procedures that guide CFD formationKey policy establishes a “maximum aggregate” property tax rate of 1.8 percent of assessed valuation Tax rate includes the 1.0 percent base rate established by Proposition 13 plus authorized overrides (e.g. general obligation bonds) and other assessments or special taxesOther CFDs may be formed subsequent to the Avila Ranch CFD in other developing portions of the City09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Avila Ranch CFD Purpose36No City property tax in Avila Ranch area due to Property Tax Exchange Agreement with CountyFiscal Analysis indicates a recurring “fiscal deficit” (costs exceeding revenues)The Avila Ranch Development Plan provides a high standard for local infrastructure and facilities that require maintenance and over time, replacementDeveloper funding advances for infrastructure above “fair share” cost allocation subject to reimbursement 09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Proposed Special Tax3709-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
CFD Formation38Proposed special tax based upon detailed technical analysis of service and infrastructure costs and also agreements reached with Project ApplicantFormation process follows precise Statutory requirementsTonight’s recommended action, adoption of Resolution of Formation, officially initiates the formation processFormation is official following Resolution of Formation, election (official landowner approval) and adoption of special tax ordinance09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Next Steps39Council to Consider Second Reading of Ordinances forRezoneDevelopment AgreementLevy of Special TaxCouncil to Consider Adoption of Resolution of Formation establishing CFD and Ordinance levying special taxAB 1600 Mitigation Fee Program UpdatePlanning Commission and City Council study sessionsCity Council to approve update; required to implement Development PlanProject Development09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Recommendation1. Adopt a Resolution certifying the Final EIR for, and approval of, the Avila Ranch Development Plan, Airport Area Specific Plan Amendment, General Plan Amendment, and Vesting Tentative Tract Map; and2. Introduce an Ordinance changing the zoning of the property from Business Park/Specific Plan (BP-SP) and Conservation/Open Space/Specific Plan (C/OS-SP) to be consistent with the Avila Ranch Development Plan and with the General Plan and Airport Area Specific Plan as amended; and3. Introduce an Ordinance to adopt a Development Agreement, as amended, between the City of San Luis Obispo and Avila Ranch, LLC that implements the above entitlements; and 4. Adopt a Resolution of Intention to establish a Community Facilities District (CFD) to finance facilities and services necessary to implement the above entitlements and to levy a special tax for that purpose against parcels located in the Avila Ranch Development Plan. 4009-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Buckley Road41Buckley Road is entirely under the jurisdiction of the County who maintains and monitors operations on Buckley Road, including traffic safety.Safety and level of service concerns regarding Buckley Road were raised during the public hearing process for the project.The EIR evaluated these issues and concluded there were no impacts. County Public Works letter of August 23, 2017 confirms the findings and conclusions of the EIR.SLOCOG and County working on solutions to address SR 227/Buckley Road improvements outside City jurisdiction.09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Summary of Infrastructure Funding 42CT09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Slide 42CT19 keep as abackup slide?Corey, Tyler, 9/15/201709-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Summary of Infrastructure Funding43Summary of Infrastructure FundingType of InfrastructureTotal Project Costs [1] Avila Ranch Pro Rata Share Total Cost of Projects Built by Avila Ranch Additional Mitigation or Impact Fees Being Paid Amount of Potential Private Reimbursement Amount of Potential Impact Fee Credit for Built Projects Final Out of Pocket for Avila Ranch Transportation $36,804,884 $17,622,154 $20,796,500 $5,883,194 ($561,350) ($3,759,000) $22,359,344 Parks $6,645,500 $6,645,500 $6,645,500 $6,645,500 Water and Sewer $427,500 $427,500 $427,500 $427,500 Public Safety $1,346,250 $1,346,250 $1,346,250 $1,346,250 Intract Improvements $20,896,000 $20,896,000 $20,896,000 $20,896,000 Offsite Improvements $552,000 $552,000 $552,000 $552,000 Total Infrastructure Expenses $66,672,134 $47,489,404 $50,663,750 $5,883,194 ($561,350) ($3,759,000) $52,226,594 CT2009-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Slide 43CT20 back up slide?Corey, Tyler, 9/15/201709-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Development Agreement – Minor Changes44Minor changes respond to recent legal decision regarding taxation (Russell City Energy v. City of Hayward)Case law holds that a City may not contractually agree to withhold certain taxes on a development – this would violate Section 31 of Article XIII of California ConstitutionSection 5.04 (Taxes and Assessments) is modified to be consistent with case law, as follows:Sections 5.04.1(b) and (c) are removedThese sections had given the City latitude to impose additional taxes on the development under certain conditions after the effective date of the Development Agreement, and to be able to increase the amount of such taxes under certain conditionsRemaining portions of Section 5.04 regarding taxes and assessments would remain in force09-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
Buckley Road/Tank Farm Creek Bike Connection4509-19-2017, Item 15 - Staff Presentation
09-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
PROJECT HISTORYZoned for Business Park in the County2000AASP with Business Park2005Annexed into City 2008Designated for Housing in Housing Element 2010Approved in 2014 LUCE for Housing2014Review Processes to Date:Planning Commission Review6Airport Land Use Commission5Park and Recreation Commission4Bike Committee5City Council Review2Community Meetings 77 (and recently)Community Advisory Group6Approvals to DateAirport Land Use Commission 2016Park and Recreation Commission20172We listened, we learned, we modified the project in response…09-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
309-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
ProjectAverage SizeSerra Meadows 1020 3043434318 2 1,788 Toscano 10 20 8 16 34 32 32 1,741 Righetti Ranch/Jones 1530 21642186383838222222111211 1,768 Avivo 78 39 1,658 Terraza 555533 1,691 SLO Terrace612 1,662 Avila Ranch30 25 25 62 39 109 70 55 93 160 50 1,477 Price Range $ 200,000 $ 250,000 $ 300,000 $ 350,000 $ 400,000 $ 450,000 $ 500,000 $ 550,000 $ 600,000 $ 650,000 $ 700,000 $ 750,000 $ 800,000 $ 850,000 $ 900,000 $ 950,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,050,000 $ 1,100,000 Project Price DistributionMIX OF HOUSING/PRICE RANGES4Above Workforce“Workforce”ModLow•58% of Avila Ranch is Targeted to Workforce and Below Compared to 36% For Other Current and Recent Projects.•Fills the “Missing Middle” Gap. Skews Unit Sizes and Prices Lower.•Need is in Total Supply and Diversity of Unit Size and Type.“The City lacks a sufficient range of housing oriented towards entry‐level through executive‐level employees” City of SLO ED Strategic PlanMissing MiddleMissing Middle09-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
HOUSING – R-15o101 unitso15% of total unitso4,000 – 7,500 sf lotso7 units/ gross acreoVariety of product types oBoth alley & street access09-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
R-1 SITE PLAN609-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
HOUSING – R-27o297 units; 8.6 units/ gross acreoMajority workforce housingoDetached dwellingsoStreetscape appearance like R‐1oProduct Types:•Linear Courts•Pocket Cottage•Motor Court09-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
POCKET CLUSTER AND COTTAGES809-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
9R-2 Neighborhood Plans09-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
10R-2/R-4 Neighborhood09-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
HOUSING – R-311o197 unitso16.75 Units/Gross AcresoParking Lot EV ChargingoProduct Types:•Attached townhomes; &•Stack flat apartments09-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
HOUSING – R-412o125 unitsoStacked flat apartmentsoClose to shopping, services, jobs & transitoOn‐site open spaceo26.5 Units/ Gross AcreoOne acre for Lower Income UnitsoParking lot EV Charging09-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL13oShared parking with parkoTransit connection/huboOffice/light service uses (limited retail expected)09-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
PARKS14o16.5 Acres Required o18.0 Acres Proposed •9.5 Ac Neighborhood Park•8.5 Ac Mini/Pocket ParksoA Mini‐park for Each NeighborhoodoFour times average City park acreage 09-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
oA Wide Variety of Features•Soccer •Tennis•Pickleball•Skate Park•Baseball•Dog Park (Small and Large)•Community Meeting Places•Sculpture Garden•Farmers Market•Basketball15NEIGHBORHOOD PARK FEATURES09-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
BUCKLEY ROADBuckley Road Extension completes long‐planned circulation need.Impact on Buckley east of project is small, 2.7% of traffic at Buckley/227.Davenport Creek/Buckley Improvements Part of Development Agreement (Since Not Required by CEQA or County Standards).Buckley Road Extension not required for Phase 1, but will be installed as soon as possible if right of way is secured earlier.1609-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
BUCKLEY EXTENSION17•Class I and Class II bike connections to Octagon Barn09-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
18Traffic Improvements09-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
19Project Bike Facilities09-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
FLOODING/STORM DRAINAGE•Ponding Occurs on the SW Corner of Site, Primarily Due to “Back‐Up” Flows from Properties South of the Project.•Findings from Hydrology Study•Construction of the Project per the MPA Will Result in a 12.3% Reduction in Peak Flood Flows from the Site, and a Reduction in the Flood Elevation in the Southwest Portion of the Site (See Table 3.7‐5 of the Draft EIR, and Master Response No. 3 of the Final EIR). •Continuation of the Existing Land Use Will Do Nothing to Address This Issue.•Flood Flows Under the MPA Would be Confined to the Tank Farm Corridor (Where They Belong).•The Remedy to the Problem South of Buckley Is To Have County Flood Control District Zone 9 or Property Owners South of Buckley Implement Improvements to the East Fork of San Luis Creek.•The Project Substantially Improves Onsite Flooding Conditions, and Offsite Conditions.•The Project Provides a Secondary Way Around the Flooded Area; Project Traffic Has Alternate Routes2009-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
2109-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY•EIR concluded that there are no noise, light, glare, or other compatibility issues with existing or future Business Park/Light Industrial uses to the north and east.•Special features and design requirements have been added to the Development Plan’s Design Guidelines and Requirements to address any complaints or issues:•Added setbacks along R‐4 property•Block wall to the north and east•20‐foot landscaped buffer along northern property line•Orientation of bedrooms/noise sensitive areas away from east and north elevations•Solar canopies in R‐4 parking lots•Web‐based Enhanced Disclosures and in all Purchase and Sale Agreements, and in property title documents.2209-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY2309-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
SPECIAL PROGRAMS•Local Preference Program•Local SLO Workers First. (Current interest list has over 1,100 SLO employees, 76% of those who are on the list).•Most direct way to address existing housing shortage •2/3rds of all SLO employees live out of town•Maximize reduction of current commute trips•Maximum GHG/VMT reductions from the project (35% reduction estimated)•Owner‐Occupant Restrictions in R‐1 and R‐2 Neighborhoods (No rentals for 5 years after initial sale).•“WHIP” Down Payment Assistance Program; 25 initial pocket cottage units targeted to “Workforce” income group. This fund will “revolve” and be used to assist others as a permanent homebuyers assistance program, possibly assisting over 100 families over the next 20 years.2409-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
ENERGY “ZNE+”•Meet and exceed anticipated 2019 Energy Code revisions•100% PV onsite electrical generation for building demands (residential, commercial, parks)•Exceed 2019 code energy efficiency requirements by 15% •New, Special Section 13 of Design Framework•Integration of passive solar, active solar, and energy conservation features•A new paradigm and process. No specific floor plans or solutions; development as part of ARC submittals after entitlement•Prototypes developed to demonstrate feasibility in Appendix E of Development Plan, including an all‐electric package•Inclusion in Development Plan makes them mandatory and not aspirational suggestions•Not “greenwashing”: proven to work with prototypical packages. Design packages are cost‐effective (any increased costs are covered by longer term savings). Results in real VMT and GHG reductions, and long term cost savings to homeowners and renters2509-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation
2609-19-2017, Item 15 - Applicant Presentation